House of Commons
Oral Answers to Questions
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab)
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)
This Government are committed to strengthening rights for parents. In April, we are introducing bereaved partner’s paternity leave and making unpaid parental leave and paternity leave day one rights, bringing more than 1 million parents into scope. Next year, we will further improve protections for pregnant women and those returning from maternity leave, and the parental leave and pay review will conclude, giving us recommendations and informing our next steps.
Laura Kyrke-Smith
The Government are making great strides in improving parental rights at work, but for kinship carers it is still tough. In Aylesbury, I met a wonderful lady who has become the kinship carer for her baby grandson, but she was given only 10 days of paid leave from work. She now has to take unpaid leave to care for him, which is causing serious financial strain. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to all our kinship carers for their remarkable work and outline what discussions she is having across Government to ensure that kinship carers get the support that they deserve?
Kate Dearden
I recognise the enormous contribution that kinship carers such as my hon. Friend’s constituent make to the lives of children. The Government are committed to helping more children grow up in safe, stable and loving homes in their family network, whenever it is in the children’s best interests. I acknowledge the incredible commitment and generosity of kinship carers in opening up their hearts and homes to our most vulnerable children. Kinship carers are absolutely transforming young lives, and we should not underestimate the life-changing difference that they make every single day. Our parental leave and pay review is considering the needs of all working families who do not qualify for existing leave and pay entitlements, including kinship carers.
Sarah Russell
Since 2004, the limit on relief for small employers at which they can reclaim statutory maternity pay has been set at £45,000. Small and medium-sized enterprises want to support working parents, but they need our help to do so. Will the Minister confirm whether that will be looked at as part of the parental leave review?
Kate Dearden
I thank my hon. Friend for her advocacy on this issue. The Government acknowledge that the class 1 national insurance contributions threshold used to determine eligibility for small employers’ relief on statutory parental pay has remained unchanged for several years. Part of the relief is an additional compensation payment, known as small employers’ compensation. Last April, the Government increased the SEC rate from 3% to 8.5%, and we will increase it to 9% from 6 April 2026. The Government keep all eligibility criteria under review while balancing the needs of business and the Exchequer.
Josh Newbury
Many of us on the Labour Benches have long argued for a boost to paternity leave, which is one of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government, but one group being let down badly is self-employed dads. Just one in six of them take leave after their children are born, and it is unpaid leave, meaning that they face a drop in income of more than £1,000 just for taking a couple of weeks off. Introducing paid paternity leave for self-employed dads would cost £38 million at most, and possibly as little as £13 million, but it would be a huge win for dads, mums and their babies. Will the Minister consider that as part of the ongoing parental leave review?
Kate Dearden
I thank my hon. Friend for his campaigning on this issue. As I have mentioned, the Government’s parental leave and pay review is under way and will conclude in early 2027. We know that the parental leave system needs to be improved and recognise that the current system does not do enough to support the many dads and partners who want to be hands-on and actively involved in caring for their children. That is why the review is so important. It will consider all current and upcoming parental leave and pay entitlements, looking at options to improve the support available to British working families and whether the support available meets the needs of working families who do not qualify for the entitlements, such as self-employed parents, as was outlined by my hon. Friend.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests; I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for infant feeding and inequalities. One of the key barriers to women returning to the workplace occurs if they continue to breastfeed their children. A lot of workplaces do not provide facilities for expressing and storing breast milk. Will the Minister update the House on what the Department is doing to support women back into the workplace when they are still breastfeeding their children?
Kate Dearden
I thank the hon. Member for raising this important question in the House today. We are committed to ensuring that every parent feels secure at work, particularly breastfeeding mums when they are returning to the workplace. She will know of the different bits of legislation we are introducing through the Employment Rights Act 2025 to help women back into work, whether that is making it more unlawful to dismiss pregnant women and mothers on maternity leave or making it easier for people to work flexibly and for employers to make those provisions in the workplace. I would be keen to hear more about the work that the hon. Member and other Members from across the House are doing on the APPG.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for that very positive answer. There is nobody in this House or further afield who does not welcome the improvement of parental rights at work. I had a chance to speak to the Minister beforehand, so she will know where my question is coming from—I ask it on behalf of the small and medium-sized businesses that may find it difficult to cover those who are on parental leave. Has anything been done to help businesses, especially the small ones, that might find it difficult to put someone in place to cover those people’s jobs when they are off?
Kate Dearden
I agree with the hon. Gentleman that family-friendly workplaces strengthen our workforce and our economy, and are important in reducing the turnover of staff and retaining high-quality staff. That is why it is really important that we are working with businesses, small and large, on our wider parental pay and leave review. In every area of my work, I am very conscious of the need to work closely with businesses in different areas, recognising that we share the same goal of keeping people in work, and especially of supporting parents and making sure that workplaces are much more family-friendly.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Chris McDonald)
We are supporting private sector investment in Buckingham and Bletchley by working with partners across the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor to find new opportunities for businesses. I acknowledge the work of my hon. Friend in launching the Bletchley investment taskforce, which is bringing together private capital and local partners, using infrastructure such as East West Rail to improve connectivity, and working with OxCam partners so that local businesses benefit from innovation, skills and inward investment.
Callum Anderson
As the Minister says, I launched the Bletchley investment taskforce last year to attract the businesses, investments, jobs and apprenticeships that local people need, and we are developing an investment prospectus to deliver that end. Will the Minister meet me and taskforce members to ensure that the Government are working hand in hand with local partners?
Chris McDonald
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his work with the Bletchley investment taskforce. I know that businesses in his constituency, such as Envisics, Carnot and Pulsar, have benefited from the work he has done, and I would be very happy to ensure that he gets a meeting with the relevant Minister.
Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)
The Minister for Trade (Chris Bryant)
Promoting Scottish industry overseas is one of our prime objectives. Whether it is opening up new markets such as India for Scotch whisky, securing new beef opportunities in the United States of America, securing contracts for Scottish steel in new bridges in Ukraine, or promoting financial services around the world, we are on the case. I have even seen Tunnock’s Caramels in LuLu in Doha.
Frank McNally
With up to £8.2 billion of private investment, the Lanarkshire AI growth zone delivered by this Labour Government represents one of the largest industrial investments in the history of Scotland. At its heart is a partnership between Lanarkshire’s own DataVita and the American cloud computing company CoreWeave. Such partnerships are critical to supporting the industries of the future, so what further steps can my hon. Friend take to promote Scottish companies overseas to secure such high-quality jobs and deliver even stronger growth?
Chris Bryant
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work he has done to make sure that the UK Government have delivered in his constituency. I am glad that he has raised the Lanarkshire AI growth zone, because it is really important in trying to make sure that the industries of the future are at the heart of the jobs of the future in Scotland. I look forward to the SNP welcoming this in the next few moments.
Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Of course, I will always welcome the fact that Scotland punches above its weight, whether it be industries abroad or investment in Scotland. Indeed, under the SNP, foreign direct investment has been higher in Scotland over the last 10 years than anywhere else in the UK outside of London—something I would expect the UK Government to also celebrate. Instead, we learned through a leaked memo this week that the Prime Minister told senior Ministers of the Government to go against the wishes of the Scottish Government when taking decisions. Does the Secretary of State agree with the Prime Minister? Does he not agree that Scotland makes the best decisions when it is the people of Scotland who make those decisions, which will happen only when it becomes independent?
Chris Bryant
It is like an open goal, isn’t it, Mr Speaker? Sorry—you do not have a view.
I believe that we achieve far more by our common endeavour than by going it alone. That is why I am a passionate supporter of the Union. Of course there are specific things about the Scottish economy that we want to drive forward. For instance, 54% of Scottish exports go into the European Union. If we manage to secure the sanitary and phytosanitary deal that we are trying to negotiate with the EU at the moment, that will pay enormous dividends to Scotland that it would never secure were it entirely on its own. Separatism never works.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Chris McDonald)
I thank my hon. Friend, who is an advocate and champion of businesses in Lichfield. As I am sure he is aware, we are making sure that the UK is the best place in the world to invest by backing priority sectors through our industrial strategy. The advanced manufacturing sector plan will strengthen UK supply chains in sectors such as automotive, aerospace and clean energy industries, ensuring that businesses in Lichfield, such as its manufacturing and logistics businesses, get the skills, technology and new commercial opportunities that they need.
Dave Robertson
The quantum technology sector is hugely important for the UK. We have world-leading researchers and businesses innovating in healthcare, defence and many more industries, but quantum firms tell me that as they grow, they find it harder and harder to secure the investment that they need to commercialise their exceptional ideas. The risk that we face is that they will take their businesses out of the UK in order to seek that investment. That is why I recently established the all-party parliamentary group on quantum technologies to help Members of both Houses to understand this rapidly evolving sector. What can the Government do to ensure that our quantum businesses get the investment that they need to grow here in the UK?
Chris McDonald
I thank my hon. Friend for his work in establishing the all-party parliamentary group on quantum technologies. He is right to identify these technologies as very important for the future, and to put his finger on the particular problem that we have in the UK: while we are brilliant at innovating and investing in research, we have historically struggled with scale-up. That is not something that this Government are prepared to accept. Just as we are investing in critical minerals and automotive connected mobility technologies, we are investing in this area. The British Business Bank is doubling its annual investments to ensure that we can support scale-up and bring forward at least 10 new-to-market growth-stage funds so that we can leverage pension investments and help British businesses to stay and grow in the UK.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
An increase in private sector investment is being seriously held back by the failure of the Government to publish their defence investment plan. Has the Minister any idea when this much-awaited document will hit the streets?
Chris McDonald
The Government recognise the importance of the defence industrial plan, which will be brought to the House as soon as it can be. On private sector investment, £10 billion of investment came in from the regional summits, and £79 billion of investment was identified in the last industrial strategy quarterly report. Investors are voting with their money, and they are investing in the UK.
Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
There was a new private sector investor in the Royal Mail last year. As we heard yesterday in the House, the regulator has let the universal service obligation slip, so will the Minister update the House on how his colleague’s meeting with the regulator went yesterday?
Chris McDonald
The Minister responsible for the Post Office and the Royal Mail, my hon. Friend the Member for East Renfrewshire (Blair McDougall), is sitting beside me. Just yesterday, he spent 90 minutes in the House answering questions from Members who have had problems with the service across the whole of the country; I have seen such problems in my constituency as well. The Government are clearly not happy with the level of service from the Royal Mail, and the shadow Minister will hear a full response to Question 15, when my hon. Friend will stand at the Dispatch Box and tell her everything that she needs to know about that particular meeting.
David Pinto-Duschinsky (Hendon) (Lab)
Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Peter Kyle)
The industrial strategy focuses on business investment and creating high-quality jobs. We back our strengths and are unblocking barriers, including through £1.2 billion of skills investment by 2028-29. This Labour Government are investing in skills, in jobs, and in creating wealth and opportunity across the United Kingdom.
David Pinto-Duschinsky
I thank the Secretary of State for his answer. Communities like mine in Hendon were let down by 14 years of economic instability and the lack of a strategic approach to driving growth under the Conservative party. Will the Secretary of State set out how our modern industrial strategy will help to accelerate growth in places like Hendon?
Peter Kyle
I absolutely will. First, Hendon has a champion in you—I mean my hon. Friend—and that counts for a lot. It also has a champion in you, Mr Speaker, as you make sure that we get through these questions so swiftly and efficiently. I can assure the House that the industrial strategy has delivered, on average, over £7,900 more in wages in the sectors that we are supporting through it. Over 50,000 jobs have been supported through investment commitments made to the industrial strategy’s eight sectors in the last quarter alone. This Government are attracting investment, spending it wisely and making sure that all communities, including Hendon, benefit from it.
Lloyd Hatton
It is no secret that clean energy is creating the next generation of well-paid jobs, and it is essential that South Dorset gets its fair share of them. The development of offshore wind at Portland, including the exciting Morwind and PortWind projects, would certainly help to create much-needed maritime, engineering and construction jobs for local people. With that in mind, will the Minister work with me, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, and the Crown Estate to support the development of offshore wind off the coast of Portland?
Peter Kyle
It would be a pleasure to work with my hon. Friend to unlock more investment in offshore wind in South Dorset. Dorset council and the Crown Estate have already committed up to £1 million to support a feasibility study for a £500 million clean energy port facility adjacent to Portland port that has been proposed by energy developer Morwind. Clean energy industries are expected to support 860,000 jobs across the UK by 2030, including up to 100,000 direct and indirect jobs in offshore wind. Thanks to the work that my hon. Friend is putting in, I am sure that South Dorset will benefit from this incredible and growing British industry.
Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
Of course, there are lots of well-paid jobs in the steel sector. In fact, the taxpayer is now subsidising every job at British Steel to the tune of £110,000. Can the Secretary of State update the House on how his negotiations are going with Jingye, and on when he will finally publish his long-awaited steel strategy?
Peter Kyle
I am very grateful for the hon. Lady’s question. Of course, after 14 years of the Conservatives running the steel industry, we have landed in a place where this Government are having to sort it out. I can reassure her that the negotiations with Jingye are well under way. I will update the House shortly on progress and, of course, on the strategy that I have been working very hard on, with colleagues, on behalf of the steel industry.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
Research from the Entrepreneurs Network shows that 54% of Britain’s 100 fastest growing companies have a foreign-born founder or co-founder. International entrepreneurs play a vital role in driving innovation, investment and job creation across the UK, yet this Government are recklessly introducing unworkable visa regulations for those very people. Since the Budget in October 2024, 110,000 jobs have been lost in the hospitality sector and 74,000 in retail, and 700,000 graduates are currently unemployed. Youth unemployment has just hit 16%. What impact assessment have the Government undertaken on the impact of their proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain on job creation, and what conversations has the Minister had with the Home Secretary regarding this damaging disincentive to those looking to build their businesses and create jobs here in the UK?
Peter Kyle
I am afraid that the hon. Lady describes the doom-laden Lib Dem world that she inhabits, not the real world that is inhabited by entrepreneurs and businesses right across the country. The reality is that 381,000 more people are in work since the start of 2025 because of this Labour Government. She may have missed the fact that my Department, under my leadership and this team, has set up the global talent taskforce, accompanied by a global talent visa. Around the world, we are out there hunting down the best talent, attracting people to the UK and aligning this endeavour with investment, making the UK the best place to invest, to grow and to scale a business anywhere in the world.
Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)
The Minister for Trade (Chris Bryant)
We want to build new opportunities for start-ups and scale-ups to export around the world. That is why we are providing tailored market advice, free training through our business academy, export finance and support on the ground in international markets.
Rosie Wrighting
British fashion is recognised globally for its creativity. At the London Fashion Week just gone, designers such as Erdem, Tolu Coker and Simone Rocha showcased the very best of British talent. With international buyers up by 17%, we showed that we have not only the raw talent here, but the business minds to commercialise it internationally. What steps is the Department taking to help emerging British fashion brands translate that creativity into export growth and scale internationally?
Chris Bryant
My hon. Friend makes a really good point by raising th4e example of London Fashion Week. She is quite right that lots of businesses in Northamptonshire are working in this field. One key thing we do through NEWGEN is to provide support to people—including, in fact, some of those she mentioned, such as Erdem and Simone Rocha—to start finding new export markets overseas. We send people to Paris Fashion Week and to Pitti Uomo, and our creative industries are a really important part of how we intend to build on that in the future. To use the name of another business in her constituency, I think Weetabix is based there—and we want everybody to have three Weetabix for breakfast so we can really export around the world.
Rishi Sunak (Richmond and Northallerton) (Con)
At the recent India AI summit, I was delighted to participate in an event, with the Deputy Prime Minister, highlighting the opportunities for British and Indian growing technology companies to do more in each other’s markets. I am looking forward to another such event in London in the coming weeks. Will the Minister join me in commending both our high commissioners—Their Excellencies Lindy Cameron and Vikram Doraiswami—for their steadfast commitment to strengthening the links between our two fantastic technology sectors?
Chris Bryant
The right hon. Gentleman makes a really good point. I noticed that he was commending the Government for securing the free trade agreement with India, which previous Governments were not able to secure, and he did so generously. Mr Speaker, I may have misled the House previously by suggesting that the India free trade agreement would enter into force this summer, because I am very hopeful that it will actually enter into force this spring.
The key thing is not just to have a free trade agreement, but to deploy it and make sure that businesses take advantage of that opportunity. Our two high commissioners—both in India and here—are absolutely essential to making that happen. I look forward to working with the right hon. Gentleman to do that not only in India, but in Ukraine, as I note he has been appointed to help Zelensky’s Government with reconstruction in Ukraine. I am the Minister for Ukraine reconstruction, and I hope we can work together to achieve that, too.
Gareth Davies (Grantham and Bourne) (Con)
We all want innovative British companies not just to start up in Britain, but to scale up in Britain, too. I welcome the Minister’s previous comments, and actually his enthusiasm, for our most innovative companies. However, he will know that the Chancellor’s decision to cut venture capital trust rate relief will be very damaging. How does he explain the disconnect between his Department’s words and what the Chancellor is doing?
Chris Bryant
We are trying very much to focus on the key sectors where we know we can really deliver, which is precisely what bringing together the trade strategy, the small business strategy and the industrial strategy is designed to do. I was delighted to be at the security and policing trade event down in Farnborough yesterday, and it was fascinating to see the small companies—SMEs make up a lot of that sector—that have really been supported by different Departments, including the Home Office, the Department for Business and Trade, and the Treasury, to scale up and take their product to market. I think I was able to persuade the Malaysian Government to secure quite a few contracts with British businesses as well.
Gareth Davies
I am grateful to the Minister for that answer, but I asked specifically about VCT rate relief. The last time that rate relief was cut, under the last Labour Government, fundraising was cut by two thirds and it took a decade for that to recover in the sector. Specifically on VCT rate relief, which has been cut from 30% to 20%, will he commit to meeting the Venture Capital Trust Association, the industry body, and will he take its concerns to the Chancellor and ask her to reverse course?
Chris Bryant
Of course, I am happy to meet the industry body and listen to its concerns, as we do all the time. However, I just want to make the point that at the moment the DBT is concentrating on taking what we do well in this country and really ensuring we have an opportunity to do it even better. That focus is a key part of what our trade strategy, our small business strategy and our industrial strategy are all about.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)
The Government recognise the central role the hospitality sector plays in supporting jobs, sustaining high streets and strengthening community life. That is why we have significantly increased the hospitality support fund, providing £10 million over three years to help hospitality businesses become more resilient, allowing them to thrive. We have permanently reduced business rates for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties, benefiting 750,000 properties. We are also beginning cross-Government work on a high streets strategy, developed with businesses and representatives, to be published later this year.
David Mundell
Energy costs are obviously a huge issue for hospitality businesses in a large rural constituency such as Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, but they are also an issue for hospitality business customers, because generally people travel to those businesses using their cars. Will the Minister and her colleagues in the Department lobby the Prime Minister and the Chancellor to ensure that the proposed rise in fuel duty does not go ahead in September?
Kate Dearden
I recognise that energy costs remain one of the biggest pressures facing hospitality businesses. I meet them regularly—including just this week—to make sure I am aware of their concerns and experiences on the ground. The real risk to businesses is dependence on volatile international gas markets, which we have, of course, seen; we have been left exposed to global energy shocks. The Government are prioritising on having more of our own power here in Britain. We are focusing on that to tackle the root cause of unstable energy markets. We are working closely with businesses, and across the sector, to understand the pressures, and we will continue to do so in a responsible way.
Sir Gavin Williamson
I am deeply concerned, as I am sure the Minister is, about the rising rate of youth unemployment, which is currently standing at 15%. One of the key employers of young people is the hospitality sector, as well as the retail sector. When I speak to businesses in my constituency of Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge, so many of them reference the fact that they have been hit by business rates and the impact of national insurance. That is discouraging investment and reducing job opportunities for young people. What action is the Minister taking to reverse that trend?
Kate Dearden
I agree that hospitality provides first jobs and career pathways for young people—a really important opportunity. As I have said many times in the House, it was my experience into employment, as I am sure it was for many other colleagues. Young people absolutely deserve that opportunity, which is why our focus is on skills and training, and getting young people into work. We will continue to back employers who take on apprentices and provide those opportunities, whether providing full training costs for young apprentices aged 16 to 21, or through employers not being required to pay national insurance contributions for all apprentices under the age of 25.
Under the previous Government, the number of youth apprenticeships was cut by 40%, and they presided over a massive increase in young people not in education, employment and training. I recognise what we are working with, but we want to provide opportunities for young people. We will not leave an entire generation of young people behind. We are looking to our £820 million youth guarantee and so much more to provide that employment support and to give them a guaranteed job, recognising the sector is vital.
Jerome Mayhew
Six hospitality venues are closing every single day under this Government. If the Government actually asked the sector why, businesses would tell them: it is because of the jobs-killing national insurance tax rises—literally a tax on jobs—as well as the red tape and additional costs of the Employment Rights Act 2025. When are the Government finally going to realise that those job losses and business closures are not happening despite the work of the Government, they are happening because of it?
Kate Dearden
The Conservative party left deep economic scars on our economy: weak growth, insecure work and a fragile labour market. This Government are restoring stability and rebuilding opportunity for people. Hospitality in particular is a vital sector for our high streets and for people. It thrives when the economy grows, wages rise, and people have more money to spend. We will always support our hospitality businesses, but do so responsibly and sustainably. They are at the heart of our high streets and community, and that is why we are backing them. We are reforming the broken system of business rates that the Conservatives left and did nothing about, and building a better support system for businesses, so they can thrive and support all employment, particularly for our young people.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
Drivers looking for refreshment on the motorway have regular signs to point them to the available hospitality, but it is less easy for drivers of electric vehicles to see where they can get a coffee and a charge because of arcane rules that prevent EV signage on motorways. This is also a problem on A roads—one charge company told me it was quoted £150,000 to put up two signs on an A road. Given that many hospitality businesses have partnerships with EV charge providers, will the Minister work with the Department for Transport to change these mad signage rules and support hospitality and EV charging?
Kate Dearden
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this issue to the House today. We are working closely with industry to promote consumer confidence in electric vehicles and their charging infrastructure. As at the end of February 2026, the Government and industry have supported the installation of more than 118,000 public chargers. In a move to help EV drivers to plug in to the rapidly expanding charging network, the Government are also modernising EV charging signage on major A roads, with changes allowing larger EV charging hubs to be signposted from major A roads, too. We are working with local authorities to make it easier to provide that signage to charging facilities on local roads.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
For almost a year, the constituents of my friend and neighbour, the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), have enjoyed the benefits of the guest beer agreement. Given that the Society of Independent Brewers believes that a right to buy a guest beer drives customers into pubs, can the Minister update the House on when she expects to announce the results of the beer market review and the merits of introducing a guest beer agreement in England?
Kate Dearden
My hon. Friend and I have discussed this matter at length. She champions the pubs in her constituency, and I thank her for it. We recognise the importance of independent breweries and pubs, and remain committed to ensuring that the beer and pub sector remains diverse, competitive and rooted in local communities. We have reviewed the beer market to assess any barriers facing small breweries and will announce the outcome in due course.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
In the Q4 2025 quarterly economic survey, 52% of businesses reported utility costs as a pressure that is driving them to raise prices, and there is a particular impact on the hospitality sector. Recent research by the British Chambers of Commerce shows that more than a quarter of businesses will struggle to pay their energy bills over the next 12 months, and this survey was conducted before the recent escalation in the middle east. Last week’s forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility also did not take into account any potential impact from the jump in oil prices triggered by the strikes in Iran. The fuel duty hike in September is already expected to hit families and small businesses hard, so will the Secretary of State speak to the Chancellor now about scrapping this damaging policy?
Kate Dearden
The hon. Lady will have heard in my earlier remarks that I absolutely recognise those pressures and meet hospitality businesses regularly to hear their concerns; energy costs have, of course, come up as one of the biggest pressures facing them. I recognise the concerns those businesses will have when looking at the Gulf conflict and its possible impacts. As the hon. Lady will have heard in my earlier answer, the real risk to businesses is dependence on the volatile international gas markets, which has left us exposed. She will know the work that we are doing in different Departments to recognise that and to tackle that root cause in order to provide better support for businesses. We are looking at the unstable energy markets that have left us exposed and trying to ensure that we have more power here in Britain; we will work with the sector closely and across Government on that.
Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)
James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Peter Kyle)
UK-EU collaboration is vital for growth and security, with 46% of the UK’s total trade, after all, with the EU. In recent weeks, I have gone to Brussels and signed a new competition co-operation agreement, furthering the partnership between our two territories in the interests of businesses. I had constructive meetings with Commissioners Ribera, Mînzatu and Virkkunen.
Tom Rutland
After years of the Conservatives and Reform trying their best to ruin our relationship with our nearest neighbours, and damaging business exports, this Labour Government have been working hard to ensure that my constituents feel the benefit of our renewed relationship with the European Union. Will my right hon. Friend update the House on the work he is doing to ensure that businesses like Worthing’s very own musical instrument business Hobgoblin Music can benefit from the reset in relations we have had with our European neighbours?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful to my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour down in sunny Sussex for that question. The reset relationship with the EU has been fundamental and has delivered for businesses right across Britain, including Hobgoblin in Worthing on the sunny south coast of England. We are tackling the barriers to trade. The dialogue we have with the EU on business mobility and recognition of professional services will unlock opportunities into the future. Where working with the EU delivers for Britain, we will do so enthusiastically.
James Asser
I put on record my role as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Bulgaria. The APPG recently visited Sofia, where we met businesses that are keen to build their trade relationships with this country, particularly in the energy and tech sectors. We also saw the good work being done by our embassy in partnership with the UK-Bulgarian chamber of commerce. Does the Secretary of State agree that we need to look at trading with many of the newer markets in eastern Europe, which are keen to create trade, particularly when we have active business communities from those countries in the UK that are keen to build a partnership that will benefit both our country and theirs?
Peter Kyle
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and his work in this area is incredibly important. Our trade with every one of the newer EU member states has increased over the 12 months to September 2025, and I can give some examples of the kind of work we are engaged in. We are supporting Rolls-Royce, which is planning to build up to six small modular reactor units in the Czech Republic. One of the EU’s fastest growing economies in Europe is, in fact, Poland, and we won Polish Airlines’ first order of 40 Airbus aircrafts, which will benefit the British economy. We have also agreed to start trade policy dialogue with Norway, and we are negotiating a trade agreement with Switzerland to boost trade services. Non-EU countries of course play a vital role in that tapestry as well.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
A sector in need of urgent attention is road haulage—moving not only goods but people across Europe for the purposes of tourism and education but also, importantly, film, TV, sport and music. My constituent Cameron works mainly in the music sector, supporting European tours and festivals. He tells me that the 90/180-day rule is leading to cancelled events and job losses, with some firms only employing dual nationals, using European firms rather than British ones or flying drivers home to swap out on longer journeys to avoid breaching the rules. Although the rules have existed since 2021, as the Secretary of State has told me, they have not been fully enforced. As part of the UK-EU reset, will he look at finding a way to help professional drivers keep the show on the road?
Peter Kyle
The hon. Member points to one of the areas where the Brexit deal negotiated by the Conservative party let down Britain. We are aware of those issues, and they are part of our negotiations. We will see what we can do for the sector into the future.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
I have heard from so many businesses in Wokingham that have suffered post Brexit with masses of red tape limiting their exports. Losing key trade relationships in Europe has meant that many local businesses have seen their profits evaporate. What are the Government doing to develop and strengthen trade with Europe, so that businesses in Wokingham can start to grow again? Agreeing a bespoke customs union would be a really good start.
Peter Kyle
The area over which we have the most agency is regulation in this country, and this Government are pledging to reduce the burden on business by 25%. We are very aware of the issue of regulation and barriers to trade, and I mentioned it in my meetings with three EU commissioners just in the last fortnight. Part of the reset is aimed at reducing the burdens on business.
It is good to see that Members from many parties in this House have a real interest in engaging in debate about healing our relationship with the EU and creating new opportunities with our biggest trading partner—with the exception of one party opposite, whose Members are all sitting there, silent. I wonder why.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)
Pubs and micropubs like the ones in my hon. Friend’s constituency are at the heart of all our communities. From April, every pub will receive a 15% reduction on its business rates bill, with bills then frozen in real terms for a further two years. Three quarters of pubs will see their bills stay the same or fall, saving the average pub around £1,650 next year. We are also launching a review of how pubs are valued for business rates and investing £10 million through the hospitality support fund to help pubs diversify and to improve productivity across the sector.
Daniel Francis
I recently visited the Bird & Barrel micropub in Barnehurst, which also operates the Bexley Brewery in Slade Green in my constituency. They informed me that, due to the number of tied tenants in the constituency, they have access to less than 8% of the local pub market across Bexleyheath and Crayford. They are pressing me, and I will be pressing, like my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns), to see the pubs code updated to support micropubs and breweries. Will my hon. Friend give some more detail about when we may see some more progress on that matter?
Kate Dearden
What a champion my hon. Friend is for micropubs in his constituency. From Anchor Bay to Bakewell Tart Stout, Bexley Brewery showcases an excellent range of beers, and small brewers and micropubs such as the Bird & Barrel play a vital role in supporting local communities and economies. Alongside the beer market review, the Government are carrying out a statutory review of the pubs code and the Pubs Code Adjudicator, as well as a post-implementation review to assess the code’s impact since 2016. The Government’s report covering that work will be published as soon as practicable.
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)
The Government closely monitor business confidence across the hospitality sector and recognise that businesses face real and sustained pressures. That is why we have announced targeted support measures to help the sector remain resilient. They include: permanently lower business rates for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties; a significant increase to the hospitality support fund; and action to reduce regulatory burdens by pressing ahead with licensing reform for a new national licensing policy framework to provide greater flexibility for pubs and hospitality venues, allowing them to thrive.
John Lamont
Hospitality businesses in the Scottish borders are being squeezed by rising energy costs and wage and supply bills. Does the Minister think that this Labour Government’s jobs tax has helped or hindered the hospitality sector?
Kate Dearden
Business confidence depends on economic stability, and that is exactly what this Government are delivering: a stable economy where businesses can invest in growth. The hon. Member will have heard my commitment to the hospitality sector—both my personal investment and my absolute determination to work closely with the sector so that we can build stronger local economies with stronger high streets and thriving businesses. Businesses will see that stronger demand, especially when working people have more money to spend, and we are focused on building that stability for our local communities and for businesses to benefit too.
Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)
It was worth waiting for. We are clear that Royal Mail’s service performance has not been good enough. I met the sector’s independent regulator Ofcom yesterday to stress the widespread concerns among hon. Members about service standards. My hon. Friend has deep experience in this area, and I welcome his engagement with the main delivery office in Corby, where Royal Mail tells me that it is recruiting nine new postal workers to support the timeliness and quality of its postal services.
Lee Barron
Quality of service in the Royal Mail has been at shocking levels over recent years. Considering that Royal Mail is legally obliged to deliver a universal service and keep our communities connected, will the Minister join me in calling on Royal Mail’s owners to honour their agreement, end the two-tier workforce, and bring new entrants’ terms and conditions up to the same standard as those of substantive Royal Mail employees? Fifty per cent of new entrants are leaving the service within a year, which is leading to a decimation in the quality of service.
Blair McDougall
My hon. Friend is correct to highlight that the service quality issues are linked directly to workers’ terms and conditions. It is precisely because we take that connection so seriously that the Secretary of State convened the meeting between the unions and the owners of Royal Mail. Ofcom made it clear in our meeting yesterday that it expects the plan for improvements in quality of service to be in place within days of an agreement being reached with the unions, and we will certainly hold Royal Mail to that.
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
Does the Minister agree that by being asked to focus on parcels over letters, and having overtime hours for deliveries restricted, many hard-working postal workers will feel that public trust in Royal Mail is being undermined?
Blair McDougall
I discussed the prioritisation of parcels with Ofcom yesterday. It had previously investigated the matter, and it is fair to say that it has heard the widespread concern around the House. If Ofcom continues to be concerned, it will not hesitate to investigate again.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Peter Kyle)
In the face of global uncertainty, the Government are acting with boldness, creativity and urgency to back British business. We will soon publish our steel strategy to secure an internationally competitive, investible and sustainable future for British-made steel. We are making highly significant interventions on energy. The supercharger discount will increase next month, further cutting costs for around 500 of the most energy-intensive businesses. The British industrial competitiveness scheme will slash electricity bills for 7,000 businesses by up to 25% from 2027.
We are helping businesses to scale and grow, with the British Business Bank making the largest ever equity investments and UK Export Finance working with banks to generate £11 billion-worth of support for small businesses to export. We are opening new markets, with the India free trade arrangement now through both Houses of Parliament. Just last week, I was in Brussels to sign a new competition co-operation agreement. I expect my Department to match the dynamism of the best of British entrepreneurs, and I am proud to report that with this Labour Government, it is.
Jayne Kirkham
Soul Farm, which delivers organic and sustainable food, is an example of a co-operative business in my constituency that benefits its community. I also have the “Save the Stag” campaign in Ponsanooth, which is trying to take over and run the local pub, as has already been done at the Ship Inn at Portloe. Setting up or transitioning to a co-op model can be difficult. Will the Minister update me on what support the Government are providing to help new co-ops to start up and existing businesses to transition to employee ownership?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s important question. She will know that our manifesto committed to double the size of the co-op and mutual sector, and we are well on the way to doing so. She will also know that a consultation on this issue closed very recently. We are analysing the results and we will make further statements very soon.
Andrew Griffith (Arundel and South Downs) (Con)
The Government do not create jobs; business does. With unemployment rising, this is the last chance to ask the Secretary of State a question ahead of the start of April when a tsunami of business rate rises will hit. Shops and restaurants will see a 50% increase on average and the business rates of hotels will double. He and I both represent wonderful Sussex constituencies full of hospitality, high street and tourism businesses, but young people need those jobs. For their sake and for others, will he finally postpone his business rate rise?
Peter Kyle
I enjoy these exchanges with the shadow Secretary of State. I note that Reform’s self-styled shadow Secretary of State—or, as I call him, the shadowy Secretary of State—is not in his place, despite being just next door in the Tea Room a few minutes ago. I think that speaks volumes.
The shadow Secretary of State knows that the private sector has created 380,000 jobs under this Government. We will continue to grow the economy and the number of people in work, and make sure that people benefit from all the rights we are delivering, which are pro-business and pro-worker. He spent 14 years letting down Britain. Now he has spent 18 months talking it down.
Andrew Griffith
The Secretary of State forgets that I have not even been here for 14 years. Some days it feels like that, but I can assure him that it is not the case. There was no answer to that question, so let me try another. Does he agree that there is something pretty badly wrong with employment law in this country when Peter Mandelson, the friend of a convicted paedophile and leaker of classified Government documents, walks away with a £75,000 pay-off? The permanent secretary thinks that is good value for money. Will the Secretary of State review Labour’s policy of uncapping employment tribunal payouts for the highest earners?
Peter Kyle
As is so often the case when we have these exchanges, the shadow Secretary of State spends a lot of his time slagging off his own record in office. The Conservatives had 14 years to reform tribunal rights—they did not even touch it. They had 14 years to update workers’ rights and employment status in this country—they did not do it. The economy moved forward; they failed to move forward.
Turning to the issue of Peter Mandelson, I start by recognising that there are victims at the heart of this debate and the issues surrounding it. Those victims are in my mind today as I answer this question, and they have been all the way through. We will make sure that those victims get the justice they deserve. When it comes to the issues surrounding Peter Mandelson, there are multiple inquiries under way. Thames Valley police is leading on a criminal inquiry, and I will leave it at that.
Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)
I thank my hon. Friend for her work in this area. The Government believe that trade unions are absolutely essential for tackling insecurity, inequality, discrimination, enforcement and low pay. We are providing a legal framework for businesses and unions to negotiate access to the workplace. We recognise that for the framework to effectively facilitate that access, it has to be supported. That is why we are consulting on this. Officials are reviewing those responses, and we will publish a response in due course.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Blair McDougall)
Fuel duty is currently frozen. The key thing we can do to make sure we deal with this instability in energy prices is de-escalate in the region. I remind the hon. Member that his party has been calling for us to join the war.
Emma Foody (Cramlington and Killingworth) (Lab/Co-op)
Blair McDougall
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Co-operatives create a really important sense of connection at a time when people feel disconnected, but co-ops and mutuals are also more resilient and more productive. That is why we have made the commitment she references. Our call for evidence has closed, and we are working on the proposals that will flow out of that. I really welcome the news this morning that the John Lewis bonus is returning and congratulate it on its results.
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
Blair McDougall
Our small business strategy sets out the range of measures we are taking to support small businesses. That includes an increase of £4 billion in the finance available to businesses, so that they can invest to take advantage of those opportunities. We will also bring forward the strongest proposals on late payments, to improve cash flow to small businesses, as well as cutting red tape, so that they can take advantage of the opportunities the hon. Member describes.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
The Minister for Trade (Chris Bryant)
I thank my hon. Friend for standing up for the business in her constituency, and she is absolutely right. The Trade Remedies Authority is investigating, as she knows, and I urge industry to participate in that, although I cannot comment on the precise details of the investigation because it might eventually come to my desk. Importantly, we need to make sure that dumping is not acceptable, because it makes it impossible for British businesses to prosper. We will do everything in our power to make sure that we use the remedies available to us to protect British businesses.
Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)
Peter Kyle
I am always grateful for invitations to drinks with the right hon. Gentleman. I might well ask him to come to Hove, though; I have been to his constituency a number of times over the years and it is about time he visited mine. When he is there, he will see a thriving hospitality sector, but one that does need support to meet its full potential. We accept that, which is why we have introduced so many support packages since we came into office. What the hospitality sector needs is what every other sector in the economy needs: a stable industrial strategy—
Mr Speaker
Order. Secretary of State, we have a lot of Back-Benchers who are desperate to get in and who want to hear from you.
Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)
For years scotch whisky has faced sky-high import tariffs in India—as high as 150%. The Scotch Whisky Association has described the tariff cuts as “transformational”, and the Scotch whisky industry supports thousands of jobs in my constituency. Does the Minister agree that the increased bilateral trade with India is set to grow the Scottish economy by £190 million a year and is a massive win for the whisky industry, West Dunbartonshire and Scotland?
Chris Bryant
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I commend him for supporting his constituents. Equally importantly, there are many Scottish products in respect of which we need to ensure that British businesses can take the opportunities the India FTA affords, and build on those so that we can build strong British businesses. We also have geographical identification for Scotch whisky in Argentina. We need to build on these gains around the world.
Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)
I recently had the pleasure of visiting Ionoptika, a fantastic local employer in Chandler’s Ford. It told me that UK small and medium-sized enterprises are being impacted by export licence turnaround times, which are taking up to six months for non-controlled goods. Will the Minister confirm when we will see a significant improvement in turnaround times?
Chris Bryant
I am happy to meet the hon. Member if she wants to take me through some of the specific issues in her constituency; I have done that for several hon. Members, and we had a roundtable last week to try to get the timelines down. Sometimes it is difficult. The median time in which we sort them out is 14 days, but if the hon. Member has problems, I am happy to tackle them with her.
Sally Jameson (Doncaster Central) (Lab/Co-op)
From Kingswood accountants to Automated Analytics and our young traders market, Doncaster is home to many businesses run by ambitious entrepreneurs. Will the Minister update the House on how Government support, such as the start-up loan scheme and the growth guarantee scheme, are helping young entrepreneurs and start-ups, and on what more we can do in this policy area?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s advocacy on this issue. Britain is the start-up capital of Europe. We are doubling down to ensure that once businesses are started up, they can scale up, stay and build their innovation here, which is why we are also the unicorn capital of Europe. We will double down and make sure that all that innovation, job creation and wealth creation remain here benefiting Britain, including my hon. Friend’s constituency.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
Anchor Sound and Security, based in Kings Langley, explained to me how it is disincentivised to hire more employees due to rising compliance costs and regulatory uncertainty. What is the Minister doing to stop regulations stifling small business growth and destroying the strong relationships between employer and employees?
Peter Kyle
The Government have a commitment to reduce the regulatory burden on business by 25%. My Department led on almost £1 billion of regulatory reform for company reporting in just the first weeks of our taking office. The small business plan and strategy will deliver for small businesses, on top of the industrial strategy, of course, which is getting our economy facing the future and into solid growth for now and the future.
Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)
I add my voice to that of my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) in calling on the Government to publish the review of market access for small breweries as soon as possible. I was delighted that Moot Brew brewery from Halling in my constituency produced the guest ale for the Strangers’ Bar in the House of Commons before Christmas. Will the Secretary of State support a national guest beer agreement policy, so that more fantastic local brewers such as Moot are represented in my local pubs?
Kate Dearden
My hon. Friend is a real champion for her local breweries, especially Moot Brew in Halling, which produces excellent beer—I know she visits regularly. We recognise the importance of independent breweries and pubs, and we are of course committed to ensuring that the sector remains diverse, competitive and rooted in local communities. We have reviewed the beer market to assess any barriers, and I will keep my hon. Friend updated.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con)
Small-volume business manufacturers in the automotive sector are having a terrible time at the moment. They rely on exports, and exports to the US are critical. Although I welcome the agreement the Government struck, costs are still four times what they were before President Trump introduced his tariffs, and those businesses are also being squeezed by business rates and national insurance at home. Will the Secretary of State make urgent representations to the Chancellor? The market is very delicate, and something must be done to reduce costs.
Peter Kyle
The right hon. Gentleman raises an issue that is close to my heart. The Government and I care deeply about the future of the automotive sector. Exports are incredibly important to it, but so is the security of supply chains. I have raised this issue not only with our US counterparts and other export markets but with the EU, to protect supply chains. My ministerial colleague chaired the Automotive Council just yesterday; we are listening, gauging and acting on behalf of the sector. Automotive production fell by 50% when the Conservatives were running the country. We are trying to get it back up to where it deserves to be.
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
The Select Committee recently flagged that small businesses in our country now face pandemic-level pressures. In April, standing charges for energy are set to rise by 60%, with no price cap protection. Now, soaring oil and gas prices threaten to be the final straw for thousands of SMEs. Will the Secretary of State make an urgent assessment of the risk of soaring energy prices, and give a clear account of how we will keep the SMEs that keep this country running in business?
Blair McDougall
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have taken action through the British industrial competitiveness scheme, which is a downpayment on exactly the sort of support he describes. We are constantly working on ways to cut costs for small businesses, and I am sure we will work with the Select Committee on that.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
Last time we were here for Business and Trade questions, I asked about exports of paraquat—the use of which is forbidden here—to other countries, and I live in hope that I will get an answer to that question. To update the ministerial team, Syngenta—the company that makes paraquat—put out a press release on 3 March to say that it would stop production this year. May I therefore expand my previous question to ensure that the response includes the export of pesticides and other products whose use is banned in the UK?
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
The UK economy needs more and more critical minerals, and in Cornwall we have loads of them. Private capital has flown into the duchy on the back of the Labour Government’s investments of about £100 million through the national wealth fund and the Kernow industrial growth fund, but will the Minister update the House on Government plans to unlock more private investment in our critical minerals sector to unleash the Cornish Celtic tiger?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Chris McDonald)
My hon. Friend is right: Cornwall has loads of critical minerals. They will be beneficial in driving not only the UK economy but great businesses and export opportunities. As we have said before, we want companies to scale and grow in the UK, to be headquartered and listed in the UK, and to provide great jobs in the UK. That is why I am working with my hon. Friend and his Cornish Labour colleagues, and with the industry and capital markets in the UK, to corral capital into Cornish critical minerals.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Since part of Grimsby falls in my constituency, I join my Member of Parliament, the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn), in celebrating Great Grimsby Day. I recently attended a meeting with the hon. Member for Scunthorpe (Sir Nicholas Dakin) and a group of potential investors in the steel industry, who I know have made approaches to the Secretary of State. Can he give me an assurance that all potential private sector investments in the industry will be given serious consideration?
Peter Kyle
I congratulate the hon. Member on Great Grimsby Day, and I can give him that assurance.
Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for speaking to me about the poor postal service in Dargavel Village in Bishopton. I know he is working hard to resolve matters and answer questions and had meetings yesterday, and I thank him for that. However, as he will appreciate, this matter is of particular importance in Scotland due to the elections on 7 May, because postal votes will be issued soon. In Scotland we have an NHS with significant waiting lists, and we cannot have people missing medical appointments, so on behalf of residents of Bishopton in particular, may I stress the urgency of this matter?
Blair McDougall
My office manager lives in Dargavel Village, so I have a person incentive to ensure that the service improves in the area my hon. Friend represents. We spoke about it yesterday; we have called in Royal Mail, we have brought together unions and management and we had a meeting yesterday with Ofcom to stress that things have to improve. Specific meetings are taking place on postal votes in Scotland, and we have sought assurances that they will not be impacted by the problems with the quality of service.
