House of Commons
Oral Answers to Questions
(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
The Euros in 2028 will be an amazing opportunity to showcase the UK’s strengths in holding major events. That is why my Department is already working with numerous organisations across the football pyramid as we develop plans for the community programme to ensure the benefits are spread as far as possible across the whole country.
Kevin Bonavia
Our fantastic English Football League club, Stevenage FC, is pushing for promotion to the championship, and its community foundation has delivered nearly £10.7 million of social value to my constituents in the last year alone. Communities outside of host cities have not always felt the benefits of hosting major international tournaments. Can my right hon. Friend explain how the legacy of Euro 2028 will be felt beyond host cities, particularly EFL clubs and communities in constituencies like mine?
Lisa Nandy
My hon. Friend raises an important point, and I could not agree with him more. Given that he has raised this point here in the Chamber, I will ask my officials to design the programme to ensure that the benefits are felt not just in Stevenage, but across the whole country.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for that answer and for her enthusiasm for what it is being brought forward. I want to ensure that Northern Ireland is very much a part of this; hopefully, the Minister will confirm that it will. With Northern Ireland being part of the host nations of Euro 2028, will the Minister confirm what steps have been taken to ensure that we in Northern Ireland are an intrinsic part of the event and not simply an afterthought? After all, we are part of this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, so we want to be part of it.
Lisa Nandy
The hon. Member will remember that when we were first elected to government back in 2024, the Northern Ireland Secretary and I worked very hard to try to ensure that Northern Ireland was able to host part of the games. Because of the timescales and the lack of action under the previous Government, we were not able to do that, but we made a firm commitment that Northern Ireland would feel the full benefit of these games, and we are still deeply committed to that.
Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. The successful bid to host the Euros in 2028 made under the previous Conservative Government has enormous potential to economically and culturally benefit the UK, giving fans lifelong memories as football comes home. But to deliver a truly lasting legacy, the Government must commit to protect pitches, properly fund grassroots sports and stop taxing clubs into oblivion. I ask the Minister again: will the Government finally U-turn on their proposed watering down of Sport England’s crucial role in protecting grassroots pitches?
Lisa Nandy
The hon. Member is absolutely right to say that the Euros should be a cross-party endeavour that commands the support of the whole House and that it will have significant economic benefits for the UK; we believe that it will generate socioeconomic benefits of £3.2 billion across the UK. He is also right to say that there has to be a legacy for young people growing up in this country to have the opportunity to access sport. We have learned the lessons from the way in which the last Conservative Government squandered the legacy of the London 2012 Olympics and refused to cascade those benefits across the country. We are ensuring that we are investing in grassroots sport. He will know that the Sports Minister and I recently announced £400 million of investment to that end.
Mr French
The Secretary of State criticises the previous Conservative Government, but national sports bodies are fully aware that this Labour Government have cut sports funding, and increased regulation and taxes on clubs, and are putting at risk sports pitches across the country. Alongside these major own goals, the ongoing Whitehall ruck over how PE is funded risks reducing participation rates even further. This Labour Government have already cut millions from the likes of the opening schools facilities fund, and are overseeing huge uncertainty for the schools games organisers network. What discussions is the Secretary of State having with other Departments to ensure that children can continue playing sport, both at school and in their community?
Lisa Nandy
The hon. Member will know that after the vandalism of the last Conservative Government, where sports, art, music, dance and drama—all those things that give young people the opportunities to live a richer, larger life—were downgraded on the curriculum and shamefully branded as Mickey Mouse subjects by a number of leading members of his Government, we have put them back at the centre of the curriculum. I think he referred to school sport partnerships, which we are strongly committed to. I have had discussions with the Health Secretary and the Education Secretary to ensure that we continue to fund those—it is something that the Prime Minister feels strongly about—to make sure that every young person has the opportunity to participate in sports.
Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Stephanie Peacock)
The UK Government have consistently backed Glasgow 2026 as a positive outcome for the games movement and for the UK. The Government are engaging partners to explore trade and investment opportunities around the games in order to support the games and maximise the benefits for the whole UK.
Martin Rhodes
Having recently visited the Scottish Event Campus in my constituency, which will host the opening ceremony along with a number of sports during the games, I have seen at first hand the opportunity these games represent for tourism, hospitality and local businesses. Given the importance of these events for Scotland and Glasgow’s economy, what conversations is the Minister having with the Scottish Government and the Scotland Office to ensure that the games are a success for Glasgow and that Glasgow is well placed to attract further cultural and sporting events in the years ahead?
Stephanie Peacock
My hon. Friend asks an excellent question. I have met regularly with the Scottish Government, the Scotland Office, the organising company and, of course, Commonwealth Sport, most recently in January this year. I also attended events in December and August last year. My Department is in regular contact with the organisers and all partners to support the games and ensure they build on Glasgow’s world-class reputation for hosting major events. He is absolutely right: there is a huge opportunity for not just sport but the economic legacy and the tourism industry.
Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)
Many of our Commonwealth hopefuls started their careers in community events like parkruns and local sports clubs, and yet the sport and recreation sector is in a state of utter confusion because of the Government’s chaotic roll-out of the new rules on medical provision. The Government have said that they do not want small events to be “overregulated”. What does that even mean? There is a wholesale lack of information from the Department of Health and Social Care and the Care Quality Commission about who will be impacted and what it will cost, and there has been no meaningful impact assessment. The Government have warm words about local sport provision, but their actions never stand up to the test. Can this Minister please give us a definitive answer?
Stephanie Peacock
The hon. Lady makes a really important point. We are obviously keen to make this a success, and I would be delighted to meet her to discuss it further.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts (Ian Murray)
We are committed to ensuring the UK remains the world’s leading destination for film and television production. That ambition sits at the core of the Government’s industrial strategy and the creative industries sector plan, which recognises the sector’s strength as a driver of growth. Every single best visual effects Oscar nominee this year had work done in UK studios, including Bournemouth’s own Outpost VFX for its work on “Sinners”.
Jessica Toale
As the Minister says, Outpost VFX is a world-leading VFX company based in my Bournemouth West constituency. It recently convened a meeting of sector leaders, and the message was clear: the UK faces significant competitive disadvantage because of our relatively low net value incentive rates and the 10% total spend rule. As a result, we are missing out on work to overseas facilities, and undermining job creation and skills retention here in the UK. Will the Minister commit to meeting Outpost VFX and other sector representatives to discuss their proposals to boost the UK’s competitiveness?
Ian Murray
I am very happy to meet representatives of the VFX industry, including Outpost VFX in my hon. Friend’s constituency. It is worth bearing in mind that there are a whole host of visual effects tax reliefs in place, including a 39% rate on VFX costs, to make it as competitive as possible in this country. I meet regularly and engage with the sector, including the UK Screen Alliance. Protecting our world-leading VFX sector base means ensuring that skills keep pace with artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. We understand and acknowledge the significant implications for the sector of various pressures at the moment, but there is £10 million being invested in the National Film and Television School to expand apprenticeships and £25 million of funding for five new CoSTAR—Convergent Screen Technologies and performance in Realtime—labs, and the Chancellor’s £725 million for the next phase of the growth and skills levy will also deliver new digital skills. That package of measures sits alongside the tax reliefs.
Siân Berry (Brighton Pavilion) (Green)
The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts (Ian Murray)
We recognise that incidents of undue attention and harassment from the media cause significant distress to the public. We will always defend media freedom, but with this freedom comes big responsibilities. Publishers must operate ethically and within the bounds of the law. The Secretary of State has met families who have experienced press intrusion. We are now carefully considering the next steps to determine how to ensure that public trust and accountability in news media is maintained and improved.
Siân Berry
Last month, a national newspaper intruded on the privacy of one of the families bereaved by the meningitis outbreak, publishing information that the family had asked to be kept private. In opposition, Labour promised independent regulation of the press to curb this awful behaviour, so when exactly will the Secretary of State keep that promise?
Ian Murray
The Secretary of State has been clear about this. In March she said, at the Society of Editors future of news conference, that the Government will
“will tread carefully and cautiously about regulation…as any right-minded Government should.”
Fearless journalists must be able to hold the Government to account, but there are also concerns that people are turning away from news and losing trust in issues that, as the hon. Member said, are very serious. I am happy to meet her to discuss such issues. The Government are closely following trends in media consumption. In an age of considerable increasing misinformation and disinformation, including press intrusion, we want to get this right.
Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
This Government believe strongly in the BBC. I recently announced at the Society of Editors event that the charter review period, which is incredibly important, will be the last of its kind. We intend to ensure through the charter process, subject to Parliament’s approval, that the charter puts the BBC on a permanent footing, so while the funding and terms of the BBC will continue to be renegotiated by successive Governments, its right to exist will never again be called into question.
Cameron Thomas
Trump donor Larry Ellison and his son David own CBS News, will soon own CNN, and part-own TikTok. In 2024, Ellison senior’s Oracle paid a six-figure sum to Hanover Communications, for whom Michael Prescott was a managing director. One year later, Prescott’s leaked internal memo landed the BBC a $5 billion lawsuit from Donald Trump. Rupert Murdoch and GB News founder Robbie Gibb know that when you own the news, you own the people. I believe that our independent news broadcaster is under attack from within and without. How are the Government going to protect it?
Lisa Nandy
As I said, we intend to put the BBC on a permanent charter, precisely because we believe it is a vital and essential part of our democracy, and it must be able to hold us all to account without fear or favour, free from political interference. The hon. Gentleman alludes to particular appointments to the board. I do not have the power to change those appointments, but I do have the ability to review them through the charter review, which I will do. When it comes to Governments overseas, we will always defend the BBC’s right to hold those in power to account, whoever they are.
Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)
Thankfully, the BBC is nothing like the public service broadcaster in Hungary—I was there monitoring elections; the winner, Péter Magyar, said that it is like North Korean propaganda. To protect Auntie Beeb, will my right hon. Friend reconsider the anomaly that, despite being a fixed-income public body—I am ex-staff myself—the BBC has not been given relief from the 2% rise in employer national insurance contributions, unlike schools and hospitals, leaving a yearly £20 million black hole at a time of falling licence fee income? Can the BBC be granted a partial or total waiver, so that we can keep getting good quality output and stop staff cuts?
Lisa Nandy
My hon. Friend alludes to the fact that many countries around the world are investing heavily in propaganda. The BBC is a light on the hill for people in many parts of the world through its World Service, and other international services. We want to ensure that we safeguard that through the charter review. She talked about financial pressures on the BBC. Colleagues will know that yesterday the BBC interim director general announced significant cuts to staffing, which I know has had a strong effect on staff and is of real concern to people out in the country. I had the pleasure of meeting the new incoming director general of the BBC yesterday, and one of the first things we discussed was how we put the BBC on a sound financial footing going forward. I will of course look into the issues raised by my hon. Friend.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts (Ian Murray)
The Government are providing up to £30 million through the music growth package. That will further provide support to grassroots venues by fostering domestic growth, talent development and music exports. We are fully committed to supporting the live music industry’s introduction of a voluntary ticket contribution for stadium and arena shows, to help safeguard the future of the grassroots music sector, and this has already contributed half a million pounds to the live music sector.
Josh Babarinde
Eastbourne’s historical bandstand is set to reopen this summer after a refurbishment programme. Mr Speaker, I would like to invite you to come and celebrate with us as our guest of honour at our famous Motown night in July; I know you are a big fan of Motown, so I will give you the invitation later on. We could have even more to celebrate at the bandstand if the Minister were able to review the criteria for the heritage at risk fund, which was announced earlier this year. The fund currently does not seem to cover local authority-run music venues, like Eastbourne bandstand, but we want it to do so, so that we can protect the bandstand for future generations. Will the Minister give an assurance that he will review the criteria?
Ian Murray
Oh, Mr Speaker—you did not steal my line, unfortunately. I congratulate Eastbourne on reopening the bandstand. I am disappointed that I did not receive an invitation—I can throw a few shapes as well and I am very happy to come down and dance the night away with Mr Speaker.
The Government very much care about these venues. The hon. Gentleman will know that on Tuesday we announced that 130 cultural venues, museums, libraries and live music venues will receive a share of nearly £130 million. That includes nearly a £1 million for Music Venue Properties, a charity that helps to conserve venues through community ownership, and Eastbourne bandstand could be part of that. The funding is part of our £1.5 billion investment through the arts everywhere scheme to support 1,000 cultural projects with that kind of infrastructure. I am happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and the local authority to discuss what more we can do for Eastbourne bandstand.
Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. On 19 November, the Secretary of State made the welcome announcement that we would end the abuse of ticket resale. Since then, gig goers at grassroots music venues have been ripped off by tens of millions of pounds. With the new Session coming, will that Bill be in the King’s Speech? Can gig goers look forward to the end of being ripped off by touts?
Ian Murray
We are determined to end ticket touting in this country. It has been ripping off fans for too long. We have a very strong policy to deal with that and we will bring the legislation forward as soon as we possibly can.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
The Government and policing partners are in regular contact with FIFA and with host country counterparts on a range of issues, including security and public safety planning for the world cup. Since I saw the hon. Gentleman’s question appear on the Order Paper, I have asked officials to ensure that those arrangements are robust.
Shockat Adam
I am sure that we are all looking forward to the world cup this summer, and that we all want the home nations to do well. When England finally brings it home, I am sure that we will all be delighted, including our friends from north of the border— I know my office staff member will be.
On a serious note, I am deeply concerned about the number of British citizens who have already been impacted by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement detentions and the threat of visa restrictions for international teams, amid lots of illegal wars—started by the FIFA peace prize winner, ironically. Furthermore, we have now learned that UK nationals may be required to surrender five years of personal social media data simply to obtain entry into the United States. Will the Secretary of State tell us urgently what she doing to ensure that British fans can travel to America safely, enjoy the games safely and get back home safely?
Lisa Nandy
The hon. Gentleman raises some particular concerns. I am more than happy to look into them for him and ensure that everybody has the opportunity to go and participate in what should be a really positive and global sporting event. I have to say, though, that he has sparked some controversy on the Labour Front Bench with his desire for England to bring football home, because while the Minister for Sport, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), and I strongly agree with him, I am afraid that the Arts Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), has a different view.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
Football fans in my area are looking forward to the world cup and many hope to travel, but before we get to that competition, many are very concerned by reports of a potential points deduction for West Bromwich Albion due to allegations of financial rule breaches, which the club has strongly rejected. Given Albion’s recent run of seven unbeaten games, keeping us just above the relegation zone, a points deduction sending us down would be heartbreaking for fans, particular because the source of the issue seems to be a loan from the previous owners. Does the Secretary of State agree that such a situation is awful for fans and can she urge that it is resolved as quickly as possible?
Lisa Nandy
My hon. Friend will know that having been through some very difficult times with my own superb football club, Wigan Athletic, I know how much this matters to people in West Brom, and I know what a great champion she is for them. This is precisely why we delivered the Football Governance Act 2025, which clearly sets out the need to protect the integrity and sporting competitiveness of existing competitions. I am sure that the regulator will be looking at this situation closely.
Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)
Thousands of people across the country—although possibly not the Arts Minister—are very excited for the world cup this summer, but that excitement is being ruined by the prospect of fans, not football, coming home. Under new US border directives, fans face having their social media history weaponised against them, with the threat of being turned away at the gates for as little as sharing an unflattering meme of President Trump. Will the Secretary of State urgently meet with US counterparts to ensure British fans are not denied entry at the border, and will she demand that the US embassy picks up the tab for tickets and travel for any fan unfairly denied entry?
Lisa Nandy
In the notes that I was given, it says that security and safety arrangements for major international sporting events are a matter for the host authorities. That is true, but the Government can play a role. I reassure the hon. Lady and the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) that I will personally ensure that we as a Government are involved to ensure that fans are not deterred from being able to participate in what should be a really positive experience.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
My hon. Friend is a great champion for young people in her constituency. She and I have had many discussions over the last 18 months, as we have delivered the first national youth strategy in a generation, led and written by young people, to ensure that every young person in this country has somewhere to go, something to do and someone who cares.
Sonia Kumar
Youth centres such as High Oak in Dudley, run by Angela Edwards, are finding it harder each year to stay open because of insecure funding, despite Dudley having some of the highest levels of young people not in education, employment or training. More youth centres and more secure long-term funding are desperately needed. What support can my right hon. Friend provide to these youth centres to ensure that the youth of today and of the future are supported?
Lisa Nandy
We have put £500 million behind the national youth strategy, and a major element of that will be to deliver the next generation of youth clubs and youth workers. Too many youth clubs exist around this country that are closed because there are not people to run them, and there are too many parts of the country where there is no facility at all. The Youth Minister is very happy to discuss that further with my hon. Friend to ensure that Dudley’s young people are well served and have the provision that they need.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Stephanie Peacock)
The Government recognise that community spaces are hugely important, whether it be for social networks, community participation or civic pride. We debated community centres and small charities in Westminster Hall last month.
Dr Chambers
The charity St John’s Winchester runs a brilliant community space for people with dementia; I have attended it myself and sung songs with them, including Motown. It is also one of the oldest charities in the UK and provides almshouses for vulnerable people. It has been running for 900 years and has survived the plague and the civil war, which was particularly ferocious in Winchester. It has specifically cited the increase in employment costs as a reason why it has had to deregister from the Care Quality Commission. What are the Government doing to support charities that provide social care and healthcare? We know that if these charities struggle, the costs will go on to councils and the NHS.
Stephanie Peacock
I join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to his local charity—indeed, I am a patron of a dementia charity in Barnsley. I recognise the challenges faced by charities, which is why I hosted a number of them at No. 10 with a Treasury Minister. I would be delighted to speak to the hon. Gentleman about this matter.
Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)
The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts (Ian Murray)
As part of our creative industries, video games are identified as a priority sector in the industrial strategy. On Monday, we rolled out the games growth package, with a £30 million investment over three years, expanding the UK games fund and investing in the London games festival. We continue to maintain our stable and generous tax reliefs, recognising their role in supporting growth in the games sector, in industry and in wider creative industries. According to estimates from the body Ukie, the value of the UK video game consumer market in 2025 was £8.8 billion.
Ben Goldsborough
Norfolk is home to a thriving games development community, with Norfolk games developers supporting over 500 members through mentoring, skills and business growth, contributing to a survival rate of small and medium-sized enterprises that is way above the UK average. What steps is the Department taking to ensure that areas such as Norfolk can access and shape the video games growth package? Will the Minister meet with me to discuss this matter further?
Ian Murray
It looks as if I am meeting with my hon. Friend about games, rather than going to the Motown dancing in Eastbourne, but never mind. [Laughter.]
Delivering for all the nations and regions remains a priority for this Government. The UK games fund, which is based in Dundee, is a UK-wide programme available to studios and teams across the country, wherever they are. The funding provided to the London games festival includes showcasing support for regional studios, enabling exposure to a greater audience. I am more than happy to speak to my hon. Friend to discuss the opportunities for Norfolk in more detail.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
As the Minister knows, the video games industry is huge in Scotland. In fact, it is huge worldwide—it is now bigger than the film and television industries put together. The Scottish industry is worth £188 million, but we have reached a point where we have identified a lack of business acumen among growing companies. We need something like business hubs specifically for video games, with centres of video game excellence, so will the Minister perhaps speak to the Scottish Government about how this can be achieved in order to continue the massive growth we have seen?
Ian Murray
My friend the hon. Member, my almost-neighbouring MP in Edinburgh, is absolutely right: Scotland is one of the world leaders in video games, and we have to make sure we are harnessing that. The games growth fund that I announced on Monday at the London games festival will make sure that we are nurturing new talent, helping people to get to the prototype stage, and growing the sector to get those projects to commercialisation. That will be spread across the country, of course, but Dundee is the key part of that. Rockstar in Edinburgh will be launching “Grand Theft Auto VI” later this year, which will be the biggest launch of any audiovisual package in the world. We are looking forward to that, but the hon. Member is absolutely right that we have to nurture that talent and bring the pipeline of talent through.
Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Stephanie Peacock)
The Government believe in the power of grassroots sport. We have committed £400 million over the next four years, and £85 million in this coming year. Of course, Sport England invests £250 million annually through Exchequer and lottery funding.
Nick Smith
I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on parkrun. As the Minister knows, parkrun is a global phenomenon, and it has just celebrated its 21st birthday this year. Currently, over 1,300 parkrun events take place across the UK every Saturday morning, including two in my constituency of Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney. Given its benefits in terms of health and wellbeing—many of my constituents are NHS couch to 5K graduates—will the Minister please outline what discussions she has had with parkrun to support that excellent initiative?
Stephanie Peacock
I was pleased to meet representatives of parkrun alongside my hon. Friend a few months ago to mark its 21st anniversary, and I pay tribute to the huge impact it has. Indeed, last year, I joined my hon. Friend for the relaunch of parkwalk, which is a great example of how inclusive parkrun is—of course, it would not be possible without all the volunteers. If I may, I would like to mention Oliver Smith from my constituency. I was pleased to run the Barnsley parkrun with my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley North (Dan Jarvis) alongside Oliver Smith, aged nine, who is running nine marathons in four months to raise money for the Brain Tumour Charity following his dad’s diagnosis. I wish him luck in completing his challenge next weekend at the mini London marathon.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
Sydenham amateur boxing club does an incredible job, working with young people in and around Bridgwater. It helps teach not just boxing, but discipline and control. In order to help more young people, it wants to expand and build a purpose-built gym, so will the Minister outline what support is available for grassroots boxing clubs such as Sydenham to help them improve their facilities and help more young people?
Stephanie Peacock
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question—it was a pleasure to meet him on a different subject earlier this week. I met the all-party parliamentary group on boxing recently. I welcome the points he makes and agree with them, and I am keen to work with him to help deliver that goal.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
As a Government, we are committed to ensuring that tourism drives growth and jobs across the country, including in rural Buckinghamshire. The hon. Gentleman may have seen VisitBritain’s “Starring GREAT Britain” campaign, through which we have showcased the UK’s film and TV locations to global audiences, and our upcoming visitor economic growth strategy will provide a long-term vision for boosting visitor numbers and delivering sustainable growth nationwide.
Greg Smith
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for that answer. With people coming to Buckinghamshire to enjoy the beauty of our countryside walking in the Chilterns, the tourism sector is important, but with the punitive levels of business tax hitting all those businesses—such as camping at Orchard View and country retreats at Starveall farm—talk of a tourist tax and an overnight levy could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. Can the Secretary of State confirm that she is actively lobbying the Chancellor not to bring in such a levy?
Lisa Nandy
The tourism Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), has of course discussed these issues with the industry. She has held several meetings with the industry as part of English Tourism Week, and has also discussed this issue with colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and in the Treasury. However, the idea behind a tourism levy is that it would be locally driven and led. It would enable local areas to decide how they wanted to apply it, so that would be a matter for Buckinghamshire itself.
Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)
In the heart of Weymouth, the Rectory is an iconic building, but it has stood empty for over a decade. We want to transform the Rectory building into a cultural and visitor centre, hosting art, boosting the local tourism economy and welcoming visitors to Weymouth all year round. With that in mind, will the Secretary of State meet me and all the key stakeholders so that we can finally crack on and deliver the exciting Rectory proposals?
Lisa Nandy
It does sound very exciting. The tourism Minister and/or I would be happy to follow that up with my hon. Friend and make sure that we can deliver on that exciting project.
Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)
Tourism and hospitality businesses across the UK are struggling. Once profitable businesses are now letting people go, not hiring or closing altogether as a direct result of Labour’s policies, in particular the national insurance increases. That has led to 100,000 job losses in the UK in hospitality and tourism alone over the last two years. The Government have cut funding to our tourism bodies and are now planning on imposing more regulations and a whole new tourism tax. Can the Minister please explain how on earth less support, more regulations and higher taxes are meant to help the tourism industry?
Lisa Nandy
I thank the shadow Secretary of State for his support for the tourism industry. I recognise that it has had significant pressures in recent years, particularly with the pandemic, but I am proud of our tourism industry; it is second to none and delivering in every part of the country. We have put the tourism industry at the centre of our attention with the visitor economy growth strategy. We see it as an area of great potential, and the tourism Minister is working closely with the industry to unlock the benefits for the whole country.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Lisa Nandy)
Since we last met, we have been delighted to celebrate the sporting success of our incredible Paralympic athletes, and we have welcomed the Brits to Manchester for the first time. We have made a multimillion-pound investment in the iconic Crucible theatre in Sheffield, securing its future as a world-class venue for generations to come. Just this week, I announced almost £130 million to protect world-class theatres, museums and libraries in every part of our country. Taken together, this Government are delivering on our promise that arts, culture, sports, dance, drama and music are not a luxury for the privileged or something to be consigned to a few postcodes—they must be for everyone, everywhere.
Mr Brash
I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Swim England recently launched its report into the state of the nation’s swimming facilities. The report, “The Deep End”, clearly shows the crisis facing community swimming, largely due to issues with funding and infrastructure. While Hartlepool’s brilliant Labour council is delivering amazing new facilities in the form of the Highlight leisure centre opening in June, not every constituency is so lucky. What steps is the Secretary of State’s Department taking to improve access to swimming facilities where those facilities have been lost or are in danger of disappearing?
Lisa Nandy
I share my hon. Friend’s passion on this issue. We are intensely aware that, as well as the sweeping cuts to local authorities that were made under the last Government, the rise in energy costs has significantly affected swimming facilities in every part of the country. We have committed £400 million to transform sports facilities over the next four years, and swimming ought to be a beneficiary of that—I will certainly make sure that it is. I have also discussed these issues with the Energy Secretary to make sure that we are pulling every lever at our disposal to ensure that swimming facilities are protected from some of the impacts, in particular of war in the middle east.
Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)
William Hill announced that it is closing 200 betting shops as a result of Labour’s tax policies making them unsustainable. That is Labour’s decisions creating yet more unemployment and undermining sponsorship opportunities and the finances of the horseracing industry overall. Labour may not be as bad as the Greens or Plaid, which I understand want to ban altogether horseracing—a £4 billion industry—and I think greyhound racing, too. Can the Minister assure the racing and gambling communities that the Government will not do any more damage to these sectors, which bring joy to millions of Brits every week?
Lisa Nandy
In a rare moment of agreement, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the gambling industry brings joy to a lot of people. He and I have discussed the harms that affect a minority of people. They are significant and important, but the industry as a whole brings positive benefits to the United Kingdom. I think he is underplaying the significant pressures on high street businesses that have existed over the last couple of decades—something that, frankly, his Government did absolutely nothing about over the 14 years that they were in government. We are dealing with those.
Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)
The Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts (Ian Murray)
May I start by paying tribute to all at the Bathgate Band who were responsible for the Bathgate Music Hub, particularly Derek Brown? Co-operative live music venues have benefited from the Government’s £150 million community ownership fund, enabling communities to take ownership of valued local cultural assets, but in England, not Scotland. We have the Pride in Place programme, which is supporting 244 neighbourhoods across the UK, and yesterday we announced that the Creative Foundations Fund—a charity that is helping to conserve music venues through community ownership—has awarded £999,000 to music venue properties in England. I have to say that the Scottish Government, through the Barnett formula, have received money in the spending review settlement. It is not clear how much they are spending in this particular area.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
Lisa Nandy
A moment ago, we discussed the importance of such facilities. I thank the hon. Gentleman for the way in which he has approached this issue by securing and demonstrating community consent. He will know that this Government have changed the way we fund so that it is community driven and led, rather than imposed from the centre, and it is very welcome that he has taken that approach. In addition to the answer that I gave a moment ago, we have backed local authorities, which lead on funding on these issues, with the first multi-year settlement in a decade. That will help them to ensure that they can better plan and better prepare to deliver on community needs.
Kate Osamor (Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) (Lab/Co-op)
The Second Church Estates Commissioner (Marsha De Cordova)
The Church remains steadfast in its support for Palestinians. The Bishops of Southwark, Gloucester, Chelmsford and Norwich have publicly highlighted their concerns by condemning the increased settler violence and calling for the reopening of holy places. They have joined His Holiness the Pope and the local heads of Churches, who have called for the protection of innocent civilians. They are offering sanctuary, working for peace and reconciliation, and building intercommunity trust.
Kate Osamor
I thank my hon. Friend for her answer. For the first time in centuries, Catholic leaders were prohibited from entering the Church of Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem to celebrate a private mass on Palm Sunday. The Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem called this a
“manifestly unreasonable and grossly disproportionate measure.”
In the light of this incident, what concrete steps will the Church take to ensure that Christians and other religious groups are able to worship freely in Jerusalem?
Marsha De Cordova
The closure of the Holy Sepulchre by the Israeli Government was totally unacceptable. It was an unprecedented step, and representations by all Churches were made at the highest level. The treatment of pilgrims and worshippers by the Israel Defence Forces, and the additional movement restrictions across both western and Orthodox Easter, were deplorable, particularly in what is the holiest of weeks.
Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)
Marsha De Cordova
Parishes across England run tens of thousands of community projects, including parent and toddler groups, holiday clubs, and breakfast and after-school provision. Under its vision 2020 strategy, the Church of England aims to double the number of children and young people in congregations by 2030. This is backed by £236 million over three years to support youth opportunities, particularly in low-income communities.
Shaun Davies
In Telford, the Church—through Rev. Laura Lenander at Telford Minster, Rev. Andy Ackroyd at St Michael’s church and Rev. Jo Farnworth at St Leonard’s church—plays a key role in supporting families, including by offering pastoral support and providing spaces for volunteers. What more will the Church do to support these churches and parishes in fast-growing areas such as Telford?
Marsha De Cordova
I express my thanks to all the churches in my hon. Friend’s constituency for their work in supporting families and young people in Telford, and I especially congratulate Rev. Laura Lenander, Rev. Jo Farnworth and Rev. Andy Ackroyd. By opening their facilities throughout the week, they provide safe and welcoming spaces where young people can receive support and build strong relationships, demonstrating that the church is at the heart of its community. I am pleased to learn that Rev. Jo Farnworth has been made the independent chair of the South Telford Pride in Place programme, and I look forward to hearing more about the work it is doing in the area.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Will the hon. Lady write to the Local Government Minister, because I think some councils are a little bit timid when it comes to faith-based organisations? The dioceses of Lichfield and Hereford, which fall under The Wrekin constituency and are partly in the Telford constituency, do a fantastic job, but I think there is a problem between central Government, local government and the Church of England in communicating, sharing resources and actually delivering new services for young people together.
Marsha De Cordova
The right hon. Member highlights the true value of what can happen in our local communities when churches, local authorities and all other stakeholders work together. Yes, I will take him up on that, and write to the Local Government Minister to encourage such a co-working relationship in his constituency.
Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
Marsha De Cordova
The Church engages with the Charity Commission on a range of issues, and the Church Commissioners have held informal discussions with it on Project Spire, which is the Church’s response to address its historical connections to the transatlantic enslavement of Africans.
Sir Desmond Swayne
Is the Church going to launch a new charity? If so, when, and why the delay?
Marsha De Cordova
I could refer the right hon. Member to the many answers I have given to written and oral questions on this issue. As I have said, the Church is having informal discussions with the Charity Commission, and it is currently preparing an application, but it has not yet been submitted.
Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)
Marsha De Cordova
The Church is concerned about the growth of extremism, including Christian nationalism, and bishops have established a working group to promote unity and support parishes with theological, practical and pastoral resources to counter extremism locally.
Mr Forster
I regularly meet church leaders in my constituency of Woking, and they often raise the plight of Christians abroad. Please can the hon. Member assure me that one of the Church’s top priorities is to tackle extremism and the persecution of Christians abroad?
Marsha De Cordova
As the hon. Member will know, the issue of the persecution of Christians abroad has come up before, and the Church obviously takes it seriously. As I highlighted in my initial answer, last year the Church established a working group that seeks to provide support for bishops and senior clergy, with relevant experience and reflection and with time for discussion. The group is also assessing the impact of the use—or, I should say, misuse—of Christian language and imagery in political campaigning. He is absolutely right to raise that important issue.
James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)
Marsha De Cordova
Mr Speaker, it always feels like I am getting my exercise in at Church questions!
Through community programmes, the Church provides a significant contribution to the local economy, amounting to around £55 billion. That includes food banks, warm spaces, credit unions, school clubs and other forms of family support. The Church recently welcomed the Government’s decision to end the two-child benefit cap, and I know that in my hon. Friend’s constituency 6,200 children will be lifted out of poverty as a result.
James Asser
Child poverty is a major concern in my east London constituency, and faith and community organisations play an incredibly important part in providing support. While my constituency is very much multi-faith, the Church continues to play a hugely important part through its churches, schools, community facilities and experience. Can my hon. Friend assure me that the Church will continue to work across faiths, and with community and charity organisations, to make sure that that network of support, on which so many families in need in my constituency rely, remains strong and is there when they need it?
Marsha De Cordova
That is an excellent question from my hon. Friend. Yes, the Church works continuously to develop local churches together and interfaith networks, encouraging all faith communities to work collaboratively to support local communities, and building support and strong networks. A good example of that is Church schools, such as those in my hon. Friend’s constituency. They are community schools that offer opportunities to thousands of children each day through their vision for education, “life in all its fullness”, which is about ensuring that all children are supported to study, discover their talents, and grow and meet their full potential.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Church Commissioner for her energetic contributions in answering all the questions this morning. They are appreciated by every one of us.
To tackle child poverty, St Mark’s parish church in Newtownards in my constituency has a raft of programmes, but I know that the volunteers take a well-deserved break in the summer. Are there any plans for specialised youth clubs during the summer holidays to provide a safe, welcoming place for young people to meet that parents can afford to utilise, so addressing the issue of child poverty?
Marsha De Cordova
I thank the hon. Gentleman for all his contributions at Church questions. I hope he does not mind if I write to update him on what takes place over the summer.
Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)
Marsha De Cordova
It is good to see my hon. Friend back in his place after his injury. I understand that he was running with his children when it happened.
Marsha De Cordova
He couldn’t keep up with his children, obviously! [Laughter.] Apologies, Mr Speaker.
The new places of worship renewal fund will be managed by Historic England on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. The fund totals £92 million over four years and will support capital repairs to listed places of worship. Priority will be given to buildings in areas of high deprivation or community need. Applications are expected to start with an expression of interest, followed by a full application, with efforts made to minimise administrative burdens on smaller parishes.
Peter Prinsley
I thank my hon. Friend for her answer. Church leaders in Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket are rightly concerned about the cancellation of the listed places of worship grant scheme. Will the Church Commissioner outline what conversations she has had with the Government regarding the support and guidance given to those people who are concerned with the upkeep of churches in my constituency and across the country? It is surely for our generation to preserve the legacy bequeathed to us by our forefathers.
Marsha De Cordova
I can confirm that I have met colleagues in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on numerous occasions, most recently the Minister for Heritage just before Easter recess. We are still waiting for the Government to publish more detail on this vital scheme. As I said in my meeting with the Minister, I urge the Government to get on and publish that detail at pace so that we can give our churches certainty. In the meantime, while we await the guidance, my hon. Friend’s constituency churches can reach out to their diocesan Church Buildings Council adviser for further advice, support and guidance on this issue.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
You will be aware, Mr Speaker, that Lib Dems are great at fixing the church roof. In Sturminster Marshall, the community is going further with Project Welcome, which will repair and modernise the space, creating a warm, safe and accessible church that is integral to the community. However, the closure of the listed places of worship grant scheme means that costs have gone through the roof. The community has raised £275,000 of a £360,000 target, which, without the VAT, they would have achieved. Can the hon. Lady confirm whether projects already under way will be eligible for the renewal scheme?
Marsha De Cordova
I will just put it on the record that we are all, across the House, keen advocates for our local churches; we recognise that they are the cornerstones of our community, so we are all hugely supportive of efforts to fix roofs, or whatever needs to be done to them. The hon. Lady highlights an important point about the scheme, and I will be happy to write to her about it.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
Marsha De Cordova
We are still awaiting details of the replacement scheme, following the confirmation of the end of the listed places of worship grant scheme in January. As I mentioned in my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley), I recently met the Minister for Heritage and impressed upon her how important it is that details of the scheme are published at pace. Church officials are working with Historic England on operational and policy issues, but we are still waiting for the Government to publish the guidance.
Daniel Francis
St Paulinus church in Crayford and Christ church in Bexleyheath are both grade II listed churches that are desperately in need of investment to restore their buildings. In line with previous questions, I ask my hon. Friend to outline what further news we might have on future capital funding schemes to help to support churches like these.
Marsha De Cordova
I hope that both St Paulinus church and Christ church will be eligible for the new places of worship renewal fund. While we await publication of further guidance, I again advise my hon. Friend that churches can also contact their local diocesan office for further advice and support. I would also be happy to write to him about any additional support that may be available to the churches in his constituency. Once again, I thank all colleagues for raising this important issue.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
St Mary’s church in Old Town in Eastbourne is a grade I listed church that was built in the 12th century. A recent survey has revealed that the roof and east window are in urgent need of repair with a half-a-million pound restoration. Mother Arwen, the vicar, therefore needs to know when the places of worship renewal fund will open. I hope that the Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, the hon. Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), who is sitting on the Front Bench, might be able to help us all in answering that question.
In the meantime, the church is launching a fundraising appeal to try to bring together community funds to restore the church. Will the Second Church Estates Commissioner come down to Eastbourne—the sunniest town in the UK—to visit the church and back our appeal, of which I am a patron, to restore St Mary’s church?
Marsha De Cordova
How could I turn down such a wonderful offer to visit Eastbourne? I will certainly try to do so. Let us try to do it around the tennis—that would be even better.
In all seriousness, it is important that churches are given that certainty. I hope the Government are hearing the wishes of so many Members across the House; it is so important that they publish the guidance for the scheme so that people can continue to plan and raise those vital funds to repair the churches. These are historic buildings; they are vital not just for now, but to future generations beyond ours. It is really important that the Government get on and publish the guidance for this scheme at pace.
Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)
Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney)
I am delighted to give the Second Church Estates Commissioner, my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova), a short rest this morning.
The possibility of the House of Lords being temporarily based in the neighbouring QEII centre during restoration and renewal is being considered. The R and R programme has worked closely with the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government—the freehold owner of the centre—and with wider Government to understand the implications of using the QEII centre during in the programme. Direct engagement with the events sector has, to date, been restricted because of commercial sensitivities, but available information suggests that conference centres across Westminster and the wider London area have sufficient spare capacity to accommodate displaced events.
Martin Rhodes
I declare my interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for events. Given the importance of the QEII centre for hosting many major international events, and its direct economic value—we are talking about hundreds of jobs, thousands of hotel rooms, and significant spend and investment across the wider supply chain—does my hon. Friend have concerns that significantly reducing capacity could negatively affect the ability to attract major business events to the UK and give our international competitors an advantage?
Nick Smith
My hon. Friend is right to emphasise the QEII centre’s value to the UK events sector. However, I am advised that the evidence indicates that any displaced events could be accommodated by other conference centres in London, given the available spare capacity. Events, visitor spending and associated economic activity would be expected to transfer to alternative venues and their supply chains, rather than being lost to international competitors. Given his expertise, may I suggest a meeting with R and R officials who have looked deeper into this, so that they can hear his concerns in more detail and share their analysis of the matter?
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
The Second Church Estates Commissioner (Marsha De Cordova)
The installation of the 106th Archbishop of Canterbury was a truly historic moment; she is the first woman archbishop. I thank you, Mr Speaker, for representing the House at that important and momentous occasion, alongside the Prime Minister.
Adam Jogee
The people of Newcastle-under-Lyme join me in welcoming Archbishop Sarah to her new responsibilities and in wishing her well. We also give thanks to Bishop Michael, who has announced his intention to stand down in September, for his service. The new archbishop will have a long to-do list, but what steps will be taken to ensure that vacancies at parish churches, including St Mark’s, Basford, and St Margaret’s, Wolstanton, will be filled quickly?
Marsha De Cordova
The Archbishop of Canterbury sees herself as a shepherd of the flock, with five broad priorities: bringing confidence in the gospel; pastoral work; showing Christian hope; offering hospitality; and being a faith and prophetic voice. Given her previous experience as a nurse, she cares deeply about pastoral ministry, and she is committed to growing the Church and to supporting parishes and ministries throughout her leadership.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Many rural areas are served by clergy who are responsible for multiple parishes. Will the hon. Lady urge the archbishop to focus on providing more priests for rural parishes?
Marsha De Cordova
I will certainly raise that issue on the hon. Member’s behalf.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
Marsha De Cordova
The Church of England supports small, often rural, churches through targeted grants, practical tools and locally focused support. That includes the minor repairs and improvements fund, net zero grants, free digital tools such as the MyFundAccounting software, and the parish giving scheme. The Buildings for Mission funding also supports minor church repairs.
Amanda Martin
St Nicholas, Hilsea, in Portsmouth is not a rural church; is a low-income parish in a city. It is trying to replace a much-loved community hub that had to be demolished in 2020, but it faces a shortfall of £20,000 because of rising construction costs. What steps is the Second Church Estates Commissioner taking to ensure that small parishes in deprived areas with no other community facilities available are not left unable to fulfil promises made to the local community?
Marsha De Cordova
The diocese of Portsmouth has £2 million to support parishes in low-income areas, and a further £4 million for clergy, lay leadership and church development. Parishes such as St Nicholas, Hilsea, can access the funding and support from the diocese and the national Church institutions team, and I understand that the local archdeacon has been in touch with my hon. Friend’s office about this case. I am also happy to follow up with her on it, but more broadly, the Church has committed £4.6 billion between 2026 and 2034 to strengthen parish ministries and resources.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
The Second Church Estates Commissioner (Marsha De Cordova)
indicated dissent.
Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney)
The Church Commissioner gets another rest.
In February, the Restoration and Renewal Client Board reported costed proposals for the programme and a recommended way forward. The key recommendations are a phase 1 works package and the preparation of temporary accommodation, including a long-term resilience Commons Chamber, and reducing the number of delivery options from four to two, with a decision on a preferred option required by 2030. Also, the R and R team has engaged with Members of both Houses in party group meetings, Committees and briefings, and has had stands in Portcullis House and the Royal Gallery; the team has had almost 400 interactions with fellow parliamentarians. The next step is for parliamentary debates on the subject, in which Members of both Houses can consider the Client Board’s recommendations and decide how to make progress.
Charlie Dewhirst
What assessment has the hon. Gentleman made of the so-called waterside option, which would see a floating pontoon with temporary Chambers built on the Thames? That would allow Parliament to access the rest of the estate during the refurbishment of this Palace. Why has that not been included in the options, and why instead are we being left to choose between two lengthier and more costly options?
Nick Smith
I, too, read the waterside options. The issue is that there is a preferred option, which is that the Commons moves to the northern estate and the House of Lords moves to the QEII centre. That has been proposed for safety and value-for-money reasons.
Business of the House
(1 day, 13 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 20 April will include:
Monday 20 April—Consideration of Lords message on the Victims and Courts Bill, followed by consideration of Lords message on the Crime and Policing Bill.
Tuesday 21 April—Consideration of Lords amendments to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill.
Wednesday 22 April—If necessary, consideration of Lords message on the Pension Schemes Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords message on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords message on the Crime and Policing Bill.
Thursday 23 April—General debate on the contribution of allied health professionals, followed by general debate on reform of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. The subjects for these debates were determined by the Backbench Business Committee.
Friday 24 April—The House will not be sitting.
The provisional business for the week commencing 27 April includes:
Monday 27 April—If necessary, consideration of Lords message on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords messages.
Tuesday 28 April—Consideration of Lords messages.
Wednesday 29 April—Consideration of Lords messages.
Jesse Norman
As the House will know, this has been a week of sporting triumph. I think of the Lionesses’ 1-0 world cup qualifier against the world champions, Italy—or former world champions, I should say—and Rory McIlroy defending his Masters title, which was another great moment. Whether or not we play, watch, or even like golf, it was an extraordinary, gripping achievement.
Jesse Norman
And he is from Northern Ireland to boot. He is an honest man facing his demons and triumphing. What a contrast with the Prime Minister’s failure to answer, or even to engage with, the question at Prime Minister’s questions. The last four Prime Minister’s questions have focused on the Iran war, fuel duty, North sea oil and gas, and the defence review. Of the 24 responses given by the Prime Minister to the Leader of the Opposition, 23 have ignored the question and changed the subject. Yesterday, Mr Speaker, we even saw the Prime Minister hectoring you in your Chair, on live television, just for doing your job. That is a shameful record, for which the Prime Minister should write to you—and therefore by implication to this House—and apologise. This behaviour is contemptuous—of you, Mr Speaker, of the Leader of the Opposition, and of all MPs, now and in years gone by.
Our job, however imperfectly we may do it, is to pursue the truth on behalf of those we represent. If we give that up, then heaven help us. It is the Prime Minister’s job to answer, and to hold himself accountable for those answers. No Prime Minister likes to do that, but those are the rules. If the Prime Minister does not like the rules, does not want to offer honest answers, or is not up to it, he should step back and let someone else do the job instead. I thank you, Mr Speaker, on behalf of all of us for maintaining the traditions of this House. I have three questions for the Leader of the House today, and I ask him first if he shares my view that the Prime Minister’s behaviour is wholly inappropriate and disrespectful of this House.
This is just part of a wider problem to do with accountability and disrespect for Parliament. My noble Friend Lord Gilbert’s parliamentary question of 16 March asked the Government about authorised Budget briefings to the media. Lord Livermore replied on the Government’s behalf:
“Consistent with these principles, there are occasions where the Government will trail and/or announce policy ahead of a Budget to provide context and help the public understand major fiscal events.”
This is nonsense. The rules are perfectly clear: major events must be announced first to this House. To do otherwise is a breach of the rules of this House, a flagrant violation of the ministerial code and contempt of Parliament. Previous Governments, as we all know, have done this on occasion, since 1997 at least, and previous Chancellors of the Exchequer have been fired for inadvertent briefings to the media before a Budget, but never before has it been a Government’s declared policy to ignore Parliament.
The deeper constitutional point is, of course, that in our representative system of government, the people are Parliament, and Parliament is the people. Nothing good can come of an attempt to undermine the British constitution by this means. I ask the Leader of the House, secondly, to comment on this, and to set out what he will do to get this policy of non-announcement of major measures withdrawn and revoked.
Finally, Lord Robertson spoke of the “corrosive complacency” of current political leadership, and of putting our country at risk. He said,
“We cannot defend Britain with an ever-expanding welfare budget.”
No one has more experience and expertise on defence across the whole of Parliament, in both Chambers. This man, the noble Lord Robertson, was a political activist for Labour since 1961. Just think. He is the last person one could imagine wanting to offer public criticism of a Labour Prime Minister, let alone in these terms—a man Labour to his boots, but a patriot first.
It is impossible to blame previous Governments for this. This Government and this Prime Minister created the defence review and the defence investment plan—no one else. It is their choice and their decision. It matters because in every constituency across the country there are companies wanting to know what the Government have decided. They are waiting for leadership. They need to know the numbers and the commitment, and, of course, our adversaries need to know that we are serious in our resolve, and they need to see the measure of that seriousness. My great fear—perhaps it is also Lord Robertson’s great fear—is that the Government will never publish this document, or they will do so in a completely insubstantial and lightweight way, and that 10 months of delay will end in nothing, and it will all have been a colossal waste of time and energy. The Prime Minister has been utterly hopeless on this. He told the Liaison Committee weeks ago that the document was on his desk, yet nothing has happened. I leave it to colleagues to judge the truth of his remarks.
I ask the Leader of the House, thirdly, if he will give this House a cast-iron guarantee on behalf of the Government that the defence investment plan will be published, and not simply shelved and forgotten. The one-year anniversary is in July.
Sir Alan Campbell
First, my thoughts are with our servicemen and women currently serving in the middle east. As the as the situation unfolds, our highest priority is to ensure the safety of our people in the region. My thoughts are also with those affected by the terrible attempted attack on the Finchley Reform synagogue. I am sure that the House will join me in thanking the police and emergency services for their swift action.
This week has seen the 37th anniversary of the disaster at Hillsborough. My thoughts are with the family and friends of those who died. As the Prime Minister reaffirmed yesterday, the Government are committed to delivering legislation and introducing a duty of candour across all public services.
I also want to pay tribute to Lord Jeremy Beecham. Lord Beecham was an incredibly influential and dedicated politician who was respected across the political divide. His dedication to the city of Newcastle changed the city into what it is today. I know that the whole House will join me in sending condolences to his family and friends.
During recess, we published our plan to halve knife crime. At the core of that plan is prevention, providing safe spaces in communities and supporting schools and families to address root causes. That means giving an alternative path to young people, which will literally save lives.
We have also announced our intention to invest £237 million to expand community diagnostic centres across England. Four CDCs will open, 17 will be expanded and 15 will receive enhancements to boost diagnostic capacity and get patients seen quicker. That means patients will be able to get swifter results, which is really important, and get them closer to home, which again is important. This week, over 500 new free breakfast clubs also began to open their doors, helping parents with the cost of living and giving children a healthy start to the day.
I turn now to the remarks of the shadow Leader of the House. If I may, I will deal broadly with his first two questions together. He referred first to the way in which the Prime Minister addressed the questions put to him yesterday, and secondly announcements made outside the House and whether the House should be the first to hear. The right hon. Gentleman has been here a very, very long time—[Interruption.] Well, a long time—let me put it that way. Not as long as me, but a long time. Frankly, we have both been here long enough to know better than to ask the questions he did. I know why he did so, and I understand exactly what the point is at the heart of it, but all Prime Ministers deal with Prime Minister’s questions in their own way. It is not unusual for any Prime Minister or any Minister not to give the answer that the Opposition want on a particular day, so let us not kid ourselves that we are entering a new chapter on that.
The shadow Leader of the House talked about announcements to the House. He actually said that the previous Government “on occasion” made announcements outside the House. On occasion? I think it was on occasion that they actually made the announcements in the House.
But there is a serious point, which I will address. I am absolutely clear, and I have said from the Dispatch Box before, that serious announcements should be made at the earliest convenience in the House. But we understand that politics is done in a different environment from how it was done a decade or two decades before: to some extent, it is a moving environment, and Government is working in that environment, too. However, I do take the shadow Leader of the House’s point, and I have said that announcements should be made in the House at the earliest opportunity.
Let me turn to the comments of Lord Robertson. The Prime Minister made his and the Government’s view clear on that. The shadow Leader of the House asked about the defence plan. It will be delivered, and the House will have an opportunity to debate the plan. I do accept that perhaps it has taken longer than any of us would have wished; let me give the House three reasons why that is so. The first is that we inherited a defence budget that was totally out of control and which had been mismanaged for the past 14 years. It had been, in the words of a previous Defence Secretary, hollowed out—and that was not a previous Labour Defence Secretary but a previous Conservative Defence Secretary. That is the first reason why it takes time to put this right and turn it around.
The second reason, and I think the shadow Leader of the House knows this because he is a distinguished member of the Defence Committee, is that we inherited an economic mess. If we are going to put defence right, we have to have the money to do that. Again, the right hon. Gentleman understands that, because he has all but admitted in this place that he is a secret Keynesian at heart. [Interruption.] He has admitted to it. Don’t worry; he has owned up to it. The point is that he understands, as do most people, that our economic inheritance was absolutely appalling, and we have to get that right too before we can press ahead with our commitments to properly fund defence.
The third point that is relevant here is that the botched Brexit deal left us diplomatically isolated, and the Prime Minister has personally invested a great deal of his time and energy to build alliances with our allies, not least in Europe. Those alliances are important as we look at the question of defence in a moving international situation and of where defence will be as we move forward. I cannot accept the analysis or the suggestion by the Leader of the Opposition that somehow, at the election, it was day zero and nothing that happened before that has any impact on the way in which this Government are forced to face up to those difficult decisions. We will publish the plan and there will be an opportunity to debate it.
Let me finish on this: I understand the shadow Leader of the House’s point about companies, and obviously there needs to be some certainty. However, let me just rid him of the suggestion that everyone is waiting for announcements and nothing is happening. Contracts are being issued all the time, and more than 80% of contracts in the last two years have gone to British companies, which is in stark contrast to the performance of the previous Government.
Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)
Stephen Yaxley-Lennon is urging his followers to behave ahead of the “Unite the Kingdom” march on 16 May. The Met police have allowed the fascists the freedom to march in central London. By contrast, the organisers of the annual Nakba march, who provided the Met with details last December, are still waiting to have their route approved. The previous “Unite the Kingdom” march erupted in unacceptable levels of violence, unlike the hugely popular and peaceful anti-genocide marches. The treatment of the two groups by the Met is stark and biased. Will the Leader of the House find the time for a debate on the alarming rise of far-right activity on our streets?
Sir Alan Campbell
I know that my hon. Friend is a keen campaigner on these matters. I am sure that the Met police will have heard her comments. Where there is the threat of a demonstration turning to violence or disorder, the Met police have a responsibility to take that very seriously indeed, even if it takes a while to agree how, or indeed whether, that march will take place. It does not matter which part of the political spectrum it comes from; what matters is security on our streets, and we trust the Met police to get on with that.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
I start by wishing my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) all the best for his parental leave. Sadly, and particularly for his wife, I have no news to update the House with, but I hope to be able to do so in due course.