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
Yesterday I met representatives of the British Chambers of Commerce, who relayed the profound concerns of the UK automative industry that it might be excluded from the European Union’s proposed industrial accelerator Act. Nissan and Honda have already broken cover to say that their futures may be uncertain unless they are included in the “made in Europe” rules. What is the Secretary of State doing, with his Front-Bench team and across Government, to ensure that the UK automotive sector is not placed at a competitive disadvantage as a consequence of those measures?
Peter Kyle
The hon. Member’s question is incredibly important. He will know that my ministerial team and I have been very active on this issue. Just a couple of weeks ago in Brussels I raised it directly with Commissioners. He will also know that in the proposed Act, which has not yet been introduced, there are potential challenges for the automotive sector. We are working with our EU colleagues to make sure that voices of the business community are being heard loud and clear and that the automotive sector—in which 86% of the components assembled in this country come from EU countries—is respected, valued, and secure in the future.
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
The sudden shift in steel import policy has created uncertainty for firms that have invested heavily in expanding their operations based on previously stable trading conditions. Will the Secretary of State commit to working with affected businesses in Scotland, including Central Rebar in Alloa, and provide clarity to prevent further disruption and to ensure that companies vital to the Scottish industrial base are not placed at a competitive disadvantage?
Chris McDonald
The Government are incredibly concerned about the gradual erosion of UK domestic steel production compared with imports. I ask my hon. Friend to wait a very short time until the steel strategy is published, and after that he might like a further discussion with me.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
High streets are a key concern for us all in this House. On the Promenade in Cheltenham we have Cavendish House, which was a cherished retail centre for 200 years. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Rhondda and Ogmore (Chris Bryant) remembers it. Now it is empty; Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct left and now we have a big, empty building owned by Canada Life. Does the Minister agree that the big pension and investment companies need to pay more respect to our high streets and bring forward planning applications to redevelop and regenerate as soon as they possibly can? We should not be left waiting for as long as we have been.
Blair McDougall
My hon. Friend the Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden) mentioned a moment ago that we are working on a new high street strategy, which will seek to deal with some of the issues the hon. Member mentioned. We want investors to step up, but we also have a responsibility, through planning reform, to make it easier to regenerate the types of areas he described.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
Given the global energy crisis, manufacturers reliant on gas will struggle with the recent spikes in energy costs. Will the Secretary of State confirm whether his Department is considering a transitional dual fuel discount, alongside the British industrial competitiveness scheme, for industries that will continue to use gas for the foreseeable future?
Peter Kyle
My hon. Friend will know that the impact of BICS is essential, and it will be fundamental in getting growth into the economy and sustainable businesses into the future. We are looking carefully at how the learning from that can be applied in other areas.
Speaker’s Statement
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate
Mr Speaker
Before we come to business questions, I would like to say something about yesterday evening’s proceedings. The final Division of the day on the Third Reading of the Finance (No. 2) Bill was subject to intolerable delays in the voting Lobbies. This Parliament is meant to be respected around the world and should set an example of good behaviour. The behaviour in the Lobby last night involving a group of about half a dozen Government Members, including the Chief Whip and the Deputy Chief Whip, was totally unacceptable. I expect better from right hon. and hon. Members. If Members are asked to move swiftly through the Lobbies, they must do so. The fact that it took 22 minutes to get a vote through is beyond the pale.
I cannot believe this behaviour. It is absolutely not going to be accepted. The Serjeant at Arms lost his authority, because MPs said, “I am not moving,” and pretended to be ill—by 7 o’clock they were suddenly well again. Do we think that gives us good standing in the world? It does not. It is appalling. We should be ashamed. I hope that I will be getting letters from the people who were involved in that protest. If the Government cannot manage the business, perhaps they ought to go on a training exercise rather than disrupting the rules of the House.
I expect better from right hon. and hon. Members. If Members are asked to move swiftly, they must do so and respect the Serjeant. There are other ways in which Government Whips can manage the timings of business in the Chamber. To behave as they did was disrespectful to the House, to the occupant of the Chair—the Deputy Speaker was put in an impossible position—and to the office of the Serjeant at Arms. The Members involved should be ashamed.
Business of the House
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)
Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?
The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)
The business for the week commencing 16 March will include:
Monday 16 March—Consideration of an allocation of time motion, followed by all stages of the Grenfell Tower Memorial (Expenditure) Bill.
Tuesday 17 March—Consideration of an allocation of time motion, followed by all stages of the Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill.
Wednesday 18 March—Opposition day (19th allotted day). Debate on a motion in the name of the official Opposition—subject to be announced.
Thursday 19 March—General debate on progress in tackling climate change, followed by a debate on a motion on online harms. The subjects of these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 20 March—The House will not be sitting.
The provisional business for the week commencing 23 March includes:
Monday 23 March—Consideration of Lords amendments to the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, followed by consideration of Lords amendments to the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Bill.
Jesse Norman
Mr Speaker, let me start by associating myself with your remarks just now from the Chair. It is plain to all Members of the House that the Government Chief Whip and Deputy Chief Whip have badly mis-stepped. Indeed, there has been scant respect for the House more generally from the Government Whips Office. I cannot believe that such a thing would have happened when the Leader of the House was Chief Whip.
If I may, let me join the Prime Minister yesterday, and I am sure the whole House today, in remembering the dreadful events of 30 years ago in Dunblane and paying tribute to the victims and their families.
On a happier note, last Monday saw the 250th anniversary of Adam Smith’s immortal masterpiece “The Wealth of Nations”.
Jesse Norman
Hon. Members may wish, if they like, to consult works by the shadow Leader of the House on this topic. I doubt whether any other book or any single body of thought has had more effect in improving the lives and livelihoods of people across the world in the intervening 250 years.
We celebrate the service of our armed forces and we rightly treat defence matters, wherever possible, as bound by a united focus on the national interest, but it is precisely that focus on the national interest that requires us now to acknowledge that the past two weeks have been a disaster for this country. Our allies in the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and across the Gulf have criticised this country for its “slow” and “weak” response to date. The Cypriot high commissioner and the President of Cyprus have publicly expressed their disappointment and dissatisfaction. Why? Because we have exposed their people and our people to drone attacks as targets, placed weapons systems on their territories, made solemn undertakings to them over many years and now failed to come to their defence in time.
It did not have to be this way, so we must ask how this can possibly have happened. Let us review the history. It was being publicly reported by 15 January that America was starting to build a carrier strike force around the USS Abraham Lincoln, targeted at Iran. On 26 January, The Washington Post reported that this force had arrived in the middle east. On 31 January, our own Prime Minister told the BBC:
“The aim is that Iran shouldn’t be able to develop nuclear weapons…we support the goal and we are talking to allies about how we get to that goal.”
Those remarks come close to an explicit endorsement of the United States on its operation, as they were doubtless intended to.
The key point is this: all this happened four full weeks before the start of the attack. Last week, at this Dispatch Box, I highlighted the gaps and inconsistencies in the Government’s position, between their supposedly settled legal view and the last-ditch political decision reportedly taken in Cabinet on the Friday before hostilities began, and secondly between the Cabinet and the Prime Minister, whose original instinct was to support the USA but who was overruled.
It is now clear that there has also been a disastrous failure of political leadership. The Prime Minister and the Cabinet knew, or should have known, for a full month that the USA was mustering a vast body of forces to attack Iran, that it could not remain on high readiness indefinitely, and so an attack must surely follow. The Prime Minister himself said last week that the Government had pre-deployed some weapons to the region, yet he failed to give instructions in time to the Navy to prepare HMS Dragon, he failed to notify the Cypriots, and he failed to warn our allies and other friends across the region.
Now that they are engaged, our armed forces are discharging their duties with distinction, but the result of this political incompetence has been a fiasco, which brought shame and dishonour on this country. We have the disgraceful sight now of the Government anonymously trashing the Chief of the Defence Staff, in a desperate attempt to deflect responsibility for their own inadequacies, not just via an anonymous leak in The Spectator, repeated in The Telegraph, but by a quoted, but of course unnamed, official to the Financial Times. I cannot recall that a political hatchet job of this kind has ever been performed on a commanding officer in the course of a military operation. It is deeply dishonourable and itself a further sign of failure in No. 10.
Will the Leader of the House support an inquiry into these leaks and briefings? Will he support an investigation, in due course, as to how this embarrassing fiasco can have been allowed to happen and what can be done to prevent it from ever happening again?
Sir Alan Campbell
May I first respond to your words, Mr Speaker, about the events of yesterday evening? I endorse everything that you have said about the need to respect staff—it is absolutely correct that you should say that and I absolutely endorse your remarks. I assure you and the House that not only have the Government heard your words, but they will be acted upon.
May I also associate myself with the remarks that the shadow Leader of the House made about Dunblane? We remember that tragedy. On a personal level, one of the proudest moments in my career was when I voted for a ban on handguns, because that has made a difference to the safety of our communities.
I will turn to the specific remarks made by the right hon. Gentleman in a moment, but the events unfolding in Iran are deeply concerning, and our thoughts are with British citizens and our brave servicemen and servicewomen in the region. The security and safety of British citizens across the region is the Government’s top priority. The first Government-charted flight landed on Tuesday morning, with the second landing on Wednesday. We will continue to explore all options for helping our citizens to return home as swiftly and safely as possible. Drop-in sessions are being held for MPs with concerns. As I said last week, should Members face issues or be unable to get the support that they need for their constituents, I invite them to speak to my office and my officials—we will help in any way we can.
This week, we have launched the social cohesion action plan, which sets out the steps that the Government are taking to improve social cohesion and protect what matters. We will invest in initiatives that create opportunities for connection across backgrounds, and we will expand the Pride in Place programme, which puts more communities at the heart of decision making in their own neighbourhoods. We will develop new tools and powers to safeguard organisations that spread extremism and hate, and that threaten public safety.
It is correct to reflect that last Sunday was Covid-19 Day of Reflection—an opportunity to come together to remember those who lost their lives and to honour the tireless work and acts of kindness shown by many during the pandemic. The Government remain committed to learning the lessons needed from the covid inquiry to protect and prepare us for the future. As a sign of that commitment, just last year the Government held the largest pandemic exercise in British history.
Let me turn to the remarks of the shadow Leader of the House. I agree with his first point; it is incumbent on us in this House that parties work together in times of crisis, which we are facing. I also agree that a bipartisan approach—if we can get one—is the best approach. That is what we did in opposition, even though some of those decisions were very difficult, so I am disappointed in his remarks today. I am particularly disappointed in the leader of his party, the right hon. Member for North West Essex (Mrs Badenoch), because she simply does not seem to acknowledge the importance and responsibility that come with her office.
In terms of the story that the shadow Leader of the House has set out, let me say that we sent assets to the region at the beginning of the year, and HMS Dragon has been dispatched. As I just said, we hold the safety and security of British citizens and servicemen and servicewomen very highly indeed.
On the wider issue that the shadow Leader of the House raises, I simply remind him that his Government left our defences in a shocking state, not least in the diminished surface fleet, with defence expenditure going down. Our task is to rebuild our defences, and we are committed to increasing spending to keep our servicemen and servicewomen safe. In terms of an inquiry, we are in the midst of an international crisis. If such an inquiry is necessary in the future, it should wait until we ensure that our citizens and our servicemen and servicewomen are safe.
Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)
Overgrown vegetation is impeding access to footpaths on Stansfeld Avenue and Pritchard Drive in Hawkinge in my constituency. When I made representations on behalf of local residents to the local council, I was informed that the footpaths are not registered with the town council, the district council or the county council, because the developers did not consider their long-term stewardship. Until now, local volunteers have ended up having to keep them clear themselves. Will the Leader of the House find time for a debate on the responsibility of developers to ensure the proper adoption and maintenance of footpaths and other community infrastructure?
Sir Alan Campbell
Unadopted roads and pavements can cause a range of issues for residents, and this Government are currently consulting on the issue of unadopted amenities. I am sure that Members will be updated when that work has concluded, but I will ensure that my hon. Friend’s comments are brought to the attention of Ministers.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
I bring to the House this week a matter that I have raised with the Leader of the House before: fraud. As he knows, fraud is a devastating crime that can destroy people’s life savings and plunge them into debt, and it is now the most frequently experienced crime in Britain. On Monday, the Government released their fraud strategy, but anybody would be forgiven for not noticing, because no Minister came to the Dispatch Box to speak about it, and there was hardly any media coverage.
Given how prevalent this crime is, we have to ask ourselves why no noise was made about this significant strategy. I think the reason is that a key pre-election commitment on fraud was quietly dropped. The Prime Minister himself said that big tech companies need to be held financially accountable for their role in fraud, but when the strategy was released, it did not enforce that commitment; instead, an industry working group emerged, which will talk to the industry and ask them nicely to act. The banks and financial regulators are unhappy about this—of course, the banks are on the hook for paying out compensation to customers when they are victims of fraud. They say that when they try to get big tech companies to act, those companies are far too slow and not responsive, and the only thing that will make them act is if they are also hit in the pocket when fraud takes place. Can the Leader of the House organise for a Minister to come to the Dispatch Box and explain why that commitment was dropped? Also, I raised this matter with the Leader of the House in October last year, and I still have not received a reply from the Minister.
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman asks why there was not a statement on Monday regarding the launch of the strategy. Monday was particularly busy—there were important statements—and the fact that there was not an oral statement on the strategy is not a reflection on the importance of fraud. However, I will bear in mind what he has said.
I am pleased that the hon. Gentleman has pointed out that the Government launched their fraud strategy this week. As he says, fraud is distressing and disruptive, and has long-term effects on victims. I am not as pessimistic as he is about our strategy; it sets out how we will use every tool at our disposal to disrupt and dismantle criminal operations, bring fraudsters to justice and strengthen protection and support for victims; £250 million is being invested over the next three years for that fight. However, I note his request for a statement and an update, and I will bring it to the attention of the relevant Minister.
Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)
Ellesmere Port is benefiting from investment in its new market and £20 million from the Pride in Place fund, but the shopping centre is basically being left to rot by its owners, Adhan. The problem we have is that Adhan is a private company. It has made many promises of investment in the past, but has not delivered; shops are left empty, units are not filled, and the heating in the centre does not even work. Adhan is milking the centre dry and leaving a big hole in the town centre. It is a real shame that this is happening when we have so much other investment, so could we please have a debate about what more powers local authorities could have to compel investment in the whole of our town centres?
Sir Alan Campbell
The reality is that when the Conservative party was in government, it hollowed out our high streets. We are giving unprecedented new powers to local communities to seize boarded-up shops and revitalise neglected high streets, but I will share my hon. Friend’s concerns with Ministers. Should he seek a meeting, I will facilitate one, or if he wants to hear directly from Ministers in a debate, I encourage him to apply for one.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, I can advise Members that on Thursday 26 March, there will be debates in the Chamber on transport accessibility for disabled people, and on support for Gurkha veterans. In Westminster Hall next week, there will be a number of debates, including one on productivity and economic growth in the east midlands and another—which I am sure will be particularly popular—on the accessibility of banking services. In the week commencing 23 March, there will be debates on sudden unexplained death in childhood, and on outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and cranio-cervical instability. There may possibly be a debate on the merits of mandatory body armour for prison officers, but that one is provisional. As the Leader of the House knows, we have a great deal of outstanding debates needing time, and the weekly plea for more time is coming his way.
Turning to an issue of mine, I have many park home owners in my constituency. As I am sure the Leader of the House will be aware, the Government published research only this week about park home owners. The Backbench Business Committee has a pending debate on this subject; if the Leader of the House was particularly generous with Government time, we could bring that forward and satisfy the many park home owners throughout the country.
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank the hon. Gentleman, and indeed the whole Committee for its work. I note with particular pleasure that a debate is scheduled on access to banking services, an issue that has been raised in business questions many times. I cannot promise him more time at the moment, but I recognise that it is important to get confirmation of time as early as possible, and I will endeavour to do that.
We recognise the long-standing concerns of park home residents about things like commission fees. We have launched a call for evidence, and I encourage the hon. Gentleman’s constituents, and everyone else’s, to contribute to it. I remind the House that park home residents are entitled to free independent legal advice about their rights through the Government-funded Leasehold Advisory Service.
Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)
My hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster Central (Sally Jameson) and I have often spoken in the House about the appalling audiology service at Doncaster Royal infirmary. It has put an action plan in place, and the situation regarding first-time appointments has improved, but second and third appointments are just not happening, and people are waiting for hearing aid refits and repairs. Will the Leader of the House ask Ministers to set out how they will support trusts to expand capacity for follow-up audiology care, including through the use of high street provision, where that can be provided under the NHS?
Sir Alan Campbell
We know that people are waiting too long for community health services, and we are committed to cutting waiting lists, including for audiology. We are providing capital investment to upgrade audiology facilities in NHS trusts and expand audiology testing capacity through community diagnostic centres. I have raised my hon. Friend’s concerns with Health Ministers, who I believe wrote to him on the matter earlier this week, but I will ensure that the Department hears his latest question.
Sir Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)
Manufacturers and distributors of bullets in the UK are extremely concerned about the decision by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to ban lead bullets in 2029. The EU was about to make the same decision, but pulled back from it. Can we have an urgent debate about the impact of the decision on UK sovereign capability?
Sir Alan Campbell
I can offer the right hon. Gentleman a meeting with Ministers, if that is what he seeks, and will certainly draw to their attention the point that he raises.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
Lots of us in Aylesbury and the villages have watched the Channel 4 drama “Dirty Business”. One resident described it to me as harrowing, powerful and emotive, and they are right. The Government have made some good progress in tackling the crime of sewage in our waterways through the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025, but will the Leader of the House ensure that further parliamentary time is allocated to debate and advance our long-overdue reforms to the water sector?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises a very important matter, and the programme to which she refers has rightly caused concern among people and started a dialogue on these matters, which it is important that we have. The reality is that the previous Government should never have allowed the water sector to get into this state, because the public deserve better. As she says, our Water (Special Measures) Act will introduce tough enforcement measures, the most powerful in a decade. The water White Paper goes further, setting out clear powers for the new water regulator, and a new water reform Bill will create the laws that we need to fundamentally change the system. When that Bill is introduced, there will be plenty of time to debate this matter.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
The situation at Zachary Merton hospital in my constituency is causing deep concern locally. Services there were closed on what residents were told was a temporary basis, but that closure has now been made permanent. The evidence behind that decision has not been clearly set out. Communities rightly expect candour when decisions are taken about the future of local healthcare provision. Does the Leader of the House agree that there is a wider issue here about transparency and accountability for NHS service decisions, and will he consider granting a debate in Government time on the future of community healthcare provision?
Sir Alan Campbell
I agree on the need for candour and openness for residents, who are obviously concerned about the matter to which the hon. Lady refers. Should she wish to make her case to the relevant Minister, I will make sure that she has that opportunity.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
Comedy has always been part of the fabric of British society, so I am delighted to be a patron of the newly launched CRAFT, the Comedy Representation and Artform Trust, which has been set up to give the comedy industry the formal recognition that it deserves, and to ensure fair funding and Government and industry support. Comedians range from national treasures and emerging talent to home-grown funny people in our communities, such as Steve Cook in my constituency of South Derbyshire, who runs “I love Swad” on Facebook with Pete Jacob and Dan Brass. Steve never fails to make me laugh. The council decided to turn a roundabout into an “interesting feature”, which he has called “Swadhenge”. Members will find it if they google it, and it features on Tripadvisor. Does the Leader of the House agree that comedy is an art form, not just a genre? Will he join me in thanking Lu Jackson—the founder of CRAFT—Steve Cook, and all those who support comedy in the UK?
Sir Alan Campbell
Comedy, much like me, brings light and laughter to our lives. It is a talent and an art that I am proud to join my hon. Friend in recognising. I thank everyone who supports the incredible UK comedy scene, including Lu Jackson from CRAFT and Steve Cook from her constituency.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
It was good that the Government hosted a session on heating oil. In rural constituencies, such as North East Fife, almost 15% of people rely on heating oil, so it is really important that the Government are debating this issue. As the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael), has said, red diesel is also an issue. The rural impacts of the conflict in Iran go beyond heating oil; fertiliser is another challenge, with reports of a 40% increase in the cost. Given that food security is becoming even more vital, will the Leader of the House ensure that we have a statement from the Environment Secretary on the rural impacts of the conflict?
Sir Alan Campbell
I do not think we have been shy in bringing forward statements on matters that have arisen from the crisis in Iran, and we will continue to do so. The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise concerns about heating oil and other matters. As she knows, the Energy Minister has asked the Competition and Markets Authority to make sure that consumers are treated fairly, and there is the option of an investigation into unfair practices, if that becomes necessary. The Government are very cognisant of energy prices in general, but also of the price of heating oil and fuel. We will keep that under close watch and, when appropriate, update the House on what we intend to do about it.
James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)
This weekend marks the 50th anniversary of the West Ham station attack, in which an IRA bomb exploded on a tube train, injuring nine people. Post Office engineer Peter Chalk was shot and seriously injured, and the tube driver, Joseph Julius Stephen, was shot and killed, as they attempted to stop the attacker escaping. Mr Stephen was posthumously awarded the Queen’s Gallantry medal, and we are marking his sacrifice at the station this week. Will the Leader of the House join me in marking this anniversary, and in sending the House’s best wishes to his widow, Janet? Does he agree that we should always mark significant anniversaries, particularly when they involve public sector workers who stepped up, went above and beyond the call of duty, and sacrificed or risked their life to protect the public?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join my hon. Friend in sending our best wishes to the friends and family of Mr Stephen, and I thank him for raising this important anniversary. It is important that we remember such events, not least because it underlines the importance of community. I join my hon. Friend in recognising all public servants who have acted in the face of danger to protect us as we go about our daily life.
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
Last week, I met Toby Hammond, the lead volunteer for West Yorkshire scouts. Astonishingly, the scouts have learned that they could be hit by Labour’s new tourist tax, which is being introduced by the Mayor of West Yorkshire, Tracy Brabin. Because the tax is on overnight stays, it could apply to youth camps, outdoor experiences and sleepovers run by volunteers at scout groups across Keighley and Ilkley, who give up their evenings for the benefit of our young people. The tax will hit thousands of children and young people, who will be negatively impacted. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate on this issue, and join me in urging the Mayor of West Yorkshire to scrap this tax once and for all? It is impacting many of our scout groups, which continue to do vital work for our young people.
Sir Alan Campbell
I sincerely hope that the impact is not as the hon. Gentleman has led us to believe. If he wants confirmation about that, I will arrange for a Minister to explain the situation to him. It is absolutely right that mayors are given the choice of whether they introduce a tourist tax. It will be controversial in many ways—we understand that—but let us not forget that there are benefits in what that income can be used for. I join with him in his worry that, if it impacts negatively on scouts, that should be borne in mind because they do a fantastic job.
Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)
Bank closures have affected many communities. In Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney, we have a banking hub in Abertillery and will shortly have one in Ebbw Vale, so that residents have access to bank services on their high street. These are very popular, and it is great that the Government are committed to delivering 350 banking hubs. May we have a statement to find out how that is going, and to hear about lessons learned and whether access to hubs could be widened in the future?
Sir Alan Campbell
Banking is changing, with many customers benefiting from the convenience of managing their finances remotely, but the Government understand the importance for many people of face-to-face banking and are committed to supporting sufficient access for customers. That is why the financial services industry, with Government support, is committed to rolling out 350 banking hubs. That 350 is not an upper limit on how many there will be. There will be 350 by the end of this Parliament, but there is no reason why the process cannot continue. The Government are working closely with the industry on this commitment, including through regular ministerial engagement. As we assess the roll-out of banking hubs, I am sure Ministers will want to bear in mind the need to update the House when appropriate.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
May I associate myself with the remarks of the Leader of the House and the shadow Leader of the House about the anniversary of Dunblane?
Many of us in this place have pensioner constituents abroad, and the 90% of them who are in the Commonwealth had their pensions frozen from the point at which they left. This is an issue of great concern not just to them, but increasingly to the Governments of Canada and Australia in particular, as it places a heavy burden on them. The annual regulations were recently passed by this House, but that happened without scrutiny because of the way in which they are passed. Is there a way to arrange a meeting with Ministers or a debate in the House so that we can examine this policy and see if there is a way to amend it to make it fairer both for those pensioners and for everyone else affected by it?
Sir Alan Campbell
I do not know the answer to the hon. Lady’s question, except to say that if she seeks a meeting with a Minister, I will help her to facilitate one.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
Monday 16 March marks the start of Sign Language Week. Derby has the largest deaf community of any local authority in the country, thanks in large part to the Royal School for the Deaf, which was founded in 1898, and the strong and supportive community that has arisen ever since. Even in Derby, however, too many people find public services inaccessible. Does the Leader of the House agree that, across our public services, everyone should be able to access information and communicate in a way that works for them? Will he join me in wishing everyone who uses British Sign Language in Derby and across the country a very happy Sign Language Week? [In British Sign Language: Happy Sign Language Week.]
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this matter to the House, and I absolutely endorse her remarks about more people being able to use and understand sign language, because it is a vital means of communication for many people. I hope that this week raises some much-needed awareness of the importance of British Sign Language, so I take this opportunity, along with the whole House, to wish everyone a happy Sign Language Week.
Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)
Farmers in Kingswinford and South Staffordshire have contacted me in recent days about the steep rise in the price of key inputs such as fertilisers and straw. Current events are likely to make these pressures even more acute, with serious implications for farm viability and domestic food production. Could we have a debate in Government time on the rising costs facing British farmers and the long-term resilience of UK food production?
Sir Alan Campbell
It seems longer, but we are 11 days into this particular crisis and, as I said, the Government have not been shy in bringing forward statements where necessary on particular aspects of it. I will raise the hon. Gentleman’s concerns with Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Ministers who, I am sure, are watching the situation very carefully. Should the need arise to update the House, I am sure that that is what they will do.
Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)
There are around 430 farmer-owned co-operatives in the UK and around 150,000 farmer members, with a turnover of £10 billion a year. They deliver high quality food produced the highest welfare and environmental standards. With food security being national security and the Government being committed to doubling the size of the co-operative sector, will the Leader of the House grant time for a debate on expanding the agricultural co-operative sector, so that it can play a role in strengthening the UK’s food production?
Sir Alan Campbell
I pay tribute to the co-operative movement for the work it does in this regard. It is a very important part of the story of food production. Should my hon. Friend seek a debate on these matters, I am sure there are many Members across the House who would want to join in to discuss what is a very important subject.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
May we have an update from a Health Minister on progress in the review of prostate cancer policy and whether it will focus, as it should, on such issues as targeting particularly vulnerable age groups or ethnic groups, such as black males, one quarter of whom will be affected by this disease at some stage in their lives, and speeding up National Institute for Health and Care Excellence approval of relevant drug treatments in England and Wales which are already being prescribed in Northern Ireland and Scotland?
Sir Alan Campbell
The right hon. Gentleman will know that the Government have produced England’s first ever men’s health strategy. We are not just reforming the way things are done; we are putting in the investment as well. On the specific issue he raises, which I agree is an extraordinarily important matter, I will seek an update from a Health Minister for him. Should he seek further detail after that, I will help him to arrange that, too.
Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)
I was delighted to see the Eden Project’s recent report, which shone a light on the nearly £7 billion-worth of positive impact it has drawn into the Cornish economy and our community over the past 25 years. Will the Leader of the House work with me and across Departments to ensure that our high street strategy and our local visitor economy strategy work for Cornish businesses, local wealth creation, skills development and our wider communities, just as the Eden Project has done?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is a strong advocate not just for his constituency but for Cornwall, and I commend him for that. As he said, the Eden Project has been an amazing initiative, contributing to the local community and economy, attracting visitors, creating jobs and generating a £6.8 billion boost to the area since it opened. My door is always open to my hon. Friend to discuss what further action can be taken to champion this cause. If he seeks one, I will also get him a meeting with the relevant Minister.
Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)
For decades, local people in Frome have used Packsaddle fields as a valued space for walking, recreation and nature. Plans to build housing on the site were refused twice last year, because of the harm it would cause to the communities who use the land. Despite that, and the fact that it has no live planning application, LiveWest is now taking legal action relating to access to the fields and has forced Somerset council to fence off the area, which simply denies local people the many benefits of being able to enjoy the outdoors. Will the Leader of the House urge the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to consider whether it can be reasonable for land to be fenced off in that way and help me to organise a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss it?
Sir Alan Campbell
I will raise the matter with the relevant Minister and ensure that the hon. Lady gets an update on the important point she raises, but I gently point out, as I do when housing matters are considered, that it is much better if these things are decided locally and communities can go along with them, because we do need more houses. We need more houses for people to live in and to make sure communities are resilient, but I will ensure that she gets a response to the specific point from the relevant Minister.
Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)
Silicosis is a particularly nasty, debilitating respiratory disease. Alarmingly, it is on the increase in the UK, predominantly in young people between the ages of 20 and 30, so we really need to look at it. It is a preventable disease. The reason it is escalating is the increase in dry cutting of engineered stone. May we have a debate in Government time on how the Government can intervene to prevent this debilitating disease from becoming the next national tragedy like asbestos?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend, as ever, raises an important issue. The Government are committed to increasing the capacity of respiratory services, and the NHS has specialist centres for diagnosing and managing lung diseases that cause scarring, such as silicosis. I will ensure that the relevant Minister hears my hon. Friend’s concerns. If he wants a meeting with the Minister, I will help to facilitate that too. We should use the experience of people like my hon. Friend on these matters, because he brings a loud, strong voice to them.
John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)
My constituent Kate Szymankiewicz’s daughter, Ruth, tragically died in a mental health in-patient unit. She has been told by the Government that the law as it stands already provides adequate protections to ensure that family contact and visits can happen, but that plainly did not happen in this case, with tragic consequences. Will the Leader of the House facilitate a debate, statement or meeting with the relevant Minister on this matter? When such a tragedy happens, it is not enough to say that the law is satisfactory as it is. My constituents will not rest until the tragic death of their daughter is properly met by Government action.
Sir Alan Campbell
The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise these matters, and I commend him on the way he has raised them today. It is an awful tragedy when these things happen, and I understand the family’s reluctance to accept that the law is strong enough. Should he seek a meeting with the relevant Minister, I will help him to facilitate it.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
March is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. As we know, this Labour Government have created a men’s health strategy in which the men and boys summit later this year will be an essential pillar. Today, the all-party parliamentary group on prostate cancer heard powerful testimony from Movember, Maggie’s, the British Association of Urological Nurses and Alphonso Archer, a survivor who spoke powerfully about the inequities in prostate cancer care provision and the place for music therapy in the recovery process. I welcome the powerful response to the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), but will the Leader of the House ensure that a roundtable on prostate cancer is included in the lead-up to the very welcome summit later this year?
Sir Alan Campbell
As my hon. Friend points out, this is the second time this matter has been raised today, which underlines its importance. Should he seek a debate, I am sure that others would join him in raising these important matters. I will certainly look into the idea of a roundtable before the summit.
Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)
Every year, for St George’s day, my local scouts in Romford have a parade and a service at a local church; in fact, there are two parades in Havering, as this also happens in Hornchurch. This year, however, the police have withdrawn support as they are not prepared to marshal the very short parade on the basis of cost. We pay in huge sums of money for the Metropolitan police and, as with any kind of event, I expect them to be there to look after the safety of the young people celebrating the patron saint of scouting. Will the Leader of the House allow time for a debate on the importance of celebrating St George’s day as part of our great English cultural heritage, as well as the failure of the Metropolitan police to ensure that the London borough of Havering is given the police cover that we deserve and pay for?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am sure that this was not an easy decision for the police, but I can understand the distress that it might cause. Even now, I hope that a local solution can be found. The hon. Gentleman raises the question of whether there will be a debate to commemorate St George’s day—let me see what we can do in that regard. Such a debate would give him and others the opportunity to raise issues like this one.
Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
It has been a really big step forward to see the statutory levy on gambling operators up and running since April last year, with the money raised from it ringfenced for much-needed gambling-related harms research, prevention and treatment. However, with only three weeks until the new financial year, I am concerned that funding allocations have not yet been announced, leaving vital organisations such as GamCare, Gordon Moody and many others uncertain of their future. Will the Leader of the House pass on my concerns to the relevant Health Minister and ask that they update the House on this issue as soon as possible?
Sir Alan Campbell
We are committed to strengthening protections for those at risk and to reducing harmful gambling. Levy commissioners are best placed to make decisions on the future of their work. I will ensure that the relevant Minister has heard my hon. Friend’s concerns and that he gets an update, but it will be a Minister from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, because that is the Department responsible for the implementation and oversight of the gambling levy.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I would like to associate myself with the earlier remarks about the Dunblane tragedy.
Could the Leader of the House arrange for a statement on Government support for egg production in the UK, which is a vital part of the food chain? My constituency has some of the UK’s largest egg producers, such as Glenrath Farms, which is very concerned about a consultation on the phasing out of enriched colony cages. They point out that current UK trade policy allows the tariff-free import of eggs and egg products from lower-welfare systems, including conventional cages, which are still legal in many non-EU countries. A unilateral UK ban on cage egg production without equivalent import restrictions would accelerate imports of shell eggs and egg products from systems that would be illegal domestically and would undermine UK producers and processors who have invested heavily in enriched cages.
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for bringing this matter to the House. I agree that support for the British egg industry is vital. He will know that DEFRA recently held a public consultation on this matter, and the call for views closed last week. We await the outcome of that consultation, but I will ensure that the relevant Minister has heard the right hon. Gentleman’s remarks this morning. Once the outcome of the consultation has been considered, we will help to arrange a statement or debate should one be necessary.
Elaine Stewart (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) (Lab)
For my constituents who have been affected by the loan charge, the McCann review is a long-anticipated step towards bringing a year of uncertainty to an end. However, some individuals still feel that cases dating back decades remain unsolved and that enforcement has not been applied evenly between scheme promoters and those who use the arrangements. What analysis has been carried out on how the recommendations of the McCann review will affect individuals and businesses currently engaged with His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs on loan charge matters?
Sir Alan Campbell
The Government understand the strength of feeling about this issue, which is why we accepted all but one of the independent review’s recommendations and at the Budget made the decision to write off £5,000 from the liabilities of everyone affected by the loan charge. I will ensure that Ministers have heard my hon. Friend’s concerns today.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
In my constituency and right across the country, the continuation of the spike in the oil price is having a huge financial impact on families who are reliant on heating oil. Will the Leader of the House please allow a debate in Government time on the plans to help with this issue, and will he ask his colleagues in the Treasury to look at a heating oil price cap?
Sir Alan Campbell
As I said previously, the Minister for Energy has asked the CMA to make sure that consumers are being treated fairly, with the option of investigation into unfair practices should they occur. We will not tolerate companies profiteering from this conflict. Should it be necessary, I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Energy Secretary will set out to the House what further action the Government intend to take.
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
Last summer, I did a tour across my constituency, holding 80 surgeries in four weeks, and the No. 1 issue in west Northumberland was potholes on rural roads. We are unfortunately lumbered with Conservative-run Northumberland county council, which manages to be both incompetent and neglectful of the west of the county to an almost historic degree. I wonder if the Leader of the House will join me on a visit to one of the potholes in my constituency.
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that matter in the House—he is a strong advocate, not just for his constituency but for the west of the very beautiful county of Northumberland. The Government are investing £24 billion in maintaining and improving motorways and local roads across the country. I join him in urging councils, such as Northumberland county council, to act so that our constituents can reap the benefits of that funding. As for the tempting invitation that he sends me, I will certainly look at my diary.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Liberal Democrat-chaired Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes fire authority has just consulted on closing Stokenchurch and Great Missenden fire stations and removing nearly a quarter of the fire engines from the Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes fire authority area. It is no surprise that the consultation responses are in and the public do not want to see those dangerous cuts taking place. Yet the papers for next week’s meeting of the fire authority seem to show that it will ignore the consultation and carry on regardless. May we have a debate in Government time about the duties on public bodies to listen to consultations? Otherwise, the public will just look at these things as token exercises rather than real, meaningful engagement.
Sir Alan Campbell
I understand public concern when issues such as those arise, and whenever possible, of course the authorities need to listen to residents. Should the hon. Gentleman seek a Westminster Hall debate, I am sure that others will seek to join him in that because there are common concerns in other areas of the country.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
A constituent contacted my office to say that their daughter and her partner are caught in a student loans trap, where although they are both working and paying back their loans, they are hardly making any headway in reducing their debts. Apparently, of those with student loans, 76% feel trapped by a student loan balance that keeps growing despite their repayments, 87% do not think that the 6.2% interest rate on plan 2 loans is fair and 81% say that they were not fully informed about the terms of the loan when they took it out. I am aware of the inquiry that has been launched by the Treasury Committee, but will the Leader of the House please agree to a debate in Government time in due course about how we can make student loans fairer, so that our young graduates do not face a life of never-ending, overwhelming debt?
Sir Alan Campbell
We inherited a system of student loans that was effectively broken for many people. We are trying to make changes to the system to make it fairer, and we will continue to look at ways to do that. My hon. Friend refers to the Treasury Committee, which is looking into the matter. Once the Committee has been given time to consider it, hopefully it will be brought to the Floor of the House and will lead to the debate that my hon. Friend seeks.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
I have been inundated, as have many in the House, with messages from constituents facing impossible heating oil costs, with one telling me that their 500-litre order has soared from £302 to over £900. At yesterday’s meeting arranged by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, the Government said that people should apply to their local council for emergency support via the crisis and resilience fund; however, we know that councils are on their knees financially and simply do not have that money. Additionally, the fund is England-only. May we have a debate in the House on the need for the UK Government to take responsibility by providing new crisis support funding for off-grid households in Wales and the other devolved nations?
Sir Alan Campbell
This issue has been raised a number of times this morning and that demonstrates the strength of feeling. I encourage the hon. Lady to seek a debate on these matters to hear from the Minister, or if she wants a meeting with him to explain her concerns, I will help her to facilitate that.
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
Rochdale’s BASA football club recently returned from its tour of Bangladesh, where members met street children, blind children and autistic children who were helped by the amazing £20,000 that the club had raised for charity. Will the Leader join me in congratulating Doliz Miah, Saj Miah and all the lads at BASA, as well as their sponsors: the Pavilion, Pandora, Panchi, and Amor restaurants?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am delighted to hear about the fundraising success of Rochdale’s Bangladeshi Arts and Sports Association football club. I join my hon. Friend in congratulating the whole team and everyone associated with them, including the sponsors who made it possible.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
In the late 1930s, this country’s defence industrial base grew very fast to deal with the mounting threat. The failure to publish the defence industrial plan is not in that tradition, from Spitfires in Trowbridge to the Royal Ordnance factory in Chorley—you will know that very well, Mr Speaker. Can we have a debate in Government time to establish when the defence investment plan, whose delay is holding back our defence industrial base, will be published?
Sir Alan Campbell
The Government are committed to publishing the plan and we will do so at the first opportunity. We are facing a similar situation to the one that the right hon. Gentleman describes at the end of the 1930s, when defences were run down and the decision had to be made to start to rebuild them. That is why the work at the end of the 1930s had to happen. Of course, we hope that what happened later will not happen now—that is evident—but we are trying to rebuild our defences. We are working on the plan, and we will publish it as soon as we can.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
I associate myself with the words of the Leader of the House in support for the armed forces, particularly HMS Dragon, which left Portsmouth’s shores. Residents in Cosham, Paulsgrove, Hilsea and Drayton and Farlington have faced years of dangerous antisocial behaviour along Portsdown Hill. Following what seems to be delays from the Hampshire police and crime commissioner’s office and potentially the council, the average speed cameras promised to the community are still only at tendering stage, and they will not be installed under after the summer. Understandably, my constituents do not want to face another summer of disruptions and unsafe driving. What further steps can I take to expediate action and ensure that these communities finally see the enforcement measures that they were promised?
Sir Alan Campbell
We published our road safety strategy in January, which marks a turning point in the Government’s approach. We are taking decisive action to make our roads safer for everyone, but I will ensure that the relevant Minister has heard my hon. Friend’s contribution. This is also an opportunity to thank everyone involved in getting HMS Dragon ready to embark; I pay tribute to them. I also congratulate the city of Portsmouth, which I understand celebrates its centenary this year.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)
Criterion Capital has recently embarked on a series of mass no-fault evictions in my borough of Merton, including Emerald House in my constituency. It is a shameless attempt to do so before the practice becomes illegal under the Renters’ Rights Act 2025. Section 21 notices have been accompanied by ostensibly fraudulent electrical safety reports issued by a company dissolved at the date of issue, after supposed visits that do not appear to have taken place. The owner of Criterion Capital is Mr Asif Aziz, who has given tens of thousands of pounds to the Labour party and to the Conservatives. Will the Leader of the House assist me in securing a debate in Government time on this rogue landlord? Does he agree that the Labour and Conservative parties should immediately return his donations?
Sir Alan Campbell
That issue was raised earlier this week by my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh). I understand the concern. It is important that the Government are changing the law in this regard, and the hon. Gentleman is right to call out people who are acting unfairly in the run-up to that change. It is much more important that we protect the people involved, rather than seek to play party politics.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
In Erewash, we are very lucky to have a fantastic community radio station in Erewash Sound. Thanks to the incredible Jeff Martin, Paul Stacey, Emma Duthie and dozens of other volunteers, we have a proper local radio station that focuses on hyper-local matters, promotes our community and has created a media training pipeline through the Erewash Sound Academy, which creates real excellence. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on community radio, so that everyone can hear more about the magic that my community and many others around the country enjoy?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join my hon. Friend in thanking all those involved in community radio, including Jeff, Paul and Emma at Erewash Sound. I know my hon. Friend was a keen musician in his youth, and that community radio stations such as those in his community are vital for local and grassroots music. I encourage him to apply for a Westminster Hall debate on the topic, because I am sure others would wish to join in and celebrate what is happening in their areas.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
On Monday, my wife asked me what we were doing at work this week, and I said I was trying to support the British pub industry. She looked at me and said, “Trust me, you’re doing your bit already.” We probably will not agree on the reasons why the pub industry is suffering a bit, but does the Leader of the House agree that we would show some leadership in our communities if all 650 Members committed to going to their local pub and buying a drink this weekend?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly encourage Members to visit their local pubs, because they are an important part of local communities, but I also encourage them to be moderate in their actions, because we might save the pub, but we might not save our marriages.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
Residents of St John’s Grange in Lichfield have serious concerns about the property management company, Remus, that is running their estate. Some residents have submitted formal complaints and had no reply from the company, and a promised meeting between the company and concerned residents has never materialised. I wrote to Remus in October to ask it to meet me but got no reply. I wrote again in November and got no reply. In February, I escalated it to the CEO. He did get back to me and told me that the regional manager would be in touch. A month later, I have heard nothing. Will the Leader of the House join me in calling on Remus to stop dodging residents’ complaints and meet me as a matter of urgency?
Sir Alan Campbell
Yes, I will. It is important that Members of Parliament raise matters such as these on behalf of their constituents. Remus and other companies should accept that responsibility and respond in an appropriate way.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
Developers building in Bosham, Earnley and Bracklesham in my constituency were given planning conditions that did not allow them to move residents on to the new developments until there was sufficient waste water treatment works capacity. Well—surprise, surprise—there is no extra capacity at the waste water treatment works, yet the developers are now going back to the council to ask it to remove from the planning conditions the commitment that got them the planning permission in the first place. Will the Leader of the House arrange for me to meet the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, so that I can talk to them about an infrastructure-first approach to development?
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. We are going to finish this at 12 o’clock. To help each other, we will have to really speed up.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
Last year, the Conservative-controlled council in the London borough of Bexley demolished the much-loved Parkside community centre in Barnehurst. The council has now said it will allow the centre to be rebuilt if a charity funds the rebuilding. I have conducted a survey of local residents, and 89% believe that the council should rebuild it, rather than a charity. Can time be made available for a debate on the importance of community buildings and the level of support available to voluntary groups who run them?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am sorry to hear about the loss of the much-loved Parkside community centre, because these are places that provide valuable services and, as I have said before, are the golden thread that ties communities together. My hon. Friend may wish to attend next week’s Westminster Hall debate on social enterprises and community ownership to hear more from the Minister directly.
Gareth Davies (Grantham and Bourne) (Con)
The Government’s strategic defence review rightly highlighted the important role of reservists across the country. I am very proud that Grantham’s Prince William of Gloucester barracks trains around 70% of all Army reservists in the country. Can we have a debate on the Government’s decision to close down Grantham’s barracks, and not just the impact on the town of Grantham but the wider national security issues it will cause?
Sir Alan Campbell
I understand the concerns the decision might cause locally. Should the hon. Gentleman seek an Adjournment debate, he can put his questions to the Minister directly.
Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
I am proud to support the Government’s ambition to cut violence against women and girls, and a cross-Government approach is essential to delivering that. I am increasingly concerned that the Department for Work and Pensions is not recognising OnlyFans content creation as commercial sexual exploitation, potentially exposing more women to harm. Will the Leader of the House raise that with the relevant Ministers, so that they can bring forward regulations to amend section 2A of the Employment and Training Act 1973 to address this problem?
Sir Alan Campbell
The Government committed to cutting violence against women and girls in our VAWG strategy published last year. We recognise that a cross-Government approach is essential and are embedding this mission into every corner of public life, but I will raise my hon. Friend’s concerns with the relevant Minister.
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
Frimley Park hospital in my constituency is due to be rebuilt as part of the Government’s new hospital programme, but it has recently transpired that the cost of upgrading vital local transport infrastructure has been neither costed nor budgeted for. The National Audit Office shares my concerns about escalating costs and slipping delivery times. I was told that the costs would have to come from a contingency fund for the scheme. Given that the scheme needs to be credible and command public support, can we have an urgent debate on this issue so that errors are not hardcoded into the process?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman rightly raises the investment that the Department of Health and Social Care intends to put into his local community, but he is right that it relates to more than just that Department because there are issues around transport. I will arrange a meeting for him with the relevant Minister, should he seek one, to see whether we can resolve this.
Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)
Reform-led North Northamptonshire council has just announced that it is increasing school transport costs from £795 to £965 a year. That £170 increase—an increase of over 20%—is unaffordable for families. It comes from a council that promised lower costs for families, that failed to have its books signed off and that has received a groundbreaking real-terms increase in its settlement from this Government. Does the Leader of the House agree that North Northamptonshire council should reverse this unacceptable, uninformed and unaffordable decision?
Sir Alan Campbell
I do agree with my hon. Friend. I would contrast the record of Reform-led North Northamptonshire council with what the Government are doing to support families through a whole range of actions. The actions of Reform-led councils are consistently brought to my attention in these sessions every week, and never in a positive light. I hope the council has heard my hon. Friend’s contribution—it is further evidence that Reform over-offers and underdelivers.
Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)
Will the Leader of the House grant Government time to debate the state of our telephone networks? It cannot be only in Tonbridge that we have noticed that connectivity has gone down. While residents may see that they have full bars on 4G, they in fact have no ability to get any data. This problem has been going on for a number of years. Jess in my office, who has been absolutely brilliant at trying to get the different organisations together, has sadly torn out her own hair, and probably most of mine, in frustration at dealing with all these different people who simply fail to connect Tonbridge to the rest of the world.
Sir Alan Campbell
I understand the right hon. Gentleman’s and his residents’ concerns. Should he want an update on what the Government can do to assist this situation, I will seek one for him. If he wants to explain it to the Minister directly, I will seek a meeting for him.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
In Hemlington in my constituency, the ward councillors Nicky Walker and Tom Mohan have been trying to push the social housing provider Thirteen to deal with the set of empty properties around Ellis Gardens and Fonteyn Court, which have been sitting abandoned for months, perhaps even years. Does the Leader of the House agree that Thirteen needs to pull its finger out, stop leaving properties to rot and support people to get into those properties?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises an important matter, and I hope that Thirteen has heard his words today. The Government expect social housing landlords to manage their stock efficiently and to ensure that vacant properties are made available wherever possible. These are obviously concerning matters, and I will make sure that the relevant Minister is made aware of them.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Despite relying on public money, the financial accountability and value for money of multi-academy trusts seemingly goes unchallenged, with many leaders earning more than the Prime Minister. Aspirations, which has a school in Poole, spent money on Teslas for its central staff and is now cutting the curriculum to balance the books. Initio is cutting teaching assistants as special educational needs and disabilities increase, blaming reduced pupil numbers, while boosting its exec team. With the current consultation on the White Paper, now is a good time for a debate in Government time on the transparency and accountability of academies, so that we can drive out excess and they can get back to doing what they were supposed to do.
Sir Alan Campbell
When the consultation has ended, I am sure there will be ample opportunity to raise the points that the hon. Lady has mentioned.
Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)
The Labour Government have given Conservative-run West Sussex county council £27 million to get our roads in shape, but across my constituency there are dangerous potholes that the council refuses to fill, and roads in desperate need of resurfacing, including Mansfield Road and Thesiger Road in East Worthing, which I saw at the weekend. Will the Leader of the House join me in calling on the county council to properly fix roads across Adur and Worthing, and will he make time for a debate on renewing our roads?
Sir Alan Campbell
The performance of Conservative-run West Sussex county council on potholes was raised with me only last week. I am sure that the council will have heard my hon. Friend’s contribution, which I hope will spur it into action.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
Duncan-Lynch Precision Engineering is a successful specialist manufacturing company established over 60 years ago. It would like to take on a number of new apprenticeships—good, well-paid jobs for local young people—but is struggling to find apprentices and appropriate courses. That is a clear concern for the business and for young people seeking good careers. Can we have a debate in Government time to discuss how to boost the uptake of apprenticeships and improve the courses available to manufacturing and engineering businesses?
Sir Alan Campbell
The tragic record of the previous Government was a fall in apprenticeships. This Government are committed to reversing that decline, which is why we have a £725 million growth and skills levy. Our reforms will help to deliver 50,000 new apprenticeships. In our first year, we helped over 350,000 people into apprenticeships. Should the hon. Gentleman wish to seek a meeting with a Minister to explore what more can be done, I will arrange it.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
This week, there was a mass release of balloons in Birmingham in memory of my friend, Councillor Waseem Zaffar, who passed away suddenly and tragically at the age of 44. There was no prouder Brummie than Waseem: he loved the city, he loved the Villa and he loved representing the people of Lozells. As the cabinet member for transport, he was the driving force behind the city’s clean air zone, and he fought every day against the health inequalities that mean so many Brummies die too young. I will miss Waseem more than I can say. He leaves a hole in the city that will be very difficult to fill. Will the Leader of the House join me in sending deepest condolences to Waseem’s wife Aysha, his four sons and his wider family? Can we have a debate on the health inequalities that Waseem cared so passionately about?
Sir Alan Campbell
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to Waseem Zaffar and his work as a local councillor, particularly on the clean air zone in Birmingham. I know that he will be greatly missed, and I extend my heartfelt condolences to his loved ones at this time. Should my hon. Friend seek a Westminster Hall debate, she will be able not only to pay further tribute, but to explore what further action needs to be taken on these important environmental matters.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
I am seriously concerned about the lack of progress on the Public Office (Accountability) Bill. I served on the Committee in November, and the issue was urgent then. Will the Leader of the House write to me to explain why the Government have not adopted the common-sense and victim-centred amendment 23? Bearing in mind that the Bill is about openness and transparency, it is ironic that Ministers seem completely unable to explain their objections to the amendment. Will he investigate what is blocking progress?
Sir Alan Campbell
Ministers are working hard on what is a sensitive Bill in many ways, and we will bring it forward in due course. If the hon. Lady seeks an update from the relevant Minister, I will get her one.
Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)
May we have a debate on the recent Valuation Office Agency changes to business rate classifications for flexible and co-working spaces? The agency says that it is just following case law, but the changes could have significant implications for businesses, some of which will face big backdated bills. Flexible working spaces are an important part of regenerating town centres, such as in Chatham in my constituency, because they drive footfall and mean people spend money in local shops. We desperately need a political solution to this problem.
Sir Alan Campbell
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend: flexible co-working spaces play a vital role in high street regeneration, which is a priority for this Government. I would be happy to help her to arrange a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss that should she wish. If she sought to secure a Westminster Hall debate on these matters, I am sure it would be popular.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
Under regional devolution plans, MHCLG has told Gloucestershire to look to the north, with Herefordshire, Worcestershire and maybe Warwickshire, too. Our integrated care board is being merged with Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire. Meanwhile, our police boundaries are being merged with Wiltshire. Does the Leader of the House agree that that makes a mockery of the devolution agenda? If he does, will he arrange for me to meet the appropriate Ministers so that we can sort it out?
Sir Alan Campbell
I do not agree that it makes a mockery of the devolution agenda. It is about getting local decisions made on behalf of local people. It is important that we recognise regional and local identity. Should the hon. Gentleman seek a meeting with a Minister, I will help him to arrange it.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
Joff Machell, from a constituency neighbouring mine, was diagnosed with motor neurone disease last October. Since then he has raised over £50,000 for MND research through activities including plunging into frozen Austrian lakes and warm Sri Lankan seas. I should declare an interest: Joff is my oldest and dearest friend. Given the importance of both sustaining research funding into MND and addressing significant patient delays in accessing genetic testing, could the Leader of the House assist me in getting a meeting with the relevant Ministers?
Sir Alan Campbell
I send my best wishes to Joff and congratulate him on the money that he has raised so far. We are investing in MND research across all areas, including causes, prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care, but I will assist my hon. Friend in getting the meeting he seeks.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I want to bring to the attention of the Leader of the House the recent visit to the UK by Nigeria’s President Tinubu. There are concerns about the ongoing harassment, persecution and killing of Christians in Nigeria. Thousands of Christians have been killed, abducted or unlawfully detained in Nigeria in the past year alone. Islamic militants operate with impunity in 12 states and enforce Sharia law, leaving Christians as second-class citizens and punishing those who convert from Islam. Leah Sharibu is one of those, in her eighth year of captivity. Could the Leader of the House raise these issues with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and ensure that Leah Sharibu is freed?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely committed to defending freedom of religion and belief for all, and so are this Government. It is our firm belief that every Nigerian should be able to practise their faith or belief in safety, free from fear and persecution. I commend the hon. Gentleman’s dedication in consistently raising these matters in this Chamber. I will share his concern with the Foreign Office after this session.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
Last October I sent a number of freedom of information requests to the Nursing and Midwifery Council on sexual harassment and misconduct cases. However, I have still not received a reply. For these bodies to be trusted, they must be accountable. Will the Leader of the House please advise me on what more I can do to get proper accountability under the Freedom of Information Act?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend will know that the FOI Act sets out the requirements for public bodies to release that information, so I am disappointed that he needs to bring this matter to the House today. I will ensure that his concerns are raised with the relevant body.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
Five thousand people walked through the door of the Blackpool Winter Gardens the other week for my second annual jobs fair, which I was delighted to open with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. More than 1,000 roles were secured on the spot, 853 of which have already started, and thousands more people were handing out CVs and have interviews on the way. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking my constituency team, the jobcentre staff, Blackpool Tourism Ltd, and every employer and resident who attended, for making it such a huge success?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly join my hon. Friend in thanking everyone associated with the Blackpool jobs fair for making it a success, not least my hon. Friend, who is a fantastic fighter for his constituents. It is incredible to hear that over 1,000 roles were secured on the spot. It was the first ever jobs fair for the youth guarantee, and it is good to see so many local employers choosing to back it. We will keep going further, as my hon. Friend has, to ensure that every young person has the chance to earn or learn.
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
Having heard that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government will soon decide on the next round of Pride in Place funding, I would like to plug my constituency. It is my honour to represent proud communities, but many, like Chadsmoor and the Rugeley Springfields estate, were hit hard by austerity, which tore away support for deprived areas. Does the Leader of the House agree that Cannock Chase would make an excellent candidate for Pride in Place, and may we have a debate on the benefits of local growth funding for communities up and down the country?
Sir Alan Campbell
I commend my hon. Friend for being a fantastic champion for his constituency. The Government are giving constituents investment in the powers they need to deliver the change they want to see in their communities. I wish his constituency good luck, but I also wish other Members of the House good luck in their campaign to get Pride in Place funding and in ensuring that it is a success.
Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)
Tomorrow marks the 85th anniversary of the Clydebank blitz, when across the nights of 13 and 14 March 1941, my hometown of Clydebank suffered horrendous losses: 528 people were killed, and of the 12,000 homes, only eight remained undamaged. I will be attending the service of remembrance at Kilbowie St Andrew’s church in Clydebank tomorrow. Will the Leader of the House join me in commemorating this occasion, and does he agree that all wars result in the loss of innocent civilian lives?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for marking this important anniversary. At this time in particular, we must remember all those who serve and have served in our armed forces, and all those who are victims of the devastating impact of war. Anniversaries such as that of the Clydebank blitz remind us of those who have served, those who were wounded and those who were killed.
Mr Speaker
May I say to the hon. Member for West Dunbartonshire (Douglas McAllister) that I attended that memorial event a few years ago? It was very moving.
Defending Democracy Taskforce
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Speaker
Before the Minister makes his statement on the defending democracy taskforce, I would like to make a related statement. Hon. Members will recall that in October 2024 I established a Speaker’s Conference to examine the security of Members, candidates and elections. That cross-party group published two reports: the first in June and the second in October 2025. Together, those reports set out more than 60 recommendations to tackle the serious and wholly unacceptable levels of abuse and intimidation faced by politicians.
The scale of the challenge is clear, and no single body can address it alone. The conference therefore called for action across Government, law enforcement, political parties, traditional and social media, and several other relevant stakeholders. It also recognised Members’ collective responsibility to lead by example in how we treat each other. Responses to both reports have now been published. I notified all Members and Members’ staff of that earlier in the week, so they should have seen them.
I am encouraged by the clear sense of shared purpose and determination to tackle the issues shown by all partners. I thank them for their constructive engagement and positive response to the conference’s work.
Although the conference has concluded its formal work, I remain committed to monitoring progress closely and will continue to press for delivery of its recommendations where necessary. With that, I am pleased to call the Security Minister, who will update the House on the work of the defending democracy taskforce, which includes action that the Government are taking in support of the conference’s recommendations.
The Minister for Security (Dan Jarvis)
Thank you for your statement, Mr Speaker. With permission, I will make a statement on the work the Government are leading to defend our democracy and those who serve within it, particularly as we approach the local and devolved elections taking place in May.
Twice in the last decade, devoted and beloved Members of this House have been lost to abhorrent acts of violence. Each time I enter the Chamber, my eyes are drawn to the shields dedicated to Jo Cox and Sir David Amess. They are not simply memorials; they are a daily reminder of the duty we owe to one another and to our democracy to ensure that no one is deterred from public service by fear, intimidation or violence. It is in that spirit that I come to the House to set out the challenges we face, what the Government are doing, and to make clear what we will not tolerate.
The work of elected representatives at every level matters. It shapes millions of lives and our country’s future. That is why those entrusted to serve must be able to do so without fear or favour. Free debate and honest disagreement are the lifeblood of democracy, but let me be clear that harassment, intimidation, abuse and violence are not political expression. Today, the volume, breadth and tempo of threats against elected representatives is unprecedented. Colleagues across the House will recognise the grim reality of assaults, vandalism, stalking, blockading and a blizzard of online abuse. This is not theoretical; it affects hon. Members, councillors and candidates, and it affects our families and our staff.
Women and ethnic minority representatives report the highest volumes of abuse, including overtly sexualised and racially charged threats, which have a chilling effect on who feels able to stand for public office. When fear warps debate, when candidates step back and when fewer people from diverse backgrounds feel able to stand, the damage is deep and lasting. That is why this Government treat harassment and intimidation not as an inevitable occupational hazard, but as a serious threat to our democracy itself.
I know that you share that stance, Mr Speaker, and I pay tribute to your leadership, especially through the work of the Speaker’s Conference. Our response is rooted in the defending democracy taskforce, which I chair, working across Government, law enforcement, Parliament, the Electoral Commission and the intelligence community. The mandate of the taskforce, renewed by this Prime Minister, is clear: to tackle the full spectrum of threats to our democracy. That means preventing and deterring harassment, ensuring real consequences when it occurs, and providing proportionate, effective security for everyone who participates in our democratic process.
This is a year-round task, but the upcoming local elections demand that we intensify our focus and, where necessary, go further. Yesterday, I chaired a meeting of the defending democracy taskforce with Ministers from the devolved nations. It was a constructive discussion on strengthening our collective security posture ahead of May. We reaffirmed our readiness to support colleagues in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The police are at the forefront of defending democracy efforts, and I thank officers and staff across the country for their dedication and diligence. Ahead of the May elections, we are working with the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council to strengthen guidance for frontline officers responding to incidents involving elected representatives. It is essential that the consistency of police response is improved across all force areas, and I welcome the police’s decision to act on the recommendation of your conference, Mr Speaker.
I am pleased to inform the House that Deputy Chief Constable Chris Balmer, from Cambridgeshire police, has been appointed to the role of the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for defending democracy. I have written to the chair of the NPCC and to DCC Balmer to stress the importance of their work to democracy itself. I emphasised the importance of keeping pace with the evolving threat that abuse poses to democracy, and we will be meeting with both shortly.
Every police force now has a dedicated superintendent co-ordinator for Operation Bridger, which handles the protection of Members beyond the parliamentary estate. Through Operation Ford, force elected official advisers at working level exist to support both Members of Parliament and locally elected representatives. I have extended the Operation Ford offer to cover all elected representatives across England, Scotland and Wales, supported by a full-time network of 66 Home Office-funded force elected official advisers. I am also pleased to announce the creation of a new threat assessment centre. This will support Operation Ford by centralising and co-ordinating intelligence nationally for incidents that target locally elected representatives. This function will be live ahead of the local elections.
Where the law fails to provide adequate protection, we will strengthen it. We have seen protests deliberately targeted at private homes, timed to intimidate families and children, and designed to exert pressure through fear. That is why the Crime and Policing Bill introduces a new offence to restrict protests outside the homes of public office holders. Peaceful protest is a cherished right, but the doorstep of a private home is not an appropriate setting for it. In addition, the Representation of the People Bill will introduce a new aggravating factor, empowering courts to hand down longer sentences to reflect the seriousness of crimes committed against those who serve our democracy, whether elected representatives, candidates, their staff, campaigners or electoral officials.
Many Members across this House and beyond have faced sustained online abuse and intimidation. Some have questioned whether to stand again. That is simply unacceptable. Through the Online Safety Act 2023, the UK has established one of the strongest online safety frameworks in the world. Services now have clear legal duties to identify, remove and prevent illegal content, including threats, incitement and non-consensual intimate images, such as explicit deepfakes. As we approach the May elections, the Government will engage directly with major social media platforms to support and inform their election preparedness.
Countering threats to our democracy is a priority for this Government, but I have always believed that this should be a shared endeavour. Therefore, today I am directly appealing to every Member of this House, and to colleagues across local government and the devolved Governments, to play their part. Where we see harassment or intimidation, we must act. Where we experience it, we must report it. I know it can be time consuming but reporting really does matter. The Parliamentary Security Department works closely with the Home Office and the police to assess threats and put protections in place, but it can only do so with accurate information.
Every report, even if the incident is judged to be below the criminal threshold, helps the authorities build a clearer picture of the threat. I urge colleagues: if there is an immediate danger, of course call 999, reference Operation Bridger and use your SOS fob; for non-emergency incidents, report them via 101 or online, again referencing Op Bridger, and inform your Bridger single point of contact. Metro mayors, local councillors and police and crime commissioners should reference Operation Ford, and this will be picked up by the local force elected official adviser.
Let me be equally clear about our message to those who threaten, intimidate or harass those participating in our democracy—and this applies to individuals and groups alike: anonymity is not safety, no one is beyond reach, and whether the offence occurs online or offline, those responsible should expect to be investigated and prosecuted.
We must challenge at every turn the notion that abuse, threats and intimidation are now an inevitability for those working in politics and public life. Across our society we must never become desensitised to rhetoric about harming those who serve in public life. When we hear it or see in our communities, it should be challenged, not shrugged off as some new normal. All of us in this House must also lead by example. Those entrusted with public office set the tone for our national conversation. If we allow abuse to creep into our exchanges, whether in the House or on the campaign trail, we risk normalising behaviour that undermines democratic debate. By leading with civility, even in moments of sharp disagreement, we demonstrate to the country that principled argument can co-exist with mutual respect.
I can inform the House that an extensive programme of work is well under way to ensure the security of the local and devolved nation elections in May. This includes support for returning officers to keep polling stations and count centres secure, alongside expert guidance on personal security and cyber-security for candidates.
History shows us that our democracy is precious, so today, together we should draw a line, declaring with one voice that we will not be deterred from serving the public, and we will never tolerate abuse, threats and intimidation. Together we will confront unacceptable behaviour, hold perpetrators to account, and defend our democratic way of life. In doing so, we honour the words of Jo Cox, who taught us that we
“have far more in common than that which divides us.”—[Official Report, 3 June 2015; Vol. 596, c. 675.]
Mr Speaker
Can I thank the Minister for his statement and for taking on the recommendations of the Speaker’s Conference? I would like to put on record my thanks to those who served on that conference for all the effort that was put in. I think this is when the House is at its best.
I call the shadow Minister.
Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)
There is much to welcome in the Security Minister’s statement. I thank him for advance sight of it and, more broadly, for his update on the work of the defending democracy taskforce, and I join him in remembering our colleagues who lost their lives in service of the public.
As the Minister rightly notes, all of us in this place have a sacred duty to protect and uphold the democracy that has made this country so great for so long. Mr Speaker, I know that few understand that as well as those in the Speaker’s Office, yourself and all three Madam Deputy Speakers, so let me take this opportunity to thank them on behalf of all Members here for everything that they do in public and in private to keep us all safe.
Targeted and serious intimidation of democratically elected politicians, particularly where that intimidation escalates into credible physical threats, is a serious impediment to the functioning of our democracy. It is of course right that criminal behaviour is prosecuted and punished. At the same time, we have a duty to ensure that the policing of genuinely criminal behaviour does not stray into the policing of free speech or free expression. In individual cases, that can be a challenging balance to strike, and I trust that the Minister will approach those cases with the appropriate caution and sensitivity.
While many aspects of the Minister’s statement are encouraging, I am concerned that other members of this Government have failed to approach this issue with the necessary caution or candour. We must be honest about the fact that, while violence against elected politicians can come from a wide variety of groups, the single biggest extremist threat to our country remains the threat of extremist Islamist violence. That threat is intimately tied up with a growing tendency towards sectarian politics in some parts of our country.
As my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition said recently, separatism is on the rise in our country, because
“for too long, Britain has been complacent about our culture and too tolerant of those weaponising identity politics for their own gain”.
Yet, in their cohesion strategy published earlier this week, the Government seemed unwilling to deal with the threat head-on. The strategy openly acknowledged the existence of
“communities in the UK living segregated or parallel lives”,
but rather than dealing with that problem directly, the Government have proposed a package that may only make this problem worse: more diversity, equity and inclusion in the public sector and an attempt to smuggle in so-called social engineering under the guise of social cohesion; advisory boards designed to manage tensions, when it was exactly that focus on managing community tensions that allowed rape and grooming gangs to operate unchecked for so long in towns and cities across our country; and a new, rebranded Islamophobia definition to be issued as guidance to public servants, which will have a chilling effect on their behaviour.
The strategy will make it harder to have open, public discussions about subjects like female genital mutilation, grooming and rape gangs, and extremism, including any threats that it may pose to our democracy. We have already seen that creating conditions in which people fear being branded as racist for keeping the public safe can create horrific outcomes. We must never again allow guidance like this to create a culture of fear, which breeds inaction, cover-up and denial. The cohesion strategy is a recipe for further suppression of discussion of the threats that face us today and their root causes. We will not make the truth disappear by discouraging people from talking about it. That has never worked, and it will not work now.
Again, I thank the Minister for his statement and for his work on tackling criminality towards elected officials. Can he assure us that his colleagues in Government are as committed to dealing with this problem at its root as he seems to be?
Dan Jarvis
Let me join the shadow Minister in expressing what I am sure are our collective thanks to Mr Speaker, all the Deputy Speakers and to all the staff in this House for the important work that they do. It is hugely appreciated, and we are very grateful for it.
Let me try to find a point of consensus, difficult though that may be given what we have heard. I very much wanted to take the opportunity today to do this on a cross-party basis; in fact, I intended, and will continue, to take the opportunity to thank the previous Government for the work that they did. In particular, I pay tribute to my predecessor, the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), who set up the defending democracy taskforce. It did not exist before he was the Security Minister; he set it up. That is a very strong legacy for him. He invested a lot in it, and I hope he will see how seriously we take that work. He passed the baton on to me, and I hope he will see that, having taken that baton gratefully from him, we have sprinted forward with it.
I was particularly pleased this week to chair a meeting of the defending democracy taskforce, which brought the whole system together. It was always the right hon. Gentleman’s intention that it would provide a fulcrum point and bring together the different constituent parts of Government, law enforcement and the Electoral Commission to provide a single version of the truth and ensure that we are properly resourcing all those who work to keep us safe. I think and hope that he is proud of the work that the taskforce is doing.
The right hon. Gentleman will understand that this is not just about periods of electoral activity; this activity takes place the whole year round, and he knows how seriously I take it. I was really grateful to be reminded the other day of the work he did in getting us to where we are now. I hope he will be pleased to acknowledge the progress that we have made in recent times, which I referenced in my introductory remarks, not least the fact that the Government have introduced new legislation to restrict protest outside the homes of public office holders; it is important to bring forward legislation where it is required. I do not think anyone really thinks it is appropriate that MPs and their families should be targeted at home, and we are taking legislative action to prevent that from happening.
As the right hon. Gentleman will know, the relationship with the police is a very important one. We work very closely with them to ensure that they have the appropriate guidance that they need, particularly for police officers on the frontline, when responding to incidents involving elected representatives.
I am particularly pleased to be joined on the Front Bench by the Minister for Democracy—she has other responsibilities, but that is a very important part of her remit. I am really grateful to her for the important work that she is doing on the Representation of the People Bill, which will introduce new measures to create a very powerful deterrent for those who would seek to those who serve in our democracy.
The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam), raised a point about policing priorities, and I understand why. She will understand, not least from her time previously working in the Home Office, that the police are operationally independent, but it is important that we work closely with them. That is why I took the opportunity this morning to welcome the appointment of a new national lead for defending democracy; I intend to work with them very closely, and they will provide an important focus for policing activity around the country.
I am very sorry that the shadow Minister chose to segue into matters that were not in the scope of this statement. I am genuinely so sorry that she decided to do so, not least because I gave Members on the Opposition Front Bench ample warning of my intention to come forward and bring a statement to the House today. I did so on the clear understanding that this is something around which we can unite as a House. If we cannot co-operate on this, of all occasions—as we stand and sit in the shadow of the shields—what can we co-operate on? I hope that she will reflect on her comments.
Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)
I hope that the shadow Minister will get to her feet and correct the record, because there is a far greater threat from the far right than there is from Islam. In this holy month of Ramadan, I am sure that Muslims all over the country will be praying for her soul, whether she deserves it or not.
I sit on the Speaker’s steering group on AI, which is chaired quite expertly by you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and every month, I put a “block of the month” on my social media. The threats to our safety are getting worse. A small number of tech firms are deciding what a large number of people see and hear on their social media platforms, with very little oversight or accountability. Eight people, basically, decide what 8 billion people see. I hope the Minister will agree that we cannot put guardrails around the AI industry—it is moving too quickly—so we need to put guardrails around human beings. We need to make sure that our rights, our voice, our image and what we do are protected, so we need to focus on guardrails around the humans. I hope the Minister will consider my human rights Bill, which I will be proposing very shortly.
Dan Jarvis
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend, not least for the work she does on the Speaker’s steering group. She is right to raise her concerns in the way that she has. She will understand that the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has a very important role in relation to these matters. These are things that we discuss in the forum of the defending democracy taskforce on a very regular basis, but she is right to raise her concerns, which I know will be widely shared across this House.
Perhaps I might just say one other thing to my hon. Friend. I am in awe of the courage that she and other hon. Members bring to their public service. In the face of the extremely unpleasant abuse that she and other hon. Members have to tolerate on a very regular basis, the fact that she continues to step forward to represent her constituents and her country in the way she does is greatly to her credit.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
I thank the Speaker’s Office for all that Mr Speaker and the Madam Deputy Speakers are doing on this issue. I must say, I was somewhat taken aback by the shadow Minister’s approach; I will try to be constructive, but where I veer away, I hope the Minister will take my points.
The Minister is right to highlight the importance of protecting politicians at every level of our democracy. We must ensure that the horror of what happened to Jo Cox and Sir David Amess never happens again, and that representatives at every level feel secure when they are discharging their democratic duties. Many Members, particularly women and those from minority backgrounds, have received death threats and harassment, and fear for their families. Having experienced threats myself—not from radical Islamists, but from right-wing extremists—I know how important these protections are. As the MP for Cheltenham, I also remember the bravery of Andrew Pennington, who died defending my late friend Nigel Jones in an attack on the Cheltenham Liberal Democrat office.
I welcome the steps that the Minister is taking to ensure that the elections in May are free and fair. Our democracy is precious, and it must be carefully protected by those in power. To that end, we welcome the existence of the taskforce, and the work it is doing. We worry, however, that the taskforce is perhaps not working fast enough to address the threat of foreign interference in our democracy. Hostile states are increasingly using social and traditional media to spread disinformation in order to undermine democracy and our elections, so what steps are Ministers taking to tackle that threat? As the Member of Parliament for Cheltenham, which is home to GCHQ, I know the vital work that our intelligence agencies do to counter those threats, but that work must be matched by political leadership from this House.
We will all remember with disgust the case of Nathan Gill, the Reform politician convicted of working for the Russian Government. That case received remarkably little attention, yet it shows the very real threat to our democracy from within. We are also all scarred by the revelation that there were agents of the Chinese Communist party working in this House for hon. Members, and we were rightly outraged that Peter Mandelson shared market-sensitive information with Epstein, and by many other elements of disgraceful conduct that pose a threat to our democracy. Is it not time for a dedicated crime and corruption unit in Whitehall, and does the Minister agree that it is time for legislation that ensures that all electoral candidates declare any donations or gifts from Russia?
Does the Minister also agree that it is time for rules to be introduced about donations made to political parties via cryptocurrencies? This method obscures the source of donations. That loophole must be closed before it is exploited more widely, to the detriment of our democracy. We will all have noted the recent endorsement of crypto by the leader of the Reform party, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), who maintains that he does not “do computers”. There is much work to be done to protect our democracy, and the Minister and the Government have our support to speed up that work, because there is nothing more important for us in this House than protecting those values.
Dan Jarvis
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his constructive tone. I am also very concerned to hear about the threats that he has faced. As he knows, if he thinks any further support is required, I would be very keen to work closely with him. I also join him in remembering his lost colleague.
The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the important work that his constituents in Cheltenham do; as he knows, I am a huge supporter of them, and a fairly regular visitor to Cheltenham. He is also right to raise concerns about foreign interference. He will know—I am pretty certain that his party has made a submission to the Rycroft review—that the Government commissioned Philip Rycroft to do an independent piece of work looking at the nature of interference in our democracy. Mr Rycroft is finishing his work and will report to Ministers in the near future, and will do so in a way that will allow the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to incorporate any recommendations that it thinks is appropriate in forthcoming legislation.
The hon. Gentleman cited a number of particularly egregious examples of interference in our democracy, and made a number of entirely reasonable and helpful suggestions. I hope he knows that my door and, I am sure, that of the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), is always open to him, should he wish to discuss these matters further.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
I should mention that I am a member of the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission; its members work very collegiately, cross-party, in support of its important work. I thank the Minister for his statement today.
Like the women who encouraged me, I aim to support any young women in my constituency—particularly those from black, Asian and minority backgrounds—who put themselves forward to represent their communities in local government, but unfortunately, the increased harassment, abuse and intimidation of councillors and candidates, particularly in recent years, has been a huge deterrent. Does the Minister agree that it is vital that we increase support and protection for all those putting themselves forward, but particularly women, so that we can encourage women from all backgrounds to step forward and represent their communities?
Dan Jarvis
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the important work she does on the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission, and for the points she has raised. She is absolutely right about the threat that women elected representatives and candidates face around the country. I hope she sees the determination of the Government to work with her and colleagues across this House to put in place the protections and support that are required. That is why I referenced the creation of the new threat assessment, which will provide greater granularity on operational intelligence that we think will deliver real benefits at a local level.
My hon. Friend is also absolutely right to highlight concern about the threats, intimidation and harassment directed at those participating in public life, both online and in person—there have been some particularly egregious examples of that in recent times. We have to do everything we can to support those women who want to step forward. I am particularly concerned about the chilling effect that some of these threats and this intimidation have on extremely talented women who might want to step forward in public life, but will look at the circumstances that they might have to deal with and think, “Why would I want to expose myself to that?” We should all collectively be very concerned about that, and should redouble our efforts against this problem. That is precisely why I made the point—hopefully clearly—that wherever we encounter this kind of activity, we must report it.
Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)
I thank my friend the Minister for his kind words. I also extend praise to Lord Case, who was so important in setting this taskforce up as Cabinet Secretary. The Minister was absolutely right to mention Jo Cox and Sir David Amess, both of whom were in my mind at various different points when the taskforce was set up, and I am indeed extremely impressed with what he has done in taking forward the defending democracy taskforce.
However, may I—perhaps unfairly—challenge the Minister to go a little further, and to answer some of the questions that I did not answer when I was in his place? I hope he may be able to answer them, now that things have progressed a bit. The first is to do with foreign influence. When we look at what China has done in our democracy, not just in this House but online—at the threats that organisations like TikTok pose, through disinformation, and through the way that they actively promote stories that encourage division—we can see that the nature of the threat has changed. Yesterday, I had the good fortune to meet the director general of Taiwan’s Ministry of Justice investigation bureau. As the Minister knows, I was the first Cabinet Minister to meet a Cabinet Minister from Taiwan in a non-trade capacity. Taiwan has a lot to teach us about the way in which China tries to influence our democracy. Has the Minister considered any of those lessons yet?
Another area on which I would be interested in the Minister’s thoughts—it is another area that I did not get to, when I was in his position, although I would have liked to—is the protection of journalists. It is of course important to protect the freedom to speak about elected members of any organisation, whether local or national, and to protect journalists’ freedom to speak. Recently, I was made aware of a very unpleasant threat against Konstantin Kisin relating to the attack on Charlie Kirk, who was murdered only a few months ago. This threat happened to come from a left-wing extremist, but as we know, there are extremists of various colours and creeds in our community, and of various political opinions. Has the Minister looked at how the need to protect journalists could be brought into the work of the defending democracy taskforce?
Dan Jarvis
I thank the right hon. Member again for the work that he did. He is right to raise the important contribution that the then Cabinet Secretary, now Lord Case, made in setting up the defending democracy taskforce.
I genuinely welcome the points that the right hon. Member makes. He has been very good about providing helpful bits of information and intelligence over the past 18 months or so, and I always really appreciate that, because it is it is well meant and well received. I understand why he raises the concerns about China, which have been very well debated in this House. I believe that he understands how seriously I take those threats. A huge amount of activity is taking place across Government. For reasons that he will know very well, we do not often get into the detail of all that, but I hope that he will understand that that activity is under way, and a crucial part of it is, as he described, working with our allies. We do that very regularly.
The right hon. Member is right to raise the important role that journalists play. He will remember from his time in the Home Office, working with colleagues across Government, that a lot of resource and time is invested in our protective security regime. We do not tend to say much about it, but I assure him of the seriousness with which we take these issues, and I agree with him about the importance of free speech and the role that journalists have to play. It is completely unacceptable for anyone in this country to be intimidated by any foreign power, and the Government will always stand against that activity.
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
I put on record my personal thanks to the Minister for the support that he has given to many Members of this House, including newly elected Members like me, and I welcome a newly elected female Member, the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer), to the House today. Will the Minister elaborate on the work of the defending democracy taskforce, and talk about any time spent looking into the algorithms that reward rage-baiting and extremist opinions? I feel that they are degrading our public debate, outside and inside this place.
Dan Jarvis
My hon. Friend is a great constituency MP, and it is profoundly concerning to me, and I am sure to other Members who have been in this place for a number of years, to hear about the threats, harassment and intimidation that newer Members have had to face in recent times. It is completely unacceptable, and I pay tribute to their resilience in standing against it, but we want to work very closely with them to make sure that they feel properly supported.
My hon. Friend is right to raise concerns about algorithms. I assure her that the subject has been discussed on a number of occasions by the defending democracy taskforce. She will understand that DSIT is the lead Department on that activity, but I heard this comparison made the other day: in days gone by, people would go into a library and choose the book that they wanted to read, but people’s content online is now often directed by forces way beyond their control. I think we should all be very concerned about that. I certainly am, and it is a matter on which I work very closely with colleagues in DSIT.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
I welcome the Minister’s statement, and entirely concur with him on the domestic elements of protecting our democracy that he announced, but returning to the issue of foreign influence, those countries that mean our democracy harm of course do not recognise the value of democracy. My right hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat) mentioned China, and we have debated Russia at length in this House. The Minister was in his place yesterday when I questioned the Home Secretary on Iran’s influence on this country; there are a lot of fears, and a lot of reporting, that entities including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps are using shell companies and proxies to operate on our shores. Given the heightened tensions in the middle east, and the focus on the Iranian regime, I ask the Minister to ensure that all loopholes are closed down, so that we stop the regime—no matter our views on the war, I think the whole House condemns the regime—being able to influence our democracy.
Dan Jarvis
The hon. Member makes some really important points, and I pay tribute to the extraordinary work conducted by our intelligence services and counter-terrorism police. By its nature, the work that they do is almost always done in the shadows, and often they do not get the praise that they deserve. There are some extraordinary people working round the clock to keep our country safe, and we owe them a debt of gratitude.
The hon. Member is right to raise concerns about the situation in the middle east, and to ask questions about the Government’s response to it. There is often a temptation to reach for the tool of proscription, and sometimes that is the right response. We talk a lot in Government about toolkits. There is quite a lot in our toolkit, and I assure the House that I will use everything in the toolkit to stand against the threats that we face.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
We have heard today from Members across the House about two twin evils that are driving online abuse: the social media giants’ algorithms, which are promoting content that makes people feel angry or afraid; and the influence of hostile states that deliberately sow disinformation designed to undermine our democracies. I heard the Minister say that it is primarily DSIT’s role to deal with that, but please will he ensure that Ministers keep us all updated on the work that is going on to address it? Unless we all work together, across parties and across Departments, this issue will continue to proliferate and there will not be a democracy left for us to defend.
Dan Jarvis
My hon. Friend is right to make that point. While of course there is an important role for DSIT, I assure him that lots of other Departments are actively involved in that work as well, including the Foreign Office, the Home Office and the Cabinet Office. He is right to raise concerns, but I assure him that we are doing everything we can to stand against those particular threats.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
I thank the Minister for his statement; it stood in very stark contrast to the response from the Opposition, which was chilling. Many Members have referenced the horrific online abuse that we see on a daily basis, which often originates, as has been said already, from foreign states. What steps are the Minister and the taskforce taking to protect our democracy from foreign interference, which is often subversive, especially following the recent arrests based on allegations of spying for China?
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to the hon. Member for the approach that he has taken. I assure him that through the defending democracy taskforce, and working with the intelligence services, Counter Terrorism Policing and law enforcement more generally, we are doing everything we can to stand against the nature of the threats that he describes. The world is a dangerous, challenging place at the moment, and a range of different state actors will take every opportunity to sow mis- and disinformation and undermine the basis of our democracy. It is a very important role of Government to stand against all of that, but there is also a really important role for this House. That is why I approached the statement in the way that I have. I want to work with Members right across the political divide, and I am grateful to him for his support of that approach.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
I put on record my sincere thanks to the Minister for reaching out after the incident involving me that occurred in Blackpool a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, since becoming a Member of this House I have received a barrage of constant threats, including death threats, from the far-right in my constituency, and that seems to be growing, which is a real concern. I know from my discussions with the Minister how seriously he takes the security of Members of this House and the councillors who serve in our town halls. Will he outline how we can support him in defending our democracy in the right way, which unfortunately is in stark contrast to what we heard in the Opposition’s response to the statement?
Dan Jarvis
I was very concerned to hear about that recent incident. Under those very difficult circumstances, my hon. Friend did exactly the right thing, but he should not have had to deal with that situation. That is why it is incredibly important that we make sure that our response is as organised and resourced as it needs to be. He asks what more we can do collectively as parliamentarians. To echo the remarks that I made earlier, we can report it. I know that we are all busy people, and our staff are busy too, but we must not let anything slide. We must take every opportunity, even if they fall below a legal threshold, to report matters to the police, so they have an evidence base that we can use.
Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)
It was an honour to serve on the Speaker’s Conference and, in all the work that I have done on security, I have tried to be a voice for the smaller parties, and particularly for people who are further away from Parliament. One of the biggest strengths of the Speaker’s Conference was the extent to which it listened to Members’ experiences. I appreciate the huge amount of work that has been done to improve data gathering, and the fact that we are much better at pooling together our understanding of the threat, but will the Minister reassure us that Members’ experiences will be listened to, in addition to looking at the data, so that we can build on the strengths of the Speaker’s Conference?
Dan Jarvis
I had a very constructive meeting with colleagues from the Scottish Government yesterday, and I appreciate their attendance at the meeting. The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise concerns about people’s experiences, and I will always make myself available to speak to any Member of this House about what has happened to them.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
Much of the intimidation that candidates now face is not on the doorstep, but from anonymous or fake online accounts. Having experienced that myself, I welcome the work of this Government, the police, the defending democracy taskforce, and the offices of Mr Speaker and the Deputy Speakers. What action is being taken to stop online anonymity being used as a shield for harassment and intimidation in our democracy, and how will candidates in Portsmouth’s May election receive advice, support, protection and the enforcement they need to stand safely for public office?
Dan Jarvis
My hon. Friend is right to raise her concerns in the way that she has done. Hopefully, she will have heard my earlier remarks, which respond to her specific point. We are working very closely with law enforcement, and we are seeking to work more closely with the tech companies, to make sure that we have all the right protections in place for the elections. If there is more that she thinks we should be doing, I would be very grateful to discuss it with her.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
I welcome the Minister’s statement and everybody’s commitment to keep us all as safe as possible. Just a few months ago, the Housing Secretary called the Russian interference within the Reform party
“a stain on our democracy”.—[Official Report, 16 December 2025; Vol. 777, c. 776.]
Since then, members of the Welsh Labour party have been investigated for their connections with the Chinese state. With the Senedd Cymru election a mere two months away, what assurances can the Minister give that the defending democracy taskforce will help to defend our elections in Wales from foreign influence and interference?
Dan Jarvis
I can give the hon. Lady the assurance that she seeks, and I am grateful to Welsh colleagues for their attendance at the defending democracy taskforce yesterday. She is right to raise the threats and challenges that we face. We are making sure that our response to them is proportionate.
Richard Baker (Glenrothes and Mid Fife) (Lab)
I am pleased to hear about the Minister’s positive dialogue with Scottish Ministers ahead of the vital elections in May. On the collective responsibility of political parties to ensure fair and safe debate, does he agree that there should be no repeat of the racist advert published by Reform last year, which attacked Anas Sarwar for his family heritage? It was widely published and seen hundreds of thousands of times on social media.
Dan Jarvis
I agree with my hon. Friend. I can tell him that the director general of MI5 and I recently met the chief executives of political parties to discuss these matters.
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
In 2019, an attempt was made to physically attack me during the general election campaign, when a beer glass was thrown at my head. That was intimidating, but I recognise that it was nothing compared with the experience of those who are commemorated on the walls of this House, or of many of the women who sit in this Chamber. I am very sorry to say that, less than 12 hours ago, the Conservative party put out social media posts that placed the Prime Minister’s face on the body of a slug, a worm or a snake on a £5 note. Several months ago, the Conservative party in Surrey Heath put out a tweet about me that suggested that I somehow supported rape gangs because I could not support the Conservatives’ reasoned amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Does the Security Minister think that those social media acts elevate our politics and conform to the values that we are speaking about today?
Dan Jarvis
I am concerned to hear about what happened to the hon. Gentleman back in 2019. He makes an important and reasonable case, and I think the majority of the Members of this House will agree with him. It is something that we need to keep a very close eye on.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
I welcome the statement, and I am particularly delighted to read the part that says, “Where the law fails to provide adequate protection, we will strengthen it.” As someone who had a case thrown out by the Crown Prosecution Service for being an MP, and who was told that I should just have thicker skin, that is welcome news—and I do have thick skin. Does the Minister share my concern that Members of this House are benefiting from engagement with platforms such as X and taking a significant income? They are essentially benefiting from angry engagement, and the money goes directly into their pockets.
Dan Jarvis
I am very sorry to hear about what happened to my hon. Friend. She is right to refer to the work that we are doing. We are strengthening the law in order to provide additional protections for Members and elected representatives. She makes a good point and poses a good challenge, and I know it will have been heard and agreed with across the House.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his statement, and the Speaker’s Conference for bringing forward recommendations—they are really important. Operation Ford, which is mentioned on page 2 of the statement, will cover England, Scotland and Wales. Will he clarify why Northern Ireland is not included? Perhaps something else is in place, but I want to check.
During election campaigns, Members and their staff are often required to undertake extensive public-facing activities, including constituency events, door-to-door canvassing and campaigning, which can expose them to additional harassment or intimidation. What assessment has been made of the adequacy of the security arrangements and guidance to Members and their staff during election periods, and what role will the taskforce play in co-ordinating measures to mitigate the risks?