I draw the House’s attention to the devastating civil war in Sudan, which sadly entered its fourth year yesterday. This is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with over 29 million Sudanese facing acute food insecurity. Earlier in the parliamentary Session, the Prime Minister said in response to a question on Sudan from the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), that he does
“not think we discuss it enough in this House.”—[Official Report, 30 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 806.]
Will the Leader of the House act in the spirit of those words and ask the Foreign Secretary to give a statement on the conflict next week and include an update to the House on her discussions at this week’s Berlin conference?
We continue to reel from the news emerging from the Oval Office. I must confess that I did not have the President of the United States labelling the Pope as “weak on crime” on my 2026 bingo card, but given recent events, perhaps I should have done. His latest AI image released last night of him embracing Jesus Christ reminded me of the immortal words of Brenda from Bristol in April 2017: “Not another one!” In all seriousness, Trump’s chaos is having real impacts here in the UK and in my own constituency of North East Fife. His reckless war in the middle east is hitting families up and down the country in the pocket and at the fuel pumps. Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate in Government time on the economic impact of Trump’s war and include a consideration of Liberal Democrat proposals for a 10p fuel duty cut? Other countries are providing that certainty on fuel duty now. Is it not time that the Government did likewise?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join the hon. Member in wishing the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) well, and we await news with bated breath—at least he might get the nursery finished by the time of the arrival.
The hon. Member makes a serious point about the Sudan civil war. The Government are doing everything we can, not just to help to address the humanitarian situation, but to try to get an end to that war. We have committed £146 million in aid to Sudan and have sanctioned Rapid Support Forces commanders. We are doing everything we can, but I join her in hoping that the conflict ends soon. We are not shy in updating the House on this matter and will continue to do so. I will draw her remarks to the attention of the Foreign Secretary.
I will not comment on the President of the United States’ comments and the effect they are having, because I think we can see that play out not just in the hon. Member’s constituency but elsewhere. The real answer from the Government is that we are absolutely focused on doing everything we can in the national interest to see if we can ensure the ceasefire continues, but also to bring an end to the conflict. She is right to point out that the economic situation is very serious, too—possibly the most serious energy crisis in the last half century. The economic impact may well be beginning to be felt and may continue for some time. Again, there are lots of suggestions about what we might do. The Government are absolutely focused on this. We will not rush to judgment about action that we need to take now—we have already taken some targeted measures, not least on heating oil—but we are absolutely focused on that, and I reassure the House that we will continue to do so.
We are looking at all of that, and I am sure that, again, because we are not shy of doing so, when the opportunity arises, there will be an opportunity for further statements on these matters. I hope the House can come together not just to ensure that we have a firm view going forward in the international situation, but on how we can combat the economic issues that I am afraid are likely to continue for some time.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
On 28 April, it will be Staffordshire Day across the Houses of Parliament. There will be a marketplace in the Jubilee Room from 12 pm till 2 pm, and there will be Staffordshire oatcakes in the Tea Room for breakfast. Could I, through a question to the Leader of the House, invite the whole House to come and sample some of the delicacies of what I think is the greatest county—after Lancashire, of course, Mr Speaker—in the country? On a serious note, would he consider holding a debate in Government time on the importance of county identities? Given local government reorganisation, county identities are important, as is how we bolster them as we look to the future with our new councils.
Sir Alan Campbell
It is a tempting offer, and I encourage the House to support my hon. Friend’s efforts to demonstrate what a fantastic part of the country he represents. I share his view about counties and county days—they are, indeed, important. I cannot offer him Government time to do this, but if he seeks an application for a Backbench Business or Westminster Hall debate, I am sure that people who represent counties right across the country will come and share his view about the importance of county identities.
Mr Speaker
And they will fly the flag for Staffordshire. I call Bob Blackman, Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
Bring back Middlesex, I say.
On behalf of the Backbench Business Committee, I remind the Leader of the House that we await the promised motion to change the Standing Orders for the election of the Backbench Business Committee for the new Session.
In addition to the business announced by the Leader of the House, next Thursday in the Chamber there will be Select Committee statements from the Environmental Audit Committee and the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee. Turning to the business in Westminster Hall. on Tuesday 21 April there will be a debate on the need for an independent national review body overseeing wheelchair provision. On Thursday 23 April there will be a debate on access to education and training for young adult carers, followed by a debate on gambling advertising. On Tuesday 28 April there will be a debate on Government support for park home owners.
I managed to get a private Member’s Bill through this place, which became the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. We are still awaiting the implementation of that Act, which means that vulnerable people are being exploited by rogue landlords. I understand that the Department has completed the consultation on the regulations to implement the Act, but it is likely that we will not see it implemented until 2027. Could the Leader of the House arrange for a statement in this place next week on what exactly the Government are doing to implement the Act, which has cross-party support? If there is no statement, Mr Speaker, may I urge you to allow me an Adjournment debate on the subject?
Sir Alan Campbell
That is quite a bid, Mr Speaker— I have not heard that one before. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his work and the work of the Committee and for updating us on the business.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned the Standing Orders. As he knows, we are bringing forward a number of Standing Orders relating to the work of his Committee. I made a commitment that we would do that before the end of this Session, and we are committed to sticking with that. I cannot tell him the exact day, but I am committed to doing that, so that is what we will do.
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on the way in which he got his private Member’s Bill through this place, because it was quite an achievement. I am sorry to hear that the Act has not yet had the anticipated effect. I know that he remains an assiduous campaigner on these matters—I think he has met Ministers and continues to press them. I cannot guarantee him Government time, so I hope that you will listen carefully to his plea, Mr Speaker, and then he can hear directly from the relevant Minister about what the plan is. In the meantime, I will take it up with the Minister because, as the hon. Gentleman points out, his concern is shared by Members across the House.
Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)
This week, Telford experienced a major fuel tanker fire near a primary school in Newdale, which affected many children, families and staff. I thank Shropshire Fire and Rescue Service for its swift action, together with other blue light services. In particular, I thank Rachel Cook, the headteacher of Newdale primary school, I thank the children for their fast action, and I thank the community for the way in which it rallied around those children to get them away from danger, including PureGym, the Grazing Cow public house, Lawley village academy, Lawley nursery and Morrisons. Can we have a debate in Government time on the importance of community resilience, and will the Leader of the House join me in thanking everybody for supporting that community effort to ensure that those children were safe?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to bring this matter to the House, and I join him in congratulating and thanking everyone who supported the response to the fire and ensured the safety of the local community, including Miss Cook and all the others he mentioned. The contribution of emergency first responders has been raised with me on a number of occasions, and I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for a Westminster Hall debate, where I am sure others will join him, so that he can raise these matters in greater detail.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
In Wick in my constituency, over 1,000 local residents have raised with me their concerns about unfair and confusing parking charges, which are deterring shoppers and damaging local businesses. May we have a statement from the Secretary of State on the delay to the revised private parking code of practice?
Sir Alan Campbell
This is a frustrating issue for a lot of people, not least in my constituency, and it is a bit of a moving target for legislation. I will draw it to the attention of the Secretary of State and see where we can get.
Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)
Last month I attended a celebration to mark the 40th anniversary of the reopening of Bathgate railway station in 1986, as part of efforts to regenerate the local economy. More than 80 passenger trains now travel through Bathgate railway station every day between Edinburgh and Glasgow, playing an important role in supporting connectivity and economic growth. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating all those who campaigned for the reopening of the station, and commend the volunteers, including Bathgate community council, which brought people together to celebrate the occasion?
Sir Alan Campbell
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in congratulating Bathgate railway station, its staff and the volunteers who helped to bring the celebration together. I particularly mention volunteers because they play such an important role in our local communities. It is vital that communities have access to joined-up transport systems. The Government have recently announced the “Better Connected” strategy for England, so we are on the side of the people she is talking about.
Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)
Many Members of the House, possibly including you, Mr Speaker, will have received communications from retired civil servants who are facing personal and financial distress as a result of the failure of Capita—the company handling the pensions—to deliver properly. Will the Leader of the House be good enough to write to the Cabinet Secretary and ask her to get a grip and sort out this mess, and seek to ensure that Capita receives no further Government contracts of any kind until this matter is fully, finally and satisfactorily resolved?
Sir Alan Campbell
As has been said on a number of occasions in Business questions and beyond, the Government are absolutely of the view that such delays are unacceptable. This is not the service that people deserve, and resolving it is a matter of the utmost urgency. An urgent recovery plan is under way, and loans are available in the meantime to provide immediate financial support where it is needed. As the right hon. Gentleman reasonably requests, I will write to the Cabinet Secretary and make her aware of the situation, and get an update for him.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
I recently met an incredible woman, Rachel Liew, a constituent of mine who joins us today in the Gallery. Following the devastating loss of her five-year-old son Sam in 2021, she has channelled unimaginable grief into extraordinary action. Sam’s death was due to FIRES—febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome. That is a rare condition within NORSE—new onset refractory status epilepticus—which can suddenly strike previously healthy children and remains poorly understood. Through her charity, Sam’s Superheroes, Rachel supports families, raises awareness and funds vital research. Will the Leader of the House help to secure a meeting with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, to discuss increasing funding, improving research co-ordination and strengthening clinical support for families facing this catastrophic condition?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises a very serious matter, and I join her in thanking Rachel for her dedication to this issue following her tragic loss, and for the work of Sam’s Superheroes. I join my hon. Friend in awe, as I simply do not know how parents cope with the loss of a child, let alone then to go on and campaign—it is remarkable what some people are able to do. Through the UK rare diseases framework, the Government remain committed to improving the lives of people with rare diseases, including conditions such as FIRES, and I commit to helping my hon. Friend arrange that meeting with the Secretary of State so that they can discuss the matter in detail.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
Next week sees the funeral of my constituent Bob Humphrey-Taylor. Bob was a pillar of our community, and the driving force behind so many projects across Mellor and Marple, especially those with links to our industrial heritage. He was often dressed as the 18th-century industrialist Samuel Oldknow, and he was the owner of the most remarkable moustache I have ever seen out in the wild. He was a champion of our campaign to seek world heritage site status for our canals, our famous lock flight, and England’s highest aqueduct. May we have a debate in Government time, setting us up for the next round of world heritage site applications? That would be a fitting legacy for Bob and all those who have done so much in my community to celebrate our industrial heritage.
Sir Alan Campbell
I join the hon. Lady in paying tribute to Mr Humphrey-Taylor and everyone involved in the work that she talked about. These people are the backbone of our community and we rightly celebrate our industrial heritage, which is so important. I will write to the Secretary of State and find out what the plan is going forward, and I will ensure that the hon. Lady is updated.
Neil Coyle (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) (Lab)
Hundreds of constituents on Acanthus Drive, Abercorn Way and Achilles Close face eviction threats, rent hikes and pressure to sign weaker tenancy agreements from their landlord Freshview and the freeholder BMR St James. Thankfully, they have the support of Andy Bates, in my south Bermondsey team, our Labour council, Southwark Law Centre and myself, but will the Government provide time to debate penalising rogue landlords and practices such as this, especially given the new rights for renters coming from our Government in May?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for his work in this regard. We celebrate the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, which is the biggest reform to renting in a generation, but we realise that there is still more that can be done. The Government stand firmly on the side of renters and I will ensure that the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has heard my hon. Friend’s concerns. I will certainly give consideration to his request for a debate at some point in the future, but I also point out that excellent work has been done not only by him but by Southwark council, which I hope residents appreciate.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Chapter 4, paragraph 23 of the North Tyneside local plan, which covers an area that includes the Leader of the House’s constituency, talks about protecting the green belt. As there is green-belt land in the north of his constituency, I am sure that he shares my concerns about over-development, which is referred to in that chapter, so will he join me in supporting my constituents in Albrighton in Shropshire, where a speculative development for 800 houses on green-belt land was recently thrown out by Shropshire council but is now going to appeal? Is it not the case that my constituents, like his and those of many Members of the House, are not against housing? They are just against housing on the green belt. Housing has to be built in the right place and at the right scale, but unfortunately this Government seem more concerned about sitting on a bulldozer and bulldozing through Shropshire’s green belt than getting that housing balance right?
Sir Alan Campbell
I do not always disagree with the right hon. Gentleman, but I disagree with his analysis of where we have got to with this matter. I agree that there should be a voice for residents, but there should also be rights and responsibilities for local authorities, who walk a difficult line. We need to protect our environment wherever we can but, as he recognises, we walk a difficult line because our residents need more houses. Housing is a good thing in driving the economy, provided that the protections in place are available to protect the areas he talks about. I understand that can be frustrating for residents, including, as he points out, my own constituents. At the same time, they realise that there is a housing shortage in our country and that housing is at a premium in many areas, so frankly we need to get on with it and build some new houses.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
Mr Speaker, I know that you, like me, are incredibly passionate about youth services. My constituents are very concerned that under the previous Conservative-led local authority, Staffordshire faced the third worst youth service cuts in the country. While I welcome the new Government report, the national youth strategy and the £500 million being invested in youth services, the first wave of those hubs announced is concentrated on cities. Will the Leader of the House guarantee a debate in Government time on youth services in towns, which have been so decimated under Conservative-led authorities?
Sir Alan Campbell
As my hon. Friend will have heard, her remarks were well received by Members on the Labour Benches, because there is an acceptance that youth services are vital for the future of young people. The reality is that there was no youth strategy when we came into office, but we now have one that has been drawn up by young people. We are doing everything we can to tackle what has effectively been the closure of more than 1,000 youth centres under the previous Government. I will raise the matter with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and ensure that my hon. Friend gets a response.
May I also put on the record my thanks to my hon. Friend for her brilliant work as my Parliamentary Private Secretary? I understand her motivation and her reason for not wanting to continue—I hope it was nothing I said—but I put on the record my sincere thanks. She was absolutely fantastic.
Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)
Anyone who attended the national emergency briefing on 27 November, as I did, could not help being captivated by the international expertise on show about the effects of the climate and nature crisis on everything from food security and national security to all other aspects of British life. Is it not time that the Prime Minister responded to the cross-party call for a nationally televised national emergency briefing? Will the Leader of the House arrange for a statement to be made by the Prime Minister in this House to accept the need for the public to really understand and hear about the genuine effects of the climate and nature crisis?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman mentions food security and the climate crisis, and he will know that the effects of the current instability in the international situation have brought these issues into starker focus. I will give consideration to what he says, but the Prime Minister is absolutely focused on matters such as food security, because we understand that this is a particularly turbulent time. He is entirely focused on ensuring that we are resilient and emerge from the current situation not by getting back to some kind of normality, but by being in a much stronger position than we have when coming out of previous crises.
Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)
There are almost 26,000 unpaid carers in Bolton, providing vital support to individuals across the borough who would otherwise struggle to manage. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking the hard-working staff and volunteers at the local charity Bolton Carers Support? They include Melanie and Georgette, who provide much-needed support to carers and who I met in Horwich earlier in the month. Will he also acknowledge the vital work done by unpaid carers to support my constituents across Bolton, Blackrod, Horwich and Westhoughton?
Sir Alan Campbell
This Government recognise the vital role of unpaid carers and are absolutely committed to ensuring that they have the support they need, not least through increasing the weekly carer’s allowance limit. I absolutely join my hon. Friend in thanking Georgette, Melanie and all the hard-working staff and volunteers at Bolton Carers Support and across the country.
Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
It has just been announced that the last NHS dentist provision in Towcester in my constituency will be withdrawn on 1 August 2026. That represents a significant loss, especially in a rapidly expanding town, with no other NHS dentistry provision around for miles. I have written to the integrated care board, but I am also writing to Health Ministers to ask for a meeting and to ask what other NHS services are available. I would be grateful if the Leader of the House could see that the Department pays due attention to that letter.
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Lady raises issues that have affected a number of constituencies across the country, not least my own. This Government are doing everything we can to ensure that there is provision and access to services, not least through dental hubs. She has done the right thing in writing to a Minister, and I will follow that up by raising it with them.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)
I welcome the Government’s decision to introduce a cap on student loan interest rates for plan 2 borrowers. That is an important step towards easing the financial burden on graduates, but my constituents continue to raise with me how unfair the system is, with significant financial pressure from the repayment terms and thresholds that have continued to increase despite the rising costs. Will the Leader of the House ensure that time is made for further debate on student loan reform so that we can consider further action to ensure that the system is fair?
Sir Alan Campbell
We have taken action to improve the system that we inherited and to try to make it fairer for students, graduates and taxpayers. Interest on plan 2 and plan 3 student loans will be capped at 6% from this September until August 2027. In the long term, we are looking for ways to improve the system and make it fairer, particularly for students and graduates from low-income backgrounds. The Treasury Committee is looking into this matter, and I will certainly give consideration to my hon. Friend’s plea to ensure that it is debated when that report comes out.
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
The residents of Cheddar suffer the weekend misery of thoughtless, antisocial drivers who come from across the country to meet in Cheddar Gorge. Not all the drivers are careless, but I have been contacted by well over 100 residents, many of whom fear for their lives as a result of often dangerous driving when drivers leave or come into the village. Can the Leader of the House ask Ministers—perhaps the Ministers for policing, transport and local government, and anyone else who might be able to do something—to consider how their agencies might work together to enable the various authorities to bring peace to the residents of this village? It is a beautiful place, but it is ruined by dangerous driving most weekends.
Sir Alan Campbell
I am sorry to hear about the experiences of residents in the hon. Lady’s constituency. The Government have brought forward a road safety strategy, but as she points out, this is more than just a question of road safety; it is about policing too, so I will draw it to the attention of the relevant Ministers and see if there is a way forward.
Sally Jameson (Doncaster Central) (Lab/Co-op)
My constituent Lisa Theobald suffered the unimaginable loss of her son Ryan, who was killed at just 20 years old when he was stabbed in Doncaster city centre one evening in January 2022. Lisa has shown extraordinary courage in the face of this grief and has channelled her energies into being a campaigner for stronger action on knife crime. Does the Leader of the House agree that more needs to be done to make sure our communities have the ability to deal with these kinds of emergencies, and will he meet me to talk about making time for a debate on the idea of introducing bleed kits to night-time venues, so that those places and their staff are better equipped to deal with those initial moments when somebody is stabbed, and potentially save lives?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am sorry to hear of what happened to Ryan—no family should have to go through that. My hon. Friend raises an important matter; the Government have just announced a knife crime strategy, and I will bring to the attention of the relevant Minister my hon. Friend’s comments about bleed kits, because they have an important role to play. First aid can save lives in these situations, so I will make sure that the relevant Minister hears her concerns.
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
Yesterday, we learned that 600 jobs could be lost across the North Tees and South Tees NHS trusts, including nurses and clinical staff. This is devastating news for hard-working NHS staff and for residents worried about local services. Will the Leader of the House allow a debate on these job losses, and will he join me in urging the NHS to ensure that the staff affected are properly supported?
Sir Alan Campbell
Where there are job losses, if they are inevitable, it is important that staff are supported. This is a local matter, and I am sure that if the hon. Gentleman seeks an Adjournment debate, he will get a response directly from a Minister.
Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)
Last week, I visited our youth hub in Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney, and heard at first hand some fantastic success stories of young people being supported into work through this Labour Government’s prioritisation. Can we have a ministerial statement on the work of these hubs and how they will integrate with the new youth jobs grant to help even more young people into jobs?
Sir Alan Campbell
Given the legacy that we inherited—the number of people not in employment, education or training—access to work is a big priority for this Government, and through the Milburn review we are looking at what further steps we can take. Should my hon. Friend seek a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss how this can be done in a joined-up way, I will certainly support him in trying to get that meeting.
Susan Murray (Mid Dunbartonshire) (LD)
I want to continue to highlight the importance of local railways—an issue that has already been raised by the hon. Member for Bathgate and Linlithgow (Kirsteen Sullivan). This year is the 200th anniversary of Scotland’s first modern railway, the Monkland and Kirkintilloch line. It opened in 1826, just months after Stockton and Darlington became the first passenger railway in the world to use steam trains, and it is the first railway in Scotland to be authorised by Act of Parliament to use steam trains for both passengers and goods. The community in my constituency is celebrating with exhibitions, talks and a guided walk in Whitegates Park, which is named after the level crossing where the line approached the Forth and Clyde canal, delivering Monkland coal to barges destined for Edinburgh. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Don Martin, an eminent local historian who has researched and championed the heritage of the line for decades, and will he consider coming north—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. The hon. Lady has been here long enough to know that questions cannot be that long.
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly congratulate everyone involved in the commemoration of the Monkland railway. It is, from the hon. Lady’s account, one of the oldest lines, and I know how important such lines are from knowledge of my region, where the first railways were developed—similarly to hers—for work on the coalfield. I congratulate everybody involved in that railway, and I hope that their celebrations are successful.
Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
Following 14 years of severe austerity under the coalition Government and Conservative Governments, this Labour Government allocated a record £7.3 billion in December to English councils to fix potholes and improve roads. Sadly, Liberal Democrat-run Stockport council has a self-imposed policy of not filling potholes under 40 mm, meaning that some of the roads in my constituency are in truly shocking condition. I am running a survey on my website on this issue, and an overwhelming majority of residents have raised Edgeley as a concern. Many of my constituents feel that there is a challenging disparity between the road conditions in more affluent areas and those in my constituency. I thank Mike Naylor, the Labour candidate in Edgeley, for his work on that. May we have a debate in Government time on how councils such as Stockport can better use the increased funding?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to point to our record investment in local highways maintenance over the next four years and the £7.3 billion to tackle the scourge of potholes. I am astonished to hear that his Lib Dem council is not prepared to use that money. I encourage residents to take part in his survey to see the extent of the issue. When they get the opportunity, I am sure that his residents will make their voices heard at the ballot box.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
Over the past 12 months or so, a lot of residents and businesses across Fylde and Wyre have reported significant delays to, and times of entire absence of, Royal Mail deliveries to their properties and businesses, with some lucky to get post once a week, or twice a week at best. I have experienced that myself. With local government elections on the horizon, will the Leader of the House provide a statement or some reassurance on the work being done among the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, Royal Mail and local councils to ensure that people’s access to democracy through their postal votes is not diminished?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman will know, because he is an assiduous attender at these sessions, that the shortcomings of Royal Mail have been raised on a number of occasions. He refers specifically to the forthcoming local elections, and I can reassure him that the defending democracy taskforce has this issue clearly in its sights. As far as is possible, the taskforce gives reassurance that this is a priority in the run-up to the local elections.
Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)
Earlier this year, I had the pleasure of attending a mixed rugby tournament at Thurrock rugby club, hosted by the Acers mixed rugby team and in which my daughter took part. The absolute joy and chaos of the event cannot be overstated, but it was a pure pleasure to be part of it. Opportunities for disabled children to take part in sport are unfortunately few and far between and are generally down to the likes of fantastic individuals such as Leah Knight, who runs Acers, or the indomitable Ally Gavin, who runs SouthSEND rugby. Will the Leader of the House allow time for a debate on the importance of sporting opportunities for disabled children and young people, so that they can truly grasp how joyous it is to be part of occasions like that one in January?
Sir Alan Campbell
The Government are clear that access to sport is important for young people, irrespective of their circumstances and their disability. I thank Thurrock rugby club and the people mentioned by my hon. Friend for their efforts in this regard. I think this topic would be ideal for an Adjournment debate, where my hon. Friend could give further weight to the case that she is making.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
A constituent recently contacted me to say that she is concerned that her son, who is a member of the armed forces, is finding it impossible to get a driving test. The well-documented concerns about delays are compounded by the fact that he is posted abroad, his timing is difficult to anticipate, and military personnel have been redeployed to support civilian instructors and testers. Can we have a statement, perhaps from either the Secretary of State for Defence or the Secretary of State for Transport, to clarify how we are going to get through the impasse that has been created?
Sir Alan Campbell
It is important that military personnel have access to driving tests, and the hon. Lady is right: the action the Government have taken means that resources are spread slightly thinner than they might otherwise be. We need to make sure that there are no delays due to administrative issues. If my memory serves me correctly, there is a Backbench Business debate next week about the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. The hon. Lady might want to raise her concerns and bring in the defence side that she has talked about.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
Many thousands of children in Derby will be lifted out of poverty by this Labour Government through the changes that came in earlier this month, but there is no complacency in a city that has some of the highest salaries outside London yet a high number of children living in poverty too. That is why the Tale of 2 Cities charity has been set up. It is working with businesses to create an improved life chances fund for around 500 children in our community nurseries—children who will be eligible for free school meals once they start school. Will the Leader of the House allow time for a debate on the next steps in tackling child poverty, so that all children have the chance to thrive?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this matter and for championing the work of Tale of 2 Cities. Local charities are the golden thread that runs through our communities, and they do a fantastic job. The Government are keen to support them, not least because we are taking action on child poverty, scrapping the two-child limit and focusing on the cost of living. I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for a Westminster Hall debate, so that she can ask the Minister who responds what the next steps in the Government’s plan are.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
I am sure the Leader of the House will share my delight at the news of two new dental contracts, worth £6 million, in Bridlington, which will double NHS dental provision in the town. However, the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. I am extremely frustrated by the news that the local NHS trust has announced the proposed closure of the care unit at Bridlington hospital this summer. Will he join me in thanking the 1,200 residents who have already signed my petition against the closure, and can we have a debate in Government time on the provision of health services in coastal communities?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman will know that I am very keen— not least because I have a coastal constituency—to ensure that coastal communities get the support that they need. The reality is that the Government are putting a great deal more resource into the NHS. There are still difficult decisions to be made, and I encourage people to make their voices heard. I am sure that as the NHS deliberates on the best way forward for his hospital, those voices will be heard.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
Queen Elizabeth II was and still is held in the highest esteem by the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme and Staffordshire, and next Tuesday is the 100th anniversary of her birth. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to Her late Majesty’s long life of service to our United Kingdom and the Commonwealth, and will he encourage all colleagues to sign early-day motion 3129, which I have tabled to mark that milestone?
[That this House notes, with affection and respect, the 100th anniversary, on 21 April 2026 of the birth of Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II; reflects on the sense of loss that people throughout the United Kingdom, the realms, territories and Commonwealth still feel following Her late Majesty’s death on 8 September 2022; expresses its grateful thanks for Her late Majesty’s long life of service and her reign of 70 years and 214 days, unparalleled in history; remembers a monarch driven by purpose, commitment, love of country and an unmatched dedication to the Commonwealth; recognises the many visits, meetings and receptions, over seven decades, through which the people of this country were able to meet Her late Majesty, and she them, in communities right across the UK and the world; acknowledges that this milestone in history will be a very personal day of reflection, love and remembrance for His Majesty the King and his family as they remember a mother, grandmother, aunt, cousin and great-grandmother; and gives thanks for Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s long life of service and the example she set to all of us and sings with one voice, God Save the King.]