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, as I always am, and I am also grateful to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland for their attendance at the taskforce yesterday. With regard to Operation Ford, the devolved arrangements are slightly different in Northern Ireland, but I gave an assurance at yesterday’s meeting that where we can provide additional support to Northern Ireland, we would be happy to do so.
International Women’s Day
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered International Women’s Day 2026.
It is an honour to open this International Women’s Day debate, which is being held in Government time for the first time since 2020. International Women’s Day was forged in the labour strikes of the early 20th century as women came together to call for better pay, shorter working hours and voting rights. It has become an important milestone that celebrates the achievement of women, promotes gender equality and acts as a call to action.
In this debate, I have no doubt that we will hear about pioneering pathfinders, including women who smashed the glass ceiling in Parliament and paved the way for us today, such as Constance Markievicz, the first woman elected; Nancy Astor, the first to take her seat; and Margaret Bondfield, the first woman Cabinet Minister—I recommend her new biography by Nan Sloane, who is a driving force behind the Labour Women’s Network. I am sure that hon. Members will mention the first woman Prime Minister, who took office in 1979. Labour has had the first female Chief Whip, the first female Chancellor and the first black woman MP, the inspirational right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott). We have also had Barbara Castle, Ellen Wilkinson, Jennie Lee and, of course, Baroness Harman in the other place. That is not to forget you, Madam Deputy Speaker—the first non-white Deputy Speaker and the first female Muslim Minister.
I have many greats and firsts sitting behind me—and probably in front of me—including my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler), who was the first black female Minister and the first black woman to speak from the Dispatch Box. I am proud that many of those were also Fabian women, and that we are marking 21 years of the Fabian Women’s Network this year.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Talking of strong women, there is my mum, my wife, my three daughters-in-law and my three grandchildren. Those three wee girls are at a very young age, but I tell you what: they have the potential to be leaders as well. They are fierce women and they are strong, and I am very pleased to see that.
Ever mindful that today we are celebrating International Women’s Day across Northern Ireland, the Minister will know that another lady was killed there last week. Of the women murdered in the whole United Kingdom, the highest proportion has been in Northern Ireland. Does the Minister share my concern that while we celebrate women, we also have to protect women? Our society must do that.
Seema Malhotra
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments and wish all the women in his family a very happy International Women’s Day. Let the message ring out from this House that every girl is a leader. He is absolutely right that we must look at where women come under threats online or through violence, and do everything to protect women and girls across the UK and around the world.
We speak today about the agenda of women’s progress, but we must remind ourselves that although we have made progress, men and women are still not equal—not equal at home and not equal abroad. Indeed, we face the new challenge of a misogynistic insurgency that is determined to roll back women’s rights. When we look at the level of online abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation, it is horrifying to see products that appear designed to make money out of the sexual harassment of women.
Today, I want to make three main arguments: that women are still not equal, that we must be uncompromising in resisting the backlash against women’s rights, and that in these fragmented times women must work with women around the world.
In a world where inequality persists in society, in the economy and in power, I am proud that Labour, led by a Cabinet that is 46% women, is putting the progress of women at the heart of its missions. That is not a coincidence. Women’s representation in politics drives new conversations and puts wider issues on the agenda. Of the 695 women ever elected to the House of Commons, 405, or 58%, were first elected as Labour MPs and 182, or 26%, as Conservative MPs.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
I am proud to have joined this Parliament as part of a record number of women elected for Plaid Cymru in 2024, and part of the record 40% of women elected in that same year. We are clearly on our way towards a gender-equal Parliament. With that historic milestone in sight, would the Minister commit her Government to Centenary Action’s call to commence section 106 of the Equality Act 2010, which would require political parties to publish diversity data on candidates, to increase transparency?
Seema Malhotra
On the hon. Lady’s comment about women making up 40% of the House of Commons today, that is an important milestone, but we are not yet at 50%. I am proud that the Labour party has got close to it, and in fact pretty much reached that level. It is important that we continue to look to the centenary, as she said, with a range of measures to push forward the progress of women’s representation and political parties’ role in that, but also to look forward to the progress of women in every part of society and of our economy.
I recognise that this is about the choices we make. Labour’s manifesto committed to action to tackle gender inequality, from strengthening rights for women in work and reducing the gender pay gap to halving violence against women and girls. Our groundbreaking violence against women and girls strategy begins a decade-long, whole-of-Government and whole-of-society effort to halve violence against women and girls, backed by over £1 billion of funding. I know that every Member of this House will want to get behind that goal.
I want to acknowledge the incredible efforts of my friend and colleague the Minister for Safeguarding—my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips)—who I am proud to stand alongside in today’s debate. [Hon. Members: “More.”] Exactly!
We are not just acting at home: we have made tackling violence against women and girls a priority in our foreign policy, too. Recently, the Foreign Secretary launched All In, a new international coalition to scale up action to end violence against women and girls. It brings together global leaders, experts and campaigners, and focuses on preventing violence before it happens.
Labour is working to prioritise women’s health, with a refreshed women’s health strategy to be published soon. Our plans to make work pay are putting in stronger protections for pregnant women and new mothers at work, and tackling maternity inequality. We are reviewing parental leave and making flexible working more easily available. With two consecutive years of minimum wage rises, we are putting more money in the pockets of working women.
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
The Minister is making a brilliant speech that lots of us will be feeling very emotional about. Does she agree with me and Members across the House that although increasing the minimum wage is really important, as it disproportionately affects female workers, we also need to restructure how we value women’s work and the workforce predominantly made up of women?
Seema Malhotra
I thank my hon. Friend for her comments. That debate continues, and I will touch on some relevant issues later in my speech.
Last week, alongside the Minister for Women and Equalities, I was proud to launch our voluntary action plans. Under the Employment Rights Act 2025, employers with over 250 employees will be asked to submit action plans showing how they will reduce their gender pay gaps and support employees going through the menopause. We are working with business leaders, civil society organisations and trade unions, because we cannot reach workplace equality without the support and commitment of all.
The removal of the two-child limit will lift 450,000 children out of relative poverty in the final year of this Parliament. As we know, poverty impacts women, whom the Women’s Budget Group describe as the “shock absorbers of poverty”.
On business, the Chancellor has backed the Invest in Women taskforce, launching a funding pool of over £600 million, including £130 million from the British Business Bank, to be invested in women-led businesses. It is the largest fund of its kind globally, addressing the enormous barriers to access to finance that exist for women.
Alongside that, the Government are supporting more women in the UK’s tech sector. Every year, the economy loses an estimated £2 billion to £3.5 billion because women leave the tech sector or change sectors due to barriers that should not exist. Men outnumber women by four to one in computer science degrees, which is a subject I studied. Women are less likely to enter tech, stay in the sector or rise to leadership roles.
Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)
Will the Minister talk about not just the tech sector, but how there is such a glass ceiling in engineering—there is a huge number of engineering jobs in my constituency—that women rarely manage to get through it? There is also a similar race equality issue in the higher tiers of engineering.
Seema Malhotra
Never a truer word was spoken. To building on the hon. Lady’s comment, it is worth the House knowing that, at the current pace, it will take 283 years for women to achieve equal representation in tech. That is why I am proud that the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology has launched the Women in Tech taskforce to champion diversity in the UK tech sector, with a pipeline strengthened by stronger engagement with tech in the classroom. There are spaces in which our economy is going to grow, and we need a plan for women to be part of that.
Throughout history, women have consistently been the backbone of our communities, giving their power, time, ideas and more. They have done this in our classrooms, in our offices, in our hospitals, in our military and in the home. History has taught us that despite giving so much, women do not always gain equally to men. Every day, women and girls across the UK challenge the stereotypes so often thrown upon them, but they are our scientists, our teachers, our business leaders, our astronauts, our athletes and so much more. There is nowhere that women and girls should not be able to reach.
But while this Government have women’s equality firmly on the agenda, the battle is not yet won. Increasingly loud voices attempt to dismiss the necessary protections for an inclusive culture at work. Some argue that our existing equality framework has gone too far—that it hinders progress. Let us be clear: these protections embody the British values that women should be treated equally with men, and that people should be treated equally regardless of their race. That is a core British value. It was fought for.
In a Westminster Hall debate last September, a now Reform MP described the Equality Act 2010 as fuelling “a corrosive culture” of grievance. He then called for it to be abolished. It is not a grievance to recognise that a woman who is made redundant for being pregnant, or who leaves work because her employer does not make reasonable adjustments for the menopause, leaves us poorer as individuals, as an economy and as a society.
In this battle, these voices are taking up space online, too. When we see the level of online abuse and intimidation, we must tackle the misogynistic insurgency that threatens to roll back women’s rights and that is having a huge impact on the wellbeing and aspiration of women and girls across our country. The online abuse of women athletes is set to be discussed at the next women’s sports taskforce meeting. I am proud that the offence of creating intimate images without consent was signed into force last month, and that our female Secretary of State announced that it will be made a priority offence under the Online Safety Act 2023, delivering for users the strongest protections from such content.
But this happens against a backdrop of changing social attitudes that we are only just beginning to address. New research from Ipsos MORI and the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College business school shows that 31% of gen Z men—born between 1997 and 2012—agree that a wife should always obey her husband, and one third, or 33%, say that a husband should have the final word on important decisions, according to a new global study of 23,000 people in 29 countries. We are in a renewed battle of ideas and new conversations about progress and rights. We also see pressures and influence through online social influencers. This demands our engagement. It is through conversation, legislation, education and campaigning that this Government are determined to keep us moving forward.
With the challenge to women’s inequality now being international, so must our response be. In the year 2000, we led the first UN Security Council resolution on women, peace and security. It was a simple but transformative idea: that peace is more durable when women help to shape it. UN statistics show that when women meaningfully participate in peace processes, the resulting agreement is 64% less likely to fail and 35% more likely to last at least 15 years. Women and girls are disproportionately affected by conflict and more likely to see their rights curtailed. Some 60% of preventable maternal deaths and 53% of deaths of under-fives take place in settings of conflict and displacement.
We continue to use our voice at the United Nations to push for women to be embedded in peace processes, resolutions and humanitarian responses. Indeed, this week Baroness Smith of Malvern and the UK special envoy for women and girls, Harriet Harman, are leading our delegation in New York at the Commission on the Status of Women, because this Government stand in solidarity with women and girls not just in the UK but around the world.
International Women’s Day marks the beginning not only of a month-long celebration of women’s history, but also, I hope, a year of progress and action. The theme for this year’s International Women’s Day is “Give to Gain”, the aim of which is to emphasise the power of reciprocity and support, whether through advocacy, education, mentoring or time, to help to create a more supportive and interconnected world, building new networks in our communities to bring hope, leadership and change, and renewing our determination. Connecting with our sisters at home and abroad will give us a renewed frontline to resist the roll back of our rights and push forward for the progress of women and girls for generations to come.
But this month is about more than reflection; it is about maintaining momentum. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg said:
“Women belong in all places where decisions are being made.”
That is not an observation; it is a directive. It is for us to hold the light up to highlight progress, and to keep fighting for a better world for women and girls everywhere.
Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)
It is a privilege to respond to the International Women’s Day debate and to follow the Minister for Equalities. It is wonderful to hear her talk about her passion for fighting inequality, fighting for rights and fighting the gender pay gap. I hope very soon to see her in shadow Cabinet—[Interruption.] Yes, I mean the real Cabinet, not with us. That would be terrible for you; you wouldn’t like that! [Laughter.]
This topic is what unites us today in the Chamber: we may have differences of opinion on every topic and come at issues from every ideological point of view, but we are united in our ability to exercise that right to debate and to stand up for women. I am so grateful to be a part of this country and to have those rights that so many women no longer have across the world.
I would like to pay tribute to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and not only for your amazing work here in the Chamber keeping us all under control—a full-time job for anyone. I want to highlight the incredible work that you have done to champion Uyghur women and girls. When everyone was turning their back on Uyghur women and girls, you led the campaign. You tirelessly campaigned across the world to make sure their story was heard and their voice was heard. You worked cross-party on that, so from everyone across the House: thank you for your incredible work. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I am incredibly grateful. It is why I was then sanctioned by the Chinese Communist party—but there are a lot of very powerful women in this room who will not be deterred, regardless of any sanctions.
Joy Morrissey
I feel that if one has received sanctions, it is a badge of honour.
First, to honour the international scope of the debate, I would like to take this moment to think about the women of Afghanistan, who have suffered under the Taliban. The life of all human beings is intrinsically valuable and should always be remembered. Afghan women, whose rights have been systematically dismantled with 100 decrees to restrict their freedom of movement, education, work and expression, to visit a doctor or to have financial freedom. There is no protection there against violence, beatings and forced child marriage. May we remember them today and how quickly the rights we take for granted can disappear.
Across the House and throughout our great country, women have shaped our communities, strengthened our institutions—throughout the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth—and led with courage, determination and resilience. Women are leaders in business, education, science, the armed forces, charities and voluntary organisations, and, of course, here in Parliament.
We must also recognise the women who contribute but who are often not recognised: the carers who support their families every day, with no thanks and no recognition; the volunteers who hold our communities together; the mothers, daughters, sisters and friends who provide strength and stability in the times we need it most. I have often spoken in this House about the importance of service, both to our communities and to our country. That spirit of sacrifice and service is embodied by countless women across the United Kingdom who quietly make an extraordinary difference in the lives of others. May we recognise their contributions today.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
Will my hon. Friend join me in thanking and celebrating the fantastic women of Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, who do exactly what she has just described in businesses, in our local democracy, in our third sector and in shaping the futures of our girls in community groups and schools?
Joy Morrissey
I wholeheartedly agree about praising the unpraised volunteers—the community organisers and those who make our towns and villages what they are. It is so important that we highlight their contributions today.
In my constituency of Beaconsfield, Marlow and the south Bucks villages, I see inspiring and dedicated women every single day. I see carers fighting for their disabled children, like Hazel, who is fighting for the Burnham day centre to remain open. I see healthcare professionals at Wexham Park hospital. I see entrepreneurs like Ally and Lissie Mackintosh, who are now global presenters for F1 and leading the way in lifestyle influencing—I wish I had their social media talents. I see volunteers dedicating their time to strengthening our communities. Their contributions should remind us that leadership is not confined to these corridors of power, but exists in every town, village and neighbourhood across the nation.
I pay tribute to the Taplow and Hitcham women’s institute for its tireless service to our community and for its wonderful 100th anniversary celebration of the branch and its building, which was opened 100 years ago by Lady Astor. We owe a great debt to the women who went before us, and none more so than Nancy Astor, who was a pioneer for women in Parliament—and, with her early pioneering, brought early exposure to the American accent in this place. It has taken this place 100 years to recover, and it will probably take another 100 years to recover from mine, but we live in hope!
Nancy Astor was a pioneer in other ways, too. She fought for children and, more importantly, the vulnerable; supported initiatives to protect children, including raising the age of consent; and fought to tackle children living in appalling conditions, helping countless women and girls. In Nancy Astor, we saw a female leader prepared to confront the uncomfortable and to endure hostility and carry on, including when many opposed her campaigns—even Churchill. It is wonderful to follow in her footsteps. That leadership and determination to fight for the voiceless lives on in many outstanding women today.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
The hon. Lady raises Nancy Astor, of whom there is a statue in Plymouth. There are 11 statues for people to view in my constituency, but none are of women. Does she agree that it is important that women throughout history are also represented in statue form? Would she therefore join my campaign to erect a statue outside Chichester cathedral of the amazing suffragist, Ethel Margaret Turner—known affectionately as Madge Turner? She was our own suffragette in Chichester, and this campaign has been launched by Chichester Women’s History. Does the hon. Lady agree that we should all get behind it?
Joy Morrissey
I absolutely agree. I support the hon. Member in pursuing this wonderful statue for Madge and lend my full support to that campaign.
It is fitting that the UN’s theme for this year’s International Women’s Day is “Rights. Justice. Action. For ALL Women and Girls”. Those are three important words—rights, justice, action—that matter to women and girls. It is fitting because there are many areas where rights, justice and the call to action have been pursued by inspirational women in the face of hostility not dissimilar to what Nancy Astor faced in her time. Many Members across the House have also faced similar challenges. No matter what party they are from, I must respect the courage of many women who have gone before me, blazing the trail by coming to this Chamber and fighting for our rights, including the right to be heard. It is thanks to their contributions and sacrifice that we are allowed to debate today.
I would like to mention a Member of this House who has battled for safe spaces for women and sex-based rights, which is the foundation from which true protection for women and girls needs to start. None has fought that battle with more energy, resilience and determination than the hon. Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield). She has fought tirelessly to protect children and women and girls, and deserves our thanks and respect for all she has done. In the other place, my noble Friends Baroness Jenkin of Kennington and Baroness Davies of Devonport led the way in protecting women and girls; they too faced much hostility, but were never deterred from doing what they believed to be right.
A champion of women-only spaces and the defence of biological sex outside of this House is J. K. Rowling, a woman who has been nothing short of inspirational. She has faced down personal threats to her safety, determined to ensure that the rights of women are heard. The Leader of the Opposition has also firmly taken a stance to protect women and girls for years when very few joined her to stand up for those safe spaces. It is for that reason that we must also be clear that, as a society, we have failed many young girls for far too long.
Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab)
I would like to make the point that there are many people with different views across this House, many of which I agree with. The hon. Lady makes a very good point in naming some individuals, but there are also many other women who stand up for sex-based rights. I would like to say that on the Floor of the House. I thank her for her words.
Joy Morrissey
I thank the hon. Member for that point. Many women from all kinds of different ideological perspectives have contributed to this debate, and I thank them.
Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)
We should also recognise that some people have also been transphobic. We must be mindful that a lot of trans people feel very vulnerable at this time; some have committed suicide. Can we also hold them in our thoughts in this debate?
Joy Morrissey
I thank the hon. Member for that very nuanced contribution. I also thank her for being the first female of colour at the Dispatch Box, leading the way, and Chairman of a Select Committee. She is someone who all Members of this House, from every party, respect and admire; I thank her for everything she does.
As we try to protect young women and girls, there has been no clearer or more scandalous a failure than the rape gangs scandal that we are confronting now. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) and my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) who have raised this matter in Parliament, along with Alex Stafford, who is no longer in this place, and the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson)—a cross-party effort—who have raised this issue time and again, while very few other Members of this House did. I commend them for being brave enough to do so. [Interruption.] Yes, there are so many I am not able to thank today, but I want to recognise them as best as I can. Baroness Casey has said that too many shied away from the issue of ethnicity in the rape gangs scandal. Those hon. Members did not, and that shows real leadership by Members in a cross-party way to protect women and girls.
This International Women’s Day, let us unite in clear determination. Where Nancy Astor led in confronting injustice for the voiceless, the parliamentarians of today will follow. We will speak up for the right of women to women-only spaces. We will make sure that, no matter the community, ethnicity or religion involved, we will never again let a scandal like the rape gangs go unchallenged. As someone who has fought for years for women and girls and fought against sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation, I think that every Member of the House should look at how we can protect women and girls, no matter who or where they are. I believe that is something we can all agree on.
For International Women’s Day to matter, it must be more than symbolic. It must combine celebration with action. It must be a further catalyst for rights, justice and action for women and girls. It must harden our resolve to ensure safety for all women and girls. It must set in clear focus our collective determination that this will be a country in which women and girls from every race, religion and creed are able to contribute their talents, with the certainty that we will keep them safe. For rights, justice and action, our women and girls deserve nothing less.
Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)
I thank the inspirational speakers we have heard so far. International Women’s Day feels particularly poignant to me this year, and there are two reasons for that. The first is watching the women in Iran. The reason why this has particularly affected me is because of the six-year fight to bring back my constituent Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, which many Members, including you, Madam Deputy Speaker, will remember. During that time, I encountered the brutality of the Iranian regime whenever we tried to negotiate her return to our country. The way that they treated her was like she was nothing, in all honesty—they attached a worthlessness to her identity.
Now we are watching women fighting just for education and the right to dress the way they want—just for the right to live. Bombing primary schools full of little girls is something that is really hard to fathom. Every morning, no matter what happens, we can wake up feeling very lucky because we know that we can walk to work or get on the tube and we will be safe. Our thoughts today are with the people in Iran who are fighting for justice, especially the women.
The second reason that International Women’s Day feels particularly poignant to me is because of the case I am dealing with of Bright Horizons nursery in my constituency, which some Members will have heard me speak about. Vincent Chan operated for seven years undetected, preying on little girls, toddlers and babies, inflicting pain on them and conducting sexual abuse— something that he had already done in previous workplace. He went undetected and was given a job in a place where parents entrusted staff to look after their children while they were at work.
Parents only found out about the abuse because he had been reported by a brave whistleblower for acts of cruelty towards children—for bullying, not for sexual abuse. It was only when police decided to seize his devices, including nursery iPads, that he was discovered. He had filmed himself committing acts of sexual violence against little girls in the nursery itself, and he had used the iPads to airdrop the images to his own devices. This makes us realise that the fight is not over and that there is so much more work we have to do to combat violence against women and girls. I am pleased to be here today, surrounded by women who have been fighting that fight, and I hope that people like Vincent Chan get justice and end up behind bars.
I want to pay tribute to all the mothers of the children who were affected in the nursery. They have made sure that this will never happen again. They are the ones who are fighting for mandatory CCTV. They are the ones who are fighting to make sure that there is a “two person per child” rule in every room in every nursery. They are the ones who are now fighting for a flare system so that whistleblowing can be done properly and without fear and nurseries are not able to mark their own homework.
However, every time I speak about this case, I make sure that I say that for all the cases of sexual abuse in nurseries and early years settings that have happened, there are hundreds of thousands of other babysitters and nursery staff who look after children day in, day out and make sure that they are loved and protected. We must not tar everyone with the same brush, but we do need to take this seriously, and something does need to be done.
Today I want to talk mainly about my brave constituent Sanju Pal, who is in the Gallery. The focus of the UN for this International Women’s Day is, as the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey) said, rights, justice and action. Across the world, women and girls have just 64% of the rights that men have. That is why I want to concentrate on Sanju’s case. Some Members will have heard me mention Sanju before. After six years of fighting a legal battle against her former employer—a management consultancy firm— for unfair dismissal, she won a landmark case at the Employment Appeal Tribunal in London. Her case sets a legal precedent for endometriosis to be considered a disability under the Equality Act 2010.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I hope you will indulge me while I talk about Sanju Pal’s case, because I feel that everyone in this Chamber, and everyone in the world, should listen to what she had to go through. In 2018 Sanju was diagnosed with severe endometriosis, and had large fluid-filled cysts on both her ovaries, requiring an immediate operation. She returned to work a month later in severe pain. She was bleeding and could hardly walk, because she had been pushing herself too much for a promotion to senior manager. She told HR in explicit detail how much pain she was in.
Three months after her phased return to work ended, and without any warning, Sanju was sacked. She was told to leave the building immediately and not to contact anyone. She was told, “Do not contact any of the colleagues you have been working with for 10 years now; just get out and leave the building quietly.” She had worked there for 10 years, and she told me that her entire life was based around her work and making sure that she looked after people she was serving at Accenture.
Sanju was sacked for not being ready for promotion within a required timeframe. This is known as the “up or out” policy, used by many corporates, where employees can be dismissed if their manager believes that they cannot be promoted. The termination letter—which, by the way, she received minutes after that meeting—did not state any actual reason for her dismissal. It also did not inform her of her right to appeal, and nor did it refer to the policy that was being followed.
As a Camden girl through and through, who went to Camden School for Girls, Sanju decided not to take this lying down. She took it to an internal tribunal, and the High Court later found that this panel had completely disregarded what she had written in her impact statement. When she then took it to tribunal, the panel ruled that she had not proved that her illness had an ongoing substantial effect on her daily life, and stated that many women with endometriosis had mild symptoms or none at all. The tribunal rejected her claim for disability discrimination and lacked any understanding of the physical impact of her health condition on her own body. She appealed that decision, and the High Court eventually ruled that she was unfairly dismissed from her job without her employer following a fair capability procedure or providing any reasonable adjustments after she was disabled because of her health condition.
I am so proud of Sanju for her tireless campaigning since her unfair dismissal in 2019. Employers must now follow this judgment on considering endometriosis as a disability and providing reasonable adjustments. More needs to be done to ensure that this does not happen to other women who are left physically disabled by endometriosis and other gynaecological conditions. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) has done some brilliant work in this area for years now, but we need a collective voice. We need everyone in the Chamber to stand up and speak about this, because it has been a taboo for too long now.
It is shocking, if the Minister is listening, that not a single gynaecological condition was introduced into the disability guidance of the Equality Act. That basic change could have saved Sanju her job, as well as so much time, money and anxiety, as she spent six years fighting for this unfair dismissal. It could also have made a huge difference for countless other women whom we have not heard about and who are facing the same discrimination in the workplace across the country. One in 10 women suffer from endometriosis, and 69% of sufferers say that they face discrimination at work. Such cases are far too common, leaving one in six women with endometriosis unemployed because of their condition.
Women should not be forced to go to a tribunal just to get the rights that they deserve. That is why I believe that women with endometriosis should be given specific workplace adjustments and the right to reasonable adjustments for their condition. Alongside that, endometriosis should be listed under reoccurring and fluctuating impairments in the guidance for the Equality Act, so that employers actually understand their legal duty to provide reasonable adjustments to women who are suffering because of the condition.
Dawn Butler
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. You may be coming to this, but it is an incredible—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. I do not wish to correct any one of our fantastic female parliamentarians, but “you” means me. One more time: Dawn Butler.
Dawn Butler
Thank you, and you are amazing, Madam Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend may be coming to this, but my friend Elaine Banton was the lawyer in the case she refers to. I want to put that on record alongside my hon. Friend’s excellent remarks about her constituent.
Tulip Siddiq
I thank my hon. Friend. Elaine Banton definitely deserves a mention in the workplace as well.
There is a lot more I would like to say about this important case, but I am conscious that many women want to speak. However, I just want to mention that when I was growing up—I grew up in a Muslim Asian household—I did not hear anything about endometriosis. I never heard the word “menopause” when growing up. If I was ever on my period, I was told to quickly move away, listen and change, and make sure that my brother did not hear anything. There is a point at which we need to change that.
My mother was very forward in other ways. Growing up in a Muslim household, on Friday nights we always had dinner with our Jewish neighbours. She was very clear about the fact that in our house we could celebrate Christmas, Eid, Durga Puja and Hanukkah—we could do whatever we wanted because we were citizens of the world. But we were simply not allowed to mention our period, menopause or endometriosis. For Sanju’s case, but also for all the South-Asian mothers who are listening out there, this is the time when we need to break the taboo. We need to talk about conditions that affect women, particularly when they affect young girls as well, so that, if they are affected by those conditions in the workplace, they do not feel ashamed and like they have to hide.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
My hon. Friend is making an incredibly powerful point. However, if we are really going to change things, we need fathers to speak to their daughters. I recall making a deliberate point when my daughter started menstruating. I was standing in the supermarket trying to assess and understand what I was faced with, with the wall of things, with people coming up to me and asking, “Do you want some help?”, and me saying, “No, I need to work my way through this.” We need men to advocate and understand these things as well.
Tulip Siddiq
I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend, who is a staunch feminist—one of the reasons why he will speak in this debate.
I will finish by saying that the justice served to Sanju is a victory not just for her, but for the countless women across the country who have fought so hard to get reasonable adjustments in the workplace. I hope that the Minister will consider this case and that legislation will follow from the Labour Government to ensure that women never again have to face discrimination in the workplace.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. These are really fantastic speeches. So that I do not have to interrupt them, let me say that “you” and “your”, unless you are referring to the Chair, should not be said at all. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)
This year’s theme, as we have heard, is “Give to Gain”. That prompted me to think about feminism on a global scale, and how interconnected we truly all are. Our globalised world is far from being made up of isolated countries, bounded by iron borders; we exist in the physical space and online. Our geopolitical landscape is shifting constantly, and feminism must move with it.
The experiences of women are shaped by overlapping factors of race, class, disability, migration status, sexuality, faith and geography. Feminism policy cannot be effective if it only reflects the lives of the most privileged. Some of the gravest injustices faced by women globally include physical violence, forced marriage and economic exclusion, and they fall hardest on those who are at multiple intersections of disadvantage. Progress for women is never a zero-sum game. When we lift up the most marginalised, we all rise. That is why “Give to Gain” is such an important theme. It has made me reflect that we as a country and a society must give overseas aid if we are to help build a more progressive, fair and stable world.
Today, I want to raise one of the most difficult and taboo subjects in the area of violence against women and girls, but one that we must confront: female genital mutilation, commonly known as FGM or cutting. It is a sensitive and distressing topic, but to break taboos, we must start to articulate the problem. Female genital mutilation comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or injury to the female genital organs for any non-medical reasons. It is steeped in misguided ideas of a woman’s virtue—ideas that are pervasive, and that manifest in all cultures in different ways, of which FGM is, I believe, one of the most insidious and violent.
In January, I travelled to The Gambia as part of a delegation from the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. FGM was made illegal in The Gambia in 2015, yet the practice continues. In fact, to avoid detection, cutting is now carried out on increasingly younger girls, and sometimes even on babies, with devastating and sometimes fatal consequences. The practice has no health benefits and causes lifelong problems, including severe bleeding, incontinence, infections, long-term pain, menstrual problems, complications in childbirth and an increased risk of newborn deaths. Beyond that clear physical trauma, many women live with depression, flashbacks and lifelong psychological scars. It is a form of torture.
FGM is a serious violation of human rights and bodily autonomy, not a cultural inevitability, and more than 4 million girls are at risk every single year, yet in The Gambia, I also saw hope. I saw the profound impact of not-for-profit and grassroots organisations, who work creatively and sensitively in communities to remove economic and cultural barriers to change. Data gathering is difficult in a country with such severe poverty, but initial estimates suggest that the prevalence of FGM has fallen: it has gone from affecting around 76% of girls to around 51%.
Non-governmental organisations and grassroots women’s organisations are uniquely effective, because they are trusted by families and embedded in communities. Those organisations are part-funded by British overseas aid, which this Government are now reducing. Those organisations’ funding runs out this year, just as the message is starting to get through. The reduction in aid tears holes in the safety net for the world’s most vulnerable communities, and leaves young girls more exposed. The Government’s decision to reduce the United Kingdom’s official development assistance from 0.5% to 0.3% of gross national income will have real-world consequences. It represents the lowest United Kingdom aid contribution as a share of gross national income since 1999 and diminishes our long-standing reputation as a global leader in humanitarian assistance.
In our report on FGM, the Women and Equalities Committee was clear: the Government must protect funding for programmes that prevent FGM and set out their plans for future investment in that vital work. Instead, in their response, the Government confirmed that their flagship programme to end FGM will finish in October 2026, and that there are no plans at all for what comes next. That is not just disappointing; it is deeply irresponsible.
When Britain invests in the freedom and wellbeing of girls globally, we gain a safer, fairer and more stable world. That is why, when the Liberal Democrats were in government, we secured a commitment of 0.7% of gross national income for overseas aid. FGM is, of course, illegal here too, but in today’s global society, British girls are being taken abroad to undergo cutting in areas with fewer protections. In the last decade, more than 41,000 women and girls have had FGM identified at an NHS appointment in this country, yet in the five-year period between 2019 and 2024, there was just one conviction under the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. Protection must not stop at the border. Intervention must happen before a child boards a plane and after she lands. Frontline non-governmental organisations in source countries are often best placed to prevent FGM.
The practice of FGM is rooted in gender inequality, control of girls’ bodies and forced silence. True solidarity means recognising that their struggle is our struggle. By supporting global efforts to end FGM through aid and diplomacy, the UK helps to meet its international commitments and reduces the chance of FGM happening to people who live here. The Government must not be complicit in halting the progress on preventing such violence against girls, no matter where they are born. Understanding intersectionality is vital to feminism today, and I call on the Government to recognise that, in our interconnected world, solving violent crime against women and girls everywhere is everyone’s responsibility.
Ms Abena Oppong-Asare (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab)
It is a privilege to speak in this International Women’s Day debate. We reflect on the women who created International Women’s Day, and the women who have left a mark every day since then—women across the worlds of politics, trade unionism, business, science and the arts, who are making strides forward in the face of ignorance and misogyny, and who are taking a sledgehammer to the glass ceiling, smashing through the barriers and making space for those who have followed.
I reflect on the women who have lit the pathway to my place in Parliament. The right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), the Mother of the House, is an inspiration to so many of us. I am also thinking of Baroness Harman and Baroness Amos in the other place, and of you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as well as my hon. Friends on the Front Bench, the Minister for Equalities and the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls—you have such a long title. [Hon. Members: “She!”] She has such a long title. I also reflect on all the women I have met in my years leading the Labour Women’s Network. These are the giants on whose shoulders we stand. They lift us up, and we, in turn, must lift others in Parliament, in our communities and globally.
We have heard about the status of women globally. Across the globe, women are denied basic rights—the right to go to school, have a job, and be paid equally—equal legal rights, and basic freedoms. For example, in Afghanistan, 2.2 million girls are banned from secondary school by the Taliban. Only a quarter of women have jobs. It is particularly cruel that Afghan women are barred from entering the medical professions, but the Taliban ban women from being treated by men, so women are denied basic medical care. In Iran, women hold only 64% of the legal rights enjoyed by men. They require permission from their husband to get a passport or travel abroad. Girls as young as 13 can be married if a male judge decrees it. There are no criminal offences of rape within marriage or violence in the home. It is women who are leading the resistance to the ayatollahs in Iran, risking everything for justice and liberation.
We should take inspiration from the women standing up for their rights around the world and here at home. I am proud that we have passed the Employment Rights Act 2025, because it is women who will benefit the most, especially low-paid women, women of colour and working-class women. Workers will have a right to guaranteed hours for the first time, which means clarity about how much they will earn, and the stability to plan childcare and family expenditure. That will be life-changing for millions of families.
None of these steps forward comes from a clear blue sky. They come from decades of struggle, argument, reversals and defeats, and steps forward and progress. They are the result of suffragettes campaigning for political rights, and the likes of Barbara Castle campaigning for economic rights. Yes, we have seen progress on social, political and economic fronts, but equality is still a distant dream. The Minister mentioned pay. According to the Office for National Statistics, median weekly earnings for female employees working full time were £710 in April 2025, compared with £815 for male full-time employees.
Equal pay remains some way off, as does healthcare. The harsh truth is that women continue to get a raw deal in the healthcare system. We do not enjoy true equality in the NHS. We have a system shaped and largely run by men—a system in which women’s health is a secondary concern. There is still a “male by default” culture in healthcare. I have been campaigning for faster treatment for endometriosis and fibroids. One in 10 women suffer from these painful and incurable conditions, yet the average time that women wait for diagnosis has gone up from eight years to nearly 10—to nine years and four months. For women of colour, who face the double whammy of racism and sexism, the time has gone up to 11 years.
Women are waiting in pain for years. Their concerns are dismissed and their pains are ignored. I have said it before, and I will say it again: no offence, but if one in 10 men suffered from a painful, incurable disease, there would be faster treatment, research into cures, time off work, and a systematic and sympathetic hearing from society. As it is, women face ignorance, discrimination and stigma when they present with crippling, blinding pain and heavy bleeding.
In this debate on International Women’s Day, I pay tribute to Georgie Wileman for creating her brilliant film “This is Endometriosis”. I was delighted to see it win best short film at the BAFTAs this year; it is truly well-deserved recognition. I also commend the work of the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), and the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis, my hon. Friend the Member for Bathgate and Linlithgow (Kirsteen Sullivan). I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq), who has been supporting a constituent who was dismissed after working in her organisation for 10 years because of her endometriosis condition. Sanju Pal, you are an inspiration to us all. Thank you for the work you have done with your MP to make sure that this hits us nationally.
I have argued that the solutions must include enhanced training for GPs to speed up diagnosis, and improving the education of young people and women on the menstrual cycle. I look forward to the new women’s health strategy, which I hope places women front and centre in the striving for equality for women in the NHS. I welcome the shifts towards greater use of technology, local diagnosis hubs and greater awareness about women’s health conditions, but of course, we have far further to march.
I take enormous inspiration from the women and girls I meet in my constituency—fearless, driven and dedicated women who want to live out their potential. I want to take this opportunity to name a few. Chiamaka Muoneke is a dedicated wife, mother and community champion in Thamesmead who supports others through healthy cooking workshops. Jattinder Rai is the CEO of Bexley Voluntary Service Council, and she supports charities, communities and local people in my constituency and beyond. Shantel Morris, who I met in one of my constituency surgeries, shared her experience of homelessness and spoke about her aim to provide support to local people and families facing eviction or living in temporary accommodation. I was delighted to see her organisation hit the ground when I attended last October’s launch of the Morris Mission in Erith, where she now provides training and support for local people.
Jo Dunkley at Off The Ropes has done an incredible job of bringing this brilliant charity to life through her passion for boxing, shared by so many. The charity supports local adults facing mental health challenges to build confidence, resilience and lasting connections through sport. I was delighted to cut the ribbon at its new gym in Abbey Wood last November. Since then, it has gone from strength to strength, and I give huge credit to Jo for making that happen.
I also pay tribute to the staff at the Community Hospice, of which I am a patron—in particular, Aneta Saunders, who is stepping into the CEO role, having been director of income generation, and Dr Lesley Bull, the medical director, who is helping to steady the team through their leadership transition. Finally, although I have mentioned her in previous speeches on International Women’s Day, I want to mention once again the brilliant Kate Heaps. Kate has been the chief executive of Community Hospice for nearly two decades. She has grown the hospice’s work and fought hard to improve hospice care locally and nationally. I pay tribute to her and wish her the best of luck in her next steps.
In this International Women’s Day debate, I want to highlight that I am proud of what this Government have achieved so far towards a fairer, more equal society and economy. I am lifted up by my sisters in Parliament and the amazing women I meet on a day-to-day basis in politics and around this place. Even in the darkest times, amid all the uncertainty, we support each other, we uphold our convictions and our passions, and we uplift each other in representing those in our constituencies and beyond and campaigning on issues that are important to our constituents.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
In this International Women’s Day debate, I rise to say a few words about the women and girls in Afghanistan, as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Afghan women and girls. I note that the hon. Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) also referred to their experiences.
I saw comments in the Telegraph at the weekend saying that the fact International Women’s Day is marked in Afghanistan shows that the day is meaningless. I beg to differ, particularly given the number of us who are here on a Thursday afternoon. Factually, it is not listed as a holiday in Afghanistan, and we are not seeing celebrations, protests, debates or marketing based on the day itself there, simply because that is not possible for women and girls in Afghanistan. Afghanistan remains a member of the UN, which marks the day, but we do not need to formally ban something to effectively do so—not when women cannot gather and cannot speak, even in their own homes if they can be heard outside them. None the less, there is value to International Women’s Day, and I believe that even in the darkest of circumstances, there is still value in this day to the women of Afghanistan.
As we are hearing in this debate, International Women’s Day is about so many struggles but also celebrations. The women of Afghanistan’s struggles and the celebration of their resilience have equal value today. When they cannot speak for themselves, those of us with voices internationally can do so. Indeed, elevating the voices of Afghan women is what the APPG was set up to do.
There is no sugarcoating it: it is bleak in Afghanistan. A new penal code was introduced in January that has effectively legalised domestic violence, including sexual assault within marriages. Husbands are explicitly authorised to discipline their wives for non-specified transgressions. The only crime on the books is a husband beating his wife with a stick, causing severe injury such as a broken bone. The burden of proof for that offence lies on the woman, and the punishment if proven is just 15 days in prison. Injuring animals carries a greater penalty in Afghanistan. I doubt we will ever see a prosecution under that law, given that gathering the proof would require the husband who has committed the assault chaperoning his wife to hospital to get the evidential X-ray required.
On the other hand, if a woman tries to leave a marriage by visiting her father or relatives and does so without her husband’s consent or refuses to return—we can imagine circumstances where somebody would look to do that, to escape domestic violence in their house—she can go to prison for three months. If a woman is found to have abandoned Islam—and I believe we are talking here about the Taliban’s interpretation of the faith, which many disagree with—she can be jailed indefinitely, with 10 lashes daily until she chooses to return to the religion.
There are severe restrictions on working, to which the hon. Member for Erith and Thamesmead referred. Some organisations in some areas have negotiated the right for women to keep their jobs. Women can still provide healthcare, though increasingly women are being denied the right to have healthcare training, and we can easily see what that means for the future of maternal and female care in Afghanistan. We are certainly a long way away from there being freedom to work, and financial autonomy is simply not a reality.
The future for the next generation is even bleaker. Girls are growing up without completing their education, and with women being unable to have medical training, there will come a point when there are no women left to provide healthcare. The reality is that in a country at war, at the forefront of the climate crisis, where 17 million people faced acute hunger this winter, and with millions of displaced people returning from its neighbours, including Iran, it is women who are bearing the brunt of the desolation.
I am aware that in setting out this reality, I am not elevating the experiences, feelings or voices of any one woman. There are 25 million women in Afghanistan, and each and every one of them should have the right to speak, to live freely and, indeed, to live at all. Prior to 2021, they were able to do so. On this International Women’s Day, I would like to see commitments from the Government to the women and girls of Afghanistan.
I do not agree with the Government’s decision to close the door on the safe and legal routes for refuge or to study or work. I was told on Monday in the Chamber by the Minister for Border Security and Asylum, who was responding to the urgent question on the Government’s immigration policy, that this is about ensuring that universities are not making the decisions on who gets to stay here. But if there are no other ways for people to seek safe refuge here, it is not surprising that they take that opportunity, and if they no longer have that opportunity, it will not be surprising if they revert to irregular routes, by which I mean the small boats that we all say we want to prevent.
Having made that decision, the Government must do more in Afghanistan—much more. In opening the debate, the Minister talked about the work the Government do overseas, but I beg to differ on that assessment. Afghanistan is not one of the countries the Government have ringfenced as they look to cut official development assistance spending, but Afghanistan is apparently a priority. I would like to understand what that means.
It is important that we recognise the strength of Afghan women. The APPG has had the privilege of hearing from several Afghan women in the last year, as well as NGOs and academics who have spent time on the ground. We have heard a lot, unsurprisingly, about the loss of hope, but we have also heard about the unbelievable resilience. Afghan women live in unthinkable circumstances for any of us here, but they keep on. While this is a speech setting out terrible things, I am not asking people to pity women and girls in Afghanistan; in talking about them, I am asking for action. I know that you, Madam Deputy Speaker, were previously a member of the APPG in the last Parliament and know how supportive you were and continue to be.
To end, I want to share the remarks that the APPG heard last year from a female medical practitioner on the ground. She said that she spoke to us as parliamentarians
“as a witness to the quiet suffering and untold strength of Afghan women. These stories are not just tragic, they are powerful. And they must inform policy decisions and humanitarian priorities moving forward.”
I urge the Government to heed those words.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
It is my absolute pleasure to speak in this year’s debate to mark International Women’s Day. This important day gives us an opportunity not only to reflect on how far women have come—and, disappointingly, how far we have yet to go—but to recognise the women who continue to shape and strengthen our communities every single day. I want to use my time to celebrate some of the remarkable women across South Derbyshire who make a real difference. Making people feel seen in this place is my absolute favourite thing to do.
First, Kalila Storey is my right-hand woman in the constituency. She runs my office, and I honestly do not know what I would do without her. I am sure that many of us across the House share that experience, with incredible women in their teams. I would like to give a shout-out to Lib Orme and correct a mistake I made in business questions this morning when I did not recognise her as being the founder of “I love Swad”, a Facebook page with almost 46,500 members—an incredible achievement. I also want to mention Lesley Aspey. I hope that she feels seen by me for the woman she is, both in the constituency as her MP and in this place—she will know why I have mentioned her name.
In Melbourne, Sharon Brown is the driving force behind the wonderfully vibrant Melbourne festival of arts and architecture, which last year celebrated its 20th year. She also manages the Creative Melbourne gallery. Through her work, she has brought art, culture and creativity to the heart of her community, creating opportunities for artists and inspiring residents and visitors alike. Also using creativity as a force for good is Julie Batten, director of People Express. Julie has led the organisation since 1992, and under her leadership it has used the arts as a powerful tool for engagement, working with a diverse range of people across our community and enabling them to become writers, filmmakers and artists of their own stories. Her work helps ensure that creativity is truly accessible to everyone.
Supporting local enterprise is Keelie Briggs, a marketing expert who provides networking opportunities for businesses across South Derbyshire, particularly in Swadlincote. She is a passionate champion of small businesses and organises the annual small business showcase, giving local entrepreneurs a platform to grow and succeed. Entrepreneurship is also embodied by Elaine Penhaul, the founder of Lemon and Lime Interiors, whose business has grown into a highly successful company supporting homeowners and property professionals alike. Supporting that growth with her is Katie Lavis, who started her own business and now works with Lemon and Lime as it continues to expand. Another fantastic local entrepreneur is Tracey Payne, who exemplifies the work, determination and creativity of women running small businesses in our community.