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly join my hon. Friend in saying that Her late Majesty was a remarkable individual, not simply because of the time that she gave to public service but because of the way that she conducted herself, and I think she would be immensely proud of the way in which the current sovereign is working. It is the 100th anniversary of her birth, as my hon. Friend says, and I think it appropriate that we pay tribute to her and mark the occasion in some way. I encourage colleagues to sign his early-day motion.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
A report by the charity MYTIME Young Carers, which is based in Broadstone but works across the country, found that young carers are twice as likely as their classmates to be persistently absent and, shockingly, more than twice as likely to face school suspensions. Young carers are now included in the school census, but 69% of schools do not have a young carers champion. Given the opportunity presented by the upcoming schools Bill, which is expected in the next Session, can we have a debate in Government time on how we support young carers in the classroom through the creation of young carers champions in every secondary school?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Lady will know that the Government are keen to ensure that schools have the resources they need to tackle the issues their children face. I do understand the difficulty of young people who are carers in ensuring they can fully commit to school life. She is right, and there is a Bill going through Parliament currently, but I will raise the issue she mentions with the relevant Minister, because I think she has an important point.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
Public service is about dedication, resilience and delivering for those who need it most, and as she prepares to retire next week, Denise McGuckin, the chief executive of Hartlepool borough council, has exemplified those qualities throughout an outstanding career. It has been my privilege to work with Denise for two decades, during which time she has shown unwavering commitment to the people of Hartlepool. From starting as a recycling officer 30 years ago to leading the council through the pandemic, securing over £160 million of investment, delivering outstanding children’s services and bringing the tall ships back to our town, her calm, compassionate and decisive leadership has left a lasting legacy. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking Denise for her remarkable service to the people of Hartlepool, and in wishing her a long and happy retirement?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to pay tribute to Denise McGuckin. Civil servants work tirelessly to serve our local communities, and they are the very foundations of local government. Chief executives have a tremendously important role to play in leadership, so I join him in wishing Denise a well-deserved retirement after years of dedicated service.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Last Friday, along with the leader of North Lincolnshire council, I visited the carers support centre in Brigg, and met the staff and volunteers who do such an excellent job. I also heard from individual carers about the challenges they face, one of which, incidentally, is the complexity of the Government forms they have to complete for various benefits. Could the Leader of the House find time for a debate to explore how we can better support carers up and down the country?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman is right to draw attention to the importance of the role played not only by carers, but by carers support centres in what are often very challenging situations. I would be interested to receive his feedback from the meeting, and I will ensure we get it to Ministers, so that we can build on the commitment we have given to support carers in every way possible.
Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)
Consett is full of great community-focused organisations. Recently, I met those at Shadows of Light CIC, which offers dog-assisted therapy for care homes, young people, those at risk of suicide and veterans. I met them at the Foundation For Good, another charity in Consett, which focuses on wellbeing and support across the community. Can we have a debate in Government time on the vital role that social enterprises and charities play in strengthening and building our communities?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to champion community-based organisations, not least those in the fine town of Consett, of which I am a son and very grateful for that. Social enterprises and charities provide essential support to the most vulnerable, and they are the golden thread that tie our communities together. I am delighted to hear of the work of the Foundation For Good and others. I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for a Westminster Hall debate or, indeed, an Adjournment debate, so she can highlight the good work being done not just in Consett, but in other areas.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
In February, it was announced in the national cancer plan that a rare cancers clinical lead and a rare cancers research lead would be appointed, but no time frame was given for these appointments. These new positions are key to progressing outcomes for people with rare cancers, who have been left out of previous cancer plans. Can the Leader of the House make time for a Health Minister to update the House on progress with these appointments?
Sir Alan Campbell
I do not know where we are with the appointments, but I will certainly take that up with a Minister and find out, and I will let the hon. Gentleman know.
Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)
We have a pothole epidemic in Hastings, Rye and the villages, and that is why the Government gave East Sussex county council a record £21 million to tackle it—more money than ever before. So, I was absolutely furious when I uncovered figures that showed that it actually planned to spend £18 million in the same year, £3 million less, on filling potholes—absolutely shocking. The drivers and residents I represent are fed up with this Conservative council dodging its responsibilities and wasting our taxpayers’ money, such as £5 million overspent on the shambolic Queensway Gateway project. Does the Leader of the House agree with me that there are now no more excuses, and that East Sussex county council must crack on and fill the potholes?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the action taken by the Government to ensure that councils have the necessary resources to tackle potholes, so it is inexplicable that the performance of Conservative-run councils such as East Sussex on potholes, which has been raised with me on a number of occasions, is falling below the standards we would expect. If they get the resources, they should spend the resources. I hope that residents are making their voices very clear on these matters.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
My constituency has two railway stations, one in Highbridge and one in Bridgwater. Sadly, neither station is accessible. There is no step-free access to enable wheelchair users and those with mobility impairments to move easily from one platform to another. To do so at both stations involves travelling a circuitous route, leaving the station and crossing a busy road. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate in Government time on improving accessibility across our rail network?
Sir Alan Campbell
I understand the hon. Gentleman’s frustration if there are railways stations and a railway service that some people are unable to access. The Government have announced an investment of £303 million over four years, via Access for All. I will get him an update from the relevant Minister on what that means for his constituency.
Gareth Thomas (Harrow West) (Lab/Co-op)
Does my right hon. Friend share my profound disappointment that the Conservative party selected a candidate for the local elections in Harrow who thinks that British-born Asian MPs such as the former Prime Minister and the current Home Secretary are not British, should go back to Pakistan, supports discrimination against Romanians, and thinks there should be mass deportations? May we have a statement on what more can be done to tackle online hatred and curb racism more generally in our politics?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend raises a very concerning matter. We stand for unity, not division. Racism or any other form of discrimination has absolutely no place in our society. There is a real political choice at these local elections. Pride in Britain and our communities up and down the country stand united against those who would exploit division for their own ends. Where political parties are aware of this situation, they should have the courage to stand up to individuals and they should, even at this late stage in the process of local elections, distance themselves from them.
Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)
A wife of a civil servant in my constituency gave up work to look after her husband when he was diagnosed with motor neurone disease. She found herself in severe financial difficulties after significant delays in the processing of her husband’s civil service pension. He sadly died last year and she only started receiving support a couple of weeks ago. As this is not an isolated case, will the Leader of the House please guarantee a debate in Government time, so that MPs can scrutinise the mess that is civil service pensions?
Sir Alan Campbell
I am genuinely very sorry to hear of the constituency case the hon. Gentleman raises. If he will let me have details—I know it has been resolved to some extent—I will make the Minister aware of them. We are busy trying to get on and resolve the situation, but I am sure that when the time is appropriate we will want to return to this issue, debate what has happened and learn lessons from it.
Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)
Last month it was brilliant to see Derby, the home of rail, host the Community Rail Network awards, recognising the fantastic work people do on behalf of their communities and the railways, and welcoming over 600 people to our city. I saw that dedication at first hand when I went litter picking with volunteers at Peartree station. Will the Leader of the House join me in commending not only the work of those hard-working volunteers in Derby, but the invaluable contribution that volunteers make across the country?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is right to champion the work of Community Rail Network and the dedication of its volunteers. As I said earlier, community groups and volunteers are the golden thread that tie our communities together. I absolutely thank the people he is talking about in Derby, and indeed those in other parts of our country.
Jim Shannon
I wish to raise concerns regarding the detention of Roy Silva, a British citizen who has reportedly been held in Sri Lanka after attending a discussion at a local Roman Catholic church where he spoke about his Christian faith. Since the end of January, he has been held in atrocious conditions, mostly in a room with 200 other prisoners and more recently in a room of 25 prisoners. Mr Silva, who lives in Chingford with his family, had travelled to Sri Lanka to attend his sister’s funeral. Will the Leader of the House ask the Foreign Secretary to set out what steps have been taken to secure his immediate release and safe return to the UK, and what representations have been made to the Sri Lankan authorities regarding his detention?
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising such a serious and concerning case. As he knows, the UK is committed to defending freedom of religion or belief for all, and I can assure him that we are treating this case with the seriousness that it deserves. I will ensure that he gets a response from the Foreign Secretary that sets out the actions we are taking.
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
This Saturday, the streets of Gravesend will be filled with vibrancy and colour with the Vaisakhi celebration and religious procession through the town. British Sikhs, the cornerstone of whose faith is selfless service, have made such a positive contribution to Gravesham and across the UK. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating all involved in this celebration and grant a debate in Government time about the contribution of British Sikhs, as well as the needed and promised inquiry into the 1984 storming of the Golden Temple in Amritsar?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to recognise the vital contribution of British Sikhs in our communities, which has been raised regularly in these sessions. They are such an important part of the diversity and strength of our communities. I think this would be a great topic for a Backbench Business or Adjournment debate; there are Sikh communities across our country, and I am sure that other Members would also like to praise the work being done in communities in their patch.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Academics in York, a human rights city, drew my attention to the Government consultation, “Family Returns: Reforming Asylum Support and Enforcing Family Returns”, which seeks to extend the use of constraints, including physical restraint, to children. This is extremely chilling. The consultation is ongoing but closes soon. Will the Leader of the House speak to the Home Secretary about withdrawing these extreme measures, as academics have highlighted how physical restraint traumatises children?
Sir Alan Campbell
As my hon. Friend says, the Home Office is consulting on people’s views of changes more widely. I can reassure her that no decision has been made and that children’s welfare and safeguarding duties remain central to this process, as does our compliance with our domestic and international obligations. Any concerns raised by hon. Members will be considered in the consultation, but I will also ensure that the Home Secretary hears my hon. Friend’s concerns.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
Following a decision last year to outsource care provision at Tygetshaugh Court in Dunipace, the community, residents and families have campaigned to highlight the significant stress and uncertainty it has caused. Following their persistent efforts, the ombudsman found serious operational failures in the consultation process, options appraisal and information given to decision makers, and compelled health and social care partnership officers to apologise to Tygetshaugh Court residents last week. Will the Leader of the House join me in commending the Denny and Dunipace community for their tireless campaigning alongside the residents?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is a tireless advocate for his constituents on a range of issues, and I join him in commending the work of those who have campaigned on this important issue. I understand that his local Labour councillors have been at the forefront of that. As I have said on many occasions, we have delivered Scotland’s biggest devolution settlement since devolution. I hope that the SNP has heard my hon. Friend’s contribution today and will take note, because his constituents deserve better than the serious failures that he has raised.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
On the doorsteps of Mow Cop, Harriseahead and Newchapel, residents tell me time and again that they are fed up with Reform-led Staffordshire county council ignoring their very real concerns about vehicles speeding through their beautiful villages and putting lives at risk. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on road safety and how we can assure that communities like ours are properly heard when decisions are being taken—or, indeed, not?
Sir Alan Campbell
This is not the first time that hon. Members have raised concerns about Reform-led Staffordshire county council, which has clearly overpromised and underdelivered. These business question sessions have made it clear to me that Reform is failing in local government and is seeking—perhaps as an excuse—to divide our local communities. We have published our road safety strategy, but I encourage my hon. Friend to seek a Westminster Hall debate on that particular topic, because his concerns are shared by a number of colleagues, not least on the Labour Benches.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
My right hon. Friend will be aware that, in a couple of weeks’ time, Sir David Attenborough will celebrate his 100th birthday. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I am sure that my right hon. Friend shares my admiration for this national treasure and living legend, who has for decades brought the wonder of the natural world into our homes. Will the Government and Parliament consider how we might celebrate that moment as a nation, perhaps by instituting a David Attenborough day for us all to celebrate the natural world and the man who has enabled us to understand it better than we ever could have done without him?
Sir Alan Campbell
Sir David has done wonders in introducing us to, and captivating us with, the natural world. As my hon. Friend will know, we celebrate Earth Day next week, which will also be a great opportunity to better understand our environment and perhaps to appreciate Sir David’s work. I am sure that many Members and communities would welcome the opportunity to celebrate his impressive 100 years and to highlight his many achievements, so I will give my hon. Friend’s suggestion some thought.
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
Council tax arrears can be devastating for people’s finances and mental health, so I warmly welcome the Government’s changes to the debt collection rules today, which mean that people will not be tipped further into poverty by a single missed payment. In Rochdale and wider Greater Manchester, Jo Barker-Marsh and other anti-poverty campaigners have been exposing how the use of bailiffs in cases of genuine hardship is not just cruel and counterproductive, but a waste of public money. Might we have a debate in Government time to highlight the scandal of aggressive council tax debt collection, and will my right hon. Friend join me in praising the work of Jo, Debt Justice and, of course, Martin Lewis?
Sir Alan Campbell
I join my hon. Friend is welcoming the change. As he rightly points out, it will help to protect vulnerable people in our communities. I join him in thanking Jo, Debt Justice and, indeed, Martin Lewis for their work. I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for an Adjournment debate on the topic so that he can give further consideration to, and hear from Ministers on, those important points.
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)
My constituent recently applied to renew his passport. As requested, he returned his old passport to His Majesty’s Passport Office. He then received two consecutive messages advising him that he had sent the wrong passport—he had not. Subsequently, he received from HMPO a package purporting to contain his old passport, but it contained instead a passport belonging to another individual. He is concerned about where his old passport is, and about a potential data breach given that he now has access to another individual’s name, address, date of birth and travel information from the past 10 years. Does the Leader of the House share my constituent’s concerns and mine, and will he raise them with the appropriate Minister?
Sir Alan Campbell
That really is a catalogue of errors. I understand how concerned my hon. Friend’s constituent will be. If my hon. Friend provides me with the details, I will raise the matter with the appropriate Minister.
David Burton-Sampson (Southend West and Leigh) (Lab)
Under the former Conservative leader of Southend city council, who is now the leader of the Reform group, £4 million was budgeted for road and pothole resurfacing works, even though highways engineers had estimated that £6 million was needed just to keep them in the poor condition they were in. I am therefore delighted that the now Labour-led council has increased that funding to £13 million over the past two years, with the help of the Government’s pothole fund, and has put in a full programme of resurfacing works. Does the Leader of the House agree that the council team should be congratulated on getting Southend’s roads and pavements back on track?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly join my hon. Friend in congratulating Labour-led Southend city council on its exceptional work in turning that situation around. We are providing £7.3 billion over the next four years for councils to fix potholes, and I am glad that Labour councils are using that money to improve their communities—unlike, as he points out, some Tory and Reform councils.
Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)
The whole House will have cheered on Rory McIlroy’s historic back-to-back Masters victory at the weekend. However, when 60 courses have closed across the country over the last five years, and when courses such as Dalmuir in my West Dunbartonshire constituency remain open only because of a community-led takeover, can the Leader of the House find time for a debate on the future of golf in this country, so that we can ensure that the courses, clubs and community facilities that will inspire and create the next generation of British champions are still there to do so?
Sir Alan Campbell
My hon. Friend is a champion for the great sport of golf, and I commend him for that. We are investing £400 million in grassroots sports facilities in communities across the UK to support the champions of tomorrow. I encourage him to apply for a Westminster Hall or Backbench Business debate, so that hon. Members across the House can raise their voices in support of community sport as he has, but also hear about the excellent work that the Government are undertaking.
British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme
(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Peter Kyle)
With permission, I would like to make a statement on industrial energy costs.
When I became Business Secretary, I said that we needed to be bolder, to go further and to move faster to support British enterprise. Today, I want to set out what that means for reduced electricity costs for British industry. The events of recent days and weeks serve to demonstrate the strategic weaknesses and the economic threats inherent in Britain’s over-dependence on the geopolitics of the global oil market. It is high time that Britain gained energy independence by ending that dangerous over-reliance and instead transitioned to become a clean energy superpower.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero is overseeing that transition; however, British manufacturing continues to have some of the highest electricity costs in Europe. That undermines our manufacturing base, impacts our manufacturing jobs, and damages the lives and livelihoods of cherished communities across the country. The Government were elected to halt and reverse Britain’s industrial decline. That is why our modern industrial strategy addresses high electricity costs for British businesses.
As part of our British industry supercharger package, I have already increased support for over 550 of the UK’s most energy-intensive businesses—those in our heavy industries. We have increased the network charging compensation scheme discount from 60% to 90%, saving companies up to £420 million a year on their electricity bills, and we have started building the UK’s first small modular reactor in north Wales, laying the groundwork for manufacturers to benefit from reliable, low-carbon electricity.
Last year, I launched the consultation on the British industrial competitiveness scheme, or BICS—our plan to bring industrial electricity costs more closely in line with those in other European economies. I am grateful for the support of the Chancellor in establishing BICS. The response to our consultation, which we are publishing today, shows overwhelming business support for BICS. The scheme has been endorsed by the Confederation of British Industry and the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders. Our partners have done more than just support the policy; they have been co-creators, helping us to shape the scope and scale of the scheme. BICS is bigger, bolder and better as a result of their hard work and partnership.
I am announcing today that BICS will benefit 10,000 electricity-intensive manufacturing businesses—those best equipped to drive growth in our economy. Those 10,000 businesses will save up to £40 per megawatt-hour from next year. They will be exempt from paying the indirect costs of three other schemes: the renewables obligation, feed-in tariffs and the capacity market. BICS is designed to support eligible businesses across all regions of Great Britain. The eligible sectors collectively employ 900,000 people, of whom 700,000 live outside London and the south-east. That is a real advantage for working families and communities around the country, and it gives British businesses a real competitive advantage in the global economy. That is the difference that a Labour Government with an activist industrial strategy makes. This is not just about high hopes or warm words; it is real action to reduce energy costs and increase industrial competitiveness.
I pledged not just to be bolder and to go further, but to act faster in the interests of British businesses. Business is keen, as I am sure the whole House is, for the benefits of BICS to take into account the challenging economic reality that we face. I can announce a one-off payment for businesses eligible for BICS, covering the 2026-27 period, and reflecting the support that businesses would have received had the scheme been in place this year. It will be delivered next year, and my Department will set out more details shortly.
Our focus now is on making sure that BICS is as strong and significant as possible, and that it delivers for our car industry, aerospace and defence—the best of British manufacturing. My Department is inviting businesses to help us finalise the operational details of BICS. I invite all companies that can benefit from it to go to the Department for Business and Trade’s website, submit their views, and help us prepare for this final phase together.
This is a major industrial intervention and financial commitment by this Government. I am determined to get it absolutely right from the start. We said that our industrial strategy was never about a single publication or a single moment in time. It is a marked departure from the old economic orthodoxies of Thatcherite de-industrialisation and a failed free market ideology that let whole towns, regions and communities go to the wall. Ours is an activist industrial strategy, supporting British businesses when they need it, intervening when circumstances demand it, and investing in wealth creation and opportunity for all.
We recognise the instability in the global economy. As the Prime Minister has said, the conflict in Iran is not our war, but we must do everything in our power to shield British businesses from the worst effects of it. Businesses are rightly concerned about the impact of the conflict in the middle east. The Chancellor will set out the principles guiding the Government’s thinking as we consider our response.
Today’s announcement of our bigger, bolder scheme is proof positive of our commitment to backing British businesses for the long term. It sits alongside our continued focus on short-term impacts, on which we will not hesitate to act where needed. We will continue using our activist industrial strategy to create the right conditions for British firms to succeed and grow. We do so because we know that when the Government and enterprise work in partnership, we can make Britain stronger, wealthier and more resilient. I commend this statement to the House.
Gareth Davies (Grantham and Bourne) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement, and for coming to the House proactively this morning. I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my former career in asset management.
I very much welcome the Government’s recognition that industrial energy bills remain incredibly high. This is an issue that businesses across the country have been raising for many months. I have heard what the Secretary of State has to say, and there are a number of areas where I would appreciate further clarity. First, according to the Government’s figures, at least 99% of companies will not benefit from the scheme, even after the announced expansion. Pubs, restaurants, farmers and retailers also face energy cost challenges, and innovative companies such as OpenAI have halted planned multibillion-pound investments in our country. What action will the Government take to address those businesses’ concerns?
Secondly, although businesses are being told today that they will be supported and that their energy bills will be reduced, no relief will actually come their way until next year, so what plan is there to provide a more timely relief for businesses who have to pay their energy bills right now? Finally, I am not clear on how this one-off additional payment next year will be funded. Just this week, the International Monetary Fund has expressed concern about the UK economy, saying that we are the most exposed of all major advanced economies, so can the Secretary of State provide clarity to the markets this morning about how this will be paid for?
High energy costs for British businesses did not start with the conflict in Iran. We all know that energy prices have been far too high for far too long, and we now have the highest industrial energy prices in the whole G7. We should look at the root of the issue at hand: the structural energy challenges that we face as a country. I am pleased that in the regulatory consultation launched today the Government have committed to the removal of carbon price support from April 2028. That is adopting one of the key provisions of the Conservatives’ cheap power plan, so I very much welcome that, but why wait until 2028, and why stop there? The Secretary of State could go further and adopt the plan in full, ending the carbon tax and green levies right now, as well as scrapping the 78% tax on North sea oil and gas companies. Those pragmatic and sensible steps are actionable right now, today. If he does those things, he will have our full support.
Peter Kyle
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support for the scheme. I know it is qualified support, but where that qualified support exists, I am grateful for it. Let us be very clear about the scheme, which I have been designing for quite some time: it is a competitiveness scheme, and it is targeted; it is not a general scheme for the entire economy. It is to increase the competitiveness of businesses, so that they can compete globally and be more profitable domestically. The scheme will be highly impactful for those businesses. Many of them are already profitable and doing great work. Through the scheme, we can turbocharge their ability to be competitive, both domestically and internationally. I have announced a range of other schemes, including the supercharger for energy-intensive sectors, and I have made other interventions, just in the six months that I have been Secretary of State.
The hon. Gentleman was gracious in praising parts of the scheme. He could have also mentioned that the growth figures that came out today show that we approached the challenges in the middle east by busting the forecasts and exceeding expectations for growth. That is good for every single business in the entire country. Growth is the No. 1 mission of the Government, and that is what we have been getting on with. That, of course, means that, going into this challenging period, we have more resilience and success in the British economy.
The hon. Gentleman asked about funding. As I said in my statement, the scheme is being funded through reliefs on three schemes, and through support from the Exchequer. It is fully funded and within the fiscal rules, and that is fully set out. More details will flow as we work with business to ensure that we get the implementation absolutely right.
The hon. Gentleman went on to call for a whole set of measures that he would like to see. I would like him to hold himself to the standard to which he holds me, and to set out how he will fund all the commitments he is making.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Let us start with the positives. I am glad that there is now some form of recognition that there is an industrial energy crisis, and that the Secretary of State has brought forward something that helps some sectors.
The bad news for the sector that I and many colleagues in the Chamber represent is that the ceramics sector is not included. There is nothing for tableware or giftware, nothing for ceramic tiles, clay pipes or clay tiles, and nothing for bricks. We have a Government with an objective of building 1.5 million homes, but there is no support for bricks in the scheme, which means that we will have to import bricks from Pakistan, on diesel-chugging super-tankers—bricks made by indentured labour in coal-fired kilns. We will not make them in Walsall, north Staffordshire or your constituency, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The same applies for sanitaryware. This sector has seen exports of half a billion pounds, employs 20,000 people directly across the supply chain, and puts £1 billion back into the UK economy. We have spoken to the Chancellor, to the Secretary of State’s predecessor, to the Energy Secretary, to Ministers across all Departments, and to the Treasury. They promised us help in the Budget, in the industrial strategy, in another Budget, and in the autumn statement. Then we were told, “Wait for BICS.” I suspect that the line from the Secretary of State will be, “The sector is gas-intensive, so wait for the supercharger scheme.” Frankly, that is not good enough. Factories will close and jobs will be lost as a result of this announcement. Bluntly and directly, may I ask the Secretary of State how many job losses and factory closures it will take, and how many brick kilns need to be mothballed, before the Government step in and do something for the ceramics sector? Is it now the Government’s policy objective to oversee the end of UK ceramics production?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his passionate intervention. I came into Parliament 10 years ago, and he came here just a short time afterwards. He has been raising these issues in Parliament for a very long time, about a sector that has long been under stress for various reasons, both global and domestic. I have been determined to ensure that my Department is connected, and as open as possible to listening, and to seeing how we can support the sector. There are monthly meetings with officials. There was a meeting just last week, attended by my hon. Friend, other MPs and industry figures from the sector. I have just discovered that no Secretary of State for Business has visited Stoke to meet ceramic industry figures for over five years. I am willing to do that, and in the coming days, my Department will reach out to the people running those companies to see if my going there, listening to the concerns and seeing what could be done would be of interest to them. If they would like that, I will be there.
I want to stress that my hon. Friend has listed a whole series of very different components of the ceramics industry. It is a diverse industry with diverse inputs. Some of them—I admit, a minority—could be eligible for the BIC scheme that I have announced today. That diversity means that there needs to be a very focused, comprehensive look at the sector. I am willing to go there and meet the industry figures myself.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. Our country is in a very fragile state. We cannot defend ourselves, we cannot feed ourselves and we cannot power ourselves. Our national security, our food security and our energy security are deeply interconnected, and the Government’s response is far too sluggish. The CBI and others are very clear: their response to the announcement is that industry cannot wait until next year. A back payment in 12 months will not cut it; businesses are negotiating their energy deals now, they need support now, and the failure to provide that will mean that jobs will be lost, companies will close and our sovereign capabilities will collapse. I urge the Secretary of State to come back to the House next week, and to make then whatever announcement about the back payment he was going to make in 12 months’ time.
There is a significant gap in the Government’s industrial strategy: we Liberal Democrats believe that the food and farming sector should have been included. Will the Government confirm whether the backdated payment in 12 months’ time and the BIC scheme will apply to the food and farming industry, including agri-tech businesses? Reports in The Times today suggest that the UK may face food shortages due to the Iran conflict. That would impact farming and the hospitality sector, and increase food bills for families. For months, the Liberal Democrats have highlighted that many non-domestic energy retailers refuse to offer good energy deals to hospitality businesses. The broken business rates system also penalises firms for investing in energy-saving measures. May I urge the Government for the umpteenth time to please instruct the Competition and Markets Authority to investigate the energy retail market for hospitality businesses? Will the Government create an energy security bank, which would offer low-interest loans that enabled households and small and medium-sized enterprises to take up energy-saving measures? Will they exclude energy-saving investments from business rates—
Peter Kyle
I could have listened to the hon. Lady for much longer, because she is listing important areas across the sector. I am very aware of the challenges and opportunities in an economy that is full of great enterprise and a lot of highly profitable businesses doing great things with great entrepreneurs. Listening to her, we would think that the economy was not full of people and businesses that are thriving. She only focuses on the challenges.
Let me be clear on how BICS happened. It came about through consultation with the very businesses that the hon. Lady is asking us to listen to. They have been part of designing the system. We will release and implement a targeted scheme that will have maximum benefit. We will announce over the summer an eligibility checker, so that businesses can see their eligibility for the scheme. Of course, as we move forward, we will make payments for costs that may have been incurred this year.