Public service is another area where women across South Derbyshire make an enormous contribution. Angela Archer, chair of South Derbyshire district council, is a passionate advocate for children with special educational needs and disabilities. As a parent of SEND children herself, she co-founded the charity Shout to support families navigating the challenges that SEND can bring. Keddie Bailey quietly supports families of SEND children, demonstrating the compassion and commitment that empower families at times of significant challenge.
In the voluntary sector, I want to recognise the work of Hollie Benton, chief executive of South Derbyshire Community Voluntary Support, and Petra Parker, who manages its food hub. Together they support local people to access food parcels and befriending services, and provide help to return home after a hospital stay, as well as a wide range of support, ensuring that no one in our community feels alone when they need help the most. Ingrid van der Weide, editor of the local publication SwadStyle, keeps residents informed about what is happening across Swadlincote and the surrounding area. She also leads the wonderful Swadlincote festival of words taking place this month, which celebrates literature, storytelling and creativity for all ages.
Our cultural heritage is also being preserved thanks to Becca King, the museum manager at Sharpe’s pottery museum, who works tirelessly to ensure that our local history is accessible, engaging and celebrated. I also recognise Peggy Moore, whose dedication to remembrance in our community is truly extraordinary. Peggy has spent countless hours knitting poppies, creating a life-size knitted Tommy soldier and collecting donations for the Royal British Legion poppy appeal. Her dedication ensures that the sacrifices of those who served are never forgotten.
I also want to recognise Maria Hanson MBE, founder of the charity Me & Dee. Since founding the charity in 2006, Maria has dedicated herself to supporting families facing life-changing and life-limiting conditions. Her vision, compassion and determination have helped thousands of families across the UK, and this remarkable work has been recognised with the charity being awarded the King’s award for voluntary service.
In my constituency, there are women whose leadership continues to inspire long after they have left public office. One such person is Edwina Currie, the first female MP for South Derbyshire. To this day, residents still speak fondly of her to me as a dedicated constituency MP who worked tirelessly on their behalf. I would like to give a special mention to Margaret Garner, an absolute gem in our community—Repton in particular. Margaret, now in her 80s, is an incredibly loyal and supportive friend, a volunteer for many activities in Repton, and swears like a trooper. She is the kind of person who lifts those around her, brings humour and honesty wherever she goes, and reminds us all of the strength and spirit that run through so many women in our communities.
Of course, none of us would be here today without the women who came before us and fought to open the doors of democracy. One such woman from my constituency is Hannah Mitchell, a suffragette who lived in Newhall in the early 1900s. She was an activist and rebel, and one of the many women who challenged inequality and fought for women’s right to take part in public life.
The women I have mentioned come from many different walks of life, from business, the arts, public service, charity work and community leadership. What unites them is their determination to make the places where they live better for others. There are, of course, so many incredible women across South Derbyshire. Giving a few shout-outs today inevitably means that I will have missed someone, but I hope this speech goes some way towards recognising the extraordinary contribution that women make across our communities every single day.
Mr Speaker
We now have a maiden speech. I remind everyone that there are no interventions during maiden speeches. I call Hannah Spencer.
Hannah Spencer (Gorton and Denton) (Green)
Four weeks ago today, I was in college, a plumber learning how to plaster, and today I am in Parliament as an MP. Being here is the honour of my life, but I do not want this to be unusual or exceptional. I truly believe that anyone doing a job like mine should get a seat on these Benches.
Where I am from, we are taught to look after each other, to look out for each other, to stick up for each other and to stick together—to see each other as human. I am so proud of that humanity and that people in Gorton, Denton, Burnage, Levenshulme, Longsight and Abbey Hey feel that way too. It is in our blood and in our bones—we see each other as human.
Where I am from, we give a nod to the statue of Emmeline Pankhurst. We remember the farm worker and seamstress Hannah Mitchell, the trade unionist Mary Quaile and the mill worker Annie Kenney—and, of course, Elsie Plant, who is from just down the road from me and who I named one of my beautiful greyhounds after. I think of these brilliant women a lot, and especially today as we debate International Women’s Day.
I think of many others, too, from pits, slums and factories; the women who changed the system so that I could be here; the women of colour whose names we will never know because history did not bother to recognise or remember them. But we do today, because without their struggle, their fight and their determination to stick together, none of this could be possible. It is bittersweet to recognise these brilliant people but to be reminded that we still need to try to be them.
The constituency that elected me is the 15th most deprived in the country. It has suffered decades of neglect and broken promises. We see that every day right in front of us, in the litter and fly-tipping, the state of housing, the struggle for a job you can build a life on, the filthy and polluted air, and the reduced life chances—the sheer unfairness of it all.
My constituency has been hit hard by the ongoing cost of living crisis. None of this is fair, none of it is right and none of it happens by accident. So I very much share my predecessor’s strong commitment to tackling health inequalities and putting local people and all our communities at the heart of decision making. That is how we begin to turn things around, to give people agency and a genuine chance of a better today and a better tomorrow.
To the girls I saw photos of, going to school on International Women’s Day dressed as Hannah the Plumber, with their overalls and spanners, and the trademark hair. To the 10-year-old boy at HideOut who rock-climbed an incredibly high wall with me, saw me become suddenly very terrified of how far up I was, and said, “Don’t ever give up. And if it’s scary looking down then just look at what’s in front of you.”
To the women in my life who have had my back and fought for equality alongside me. To the men I work with—especially the lads on my plastering course, who dealt very well with my new-found spotlight in the middle of our training. To those men who will suffer the effects of this unequal society through their mental health. To the veterans I know who were willing to risk everything, and came home and found that society was turning its back on them.
To the white working classes, who are always lumped into one group and never appreciated. To everyone who will have nowhere to sleep tonight, or will barely exist in a cold, damp and insecure home. To my trans siblings who get blamed for everything. To the Muslims everywhere, who are constantly, and often violently, scapegoated. To the disabled people who cannot access the world because of structural inequality that is completely fixable. To the people of colour, who have to work harder at everything.
I do not always get it, and I will not say that I always understand it, but what I do know is what it feels like to be looked down on, to be let down and left behind, to be less worthy because of something about me. Our struggles may be different, but our humanity is the same. We always stick together, we always fight for each other, and that is what I want us to take forward from International Women’s Day, and to do that every single day.
The cleaners, bus drivers, nursery workers, foster carers, home carers, unpaid carers, teaching assistants, bin collectors, warehouse workers, delivery drivers, school dinner staff, lollipop wardens, supermarket workers, posties, library staff, kitchen porters, farm workers, mechanics, ground workers, scaffolders, electricians, plasterers and plumbers—we deserve to be here; every single one of us. And I will make space for you to come and join me, to get to have your say.
From the bustle of Longsight market, the many Irish pubs in Levy, Sue’s chippy, and Tony at California Wines in Gorton, to the amazing young people at HideOut, the best hash brown butty at Cafe Plus in Denton, and the women-led social enterprise at Dahlia Café on Burnage Lane—you are the best of our brilliant communities. I want to put Gorton and Denton on the map by championing the positives about our community: the spirit, the warmth, the grit, and the way we help each other out every single day. Whether it is our neighbours where we live, or our siblings in places like Afghanistan, Gaza, Sudan and Iran—wherever we are, we deserve to live freely as the human beings that we all are.
We do things differently in Manchester, and it makes me proud every single day. Now I want to make Abbey Hey, Levenshulme, Burnage, Longsight, Gorton and Denton proud of me. Thank you so much for putting your faith in this plumber and newly qualified plasterer. Together, we can make hope normal again, and we will look after each other, whoever we are, because where I am from, that is just what we do.
Mr Speaker
At least the hon. Lady can cross the football political divide by being a Bolton Wanderers supporter.
Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) on her first speech, and welcome her to this place. I do not know whether she has noticed, but the Palace of Westminster is in need of some maintenance, so it is entirely possible that both her plastering and plumbing skills will come in useful in the very near future.
I rise to speak in my first International Women’s Day debate. I have followed these debates since before I was elected, so it is a true privilege to take part today. I have to say, if the composition of the Chamber were like this more often—by which I mean the number of men and women relative to each other—we might have different kinds of debates.
Today, we celebrate women in our communities, across the country and throughout our world. We celebrate extraordinary women who achieve incredible things for the good of humanity. In that context, it is a great but sad honour to sit opposite the coat of arms of my late dear friend Jo Cox, with whom I served on the board of the Labour Women’s Network. I think of her every time I come to this place and see her coat of arms. We miss her and her contributions dearly.
I have previously mentioned Jennie Lee, a proud Fifer who grew up in Cowdenbeath in my constituency and served two spells as a Labour MP. As well as having been the first ever UK Minister for the Arts, and the creator of the Open University, it is less known that Jennie served in the Ministry of Aircraft Production during world war two, keeping aircraft factories running during the blitz. She was called on to do so because of her no-nonsense attitude and ability to get things done. I take inspiration from that.
I am proud to follow Jennie as the 595th woman—among many thousands of men—elected to this Parliament, together with an unprecedented number of women MPs. Our Labour Government have important plans to advance women’s equality, from halving violence against women and girls to transforming women’s experiences of maternity care—a subject I discussed with the right hon. Baroness Amos just this week.
Beyond the women who are recognised for extraordinary achievements, we must be clear that the unseen work that women across the world do every day does not receive the recognition it deserves. According to the UN, women and girls do 16,000,000,000 hours of unpaid care work every single day. Their work is the very glue of families, communities and economies—countries could not function without it—yet it remains largely invisible, undervalued and unequally distributed.
Today, I want to sound a warning. We know that violent struggles are being fought for global power, but around the world, and increasingly at home, the struggle for power is being expressed as a struggle for control over women and our bodies. My hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) and I have written about that together this week. There are many shocking examples of the battle to control women’s bodies. As my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) mentioned, the oppressive regime in Iran has been desperate to prevent women from dressing in the way they want to, despite the incredibly brave protestations of amazing women there in the wake of Mahsa Amini’s death.
As the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) said so eloquently, in Afghanistan, the Taliban have tested the limits of whether the world will stop them enforcing gender apartheid, by forcing women out of schools and workplaces and into the home. They looked for, and found, the answer they wanted: that the world does not care enough to stop them.
In Sudan, which is suffering the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, rape and sexual violence is routinely used as a weapon of war. At the recent Munich security conference, which I attended, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary spoke powerfully about her visit to Sudanese refugee camps and the horrific accounts that she heard there, including of the systematic rape of girls as young as eight. I am proud to be a former chair of The Circle, the global feminist organisation founded by Annie Lennox. Only this morning it shared with me data showing that sexual violence in conflicts worldwide has increased by 25% in the last year.
In conversations about a shift in the global order, there is an increasing subtext of the need to control women’s bodies. We see that in some of the attacks on the legitimacy and funding of the United Nations. I worked with the UN in my previous work. Let us make no mistake: the UN would benefit from many reforms, but starving its institutions of funding to do work that no one else will do, for people no one else will help, is a grave error. That work includes providing contraception to women in war zones and refugee camps, so that they have some basic control over their bodies in situations where they have control over almost nothing else. In the context of domestic cuts to our own aid budget—a source of concern to many of us—we must do everything possible to preserve support for women and girls. I know that the Foreign Secretary is doing important work on that.
We must not content ourselves by believing that such misogyny only exists abroad. Matt Goodwin, the Reform candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election, said that women who do not have children should be taxed more, and that young women need an education in fertility—as if “The Handmaid’s Tale” was something we should aspire to. He seems to believe that women who choose not to have children, or who cannot, are somehow failing in their duties. Reform has said that, were they in government, the Equality Act—the basis for much of the progress we have made on women’s rights in the UK—would be repealed. Shame on them.
Online, British women are stripped of the agency we have over our own bodies, exemplified by Grok weaponising women’s bodies through nudification. Our Labour Government are right to crack down on such apps. My hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) had the truly awful experience of someone using that technology to make a fake video of her being chloroformed and “prepared for rape”. That makes the comments by the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam), in the previous statement all the more unacceptable. The intended humiliation of women online is not simply cruel or misogynistic, although it is certainly both. It is intended to instil fear, to signal that some violent men believe that they are entitled to dominate women and to normalise such abhorrent behaviour.
Last week, ahead of International Women’s Day, I met members of the Fife violence against women partnership. We discussed the more than 5,000 incidents of domestic abuse and the more than 1,100 crimes of indecency reported to the Fife police last year. We know that many more will have gone unreported. They also shared with me their concerns about social media and the misogyny spread online by so-called male influencers. I heard shocking reports about some of the things that local schoolboys have said to female teachers—comments that they have learned online. They included female teachers being told by boys that they teach, “You’re so ugly, I wouldn’t even rape you.”
Male influencers online also seek to spread the idea that the role of the tradwife is what girls and young women should aspire to in life. This is the idea that women belong only in the home, and that we should all take our fulfilment simply from cooking meals for our husbands and rearing children. This online misogyny is spread by the likes of Andrew Tate, the late Charlie Kirk and far too many others, and it is aided by harmful algorithms. Perhaps it should not surprise us that a new global survey has found that younger men increasingly believe that a wife should obey her husband, and that men are expected to do too much to support equality. That is not an accident; transnational organisation is making that happen.
The European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights has found that $1.18 billion was pumped into European movements dedicated to rolling back women’s rights between 2019 and 2023. That funding came from 275 different actors, including church-run non-governmental organisations and far-right populist parties. Russia was the biggest source of donations, and the United States the second biggest—especially from American Christian nationalists. That American funding is now accompanied by financial help from the US Government, who have set aside $200 million to support MAGA-friendly think-tanks in Europe. Let us be clear: this is designed to spread their ideology, including here in the UK. When we, the decent majority, both in this House and outside it, confront the grassroots arm of the far-right—local groups acting in our communities—we must be clear that they are not just isolated local groupings of people; they are the grassroots arm of a well-organised international effort to reverse women’s rights.
Our Government are doing a huge amount to drive forward women’s equality on closing the pay gap on childcare, on tackling violence against women and girls, and so much more. I am proud of that work. But we face a dark threat to the fabric of our society from the organised misogyny that I have described. We must defeat it, and we have much to do.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
Let me start by paying huge tribute to the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) for her maiden speech. She spoke with grace, poise and purpose, and her constituents are very lucky to have her representing them here, whether they voted for her or not. Members on the Conservative Benches will know that I am not overly competitive—I just have to win everything—so I was rather devastated that she made a far better maiden speech than my own meagre offering after the 2024 general election.
The hon. Lady said she wanted to put Gorton and Denton on the map, and she certainly put it on my radar. As she was listing the distinguished people from her constituency, I wondered whether she would get around to mentioning Ethel “Sunny” Lowry, who was born in Gorton, and was the first British woman to swim the English channel in 1933. I know what hon. Members are thinking: surely I have some neat segue to other women doing water-based heroics from my own Spelthorne constituency. I would not like to disappoint them.
In 1903, at 111 White Hart Lane in Barnes, young Amy Gentry was born to a Cockney father who had worked his way up and become a publisher. They bought a camping plot on Hamhaugh island, which is the southernmost point of the River Thames, and also the southernmost point of my constituency. She went there from the age of one—her dad got a boat and they used to love messing around in it. Before she was 10 years old, the people on Hamhaugh island had gymkhanas, and she was entered into a dinghy racing contest, which I think she won, and which clearly gave her a taste for competition.
The war then intervened in Amy’s growing up, and hon. Members will be only too aware that in 1918 we passed in this place the Representation of the People Act. The tide was turning in respect of votes for women, women’s individuality and women expressing themselves. In 1920, Weybridge rowing club decided that they would form a women’s section—considerably revolutionary at the time. They got a group of young ladies together and trained them in how to row properly, and the women’s rowing movement began.
In 1925, young Amy Gentry went over to the charity regatta in the Netherlands, where she competed against France, Belgium and Holland. By 1927 the sport had developed that much further that there was an eights competition on the Oxford and Cambridge course between Putney and Mortlake. She wrote at the time that she felt like she was rowing backwards at times—obviously, literally she was rowing backwards, but she did not feel like she was going anywhere—so dreadful were the conditions.
In 1932, her father went to a boat builder and asked, “If you build my daughter a boat, will she win?” The boat builder said, “She will,” and indeed she did. She carried all before her from 1932 to 1934. She became the secretary of Weybridge rowing club, and by 1939 she was its chair. She was the driving force in women’s rowing in the country.
One of the clubs that had been useful and had adopted women’s rowing with some enthusiasm was the Vesta rowing club, which set up the first women’s regatta. At the time, a gentleman from the club said:
“While I do not approve of rowing for women, as they will do it anyway the best thing I can do will be to help them do it properly.”
We can see what the attitudes were at the time. Nevertheless, Amy was fantastic at it. She retired from the highest level of the sport in the late 1930s.
Obviously, the second world war came around, and in 1939 she became the secretary to Barnes Wallis. For hon. Members who are not familiar with the dam busters raid, Barnes Wallis was instrumental in developing the bouncing bomb. He and Amy Gentry would go to Silvermere lake, where he would fire various projectiles from a catapult across the lake—sort of a high-grade stone skimming competition—and then he and Amy would row out to collect them to see how they fared. Barnes Wallis was a pretty serious guy, but when that they were rowing out to one of the projectiles, Amy pointed out, “Wallis, you may be in charge, but I am in charge in this boat. Sit down.”
After the war, rowing went from strength to strength. We were represented in the European championships in 1952 and in 1954, carrying all before us at the national and international levels. As a slight aside, at the 1954 European games Amy Gentry handed out some prizes to one of the crews, including to a young lady called Bette Shubrook, a member of the London rowing club. She had met her soon-to-be husband at the London rowing club on regatta on Boxing day. His name was Graham Hill. She went on to be Bette Hill, and she became the only person to be married to and the mother of a Formula 1 world racing champion.
Amy was instrumental in bringing the European championships here in 1960, and she was awarded the OBE in 1969. She died in June 1976 in Stanwell in my constituency. The significance of that date is a sad irony: she did not quite live to see the moment one month later when women were allowed to compete in rowing in the Olympic games, in Montreal.
In the Oxford and Cambridge boat race, when the women’s crews go under Barnes bridge in the latter stages of the race, they pass a huge pub on the south bank of the River Thames called the White Hart, which is at the end of White Hart Lane, where Amy Gentry was born. If hon. Members happen to be watching in a month’s time and see that moment, perhaps they will join me in raising a glass to the remarkable woman, Amy Gentry.
Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)
I thank the Government for holding this debate in Government time. I had applied for a Backbench Business debate as a back-up, as I normally do, but now that we have a Labour Government I can probably stop doing that.
I need to apologise for my voice. I was going to blame it on a cold, but actually I was at the Trans Mission concert yesterday at Wembley arena, where I was shouting quite loudly that trans rights are human rights and singing along to Beverley Knight’s “Everything’s Gonna Be Alright.” It reminded me of the saying that everything will be all right in the end; and if it is not all right, it is not the end. Right now, things are not all right for women.
As the Minister stated in her excellent opening speech, women globally are currently at our most vulnerable. It feels worse than it has been in a long time. With the influencers, the brain rot of social media, the increasing lack of legislation around bodily autonomy and, as we have heard many times, men influencing boys on what a perfect woman should be, with detailed instructions on how to abuse women and girls, we as women are in serious danger, and we need protection. International Women’s Day is the day to tell some truths.
For many of us, progress has not been made by us being welcomed in the room; progress has been made by us taking up room. Progress has been made by us taking up space. I thank all the women in my constituency in Brent who have taken up space, even when as women we have been told, “You don’t belong here,” or “They’re letting anyone in nowadays,” which was once said to me by an MP on the Terrace.
That is not the only thing that has been said to me as an MP. I have been told that I am too serious, and that I am not serious enough. I have been told that I need to dress up, and that I need to dress down. I have been told that I should smile more, or that I smile too much; that I am too confident, or I am not confident enough; that I talk about black issues too much, and that I do not talk about black issues enough; and that I talk about women’s issues all the time but do not talk about men’s issues. The reality is, I have been here for all the International Men’s Day debates, when there has been nobody on the Conservative Benches. Nobody can accuse me of not being an equal opportunity debater. The truth is this: you cannot win, and you will never win if you are trying to fit into anyone else’s expectations. Some people try to make you feel so small; they try to strip away who you are, so that you no longer recognise yourself. The hallmark of those people is that they are unhappy in their own life—they often have a small appendix—so they will try to put others down. The worst thing that we can do to ourselves is allow that to happen, because in life, we women need all the strength we can get, just to survive.
After my cancer diagnosis and while writing my book, “A Purposeful Life”, I recall deciding that I wanted to be mayor of London. There were many positive responses to that, for which I am eternally grateful—I will be tapping those people up for the campaign—but they were mixed with responses like, “Oh, there’s never been a black mayor”, “Oh, there’s never been a female mayor”, and, “What makes you think you can do it? What have you done? What have you delivered? It’s a man’s job, isn’t it?”. People said that I should stay in my lane. The truth is, my lane is wherever I say it is. I will slay in my lane, and I will achieve my ambitions.
I have learned something important on my political journey: when we give our voices, our time and our courage, we do not lose; we learn, and we gain. I have gained so much: I have gained friends, knowledge, and the power to change things for the better. I have made it my mission to pave the way for others. I do not always succeed, and sometimes people let you down—that is just life—but sometimes I do succeed. I gave two female MPs in this place their first job in Parliament: my hon. Friend, and dear friend, the Member for Stratford and Bow (Uma Kumaran), and my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes)—two women who are now doing a phenomenal job for their constituents. That is what can happen when you give; you and others gain.
I know what it feels like not to be taken seriously, and to have my experiences dismissed and my views belittled, and what it is like when people do not recognise the struggle or your greatness, so in this International Women’s Day debate it is time to tell the truth. I have been in many rooms where I have not fitted in, so I have come to accept that, and I have come to embrace standing out. I will wear my bright clothes—the outfit I am wearing today is from Dabra, Madam Deputy Speaker—I smile when I am happy, and I will act confident, even at times when I do not feel confident.
The truth is that when women rise, the system gets better. Women are failed by the system and by some men—and women—time and again, whether it is the courts system or whether it is in Iran, Gaza, Afghanistan, Sudan, the UK or America. Women and girls’ lives are in danger all over the globe. I find it strange that although misogynistic men are part of the biggest, wealthiest paedophile gang that we have ever seen, no one is in prison. Even though the evidence is there in the Epstein files, hardly anyone has been arrested, and where they have been arrested, it is not for raping little girls and teenagers. We should ask ourselves, why is that? How is it that people will protest outside hotels, but not outside the Sandringham estate?
No matter the colour of a person’s skin, or how much money they have in the bank, if they abuse and rape little girls, teenagers or young women, and are part of a grooming gang, large or small, they should be punished, and should be in prison. It is our duty in this place to speak up, and to ensure that paedophiles are punished, without fear or favour. I do not care who they are; I do not care who they are friends with; I do not care if they are royalty; and I do not care if they are influential people. It is time for people to tell the truth, rather than pretending, selectively, that they care about women and girls.
A woman is killed every three days in the UK and every 10 minutes globally. A woman is raped every eight minutes in the UK and every few seconds globally. I want women and girls to be safe, not just in the UK but all around the world. This International Women’s Day, I would love for people to give comfort to the women who are struggling everywhere, whether it is at war or in the workplace. There is no hierarchy of women —none of us is free until we are all free, and none of us is safe until we are all safe. No one knows how strong they are until that is the only thing that they have left, but they should not need to be strong—they should just be safe. It is also true that women of colour are expected to be strong all the time, and we are tired—tired of not being supported, tired of being overlooked, and tired of our pain not being recognised, whether in the UK or globally. As we pour unprecedented amounts of money into artificial intelligence systems that make women’s lives less safe, let us refocus our efforts on protecting women and girls. If our starting point is to protect the most vulnerable women, then the outcomes will be better, stronger, fairer, more equitable and safer for all.
Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)
It is always difficult to follow the hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler)—I am genuinely in awe of her speeches, including the one she just gave. I was also in awe of the speech made by the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer). Like the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp), I wish I had delivered a maiden speech that was anywhere close to as good as hers. Her passion for and her understanding of her constituents were very clear. So many MPs in this place do not understand their constituents or their constituency when they are first elected, but it is clear that the new hon. Member for Gorton and Denton is one of her people, and she really understands how people in her patch feel. Her constituents are very lucky to have such a representative.
I thought about how best to approach this speech. Would I make a political speech, raging about all the injustices, or would I talk about all the unseen women—those who are doing all the heavy lifting, but whom we do not talk about and do not notice? I thought about how best to put across what I thought, but honestly, I have had the busiest week in Parliament that I have ever had, so I am going to try to give a speech in which I do not cry. That is my bar for today. If I do that, I will have won.
A member of my team, Alma, is one of the most wonderful humans I have ever met. She was born in Denmark and spent a lot of time there. She was telling me that in Denmark, International Women’s Day is called Kvindernes Kampdag, which I have probably pronounced wrong. That means “women’s struggle day” or “women’s fight day”. It is about recognising the fight and the struggle that women face, but it is also about fighting and struggling for women. I thought that was such a good thing for all of us to think about, because that fight and struggle is ongoing; it has not been won.
As the hon. Member for Brent East said, things are not in a good way. Things are less safe than they have been for a very long time. We need to continue to support, recognise and fight for the unseen women. We talk about unseen work sometimes, and about the fact that there are women doing jobs that nobody notices. Let me tell Members: we would notice very quickly if those women were not doing them, because things would not work.
We are all here today, able to have this debate, because of a member of the House staff who ensures that these debates happen. It is her birthday today. I am not going to say her name, because she would probably kill me, but I want to recognise that she is one of the many unseen women in this place who ensure that we can do what we do, and that we have the time and space to make speeches. She has made the time this Thursday for us to speak about the issues affecting our constituents and women around the world.
A number of people have spoken about oppressive states, and what is happening in the many countries around the world where the situation, systemically and because of how things are run by the state, is becoming worse for women. Some of that is because of various religions’ extreme interpretation of religious texts, which requires women to behave in a certain way, but some of it is not. Some of it is just because we continue to have patriarchal societies throughout the world. Men are historically bigger and stronger than us and are able to keep that patriarchy in place.
There are hugely gendered expectations on young women growing up. That is made worse by the fact that they are on the internet. We see those gendered expectations not just in classrooms and on the television shows that young women see; they are in the games that they play online, and in the online spaces that they inhabit. They are everywhere that women are expected to be subservient to men.
A number of us have spoken about women having to be better than men to get to the same position. I have spoken a lot about the phrase “hard-working families”. Sometimes, when people say “hard-working families”, they mean middle-class families; they mean people earning £40,000 or £50,000 a year. They do not mean people working as carers. They do not mean people trying to get four kids out the door in the morning, with the right shoes on the right feet. They do not mean the people doing the everyday jobs that we desperately need done. They do not mean the bus drivers, or the people working to ensure that all our lives run smoothly.
The hon. Member for Darlington (Lola McEvoy) mentioned the way that we look at society, and the value that we give to rules. I have been thinking for a long time that we should really tip this issue on its head. We should think, “Which jobs do we need people to do?” We need people to be carers. We need people to look after children in nurseries. We need people to be teachers, nurses and doctors. We need people to do all the public-sector roles that we desperately need. However, we do not value those roles. We do not pay those people more than the living wage, in a lot of cases. Those are the people whose jobs we desperately need or society would fall apart, yet for some reason, we continue to think it is okay that they continue to be at the bottom of the pile. These jobs are overwhelmingly jobs that women are in, and we need to think about the gendered expectation that women will continue to do all of the hard work and we will pay them very little for doing so. Imagine if they did not—imagine if women went on strike. Imagine if every woman we know who is working in every job we know went on strike. How quickly society would fall apart if the women stopped doing all of that work that we do not see!
That is why we need to fight for all of those unseen women doing those unseen jobs. We need to fight so that we can ensure it is not just women who are filling those roles; we need equal opportunities at the top of the pile and at the bottom of the pile. We need to be able to lift women out of some of those roles, but we also need to ensure that men can take up some of those roles. Perhaps we would get more pay for carers if more men were carers—there are some, but I think that would tip things in a good direction.
I have a couple more things to say in relation to Parliament. I thought it was really interesting that the statement on the defending democracy taskforce took place just before this debate. I struggle more than I ever have to tell young women to come to Parliament and become an elected representative. It is harder than it has ever been. Part of that is because of social media and the toxic climate that there can be, particularly out in the world where there is so much polarisation and ideological position-taking, which results in the abuse that women and Members from ethnic minority backgrounds face. Standing in front of a class of young women and people from a variety of different ethnic backgrounds, it is very hard to say to them, “This is a great job—you should do it.” What I find myself saying to them is, “This is a really hard job. This is a job where you will face abuse, but it is worth it to make a difference.” I think that, across the parties, we are genuinely all working together to try to ensure that democracy is defended and that younger people—or older people—thinking about going into politics can truly consider doing so, and can take on those roles without fear that they will be abused.
Again, the hon. Member for Brent East talked about the expectations on women. I remember doing BBC TV—I think it was the Queen’s Speech. I was sitting there, and the journalist turned to me when Theresa May got out of the car and said, “What do you think of Theresa May’s outfit?” I was like, “Um, she looks very resolute?” He said, “Okay, you’re right, I shouldn’t have asked you that. I’ll ask the man on the panel instead—what do you think of Theresa May’s outfit?” That’s not the point. It is not about what Theresa May is wearing; it is about what she is doing and the importance of this moment. Whether I agreed or disagreed with the Conservative Prime Minister, she was stepping out of that car as Prime Minister. It was really important, and talking about what she was wearing was not the right thing to do in that moment.
The hon. Member for Brent East talked about those expectations—about being too smiley or not smiley enough—and the fact that we simply cannot win. No matter what abuse is thrown at me, I guarantee that I have said worse to myself. I am my own greatest critic, as are many of the women who I meet and know across Parliament. I am the SNP’s only woman MP right now, because of being wiped out by you guys, frankly. It is not that we did not stand lots of women—we did—it was just bad electoral luck on our part and losing lots of seats. As the only woman MP in the SNP, finding that fellowship and support across the House is really difficult right now, so I have been happy to support and work with people who are organising the women’s caucus and trying to get it off the ground, for the sake of people like me and women in other parties—particularly small parties—who do not have those natural relationships within our parties. We cannot find those people unless we happen to bump into each other in the Tea Room; we do not get that at group meetings. It is really important that we push forward with the women’s caucus, so that women can have that place where we get support; I commend all the Members who have worked really hard in trying to bring it forward.
The last thing I want to touch on is menopause, because Members are right: it is not talked about enough. It is not something that I ever heard discussed in my home when I was a child. It is not something that I knew existed. I am sure I knew that periods stopped at some point, but I did not know much beyond that. The more groups of women who are past their 30s I speak to, the more I learn about menopause. I just want to say, how unfair is it that itchy ears are a symptom of menopause? These women have everything else to deal with; they are dealing with so much rubbish. For anyone who did not know, itchy ears are a symptom of menopause—I think that is my public service announcement for the day—so if you hear women in your life talking about having itchy ears, be kind to them and give them a bit of support.
It is really important that we hold each other up, support one another and work on a cross-party basis to further the rights of women, and ensure that those unseen women are supported and that we pay an awful lot more money to people working in roles that, traditionally, have mostly been held by women, in order to recognise their contribution.
Katrina Murray (Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch) (Lab)
It gives me great pleasure and pride to contribute to the debate. I have only been here 18 months, but this is one of my favourite debates in the Chamber because it gives us the privilege of listening to experiences from across the House and recognising women who make a difference in everybody’s local communities and globally. It is always inspiring.
It also gives me great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman). In a conversation that we had earlier this week, I uttered the phrase, “In this place, we cross paths more often than we cross swords”—proverbial, verbal, swords, not physical ones; I will leave those to the Serjeant at Arms. While we are here as women, and this is the most diverse Parliament that there has ever been, we are not homogeneous. We all bring different things to this place, including different perspectives, and this Parliament is stronger for it. That is why I also feel really privileged to have heard the maiden speech of the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer). I welcome what she brings to this place, and welcome her to her place.
As has been said, the theme of this year’s International Women’s Day is “Give to Gain”, but there is also the UN theme: “Rights. Justice. Action. For ALL Women”. It reminds us that we must never accept that the work is done. We must never forget that what advances we have made can still be lost. There are still far too many women and girls across the world who do not have rights, cannot access justice and are denied education, healthcare and financial independence.
In the short time available to me, I want to highlight some of the women in my constituency of Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch who embody that theme—women who work every day for the rights, wellbeing and opportunities of others; women like Linda, Lorna, Christine and all the women at Tony’s Safe Place, an organisation that was founded four years ago today to provide support for those affected by suicide, bereavement and mental health issues. A group of women turning personal tragedy into compassion and practical help for others is an extraordinary act of strength in itself.
Anne Miller of Kilsyth Senior Citizens and the Old Library Management Group is a real force of nature in the community, working tirelessly to ensure that older people remain connected, active and supported. She has been known to chase me down when I have been doing my surgeries, and she is somebody I always love to see. Isobel Hughes and the welcome group at St Patrick’s in Kilsyth provide support, respite and friendship for people living with memory loss, and for their families. The woman’s name “GRACE” stands for the Group Recovery Aftercare Community Enterprise in East Dunbartonshire, where Lynnie and Yvette support adults who are in recovery from life trauma. The organisation provides therapy, recovery support and aftercare, and is rooted in lived experience and a fundamental belief that the need for aftercare never stops. GRACE is a powerful force for good for those rebuilding their lives.
Those women, and so many others across Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch, give their time, energy and compassion to support others. As the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) said earlier, that work happens quietly, without recognition, but its impact is profound. Such women strengthen communities, lift people up, and remind us all of the power of kindness and solidarity. That is why International Women’s Day matters. It allows us to celebrate those contributions while remembering that progress has never been inevitable. Every right that women enjoy today has been hard won by those who came before us. As we celebrate their achievements, we must also recognise the work that is still to be done, including tackling violence against women and girls, closing the gender pay gap, and ensuring that every girl has the right and the opportunity to lead, learn and thrive.
Today I place on the record my sincere thanks to the women across Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch who give so much of themselves in service to others. Their work reminds us that progress is not just delivered by Government; it is built every day in our communities by the people who choose to care, to support and to stand up for others. If we truly want a world where women and girls gain equality, justice and opportunity, we must continue to match their commitment with our action.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) on her maiden speech. It was an eloquent speech that made us think that she has been here for several years. I really enjoyed her description of her constituency, and of the people and organisations she now represents. I hope that the hon. Member does not get involved in fixing the plumbing and the plastering in this place. Her place is in this Chamber, and I am sure that she will make a name for herself and be a really good champion for her constituents.
This debate is an opportunity to mark the progress that we have made in improving gender equality and empowering women in all areas of life. It is important that we monitor that progress and assess where there is much work to do. The gender equality index is a helpful tool that looks at gender equality across all UK authorities. Wokingham scores in the top 10% of local authorities for women’s outcomes, meaning that women in Wokingham generally have better equality in pay, life expectancy, job progression and skills compared with women nationally. However, there is still a significant gap between women and men in pay, job progression and participation in civil society. That needs to change. It is, of course, very welcome that women are doing well in Wokingham, but that counts for little if their outcomes are still far behind those for men. That is why so much work still needs to be done to ensure that the gender balance is improved and strengthened for this generation and for many generations to come.
A very serious issue is when a lack of gender equality plays out in shocking and violent ways. Through casework, I have seen how many women in Wokingham are victims of abuse and violence, which is often linked to an imbalance in financial and physical power. It is a great shame that many women who are victims of domestic abuse feel unsupported and neglected by the police, the courts and other services, and are often left relying on charities.
The Government must ensure that survivors of violence against women and girls are properly supported in the criminal justice system, with mandatory training for police and prosecutors on the impact of trauma. The Government must also ensure sustainable funding for services that support domestic abuse survivors. On that point, I must highlight the vital work done by Vickie Robertson and her charity Kaleidoscopic UK, based in Wokingham, which helps women who have experienced domestic abuse across the Thames Valley.
I have also seen through casework that so much of homelessness stems from domestic abuse, because a financial imbalance means women often have to care for their children, and the accommodation offered is unsuitable for families. The Government must take action to ensure that victims are not forced to return to perpetrators due to inadequate temporary accommodation. It is clear that although some progress to close the gender gap has been made, there is still so much more to do to make our communities safer for women and to level the playing field.
Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab)
It is a real privilege to speak in this debate marking International Women’s Day. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) for her maiden speech. I remember that when I made my maiden speech nearly nine years ago—time flies—in the Gallery above me were my mum, my younger brother and my son, aged just 13 at the time. I do not know who the hon. Lady has with her today, but I would like to pay tribute to our family members. We lost my mother last September. I want to say that if it was not for other women supporting women, and their brothers and sisters and children, we would not be able to stand here to do our job. I wish the hon. Lady all the very best in her career.
There have been many advances in the fight for women’s equality in recent decades, and indeed the very welcome and much-needed action on male violence against women and girls since this Labour Government came into office. There has, however, been a frustrating stasis on some issues, meaning they have worsened.
Sexual exploitation has shown a clear and sustained rise in the United Kingdom, with an increasing number of women being identified as victims. We are seeing more UK-national victims of sexual exploitation, and at a younger age, yet the women and girls exploited in the sex trade remain among the most neglected in our policy discussions and reforms. I want to talk about them today, because these women matter and the harms they experience are extreme.
Technological change has reshaped our world, but it has also created new opportunities for sexual exploitation to proliferate on a scale we have never seen before, because our legislation has not kept pace and is not capable of keeping pace. Despite it being illegal to place a prostitution advert in a phone box, the same advert can legally be published for profit on a website, and traffickers have moved quickly into that gap. Pimping websites that act as a vast online brothel drive demand and supercharge the sex trafficking trade by making it easier and quicker for pimps to advertise their victims. They make it as easy to order a woman to abuse as it is to order a takeaway. They operate freely and openly because our legislation allows it.
A report published just weeks ago by the Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner shows how adult services websites do not just host exploited and trafficked women but provide the infrastructure to initiate, scale and normalise their abuse. Nearly 63,000 listings for women were recorded at one point in time across 12 of these sites, and they attracted almost 41.7 million visitors in a month. That is just a fraction of an even larger marketplace, because additional sites are available to users. Nearly 60% of the adverts analysed displayed three or more indicators of trafficking or exploitation, which include multiple ads linked to the same phone number and “new to area” language.
Behind the numbers are real and severe harms endured by the women exploited on these sites. Survivors interviewed for the report talked about how they were groomed, controlled and advertised online without their knowledge or consent. A survivor, who was exploited alongside other women, said:
“None of us had access to the emails from buyers. They came directly through him. He answered as if he was us and then he would send me a message saying, ‘Oh, this person, you know, this is where you’re going to meet them and this is what you have agreed to do.’”
The use and abuse of women is directly enabled and amplified by the sites’ very design, which, for example, enables third-party facilitation. Survivors spoke of how traffickers and abusive partners created profiles, arranged bookings and made profits, while women themselves were controlled and intimidated. Despite third-party facilitation being a known red flag for trafficking, Ofcom guidance ignores that and portrays it as a safety measure.
Profiles on the sites also give the illusion of independence to mask deeper exploitation. Another survivor said she was
“being raped on webcam essentially. And of course, the people watching aren’t aware of that...the profile is written so it sounds as if I’m independent and enjoying it...how do you go behind a webcam to make sure that the woman isn’t being coerced?”
Meanwhile, buyers on some forums openly discuss which women are controlled and the benefits this has for them. As another survivor explained:
“You will see men sharing about...‘these girls are trafficked’...‘you can get away with doing this to her’...it’s just right there on the page”.
This is the selling and abuse of women in plain sight on an industrial scale, enabled by our legislative framework. It is totally unacceptable. These women deserve so much better. The Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner is absolutely right to say that these websites are ready-made tools for abuse, and that the toughest action must be taken against them.
The all-party parliamentary group on commercial sexual exploitation, which I chair, has been sounding the alarm on pimping websites and their harms for quite some time. The truth is that the current legislation and regulatory guidance are not acting or preventing harm, and it is traffickers, pimps and punters operating with near total impunity who benefit. Women are abused as if they are objects and suffer acutely. We are failing them. I urge the Government to pay close attention to the report’s findings and to act urgently on its recommendations for a robust review—one that includes survivors, and it needs to be prompt. A lot of evidence is already out there and the longer we wait, the more women and girls are suffering as a result.
What is more, the scale and ease of access of the online market is not only facilitating exploitation; it is, more widely, fuelling the dangerous rise in misogyny by normalising the idea that women exist to be bought, used and discarded. In an age when prostitution is glamourised, boys and men are repeatedly exposed to platforms that present women as sexual commodities, and that inevitably shapes their attitudes. The scale of demand for pimping websites should give us serious pause for thought in that respect as well. Shutting these sites down has a fundamental role to play not just in preventing horrific exploitation, but in shifting the attitudes of men and boys to promote healthy and respectful relationships. If we are to tackle male violence against women and girls, these websites have to be shut down.
John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)
I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) for a profound speech. She used the phrase “our humanity is the same”, and there is a profound truth in that. We in this House must recognise that there are people who disagree with that and want to tear us apart. I have a diverse constituency, which covers many different races, faiths and differences of views, and I treasure that diversity, because I believe our humanity is the same. We in this House must be very careful to fight against those who want to shatter that, tear us apart and take us significantly back in time.
Our humanity is the same as that of the women and girls mentioned by my friend, the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain), an office bearer on the APPG on Afghan women and girls. We must do much more to support women and girls in Afghanistan, and we must look afresh at things like international law to criminalise the mistreatment of women and girls to such evil degrees.
The Minister rightly mentioned the fight by trade unionists for equal pay. The first socialist in my family was my great auntie Nellie, who in the ’30s led equal pay strikes in the liquorice factories in Pontefract and became friends with Barbara Castle, who was, of course, responsible for the Equal Pay Act 1970. We should all be very angry about the fact that there is still considerable structural inequality of pay, and women now are paid less than men.
Our fight for equality now, which I believe is shared by us all, and which we must all share, faces new and much more dangerous threats, and we must redouble our efforts. We should not just be angry about that; we are legislators, so we must legislate and then see that legislation acted on. Otherwise, the future for women and girls—my daughter and the other children in my constituency and around the world—will become bleaker, instead of our seeing progress.
I want to speak about domestic abuse. One in 4 women in the UK will experience domestic abuse in their lifetime. When I work with survivors in Glasgow East, I see how housing instability in particular is a barrier to my constituents fleeing abuse. I am dismayed at the lack of support provided by the housing sector in Scotland to survivors, who do not receive trauma-informed care and are not supported into safe, settled homes; instead, I have met women who, after suffering terrifying sexual violence, are forced into social housing in awful conditions and then face months of unknown male workmen coming into their new home. The social landlords are aware that the women in question have suffered. They should not have to ask for female workpeople to come to work in their homes—it should be a matter of course.
Women in my seat wait months for house transfers, meaning that their abusers know exactly where they live. A particular legal problem is when women are not included on the tenancy agreement for their rented home, which means they do not have legal rights to stay in their home and, when their relationship comes to an end, those women face eviction and homelessness. That is why the Scottish Parliament passed part 2 of the Domestic Abuse (Protection) (Scotland) Act 2021, giving social landlords powers to transfer tenancies from abusers to survivors.
Almost five years after that Act was passed, however, we are still waiting for it to be made legally enforceable by the Scottish Government. I have been pressing the Scottish Government on the issue. In January, I wrote to the press about this disgraceful delay, and the next day the Scottish Government announced they would finally bring the provisions into force.
Despite the five-year delay, social landlords have had no formal guidance from the Scottish Government on how the provisions will operate in practice. They do not know how the courts or police will approach this, but it is essential for social landlords, and a poorly thought-out implementation will put survivors at further risk. I have raised these concerns with the SNP Government and am still awaiting a response.
There are organisations that do fantastic work to ensure housing stability for survivors. The Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance provides the infrastructure, training and monitoring necessary for social landlords to recognise and tackle domestic abuse, and it works very well in England. Just north of here, Islington council has worked very successfully with DAHA and significantly improved the outcomes for survivors of domestic abuse. In Glasgow, social landlords need help and support to make the improvements that they must make, and social landlords do recognise the importance of this.
I am determined to see survivors of domestic abuse get much better help and support, so I have asked social landlords to meet with DAHA. I am pleased that Wheatley and Govanhill housing associations and the Scottish Housing Regulator have expressed an interest in learning more and are willing to meet with DAHA. In agreeing to do so, they are demonstrating their commitment to supporting survivors of domestic abuse. I encourage others to do the same. We must do much, much better in Scotland for the survivors of domestic abuse, and I am determined to continue to work hard on this.