Let me be really clear, however, about how those businesses are working. Most of the businesses—I include the business that was on the Radio 4 “Today” programme this morning; Sharon from Tees Components up in Teesside was on the programme—have entered into a contract with fixed prices for the coming year. Most companies in the categories that we are targeting, which have manufacturing processes in which electricity is a high-component cost, are either hedging, or are in contracts, so that they have some stability into the future. We have designed a scheme that takes that into account, will be there when they need it, and supplies support for costs that they would have had this year.
On CO2 and the issues that are in the news, six months ago, within days of becoming Secretary of State, I mothballed Ensus up in Teesside—a fantastic company. I have had to un-mothball it, and I did so in the first couple of days of the strikes in Iran to ensure resilience in key parts of our economy. That was leaked; we do not normally comment on leaks, but that is out there now. These are the things that I am doing. I am being bold and creative, and am acting in the interests of the whole of society and the economy to make sure that we have the resilience to carry on doing business, and come out of this with growth in our economy.
Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)
We will not prosper as a nation without a lot of support for the manufacturing sector—vital for our security and our resilience—so I welcome today’s statement. I notice with some irony that the fertiliser sector is included. A producer in my constituency closed under the previous Government, and as the Secretary of State has already referred to, several hundred million pounds have already been spent correcting the failure to foresee the risks of such a move.
It is good to see that a number of sectors in my constituency are covered by the scheme, including automotive. The Secretary of State will be aware that the automotive sector faces multifaceted issues, not least on the supply side, but also to do with competition and European proposals. Will he say a little bit more about what else he can do to support the wider challenges facing automotive and manufacturing more generally?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his work when he was in my Department, upon which I seek to continue. He is right to point to the closure of the fertiliser plant in, I believe, 2023. Those are the sorts of things that have stripped out resilience from our economy and society and which I have sought to rebuild in turbulent times. The automotive sector will qualify for the BIC scheme and other high energy- intensive industries outside automotive will also benefit from the supercharger before it does. I regularly meet automotive industry figures, and the Department is deeply engaged with the sector. He will know some of the outcomes of those conversations and that it is a sector that has this Government and me on its side.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
The buzzword this morning is “bold”. Yet the reality is that, though this plan might be bolder than what went before, it remains with all the oomph of a 40W bulb. When electricity in Dumfries in my constituency is four times the price in Dumfries in Virginia, in the United States, this country has a major problem with competitiveness— I have a problem saying it. What industry in this country needs is the decommissioning—the unplugging—of the Energy Secretary and his dogmatic carbon taxes, which really lie behind the electricity prices that we face. Today’s announcement does nothing to address that.
Peter Kyle
I have done more in six months than his Government did in 14 years. If I am not bold, what the heck was his Government?
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for coming to the House to give the statement. I also welcome the expansion of the scheme; I know it is desperately needed across our manufacturing sectors. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) has already highlighted, there is a missing sector, in that ceramics does not feature heavily. It is not just pottery—not that potteries are not very important in Staffordshire—but our brick-making factories need support because as a Government we are committed to building homes. We are also committed to buying British, backing British and building British. How does the Secretary of State intend to support a sector that is a linchpin for our wider economy?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s thoughtful words. I can assure her that the ceramics sector and the subsectors she mentions are in my mind. I said in my statement that the Chancellor will set out in the near future the approach that we will take for industries that have been put into distress as a result of the action in the middle east—a war that we did not start, but a war that we are having to respond to. I am happy to stay closely in touch with her and the industries for which she is being a magnificent voice to ensure that we get any response right.
Dave Doogan (Angus and Perthshire Glens) (SNP)
We were promised a statement on the British industrial competitiveness scheme; we got the Secretary of State talking about foutering around with the energy bills of less than 1% of UK companies and compensating them to some undetermined extent at some period in the next year. That will come as the coldest of comfort for industries across the UK, such as the ScanStone industrial equipment manufacturers in my constituency, which is already burdened with extraordinary energy bills but is not an “intensive” energy user, so it will get no help from this. It will be similarly encumbered by the same Secretary of State’s quotas on steel imports, which stockholders and manufacturers are already saying will risk output. Will he meet me to discuss my constituents’ concerns about his plans? We support the supporting of British steel in theory, but British manufacturing cannot be put out of work in the process.
Peter Kyle
The scheme we have designed is aimed at manufacturing. The figure the hon. Member quotes is for all businesses in the UK, whereas this is one scheme aimed at competitiveness within the manufacturing sector. I hope that when he reflects on his comments, he does not expect us to announce a scheme for every business in all circumstances. That is what Liz Truss did, wasting enormous amounts of money—a third of those billions went into the pockets of high earners. We need to be targeted and growth orientated and support the great businesses out there.
I have invested £2.5 billion into steel. I am modernising steel and protecting it where I have to. I am proud of the strategy we have. There has never been a steel strategy or a quality piece of strategic thinking from the previous Government, which is why the strategy I announced was universally welcomed by the sector.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
I am a proud Stoke-on-Trent MP, and the clue is in the name “the Potteries”—we make pots, we always have done. It is my family’s and our community’s source of pride. Sadly, despite the good engagement I have had with Ministers on the matter, this particular scheme does nothing for ceramics companies in my constituency. I was recently asked a direct question on BBC Radio Stoke, “Do the Government get and understand it?” I do believe that our Government understand the issues faced, but action is not coming forward quickly enough, and our companies are at risk. They are on the brink and need support now. They have incredibly high energy bills and need Government support. If the BICS is not the right scheme for ceramics, we know there is the supercharger scheme. Can I gently encourage my colleagues to please meet us as a matter of urgency because our ceramics sector absolutely needs and deserves our support?
Peter Kyle
I thank my hon. Friend for his passionate intervention. I understand the pressing needs and am fully aware of the issues facing Denby, which is partly, I believe, in his constituency. I have been in touch with the regional mayor about it numerous times since that situation unfolded. I certainly wish the workforce well and hope that the interventions and the partnership that the Government have been providing alongside the regional mayor will mean that a buyer can be found, which I am convinced is perfectly possible. When it comes to the long-term regeneration of the Potteries and the ceramics industry, as I have said already, I am willing to meet the industry itself to listen to and learn from their insight and the challenges they face, but also the opportunities they have as we rebuild our economy after the damage caused by the previous Administration and ensure that we get growth back into our economy.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
Is that it, Secretary of State? It has taken five months for the Secretary of State to come up with an energy price scheme which he has admitted here in the House today only supports 10,000 businesses. He seems to forget that there are millions of small businesses up and down the country—restaurants, fish and chip shops, pubs, ceramics or farmers. When will the Secretary of State admit that the reality is the reason this country’s economy has no growth is because of high energy prices? When will the Secretary of State do the right thing and scrap net zero so we can bring our electricity prices down?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful to the shadowy Business Minister for his greatest hits performance for the House today. He says that supporting 10,000 businesses is nothing. I can tell him that it means a hell of a lot for those businesses getting that support, because it will mean a 25% reduction in their energy costs. It is being paid for, of course, by reducing some of the tariff charges and by some of the other Government schemes that offer relief. It is also paid for partly by the Exchequer, which is funded by people who pay their taxes.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
I hosted a meeting of small and medium-sized manufacturers in Derby about the challenges of energy costs as part of a manufacturing commission inquiry on SMEs and growth. I welcome the expansion of Government support for British business in energy-intensive sectors by slashing their electricity charges. Can the Business Secretary assure us that the scheme will support smaller manufacturers as well as the largest, and can he tell us more about how this Government will continue to work proactively, hand in hand, with businesses to meet challenges, rather than sitting on their hands like the last Government?
Peter Kyle
I am extremely grateful for my hon. Friend’s representations and reflections. I can assure her that the BIC scheme is being calculated on the electricity intensity threshold. It is for those manufacturing businesses that have electricity as a significant part of their costs of doing business. In the summer, we will announce an eligibility checker so that every business can go and check their own eligibility for the scheme going forward. I am keen to stay in touch with her because her area around Derby, of course, is part of the manufacturing renaissance, creating great opportunities for not just her region, but the whole country.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
The Minister’s comments about the potential of energy production in north Wales are to be welcomed because we have been waiting for a very long time. He will also know that energy markets have a direct impact on agriculture, and farmers are facing agflation at 7.6%. That hits Welsh farmers hard because many have to hold back on buying fertiliser until livestock can be turned out, and that is happening now—those prices are hitting them now. They face fertiliser price increases of up to 80% as a direct result of Trump’s warmongering. NFU Cymru leaders met the Secretary of State’s Wales Office colleagues in London this week. Could he tell me whether there was a solid result that farmers can see a benefit from following that meeting?
Peter Kyle
I am thankful for the right hon. Member’s acknowledgment of the work we are doing to invest in Wales—not only the small modular reactor, which we are already starting to construct the site for, but the investment in two AI growth zones. This is a Government that, since we came into office, take investment into Wales and the reindustrialisation of Wales incredibly seriously, and both those things are starting now.
On food and agriculture, I spoke just yesterday with the Environment Secretary. We are in touch over these issues and sit in the same committees where we talk about all the specific challenges as we scenario plan for impacts that may or may not result from the conflict in the middle east. That work will continue, and she can rest assured that farmers, alongside other key sectors in our economy, are at the forefront of our mind.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I thank my right hon. Friend for this statement and, importantly, for recognising the energy-intensive industries, especially those that are essential for growth and without which we cannot prosper. It is a start, but can I make a plea for consideration of the sectors of our economy that do not so obviously sit in a globally competitive environment but are still vital for our economy, especially hospitality? Our restaurants and cafés are not able to move elsewhere, but are caught in a situation where there is no current help to support them to shift to clean or cheaper energy so that they can keep doing what they do well: making people happy. Would he agree to meet me and colleagues who are seeking to secure a stable future for this important sector?
Peter Kyle
My hon. Friend gives voice to the hospitality sector, and she is absolutely right: the hospitality sector is important for so many reasons. For many people, it is the most interaction they have with the frontline of the economy. It is the place people go for light relief and fun—and, my goodness, we deserve more fun as a country more often. It is also often the first part of the pathway into the economy, because many people’s first job is in hospitality. I recognise that hospitality is an incredibly important part of our economy, for all those reasons.
What the hospitality sector needs first and foremost is economic growth, so that people have more money in their pockets to spend. That is why today’s news that we reached economic growth of 0.5% in the quarter leading up to the end of February is so significant. Embedding the foundations for growth in our economy is what hospitality needs more than anything else. Of course, I meet UKHospitality regularly and I have roundtables with the sector. I represent Hove, which has a thriving hospitality sector, where I meet people on the frontline all the time. I always enjoy engaging with my hon. Friend on these issues too.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and for all his hard work, which should be recognised. I welcome the statement, which outlines support for Thales, Spirit AeroSystems, Boeing and Bombardier, which are all big employers in the aerospace and defence sectors in my constituency. However, I also think of manufacturers such as Magellan Aerospace in Greyabbey; T.G. Eakin, a pharmaceutical company in Comber; and Mash Direct, a food and farming business in Ards. I am not sure that they will be eligible for this help. Small businesses are the backbone of the United Kingdom, particularly in Northern Ireland, and they are struggling. What help and hope can the Government give to them?
Peter Kyle
I thank the hon. Gentleman, who is a friend, for his kind words. We have designed a scheme that is for Great Britain, but we have not forgotten Northern Ireland—I do not think he would expect me to forget Northern Ireland in any aspect of my work. We are working with the Northern Ireland Assembly to ensure that we have a scheme that is appropriate and matches the scale of the opportunities that BICS presents to Great Britain, so that all parts of the United Kingdom can benefit in one way or another and the benefits are felt by those fantastic manufacturers he mentioned.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
The Carlisle of my childhood was a thriving industrial hub of textiles, engineering and food manufacturing sectors, which were all sadly decimated by successive Conservative Governments. We do, however, remain home to the world’s oldest biscuit factory and the UK’s last tyre manufacturing facility in Pirelli. Can the Secretary of State set out how the scheme announced today will ensure that those businesses that remain in Carlisle and across the UK will continue to be able to export their products abroad?
Peter Kyle
My hon. Friend speaks eloquently about the challenges that industry has faced in the de-industrialising period of a previous Conservative Government but also the opportunities that are there for the re-industrialising purpose of this Labour Government. Some of the companies she mentioned are, I imagine, in sectors that BICS will be very meaningfully able to support. I hope those companies will work with my Department to ensure that implementation is as effective as possible, and the eligibility checker, which will go live before too long, will mean that those companies can check their eligibility directly.
In general terms, we are investing in industry in our country. We are working tirelessly with aerospace, automotive and other key parts of the industrial landscape. The fact that Ensus was mothballed and not allowed to go bust shows that we are thinking very deeply and carefully about resilience and economic growth, and not just for today but for the long term.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
The Secretary of State will know that the south-west and Exeter is home to a nationally significant cluster of high-value manufacturing businesses and is identified in the Government’s industrial strategy as a key region for advanced manufacturing, with critical clusters in nuclear, green energy, defence and critical minerals. The last Government had some choice words for business—I will not repeat them here, Madam Deputy Speaker, because they are unparliamentary—but can the Secretary of State set out how this Government are working in partnership with businesses, including those in my region of the south-west, to ensure that they can prosper and succeed into the future?
Peter Kyle
I was down in the south-west just last week at Agratas, one of the largest battery production plants for electric vehicles in the whole of Europe. The sheer scale of manufacturing development in the south-west is typical of the renaissance and the capability of the region. The Agratas plant also shows the Government’s securonomics approach in action, with 230 tonnes of British steel being used in the production. From the roof, we can look across and see Europe’s largest nuclear power station being built. It is a real testament to the vibrancy, ambition and capabilities that we see right across the south-west.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
Erewash has a proud manufacturing history, from the ironworks, whose grates cover almost every manhole in the country, to our high-end furniture manufacturing industry, whose sofas adorn palaces, to our advanced manufacturing firms and the concrete makers building the tunnels for High Speed 2. As a former manufacturing engineering researcher, I am very proud of this Government’s investment across the advanced manufacturing sector. Can the Secretary of State elaborate on how the action he has announced today will help Erewash’s manufacturers sell their goods to the world?
Peter Kyle
My hon. Friend mentioned palaces—is he living in a palace, I wonder? Given the success he has outlined in his career in manufacturing, who knows? I can assure him that manufacturers across his constituency will benefit from the BIC scheme. In the summer, the eligibility checker will confirm which businesses can benefit, but this is about competitiveness. He is describing businesses that are already competitive and will become more competitive on the back of the BIC scheme and therefore be able to export and be a real credit to our country and economy.
Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)
I start by declaring that before coming to this place, I worked in the head office of a retail business that sells internationally. I know from my experience there and from businesses in Kettering that when British businesses export, they grow, become more productive and create good, well-paid jobs. Can the Secretary of State outline how the measures he has announced today will support businesses to sell their goods around the world?
Peter Kyle
I am highly aware of my hon. Friend’s advocacy for those sectors; she is a true credit to them. The BIC scheme is about competitiveness. It has been designed in co-operation and partnership with business. Only one in 10 businesses in our country is exporting, but we have secured great trade deals with South Korea through to India, as well as the economic prosperity deal with America, and of course we are continuously rebuilding the relationship and creating new opportunities with the European Union—the most important trading bloc. I can assure her that the BIC scheme is part of making us even more competitive and more able to prosper on the global trading scene.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
The font of this statement is so small that it is super difficult to read, which made it even more difficult for me to look for the word “ceramics”, which I have yet to find. The Secretary of State said in his statement that he wants to “move faster” to support British manufacturing. He has heard from a number of my colleagues, and now he will hear from me, that we want to meet him. We have met Ministers—we had an excellent visit with the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald)—but we want to see the Secretary of State, so that we can talk about this scheme and the ceramics industry. We need to have that meeting quickly, because this is about the jobs, livelihoods and future of my community and many others across our country.
Peter Kyle
I know that my hon. Friend has had meetings with several of my Ministers, and of course I am always available for him too.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
I am very proud to represent a strong industrial constituency with hundreds of excellent manufacturing businesses, and I was very grateful to the Secretary of State for his visit to one of them before Christmas. This Government back British manufacturing, and the BIC scheme will be game changing for the 10,000 businesses that benefit from it. Can the Secretary of State ensure that it is not too onerous to prove eligibility, and that we look after the many excellent businesses in the metal-forming sector in my constituency, which are impacted not just by the historically high industrial prices we inherited, but by the steel safeguarding changes?
Peter Kyle
I remember that visit well, and I will reflect on my hon. Friend’s words, as I always do. The eligibility checker will go live in the summer, and the businesses she refers to will be able to check their ability to benefit from what she correctly describes as a highly impactful scheme.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, and I welcome the extension of the BIC scheme and the difference it will make to manufacturing businesses in my constituency. I wish to make a brief representation on behalf of the Lea Valley Growers, who are based in Nazeing in my constituency. As the Secretary of State will know, glasshouse and greenhouse growers use a lot of electricity and gas, but they are not recognised as energy intensive. Will he reflect on what steps the Government can take to support vital food producers such as the Lea Valley Growers, and may I request an urgent meeting to discuss that with him further?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for getting the Lea Valley Growers on the record, and I am keen to meet him to hear more about it.
Women’s Health Strategy
(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Secondary Care (Karin Smyth)
With permission, I will make a statement on the Government’s renewed women’s health strategy.
The NHS was founded on the principle of equality and the right care for everyone, whenever they need it, but there is no getting away from the fact that it has failed to live up to that founding promise. For too long, women have been left to navigate a confusing system, fighting to get the basic care they deserve, and under-represented in health research. Above all, women’s voices and choices have been dismissed, and it is truly shocking how often women have been ignored when telling medical professionals about their pain. From pelvic mesh to endometriosis, we are expected to put up with pain as our lot in life, as if it were normal. But it is not normal, and since coming into office this Government have taken a number of measures to improve women’s health.
We have taken action to bring down gynaecology waiting lists, introduced menopause questions into routine health checks, made the morning-after pill available for free at high street pharmacies, stood up a rapid and independent investigation into maternity services, and introduced Jess’s rule, so that GP teams have to “reflect, review and rethink” if a patient presents three times with the same or escalating symptoms.
The blunt reality is that the NHS is failing women and girls on even the most basic measures of healthcare. Indeed, we do not treat all women equally either. The wealthiest 10% of women live almost 10 years longer than the poorest 10%, while the most deprived spend over a third of their lives in bad health—something I see starkly in my constituency of Bristol South. Disabled women experience poorer outcomes, and we should recognise the additional disadvantage faced by black and Asian women, who face the double discrimination of racism and misogyny all at once.
Our renewed women’s health strategy will address those and other glaring injustices. It will give women and girls faster care from a health system that actually listens. It will make it simpler and faster for them to access the care they need the first time they ask for it, and it will make sure that the latest innovations work for women, ranging from reproductive and maternal health to menopause and chronic conditions. Of course, every day women are receiving outstanding, compassionate care from our dedicated NHS staff, but being ignored, gaslit, humiliated and disrespected are all-too-common experiences for far too many. More than eight women in 10 say there have been times when healthcare professionals did not listen to them. Our mission is to dismantle the culture and ingrained behaviours that allow that medical misogyny to fester and grow, and that starts by listening to women.
Women’s voices and choices are the golden thread that runs through this renewed strategy. Their voices will be heard, as we work to reduce variation in how GPs listen to and respond to women, using patient survey data in a quality improvement programme. Their voices will be heard as we capture whether women have been treated with respect, kept informed, and involved in decisions about their own care. Their voices will be heard, as we co-develop new standards of care for procedures such as hysteroscopy, so that every woman has informed consent and a real choice over her pain relief.
Yesterday, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced that we will do the first trial of a scheme known as patient power payments, which will cover gynaecology services. Women will get a say on whether the NHS provider should get full payment for the services women receive, based on the quality of their experience. It means that if a woman is not happy with her experience, a portion of the tariff paid to that provider would be redirected to fund improvements in the same services instead. In other words, women will have the power to kick medical misogyny where it hurts: in the budget.
All this is building on the evidence and expertise that informed the original strategy. I wish to acknowledge the intended ambition of that work, not least because it was based on the contributions of thousands of women. However, the changes that were promised have not translated into consistent improvements in access, quality of care or outcomes. Take gynaecology services. The waiting list for gynae care was north of 600,000 when we took office. Today that figure is finally moving in the right direction, but we cannot make as much progress as we would like because the system simply was not designed with women in mind.
I pay tribute to Baroness Merron, who has led this work on behalf of the Government. As she made clear in her foreword, this system was not designed in such a way—to be fair to Nye Bevan, in 1948 he was largely thinking about working men who were dying early in their sixties from the awful consequences of poor work, with some support for maternity services. We need to change that. We will support integrated care boards to introduce a single point of access for all non-urgent referrals to gynaecology and women’s health services, to speed up access. We will redesign the most common clinical pathways for heavy periods, menopause and urogynaecology, to remove unnecessary delays. Women with fibroids and endometriosis will be listened to at first presentation. They will be seen faster, and offered clear information through our new virtual hospital, NHS Online.
Women’s health pathways are being prioritised in NHS Online, and menopause and menstrual health services will be among the first to go live when it becomes operational this year. There will be a relentless focus on reducing women’s pain, improving standards, and reducing variation in both procedural and chronic pain management, including for chronic pelvic pain. We will launch a new programme to help young girls grow up understanding their menstrual health and know when to seek help.
From gynaecology to pain relief, our renewed strategy takes forward the work of the previous Government, and goes further and faster to fill the holes they left. It has only been made possible by the record £26 billion in funding for the NHS that was secured by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, the first woman to hold that office. All that will be underpinned by an NHS that finally listens with respect, dignity and compassion to the voices and choices of every woman and every girl, every time. That is not least with the creation of the women’s voices partnership, which is a new space for organisations representing women, giving them a direct line to Whitehall to inform national decision-making. The partnership will have a particular focus on those women who are most excluded from traditional services, and through it we will ensure that women’s voices help to shape the long-term direction of NHS reform.
Unlike the original strategy that was based on an outdated model of care, this renewed strategy maps across the three shifts in our 10-year plan for health. The shift from sickness to prevention will mean that women can better understand and act on their risk of conditions such as breast cancer and diabetes. The shift from hospital to community will mean services designed around women’s lives, with much faster access to diagnosis and treatment. The shift from analogue to digital will mean that women will avoid long waiting lists for painful conditions through NHS Online. Within two years we will launch a new challenge fund, backing the most promising women’s health technology start-ups, with a focus on tackling health inequalities in community settings. We are embedding new sex and gender policies into studies through the National Institute for Health and Care Research, so that findings are genuinely representative and no woman is left behind by science.
As every woman hearing this statement knows, to fully exercise power over our lives we need to be at the top of our game, both mentally and physically. We also know that women’s health has been neglected for too long. It therefore falls to this Government to restore the founding promise of our national health service, and to deliver the right care for everyone when they need it. From the classroom to the clinic, our renewed women’s health strategy promises a fairer, healthier future for women and girls everywhere, acting on women’s voices and choices, transforming NHS performance in services that matter most to women, supporting all women to live healthier lives, and creating an approach to research and development that works for and empowers women. We are designing the system to fit around women’s lives. This will not be a strategy that sits around gathering dust on a shelf, because women are counting on us, and we will not let them down.
Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
I am glad to see that the much-delayed women’s health strategy is finally here, and I thank the Minister for her work on that and for advance sight of her statement. I am particularly pleased that Ministers have pledged to prioritise medical health conditions such as endometriosis and to continue the roll-out of the HPV testing that we piloted.
Today it is one year since the For Women Scotland judgment in the Supreme Court confirmed that sex is biological sex. At the time the Secretary of State told the public:
“We will be issuing guidance in the coming weeks before the summer”.
To be fair to him, he did not say which summer. This week, a Minister told the House that the guidance on single-sex spaces could not be published under purdah rules until after the local elections. Will the Minister explain why it is okay to announce policy on other aspects of women’s health but not on single-sex provision in the NHS?
I find it remarkable that the Minister has the audacity to talk about women harmed by pelvic mesh when, after almost two years in office, the Government have still not responded to the Hughes report. When do they intend to do so?
I was disappointed not to find a commitment in the strategy to the lobular breast cancer moon shot project. Will the Minister give us a timeline for what I understand is a commitment to that project by the Government?
The Minister talked about waiting lists. While it is welcome that gynaecology waiting lists have fallen in the past year by 1.9%, for those requiring some sort of procedure or admission, waiting lists are 4.5% higher than they were a year ago. One way to make waiting lists shorter is to not start counting until someone has been waiting for a few days already—more targets can certainly be hit that way—so will the Minister clear something up for me? The Government have decided to prevent GPs from directly referring patients to consultants, insisting that they request advice from consultant-led teams instead. If the consultant then decides to offer an appointment, the clock starts, but that will be a few days after the original request is received, making the waiting time a few days shorter. This is where it gets really confusing: the Minister for Care said that the rules are going to change so that the clock will start when the advice request is received, so that patient waiting times are accurately reflected, but the Minister for Secondary Care has said that that will only happen from October.
Who is right? Do the Government intend to try and fiddle the figures by making people’s waits look shorter between now and the autumn? Given that we have heard different answers from two different Ministers, do they not know what is going on? Or can they confirm that with their new process and with immediate effect waiting times will be calculated from the moment that the advice and guidance request is received, in the same way as happens with referrals now?
The first chapter of the strategy is about acting on women’s voices and listening to women, which of course is welcome, but the Government plan to abolish Healthwatch in favour of listening to organisations. Why are the views of organisations that may or may not accurately represent the voices of women more generally being prioritised, and the voices of women themselves being somewhat deprioritised?
In the strategy, the Government commit to increasing capacity for surgical—in other words, later—abortions. They commit to making the morning after pill available free from pharmacies; they have made the oral contraceptive pill available from pharmacies too, and they have said that they will improve workforce capacity to provide long-acting reversible contraception. At a time when sexually transmitted infections are on the rise, with potential significant short-term and long-term consequences for women, there is no mention of condoms in the strategy. Given that some men can be reluctant to use condoms and there is discussion of eliminating misogyny throughout the document, will the Minister explain the choice not to include those too?
Another issue I want to raise is that of fracture liaison services. On entering Government, the Secretary of State said that one of his first jobs would be to establish universal fracture liaison services by 2030, yet that is moving at such a slow pace that he will not meet his target. Will the Minister set out how many of the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry—DEXA—scanners are new, how many are replacements and how many will be used to set up new fracture liaison services?
There are many more questions that I can ask, but I understand that I have run out of time. In summary, while there are a few good points, it has taken a long time to produce a strategy that is rather disappointing. Women deserve much better.