I wish to speak about one other topic. I am very proud of one of my local charities, Scottish Sports Futures, which does great work with young people in my seat. In particular, it encourages young women to speak up about their experience of violence against women and girls. That means that the young men in the charity’s programmes learn how to treat women as their equals and with respect. I cannot praise Scottish Sports Futures enough for working on this and giving those young women a voice.
Several of those young women in the programmes spoke with bravery about this at the charity’s annual awards event last week. A young woman from Barrowfield, in my constituency, spoke courageously about violence against women and girls, and the issue of youth violence more generally, which has had a profound impact on girls in my constituency, particularly following the killing there two years ago of a young boy, called Kory McCrimmon—his family faced their grief, by the way, with profound dignity and courage. I am proud of all my young constituents.
Politics is a matter of morals, and this is a moral issue. My moral obligation as their Member of Parliament is to do everything within my power to tackle violence against women and girls.
Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)
I thank all the women in this Chamber who really have slayed in their lane in today’s debate.
Madam Deputy Speaker:
“When they amputated my leg, they amputated a part of me. I see my body and I feel disgust, repulsion. I fear that my amputation took away my femininity, my ability to be yearned for; my womanhood pauperised. Trapped in a body that does not reflect my mind or my self.”
“Anorexia, unplanned, like an addiction, crept upon me. I ate less and became thinner. My wish: that nobody would notice my disability and I would simply disappear—a physical escapism. For the first time in my life, the eating disorder gave me control over my body; the way it looked, the way it felt. My frustration about my physical form turned into obsession; the obsession fed me where food did not: it gave me power.”
“Success became feeling bones left behind under taught skin; in knowing my pelvis protruded below a small waist, cheek bones were prominent on a smile-less face.”
“Anorexia was about the relationship between a despised body and a disciplined mind. Eventually, the mind was consumed too: a warped wasteland where fear and anger roamed. There was no escape from or for my self.”
“Weight: 4 stone 10 lbs. My body was breaking down, I was losing my hair, and my periods stopped. My menstruation ending ultimately saved me and my life. Somewhere, at the back of my head, I knew I wanted to have children. Eventually, I took the pill, my periods started again, I ate more. My desire to be a mother gave me a reason to get better, signalled a future and made me know choice once again.”
I wrote those passages 20 years ago, in my early 20s, while recovering from my last major surgery to my legs. I was anorexic for four years from age 14, and although I was physically better by the time I went to university, it took me until my mid-20s to have a healthy relationship with food.
I am not alone. Over the years, I have spoken to other disabled women about their experiences of eating disorders linked to their own body image and identity. Devastatingly, 20 years later—two decades after I wrote those passages— social attitudes towards sex, relationships and disability remain an enormous taboo, which means that disabled women are still going through that anguish, damaging their mental health, causing them to self-harm and eroding their self-esteem.
Actor and disability activist Melissa Johns, who has an upper-body limb difference, has shared her story. She said:
“I have a strong history of loathing my body. That never came from me—it came from society telling me that my body was wrong.”
Too often, disabled women’s bodies do not count.
Mum, social media influencer and wheelchair user Sophie Bradbury-Cox showed me just some comments made on her social media about the fact that she is a disabled mother. They included:
“There’s something horribly unethical about having children when you’re not able to care for yourself.”
Those damaging attitudes and a lack of awareness of the issues are leading disabled women to face barriers in public services, including accessing sexual, reproductive and maternity care.
In the last year, I have met two incredible disabled women: Carly, a Paralympian, and Sarah, an occupational therapist. Both have cerebral palsy and neither found out about their pregnancies until their second and third trimesters, respectively, because none of their clinicians considered that they might be pregnant. Carly Tait, who competed in the 2016 Paralympic games in Rio de Janeiro, soon discovered she was pregnant after retiring from professional sport. That was immediately followed by a lot of questions about whether she was capable of giving birth, in a line of conversation that she faced throughout her pregnancy.
Some people seemed to ignore Carly’s pregnancy altogether. On the last day before her maternity leave, a colleague approached her and said
“Oh my gosh! Are you pregnant?”,
showing an ableist view that someone like Carly could not possibly be pregnant. But disabled women are making babies, having babies and being brilliant mothers against the odds—odds that mean we face a 44% higher likelihood of stillbirth. That is why I have called on the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to put inclusive maternity care for disabled women at the heart of our women’s health strategy, so that our womanhood no longer remains invisible.
But we need to go further. We need to finally embed the social model of disability into women’s healthcare, and implement the recommendations for the UK Government made by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2017. That committee found that the rights of disabled women and girls have not been systematically mainstreamed into either the gender equality or disability agendas, with disabled women facing multiple barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive health services and professionals. I have lost count of the number of disabled people I have ended up mentoring who have self-harmed and attempted suicide because of sex, relationship and disability issues not being discussed, the lack of services and the absence of professional expertise to support them.
I am proud that our Government’s reforms will engender a high-quality and inclusive curriculum for all, but that must include the representation of disabled people in personal, social, health and economic education lessons at school. We must turn the tide of public attitudes towards disabled people, and particularly empower young disabled people to have more positive perceptions of self.
There are reasons to be hopeful. Green shoots of representation are appearing on our screens. “EastEnders” is currently covering a storyline about a pregnant woman who is a wheelchair user. This season of “Bridgerton” featured a subplot with Hazel, a maid played by Gracie McGonigal, and her love interest with dashing footman, John, without ever mentioning Hazel’s limb difference.
Instagram has become a burgeoning social media platform for brilliant disabled women who are super-charging the representation of disability and desire, and of being proud and empowered about the intrinsic beauty of our bodies and our selves. They are boldly forging the conversation about us being loved and in love. They are powering the narrative on disability and dating, elucidating new language about being in inter-abled couples, and navigating difficult conversations and acceptance. It is disability cast no longer as absence but as complete, full-bodied presence. To be loved is to be seen. It is high time our society saw disabled women’s whole selves, for only then will we create a society that treats disabled women with the dignity and respect we deserve.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
Earlier, the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) mentioned that it can be difficult to advise people to come into the role that we all do. She would be well served just by playing people a recording of what we have heard in the House today. This debate has been of the highest quality, and I thank everybody for their contributions so far. It has been a genuine pleasure to listen and be part of it.
We have had the whole gamut. People have taken the opportunity to big up their own constituencies. My hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett) and the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) did excellently. I will not mention everybody because I cannot remember everybody’s constituency, but I will do my best. People have taken the opportunity to celebrate wonderful things in the country, and the wonderful people who saw a glass ceiling and jumped higher. It has been wonderful to be part of it.
People also did not shy away from the difficult things that we must do. I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for North East Hampshire (Alex Brewer), as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East (John Grady), who both took the opportunity to talk about some really difficult things. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) for her powerful testimony. She is somebody I always enjoy listening to in the Chamber, and I thank her for her contribution today.
The debate today serves many of those purposes. It gives us the opportunity to celebrate what is great, but also to talk about where our society and systems have failed women for far too long, and unfortunately, that is my role today. I want to raise a way in which the system has let down far too many people for far too long. I am talking about the crimes of Mohamed al-Fayed. I am specifically talking about his crimes, because I do not want to talk about him. Today is about the proud survivors who have done all they can to bring his crimes to light.
Al-Fayed, the former owner of Harrods, was a sexual predator. He trafficked and sexually abused hundreds of women over decades with near complete impunity. Well over 400 survivors have already come forward, and every day, more women take the brave decision to do so. Yesterday, the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) powerfully described al-Fayed as Britain’s Epstein. It is a characterisation that she and I have heard many times from survivors, as we co-chair the all-party parliamentary group for the survivors of Fayed and Harrods. It is good to see another of our officers here, the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam).
The scale of the crimes committed by this predator—I will not call him a man, because real men respect women—is staggering, but it is a mistake to think that this is the work of one bad human. Al-Fayed was supported by a network of enablers. He died having escaped justice, but there are scores of people who can and must be held to account. They include employees who identified, groomed and trafficked women for abuse; security staff who harassed and intimidated survivors into silence; lawyers who churned out non-disclosure agreement after non-disclosure agreement, while nobody thought to do anything about it; doctors who performed invasive medical exams and reported—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. I apologise for interrupting the hon. Gentleman, but as there is one live civil case, may I encourage him to exercise caution in what he says? It is perfectly okay to say anything about Mr al-Fayed, who is dead.
Dave Robertson
Thank you for your guidance, Madam Deputy Speaker. That is really important, because there are some ongoing cases; I will talk about the Metropolitan police in a minute.
It is clear that we must do better. For far too long, survivors have been ignored. That cannot and must not continue. I am really grateful to the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls, who is set to meet survivors very soon, and I welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment yesterday to meeting survivors. It has taken far too long to get to this stage, but I am glad to see that things are finally starting to move.
I have had the privilege of meeting dozens of women who have taken the very brave step of disclosing their experiences to parliamentarians and people they have never met before. Their tenacity and strength has been fundamental to driving this agenda forward and making these recent advances. I am very grateful to all survivors, as I am sure everybody in the APPG is, but we must never take the trust that they have placed in us for granted.
The APPG ran a consultation with survivors, and we are really pleased that we have had dozens and dozens of responses to it, because we are clear that there is a huge network of people who have been wronged in so many ways by so many systems. It is astonishing how almost every time we have a meeting, there is something else. The scale of the failings cuts right across civil society and enormous parts of the state, and a huge amount needs to be done to recompense these people who have been so poorly served for so long.
I thank the Survivors Trust, which has been working with the APPG, and which provided invaluable support to ensure that we are working in a safe way, bearing in mind the trauma that survivors have suffered. In the coming months, I am eager to work with Members across this House and the other place, and anybody who wants to be involved, to make sure we build up a drumbeat of evidence about the scale of these crimes.
Wendy Chamberlain
The hon. Member is rightly and powerfully talking about the testimony of survivors. I join him in thanking the Survivors Trust, which has given us such invaluable support as we navigate managing a very difficult APPG. I want to mention two amazing women: our researchers, Kathryn and Jessie, who keep us right, keep us grounded, and have done a huge power of work, while we establish how we will take the APPG and the secretariat forward.
Dave Robertson
I am thankful to the hon. Member for mentioning Jessie and Kathryn, who act as the secretariat in a difficult space. They do that in and around other busy jobs. It is clear to me and the hon. Member that without their hard work, we would not have been able to do this. [Interruption.] They are far too good.
We are regularly reminded by survivors that for far too long, parts of their story, and often their entire story, was ignored. We are clear that things need to change and to move quickly. One of the things that comes up most regularly is the police investigation. I am glad that the Met, along with forces in Scotland and France, are investigating. The Met has now confirmed that it is interviewing suspects on suspicion of trafficking. That is vitally important, because survivors regularly bring up that the issue was not being taken seriously enough, and I am very glad that it now is. That focus is vital to maintaining what trust is left between survivors and the Met, but survivors still need reassurance that the force truly grasps the scale of the issue, and is truly working on this as fast as it can.
A frustration often raised with us is that the updates from the Met appear to be, “We will give you another update in three months.” That update ends up being, “There will be another update in three months.” Three months is not a short time, and when that statement is made a third, fourth or fifth time, it undermines people’s trust that things will ever come to a head, and that justice will happen.
I thank all Members who have spoken about al-Fayed’s crimes in this Chamber. A number of people have done so, in various ways. There are all those who joined the APPG, and all those who have spoken to me about the subject. It has been a real learning curve for me over the last year or so. It has been challenging for me; that is not to say that it is not more challenging for other people. I have appreciated people coming to me and showing trust. I want to repay that, as time goes by, and to move things forward for them.
A few Members have mentioned that the themes for this International Women’s Day have been rights, justice and action. We can see that this predator took rights away from far too many people; they deserve justice, and it is time for action to get justice delivered.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I expect to call the Front Benchers at about 4.30 pm, or maybe a little later, and I have either six or seven Members waiting to speak. Perhaps Members who are still waiting could confine their remarks to six or seven minutes, so that everyone can get in.
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
It is a privilege to speak in this debate. I pay tribute to the women and men here, and particularly to my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) for her powerful and moving account, and for sharing her experiences. She is a voice for so many, and there will be action because she is here. Thank you.
In Gravesham in my constituency, I have met many amazing women. I want to mention a couple before I move on to the substantive part of my speech. Nageena Hussain is a phenomenal woman. Last week, I met over 100 women, and we had a beautiful, wonderful evening together, in which we shared food at the breaking of the fast—it was phenomenal. I pay tribute to her, as well as to our business leaders, such as Sandra Hassan from Nell’s Café, who I nominated for the MP HERoes, which is Savvitas’s programme in partnership with NatWest. She is a business institution, and a business leader. I also pay tribute to Sylvia Mead, who brought people from wonderful Gravesham businesses to visit me in Parliament this week. These are women coming together to bring communities together, and there are many more such business leaders.
Women in Gravesham do great things, and I will tell the House a little about just one of them. Catherine Green grew up in Gravesend. She went to Gravesend grammar school for girls. She went on to university, to study natural sciences. She earned her PhD and completed many fellowships. She was part of the team at the Jenner Institute that developed the AstraZeneca covid vaccine. She worked with Sarah Gilbert, and we thank them for using their talents and expertise. When the world needed them, they were there, so I thank and recognise them for that.
When it comes to celebrating women and science, not all women in science have been recognised. I want to pay tribute to some who have not been recognised. Ada Lovelace is the mother, inventor and founder of computers, but that was recognised only 100 years afterwards. Rosalind Franklin was a chemist and X-ray crystallographer. She was not credited or valued for her research, but it was her X-ray image that showed that DNA is a double helix. Alice Ball was an African American chemist who discovered a leprosy treatment, but it was stolen and written up as the Dean method. That term was later changed, but still. Marie Tharp is the mother of plate tectonics. Those women were absolutely credible, and their names and contributions need to be recognised.
UN research shows that only a third of the global scientific community is made up of women, and only one in 10 of those researchers are women in leadership roles. Why is that? Well, women face a set of different challenges. One of those challenges is the motherhood penalty, from pregnancy and beyond. There are structural issues. In science, PhD students receive a stipend, and they are not employed, so they do not get access to maternity rights or Government-subsidised childcare. Maternity time is not really factored into their two-year contracts, so what should they do if they need to step out for six months or a year? Put their research on pause? Have somebody else come in and finish it? It means that they produce fewer papers, have less impact, and are less likely to see progress. Many women have suffered through that system, and have delayed having families until they have tenure—a permanent position. That is possible, but it does not need to be that hard.
That is just the pregnancy part. What about when the children grow up? Half of respondents to the Carers in STEMM report said that they had to cancel travel plans because of care responsibilities—I have experienced that myself. We might spend months planning an experiment, but then the nursery rings and says, “Come and collect your child—they’re ill.” Researchers in the field say that they do not travel to international conferences, where scientists network and bring ideas together, because of caring responsibilities. It is fine; we look after our families instead—but it all means that we are one step behind.
Others take career breaks, as I did. I declare an interest: I was the recipient of a Daphne Jackson fellowship. Those fellowships are amazing, because they help women and men return to science. The fellowship was named after Daphne Jackson, an English nuclear physicist who became the first female physics professor in the UK, at the University of Surrey, at the age of 34—phenomenal. She thought that qualified women who are unemployed or under-employed following a career break because of family commitments represent an appalling waste of talent and of the initial investment in their education, and I could not agree more. Many such women are eager to return to their original careers, or to field activity in which their initial education is relevant, and Daphne Jackson fellowships provide retraining, so that they can return part time. I thank and pay tribute to the Daphne Jackson Trust, as well as to the Francis Crick Institute, for supporting many women back into research.
After my meeting with the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology—in which we discussed my career, the choice to leave science to raise a family, returning and trying to wiggle everything through to make it work—she launched yesterday a new charter to support women in research. It calls on all PhD funding bodies supported by UK Research and Innovation to step up and include 52 weeks’ maternity leave. That is about raising the bar and improving paternity leave, too; a rising tide lifts all boats. She also announced a £2.3 million increase in support for the Daphne Jackson Trust. That is over 100% extra. How many returns to science will that fund? It is incredible. The charter is a direction of travel—a marker. We are not done. This is a call for women researchers in the UK to tell us what else we can do, and how we can work together to make changes to improve science for everyone.
In my concluding remarks, I want to speak to all those young women and girls who are curious about science, and who want to help people or save the world: do not doubt yourself. The country needs you. Finally, to the men who support us and let us embrace our talents: thank you. Good men never finish last; they help us improve everybody’s quality of life. I believe that the profession of science has the ability to improve lives beyond measure. I thank the scientists who are making a difference. We see you and we thank you.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
I thank all those who have contributed to this and other debates this week, including my hon. Friends the Members for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) and for Warrington North (Charlotte Nichols), who this week have shown true bravery and should be an inspiration to us all. I also welcome the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) to her place and thank her for her passionate speech.
I want to thank and celebrate the amazing women who have played, and still play, a part in my life, including friends, family and my fabulous staff. They are truly inspirational in the love, support and grounding that they give me, and I hope that they know that I would not be here and I could not do this job without them.
This International Women’s Day, I want to celebrate the women of Portsmouth—my city—which, this year, is celebrating a truly special milestone of 100 years as a city: 100 years of community resilience and remarkable women getting on with the job and making our city the place it is. Traditionally, Portsmouth has been a city that celebrates its people’s achievements but, dominated by its naval dockyard, its history has often been a masculine one. But the women have always been there. As the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) said, we would certainly notice if they were not. Teachers, doctors, nurses, city councillors, factory and shop workers, small business owners, faith leaders and volunteers are all pioneering equal rights at work and are all quietly cracking on and holding their families and their communities together. They did not, and often still do not, get the recognition that they deserved.
Members may notice that I often wear a necklace that says “Pompey Belle”. When I was teaching, a group of girlfriends in the National Union of Teachers and I began wearing them, partly in tribute to the women who, during the first and second world wars, kept my city’s heart beating while the men served abroad. But it is also a quiet reminder that we never face things alone, and that together we can achieve so much more. Whenever I put on this necklace, I feel like I am carrying the support of those women with me: women who are kind, intelligent and determined and who get things done. These necklaces are also made by Hip Hip Hooray, a brilliant woman-owned local business—local creativity celebrating our women.
To mark our city’s century, I am proud to be joining forces with others, including my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), to launch the “100 Pompey Belles”—a campaign to truly recognise the unsung, amazing heroines of our city. The “100 Pompey Belles” are the women who show up every single day; the women who do not seek the spotlight but, without whom, Portsmouth simply would not function. These women are in all parts of my city and of all ages and of all backgrounds, and I am privileged to meet so many of them in this role as the Portsmouth North Member of Parliament. I am so often very humbled, and many times reduced to tears, by all the pride, strength, openness, trust and resilience that they demonstrate day after day, night after night, week after week.
With this year’s theme of “Give to Gain” I want to recognise the absolute queens in my city, because my city really does gain from them. Nominations will open soon, and I would love to see as many local women as possible get involved. I would love their friends, families, colleagues and neighbours to put their names forward, because we know that, too often, they will not do it themselves. We want to celebrate them and all that they do, from breaking barriers in science to running food banks, teaching and coaching our children, caring for our most vulnerable, running our small and large businesses and simply holding our communities together. Portsmouth women have always been extraordinary, and they have always been proud. To every Pompey Belle in this House and beyond: thank you for being you, and for all you do for others and for our city.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
We have had an excellent debate, with so many brilliant contributions, but I would like to single out three in particular. The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) made a brilliant maiden speech. I am sure she will continue to make many colourful and inspiring contributions in her years ahead in this place, and it is always a joy to welcome another northern woman to the Chamber.
My hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) should pick whatever lane she would like—I will gladly follow. The important thing is that she keeps driving ahead.
The hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) reminded us that whatever our differences, we always have more in common than that which divides us. Madam Deputy Speaker, you were not in the Chair for her remarks, when she talked about strike action by women, but I caution the three Deputy Speakers not to go on strike, as I really dread to think what would happen to this place—with the greatest respect to Mr Speaker.
I put on record my thanks to my senior caseworker Megan Redhead who week in, week out strives to deliver great results and improve the lives of the people of Carlisle. In the last couple of weeks, she has achieved the most remarkable outcome for one woman in Carlisle in particular.
It is my privilege in this International Women’s Day debate to speak about another remarkable woman: Angela Burdett-Coutts, an overlooked figure from the Victorian era whose compassion, generosity and determination helped shape modern philanthropy. She was a woman who embodied “Give to Gain”. She was born on 21 April 1814 in Piccadilly, the youngest daughter of Sir Francis Burdett and Sophia Coutts. She inherited not only her family’s name but, in 1837, her grandfather Thomas Coutts’s immense banking fortune, making her one of the wealthiest women in England.
Burdett-Coutts, deeply influenced by leading social reformers including Charles Dickens, with whom she collaborated for many years, dedicated her fortune to education and tackling poverty and social injustice, earning her the name “Queen of the Poor”. Her philanthropy was extraordinary in its breadth: she helped to fund ragged schools, built model housing in the east end and developed the Columbia Market to bring wholesome but affordable food to the poor. She co-founded innovative projects such as the Urania Cottage, a home for vulnerable and homeless women seeking a new start in life.
In 1884, Burdett-Coutts co-founded the London Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which later became the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. She championed the protection of animals, becoming president of the ladies’ committee of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and commissioned the fountain and commemorative statue of Greyfriars Bobby. Her humanitarianism reached far beyond Britain, endowing bishoprics in Cape Town, Adelaide and British Columbia. Back home, she funded drinking fountains and animal troughs right across London. She also financed Charles Babbage’s early computing efforts and contributed significantly to hospitals and churches.
I first came across Angela Burdett-Coutts when I discovered that she had funded the building of St Stephen’s church in Carlisle in 1864. Having learned that she had financed the new St Stephen’s church in Westminster—just a stone’s throw from this place—the then Bishop of Carlisle wrote to her to inquire whether she would fund the building of a new church in one of Carlisle’s poorest areas, Wapping. Not only did she agree, and personally select the stained glass for the church, but she gifted a peal of eight bells, which on the church’s demolition in the 1960s were installed in the new St Elisabeth’s church in Harraby, where they remain to this day. In 1871, Queen Victoria recognised Angela Burdett-Coutts’s immense contributions by granting her a peerage, making Baroness Burdett-Coutts one of the few women of her era to receive such an honour in her own right.
Like all female pioneers, Angela Burdett-Coutts was unafraid to challenge convention. Possessing considerable wealth, she was beset by suitors. Many men proposed marriage to Miss Coutts, and she declined all of them. She did, however, propose marriage to her friend and adviser the Duke of Wellington when he was 79 and she was 33; he gently declined her. But that was nothing to the scandal her eventual marriage caused. When she was 66, she married a 29-year-old American, William Lehman Ashmead Bartlett. In doing so, she not only caused an outrage in Victorian society, but she triggered a clause in the will of her grandfather’s second wife, which stipulated that she must marry an Englishman, and in doing so lost much of her multimillion pound fortune.
Since discovering Angela Burdett-Coutts, I have mused not just on how stories such as hers deserve to be more widely known, but on how we should celebrate the female philanthropists and changemakers who did so much for people and wider society. So in closing, I invite you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister and all colleagues from across House to support not simply a statue or a plaque to female changemakers, but to support an audible celebration, featuring the Coutts bell from St Stephen’s church Carlisle, in a new national monument to the social change that women like Angela Burdett-Coutts and so many who we have heard about today have made possible.
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to speak in today’s phenomenal debate marking International Women’s Day, alongside so many remarkable women from across this House, including the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer), who gave an inspiring maiden speech. Although she is no longer in her place, I particularly thank her for her words of solidarity for our trans community, including trans women, who should never be forgotten in this discussion. It is appalling that the hon. Lady has already experienced intimidation just for standing shoulder to shoulder with our trans siblings, but I hope she knows that many of us, on both sides of the House, will have her back on that.
As a man, I approached this debate with a little hesitance, because I am acutely aware that the experiences being discussed today are not my own, but I also remembered how many women from across the House contributed so thoughtfully to the debate on International Men’s Day, and that reminded me that progress on equality has never come from working at cross purposes to one another, but from working together. The women who shaped my life, particularly my mum and my sister, raised me not only to respect women, but to champion them—to raise women up, to challenge barriers whenever we see them and to take that responsibility seriously in the work that we do in this place.
Since becoming a father to my daughter, these issues have taken on an even deeper meaning for me. When you look at the world through the eyes of your child, you start to notice things that you might once have taken for granted. My daughter is only six years old, and yet I have already heard her say things like, “I can’t do that, that’s a boy’s job,” or describe certain roles as ones that require you to be “brave”—an attribute that she associates with men.
I can assure the House that my husband and I made sure that she knows that she can do any job that she wants to do, and that she is exceptionally brave herself, but hearing that from a six-year-old reminded me that, despite the progress we celebrate on International Women’s Day, the messages that children absorb about what women and girls can or cannot do can still shape their ambitions from a very early age. As a parent, and as a Member of this House, that is something that I feel a responsibility to challenge. Every girl, in this country and beyond, should grow up believing that her ambition is limited only by her talents and her determination.
One issue that I want to touch on, which has been mentioned by other hon. Members, is the perception of masculinity, and how that shapes the experiences of both men and women. For a long time, I have spoken about the challenges facing young men and boys, but doing that should never be seen as being in opposition to championing women and girls. In fact, the two go hand in hand. If we want a healthier society, we have to address both sides of that equation.
Wendy Chamberlain
The hon. Gentleman has made me remember something very important. When Sarah Everard was murdered, a number of us were lighting candles, and I remember having a conversation with my son and my daughter, during which my daughter, who was 15, told her brother about all the times that she had been cat-called and harassed on the street. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is important that the issue is not just about educating girls or educating boys—it is about educating the human beings that we are raising. Does he agree?
Josh Newbury
I completely agree with the hon. Lady. Allyship across many different characteristics is essential, but I have always felt that anything that men can do to echo and raise up the voices of women is incredibly powerful. We should take that seriously and not shy away from it in debates such as this one, where we may perhaps feel that our voice is not as important, as it absolutely can be.
Too many men and boys today feel disillusioned with politics, with opportunities and with what positive masculinity can look like in modern Britain. That is a real issue that deserves serious attention, but the answer to the challenge is not to exploit those frustrations by turning men against women, or to seek votes by weakening women’s rights, yet that is exactly the direction that some would take us in. For example, as we have heard, the Reform candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election suggested that people without children should be taxed for that, placing pressure on women to have children. That misogynistic view of women’s role in society should be rejected in the strongest terms.
I am proud of everything that this Labour Government are championing for women, including closing the gender pay gap. British women still earn 13% less than men, but the pay gap is not just about numbers on a spreadsheet. Large employers are required to publish gender pay gap data, but that alone will not close the gap. This is not just fiscal; it is cultural. Thanks to the Employment Rights Act, employers will have to publish clear action plans showing how they will close the gap and support women to progress.
Before they even go into work girls can feel, as my daughter has shown me, like there are things that are not for them—certain ambitions that are out of reach. When we look at the history of opportunity in this country, we are reminded of how much can change when assumptions and prejudices are challenged. One of the most powerful examples of that is the work of Jennie Lee. As well as being a true Fifer, as noted by my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward), Jennie was also one of my predecessors as an adopted sister of Cannock.
As the Minister for the Arts in the 1960s, Jennie championed the creation of the Open University, which was built on the belief that talent should not be limited by background, age or sex. The idea that someone could study for a university degree from their own home was dismissed by many as unrealistic, but Jennie believed that education should be open to anyone with the determination to learn. The result has been extraordinary: the Open University has educated millions of people across this country and beyond, many of whom might never have had the opportunity otherwise to access higher education.
That legacy reminds us that expanding opportunity is not simply about access to education; it is also about expanding the horizons of what people believe is possible for themselves. But equality also depends on recognising the barriers that women still face in other areas of life. Women’s health has been overlooked far too often, with conditions such as endometriosis taking years to diagnose and many women leaving the workforce because of untreated menopause symptoms. I am proud that this Government are taking steps to tackle medical misogyny, from strengthening rights at work to improving support for conditions that largely affect women and expanding opportunity through education and childcare.
According to a report published by UN Women in 2022, it could take close to three centuries before we achieve full gender equality. That statistic should give us pause, but it should also strengthen our determination, because progress does not happen by itself; it happens when we smash outdated assumptions and refuse to accept that inequality is inevitable. If my daughter and millions of girls growing up across this country are to inherit a fairer society, it will need all of us in this House to continue that effort.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Order. The previous occupant of the Chair reminded Members that we need to start Front-Bench speeches at around half-past 4. If the remaining Members could keep their comments to around five minutes, that would be very helpful.
Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)
I will do my very best, Madam Deputy Speaker.
I congratulate Members on their contributions to the debate so far. In particular, I congratulate the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) on a very impassioned first speech about the rich traditions in her constituency of standing in unity and for humanity against attempts to divide. It has been six years since I delivered my first speech in Parliament during a similar debate on International Women’s Day, in which I paid tribute to our local history of women’s struggles for social justice, which continue to be daily sources of inspiration.
Today’s debate comes as the cost of living crisis continues to foster a sense of injustice, uncertainty and anxiety across the UK, set against a brutal backdrop of more than a decade of Conservative austerity and chronic under-investment in public services, which were left hollowed out and, in many instances, privatised by the last Government. The cost of living crisis has meant that women are more likely than men to lose their jobs or reduce their paid work, given that they are more frequently employed in sectors that have been directly disrupted by austerity measures and impacted by cuts and under-investment in public services.
Women, particularly black, Asian and minority ethnic women, continue to account for around two thirds of low earners, and they are more likely to be working on zero-hours contracts or part-time contracts. Ahead of the UN International Day to Combat Islamophobia this weekend, I am all too aware of how Muslim women are among the most economically disadvantaged faith groups in the UK, impacted by the prevalence of negative stereotypes, harassment and hate crimes.
The increased overlap of working and caring responsibilities has added to the ongoing reality that caring continues to be a major factor in women’s ability to participate on equal terms. Put simply, women still face structural economic inequality throughout their lives, which intersects with other structures of inequality, including race and disability. We also know that violence against women, including trans women, continues to blight our society.
I know personally that the impact of domestic abuse on the physical and mental health of survivors can be devastating. Four years ago, I faced a reselection process in which numerous complaints were made about rule-breaking and misogynistic intimidation, a process marred by the involvement of my ex-husband and his associates. As many Members will be aware, I was subsequently signed off sick from work. Although activists and organisations in the domestic abuse sector expressed alarm at my treatment, and my independent domestic violence advocate made representations on my behalf, the matter remains unresolved. The post-separation harassment and the institutional gaslighting and silencing goes on and on.
What I am reminded of by my lived experience is that domestic abuse can impact people from all walks of life and in all forms of employment, including those of us in public life. To this day, I still have women from across the country reaching out in support, and I continue to work with Members from across the House to call on all political parties to ensure that political representatives who are survivors of domestic abuse are not exposed to further harassment in their roles. I also continue to call and campaign for better protections in the workplace more widely, from paid leave for domestic abuse to mandatory policies on domestic abuse in every workplace, to eliminate domestic abuse in our society, because that requires a whole-society approach.
I am intrigued by today’s announcement of a new unit to look into intimidation experienced during elections, given that my ex-husband stood against me at the last general election with the stated aim of trying to “set the record straight”, after everything I had already endured. I will look at ways to contribute constructively to the Government’s work in this regard, because this is not just about me. No survivor of domestic abuse should be prevented from standing for office or staying in public life, having fled abuse or because they experience post-separation harassment.
We need to ensure that this place sends the right message to our country. In the light of the Mandelson scandal, we need an independent statutory inquiry into all of Jeffrey Epstein’s links to British institutions and figures, which I—along with over 70 Members of this House—continue to call for. I also believe we need an independent investigation into the activities of Labour Together.
As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on domestic violence and abuse, I am delighted to be working with Women’s Aid to ensure that no survivor is left behind. As we approach the fifth anniversary of the landmark Domestic Abuse Act 2021 next month, this could not be more important, because we in the VAWG sector know that the weaponisation of violence against women and girls by far-right groups and political parties such as Reform harms survivors and ultimately impedes the real work of tackling the root causes of society-wide violence, to the detriment of women and girls. It has resulted in women fleeing persecution abroad facing even more danger here, including being targeting at hotels over the past year.
The Government have an ambitious commitment to halve violence against women and girls in a decade, and our APPG welcomes measures in the VAWG strategy to try to achieve that, including the overarching, cross-departmental approach and the focus on prevention. The Minister for Safeguarding has positively engaged with us in that regard, and is also delivering on other commitments. However, I am concerned about the Government’s wider programme of austerity; the real-terms cuts to benefits, including the retention of the overall benefit cap and the freezing of the local housing allowance; and the continued injustice of the WASPI women’s lack of compensation.
I am also concerned about the ongoing assaults on civil liberties, which target those who are most at risk: minoritised and migrant women, including those from Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. I hope that, going forward, the Government can address the areas in which migrant and minoritised women need our support.
Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)
All of us in this House—women and men—will have been inspired by individual women, both in and outside our own lives. I have certainly been inspired by many of the contributions made by women Members today, and I have been proud to be part of the minority who are listening and also contributing.
I am proud to say that I have become who I am today because of many women in my own life. There are three I want to single out and pay tribute to: my mum, who brought me up, despite many personal challenges in our family; Sister Bernadette of the St Joseph convent school in Malta, who gave me the self-discipline that I hope I still have today; and Patricia Hennessy, who was an inspiring primary school teacher who helped me and so many others to believe in ourselves. I am sure that is why I am here today.
I am proud to represent a constituency that has produced so many great women who have not just inspired those around them but made the weather that has brought greater equality for women across the country. Every year, I visit the grave of Lady Constance Lytton in Knebworth Park. She was a suffragette who came from a privileged background but took another name so that her privilege would not give her advantages. She was imprisoned and force-fed. She carved “V” with a hairpin on her chest: V for “Votes for women”. Women got those votes, but she soon lost her life, and every year we pay tribute to her and all the women who gave up so much to get to where we are today. We have so much further to go.
We have other great women in Stevenage who are still with us today, including Barbara Follett, one of my predecessors. We are very proud of our Barbara, who helped to found the Labour Women’s Network. I stand next to my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare), who has been a stalwart there herself, because Barbara helped to lead the way. Much of the composition of the House is down to her hard work. Not only that, but she has improved the appearance of many of us in this House; I myself have been Folletted by Barbara, so I give her special thanks for that.
Baroness Sharon Taylor in the other place was the leader of Stevenage council for 16 years, and is now doing great things as a Minister in this Government, improving housing for so many people. Housing is what gives women a much better quality of life.
Those women are trailblazers, but in my town we have other great women. Our deputy council leader, Jeannette Thomas, is leading the housing revolution in Stevenage. We have a mayor of Asian background, Councillor Nazmin Chowdhury, who with grace and understanding exemplifies the best of women in Stevenage. Finally, our youth mayor, Charlotte Gregory, has been shadowing me in this place this week. She also helped to put together my notes for this speech, not all of which I can use, unfortunately. I thank Charlotte for being an exemplar of the future of women in our town and our country. May there be many more like her to come.
I will not talk about the great things the Government are doing—I will let the Minister set some of that out—but I fully support our mission to halve violence against women and girls in the coming years. It is a lot of hard work. We have to keep pushing at it, and I will support that all the way. Trying to get equality for women is not a zero-sum game; it is good for us all. It is good for men too. We all benefit from equality for women. I am proud to have taken part in this debate, and will fight for equality with every breath, inside and outside this place.
Dr Lauren Sullivan
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to make it clear that, as per my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, I am a visiting research scientist—an unpaid position—at the Francis Crick Institute. I forgot to mention that in my speech.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I thank the hon. Member for her point of order. Her interests are now on the record. I now call, to make a very quick speech, Calvin Bailey.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
“A very quick speech from Calvin Bailey,” said no one ever. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—this will show your influence over me.
In 2021, the Defence Committee published a landmark report on women in the armed forces. One of the most consistent things that came out of it about women who serve is their feeling that they fail to be recognised by the public. Our veterans do not feel that society acknowledges them, so the Committee recommended that we use occasions like International Women’s Day to make sure that those voices and experiences are heard.
Throughout my career, I have had the privilege of serving alongside some exceptional women. When I led humanitarian aid operations in the Philippines, I did so alongside Master Sergeant Aircrew Samantha Green. When I delivered aid to the Yazidi women stranded on Mount Sinjar, it was Flight Lieutenant Abbie Anderson who generated our beloved C-130J aircraft, and it was my very close friend Jen Bracewell who managed both me—as you have done, Madam Deputy Speaker—and the missions. When I commanded a frontline squadron, I learned from the venerable Wing Commander Caz Viles, who had commanded the Royal Squadron. I did so under the exceptional leadership of Air Marshal Suraya Marshall, who is without doubt one of the most outstanding military leaders of her generation.
Despite the landmark Sex Discrimination Act 1975, women continued to be excluded from frontline combat roles in the British armed forces until 2016. In fact, it was only when I entered the Ministry of Defence in 2018 that all the restrictions were finally removed. Over the past couple of days, we have all seen that a female F-15 pilot was shot down over Kuwait. We should all reflect on the fact that, although women are putting themselves in the line of fire, the people who deploy them are questioning whether their gender makes them suitable to do their job. In the extra five minutes that I would have taken, I would have discussed how these things are being challenged at this very moment. I call on all of us to ensure that we challenge them when we are given the opportunity to speak.
Although the armed forces are recovering and the number of women in service is improving, it is important that we point to the disparities in treatment that persist. There are good stories, but there remain challenges and inequities. I urge anyone who sees my very truncated speech to go and listen to the wonderful speeches that we have heard today, including the maiden speech from the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer), which will all be very ably summarised in a moment.
I started my speech by saying that a landmark piece of work was done by the Defence Committee. It is therefore important that I recognise Lucy, Eleanor, Ines, Toni and Corrin, who sit in the background and tolerate the likes of me, and who helped us produce that incredible work. I thank them. I look forward to hearing the summing up.
Joy Morrissey
This has been an excellent debate, with some outstanding contributions. I congratulate the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) on making her maiden speech, which was significantly better than mine. Her empathy, honesty and generosity of spirit will serve her well in this place, and her genuine pride in Manchester puts even Andy Burnham to shame.
I thank the hon. Member for North East Hampshire (Alex Brewer) for her excellent speech on FGM, and for raising this important issue. We also heard from the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett), who raised the excellent idea of praising her staff. I shall shamelessly copy that by praising my office manager, Aleksandra Turner, and my senior case worker, Mary Shaw. Without these women, I would be truly lost. I thank the hon. Member for her idea, and all the women who serve as parliamentary staffers across the House. Honestly, we would be lost without them.
I shall keep my comments to a minimum, as I know that the Minister would like to speak. I just want to thank everybody for these incredible debates, and for the incredible time and honesty that all Members put into their speeches. I thank the hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler), and I am sure that her campaign to be the Mayor of London will be a smashing success. I was the first female to make it to the final three for the mayoralty for the Conservatives, and I would be absolutely terrified to stand against her. I have no doubt that she would do a fantastic job for London.
I thank the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) for her contribution, and for standing up for young women and girls on online harms. She has continued to champion this issue, not just in this debate but throughout her time in Parliament.
I want to talk about everyone—for example, the hon. Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) really championed the issue of child sexual exploitation, which is so important —and I feel as if I am doing them all an injustice by cutting short my comments, of which I have a plethora. Please know, however, that it was an incredible debate to watch, and we do have more in common than we think.
With that—everyone will be happy to hear that I am bringing my speech to a close—it seems fitting to return to Nancy Astor, and I want to end with one of her greatest quotes. She once said:
“Women are young at politics, but they are old at suffering; soon they will learn that through politics they can prevent some kinds of suffering.”
We in this House have that chance for our women and girls. Let us take it.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jess Phillips)
First, I thank the Minister for Equalities for securing this debate in Government time. In the time I have been in the House, I think this is only the second time that has happened. I am incredibly proud to stand alongside her. I also thank the Opposition spokeswoman, the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Joy Morrissey), for setting the tone for this debate, and everybody else for following that tone.
I have to say that I have felt tearful at lots of points—I do not know what is wrong with me, but it is almost certainly something that the mother of my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq) would not be pleased for me to say. It is either hope or anger, or just the fact that I have my period, that makes me feel tired, hopeful and angry in equal measure. I say to the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) that if I get through this without crying, it will be a miracle. I just want to say a massive thank you.
As others have done, I had assumed—because sometimes I do not pay much attention—that this debate had been secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler), who does us that service so well every year, through the Backbench Business Committee, but it was in fact the Government’s doing. I thank the hon. Member for Beaconsfield for her comments, and I agree that she would be—and I hope she is—a challenge to whoever she stands opposite.
I thank the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer), who made her maiden speech. When I made my maiden speech, I commented on how sexist it is for it to be called a maiden speech, and I said I was not a maiden because my children were in the Gallery. True to form, I am talking about my period and my lack of virginity, but I shall continue. It was an absolute pleasure to listen to her. I shall put aside my Birmingham versus Manchester rivalry, and say that she is very welcome here and across this House. I am definitely not going to repeat what I said when I first introduced myself to her, but to paraphrase it without being sweary, I said there are lots of lovely people here regardless of which political parties they come from, and when we work together we are always strongest.
I wish that I could go through everybody’s speeches, but I just want to highlight my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball), a woman who I work very closely with. Campaigns we have worked on together gave me cause to cry earlier in the week. I would only say that she has ruined “Bridgerton” for me, because I have seen only the first episode, so I am irritated. However, she always speaks with such passion, and who does not deserve love? That rang out through the Chamber.
I would like to pay tribute to the towering figures of the past that everybody has mentioned who advanced the causes of women’s rights, but we have also all paid tribute to the women who, without fanfare and acclaim, support families and contribute to their communities every single day. I personally could not cope without the women in my life propping me up, making me laugh and just noticing the stuff that needs noticing. People do not notice how important that little act of love actually is.
We have spoken of progress and celebration, but we know we have far to go. I could highlight the women of many countries in the world whom many Members have highlighted. The women of Afghanistan and Iran have featured very heavily in this debate. I am the sister-in-law of a beautiful and now departed Iranian woman who died of breast cancer. She made her home in our country, because her country was not safe for her. The bravery of the women who stand up to be counted in Afghanistan and Iran should move every single one of us.
When we do not want to come here on a Monday morning, imagine the privilege to be able to stand and speak out in this place. The reason I stood to be elected to Parliament in the first place is that, while we are gathered here at the heart of our democracy to discuss these issues in comfort and safety, beyond these walls in every part of our country women and girls are suffering. They are being attacked, abused, harassed and stalked. At home, in public places and online, the scale of violence against women and girls shames our society.
Today’s debate is not the moment for detailed policy talk, so I will not do that. But I will say that I am proud to be part of a Government who are tackling this issue as the national emergency it is. That has been underscored by many people who have spoken about our commitment to halve violence against women and girls in a decade. But we know that words are not enough. Plenty has been promised and pledged in the past without results. That is why our violence against women and girls strategy, published in December, had to be different. It must deploy the full power of the state to deliver the change that is desperately needed. It is just a piece of paper; it is just a document. I have always said that when it needs to be stretched and ambition needs to be stretched, then that is absolutely what it should be. Brilliant women and campaigners—and credit to the Domestic Abuse Commissioner—campaigned for what I am about to say, which was not in the VAWG strategy.
Before I take on the grim task of reading out the names of all the women who have been killed in the past year, I want to take this opportunity to commit the Home Office to funding and delivering the oversight mechanism for the recommendations made in domestic homicide reviews. We will put in place a system that strengthens accountability and ensures that learning is consistently embedded across both local and national agencies.
This is about turning lessons into action, not just letting documents sit on a shelf in some local authority. By doing so, we will drive the meaningful change that is so desperately needed, because those women’s names—they used to just be numbers, but now they are names—must enable us to change to prevent future horrific deaths. It has been a long and arduous struggle, but I do believe that, with drive and leadership, change will come. Tragically, though, it will be too late for the victims, whose lives have been ended by this scourge, and their shattered families.