Karin Smyth
It is hard to know where to start. I heard the word “welcome” somewhere in the hon. Lady’s remarks, so thanks for that.
In launching what we call a “renewed strategy” we have given credit to the previous strategy, which we welcomed when we were in opposition. However, on issues where there could be cross-party agreement, from going to war to the women’s health strategy, the Conservatives’ modus operandi is now to give nothing for us to work on together on behalf of the people who we represent. It is disappointing that they choose to start on a negative and really they could have done better.
In opposition, we welcomed the initiative to have a women’s health strategy and we supported that work going forward, which has led to the publication of this renewed strategy, because the diagnosis of many of the issues was right. However, as I have made clear, we are upending the system because for decades the health service was built around the work and health needs of men and the predominance of men working in the system, despite the fact that 77% of our nursing staff are women. We are upending that to put women’s voices and choices front and centre, including control of the budget and through NHS Online. Those are the game changers.
The Conservatives do not recognise the total game-changing nature of NHS Online in facilitating services for women wherever they live across the country, whether they live near highly specialised centres, such as those that I am privileged to have in my city of Bristol, in the coastal and rural communities represented by Members from across the House, or near tertiary centres. Any woman, from any part of our country, can access NHS Online and have that specialist service. We are trialling that with gynaecology. They will then get support from our rapidly expanding community diagnostic centres, about whose expansion we made an announcement this week, in order to get quicker diagnosis and the support that they need, closer to home in their neighbourhood health services.
I am happy to respond to the other issues that the hon. Lady raises, including the For Women Scotland judgment, and to set out the work that we have had to do to clear up the mess that the Conservatives left. Everything that happened to women under that system happened on the watch of the Conservative Government, from self ID to the issues at the Tavistock and everything else. There was a lack of rules, a lack of governance and a lack of clarity, and they did not take control. That is the mess that we inherited from the Conservative Government.
The Minister for Women and Equalities, my right hon. Friend the Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson), is doing an excellent job: she is made of steel and good experience, and she has had to navigate a difficult landscape. The Conservatives understand the rules of purdah like the rest of us, so let us not pretend that they do not. My right hon. Friend will be laying that guidance as soon as she can after the election.
I will go on to talk about the DEXA scanners that we are investing in and fracture liaison services bringing people together, which were promises in our manifesto. This strategy is about specialists coming together and working together in fracture liaison services and women’s health hubs. Those have led the way among clinicians about how we can work better for women. That is why we are building on and expanding them, and it is disappointing that the Conservatives do not want to work with us on that.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
I warmly welcome the women’s health strategy. I recently visited the Navigating Our Womanhood Together bus in Dudley, which supports women’s health from menstruation to menopause, and I look forward to more such initiatives being delivered as part of the strategy in my constituency. Will the Minister set out how the strategy will harness allied health professionals, including specialist physiotherapists, to support pelvic health, such as incontinence, prolapse and post-natal care?
Karin Smyth
My hon. Friend is a fantastic champion in this area. We are so pleased to have her clinical experience and no day goes past without her representing her own speciality of physiotherapy and AHPs more generally. She is absolutely right that those professionals have led the way in looking at women’s care and it is important that women feel confident with that physiotherapy advice. I think that she will be pleased to see the developments that will come from the women’s health strategy and those that will come when we bring forward our workforce plan, which will have AHPs front and centre working in women’s neighbourhood healthcare.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
The Liberal Democrats welcome the strategy, and its specific recognition of the socioeconomic and racial disparities in women’s healthcare, which it is important to put front and centre. We also appreciate the specific recognition of endometriosis and similar conditions. My partner, Emma, suffers from endometriosis, and on many occasions I have seen her unable to stand up or barely get off the sofa, having been told for years that her symptoms are completely normal and that there is nothing wrong with her. Given that at least one in 10 women suffer from endometriosis and there are over 500,000 people on gynaecology waiting lists, clearly her experience is not unique.
The picture around maternity safety is deeply troubling. Maternal mortality has increased by over 20% in the past 15 years, and there have recently been some high-profile media discussions about women and babies being let down, sometimes with devastating consequences. That is why the Liberal Democrats have been calling for one-to-one midwifery care and specialist doctors on every unit.
I welcome the Government’s specific commitment on treatments for morning sickness. My hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (James MacCleary) has campaigned on that issue for a long time, and it is right that we end the postcode lottery for these medicines. The condition can be debilitating for some people, and it is not fair that women have different experiences simply because of where they live.
Given that this is not the first women’s health strategy to be brought to this place—the previous Government brought one through in 2022—and the fact that many women we speak to do not feel that there has been any meaningful change, a lot of people are saying that we cannot just keep announcing strategies while women are waiting for basic care. Given the failure of the last Government to deliver meaningful change, can we have reassurances that this will not simply be another strategy announcement and that women will feel a difference in the care that they receive?
Karin Smyth
I thank the Liberal Democrat representative for his comments—frankly, that is the way it is done.
Let me turn to some of the issues that the hon. Gentleman raised. May I take the opportunity to mention endometriosis in particular? There have long been campaigns on that issue in this place from many women and men such as him talking not on behalf of their partners, but for them about the suffering. That is all very welcome.
I commend the work of Sir David Amess, a former Member of the House whose plaque is behind us, and of my right hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Anna Turley) in chairing the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis. When in opposition in 2017 or 2018, I had a member of staff—I hope she does not mind my saying so—who opened my eyes to this issue. Persistence works. We have got to where we are by supporting women’s voices across the country, and that is front and centre in this strategy.
On the hon. Gentleman’s wider point, I am sure that when he gets all the way through the strategy, he will see that there is a list of 102 actions—if I remember rightly—with dates aligned to them. I am sure that all hon. Members will look at that. I notice that my friend Baroness Merron is in the Gallery; she will be keeping everybody’s feet to the fire, including the Secretary of State’s, to deliver on this work. That list is in the strategy, and we wanted to set it out very clearly. We are waiting for the roll-out of NHS Online during the summer, and seeing how that works will be a litmus test for us, so I very much welcome the hon. Gentleman’s challenging us on that.
Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)
I strongly welcome the women’s health strategy, and I congratulate both Baroness Merron and my hon. Friend the Minister on their work on it. Since its publication yesterday, my inbox has received a number of emails from women in my constituency who suffer from endometriosis.
I wanted to highlight that, because it is very rare that constituents contact us on the publication of a Government report to comment on its contents so quickly. That shows what an absolute hotbed this issue is and how profoundly it affects people. They speak of sometimes having decades of debilitating pain, going into debt while looking for treatment, losing housing, and suffering from relationships being impacted, their jobs being undermined and experiencing a loss of income, but overall they talk about how the condition is just not recognised and how their pain goes unheard.
One of my constituents said that women need better understanding, better support and better options, and seeing that set out in black and white in a Government report has really meant so much to women. Will the Minister join me in thanking these women for their bravery in continuing to raise their voices despite their continued experience?
Karin Smyth
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is unusual to receive emails saying good things. There will be challenges in this work, but it speaks to a wider issue. Many of us as women experience much of this ourselves, and we have women in Parliament who are able to articulate that. There are some fantastic women clinicians whom we have been pleased to work with and who have really pushed forward those voices as they have become more senior in the medical and clinical professions to help us with those clinical pathways. We have been able to build on all that in bringing this strategy forward.
May I commend my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State? He was on various media yesterday and he has been working with people such as influencers to give voice to those women. I think that this is an important part of our democracy. It is worth emailing MPs—I am sorry if that elicits more emails to other Members and to my staff—because we listen and we are engaged. It matters when people raise these issues in our surgeries and come forward with them. Sometimes policy development and getting action is a struggle for all of us; it is tough and takes a long time. The process of politics sometimes takes too long, but those women have made this happen, and I thank them for it.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
I want to ask the Minister about a particular area of women’s health and how this strategy might impact on it. This is a very personal issue for me and my wife, regarding the pathways and support for women who have colostomies or ileostomies and have lifelong stoma care. I place on record my thanks to Mr Arnab Bhowmick, who is my wife’s very long-term consultant and has performed two major surgeries on Caroline—he is known as “the fantastic Mr B” in our house and to many of his patients. We know that on those pathways and in the decisions leading up to making the decision to have a stoma, putting it off can put people’s lives at risk. How people cope with a stoma afterwards has very unique elements for women—that can be around periods, fertility and pregnancy, or around the menopause later in life. How does the Minister think the strategy will help women like my wife, the friends she has met in hospital and others on those pathways?
Karin Smyth
I really thank the hon. Gentleman for raising the sometimes taboo subject of stoma and stoma care and for highlighting the complexity of that for women. I send my best wishes to his wife. I did not get the name of her clinician, but I thank the hon. Gentleman for getting their name on the record; that matters when people are dealing with such an intimate sort of care.
Again, bringing voices forward is a key part of this work. The thing to bear in mind in the development of this strategy is that it is predicated on the 10-year plan and on bringing care closer to home. For example, people who have stoma and stoma care sometimes have quick questions and do not need to make an appointment to go and see somebody else, with lots of rapid appointments to and from a hospital, and all the parking, travelling and so on.
There are ways in which we can use online services and particularly neighbourhood services, where people are closer to home, to facilitate the management of care of things like stoma after people have come through or are in ongoing care. That is the sort of place where we have voices and experience informing local care, which will look different in different geographies depending on the other facilities available. I ask the hon. Gentleman to keep working with us on how that experience works out.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
I welcome this strategy, having worked on maternity and medical misogyny on the Health and Social Care Committee. I will bring up the thorny issue of sexual health. In a recent sitting of the Committee, we heard that a third of sexual health doctors are set to retire in the next three years and that there are only 14 training places. The key to ensuring that we are looking after women’s sexual health is to have a pathway for new doctors. Will the Minister look at that issue and at what we can do to resolve the training blockages?
Karin Smyth
Yes, of course. The retirement age is a constant issue that we need to look at across a number of professions, and I am happy to come back to my hon. Friend on that. As part of our workforce plan, we are looking in particular at retaining the expertise that we have, as well as at recruiting people into new roles.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
On behalf of the newly established APPG on urinary tract infections, which I am proud to co-chair alongside the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner), I warmly welcome the Minister’s statement and this strategy. The APPG welcomes the acknowledgement that women’s health has been neglected for far too long, and we cautiously welcome the commitments to redesign urogynaecology pathways and fund a specialist centre in each region.
On behalf of the many women and, heartbreakingly, children who suffer from chronic urinary tract infections, can the Minister confirm whether those commitments cover the treatment of acute, recurrent and chronic UTIs? Will she consider our requests for support to establish agreed clinical definitions for the different types of UTIs so that we can inform long-overdue updates to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines and finally end the scandal of sufferers being ignored and gaslit by medical professionals, which has happened for far too long?
Karin Smyth
I thank the hon. Gentleman and my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner), who I know cannot be here today. She has used her expertise to drive forward recognition of UTIs and incontinence—another taboo subject. We have previously had a very good debate in this Chamber on that issue, and that has all informed what we are saying.
The hon. Gentleman tempts me to move into some clinical definitions and clinical pathways. I am not going to do that, but I am very keen to hear about the work that the APPG is doing and its expertise. We will continue to hear from it and about the work that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South are leading to ensure that we make this work in reality. That is absolutely central to the strategy.
Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)
I welcome the Government’s renewed women’s health strategy and their efforts to tackle the ethnic disparities that still exist in the healthcare system. Placing women’s voices at the heart of the strategy is absolutely the right approach, but does my hon. Friend the Minister recognise that there are still persistent gaps that will require robust, targeted interventions if we are to truly address some of the racial barriers that black women still face within the healthcare system, and can she say a little bit about how the strategy will seek to address those gaps?
Karin Smyth
I thank my hon. Friend for the work she has done, both on maternity and on sight loss, and for people generally. She is a great advocate for making sure that those voices are heard, both from her own experience and through her advocacy. We are bringing together a voices group—apologies, I cannot remember exactly what we called it in the end—so that there is direct representation in Whitehall at a national level. That is one of the things we wanted to make sure was included in the strategy, and my hon. Friend Baroness Merron has worked assiduously with stakeholder groups and their representatives to ensure that we make that work, as well as on the development of online services and the work to bring things into neighbourhoods. I am very committed to working with her to make sure that that happens.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)
I commend the Minister on this women’s health strategy, and particularly on action 59, which is to invest in the women’s maternity and neonatal estate. I am also grateful to the Minister for agreeing to meet me next week about power cuts at Eastbourne district general hospital, which have knocked out the maternity unit at various times. I am really disappointed, though, that although the invitation was originally extended to me and two guests—who included our chief executive—that has been withdrawn. Can the Minister confirm that those guests can attend, so that we can discuss how to put this strategy into action in Eastbourne?
Karin Smyth
The hon. Member is referring to a meeting as part of my ministerial surgery, which is for Members. I will be happy to see him next week.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister and the noble Lady Merron on bringing forward this renewed strategy. My constituent Jodie Goodwin has recently been refused a hysterectomy for reasons of funding, despite the medical and surgical advice that that is what she requires to deal with her health issues. Can the Minister advise me on whether the strategy will deal with matters like this and with Jodie’s issue in particular, and would she perhaps make some time available to discuss this case in detail?
Karin Smyth
I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting the case of her constituent Jodie and many others—such cases will be familiar to many people, and they are of course unacceptable. I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that case further.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I welcome the Minister’s statement and the strategy. I want to speak specifically about one constituent who has contacted me, who has waited over 200 days without receiving the results of a gynaecological test—200 days of anxiety, uncertainty and delays to her treatment. Please forgive me while I read her actual words:
“this complaint is not simply about one patient having an unfortunate experience. It concerns what I believe to be a broader and deeply concerning failure in the way menstrual and gynaecological pain is recognised, assessed, investigated, and acted upon”.
I completely agree with her. Does my hon. Friend the Minister agree that yesterday’s renewed women’s health strategy allows us to commit to streamlining and improving gynaecological care, and can she tell me more about how she believes this will make a real difference for my constituents?
Karin Smyth
Again, my hon. Friend raises a shocking case on behalf of her constituents, and I agree with her and her constituent. Access to diagnostics is a key part of our 10-year health plan, which is why, as we were able to announce this week, we are rolling out more community diagnostic centres to improve diagnostic capacity more generally. I am also working with the Minister for patient safety, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed), to look at how clinical pathways can be streamlined. That work is informing how we are developing NHS Online and making sure that we shorten those pathways, as my hon. Friend has rightly called for. All those cases—including, unfortunately, her constituent’s experience—have informed that work. We are linking our work on the 10-year-plan with that work and putting women, gynaecology and menstrual health front and centre as trailblazers, because unfortunately, those are the areas in which this work is needed. That is what this strategy does.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
As the Minister knows, I have long campaigned around mental health. The strategy highlights that women disproportionately have poor mental health, and I welcome that recognition. However, action 49 says:
“we will improve mental health support for women and girls”,
but it does not say what the Government will do. Will they produce a strategy for delivering on this, and how will progress against this document be measured, so that we can hold the Government to account?
Karin Smyth
I thank my hon. Friend for her question. The document contains a long list of actions, with clear dates alongside them, so that she and others—including her constituents—can see what we are saying, and can measure progress.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
Ignored, humiliated and misdiagnosed—these are the experiences of far too many women, and far too often, those experiences have tragic consequences. There is no more depressing example of this than the women who were prescribed the banned anti-miscarriage drug diethylstilbestrol, or DES, and the struggle that they, their children and their grandchildren have had in accessing the care and support that they need and deserve. I welcome the steps this Government have taken to improve women’s health outcomes. Will the Minister consider meeting DES campaigners to ensure that their voices and experiences are part of this strategy?
Karin Smyth
As we know, and as is documented in the strategy, there is sadly a long list of issues that particularly affect women that have been ignored, and it has taken far too long for women to draw attention to those issues. I understand that my hon. Friend the Minister for patient safety has met DES campaigners, and we will continue to listen to and learn from their experiences as we develop the strategy.
Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)
As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis, I thank the ministerial team and my honourable Friend in the other place, Baroness Merron, for the focus that they have placed on that condition in the strategy, and for putting women’s voices front and centre; too often, they have been ignored. I also commend the sterling efforts and work of the late Sir David Amess and my right hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Anna Turley) to establish the APPG in 2019 and put endometriosis firmly on the parliamentary agenda. I am delighted that a new programme to improve menstrual health education for girls is included in the strategy, but does the Minister agree that there must also be menstrual health education for all clinicians, so that symptoms can be recognised at the earliest opportunity, and women and girls can get the care they need, when they need it?
Karin Smyth
Again, I put on record my respect and thanks to Sir David Amess and my right hon. Friend the Member for Redcar for the work that they started. I could not remember the exact year—I thought it was 2017, but my hon. Friend says that it was 2019. They raised awareness of what was a taboo only a few years ago. Many of us, including me, accepted it as normal to feel pain, whatever we did. Now, we are saying—that includes clinicians—that it is not normal. We look forward to joining in the great work that my hon. Friend and others are doing to make sure that this strategy becomes a reality, and that women see that happen very quickly.
Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)
I so welcome this strategy. I am quite ashamed to say that before being elected to this place, I did not know enough about women’s health issues, and in particular the issues with pelvic and vaginal mesh—the wait for treatment and the struggle to be heard—and endometriosis; people with that condition face a wait for diagnosis and a struggle for recognition. Since I was elected, I have been contacted by tens of women across Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield, who are fighting the fight for recognition of these topics on behalf of women across the country. It is because of that that I am educated enough to stand here today. Those women feel ignored and abandoned by a health service that does not care enough about women’s health issues. Will the Minister give a commitment to campaigners such as the women in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield who have approached me that because of this strategy, they will now be heard?
Karin Smyth
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. He should not apologise for not knowing before; my generation of women, and many before us, were told not to talk about this. We were told not to tell anybody, and to put up with it. We were told that every month, whatever happened to us was normal, and we should crack on. A generation of men, and all of us mothers, need to talk about this, too. We welcome all allies and spokespeople. Learning is a key part of being in this place, and my hon. Friend and others are bringing the experiences of women to this campaign. The proof is in the pudding, and we will make sure that what my hon. Friend has asked for happens.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for her announcement of this strategy. In particular, I welcome the fact that the strategy says that it will be made simpler and faster for women to access the care that they need the first time they ask for it. More than eight in 10 women say that there have been times when healthcare professionals did not listen to them. One such woman was my constituent Daizy Bing, who, at the age of 17, came to me to raise her concerns. She had been told by her GP that she was too young to have an endometriosis diagnosis. Thanks to my intervention, she got a gynaecological appointment, but we all know that an MP’s surgery should not be the gateway to decent healthcare. Daizy has turned her experience into academic research. Will my hon. Friend meet her, so that her insights can inform the delivery of this ambitious and game-changing strategy?
Karin Smyth
My hon. Friend again raises younger women’s voices; we want to continue to hear from them. Part of this strategy is about working with the Department for Education to ensure that girls—and indeed boys—are made more aware of some of these issues. The women’s voices partnership—my apologies for not quite being able to remember its name earlier—will bring women together, including younger women and girls. If her constituent is keen to be one of those advocates, we would welcome that. We are talking about having new patient-reported experience measures and patient-reported outcome measures; we will develop those pathways over the years. Through that, women will have clear ways to navigate the system, and to put their voices forward.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
I thank the Ministers for this renewed women’s health strategy for England. Two of my constituents in particular—Evie Solomon, who founded HER Circle, and Shelly Lynn—will welcome the focus on medical misogyny, and they will be watching to make sure that we deliver. It was great to hear that there were influencers at the launch of the strategy yesterday. I met one of them, Milly Evans, who is a sex educator. Is there space in the women’s health strategy and the men’s health strategy for the provision of lifelong sex education, so that we have consistent, relevant and appropriate sex education for everyone who needs it? Frankly, women who have health issues still want a fulfilling and happy sex life.
Karin Smyth
As I said, part of this strategy is about educating girls and boys on health and bringing together all parts of education. We are keen to work in new ways with new media, and with influencers who are positive about women and women’s health, and we will continue to do so.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Minister for her statement, and for her ongoing commitment to ensuring that women’s health is at the heart of this Government’s agenda, which is hugely important. A bit like my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Oliver Ryan), I was shocked by the number of women from my constituency of Harlow who came forward to tell me about their terrible experiences of being gaslit, ignored and disrespected, particularly when it came to endometriosis and the pelvic mesh scandal. My constituent Belinda, when she was 36 years old, went to the GP complaining of head pains. She was told that it was nothing and was sent home. She had actually had a stroke. She was told by the GP that she could not possibly have had a stroke at the age of 36, which was obviously incorrect. What would the Minister say to women in my constituency who have long felt ignored, disrespected and gaslit because they are women?
Karin Smyth
Belinda’s story is shocking, and I hope that she is doing better. This strategy is, as I said, a total game changer. In particular, the renewal of this strategy, based on the previous strategy, sends a signal to the system that we will look at the experience of women and take it into account. We will look at the budgets and the return of money to the service to improve things. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said yesterday, there is nothing quite like seeing chief executives and chief finance officers suddenly notice—perhaps they had not noticed it before; they are busy sometimes—women’s clear dissatisfaction with gynaecology. The strategy sends a positive signal to improve the service, and that puts power in the hands of women.
The other real game changer is the online service. As I said, women, wherever they live, be it in Harlow, Bristol, rural Lincolnshire or coastal areas like Thanet—I have heard from Members from so many places this afternoon—will have access to online specialist treatment. There will be a further roll-out of diagnostic services, to get that diagnostic record back into neighbourhood healthcare, so that people can be treated closer to home. Building an NHS around women, women’s needs, women’s experiences—that is the game changer promised by this Labour Government.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
As a trained science teacher, I welcome the Minister’s news that through the strategy, the Government are launching a new programme to improve education for girls about their menstrual health, with additional funding from this year to support targeted work in schools and community settings. Does the Minister agree that this programme will support girls’ knowledge of menstrual health, and when to seek healthcare?
Karin Smyth
I thank my hon. Friend for his expertise, and I agree that the programme will do that. When I was first told about menstrual cycles as a young girl, I was told to hide what happened, even from my father and my brother in the household, let alone my peers in school and so on. We have come a long way, and it is good to have so many good advocates to help us. Education in school is central to that.
Backbench Business
Modernisation Committee Report: Access to the House of Commons
(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Before I call the Leader of the House to move the motion, I point out that live British Sign Language interpretation of the debate is available to watch on parliamentlive.tv.
The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the First Report of the Modernisation Committee, Access to the House of Commons and its Procedures, HC 755, and the House Administration response, HC 1726.
It is a pleasure to open this debate today, both in my capacity as Leader of the House of Commons and as Chair of the Modernisation Committee. I begin by extending the Committee’s thanks to all those who provided evidence. The Committee heard directly from Members of this House and the other place, as well as from members of staff, experts and academics. I thank former and current Committee members for their work on this inquiry. In particular, I thank my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell).
The Modernisation Committee embarked on this inquiry following a consultation that it held in autumn 2024, when it heard the views of hundreds of members of the parliamentary community about what it should prioritise. The resounding call was to consider the accessibility of the House—both physical accessibility of the parliamentary estate, and the accessibility of procedures and conventions in the Chamber, including the information that the House provides to the public about our work.
We all recognise that the Palace of Westminster is an iconic building and part of a UNESCO world heritage site, but that comes with challenges for accessibility. The Committee received sobering evidence about the negative impact that these challenges can have on Members, staff and visitors. They include inaccessible doors, toilets, lifts, lighting and signage, which impact on the daily lives of people trying to use the estate. The Committee has been encouraged by the House Administration’s efforts to address some of these issues, including before the inquiry concluded, but the tasks before it remain substantial.
To assist the House Administration, the Committee recommended that an external accessibility advisory group be established, so that the Administration can call upon its expertise when needed. I am pleased that the House of Commons Commission is undertaking work to set up that group. A key issue that the Committee identified was the lack of progress on issues raised in accessibility audits of the estate. The Committee therefore recommended that the House Administration publish a summary of progress against accessibility audit recommendations, and I am pleased that the House Administration’s progress will now be a regular feature of business plans and tracked throughout the year.
An overarching challenge for the House Administration is the culture around accessibility. The Committee concluded that although the aspiration of the Administration is to provide accessible services, there is a lack of central responsibility or clear lines of accountability to deliver it. The Committee believes that this must be addressed by introducing better training and practical guidance for staff, specific to their area of responsibility.
The Committee also recommended that the House Administration revise its strategic priorities to make it explicit, as part of the value of being inclusive, that accessibility is a priority for the organisation, alongside security and safety. I am pleased that the next three-year strategy for the House Administration includes an explicit commitment to improve accessibility.
I turn now to the House of Commons procedures and processes. Many of the procedures and processes that govern our proceedings have been in place for a long time, for very good reason. We are grateful to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and to Mr Speaker and the other Deputy Speakers, for the care that you take in assisting Members who have access needs. To ensure that this support is clearly advertised to all Members, the Committee recommended that references to the routes available to MPs who require reasonable adjustments be made in the guidance for Members. The report also explored issues relating to seating in the Chamber and to Divisions, and made a series of recommendations. Work is currently under way to consider how deferred Divisions might be made more accessible, and the potential introduction of a reasonable adjustment card scheme for MPs who require certain seats for access reasons.
The final section of the report focused on communication. Ensuring that we communicate in an accessible way is key to ensuring that our constituents can stay informed about what happens here. That includes thinking about how we improve accessibility for visitors in the Public Gallery, and leading by example in ensuring that the documents we produce are accessible to the largest possible number of people. I know that the Administration Committee and the House Administration are considering what more can be done in these areas.
The Modernisation Committee received the House Administration’s response to our report, published on 19 March, which assured us that it would make progress on our recommendations. Today I look forward to hearing from Members across the House on their experiences. The Committee will draw on these when we hear about further progress from the House’s senior leadership team later this year.
Accessibility should never be an afterthought. It is a core part of what we do, and I commend this motion to the House.
Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)
I thank the Leader of the House for his remarks, and fully echo both their detail and their sentiment. As he says, accessibility should never be an afterthought. In the case of the House of Commons, there is not just the common decency that goes with trying to support anyone with a disability or another need. A vital aspect of being an effective parliamentarian is that every single Member of Parliament, whatever their background and personal needs, should be able to discharge their full capabilities on behalf of their constituents. That is why it is so central to what we do as a House.
Let me join the Leader of the House in welcoming the report. I also very much welcome the response from the House Administration, which is a very constructive document, by and large. We on the Committee are grateful for the constructive way in which the House Administration engaged with our concerns all the way through. I pay tribute not just to the current and previous members of the Committee, but to the former Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), and indeed to the current Leader of the House for steering this ship home to port.