That brings me on to the task at hand. I will now read the names of the women who have allegedly been killed by men in the past year, collated arduously every year for over a decade by the Femicide Census. They are: Anjela Chetty; Joanne Penney; Michelle Egge-Bailey; Maleta Rosevear; Carmenza Valencia-Trujillo; Rachel Dixon; Claire Anderson; Paramjit Kaur; Clare Burns; Sarah Reynolds; Hien Thi Vu; Rebekah Campbell; Paria Veisi; Tracey Davies; Pamela Munro; Aimee Pike; Elizabeth Tamilore Odunsi; Nnenna Chima; Kathryn Perkins; Margaret McGowan; Ellen Cook; Rachael Vaughan; Marjama Osman; Yajaira Castro Mendez; Miriam MacDonald; Mary Green; Mandy Riley; Samantha Murphy; Isobella Knight; Christina Alexander; Annabel Rook; Reanne Coulson; Nilani Nimalarajah; Irene Mbugua; Nila Patel; Sarah Montgomery; Angela Botham; Fortune Gomo; Phylis Daly; Gwyneth Carter; Stephanie Blundell; Brenda Breed; Vanessa Whyte, and her children, James and Sara; Courtney Angus; Nkiru Chima; Kimberley Thompson; Shara Miller; Paris Kendall; Sufia Khatun; Zahwa Salah Mukhtar; Niwunhellage Dona Nirodha Kalapni Niwunhella; Sheryl Wilkins; Halyna Hoisan; Tia Langdon; Ndata Bobb; Linner Sang; June Bunyan; Michelle Thomson; Ann Green; Shelley Davies; Anjanee Sandhir; Catalina Birlea; Chereiss Bailey; Sonia Exelby; Agnės Druskienės; Michele Kennedy; Angela Shellis; Stephanie Irons; Dickiesa Nurse; Natalie Egan; Colleen Westerman; Katie Fox; Lainie Williams; Lili Stojanova; Xiaoqing Ke; Julie Wilson; Maria Saceanu; Lisa Smith; Janet Bowen; Samantha Lee; Lisa-Marie Hopkins; Gilly Livie; Tania Williams; Gloria De Lazzari; Victoria Hart; Lisa Denton; Vanessa Pountney-Chadha; Helen Rundle; Anam Rafay; Rita Rowley; Amaal Raytaan; Carla-Maria Georgescu; Helen Bird; Angela Clayton; Naomi MacIvor; Carolann Barraclough; Jennifer Symonds; Ellie Flanagan; and two women in their 40s whose names have not yet been confirmed. Every single year, there is always a name that has to be written on at the end because it comes in as I am walking in—I say that to give the House an idea of how regularly this happens. That final name on this year’s list is Karlie Sone.
The following are women whose names have not been read out in previous years: Lat Parks; Delia McInerney; Lucy Harrison; Laleh Zarejouneghani; Judith Law; Jane Riddell; Dawn Kerr; Victoria Adams; Simone Smith; and Brigitta Rasuli. I am grateful to the women of the Femicide Census for completing the list—it was incomplete because the information was not known—so that those women can be remembered. I also want to take a moment to remember those who have died by suicide or in unexplained circumstances as a result of abuse. We commit to doing more, so that their names are not forgotten. The number of those women outstrips the number in the list that I have just read out by some margin.
We refuse to forget these women, who all deserved so much more. I want to once again thank the Femicide Census for the tireless work that goes into collating these names every year. We find it difficult to listen to them, but the Femicide Census look through every single story. I express my profound gratitude for the work that it does to raise awareness of women and girls who have been so tragically killed by men. There is so much more that I could say, but the list continues to speak for itself. I will finish by saying only this: may these women get the justice that they deserved, and may we honour them by preventing others from suffering the same fate.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered International Women’s Day.
Fire Station Closures
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)
I am grateful for the opportunity to open this debate on fire station closures. I would like to begin by paying tribute to the bravery of firefighters across the country.
John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this debate and paying tribute to the bravery of firefighters. As the Member of Parliament for Glasgow East, I wish to pay tribute to the brave firefighters in Glasgow who risked their lives to battle the fire on Union Street this past week, preventing casualties and saving Glasgow Central station. This fire is absolutely devastating for the people who made their livelihoods and fed their families by working in that building, which has now closed.
Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that, in Scotland under the SNP, 1,250 firefighter posts have been cut since 2013, and high-rise appliances—critical for tackling fires like the one in Glasgow on Sunday—have been slashed from 26 to 16? Two of those appliances were in Glasgow, but both were unavailable on Sunday, it is understood.
Brian Mathew
I thank the hon. Member for those points; he made them well, and I take them on. We should all think of what happened in Glasgow at the weekend.
Family members of firefighters from Wiltshire are in the Gallery, and I thank them for coming. I know of firefighters from Dorset and Wiltshire who would have liked to be here, but as on-call professionals, they are in their communities today, ensuring that cover is in place, and they will mobilise if the call comes in. We owe them all a debt of gratitude.
I have met firefighters at a number of fire stations in Wiltshire. They are dedicated local people demonstrating real pride in place, protecting their area, and they have genuine concern about what any proposals mean for fire safety in rural communities. There is a consultation taking place on the closure of eight fire stations across Dorset and Wiltshire. To put that in perspective, that is eight engines supported by nearly 100 firefighting staff who keep communities such as Bradford-on-Avon safe. The town’s fire station has served for generations, and the consequences of its closure would be profound. That goes for all eight stations listed for closure.
The crews attend over 500 incidents per year, ranging from house fires to flood response, from road traffic collisions to river rescues. Those are the emergencies that make the headlines, but the everyday call-outs are no less important to those in trouble, and they include freeing trapped livestock, assisting vulnerable residents who are stuck in their home, and ensuring that partner agencies know about any safeguarding risks.
The stations act as natural points of emergency response co-ordination for events that we hope will never happen, but for which they must always be prepared. Beyond the communities the stations serve, the closures will have an impact on the whole Dorset and Wiltshire service. More than 60% of incidents that crews from the eight stations attend are outside the station catchment area. My hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson), who is also my constituency neighbour, has written to me to say that she shares the concerns of the fire service and the many residents across Wiltshire who are worried about the impact of the closures on our community.
Last summer, firefighters from Bradford-on-Avon travelled 50 miles to tackle a large wildfire on Holt Heath in Dorset. The incident was a stark reminder of how our changing climate is adding to the burden on fire and rescue services. Wildfires, flooding and extreme weather are no longer once-in-a-generation events; they are becoming part of the operational norm. In spite of massive flooding during Storm Bert in my constituency and, indeed, this year in Devon, Cornwall and the east midlands, fire services across the country receive no specific funding for flood responses. How can we contemplate such sweeping cuts to emergency response capacity and civil resilience when, in fact, more is required?
Since my election, I have been in regular contact with Dorset and Wiltshire Fire and Rescue Service leadership, who have told me about the increasingly challenging funding environment. Since the merger in 2016, the service has had to find savings of over £15 million, which has led to a 15% reduction in firefighter posts and the withdrawal of second engines from five stations. Though no one disputes the need to focus on value for money, the service is already recognised as outstanding for efficiency by the independent inspectorate. The service’s current operations are lean, and ongoing modernisation is keeping capabilities up to standard, but the obvious question looms of how any further cost pressures can be absorbed.
The Government’s three-year settlement has been a welcome aid to longer-term planning. Indeed, the Minister will be quick to point out the Government’s 4.1% annual uplift over this period; that arises because they are allowing the fire authority to raise the council tax precept by £5 to offset the 19.5% decline in central Government funding between 2026 and 2029. However, at the core of that settlement is the Treasury’s assumption that the area’s council tax base, which is driven by new housing development, will increase by 1.57% annually. That forecast contrasts sharply with what has happened to actual growth in the past three years, in which it has averaged just 1%. For the coming 2026-27 financial year, the figure is now confirmed at 0.9%, far below the Treasury’s projection. That is what it will remain for the following two years, and the result is a £1.27 million annual disparity. The Government have been clear: the multi-year settlement is intended to provide greater certainty for local authorities to take sustainable long-term decisions. The Treasury’s 4.1% uplift for Dorset and Wiltshire is welcome. The service is not asking for special treatment; the request is that the means are available to achieve the funding uplift on the ground, not just in an optimistic Treasury model.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
I am grateful to my constituency neighbour for allowing me to intervene. He will know that my right hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (John Glen), who is concerned about Wilton, has written to the Minister to request a meeting. I did the same at Prime Minister’s questions yesterday. I very much look forward to that meeting—
Dr Murrison
Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the issue is easy to resolve? The conundrum we are in is based on the Treasury assessment that he described, which was over-optimistic through nobody’s particular fault, but we can remedy it simply by allowing some flexibility in the precept. That would deal with the issue facing our wonderful fire and rescue service. I join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to those wonderful people, particularly the volunteers, who freely give their time to keep our constituents safe.
Brian Mathew
I thank the right hon. Member for his comments; in fact, I will go into some details on that now. Members from all parties will recognise that rural fire services face different cost pressures compared with urban ones, and rurality is not adequately addressed in the current or previous funding formulae. We must continue that debate but, in the face of closures this summer, an urgent solution is required to safeguard our community fire services.
If the Government are not prepared to review their central funding, the only options on the table, when the Treasury’s assumptions are proven incorrect, are station closures, or additional precept flexibility for the 2027-28 financial year to address short-term funding pressures through local rather than additional central Government funding. Dorset and Wiltshire’s current precept is below the national average for stand-alone services, and a one-off correction would bridge the funding gap while keeping the precept in line with that of neighbouring services. In the consultation on closures, residents have been asked whether they are willing to pay a little more for their fire and rescue services. I urge the Minister to study their responses and act on them.
I can find no recent precedent for such a large number of fire stations being closed in one year, and with them the loss of so many frontline jobs. Once a station is closed and its site sold, there is very little chance it will be reinstated. The hit to emergency response times and community resilience is essentially irreversible.
For the average household, the fire precept amounts to less than £100 per year or £1.85 per week. For that amount, we receive what is arguably the most important insurance policy any of us can have: a well funded, well staffed and well-trained fire and rescue service, ready to respond when the worst happens. All eight stations are staffed by on-call firefighters—individuals who put their communities first and who are ready to pause their job and family life at a moment’s notice, putting themselves at risk to keep us safe.
To my mind, the question is simple. The Minister can do nothing, and the stations that have served our towns and villages for decades will close, or, by allowing some adjustments and giving the authority the opportunity to raise the funding that the Government say the Dorset and Wiltshire fire service should get via the precept, the stations will remain open, providing the emergency response, civil resilience and capacity that our communities will need in the years to come.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) on securing this important debate, and I thank him and the Minister for giving me permission to speak. I am in danger of repeating many of the points that my hon. Friend made, but they are important points, and this is an important issue.
The proposals from Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service would see the closure of eight on-call fire stations across Dorset and Wiltshire, including the stations at Charmouth and Maiden Newton in my constituency of West Dorset. I recognise that decisions about station closures ultimately sit with fire authorities, not the Minister, but when the pressures driving those decisions stem from central Government funding settlements, it is only right that the Government are held to account.
If approved in the coming weeks, the closures would remove 16% of the service’s fire stations and lead to the loss of 72 firefighters. For many of the villages and towns these stations serve, they are the closest responders, and their loss would change the resilience of emergency coverage across our rural communities.
The proposed closures have understandably caused deep concern among my constituents. I have met the chief fire officer and senior management, representatives of the two firefighters’ unions and the station commanders for both Charmouth and Maiden Newton. I have also received a huge number of emails and letters from residents who are rightly worried about what the changes will mean for their safety and the safety of the many visitors who come to West Dorset each year.
The firefighters who serve our communities do extraordinary work. The stations at Charmouth and Maiden Newton, as well as the six other stations, are staffed by on-call firefighters—people who live and work locally but are ready to leave their jobs and families at the drop of a hat to respond to emergencies. They do so knowing that they may be putting themselves in harm’s way to protect their neighbours. In West Dorset, they are often the first responders to road traffic collisions, particularly on dangerous rural roads such as the A35. During the summer months they respond to wildfires and heath fires, which are becoming more and more frequent as temperatures rise. They also assist during flooding incidents, which our communities have experienced repeatedly in recent years, most recently during Storm Chandra.
Since the merger that created Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service in 2016, the service has had to find more than £15 million in savings and is under real financial pressure. That has already resulted in a 15% reduction in firefighter posts and the removal of second fire engines from five stations. Under the so-called long-term funding settlement offered by this Government, the authority has a revenue budget deficit of £1.2 million in year 1, £1.5 million in year 2 and £1.7 million in year 3. Frankly, I do not think “funding settlement” is the correct phrase.
The Minister will mention the Government’s decision to allow fire authorities to raise the council tax precept by £5 per year, which is said to produce an average annual increase in funding of 4.1%, but, as has been outlined, that does not tell the full story. The central Government revenue support grant for Dorset and Wiltshire is projected to fall from £12.8 million in 2026-27 to £10.3 million by 2028-29—a reduction of nearly 20% in three years. The fair funding model has, to date, removed about £1.8 million a year from the service’s budget. Put simply, the Government expect fire services to make up the shortfall the Government have created through council tax increases.
In theory, council tax makes up 73% of fire service funding, business rates make up 11%, and revenue support grant from central Government makes up only 16%, but the underlying assumptions do not work for our rural areas. Council tax revenue depends heavily on local population growth and housing development. In many rural areas, including Dorset, the tax base is growing far more slowly than Treasury assumptions suggest. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service has already confirmed that its council tax base growth is below the levels assumed in the funding settlement.
At the same time, the service faces rising costs that it cannot control: increases in employer national insurance contributions; higher fuel costs, especially with the current conflict in the middle east; higher energy bills; and rising contract costs. That is further compounded by the fact that the funding model does not properly account for rurality. All this leaves the service in an increasingly vulnerable financial position.
Dr Murrison
I agree with everything the hon. Gentleman has to say. However, does he agree that the only practical way of getting Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service the funds it needs to prevent the closure of the eight stations, including at Mere in my constituency, is to allow for flexibility around the precept? Otherwise, sadly, they will close. The structural issues he has cited of course need to be addressed, but they will not help in respect of the emergency that is upon us.
Edward Morello
I fully accept that an increase in the precept would be one option available to the Government, but I would also like to challenge the Government on the underlying assumptions in Treasury funding models, not least with the forecast population growth and the lack of rurality in many of the funding models across the board. We are talking about fire services, but I could talk to rurality in the funding of Dorset police, Dorset NHS or any number of areas. The fact is that rural Britain is repeatedly underserved when it comes to the Treasury funding model.
The result is that stations like Charmouth are now being considered for closure, with neighbouring stations, such as Lyme Regis, expected to cover larger areas without any additional resources. If local stations close, travel distances will inevitably increase, which means longer response times for fires, road traffic collisions, flooding incidents and other emergencies. Sixty per cent of incidents that crews from the eight at-risk stations attend are outside the station catchment area. In critical, life-threatening situations, small delays will have consequences. That is particularly concerning in West Dorset, where the population increases by 42% during the summer months due to tourism. Our narrow country roads, the wider effects of rurality, seasonal visitor numbers and coastal geography all create travel difficulties that are not accounted for in the formulae. Time and again, it is rural communities that end up paying the price.
A consultation on the proposed closures is under way and, like many, I urge all my constituents to make their voices heard. But the reality is that the service is being pushed towards these decisions by the financial framework that it has to operate within. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service has already lost one fifth of its workforce since 2010. Removing another 16% of stations would push the service even further. I therefore ask the Government to look carefully at whether the current funding settlement for fire and rescue services properly reflects the needs of rural and coastal areas, and whether the current funding is undoing years of underfunding or, in reality, compounding it.
It is not hyperbole to say that, without proper funding, we are putting people’s lives at risk. I beg the Minister and the Treasury to meet Dorset and Wiltshire fire service to review the underlying assumptions and reconsider the funding settlement.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Samantha Dixon)
I thank the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) for raising this important issue and setting out his concerns so clearly. I acknowledge the firefighters who have attended and welcome them to the Gallery. I am mindful that this is an issue of significant concern to many, including those who have travelled here today and those who feel passionately about this subject. He has quite understandably focused on proposals affecting his constituency, and I will address the points he has raised, while noting that there are, as he acknowledges, limits to central Government’s involvement in local decisions.
First, let me be clear: public safety is and always will be the main priority of this Government. I want to place on the record the Government’s deep appreciation for the dedication, professionalism and courage shown every day by firefighters and the support staff who stand behind them. As my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow East (John Grady) pointed out, their work saves lives and provides reassurance to communities across the country, as was demonstrated in the fire near Glasgow Central station on Sunday, which shows how much we depend on the bravery and rapid response of firefighters to safeguard lives and provide reassurance in moments of real danger.
Members will appreciate that decisions on how fire and rescue services are organised, including the number and locations of fire stations, appliance availability and crewing numbers, are not decisions for the Government. I am pleased that hon. Members recognise this and that they are rightly the responsibility of the local fire and rescue authority and its chief fire officer, who are best placed to assess local needs and demands.
All FRAs have a statutory duty to produce a community risk management plan in which they set out the key challenges and risks facing their communities and how they intend to mitigate them. Decisions on fire and rescue resources, including how staff are best deployed and the location of fire stations, are matters for each FRA based on risks identified within local community risk management plans.
Let me turn to funding. After a decade of short-term settlements, 2026-27 marks a significant change, as hon. Members have recognised. It delivers the first multi-year funding agreement for local government, providing councils and FRAs with the stability and certainty required to plan ahead and invest for the long term. Under the settlement, almost £1.95 billion in core spending power will be made available to stand-alone FRAs in England, excluding North Yorkshire and Greater Manchester. That represents an average increase of 4.71% on 2025-26 levels, rising to a total increase of 12.75% by the end of the multi-year settlement period. In addition, since the provisional settlement, an extra £15 million has been secured for fire and rescue services over the multi-year settlement. That ensures a minimum uplift of 3.8% in core spending power in 2026-27 for all stand-alone fire and rescue services, with some benefiting from increases of more than 7%.
Dr Murrison
I welcome the multi-year settlement, and so does the fire and rescue service. However, does the Minister accept that one problem is that the assumptions on which Government support is based—the growth of council tax—cannot be tweaked up or down, because we are looking at a longer settlement period than was previously the case? That is precisely the problem that we face. The solution being offered is precept flexibility, which would keep our fire stations open. In a sense, what we are talking about is an unintended artefact of the multi-year settlement.
Samantha Dixon
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his points. I look forward to discussing them with him further, as I will no doubt be representing the Prime Minister in our meeting. In line with usual practice, and in recognition of the views raised, the Government will continue to keep our methodology under review when calculating the core spending power of local government for future years. I have noted Members’ comments.
The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes mentioned funding pressures. Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue service will have access to £79.5 million in core spending power in 2026-27—a 4.1% increase compared with 2025-26. That strengthens the FRA’s ability to plan, invest and deliver for the communities it serves. Although the Government set the funding framework, decisions on how best to deploy resources to meet core responsibilities remains the responsibility of the FRA, ensuring a locally led response to local risk.
I pay particular tribute to our on-call firefighters, who balance everyday lives, jobs, families and responsibilities with the exceptional commitment of responding to emergencies. Whether they are attending a fire in a rural village or a major incident in a city centre, their readiness and bravery command the respect of the whole House. In many rural areas, on-call firefighters are not just important; they are indispensable. Those communities rely heavily on their presence, their local knowledge and ability to respond rapidly. I firmly believe that the on-call model is invaluable to the communities that it serves. Although the Government recognises the challenges for services in which the on-call model is integral to operations, it can, with innovative and strategic thinking, work and offer real resilience within fire services. With sustained collaboration between Government, fire and rescue services and fire and rescue authorities, there is real opportunity to strengthen and revitalise the on-call workforce as part of a wider workforce strategy that sees on-call staff treated and respected as the professionals that they truly are.
To support that work, the National Fire Chiefs Council has published detailed research into the sustainability of the retained duty system. This work has been shared with FRAs to inform future planning, improvement activity and local workforce strategies. The Government continue to engage closely with the sector on this important issue.
More broadly, the Government remain committed to a reform agenda that supports the sector to evolve, professionalise and thrive. I am encouraged by the work of the ministerial advisory group for fire and rescue reform, which has brought together a wide range of voices to identify good practice and remove barriers to progress. I do, however, recognise that the funding formula as it stands is out of date. We are working on reforming it for the next spending review period.
Operational decisions rightly must remain with local FRAs. I note that the Dorset and Wiltshire fire and rescue authority, in which the hon. Member’s party holds the majority, is consulting on these proposals. The consultation runs until 15 May, so I encourage all affected residents, firefighters and stakeholders to participate. Meanwhile, this Government will continue to support the sector with stable funding, a clear framework for reform—of the role of firefighters and FRAs and of funding—and an unwavering commitment to public safety. We will stand with firefighters as they continue to protect our communities with professionalism and courage. I thank the hon. Member once again for raising these important issues, and I look forward to working with Members across the House to ensure that our fire and rescue services remain resilient, responsive and equipped for the challenges ahead.
Question put and agreed to.
Westminster Hall
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Marriage Regulations
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the potential merits of modernising marriage regulations.
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. The gateway to my constituency, and indeed Scotland, is the historical village of Gretna Green. For centuries, Gretna Green has been shorthand for the potent idea that love cannot be constrained by needless bureaucracy. That really started in 1754, following the implementation of the Marriage Act 1753 in England and Wales. The Act was intended to prevent secret or impulsive marriages by requiring those under 21 to obtain parental consent, and forcing all weddings into the church with public announcements.
However, those strictures did not apply in Scotland, where a couple could legally marry simply by declaring their intention in front of witnesses. That legal difference created an immediate opportunity for young lovers seeking to marry quickly or without the permission of disapproving families. Gretna Green was the first village that these runaway couples reached after crossing the border on the main coaching route to Scotland.
In Scottish custom, a blacksmith was seen as someone who could symbolically forge relationships just as they forged metal. As the law in Scotland allowed almost anyone to conduct a ceremony, Gretna Green’s blacksmith became the wedding officiant, marrying couples over the anvil—an object that symbolised the forging of a new life together.
By the time the law changed in 1856, to require a 21-day residency period in Scotland, the village’s reputation as a romantic destination was already assured, and remains so today. Couples still come to marry in Gretna Green. Indeed, only recently, Bryn and Sandra flew in from Sydney, Australia to marry there, following in the footsteps of Bryn’s grandparents. Not everyone travels as far as from Sydney, but more than 4,000 couples from across the UK choose Gretna Green each year, with up to 60 weddings every Valentine’s day alone. In fact, one in five of all marriages in Scotland takes place in Dumfries and Galloway.
Two adults wishing to marry in the United Kingdom must now wait nearly a month—a full 28-day notice period—simply to formalise their commitment. When we can apply for passports online, secure mortgages and even complete divorces within a matter of days, that legal lag looks like an anachronism, wholly out of sync with technology, norms and modern public expectations.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
The right hon. Gentleman talks about anachronisms. Would he agree that the inequity between humanist marriages being legal in Scotland and not being permitted in England and Wales is an ongoing anachronism that should be addressed?
David Mundell
I agree. The hon. Lady will be aware that many humanists come to Scotland, and indeed to Gretna Green, to get married for that very reason. That issue needs to be addressed in the context of modernising marriage regulations.
Dumfries and Galloway council, one of the three councils in my Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale constituency, has indicated that it could complete all the necessary checks within five days, yet the law mandates a wait that effectively stretches to 29 days in real terms. In the United States, Minnesota and Massachusetts require a similar three to five days for checks, while New York and Las Vegas allow for marriages within minutes or 24 hours. The British overseas territory of Gibraltar requires only 24 hours, and Denmark, sometimes competing with Gretna Green to be the Las Vegas of Europe, requires just five days. In Denmark, a jurisdiction that the Home Secretary seems very keen to promote, the system protects against abuse and fraud while allowing couples to marry within days rather than weeks. Why can the UK not do the same?
This debate is not about weakening safeguards or making marriage easy in a way that invites fraud; it is about asking whether our system reflects the realities of modern life. Under the Immigration Act 2014, the UK Home Office already has the power to extend the standard marriage notice period to 70 days. If the UK Government already have the power to identify, investigate and disrupt sham marriages, why does every couple need to have their wedding delayed?
The public are clear. They want a system that is simpler, fairer and more flexible. A recent YouGov poll found that 88% of UK adults support the ability to fast-track the marriage process. With fewer than half of UK adults now married, we are witnessing an historic shift in the structure of our families. While shifting social ideas play a part, 61% of adults cite the rising cost and complexity of weddings as a key reason for the decision to decline the opportunity.
Inaction also has an economic cost. The UK wedding sector is estimated to be worth £10 billion to £15 billion annually, supporting countless jobs and venues across the UK, as in Gretna Green. Such venues are spread across the breadth of the country, and I am sure Members present have venues in their own constituencies that come to mind. By maintaining a needlessly slow process, more flexible jurisdictions will come to benefit more than Britain from spending on weddings. Many visitors from the United States now come to Scotland to get married, having seen “Highlander”, “Outlander” and other such programmes on international television channels and realised the beauty of the country.
I of course appreciate that the Government in Holyrood and the Scottish Parliament have responsibility for some of these issues in Scotland, and I would also be delighted to see the Scottish Government take forward proposals at the first opportunity, but in the absence of them doing so, the UK Government have the capacity to demonstrate a different way of doing things. I do not wish to pre-empt what the Minister may have to say, but she may reference the Law Commission’s 2022 report, “Celebrating Marriage: A New Weddings Law”, and the announcement in October last year that the UK Government would reform wedding law.
Although the Law Commission’s report was extensive and thoughtful, its focus was largely on where weddings can take place and who can conduct them. It suggested moving towards a system focused on authorised officiants, rather than on licensed buildings, which would allow for more outdoor and home ceremonies—reforms that I wholeheartedly support. The administrative notice period, however, received far less attention in that review. With the Government already having accepted that marriage law needs modernisation, why not tackle the waiting time, too?
To be clear, this is not about deregulating marriage law, but about making it fit for the modern day through digital notice systems and more flexible waiting periods, the recognition of independent celebrants to allow personalised, but legally binding ceremonies—the hon. Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) has already referred to the opportunity for humanist weddings—and simplified documentation that reflects modern administrative capability. One suggestion has been the appointment of a marriage tsar to move forward the aforementioned modernisation. However, I am sure that if it is driven from within Government, it can take place.
Administrative delays are not merely bureaucratic inconveniences; they carry a profound human and financial toll. For many, particularly in our armed forces, these administrative hurdles are not merely inconvenient; they can be fundamentally incompatible with the realities of service life. In recent days, we have all seen service personnel deployed at short notice. That is part of being in the services, as are unpredictable posting cycles that do not align with a rigid, 28-day delay, and the marriage system’s opaque exceptions are difficult to navigate at a time of high stress.
Moreover, with the average UK wedding now costing more than £20,000, delays can lead to the loss of substantial venue deposits and the risk of escalating catering and other fees, which have also risen by about 24% due to inflation. This “cost of worry” creates uncertainty, where heartbreaking last-minute cancellations become a reality for those caught in an antiquated system. These hurdles, and the costs associated with them, effectively put marriage on the back burner for many who would otherwise want to marry.
The history of Gretna Green shows that love cannot wait, love should not wait, and neither should we. I look forward to the Minister’s response and hope that she will agree that the time has come to review the administrative hurdles that stand in the way of love today.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher.
I want to make a very small point. I am very grateful to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) for the points he has raised, to which I would like to add. Following the Council of Europe recognising the Cornish language with part III minority language status, giving it the same status as all other Celtic languages, I am hopeful that the Minister will agree with me that regulations now need to be updated and the Cornish language marriage regulations brought in line with the practices in Wales, for example, so that the entire service can be conducted in the Cornish language, which is not the case at the moment.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I congratulate the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) on securing this debate, which has made me reflect on the hurdles I had to overcome to get married.
I am a Roman Catholic; my husband is Church of England. We got married in the ecumenical chapel of my old university. That meant we had to apply for a special licence, which turned out to be an extraordinary document in calligraphy and with a seal. We had to get a letter from both our dads to confirm that neither of us was already married. We had to get permission from our local parish church and consent from the Catholic Church. It took a very long time to arrange all that paperwork—obviously because of the religious requirement, rather than Government administration.
I am happy to say it was worth the trouble, and my husband and I will be celebrating our silver wedding anniversary next year. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I take this opportunity to send my best wishes to anyone in my Richmond Park constituency or, indeed, across the country who is planning a wedding this year, whether in Gretna Green or not.
The Liberal Democrats firmly believe that couples should be able to celebrate their marriage in the way they want. Changes to marriage regulations would be small, but they would change the lives of so many people who want to demonstrate their love for one another in a manner that reflects their own religion or beliefs. That includes humanist celebrations. The Liberal Democrats made this case during our time in the coalition Government, but it was blocked by the Conservatives, despite 90% of the public supporting the legislation. We will continue to back full legal recognition of humanist marriages, in this Parliament and beyond.
In 2020, the High Court found that the failure to recognise humanist marriages was discriminatory, and in the summer of 2022 the Law Commission recommended modernising marriage law and breaking down unnecessary barriers to weddings for engaged couples. The Law Commission concluded that the law in its current state was out of date, complex and uncertain, yet still the Conservatives failed to act.
I welcome this Government’s intention to modernise our marriage law to recognise humanist weddings, as well as to permit legally binding religious ceremonies in the UK to take place, including Sikh, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu weddings. Many of those weddings involve beautiful ceremonies, joyous moments and ultimately the declaration of love and commitment by couples. Ruling such marriages as unlawful does not represent modern-day Britain, our values or the acceptance and welcoming of other cultures.
The Liberal Democrats firmly support the liberalisation of marriage law through the Government’s proposals, and we have long supported the need for reform. Enabling couples to commit to spending their lives together is a fundamental principle of British culture. Although we term these proposals as modern, the reforms should have been introduced a long time ago. The Government have stated that they will consult on their proposals in early 2026, and I would like clarity on the date the consultation will be opened, considering that we are nearing the end of the first quarter.
The legal recognition of more marriages will provide a boost to our economy, as the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale recognised in his opening speech. Allowing more couples to take part in legally binding ceremonies is expected to add over £100 million to the public purse, while providing a significant boost to the events and weddings business sectors, which are important parts of the hospitality industry in all our constituencies.
The Liberal Democrats are proud to have been instrumental in securing the legalisation of same-sex marriage during the coalition Government, with the then Lib Dem Equalities Minister, Lynne Featherstone, fighting the Conservatives to introduce the legislation. We long campaigned for that change, and the announcement that same-sex marriage would be legally recognised is one of the biggest achievements of the coalition.
Marriage for same-sex couples was a crucial step towards equality, and one that has touched so many lives for the better. The joy of getting to marry the person you love, surrounded by family and friends, is something everyone deserves the chance to experience. Although at the time it was considered a contentious issue, I am delighted that public opinion is now overwhelmingly in favour of same-sex marriage. That is not to underestimate the extent to which homophobia remains an issue in our society. In the year ending March 2025, nearly 116,000 hate crimes were recorded—an increase on the previous year—but recognising same-sex and other marriages has established a footing for social acceptance, and it is a step towards a more tolerant society.
The proposed reform to wedding law will have positive implications for family law. It will ensure that more couples enter marriage with a secure legal foundation, and it will prevent issues from arising where couples assume their religious ceremony is legally binding, only to find that it is not. Issues such as a lack of financial protection causing significant hardship on separation can be a result of non-legally binding ceremonies. The Liberal Democrats believe that modern marriage should be recognised under the law, and therefore that these couples deserve exactly the same rights as any other married couple.
Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I warmly congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell)—who I consider a friend—on securing the debate. I could characterise him as a romantic perhaps, given his decision to focus on this topic, and I know from his early-day motion that he has taken a close interest in these issues.
From the perspective of the justice system, marriage is not simply a social institution, but a legal status that carries significant consequences in areas ranging from inheritance and family law to taxation, immigration and parental responsibility. Because of that, the framework governing marriage rightly sits within the responsibilities of the Ministry of Justice. With that responsibility comes an obligation to ensure not only that the legal framework is workable in practice, but that it continues to uphold the seriousness and integrity of marriage as an institution.
The statutory 28-day notice period, the processes surrounding registration, and the complexity of guidance for couples all deserve periodic scrutiny to ensure they continue to serve their intended purpose. Safeguards are essential, and notice periods allow registrars to verify eligibility, while also helping to prevent sham marriages or coercion, but the experiences of couples and registrars suggest there may be circumstances where greater clarity and flexibility would improve how the law operates in practice. However, any move to modernise the framework must be undertaken with care. Reform should not create a system that treats marriage casually or allows the institution to be diluted. Rather, modernisation should reinforce the seriousness of marriage while ensuring the law functions effectively in practice.
My right hon. Friend drew attention to the perspective of Gretna Green—one of the most historic and recognisable wedding destinations in the United Kingdom—which is in his constituency. For centuries, Gretna Green has occupied a unique place in the story of marriage law in these islands. Following the Marriage Act 1753, couples famously travelled north of the border to marry under Scotland’s more flexible rules. That history has become embedded in the cultural identity of the place and has helped to shape a thriving wedding destination that continues to attract couples from across the UK and beyond. Today, that tradition supports not only the ceremonies themselves, but a wider network of hotels, restaurants and local businesses that rely on the wedding sector, and for which my right hon. Friend is a champion and advocate in all the right ways.
The “Love Shouldn’t Wait” campaign launched by Gretna Green Ltd raises a number of practical questions about whether aspects of the current system create avoidable delays for couples wishing to marry. Although the MOJ must rightly approach such proposals with care, it is appropriate that we listen to the experience of those who work daily with couples navigating the system.
From a justice policy perspective, my right hon. Friend’s EDM raised several points: first, whether the current framework provides sufficiently clear and transparent mechanisms for urgent marriages in exceptional circumstances; secondly, whether the system of guidance and administration should be simplified so that couples and registrars alike can navigate it more easily; and, thirdly, whether the continued development of secure digital processes could streamline elements of the marriage registration system, while preserving safeguards against fraud.
However, in pursuing such reforms, we must be careful that the pendulum does not swing too far in the other direction. It is worth remembering that the question of modernising marriage law is not new; over the past decade, successive Governments have recognised that aspects of the legal framework governing weddings in England and Wales warranted wider review.
Most recently, the Law Commission set out a comprehensive package of recommendations for reforming wedding law in its report published in 2022. Among its key proposals was a shift away from the current system in England and Wales, which largely regulates weddings through the buildings in which they take place, towards a model centred on the officiant conducting the ceremony.
Alongside that longer-term review, the previous Government introduced more limited reforms where there was a clear practical need, such as the changes made during the covid pandemic to allow weddings to carry on. However, Ministers at the time were clear that more fundamental questions about wedding law should be considered comprehensively, rather than through piecemeal change. My right hon. Friend has also suggested the appointment of a marriage tsar; I do not know whether he is suggesting that he might be a candidate for that role, but it is something we should look at.
As a member of the all-party parliamentary humanist group, I wanted to touch on the contribution from the hon. Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins), because I have a lot of sympathy for the point she made. The Conservative party has not reached a settled policy on it at this stage, but I am personally very sympathetic to her suggestion.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale has rightly drawn attention to the experience of communities such as Gretna Green, where the intersection between legal regulation and real-world practice is particularly visible. By listening to those experiences, and by considering the practical reforms highlighted in EDM 2200 and the substantial work already undertaken on wider wedding law reform, Ministers can help to ensure that our marriage laws remain legally sound and practically workable, while continuing to respect and uphold the institution of marriage itself.
I once again thank my right hon. Friend for securing the debate, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s thoughts on the concerns raised.
The Minister for Courts and Legal Services (Sarah Sackman)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. Let me start by reiterating the thanks that others have already extended to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) and by congratulating him on securing this important debate. What a pleasure it is to discuss something like love and marriage, as opposed to some of the slightly darker subjects that often detain us in all matters justice.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the modernisation of weddings and marriage law, as well as the important points the right hon. Gentleman raised about whether the current legal framework keeps pace with modern expectations and the practical realities of couples wishing to marry. Marriage will always be one of the most important institutions in our society, and I know that Members across the House care deeply about it, as do I and many of our constituents.
I start by paying tribute to the unique place that Gretna Green, in the right hon. Gentleman’s constituency, has in the history of weddings in the United Kingdom. When this issue first crossed my desk, my first thought went to “Pride and Prejudice”, which is one of my favourite novels. Gretna Green is the location to which Lydia Bennet and the slightly roguish George Wickham fled to get married out of sight of their parents. There are, of course, plenty of other good reasons why Gretna Green remains a popular choice for wedding ceremonies to this day. It carries a long and rich history, which the right hon. Gentleman described so eloquently. Sitting just over the border between England and Scotland, it was indeed often the first Scottish settlement that couples fleeing England and its stricter wedding laws would reach. Although I am glad it is no longer necessary for couples to brave a trip north of the border to Gretna Green to seek freedom by eloping, its reputation for romance and tradition, as we have heard, persists to this day.
As the right hon. Gentleman acknowledged, the responsibility for weddings law in Scotland sits with the Scottish Government. As such, I cannot comment on specific aspects, but I recognise that the issues he raised about how the different systems operate across the United Kingdom, and the opportunity that this Government have to modernise weddings law, are part of a conversation that we in this House will want to have.
Let us turn to what the Government are doing to reform weddings law in England and Wales. As the right hon. Gentleman referenced, last year the Government announced the biggest overhaul of weddings law in England and Wales since the 19th century. Our planned reforms build on the comprehensive and important work of the Law Commission and its 2022 report on weddings law. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that that report is both extensive and thoughtful.
The Government made that announcement because marriage is one of our most important institutions. At its best, it is a celebration of love, a symbol of enduring partnership and a deep personal commitment between two people. For those choosing to marry, it is a significant and meaningful decision. It is therefore important that the legal framework governing weddings is clear and modern and works well for those who rely on it.
Our reforms focus on two key areas ripe for change. First, the law will move away from regulating the building in which a wedding takes place, and instead focus on the officiant responsible for conducting the ceremony. That will make it easier for people to get married in a variety of settings, giving them flexibility and choice. Secondly, we will introduce a single set of rules governing all weddings, with the exception of retaining Anglican preliminaries. That will enable many more couples to have ceremonies that reflect their values and beliefs.
At the centre of the reforms is the Government’s commitment to protect the dignity and integrity of weddings as we create a level playing field for all groups. We will give couples more choice and freedom over how they marry, but ceremonies must always reflect the significant lifelong commitment that marriage represents.
To progress those reforms, and to answer the question from the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), the Government will publish a consultation early this year. I appreciate that it is already March, and as one knows, “early this year” can be a flexible concept in this place, but our determination remains to get on with that consultation, building on the Law Commission’s report. That report was comprehensive, and the Government’s consultation will therefore focus on more detailed aspects of reform, including the dignity and suitability of locations and ceremonies, and the role of independent officiants.
I want to address the point made by the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale about the necessity of notice periods. As he said, under the current law of England and Wales, once a couple have given notice of their intention to marry, they must generally wait 28 days before they are issued their marriage schedule. He pointed to Gibraltar as an example of a place where that process is much quicker—having strong connections to Gibraltar, I know that is why it is an attractive jurisdiction, not just for John and Yoko, but for many others since.
The notice period exists to ensure that any legal impediment to the marriage, or any other concerns about it, can be raised and dealt with before the marriage is given approval to go ahead. The Law Commission considered the preliminaries process in detail in its report and emphasised the importance of maintaining a robust notice system, given the protections that it offers for vulnerable people and against forced and sham marriages. That is important.
While recommending that the process be modernised, including by enabling couples to give notice online, the commission did not propose shortening the existing 28-day notice period. However, it noted that the process could be made easier for couples, and recommended providing an online system for giving notice, as the right hon. Gentleman also suggested. The Government are carefully considering our approach to preliminaries and the process for giving notice. As part of that work, I will ensure that the policy team engages with international jurisdictions, including overseas territories such as the ones the right hon. Gentleman mentioned.
The case for reform in this area is compelling. It will result in a great many benefits. The right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale noted that the current law means that weddings, while good for the local economy, can become very costly for both couples and businesses. The Government agree that weddings can be far too expensive, so our reforms will make it more affordable for couples to get married. A new system to regulate officiants should make many lower-cost options much more accessible. Families will no longer need to fund two weddings—one that is legally binding, and one that is not but reflects their culture and beliefs.
Reforms will also see a significant boost to the economy, with the Law Commission estimating that they could lead to a 3% increase in weddings in England. Wouldn’t that be a fine thing? There are also a huge number of social benefits. We will make it easier for religious groups to marry in accordance with their beliefs, improving equality and preventing vulnerable individuals, particularly women, from unknowingly having a wedding without legal protections.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) and the hon. Member for Richmond Park for raising the issue of humanist marriage. They will know that the Government committed to allow non-religious belief organisations, such as humanists, to conduct legally binding weddings, representing another huge step forward to ensure that marriage law reflects the make-up of modern Britain. I look forward to seeing those plans come forward. I will offer to write to my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), who is no longer here, on how the Cornish language operates within our marriage system.
Suffice it to say that reform is coming and the consultation is coming. We need a broader national conversation for the comprehensive reform that is required. Something as important as modernising our wedding laws for the first time in a very long time needs to be undertaken in a thoughtful, considered and comprehensive way. I look forward to seeing many of the reforms and the modern step change that will allow more couples to enjoy this precious thing long into the future.
David Mundell
I thank all participants for their engagement in this debate. I particularly welcome the Minister’s remarks and the tone of those remarks. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan) said, it is important to reflect on the experience of the people carrying out weddings at this time, and few people are more experienced than those in Gretna Green.
I am glad that the Minister said she would look at other jurisdictions. As I said in my remarks, our Home Secretary has highlighted Denmark as a country with robust rules and regulations on immigration and illegal immigration, yet Denmark is able to consider whether a marriage is a sham or one of true commitment within five days. It is important to look at the systems that allow that to happen. The length of time is not, in itself, necessarily a way of ensuring an outcome if the systems behind it cannot detect the issues that we are trying to detect by creating a waiting period.
We also touched on the fact that people should not be put off getting married by the bureaucracy or cost. That is at the heart of this. A couple’s commitment to each other and wish to get married should prevail, and bureaucracy and cost should not be impediments.
On the digital issues, it should not be easier to complete divorce proceedings than to complete the forms required for marriage. The digitalisation of many of these processes should certainly be a priority. Having served in government myself, I am familiar with the time periods involved, and I know that “early in the year” might well progress to September—we always regarded the winter as going through to March or April. However, I hope that the proposals will be introduced soon, and that this discussion, debate and dialogue can continue.
As I said in opening, bureaucracy should not be an impediment to love. We should encourage people who want to get married to do so in the way they wish, while protecting the integrity of marriage. I thank all those who have contributed to the debate, and I look forward to its continuation.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the potential merits of modernising marriage regulations.
Carnivals
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Government support for carnivals.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for scheduling this important debate.
Carnivals have been celebrated in Somerset for over 400 years and continue to be wonderful celebrations that are of economic, social and cultural importance to the country. They are part of the fabric of so many communities: it is estimated that across the country, 220 traditional English carnivals still take place each year. They are often aligned with saints’ days or events in the agricultural calendar, which reflects their origin as part of England’s cultural life. Across our nation, carnivals promote cultural inclusivity and multiculturalism, as can be seen at the Notting Hill carnival, which welcomes over 1 million spectators annually.
Last Friday, I was pleased to bring local carnival club members, committee members and stakeholders together at a roundtable event in Glastonbury. It was a pleasure to meet so many dedicated volunteers who work tirelessly to make Somerset’s illuminated carnivals so special. I am grateful to everyone who took the time to share their experiences, concerns and hopes for the future. Carnival is their passion, and it is their deep commitment to it that keeps the much-loved tradition alive. The number of hours that each club and each committee puts into building and maintaining their carts and organising each carnival is simply astounding. Mini Sheppard, a member of the Mendip Vale carnival club, spends six nights a week committed to assisting local carnival clubs, while building and maintaining carts. That highlights the level of commitment that club and committee members give to carnival, as do so many others. For most people involved in carnival, this dedication spans decades; for some, it is a lifetime.
In Somerset, the tradition of carnival originates from Guy Fawkes’s foiled Catholic gunpowder plot of 1605. From those roots, carnivals continue to be an integral part of Somerset’s cultural identity. West country carnivals are unique in being illuminated night-time winter events organised solely by local volunteers. Nigel Clarke from Wells City carnival committee told me that
“it is our love for this tradition that binds the whole community together.”
Illuminated carnival parades occur in more than 30 towns across Somerset between August and November. The most famous are the magnificent seven of the Somerset county Guy Fawkes circuit. This fantastic circuit starts in Bridgwater and concludes with Glastonbury carnival, which will be held this year on 21 November. Glastonbury carnival celebrations can be dated back to at least the mid-19th century. Records show that in the 1840s, bonfires and a carnival were organised by the “bonfire boys”. A turning point in the attitude to Glastonbury’s carnival celebrations came in 1920, when the Chilkwell Guy Fawkes carnival committee was formed.
Other carnivals in my constituency are Wincanton and Castle Cary, which are both part of the Wessex grand prix circuit. The circuit was the brainchild of Keith Berry of Frome carnival association and Gordon Stockman of Castle Cary carnival society, and I am pleased to say that this year it celebrates its 41st year.
Given illuminated carnivals’ unique place in British history, they must feature on the UK’s inventory of living heritage. It is incumbent on the Government to ensure that they remain a living part of our heritage and are not allowed to disappear from Somerset’s streets.