I have a couple of reflections to add on this topic. Of course, when we think about accessibility, it is very easy just to think of physical changes to the structure of the House of Commons, but the Leader of House was absolutely right to think about not just Members but visitors, staff and people who use this building in many different ways, and about accessibility in relation to the public’s understanding of what we are trying to do.
There is a tradition in British political thought that the House of Commons should have not merely an efficient aspect to it, as Bagehot would put it, but a dignified aspect to it and even a certain mystique. I think there is some truth to that—as a Conservative, I would say that, wouldn’t I? There is some benefit to sticking with procedures that have proven their worth, even if it requires a little bit of effort to understand them. As a result, I would be very suspicious and concerned, on behalf of the House as an institution, about anything that I thought was dumbing down, but I do not think that is what is at stake here. What is at stake here are intelligent simplifications of language and presentation that allow Members to understand from the get-go how they can contribute constructively and effectively to what we are doing. Although the changes that were put through by previous House Administration officials in relation to the Order Paper did not come out of this process, I think that they were very constructive and helpful. The Order Paper is now unrecognisably better than what it was when I entered Parliament just a few years ago.
Let me say a couple of other things. The report mentions restoration and renewal, and it is important to keep these two things separate. The House will know that I am an extreme sceptic on the restoration and renewal process. The content of what is being proposed is poorly conceived, and there is a lack of a fixed budget. I am also sceptical about the process that has been followed and the lack of what I consider genuinely effective governance, but it is important to recognise that the report talks about that in order to reflect the importance of accessibility to that process. Whatever decision the House makes on restoration and renewal—I hope it will go for a drastically different version of what we are talking about—it will respect the need for full accessibility to this House and the House of Lords. I do not think that is on the table or up for negotiation at all, but one key point is that when we discuss this, we should not regard restoration and renewal as any substitute—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. I gently point out to the shadow Leader of the House, and to anybody else planning on contributing, that this is not a debate on restoration and renewal. Although reference to it is of course acceptable, perhaps the substance of Members comments’ should not focus on that.
Jesse Norman
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am afraid you may have been slightly misled by your officials. The report mentions restoration and renewal, and specifically refers to it as something that the Committee was invited to look forward to. Therefore, it is not inappropriate to mention it.
The specific point that I am making, if I am allowed to make it, is that we should not defer changes out of an expectation that restoration and renewal, whatever it may be, will be a panacea; we should be getting on with changes as soon as they can be made. One of the things that is so attractive about the work that the House Administration did in responding to the report, and to the Committee, was the energetic way in which it started the process of making changes when they were pointed out. I remember the director general coming forward with several hundred potential changes that could be made, and on which the House Administration had started to make progress.
Whatever the future may bring, let there be no delay in making this House as genuinely open and accessible as it possibly can be. Let me congratulate everyone on all the work that has been done so far, the officials who have made it happen and the Committee.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
I declare my interest as a member of the Modernisation Committee, but also as the chair of both the all-party parliamentary group for wheelchair users and the APPG on access to disability equipment. I come at this issue from that perspective. As many Members know, I am the parent of a wheelchair user and have campaigned on both accessibility and Changing Places toilets, and I will refer to those during my contribution.
Shortly after my election to this place, I asked a series of questions. I have twin daughters, one of whom can access the building, but the other cannot access it in the way that we all can. What if she were to come here, and what are the most easily defined routes around the building? I was very lucky, because I had an accessibility tour, but I will continue to say that those routes are not easily defined for staff or visitors. For visitors, what are the most accessible routes around the building to get from A to B? We need to continue to look at that. If a Member is arranging an event, what are the main access routes for somebody who is a wheelchair user or who has different access needs?
In the report—I was not a member of the Modernisation Committee when the report was undertaken, but I am now—there are recommendations about external accessibility. In my role as chair of both groups, but particularly as chair of the APPG for wheelchair users, we continue to have problems. A significant number of wheelchair users attend our meetings, but there is only a very small number of rooms in this building that we can book. The Chair of the Administration Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney (Nick Smith), is very aware of this—we have written and spoken to each other about it at length—but under the booking system’s current procedures, the APPG cannot be given priority over others, which proves very difficult when only a very small number of rooms are available. It also proves very difficult when we try to provisionally book a room, and the only room our users can use is booked by somebody else. We do need, through the Administration Committee, to look at our booking system procedures.
My hon. Friend is also aware that the APPG for wheelchair users held an event last month at which the majority of speakers were wheelchair users, yet we managed to set up a podium for the speakers to give their speeches from. Reluctantly, we then had to dismantle the podium in front of all the wheelchair users, because it was clearly a completely inappropriate layout for how the wheelchair users in question needed to address the event. As my hon. Friend is aware, and as I said in the Modernisation Committee when we considered this report recently, there continue to be external accessibility changes we need to make in the House.
I note the recommendations in the report on accessible formats. I was really glad when my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington) had her East Kent Mencap group visit the building recently, and a number of Members with experience of this went to speak to them about their experiences—I was very privileged to do so. We clearly always need to look at those formats, and ask whether our information is available in an easy read format for them in the way it would be for any other visitors, and whether we can have the same discussions with those users.
Although she is not here today, I want to pay particular tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) for her valuable work since her election to make this building far more accessible. From her viewpoint, the building certainly was not in such a place.
Lastly, I want to refer to Changing Places toilets. A few months ago, my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney and I wandered down to the National Portrait Gallery to see what a more modern, accessible Changing Places toilet looks like. We have the issue that, when wheelchair users who attend the all-party groups I chair come to Portcullis House, there is no Changing Places toilet there. The Changing Places toilet we have is in the Lower Waiting Hall, and I would say it is to the original Changing Places standard of about 20 years ago. I have used it with my own daughter, and the hoist is a mobile hoist. The ceiling is very low, and an adult trying to get on it will most probably hit their head on the ceiling. It does not have a moveable sink to get a wheelchair underneath. It is not to the current standards we would expect of a Changing Places toilet. It is the one place where the people who attend the all-party groups I chair can use the toilet, yet it still is not to modern standards. As my hon. Friend and colleagues across the House know, I will continue to lobby to have one of a modern standard in Portcullis House and equally for the existing toilet to be of a modern standard.
As I said in my Changing Places debate last year, we have seen great improvements. My daughter, who has quadriplegic cerebral palsy, will be 13 this year, and I remember how few Changing Places toilets there were in this part of London 10 years ago. There has been great progress, including under the previous Government, in making sure that local railway stations and tourist destinations have Changing Places toilets. There are the ones at the National Portrait Gallery and the National Gallery down the road; there is the one in IKEA in Oxford Street, which I had to work very hard for and lobby to get its standard up to spec; and, just yesterday, the one at St Paul’s cathedral finally opened. Those places, where visitors are welcome to access the history and culture of our amazing city, do have such facilities, yet this place does not. We need those facilities both in Portcullis House and, to a more modern standard, in the Palace itself.
I thank the Committee for its work. I will continue to press on these areas, including in my role as a member of the Modernisation Committee, but while other workplaces have brought themselves into the 21st century, we must acknowledge that there is work that we still need to do.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
I rise to speak, on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, both as a member of the Modernisation Committee and, at one point during this inquiry, as a witness. That is also true of the Leader of the House, who gave evidence to the Committee before he became its Chair.
The work we do in this place is complicated, but sometimes it is more complicated than it needs to be, and sometimes we revel in that. I am very conscious that we are having this debate during the final stages of the parliamentary Session and ping-pong, and I as an opposition MP have been leading my colleagues to vote No because we disagree with a Government motion to disagree with a Lords amendment, so we sometimes make this place overly complicated, and the whats and whys of how we do things do not often make sense externally.
I maintain and agree with the shadow Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Hereford and South Herefordshire (Jesse Norman), and indeed the Leader of the House, that once we are here, we see that while there are definitely things that could be done better or differently, that is absolutely not the case for all things. We must always be aware of the need not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when considering what we should do. I came into Parliament in December 2019, and over the last two Parliaments—in both 2019 and 2024—we have had a huge turnover of legislators, and understanding why things are the way they are, and what needs to be improved, does take time.
I want to make my remarks in line with the three sections of the Modernisation Committee’s report, and I echo others in commending the House Administration for its constructive response. The reality is that in many circumstances, but particularly in relation to accessibility more generally, it knows fine well what the issues are in this place, and it is as keen to ensure that it makes visible progress on those issues as are we on the Committee and parliamentarians more widely.
However, the report summary talked about clear and prompt action, but we need to acknowledge that it will not be quick. I want to mention our experience yesterday. I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on PANS PANDAS, a paediatric condition—have I mentioned that I am running the London marathon for it a week on Sunday?—and yesterday some young people came in for a roundtable in advance of the Backbench Business debate we are hoping to have in a few weeks’ time, because it was important to hear directly from those young people about their experience of the condition. However, one of them was using a wheelchair.
My fantastic team in Westminster, Kathryn and Claudia, incorporated a tour into those young people’s experience as part of their day, but the reality was that the one young person in a wheelchair had a completely different experience from everybody else. There is no access to St Stephen’s Hall or the top of the Westminster steps, which meant she could not see that part of the tour. A moveable ramp for the few steps from Central Lobby to St Stephen’s Hall, which could be used when needed, would be an option. The lift on the accessible lift route is really small. The young person yesterday had one of those quite mobile wheelchairs, but I have been doing bus journeys with wheelchair users in my constituency recently, and the technology is advancing significantly, but the necessary space and access are not. There are also very simple things like the fact that the carpet outside the accessible lift has a really deep pile, which makes it difficult to move across.
Among the evidence that the Committee heard, what we heard from people working on the estate, about the difficulties they face, was pretty arresting. There is the Clerk who cannot progress in his career because he is no longer able to sit at the Table in front of you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and therefore his development opportunities are restricted. There is the member of staff for an MP who started on a Speaker’s internship for 12 months—a way of getting people from different backgrounds into Parliament—and was fortunate enough to go on and work for the same MP afterwards, but it took 15 months for the nearest wheelchair accessible toilet to be accessible to him, because he could not open the door before that point.
As a Committee, that was shameful for us to hear and it shows that we have so much more to do. It is important that we remember that Parliament is a place of work and a place of democracy, and when we consider the restoration and renewal proposals—I agree with the shadow Leader of the House—we need to keep accessibility at the forefront, regardless of what our overall opinions on R and R might be.
On procedure and processes, I remember meeting the previous Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), to discuss the Committee when the Government were looking at setting it up. On how I thought about the Committee, the equivalent that I came up with, from my time in the police, was a tasking and co-ordinating group. The remit of the Committee is wide and our make-up is unique, with the Leader of the House as Chair. The decisions on some elements of the work that we have looked at belong to other Committees, so we should be able to task and co-ordinate with them accordingly. It is right that decisions and inquiries on call lists, electronic voting—we had issues with that this week—and proxies are being led and reported on by the Procedure Committee. Our Committee also recently looked at virtual Select Committee appearances.
The evidence we heard from disabled MPs demonstrates that there is absolutely more that can be done to accommodate them. Also—this has been my own experience of late as a Chief Whip—there are practices that we have utilised in the past that in some ways we have forgotten about, such as nodding through. I am not suggesting that we go back to what is depicted in the James Graham play “This House”, but there are accommodations that can and should be made. We should be constantly challenging ourselves in that regard. Certainly, I see it as part of my role as Chief Whip for my group to make those challenges and ask those questions.
On reading the report, I also thought about my own reflections on covid. As I said, I was a new MP in 2019. There is no doubt that there was an impact on how relationships were built here in Parliament as a result of the practices we had during covid. We participated in the Chamber virtually, which gave no opportunity to learn how to intervene, or to just have those conversations in the Tea Room and the Lobby. It was quite easy to become siloed in our parliamentary groups, and I think all of us here know well that this place is at its best when it works in a constructive, cross-party way to make things progress.
The last section is on communicating what the House does. Generally, the recommendations attempt to strike the right balance between the traditions of the House— I say that as a trustee of the History of Parliament Trust—and the need for Parliament and its processes to be understandable to the wider public. There is clearly more to do, but it is important that we continue to assess whether that balance is being struck correctly.
I want to highlight the work of the Education and Engagement Team. I recently attended an event here in Parliament. Sarah Donald, the headteacher of Dairsie primary school in my constituency, is on the UK Parliament teacher ambassador programme, which will give her the opportunity to be an accredited partner of the Education and Engagement Team. That education and understanding of our democracy and how it works is really important. We are currently having Scottish Parliament elections, so knowing the difference between what an MSP can do and MP can do is important. Indeed, last week I visited Busy Bees nursery in Strathkinness to talk on the topic of “People who help us”. It transpires that it is really quite difficult to explain to four-year-olds what the job of an MP is. I have to say that when I visited my child’s nursery school a number of years ago in the unfirm of a police officer, I was much more popular.
To conclude, the Modernisation Committee is an important feature of this current Parliament. We can and should be in a position to continue to review progress and we should continue to do so as this Parliament progresses. I am very pleased that the House Administration has engaged with the report so constructively and I look forward to revisiting this topic in due course.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Leader of the House, the shadow Leader of the House and the Liberal Democrat Chief Whip—I have no doubt that she will thrash me in the London marathon in 10 days’ time—for starting the debate. I join the Leader of the House in paying tribute to the former Leader of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), who chaired a number of the meetings when I had the pleasure of sitting on the Modernisation Committee. I recognise the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis), who often talks about this subject with such passion. He makes vital points, particularly with regard to Changing Places toilets. I hope the House Administration is listening. I am sure the Leader of the House is listening, too.
I would like to thank all hon. Members who participated in the evidence sessions, in particular my hon. Friends the Members for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova) and for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball), and the hon. Members for South Northamptonshire (Sarah Bool) and for Torbay (Steve Darling). I should also personally thank the former Member for Harlow for his contribution. He said during the evidence session that he found it so difficult to spend long periods of time in debates that he would come in, make an intervention and then leave—so I have learnt something from him! In all sincerity, he made a really important point.
The shadow Leader of the House made the important point that accessibility issues must not impact on the ability of MPs to do their job in this House. It is also vital that prospective MPs are not put off standing for election because they see this place as being inaccessible. Whatever my political differences might be with Robert, I recognise that he was a brilliant MP for Harlow, and I seek to emulate him in the work he did. It would have been a real tragedy if he had been put off standing for election in the first place because he felt that he could not access democracy in the way that he was able to do.
This matter, however, is not just about us MPs. It is important to recognise the contributions from Clerks, MPs’ staff, House staff and Members of the other place. There is a danger that those of us who do not have accessibility issues do not truly appreciate the challenges for those who do. I thank the Clerks who brought together this important report. Before I make specific reference to parts of the report, I would like to say that, like everybody in this House and the other place, I want us to get this right and for everyone who works in this place not to have barriers to doing their jobs as effectively as possible.
As many Members have mentioned, the report is in three parts: the built environment, procedures and communication. As it rightly recognises in the first instance, there is a realisation that the estate is comprised of a complex combination of buildings that were constructed in a patchwork manner, and that that built environment can create physical and psychological challenges for its users. It is important to recognise that.
One conclusion on accessibility is that we need to learn from disabled people about their experiences of visiting and engaging with Parliament. Again, I think we can have cross-party agreement on that. As briefly mentioned by the Leader of the House, my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge made reference to the challenges of opening doors, including in Portcullis House. Portcullis House is nowhere near as old as this building, so there is no excuse for such challenges, particularly in relation to toilet doors. We heard a lot about the toilet doors in Portcullis House.
I am pleased that there has been positive action to make the estate more accessible, but I urge, as the report does, the establishment of an accessibility group to include disabled MPs to consider the wider issues. I would add to that, on the back of what my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford said, the need to think about disabled visitors to this place and how their voices can be heard, too. On page 22, the report talks about safety and security being the main focus of the House of Commons administration. We would of course all agree with that, but it should not be at the expense of accessibility. Nor does it need to be if we think about how the space supports everybody in it.
On procedure—I promise I will not make my speech too long, Madam Deputy Speaker; I realise that I have gone on for quite a bit—I am someone who has grown to enjoy the procedures of this place. I am a relatively new MP, but as Members across the House will know, I spend quite a lot of time in the Chamber—my place on the Bench is slightly more worn than those around it. I have really enjoyed other MPs coming to me and asking questions about procedure—it has made me feel quite important. However, procedure and how this place works should not be a big secret. Making sure that everybody—particularly those who have accessibility and reasonable adjustment requirements—understands the procedures is really important. I echo what the report says about the importance of formal and informal routes for MPs who require reasonable adjustments, which is essential.
There has been a lot of talk about call lists. Actually, I have found a great solution to the issue of call lists, as has the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon): if a Member talks a lot, they end up getting called last—although I have not been on this occasion. Although call lists do change, the compromise solution could be that Members who have reasonable adjustments can be told where they will be in the list, and then the rest of us can proceed as normal. I think that would be a fairer way to do it. It deals with the issues that those who do not want call lists have raised.
I agree with the usefulness of in-person voting—although I think the Health Secretary might not agree with me, as I have lobbied him during quite a number of votes about issues that affect Harlow—and I think it is important that we have it. However, I recognise that in situations where we have up to 12 votes in a row, as we had this week, there can be real challenges for people who need reasonable adjustments. I absolutely support the point that has been made about proxy voting, the potential use of a digital system and the recommendation about reasonable adjustment cards.
I turn finally to language. I do not want to sound like too much of a traditionalist, but I do like the fact that we have traditional parliamentary language. I think the shadow Leader of the House got it right earlier—and that is not just because he is a Conservative. We want to keep some of those traditions, but we want to make it accessible, too. There is absolutely an achievable compromise to be made between simplification and remembering the customs and history of this place.
I have spoken far more than I expected to on this issue, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it is really important to me and to my constituents.
Chris Vince
Do you want more? Okay. [Laughter.]
To finish, I will say that it is hugely important that democracy is not just for the few. It is so important that everyone has the opportunity to take part in this country’s democracy, and this place is a beacon for democracy in this country like probably no other; actually, it is a beacon for democracy across the world, if we are honest. I do not want there to be barriers for anybody working here. That is hugely important for MPs as it is for Members of the other House, Clerks, House staff and the people who work for us as MPs.
I welcome this report. I think it is the start of a conversation, not the end. I hope we can move forward so that there can be more Members in this place like my predecessor who feel confident and comfortable to participate in the democracy of this country to the fullest amount.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
The Modernisation Committee has indeed put forward some excellent proposals with regard to accessibility and our procedures. It also refers to the recently published 125-page restoration and renewal proposals, which we at Reform have rebranded “ridiculous and ruinous”, as they are the wrong schemes at the wrong price, based on the wrong brief under the wrong governance structures.
Madam Deputy Speaker, your predecessor in the Chair informed us that this is not the time to debate the matter of restoration and renewal. Bearing in mind, though, that it is a multibillion-pound proposal—possibly up to £40 billion—and the fact that these proposals have been out for a number of weeks, can you, Madam Deputy Speaker, or the Leader of the House confirm to hon. Members when these proposals will be debated in full, so that we can expand on our thoughts?
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) for his pithy contribution to the debate—
Adam Jogee
Finishing too early is not always a good thing.
I start by extending my condolences to my constituent and great friend back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme, Rosi Monkman, whose mother died in County Waterford in the Republic of Ireland yesterday. I pay tribute to her mother, Mrs Morrissey, and to Rosi, her husband, their sons and all the family.
As there were so many pithy contributions before me, Madam Deputy Speaker, and we have until 5 o’clock, I would like to place on the record my respect for Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. As was discussed in business questions, next Tuesday will mark the 100th anniversary of Her late Majesty’s birth, which is a fitting opportunity for us to remember, reflect and give thanks for a long life of service to our United Kingdom and the Commonwealth.
This is an important debate, and I hope people do not think that the number of colleagues present means that it is not taken seriously. I am grateful to all members of the Modernisation Committee from across the House for their work, and for taking on the most Herculean task of making this place fit for the 21st century and creating the best means for us to deliver for the people who sent us here. I will focus my comments on part 2 of the report on procedures and processes, and within that on pages 2, 25 and 30, as well as page 11 of the response.
I would like to acknowledge the work of my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell) while she served as Leader of the House— I suppose I should declare an interest as her former Parliamentary Private Secretary. I acknowledge the Leader of the House of Commons, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Sir Alan Campbell), for picking up the baton and running with it.
As my office staff would tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as would my wife and family, I am in many ways an analogue politician in a digital age—or, now, an AI age. I much prefer the written word and signing letters by hand over putting some app on my phone to record 30 seconds of myself speaking into a screen. In many ways, it might seem odd that I have taken such a close interest in both this report and the recent report from the Procedure Committee on proxy voting, and, more generally, in the measures being taken to open our national Parliament to all who work here and bring it into the 21st century.
Like my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince), I broadly like the customs and practices of this place; they are age old and they broadly work. Indeed, they have been adopted by nations across the Commonwealth that have developed their own Westminster systems, such as in the Caribbean, Australia, Canada and on the African continent. I would not, therefore, advocate for radical changes that would change how we do things, but I am willing to advocate for sensible and respectful changes that would allow us to do our jobs more properly and effectively.
Everyone has good days and bad days at work and at home. That is the nature of the world that we live in. It has always been that way, and that is not going to change. At work, some things go well; in our case, sometimes we win, and then we hope to keep on winning. It is those victories that allow us to serve in this place—and what a pleasure and privilege it is to do so.
However, as we speak for our people, tackle injustices wherever we find them and work every day to get things done, no Member of this House should be forced to choose between family and doing our job of honouring the trust of the local people who sent us here and holding Ministers to account. The fact that I was forced to make such a choice on Friday 20 June 2025 is something that will stay with me forever. It remains, I am sad to say, the worst day I have had in this job.
My wife received a phone call on 15 June to tell her that her father had taken unwell after many years of living with Parkinson’s. By the following Tuesday, it appeared that he was reaching the end of his life, and that if we wanted to say goodbye, we had to get there as soon as possible—and so we did.
On Friday 20 June, this House was considering the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill—an issue of the utmost importance to all of us and to our constituents. Whatever our views, we all wanted to have our voices heard and to be able to take part in this most important of debates. I asked my Whips if a proxy vote could be sorted so that I could represent my constituents and also be with my family, but was told that because it was a private Member’s Bill, a proxy would not be possible, and therefore the only option available to me was to seek my own pairing arrangement with a colleague in the House. To say I was cross is an understatement, but I took on board that response and went on my way to find my own pairing arrangement.
It was clear at that time that my father-in-law was not going to get better, so I asked colleagues in my party and on the Opposition Benches if they would pair with me. I asked the promoter of the Bill, who said that she was not able to help. I asked another colleague—whom I will not name, although I think it is important that I say this—who said that she could not help me because she was doing the numbers for the pro side, and she would therefore be “gleeful” that I could not be there, as it would be one less vote against the Bill.
Given the stress and hassle it causes, no colleague should be forced to find their own pair when a loved one is dying. That is insane and, frankly, inhumane. If a teacher cannot be at work, we get a supply teacher—we all remember the days when a supply teacher was in charge. How that cannot happen in the mother of Parliaments is inexplicable.
We must get a grip of the proxy voting system. Nobody wants to let people off or change how we do things in a radical way, as I said at the beginning of my remarks. We do not want to stop people being here to vote, but we need to be sensible, compassionate and respectful. We need to get a grip because nobody should be forced to experience what I had to.
Having failed to get a pair, despite trying really hard to do so given that my father-in-law was still on the journey to the end of his life, and having spoken to my family, I came to vote on that Friday, because if I had not, my constituents would not have been represented in that debate. As I left this place to go back to my wife and in-laws, my wife called to tell me that her father had died. I will never forget that phone call. I received it only because I was unable to get a proxy or a pair. That remains the worst day that I have had in this job.
The Leader of the House, the shadow Leader of the House and the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) said that all Members should be able to do their jobs properly, and that is true, but it should not come at the expense of our family commitments—not least as a loved one reaches the end of their life. It is not lost on me that we were voting on assisted dying, but I was given no assistance by this House, or by the powerful people in it, to do my job and be with my family when they needed me most.
Nobody wants a sob story—I fully accept that—but this is my experience, and I hope that we will look at how we can do things differently so that nobody has to experience what we have. We need to consider the eligibility rules for Members seeking a proxy; in my view, the current rules are far too narrow. I read the Procedure Committee report, and I hope that, together, the Procedure and Modernisation Committees will be able to get us to the right place sooner rather than later. I say this not to seek sympathy but to be helpful, so that we finally make our Parliament compassionate and fit for purpose.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) for that powerful speech. I agree wholeheartedly with him about the need for reform of the proxy voting system and for some humanity to be introduced for such circumstances.
I was proud to serve on the Modernisation Committee and to take part in gathering evidence for the report. The Committee very much appreciated all those who took the time and effort to submit evidence and to give oral evidence, including Mr Speaker and you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as well as the wider team, many members of House staff, and campaigners. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball), who has already been mentioned. She is a tireless advocate for disability rights and access. It is thanks to her advocacy that the door handles across the estate are now properly usable by those with disabilities. Before, as we heard earlier, many disabled people were unable to go to the toilet unaided, which was scandalous.
In this place, many people often talk up a tension between modernisation and tradition, which does undoubtedly exist, but the Committee’s role is to find a way through that does justice to those who have every right to be properly represented here. As has been mentioned, this Parliament is unique in that over half of MPs were new in 2024. I think that is the highest turnover of MPs in any Parliament. Many of us came here from modern workplaces in which the accessibility, inclusivity, hybrid working, productivity and efficiency standards far exceed those in this place. In coming to work here, a lot of us felt that we were walking back in time, not just because of the ancient building, but because of the way some of the processes here work.
The Committee’s report is comprehensive. We have heard excellent speeches about the accessibility of the building, but I will build on what my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme said about the accessibility of parliamentary procedures, particularly speaking, bobbing and voting. I will also mention gender representation among speakers. Before I go through those points, let me say that the staff here do excellent work and are very considerate; they work with MPs to help us do our jobs and speak for our constituents.
I wanted to put on the record in this debate some of the powerful and eye-opening evidence we heard from current and former Members during the report process. I will not speak for other members of the Committee, but I honestly found some of the evidence we heard shocking. It is hard for those who are not MPs to understand how speaking in this Chamber—our No. 1 job as Members of Parliament—works. For those listening who do not quite understand how it works, an MP informs the Speaker’s Office of their desire to speak. They then come to the Chamber, “bob” and wait until they are called to speak. That can mean waiting for three or four hours—and sometimes up to six hours.