Not only are carnivals a cherished, integral part of Somerset’s cultural identity, they are economically significant to our region. Across the south-west, culture plays an important role in the regional economy. It is estimated to be worth over £1 billion annually, with Somerset’s carnival season generating over £40 million every year. The events provide a major boost to local businesses, with carnivals generating a large increase in footfall that supports the hospitality, catering, retail, leisure and entertainment sectors. Hazel DeGregorio, the chairperson of Glastonbury Chilkwell carnival, told me that more than 400,000 spectators attended the seven Somerset county carnivals in 2025, with more than 100,000 visitors gathering in Glastonbury for the day of the Chilkwell carnival. I can attest to that as I was there, and it was the most wonderful procession.
The magnificent seven of the Somerset county Guy Fawkes circuit contribute more than £4 million each year to Somerset’s economy. The tourism sector is huge for the west country’s economy, and illuminated carnivals help to sustain that economic activity during the winter months, bringing visitors and spending into rural communities during the quieter tourist off-season.
The benefits are not only economic, but charitable. Since 1980, more than £2 million has been raised through street collections at the seven Somerset carnivals, with much of that money supporting local charities and community groups. Behind every carnival are the clubs and committees that work tirelessly all year round, fundraising, building carts and organising processions, while feeding back into the local economy at every step. When we talk about Somerset’s illuminated carnivals, we are not only talking about spectacle, culture and tradition. We are also talking about jobs, businesses, tourism, charity and community investment.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I do not know whether you have had the opportunity to visit any of the Somerset carnivals, but they are spectacular and huge. One of the magnificent seven is, of course, Wells, and the second in my patch is Shepton Mallet. As my hon. Friend was saying, they not only contribute to cultural life but have an absolutely huge number of volunteers. They work on making carnival carts all year round, engaging young people in the activity. It is fantastic that so many young people—literally hundreds and hundreds—get involved in building the carts. They really are a spectacle, and I invite you to come down to Somerset to have a look. You will not see anything else like it anywhere else in the country.
Sarah Dyke
I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution—it was not really a question. I wholeheartedly endorse her offer of a visit to carnival in Somerset; it is a spectacular sight, as she rightly points out. I will come on to her point about the importance of young people continuing to be a part of the tradition, and about the skills that they can learn by getting involved in carnival.
Despite the economic significance of carnivals to Somerset and the wider south-west, carnival clubs and organising committees face rising costs that threaten their long-term sustainability. The cost of participation has increased significantly: it now costs more than £30,000 to put one single illuminated cart on the road during a procession. The costs include materials, fuel—another significant cost that will increase this year, as we know—tractor and generator hire, insurance and health and safety compliance. All those costs have risen and continue to rise.
Historically, carnival clubs have sustained themselves through a combination of membership fees, local fundraising and sponsorship from local businesses, but with small businesses navigating a challenging fiscal landscape, many simply cannot afford to sponsor local clubs, no matter how much they value them. Given those challenges, I would welcome it if the Minister outlined how the Government plan to safeguard the viability of Somerset’s illuminated carnivals, and whether they recognise the financial damage that losing them would inflict on our regional economy.
Carnival committees also face increases in the cost of insurance, licences, safety infrastructure and prize money. Paul Burch, the entries secretary and lead organiser of Castle Cary and Ansford carnival society, told me that the cost of organising and running its carnival is likely to rise from £9,000 in 2022 to more than £13,000 this year. The carnival in Wincanton, in the east of my constituency, was revived by John Sansom in 1977, but sadly had to stop in 2009 for six years because of a number of financial restrictions. Thankfully, a local committee was formed in 2015 to bring back that much-loved carnival.
Volunteers are key to running successful carnivals, but with fewer volunteers available, some carnival committees, such as Castle Cary’s, are now forced to pay professional marshalling costs to assist with manning the road closures. For smaller carnival committees, the costs are even more crippling. South Somerset carnival park committee’s costs, which cover insurance, first aid, radio hire, barriers and road closures, now exceed £6,000 and are rising. These growing costs place enormous pressure on those volunteers and committees.
A key reason why carnival committees are struggling is the sharp decline in money raised through street collections. For generations, collections taken along the carnival routes would help to cover the cost of events, with a significant remainder donated to local charities. Reg Cohen, president of Glastonbury Chilkwell carnival, tells me that collections have been falling year on year, with the coins and notes that once filled collection buckets becoming far less common in an increasingly cashless society.
Those who went to carnivals years ago will remember throwing coins at a cart as it was going by. As we go out with less and less cash in our pockets, that happens less and less. Carnival committees in Somerset have attempted to adapt by introducing QR codes and digital donations, but in many of Somerset’s rural towns, unreliable mobile signals make that almost impossible. It is also very difficult logistically, because spectators simply do not want to be doing all that while they are at a carnival procession; they want to be watching the amazing illuminated carts go by.
Tessa Munt
My hon. Friend is making a brilliant speech. I thank her and my friend the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall, because it is a really important issue. I have been a carnival collector for years. I carry two buckets. In years gone past, it was almost impossible to carry them because they were so heavy with coins. Everyone used to save their pennies, tuppences and fivepence and tenpence pieces, but now there is very little of that money saved across a year. First, that is because things are tight: it is hard to live, so people need every penny that they can get. Secondly, as my hon. Friend mentioned, there is a lack of wi-fi. In fact, in parts of Shepton Mallet and particularly in the city of Wells—
Carolyn Harris (in the Chair)
Order. May I ask the hon. Member to come to her question?
Tessa Munt
Almost the whole of the way east of Wells is without any wi-fi, even for those who live there. That makes things incredibly difficult. Does my hon. Friend agree?
Sarah Dyke
I certainly do agree, and I thank my hon. Friend for her question this time. She makes a very good point: the income that was brought in buckets and thrown on the carts once sustained carnivals. Now, it does not go far enough to cover the cost of running them, especially with all the additional associated costs.
That concern has led to leading club and committee members in my constituency, including John Dando of Glastonbury carnival committee, Sue and Gordon Stockman of Cary Comedians carnival club and Dr Andrew Tallon of Mendip Vale carnival club, founding the Carnivals in Somerset Promotion Project to protect this unique tradition and prevent it from disappearing, which could happen unless urgent efforts are made to widen participation and increase support. I thank them for founding that brilliant project to keep our brilliant carnivals alive.
I would like to highlight not only what carnival clubs bring to Somerset’s culture and economy, but the opportunities they bring to members. At my roundtable, people told me about the vital practical, teamworking and social skills they gained, along with skills in engineering, electrical, carpentry, costume design, event organisation, publicity and accounting, to name but a few opportunities on offer within the carnival environment. Those are all vital, hands-on skills that can translate directly into future careers for younger members. That is particularly important in rural areas such as Somerset, where opportunities for practical learning and apprenticeships have diminished. For young people for whom the traditional education system just is not suitable, carnivals provide an outlet to develop skills, learn from experienced volunteers and contribute to their community.
In Somerset, 7% of 16 to 18-year-olds are not in education, employment or training, which is above the national average. Sally Taylor from Wick carnival club in Glastonbury stressed the role that clubs play in helping young people with SEND to gain skills and opportunities, but for that to continue, we must make sure that carnival clubs can access safe and secure premises from which they can operate. Kym Tomms from South Somerset Carnival Park noted that two clubs on the south Somerset circuit face closure, as they do not have adequate physical space to run their clubs. One currently has outdoor storage space only, while the other faces the expiry of its shed lease next year. Following more than a decade of negotiations, planning permission has finally been granted for South Somerset Carnival Park to build a new storage shed on the Dillington estate for four carnival clubs. These facilities are not simply workshops; they are community and educational hubs. Although planning permission has been secured, the clubs must now raise the funds to construct the sheds—a process that organisers say could take years and obviously adds financial pressure.
Carnival clubs across the region are facing umpteen barriers when seeking permission for the industrial-sized units needed to build their carts. We need a planning system that supports local enterprise and recognises when development will bring benefit to communities. Supporting carnivals and carnival clubs is an investment in transferable skills, strengthening communities and providing opportunities for young people.
Health and safety is absolutely paramount for carnival clubs and carnival committees. Since the late 1990s, organisers have rightly seen increased regulations designed to protect participants, spectators and volunteers. Since the covid-19 pandemic, sadly, Somerset council has not held any safety advisory group meetings prior to carnival season that include all the relevant stakeholders. Avon and Somerset police operational planning specialist Andy Newland told me that reimplementing this advisory group is key to enable these important discussions.
Due to the crisis in local authority funding, Somerset council has been forced to move to a risk assessment approach. That is why I am calling for councils to be subject to a statutory requirement to hold safety advisory group meetings with all relevant stakeholders ahead of carnival. With support from central Government for local cultural events, we can make sure that our carnivals remain safe and well-organised celebrations for years to come.
In the 1990s, Avon and Somerset police introduced a vehicle special order specifying the height, weight and length of a cart, known as “the box”. Diane from Harlequin carnival club told me that the approach has levelled the playing field for clubs in competition, as they are all building to the same dimensions, while also seeking to improve public safety. That is a good thing, but the restrictions have diminished the creativity and flexibility that carnival clubs rely on when designing the carts and the fabulously themed productions. For example, if a performer’s arm movement goes too far outside the box, that is a breach of the safety restrictions that have been imposed. Although I understand why the regulations on the box are in place while the cart is being transported along the highways outside of a procession, it is really important that we are able to flex the regulations to make sure that, while the carnival is in procession, it is as spectacular as possible.
To achieve the right balance between safety and expression, I implore the Minister to bring together the Vehicle Certification Agency and carnival clubs and committees in Somerset, so that they can voice their concerns. The clubs and committees are not opposed to the regulations and support sensible restrictions—they themselves called for stronger safety regulations to professionalise carnivals in the late 1990s—but they must be fair and developed in co-ordination with those looking to keep this tradition alive.
Carnivals are a wonderful example of community cohesion, brought to fruition by the hard work and commitment of local volunteers. They bring people together across communities, as they have for hundreds of years, and we must make sure that they continue to do so in the future. Put simply, carnival is part of Somerset’s DNA, so I hope that we can secure its long-term future.
Carolyn Harris (in the Chair)
I call the co-sponsor of the debate, Dan Aldridge.
Dan Aldridge (Weston-super-Mare) (Lab)
Thank you, Mrs Harris; it is an honour to serve under your chairship.
I am grateful to the hon. Members for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) and for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt), whose passion for Somerset carnivals and communities I share, for their hard work in securing this debate. I am also grateful to see the Minister in her place. It was a pleasure to welcome her to Weston-super-Mare last year, so that she could launch her appointment as tourism Minister at the Grand Pier. It really mattered and meant a lot to my constituents that she chose my town, which is long overdue serious Government attention and investment. I thank her for that. It speaks to my values, which I believe this Government also hold dear, and to the reason that I fought to represent the town I love back in 2024.
We believe in these communities because we are them, and we need them to succeed. In this job, when we do something important, it can be all too easy to whizz by and think, “Right, what next?” but the debate on this topic matters. No Member of Parliament has previously considered Weston carnival as worthy of note, but an event so impressive and integral to my town’s identity and Somerset’s rich heritage deserves to be recognised, so I am proud to be the first Member of Parliament to talk about Weston carnival in this place.
I have thought a lot about the importance to my family of carnival and all the memories it has given us over the years. One annual tradition is for my mother to say that she is, “not going in this weather”, only to rally at the last minute with a pint of Thatcher’s—well done, Mum. Another is trying to find my sisters, nephews and niece, who insist on setting up camp at one end of town despite knowing that I like the other end of town, and getting across town is a bit of a battle. I am always grateful that my brother lives in town, so I can use his loo—and sometimes dry off—as the parade goes past. While my family try to find each other, we always end up finding and hugging friends, some of whom we see only at carnival because we have busy lives and it is difficult, so that is really important to us. The shops, bars and pubs also stay open to share these experiences with customers and friends.
Having thought it through, I find carnival has been there for some of the biggest moments of my life: as a boost and a distraction during some really sad family bereavements, as something to do when I had no money—that was the case for a few years—and as the background to some of the biggest decisions of my life, not least when a good friend floated the idea that I might want to be Weston’s MP, although that is a story to dissect at a later date. That is just some of the history I share with the carnival; the number of such stories across my town would be incalculable.
Carnival speaks to something fundamental in us all: the need for not only community, but light and joy in the cold winter months. The electric lights and loud music of the carts may be modern, but the spirit of carnival is rooted in something instinctive, human and ancient, just like our historic county. It is about not only resilience and community but defiance and rebellion, allowing us to shake off normality, let loose and extend the season that starts with Halloween and trick-or-treating. Weston carnival is also part of the run-up to Christmas, which I think is why I love it so much. When the Christmas carts come by, I will be singing and dancing to Mariah Carey’s “All I Want for Christmas Is You”. That tradition will live for evermore.
The relationship every person has with carnival is both personal, and shared across their community. That is part of what makes carnival special: it is for everybody, and everyone has their own memories, stories and traditions. It also maintains a deeply local feel, even though it would not look out of place in a Disney or Universal Studios production. When friends visit for carnival, they are blown away. They cannot believe that it is not as globally renowned as carnivals in Rio and Venice. Some people might sneer at that, but they should come and see it before they judge.
Interestingly, however, our best-kept local secret has started to get out. People have started to notice it on Instagram and TikTok. Millions across the world are starting to watch it, and the insights about where people are logging in from show that it sometimes correlates to where other carnivals are. People are interested in what is happening, and I really hope that that translates into them coming and visiting.
I will play favourites when it comes to Weston carnival, as I expect my colleagues will about their carnivals. We all genuinely believe that ours is the best, because place and community matter far more than some might think or believe. In a world of increasing disconnection, carnival is a beautiful, bright, singing, dancing advert for the power of human connection. We put it at risk at our peril. None the less, it is fair to say that to love my carnival is to love them all, because they are an interconnected ecosystem. They all depend on each other, and on a network of thousands of volunteers and families with skills and passion passed down through generations. They maintain, innovate and deliver jaw-dropping, heart-pumping “wow” factor year on year.
For children, going to carnival with their parents is a thing of wonder. It is the most amazing thing to watch young children with their families have these bright eyes and be so in awe of it. It is beautiful, but it is also fun to go with friends for the first time as a teenager—that is a rite of passage. Families stand side by side on the route, parents with bags of snacks and children with light-up toys that are immediately regretted as soon as they get in the car to go home. Every square inch of pavement in Weston is taken up by people who love our carnival, who love the town and who love each other. Those moments stay with you, and they speak to the deep sense of belonging that carnival creates and sustains.
I will talk briefly about the practical importance of carnival for our community. From young children to great-grandparents, people learn from each other, teaching and gaining practical experience in costume design, choreography and theatrical make-up. It is also a huge engineering feat. I really love that Weston college is starting to tap into that and see it as a strategic piece of infrastructure in the town, giving students practical experience in electrical engineering, metalwork, carpentry and construction. Those are exactly the skills that our future economy needs, and they are forged in coastal and rural towns that have been overlooked too often and for too long.
Many of us who represent seaside towns argue for money and strategies to help develop skills, attract investment and build year-round economies. In Weston-super-Mare and across Somerset, we already have a powerful part of the answer—not holding out a begging bowl, but saying, “We want to do this in partnership.” Despite our carnival still flying somewhat under the national radar, it draws more than 400,000 visitors from a worldwide audience, adding to the thousands of residents who turn out loyally year in, year out, bringing vital footfall at a time when coastal businesses need it the most.
Weston carnival is not simply a local spectacle; it has national and international significance as one of the largest illuminated processions in Europe. The thing I find most special about it is that it is built not by companies and corporate giants but by local people, who give their time and talent freely. Young people see their work light up the night for the first time and see the real, tangible impact of hard graft. Ties are built and strengthened across generations by thousands of hours of voluntary effort, building something shared that the whole town, county and country can be proud of.
Brilliant charities participate and raise funds, local businesses sponsor the carnival and dedicated volunteers, including a number of my friends, stay way past the event to clear up the litter when everyone has gone home. As a plea to everybody: make sure you clear up your litter and dispose of it appropriately; do not leave it for volunteers to pick up. But for those volunteers, no sooner has the year’s carnival finished than they are preparing for the next one. That hard work goes on year in, year out and year round. I thank them; they are seen, and they are appreciated.
Carnival is the largest annual event in Weston-super-Mare and a major regional mass participation event. For an event that receives no external funding support, built and run entirely by volunteers and organised by the Weston carnival committee, it is a living, breathing testament to the human spirit and the strength of community. Last year alone, Weston carnival volunteers raised more than £21,000 for local charities and helped to foster a powerful sense of civic pride.
Yet there remains a clear gap between what carnival towns contribute and the support they receive. The UK’s creative industries generate more than £100 billion a year—indeed, they are one of the eight critical sectors in the industrial strategy—yet in Weston that creative power is sustained almost entirely by volunteers, who face rising safety, insurance and infrastructure costs. There is limited access to the funding frameworks available to other cultural institutions, and often a lack of skills and knowledge about how to access them.
If we are serious about growth that is felt across all our communities, investment cannot be confined to summer tourism and hospitality. We must back the wonderful things, such as carnival, that already exist. We must play to our strengths. If we do, coastal economies and towns such as mine can grow sustainably and thrive for the next generation. Those towns matter. It is up to all of us in this place who represent towns to use our voices effectively and collectively to build the case for a better settlement that looks to our unique strengths and does not simply see us as subsidiaries of cities.
Carnival is heritage and soul. It is our unique town culture writ large. It is skills and business, it is community support—and it is real life. It is proof that towns such as Weston are primed to unlock the full creative and economic potential that all of us who are rooted there see in bucketloads. We just need the right engagement and support. Let us back the creators and community champions who step up and do the work to build the community they want to see. I urge my colleagues, the Minister, the Government, the House and the country to see the Weston and Somerset carnivals, and towns such as mine, in those terms.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) and my hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) for securing this debate on carnivals and for the fantastic speeches that have already been made.
In Luton South and South Bedfordshire there is a long history of processions to mark important events, celebrations and protests, bringing communities together. In Luton they date back as far as the 1400s, when guild feasts were a common feature of local culture. In the South Bedfordshire part of my constituency, many of the villages still participate in the traditional May fairs, which date back to medieval times and mark the beginning of spring. I have been delighted to attend community events in Studham and Kensworth, which are full of fun, with schoolchildren dancing around the traditional maypole, music, community spirit and just good times.
In Luton, carnival goes back a long way, but it is slightly different. In May 1976, we held the first Luton carnival as we know it, to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Luton becoming a borough. To give away a little secret, I was there as a very small child, with my mum and the other members of the Luton Labour women’s council, who hosted one of the stalls in the street fair. From that small beginning, the carnival has quickly become a significant annual celebration, showcasing the rich mix of cultures that call Luton home. It particularly spotlights the influence and impact of our Luton Caribbean community, many of whom came to the UK as part of the Windrush generation and found their home in Luton, as well as the cultural influence of our African diaspora. Growing up, carnival was an institution, the classic scene that all hon. Members can imagine: up the side streets, stacks of speakers, loud music and everyone having a good time, getting food on one corner and seeing the costumes of the parade on the other.
In 2012, Luton International Carnival was officially recognised as the biggest one-day carnival in the UK. That legacy remains, with the event still one of the biggest annual events of the calendar—a true representation of unity, music and culture that embodies the spirit of our Luton community. I am proud to have the UK Centre for Carnival Arts, a registered charity and Arts Council national portfolio organisation, in my constituency. It is dedicated to promoting excellence in carnival arts, championing the work of carnival groups across the UK and connecting, inspiring and strengthening the carnival arts sector.
Our carnival is a symbol of everything that makes our town special, celebrating our diverse heritage, our energy and, importantly, our togetherness, making us one town full of many voices. There is no greater evidence for that than the wide-ranging list of participants who join the celebrations alongside our Caribbean groups such as the St Vincent and the Grenadines: the Luton branch of the Association of Ukrainians in Great Britain, Luton Roma Trust, Luton Irish Forum, Luton Keralites Association, United Nations Associations—Luton, Luton Malayali Muslim Association and Purbachal—The Eastern Sky, to name just a few.
This year, our carnival is even more significant, as we celebrate the 50th annual Luton International Carnival on Sunday 24 May, which of course coincides with Luton’s 150th anniversary year as a borough. To mark this occasion, this year’s theme is “gold”—of course it is—with participants showcasing their creativity by celebrating bold and imaginative designs inspired by gold. The procession will travel from Luton town centre down to Wardown Park, which was the original and traditional location for much of the carnival’s history.
The impact of the carnival and what it symbolises have been passed from generation to generation in our town. Last June, I was delighted to host the brother and sister duo of Luton filmmakers, Niya and Jadean, in Parliament for a screening of their film, “Beyond The Rush”. The film, developed in collaboration with the British Film Institute documentary society, explored the vital impact of the Caribbean community on our economy, nightlife and cultural scene in Luton, from the Windrush generation to the present day, including key cultural events such as Luton International Carnival. It was great to bring young, local talent from Luton to display this brilliant piece of work in Westminster, featuring some fantastic members of our Luton Caribbean community, and to highlight the enduring legacy of Luton’s carnival in our local community.
As has already been said in this debate, carnivals are more than just a great day of cultural and creative fun; they have economic, social, educational and community cohesion benefits. I look forward to joining people from across Luton at this year’s 50th celebration carnival, and I am sure this carnival will be even more epic than last year’s.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris, and it has been a real pleasure to hear about the different carnivals today; I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) and the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) for that. I am sure everyone here, and everyone listening, has taken note of all the carnivals that we have to visit this year—and, of course, that everyone will remember to clean up their litter afterwards.
Carnivals are quite special to me, Mrs Harris, but not for the reason you might expect. In my last year at Durham University, the first house party that my flatmates and I had was carnival-themed, and henceforth we were known as “House Carnival”. The five other girls that I lived with got me through a dissertation, last-year exams and heartbreak, and we have been best friends for life. Almost 20 years later—that sounds far too long; I do not want to believe it!—we are still close friends who gather for the weekend, even from across the UK. But I digress—I may come back to that.
Carnivals are also special to the people of Harpenden and Berkhamsted—and, as we have heard, to people all across the country. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton, and from across the Chamber today, about the celebration of multiculturalism, the carnival clubs, and the volunteers who dedicate hours of their lives to them and that history that is so special. I loved what she said about not just the importance of a living heritage and the stories that it tells of our past, our present and our future, but the opportunities and challenges; there is the wonder of carnival, but also the practicality around it—the skills and what we learn.
The hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare shared beautiful stories of those celebrated family memories—that light and joy. I loved hearing him talk about shaking off normality; I think we all need a little bit more of that. He also reminded us that carnivals bring people together not only locally but globally, and of that idea of a rite of passage—that, actually, it is not just being there, but being present, because either we have taken part or someone we know has—and how special that is.
The hon. Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) is not far away from my patch. Given the history and the fantastic multiculturalism that she mentioned, especially with the Caribbean and Ukrainian communities who are integral to that, means that I have noted down the 50th Luton International Carnival for this year.
In Harpenden and Berkhamsted, we have our Tring summer carnival, organised by Tring Together, where people are sure to be offered some award-winning beers from Tring Brewery, or Puddingstone Distillery’s Campfire Gin—I have a little bit of that in my cupboard. They can hear from Tring Music Partnership, Tring school’s swing band and Tring’s glee club, see the Tring Youth Theatre Project and Tring Shotokan karate club, and have input from the youth town council in Tring.
I thank Tring Together, the many dedicated volunteers across this country, and stalwarts such as Vivianne Child. Tring Together works with the Tring Team Parish and the Tring town council, but it is involved in much more than just the carnival—the Tring Business Mart, the Spring Fayre, Tring cinema, Group Action and the Christmas festival. In Tring, we also have the Apple Parade, led by Mr and Mrs Green and supported by Sustainable Tring. That is something to celebrate. This weekend—sadly, I cannot make it—we have the Tring Spring FEASTival. In Harpenden, we have the summer carnival, the Christmas carnival, and all the other joyous occasions that bring the town together. As has been mentioned today, these events also raise money for local charities and support so much of our community.
In Berkhamsted, we may not have a carnival by name, but we have BerkoFest. BerkoFest was where I first met John from Herts Welcome Refugees, who was in Parliament just yesterday—it brings so many of us together. It is also where I heard the world-class violinist Nikita Vikhorova from Odessa in Ukraine, just a few months after we lamented Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the war that, sadly, still continues.
We also have the festival of light with Berkhamsted town council, bringing joy and festivities and filling the 800-year-old St Peter’s church with candles for a magical evening. In Aldbury, we have the May fair, a wonderful summer day with beautiful colours and the “May Queen”. It is just so special. All those traditions represent, as I said and as has been mentioned, the history, the present and tomorrow.
On behalf of other hon. Members, I will mention Somerset, where the carnival tradition stretches back hundreds of years and is one of the most distinctive and cherished cultural traditions in the south-west. It is important to note for the record that Somerset carnival, which runs across four circuits and draws around 150,000 people each year, is a carnival of carts, not floats—I believe that has been mentioned, and that it is a small but important distinction.
The modern carnival raises vital funds, and the circuit passes through Shepton Mallet, Glastonbury, Bridgwater, Burnham-on-Sea and Midsomer Norton. My hon. Friend the Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), who could not be here today, tells me that the year’s standout achievement went to the Huckyduck carnival club, which won the overall tableau category with its cart “Scarecrow Partea”, achieving maximum points at all seven carnivals on the circuit—a remarkable achievement and testament to the dedication and craft involved.
This is a timely debate, however, because that tradition faces a real challenge. It is largely kept alive by the older generation, with their concerted effort and their knowledge, skill and passion, which are so vital but risk being lost. My question to the Minister, which I think has been asked already, is, “What more can be done through arts funding, heritage programmes and community support to help to pass this tradition to the next generation before it is too late?” Each of these town and regional carnivals reflects its own characteristics and community.
Carnivals bring together people of all ages and backgrounds. Just like “House Carnival”, which brought me joy, comfort and community and helped to bring out the best in me, carnivals across this country do the same for communities, and we must do what we can to support them. I hope that today has inspired many more to get involved and to visit their carnival, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I thank my Somerset neighbour, the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke), for opening this debate and describing how important carnivals are to Somerset’s culture, life and economy. My neighbour in north Somerset, the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge), made an excellent contribution, highlighting how important carnival is to our communities across Somerset. I also thank the hon. Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) for reminding us that there are thriving carnivals outside Somerset as well.
I am delighted to respond to this debate, because the Guy Fawkes carnival in Bridgwater is the oldest of its kind in our country. We can trace its history back to the famous gunpowder plot of 1605; Parliament decreed the lighting of bonfires in memory of the event, and the people of Bridgwater embraced the tradition with some enthusiasm. Perhaps that was because Bridgwater was strongly Protestant, or perhaps it was because they were fans of their elected parliamentarians—I appreciate that may seem unlikely to today’s Members of Parliament. Whatever the reason, those early celebrations eventually grew into the magnificent spectacle that now takes to the streets of Bridgwater each year on the first Saturday of November and then continues across Somerset.
Unfortunately, the earliest years were not well recorded, as local newspapers did not appear in the town until the mid-19th century. Luckily, once journalistic records started in 1847, we can trace the development of the carnival more clearly, making it clear that Bridgwater Guy Fawkes carnival is the oldest event of its kind in the United Kingdom. In those days, celebrations centred around a huge bonfire on the Cornhill in the centre of the town. People from all corners of Bridgwater would parade to the fire, often in costume. However, in 1880, the parade descended into disorder and rioting—it is believed that alcohol may have played a part in this. A letter written by Mr Frank Squire to the Bridgwater Mercury—which is still our town’s newspaper—provided a solution: he suggested forming a controlling committee and organising an official procession so that the magnificent costumes could be seen throughout the town. The idea garnered significant support among residents of the town and the very next year the first carnival, as we would recognise it today, took place. We now have the longest-running carnival in the country, and that is why we are proud to call Bridgwater the home of carnival. It has been my pleasure, as Bridgwater’s MP, to visit the sheds where the carts are built, attend the carnival concerts and watch the spectacular performances, to watch the magnificent carnival as it moves slowly through the town—and finally, to take part in the squibbing.
If you have not witnessed it, Mrs Harris, squibbing has nothing to do with Harry Potter; it involves simultaneously lighting a great many fireworks attached to coshes and up to 150 squibbers holding them overhead. I want to pay tribute to the many volunteers who make costumes, rehearse their acts, construct their carts, judge the entries, raise funds, and undertake the many other hundreds of tasks that are necessary to put on this fantastic spectacle. I particularly thank Dave Creedy, the president of the Bridgwater Guy Fawkes carnival, and his committee for their tireless work. Thanks also to the many carnival clubs within my constituency. I pay tribute to Bridgwater Belles, British Flag, Cavaliers, Centurion, Crusaders, Gremlins, Griffens, Lime Kiln, Marina Sydenham Juvenile, Marketeers, Newmarket, Hill View, Pentathlon, Ramblers, Renegades, Toppers, Vagabonds, Westonzoyland, Wilfs and Wills. I doubt any other constituency has more carnival clubs than Bridgwater.
While carnivals are an extraordinary spectacle that attract hundreds of thousands of tourists to Somerset’s towns every year, they are increasingly expensive to run. The cost of insurance increases every year. Then there are the costs of compliance with regulations, the cost of diesel and of disposing of waste, and how His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs does not allow VAT relief on all the related expenditure that is necessary for the carnival to fulfil its charitable goals.
The Minister will be pleased to hear me say that these problems did not start in 2024, but they do increase little by little each year. The cumulative effect is to make life more difficult for the great teams of volunteers who put in so much work to run our carnivals across Britain. Will the Minister confirm that the Government value our carnivals? Does she acknowledge the contribution that they make to encouraging volunteering and to engaging young and old alike in community projects, to raising money for charity and boosting tourism? Will she commit to working on a cross-party basis to ensure that this great tradition is able to continue for another 180 years?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Stephanie Peacock)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) and my hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge) on securing this important debate and for the powerful way in which they have spoken about their constituencies and the distinctive long-standing cultural tradition of illuminated carnivals. All hon. Members who have contributed to this debate have spoken with such passion. I will address some of the direct points put to me before talking about how carnivals impact the arts and tourism.
As we have heard, the west country carnival circuits are a spectacular annual celebration dating back to the 17th century. They represent far more than local custom; they bring in visitors and are a valuable source of income. I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton on her continued advocacy for carnivals, including the Glastonbury carnival, and for the roundtable she held in her constituency this month. She spoke about the passionate commitment of everyone who attended that and, indeed, she referenced the magnificent seven carnivals and their impact on things such as charity, tourism, culture, volunteering and the community. She made an important point about skills and volunteering, which I will touch on later.
The hon. Member put points to me about costs, including material, fuel, tractors and insurance. I acknowledge that and the shadow spokesperson, the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox) made that point as well. The hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton spoke about fundraising, membership fees and sponsorship, and increasing challenges. We live in an increasingly cashless society, and we have seen a roughly 15% reduction in the use of cash since 2017. That is something the Government are aware of. The hon. Member also made a specific point about safety advisory groups. The Government issue best practice, which is co-ordinated by the Cabinet Office, but it is a matter for local government. I will write to her about that specific point, as it might be useful.
My hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare rightly stated that my first visit as the Minister for Tourism was to his constituency, and I was delighted to visit. I had the pleasure of meeting local tourism and hospitality leaders, as well as the dedicated team at the Grand Pier. I thank him for his kind words and his warm welcome. The visit made it incredibly clear to me how vital the visitor economy is to the spirit and economy of the west country. I wish all those at the Weston-super-Mare carnival continued success and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for being the first in this place to speak about that carnival. He spoke passionately about the carnival ecosystem and how it inspires younger people. Indeed, it inspires those of all ages, as the shadow spokesperson rightly pointed out.
It was good to hear from the shadow spokesperson, and I know he takes a keen interest in this subject. He asked a question at oral questions a few weeks ago and I am delighted that I will meet him soon to discuss the matter further. The Bridgwater carnival is part of the west country carnival circuit, and the magnificent seven procession travels from his constituency to Glastonbury. He spoke about his constituency being “the home of carnival”.
My hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) spoke about the history in her area, dating back to the 1400s. She also asked a question on this topic at Culture, Media and Sport questions—it was a popular subject. She spoke about the UK Centre for Carnival Arts in Luton. It is the first dedicated facility for professional development, production and celebration of carnival culture. That is really important and it is the driving force behind the Luton International Carnival, which my hon. Friend spoke so passionately about.
Every year, carnival draws thousands of visitors. It is not just a show; it supports the local economy and brings the community together. It is a unique form of living history. Both Arts Council England and the national lottery project grants have supported vital initiatives around the carnival, including community workshops, school programmes and the development of key skills, such as costume making and set design. As an art form rich in cultural heritage and global influence, the Government continue to fund carnival arts right across the country via their grant-in-aid investment in Arts Council England. My hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare raised a point about access to funding. It might be helpful if I write to all hon. Members in the debate about how carnival can bid for and access funding. I will make sure my Department writes to each hon. Member here after the debate.
As part of a transformative £1.5 billion package over the course of this Parliament, the Government provided a 5% funding uplift to key national arts organisations. That means organisations, such as the UK Centre for Carnival Arts in Luton and the St Pauls carnival in Bristol, are funded as part of the Arts Council’s national portfolio. The funding supports a broad ecosystem beyond the incredible shows. It supports creative workshops, master classes around events and, of course, the unforgettable original costume designs and live music. The Government’s arts everywhere ambition ensures that carnival is not merely a seasonal event, but a sophisticated year-round art form that supports places to thrive, generating millions of pounds in benefits and telling our nations’ stories.
The next generation of carnival artists are being cultivated and supported through Arts Council England investment in organisations such as Global Grooves in Tameside, which transforms the lives of young people by immersing them in the world of carnival. Through its dedicated future leaders programme at the Vale youth hub, it bridges the gap between community tradition and professional skills development, offering hands-on experiences in costume design, puppetry and dance.
Government support helps to ensure that the vibrant heart of carnival continues. The organisations that I mentioned are amazing examples of how our national story moved from community practice to national policy in 2024, when the UK ratified UNESCO’s 2003 convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Intangible cultural heritage, or living heritage, matters because those traditions are the threads that weave us together. They provide a way to celebrate our incredible diversity, which can turn strangers into a community through shared song, craft and celebration.
This debate is important because of the impact that carnival has on tourism and the visitor economy, not just on the arts. Our ambition is clear: we want to welcome 50 million international visitors annually by 2030. But we recognise that numbers alone are not the measure of success. We must ensure that those visitors stay longer and explore further, reaching beyond our major hubs and into the rural and coastal heartlands. That is something that we will acknowledge and celebrate next week in English Tourism Week. To do that, we understand that sustaining regional growth requires more visitors. We want to be passionate, and carnivals play an incredibly important role. I also want to recognise the huge impact that volunteers have in carnivals. A number of Members have made incredibly important points, so I will end by paying tribute to all Members and the vital role that carnivals play.
Sarah Dyke
I thank all hon. Members for their contributions and give special thanks to the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge), who co-sponsored the debate alongside me. As has been outlined, carnivals are a distinctive and important part of British cultural heritage. For many in Somerset, they are a key point of celebration throughout the year. I appreciate the Minister’s supportive comments recognising the value that they bring and extend an invitation to her and you, Mrs Harris, to join me at Glastonbury carnival on 21 November. You will be very welcome there.
We must make sure that carnivals across the UK are supported, and I hope that today’s debate will help us focus our minds on the work that is needed to ensure that these celebrations take place long into the future. I hope the debate has illuminated to this place the special social, cultural and economic importance of carnivals to Somerset. Let us keep their lights on. To finish, it seems appropriate to quote Robbie Williams: let us make sure that they are “Back for Good” and let us make sure that we let them “entertain you”.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered Government support for carnivals.
Written Statements
National Security and Investment Act 2021: Notifiable Acquisition Regulations
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)
I am today publishing the Government’s response to the consultation on the National Security and Investment Act 2021 (Notifiable Acquisition) (Specification of Qualifying Entities) Regulations 2021.
On 22 July 2025, the Government launched a 12-week consultation on the NARs, which set out the areas of the economy subject to mandatory notification under the NSI Act. The consultation provided stakeholders with the opportunity to share their views on our proposed updates to the NARs. Within each schedule of the NARs, our proposals sought to reduce scope where possible, increase scope where necessary and improve clarity for businesses. The consultation closed on 14 October 2025.
Respondents largely supported the proposed changes, including creating stand-alone semiconductors and critical minerals schedules and adding water as a new area. Many stakeholders suggested that some definitions, such as artificial intelligence and critical suppliers to Government, remained too broad or technically complex. Most respondents also requested clearer and more extensive guidance across the NARs.
I would like to thank all respondents for providing thoughtful, thorough and constructive feedback.
Following careful consideration of the feedback received, the Government will:
Make further drafting changes to the following updated schedules to reduce capturing low-risk notifications where possible: critical minerals, semiconductors, artificial intelligence and communications;
Make further minor amendments to the following updated schedules to clarify scope and definitions: critical suppliers to Government, data infrastructure, energy and suppliers to the emergency services;
Finalise the water schedule;
Keep the updated advanced materials and synthetic biology schedules broadly as they are, to ensure that emerging technologies and the diverse uses of these are captured; and
Provide updated and more detailed guidance for the majority of the schedules consulted on, alongside the defence schedule, to address topics frequently raised in feedback.
These reforms will ensure that the NARs continue to capture emerging national security risks proportionately while getting out of the way of secure investment, unlocking economic growth across the UK.
I intend to lay secondary legislation to update the NARs in due course.
[HCWS1394]
Service Police Complaints Commissioner Annual Report 2024: MOD Response
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Veterans and People (Louise Sandher-Jones)
I am pleased to place in the Library of the House today the Ministry of Defence’s formal response to the Service Police Complaints Commissioner’s annual report for 2024.
The commissioner’s report assesses the delivery of their functions and the work of the office in 2024. The response sets out the MOD’s comments on the report and approach to each of the four new recommendations made by the commissioner.
The MOD values the strong, independent oversight that the commissioner brings to the service police complaints process and is committed to having a system that our personnel can have trust and confidence in.
Attachments can be viewed online at: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2026-03-12/HCWS1396
[HCWS1396]
IEA Co-ordinated Oil Stock Release: UK Participation
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
My thoughts are with British citizens and those across the world affected by the events in the middle east of recent days. Since the conflict began, we have seen Iran target energy production and export infrastructure across the Gulf. Traffic in the strait of Hormuz, through which around 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas is shipped, has declined very significantly, and the Iranian regime has issued reckless and unjustified threats to all ships using it. As a result, we are seeing significant disruption to international fossil fuel markets. While the UK’s energy supplies remain resilient and stable because of our diversity of supply, we are exposed to global oil and gas prices. This is yet another example of why we must end our reliance on volatile fossil fuel markets and switch to clean, home-grown energy. We are accelerating towards clean power by 2030, which will protect bill payers from future fossil fuel shocks and bring down bills.
Over the last week, I have had multiple meetings with the executive director of the International Energy Agency, with counterparts in the Gulf and the G7, and with our major UK oil and gas companies. The G7 Energy Ministers’ meeting and the exceptional IEA governing board on 10 March were crucial opportunities to assess security of supply and market conditions, and the response available to Governments.
Following the IEA governing board, and reflecting the global market conditions, members, including the UK, decided to take co-ordinated action to release emergency oil stocks. IEA members will release a total of 400 million barrels to the market. The UK will contribute the requested 13.5 million barrels, reflecting our share of oil consumption across IEA members.
The UK’s participation in this co-ordinated action demonstrates our commitment to the stability of global energy supplies and protecting consumers. This is an appropriate measure, taken alongside IEA partners, to protect bill payers and our economy while the situation in the middle east continues. Although co-ordinated action on an oil stock release is an important step towards stability, we are clear that ensuring the safe transit of tankers through the strait of Hormuz is the crucial enduring solution.
I would like to thank the IEA for its co-ordination and expert analysis, underlining its vital role in global energy security, and fellow IEA members for their allyship and collective resolve.
[HCWS1395]
NHS Mental Health Spending
(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Wes Streeting)
Today, I am publishing the annual statement for NHS mental health spend. The Health and Care Act 2022 introduced a statutory requirement to publish a statement setting out expectations for NHS mental health services spending before the end of each financial year. 2025-26 2026-27 Recurrent NHS baseline (£billion) 180.8 191.6 Total forecast mental health spend (£billion) 15.7 16.1 Mental health share of recurrent baseline (%) 8.68 8.40
The Government are committed to improving and supporting the nation’s mental health, focused on delivering better outcomes rather than just inputs—giving people the right support, at the right time. This priority runs consistently through our manifesto, the 10-year health plan and NHS England’s medium-term planning framework. We recognise that more must be done to reduce unacceptable waits and ensure services meet the needs of the population. That is why the medium-term planning framework sets such ambitious goals for integrated care boards over the next three years to drive improvements across mental health services, including putting mental health support in every school by 2029, expanding NHS talking therapies and individual placement support, and reducing the number of inappropriate out-of-area placements by the end of March 2027.
The Government have already taken action to improve mental health care, including through the Mental Health Act 2025, which ensures more personalised and compassionate care for people with severe mental illness. I have also launched an independent review into prevalence and support for mental health conditions, ADHD and autism, so that we can build an improved system that prevents mental ill health and delivers improved outcomes. Later this year, we will publish a new modern service framework that will set out what excellent care should look like for people with severe mental illness. Alongside this, we are confronting the root causes of mental ill health through cross-Government action, including through our suicide prevention strategy and men’s health strategy, and I fully support the efforts of the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology to make the online world safer for children.
On funding, real-terms spending on mental health continues to increase year on year, reflecting this Government’s commitment to improving mental health services. For 2026-27, mental health spending is forecast to reach a record £16.1 billion, up from £15.7 billion in 2025-26. This represents a real-terms increase of around £140 million compared with 2025-26. Real-terms growth in budgets will enable continued delivery of the ambitions set out in the 10-year health plan and the medium-term planning framework.
Spending for 2026-27 also includes ringfenced service development funding: firstly, to expand access to NHS talking therapies and individual placement and support, ensuring we reach those most in need while also supporting economic growth; and secondly, for accelerating the expansion of mental health support teams in schools and colleges to 100% coverage by 2029.
We are also making significant capital investment over the spending review period. Some £473 million of mental health capital funding has been made available over 2026-27 to 2029-30, as set out in NHS England’s capital guidance, published in November. This funding is available to systems to invest in community-based mental health centres, establish mental health emergency departments and reduce inappropriate out-of-area placements and locked inpatient rehabilitation.
Critically, financial safeguards remain in place. I am pleased to update the House that in 2025-26, all integrated care boards are forecast to meet the mental health investment standard, which sets a minimum rate of growth in annual spend on mental health services. These figures are based on data up to December, as full-year data are not yet available. To maintain this progress, the Government are requiring all integrated care boards to meet the mental health investment standard over the next three years. As this statement must be issued before the start of the new financial year, the figures for 2026-27 represent the best current estimates, based on projections that take account of the medium-term planning framework allocations published on 17 November 2025.
The proportion of overall NHS spend allocated to mental health in 2026-27 is forecast to be 8.4%, 0.28 percentage points lower than in 2025-26. This is a consequence of significant additional investment in other core areas, including those that benefit mental health services such as the substantial amounts going into NHS technology and digital transformation, general practice, community-based services, and neighbourhood health centres. These system-wide improvements are focused on fixing the fundamentals of the NHS and, although they are not counted in pure mental health service spend, will deliver significant benefits for mental health services and patients. There are also important areas of mental health-related expenditure not captured in the share of spend figure, such as prescribing mental health medication, continuing healthcare and NHS England’s investment in training the mental health workforce.
The 2025-26 NHS baseline has been restated to include the 2025-26 pay uplift. The 2026-27 NHS baseline has been updated to reflect last year’s spending review settlement, including some items which were not previously included in the baseline for this assessment, but are now recurrently part of the NHS budget. Total forecast mental health spend includes integrated care board expenditure contributing to the mental health investment standard, as well as NHS England’s service development fund and specialised commissioning spend on mental health. It also incorporates the £117 million from the autumn statement 2023 for the expansion of NHS talking therapies—protected in the 2024 Budget settlement—and the £65 million from the spring and autumn Budgets 2024 to expand individual placement and support. The figures exclude capital funding.
Through setting clear expectations for integrated care boards, increasing investment in mental health, and maintaining firm financial safeguards, this Government are committed to delivering the ambitious reform agenda set out in the 10-year health plan and medium-term planning framework. This approach supports a shift away from input-based requirements towards a clearer focus on the outcomes that matter most for people with mental health needs, ensuring that services deliver the improvements in experience and care that the public rightly expect.
[HCWS1397]