I have learned much sitting in this Chamber and listening to other Members speak, but the process certainly does have a disproportionate impact on some MPs. Let me mention a few examples from our evidence sessions that stayed with me. One MP with severe physical disabilities told us how difficult they found waiting hours and hours to speak in a debate. They felt physically exhausted by the time they were called to speak many hours later, and felt that they just could not do justice to what they had hoped to say on behalf of their constituents. Another MP with musculoskeletal issues sat on these Benches and waited to speak for so long that they were in agony for days afterwards. Another told us that voting 10-plus times over hours left them practically unable to walk in the days afterwards.
One woman MP in the very early stages of pregnancy felt extremely ill but waited hours to speak. In all fairness, she did not want to confide in the Speaker’s team about the situation. Another woman MP told me about experiencing pregnancy loss in this House, and feeling that she had to disclose it to her Whips. I do not think anybody would want that.
We had an evidence session with disabled MPs. A Member of the House of Lords who was in attendance said that he was completely shocked by the disparity in reasonable adjustments between this House and the other place. I am very glad that many of those issues were addressed by the recommendations in the report, including the recommendation that a reasonable adjustments card be introduced, which would allow a seat to be saved for disabled Members. That has been an ongoing issue. Other recommendations include potentially using the Reasons Room for voting in a way that is inclusive and not so exhausting; and a new disabled toilet near the Chamber.
I hope that wider issues continue to be considered, however. The evidence we heard strongly suggested that the best processes are accessible by design; that is preferable to forcing disabled people or those with conditions to ask constantly for exemptions, or to explain themselves. I know that many of those who submitted evidence to our inquiry were disappointed by the outcome of the Procedure Committee report on call lists, which could have made a significant difference by providing more certainty to those who have conditions but do not want to disclose them, or to people who have to take medicine at mealtimes, for example.
Voting is at the heart of what we do in this House. Surely more can be done in 2026 to preserve all the good bits of MPs physically voting together, while speeding up proceedings enormously through the use of tech, particularly on days with 10, 12 or 14 votes, such as those we have experienced lately.
I also want to address the gender split of speakers. The one thing that MPs can do that no one else can is speak in this House on behalf of our constituents, but if we consider the speaking statistics, all is not equal. Women make up 41% of all MPs, but a rough calculation —such as the one the House of Commons Library has done for me—shows that just 35% of contributions made in this Chamber are from women. In the Lords, where 34% of Members are women, 41% of all contributions are from women Members. I wonder what we can learn from the structure for speaking in the Lords. I note that the Lords have a form of call list for some proceedings, and it seems to benefit women’s voices.
I realise that I am still a relative newbie in this House, and I am sure that the views of MPs change over time as they experience different iterations of Parliaments, but I hope that, in addition to the good changes that have already been made as a result of the report, there will be further progress in the future.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the shadow Leader of the House to speak, with the leave of the House.
Jesse Norman
Thank you very much indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am grateful for the opportunity to say a couple of words about the excellent contributions to the debate.
I will, if I may, pick up on a couple of points. I do not think that anything more needs to be added to what the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) said about properly accessible toilets; he was absolutely right about that. The hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) made a well observed point about the diversity of experience and views among wheelchair users. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for his gracious words about his predecessor, the brilliant Robert Halfon.
I welcome the support of the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) for the sceptic’s view on restoration and renewal. I ask the Leader of the House whether it might be possible to have two debates on that. We could first have what one might call a digestive debate, to discuss the actual process of R and R, how it will work and what might be involved, and then a second debate on the motion. The figure of £40 billion is so big that it would be helpful for the House to pre-consider the matter, before considering the motion.
I thank the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) very much for his moving remarks about his experience on the assisted dying private Member’s Bill. Finally, the hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) reminded us how difficult it is to replicate the specific experience of individual disabled MPs, and how important it is to listen to what they have said. With all that in mind, I thank the Committee and the Leader of the House for all the work they have done, and the Administration for its response.
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank all Members for their contributions to today’s debate. I hope to take a little bit of time responding to them, because although this has been a relatively short debate, it has been a very useful one.
Let me first comment on the shadow Leader of the House’s speech. I thank him for his remarks and the way that he made them. It is abundantly evident from the time that we have worked together that he cares deeply about this place, as do I, as he knows. We are, to some extent, adversaries in a system that is adversarial; but at heart, we share a deep respect and love for this place, not least because, as he knows, we are both passing through. It was here before we got here, and it will be here after we leave.
That means that we work well on the Committee. What has struck me, in the relatively short time that I chaired the Committee, is that it works in a cross-party way; in fact, it works in a non-party way. Given the varied experience and the varied party labels of people around the room, it is amazing how often we actually understand the problem, analyse it and get to the right conclusion. That is not as rare in this place as people think; indeed, it is why it works very well indeed.
I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman’s concern that dumbing down can be a problem if we are not careful. This is not about dumbing down; it is about making this place more accessible, but also about how we do things. Where I do not agree with him, as he knows, is on restoration and renewal; on that, we are on different sides. However, as has been pointed out, today’s short debate is about now. It is about how we conduct ourselves now and for the foreseeable future, because even if the House takes a particular view on R and R and moves forward, it will still be quite a long time before some of the issues come to fruition. I believe that accessibility must be at the core of what we are doing now, but it must also be at the core of what happens after a decision is made on R and R.
Let me turn to the excellent speech by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis). I commend him on the excellent work that he does on his all-party groups, which I know comes from his deep personal interest in these matters, his experience and his commitment. The personal experience of these issues that he brings to this debate is important; it is abundantly clear that instead of observing these things from a distance and seeing them in our own way, we should learn from a position of experience. I very much value his contribution to modernisation. He is a strong advocate; if he has a strong view, he will voice it, and I absolutely commend him for that.
The issues with booking that my hon. Friend spoke about are not acceptable. I give him a commitment that we will look into that and see what more can be done. The story of what happened at that recent event illustrates the problem, and shows how important this investigation and report are. However—I will return to this point in my closing remarks—this is a work in progress. The report is a step along the way, not the end point.
Like other Members, my hon. Friend paid tribute to the work of our hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball). As I know from personal experience, on matters of policy and everything else, she is a very strong advocate. I value her contribution and her knowledge on these matters very much indeed.
My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford raised the issue of changing places and toilet facilities and, interestingly, pointed to the National Portrait Gallery. I have found out that, as Leader of the House, I am a trustee of the National Portrait Gallery— I have more than found it out; I have actually participated in the trustee role, to some extent. The next time I visit, I will once again remind them that there is a portrait of a former Member for Tynemouth—Dame Irene Ward, who was also the longest-serving woman MP—in the gallery, and I recently surpassed the length of time that she served in that seat. I am just letting them know that there is a certain logical conclusion that follows, but so far, they have not taken the hint—although I will not be wearing the hat that she is wearing in her photograph. [Interruption.] Well, it will be very popular.
Let me turn to the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain), the Lib Dem spokesperson, who drew on her experience of this period of the Session, when there is ping-pong and Lords amendments. It is a difficult course that we have to navigate. I do not want to stress this too much, but I have been around quite a long time, and I can assure hon. Members that every time we get to Lords amendments, I have to go to the Clerks and ask whether I am right in what I think. I am not going to say that every time I navigate this, I get a different answer, but it is notoriously difficult. However, she is right; there are things that we should be able to do to inform Members of where we have got to.
I agree with the hon. Lady’s remarks about thinking about how and why we do things, because it is really important—other Members also picked this up—that the way we conduct our affairs in this place evolves, although we should also be careful about how that happens. We need to be—if hon. Members do not mind me saying so on this occasion—conservative with a small c. There should be a good reason before we change things. I fear that she might be correct, in that some of the changes will not be quick, but that does not mean— I know that she accepts this—that we should not get on with them. We do get on with them; we knock down the barriers and, where we can, quicken things up.
The hon. Lady has mentioned on a number of occasions that she is running the London marathon. I commend her for that, and for her hard sell on sponsorship. I would encourage people to run it; most of us, not least me, will not be doing that, but she is, and that is great. She talked about how the Modernisation Committee works. It is right that we share a space with other Committees, but they bring an expertise to what we do. I think that works quite well, because we can and do work effectively with other Committees.
The hon. Lady is absolutely right about the impact of covid, which had a massive effect on the way that this place works. We have spent a great deal of time trying to get back some of the things that were lost during covid—and they were lost. It was not just the way that this place conducts its votes that changed; it was, for example, the way that speeches were made. When most people, apart from the Whips, vacated this place and we moved to virtual speeches, I for one expected that nobody would want to speak. In fact, everybody wanted to speak, because they were speaking from their kitchen and making a three-minute speech. As a result, and with all due respect to new Members, there are now far more people trying to get in on debates, and far more time limits. It is now quite unusual to listen to a speech like this, that lasts more than three minutes. There were lasting effects from that time. However, there are lessons here, not just on this issue, but on other things we do. I would say to the hon. Lady that we are not going back to what we regarded as normal. We need to move forward and make things better.
I also endorse what the hon. Lady said about the great job that the education team does, particularly with younger children, and the daunting experience of trying to explain to them how this place works. I had that experience when children from Marine Park first school came down recently. Before I spoke to them, they had been in St James’s Park, having their packed lunch. I expected the first question to be, “Have you ever met the King?”, or “How much do you get paid?,” but it was, “Have you ever had your sandwich stolen by a duck?”, which brought politics down to a different level. I had not, actually, but unfortunately the child had, and she clearly remembered it.
Turning to my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince), I agree with his appreciation of the work of the previous Member for Harlow. We did not agree along political lines, but I learned a great deal from him; he was an excellent Member of Parliament.
I also agree with my hon. Friend about accessibility for all. It is not just about making this place accessible but making politics accessible. It is also not just about the people who are here now, who often had a greater struggle than some of us to get here, but the people in future who might want to get here but think that there are literally physical barriers in their way. Everybody has the right to get here, or at least to aspire to—it is up to the electorate to decide whether they are coming or not.
My hon. Friend also made an interesting point about Portcullis House. To some of us, Portcullis House is very new, yet it was the very place that was identified as being inaccessible. This is a battle that will continue over a long period of time. I echo the point that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) made that procedure is important, and the history of this place is important. It is quite interesting what happens when new Members turn up—I know because I was one once. We think that things are going to change rapidly and that the House is going to change, but when we settle in a bit we realise why we do what we do. That is why we need to proceed at speed with some of these changes, but—if it is not the opposite—we also need to proceed with a degree of caution.
Turning to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice), I look forward to his contribution when the debate on R and R comes around. I think he thought that that is what this debate was going to be about. I cannot tell him when it will be, but there will be a debate. To some extent it has already been postponed, but that has been done for the right reason. He and I are on opposite sides on this, but I want Members to have absorbed the report. It is a big, far-reaching and powerful report, and I want Members to have the time for it to sink in.
I am very conscious that the situation is going to be brought into greater focus in the difficult international and economic situation we are living through. Considerations about how we spend taxpayers’ money will come into greater focus, so it is absolutely right that the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office are looking at this. It is right that we get reports from them and are able to see in a more authoritative way—it is their job to do this—whether the proposals on the table are ones that we want to back or change. I can say to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness and the House two things: first, there will be a debate, and, secondly, Members in this place and in the Lords will make the decision on this. It will not be a decision taken behind closed doors.
Jesse Norman
The Leader of the House may not have been in his place, but I suggested that it might be possible to have two debates—a digestive debate and then a debate with a decision. Even if one of those is a Backbench debate, would that be something that he would support?
Sir Alan Campbell
I certainly support people having their say and being informed by debates. I will give it some thought; I am not rejecting it out of hand. But there will be a moment and there will be a motion, and then we will have to decide. As I say, I will be on a different side because, going back to what I have said about this remarkable place, this is an iconic building. It is part of a UNESCO world heritage site. Despite how legalistic the terms are, it is not owned by the Government but by the nation.
People will look at the numbers, and the numbers are eye-watering—I give them that—and the timescale is eye-watering too, but we will not save any money by delaying the vote to decide to either get on with it or not. Time and again when people were asked, they said that they want to see this place survive. It is the crucible of their politics. They want to be able to access it safely, and currently it is not safe in many ways. We are going to have to address this, but I give the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness and the House my word that we will have a vote at some point in time.
Let me turn to the contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme. I do remember the event that he talked about. I am sorry that we were not able to find a way through that situation. He raised the different aspects of why he felt that he was in that situation, and I do think that we need to go away and reflect on that. The proxy system is evolving, but we should take away examples and see whether we need to make some changes.
This is not an excuse for what happened, but it was a set of unusual circumstances in the sense that it was not just a private Member’s Bill but a hotly contested private Member’s Bill. People felt personally committed to it, and I remember a huge number of emails about. There was also an expectation that people would be here. Therefore, the thing that we can do—to decide not to be here and not to vote—was not really an option for many people. When it came to trying to get someone to pair or finding some other way, I could not find a way through it at that time.
Briefly, I want to say that this is not just about changing a system—for example, proxy voting, which I would be open to looking at, and I think the Modernisation Committee would be too. I am a great advocate of the usual channels. I am a great advocate of the bit that people think is very suspicious and that makes them wonder why on earth we have such a system. Actually, it makes this place work. It is the oil that makes the engine of this place work. There are things that can be done through the usual channels that are never seen but that make life better for people—for MPs.
I will not go into the realm of the divisive politics that we have just lived through, but I will say that it is not just about covid. Covid is one part of it, but I have lived through recent times where politics has been more divisive. Therefore, it has been more difficult to get Opposition parties to accept the Government position, and the Government are finding it difficult to accept the perspective of the Opposition parties. I have to say, if this place is going to work better, we have to do it better. That is not to say that we have to resurrect the usual channels as it always was, but we have to find ways of better working, and that includes—I am not ashamed to say this—the personal relationships that make the usual channels work. That is certainly my approach, and it will continue to be so as long as I have the opportunity to contribute.
My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) was right to say that there was a huge turnover at the general election. In fact, it was said to me that 80% of Members now have less than seven years’ experience. Even when there was a massive change in 1997 and, indeed, 2010, it was not on that scale. The effect is that we have lost some of the institutional memory of this place, and that, as far as I am concerned, is a deficit.
On the other hand, we have a great number of new MPs with varied backgrounds, with all sorts of experiences, and also with varied needs. That is good, because we need to keep moving through that generational change. There is always a bit of a price to pay, but there is always an advantage to getting there as well. It is important that we take that into account. There are solutions to many of the issues that have been raised, but as I say, this report is not the end of the story. We will continue to work on this.
I understand the points that have been made about lots of votes, the time it takes and how exhausting it can be—and that is not to trivialise the experience of people who have additional needs. But going back to what I just said about the usual channels, I cannot remember a time when we had as many votes. When it comes to the responsibility of this place and the relationship between us and the other place, yes, they have every right to send lots back, and we have every right to kick it back too, but at some point they have to start giving something and the Government have to start giving something too. It is how Parliament works. It is how democracy works.
We do not have to have as many votes in this place as we do. They do not have as many votes down the corridor as we do here on a day-to-day basis. We do not have to have a vote at the end of Second Reading. Even if Members do not agree with a Bill, they do not have to vote against it on Second Reading. They can vote it down on Third Reading. The point of listening and making a speech against a Bill on Second Reading is that it will go to Committee, where changes can be made. If hon. Members do not like it, they can have a go on Report, and if they still do not like it they can vote it down on Third Reading. We spend a great deal of time on Divisions when we pretty well know what the results will be in most of them. [Interruption.] I am wandering a bit now, I can see that, but these are all issues where there are different solutions from those that might appear obvious. However, I will take that away and think about it.
My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich also made an important point about gender. Long may she continue to do so, because that is very important indeed.
We clearly have a long way to go on modernisation. We have seen some encouraging progress, and the report is part of that. We will continue to monitor all sorts of issues, including accessibility. I look forward to working in a collegiate way with colleagues to make progress and to make this an even greater place to work and for visitors to visit. I thank the House authorities for their ongoing work and commend the motion to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the First Report of the Modernisation Committee, Access to the House of Commons and its Procedures, HC 755, and the House Administration response, HC 1726.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. On Tuesday evening, in the midst of a succession of votes, the technology supporting the world’s oldest continuous Parliament failed. I thank the Clerks and support staff for their speedy response and the quick transition to the old paper system, and the Whips for the effective communication. The Microsoft technology that runs our electronic voting system did not communicate effectively and displayed the message, “Cannot connect to essential module” or something similar. Despite successive reboots and the window of doom, that was all we could get out of it.
Madam Deputy Speaker, can we expect a report on the reasons for the failure, whether Microsoft provided speedy and appropriate support, how resilient the technology is and whether other providers are available? The failure was time consuming for Members, but more importantly it reduced confidence in the democratic process.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I thank the hon. Member for notice of her point of order. The issue that caused the fault on the pass reader voting system on Tuesday was quickly identified by the Parliamentary Digital Service later that evening and rectified. PDS and other House officials are now looking at the lessons learned from the incident and what additional resilience measures can be put in place to support the voting system. I put on record my thanks to all House officials involved for quickly facilitating the paper Division system on Tuesday so that proceedings could continue with minimal delay.
Upton Heath
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD) [R]
I rise to present a petition about Upton Heath in my constituency and note my personal interest as a regular user and contributor to the fundraiser. Alongside helping to raise almost £110,000 in two weeks via a crowdfunder, the 1,763 petitioners and I note the importance of Upton Heath as a natural asset for the wide range of species that call it home and for those who spend time there for their wellbeing. Heath restoration needs to be prioritised and mineral extraction prevented. I thank everyone who donated to bring the site back into public ownership this week. The petition states:
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to take action to secure the preservation of the whole of Upton Heath as a public natural asset.
And the petitioners remain, etc.”
Following is the full text of the petition:
[The petition of residents of the United Kingdom,
Declares that Upton Heath is a vital natural asset to the people of Mid Dorset and North Poole; notes that Upton Heathland is a protected Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Special Area of Conservation; and further declares that local people oppose the use of Upton Heath for mineral extraction, which could damage biodiversity in the area.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to take action to secure the preservation of the whole of Upton Heath as a public natural asset.
And the petitioners remain, etc.]
Neuroendocrine Cancer
(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)
I am grateful for the opportunity to bring this vital issue to the House. The term neuroendocrine cancer may not be familiar to many, but tens of thousands of people across the United Kingdom have had to educate themselves after receiving a diagnosis. As with any rare cancer, this is often an uphill struggle marked by delays, misdiagnosis and a persistent struggle for visibility in our healthcare system.
Hon. Members, possibly including the Minister, will have heard me make this point before: a cancer being considered rare does not stop it from impacting many thousands of people right across the UK. Indeed, about 6,000 people are diagnosed with neuroendocrine cancer each year in the UK, which works out at roughly one person every 90 minutes. Today, more than 36,000 people in the UK are living with the condition. To put that into perspective, it is now more prevalent than stomach or pancreatic cancer. The rate of growth is incredibly alarming. Between 1995 and 2018, the incidence of neuroendocrine cancer increased by a staggering 371%. This is not a niche health concern; it is a rapidly growing challenge that our NHS must be equipped to meet.
Statistics can often feel abstract in the Chamber, which is why I want to share the story of a meeting I recently held with three neuroendocrine cancer patients, Liz, Carolyn and Craig, at my office in Fountainbridge in Edinburgh South West. Their stories were both moving and illuminating. We have just been talking about modernising the House of Commons. Given that that meeting took place just four weeks ago, I find it incredible that in four weeks I can meet someone, request a debate and then have that debate, with my favourite Minister answering my questions—it restores my faith in democracy.
Craig, whom I met that day, is in the unique and challenging position of being both a professional advocate and a patient himself. He and the others I met expressed immense gratitude for the care they eventually received, describing it as nothing short of fantastic once they were in the right hands. However, they also spoke about the exhausting battle it took to access specialists who properly understood their condition. They described a system where specialist doctors and centres of excellence are too often hidden behind a wall of referral delays and low clinical awareness. That is particularly in evidence in Scotland, where patients currently face the worst waiting times since records began, but it is also true—albeit possibly to a lesser extent—in our health systems south of the border and in Wales and Northern Ireland.
One of the most powerful parts of our conversation centred on a symptom that is often difficult to discuss yet utterly debilitating: the frequent and urgent need to access a toilet. This is not a minor inconvenience but a symptom that robs people of their autonomy and their dignity. They spoke of how that invisible burden prevents many patients from working, from attending social events and even from leaving their homes for long periods of time. It is a barrier to a normal, fulfilling life.
They also brought a message of hope regarding the drug telotristat. They described how that treatment has quite literally given them back their lives. By managing the symptoms and stopping the cycle of incontinence, the drug has allowed them to return to work, to contribute to their communities, to pay their taxes—that is quite important—and, most importantly, to enjoy a fulfilling family life. This is a clear example of where the right medication does not just treat a disease but restores a person’s dignity and their place in society. It is a powerful reminder that when we invest in the right treatments and pathways, the system burden is reduced because patients are empowered to live independently.
Despite those successes, the single biggest driver of poor outcomes remains the time it takes to get the initial diagnosis. At a meeting I attended at the Royal College of General Practitioners in December, bringing together UK-based healthcare professionals involved in trials, patient care and leading research into neuroendocrine cancer, I heard that, on average, it takes four-and-a-half years for a patient with a tumour to be correctly diagnosed. During that time, the average patient visits their GP 11 times.
Because the cancers can occur anywhere in the body and the symptoms are often non-specific, they are frequently dismissed as more common conditions such as irritable bowel syndrome, asthma, the menopause or anxiety. I hope somebody somewhere is taking a list of all the conditions that get confused with menopause, because I think it is quite a long one. Many patients, including the three who came to visit my office, look perfectly well, even while harbouring the disease. The consequences are severe, however. Over half of all patients are diagnosed at stage 3 or 4, when treatment options are more limited and the cost to the NHS is significantly higher. Neuroendocrine Cancer UK estimates that it costs between £200,000 and £300,000 more per patient when treating at a later stage rather than at an early one.
Currently, the UK has 13 accredited centres of excellence, including a specialist team in Edinburgh and an accredited centre in Glasgow. Those hubs deliver multidisciplinary, evidence-based care that is proven to improve survival rates—yet access remains a postcode lottery. Whether a patient is in rural Scotland or in a coastal town in England, the quality of care they receive should not depend on whether their local hospital happens to have a neuroendocrine lead. In Scotland we see a stark divide between our urban hubs and our rural communities, whereas in England the access issue is more related to the divergent priorities of different cancer alliances. In both cases, patients suffer because we do not have a standardised diagnostic pathway for everyone.
The closest we have to a standardised service, which all neuroendocrine patients can access, is the one that is offered by Neuroendocrine Cancer UK. It provides a critical safety net, offering helplines, counselling and peer support, and it regularly steps up to fund the small-scale, early-stage studies or trials that are needed to get research off the ground. It is sobering that 95% of Neuroendocrine Cancer UK’s income comes from community generosity. It delivers system-critical services that support the NHS, yet it does so with almost no statutory resourcing.
In closing, I ask the Minister to address five specific priority areas. The first is clinical awareness. May we embed neuroendocrine cancer into primary care training and early diagnosis initiatives to stop these patients being lost in the system for years, perhaps reducing the number of GP appointments needed before a diagnosis?
The second area is clear pathways. As I mentioned previously, we need to tackle the postcode lottery when it comes to treatment, and the only way to do that is through a nationally recognised diagnostic and referral pathway to centres of excellence. Will that be considered?
The third area is the guidance gap. Currently, the NG12 guidance is critical to cancer diagnoses in England and Wales. Neuroendocrine cancer is not included in that guidance. May we review whether there could be a way to include it?
The fourth area is data and visibility. Neuroendocrine-specific cancer data is not routinely published. We need that to accurately track the incredible rate at which cases are rising and our response to that. May we also ensure that more data is published more regularly?
The fifth area is research equity. The issue of funding for research into rare cancers was one of the key asks that charities raised with me when I was consulting on my Bill, which is now the Rare Cancers Act 2026. What more can we do to ensure that the Government are using all the mechanisms at their disposal to stimulate research in this rare cancer and all the others that currently fall through the cracks of major funding streams?
In summary, earlier recognition, clearer routes to specialist care and access to life-changing drugs have the protentional to transform outcomes. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s plans to make that a reality.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Mrs Sharon Hodgson)
I start by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) for securing this important debate. I am not sure if he is aware, but we could actually go on until about 5.30 pm, so we have hours at our disposal if we want to continue this conversation for that long. We do not want to test your patience too much, Madam Deputy Speaker, but we do not have to be too speedy. We can cover this properly and in depth.
I also must congratulate my hon. Friend on his huge achievement with the Rare Cancers Act 2026, which received Royal Assent, as he knows, on 5 March this year, with support from right across this House and in the other place. This Government are proud to have supported the Rare Cancers Act. During its parliamentary passage, it was described as “a Bill of hope”, and it does give hope to all those who face a diagnosis with a rare cancer, such as those with neuroendocrine cancer.
As set out in our national cancer plan, we will implement the Rare Cancers Act to make it easier for rare cancer patients to be contacted about clinical trials. This Act will help accelerate the clinical trials needed to deliver the most effective, cutting-edge treatments and the highest-quality care for patients facing a rare cancer diagnosis.
Since this Government took office, around 228,000 more people are getting a cancer diagnosis on time, around 40,000 more are starting treatment on time, and rates of early diagnosis are hitting record highs. Despite those vital signs of recovery, the NHS is still failing far too many cancer patients and their families. We know that improving outcomes for rare cancer patients is key to ensuring that we make the NHS fit for the future.
In February, this Government published our much-lauded national cancer plan. We now have a blueprint to shift the dial on rare and challenging cancers, including neuroendocrine cancers, underpinned by three key targets. The first is to save 320,000 more lives by 2035, ensuring that three in four people diagnosed in 2035 will be cancer free or living well with cancer after five years. Secondly, we will achieve the three cancer performance targets by the end of March 2029. Finally, we will improve the quality of life for people with cancer.
As we have heard, neuroendocrine cancer is a rare type of cancer that can develop in various organs in the body, including the pancreas, lungs and intestines. The National Disease Registration Service collects patient data on cancer, congenital anomalies and rare diseases, and provides expert analysis to support clinical teams, academics, charities and policymakers to help plan and improve treatment and healthcare in England. The NDRS understands the need for statistics on neuroendocrine neoplasms and has worked with an expert working group to identify these cases in the cancer registry data. The working group has included clinical experts and charity engagement, and the first statistics on these groupings are expected to be published as part of Get Data Out in a few months.
Furthermore, in the national cancer plan, we have committed to improving data on rare cancers to ensure transparency and to support the NHS to speed up diagnosis and treatment. To help cut cancer waiting times, we will give trusts and cancer alliances the detailed, practical information they need, from more granular data for individual cancer types to real-time pathway insights through the federated data platform. By streamlining cancer metrics, we will shine a much brighter light on unwarranted variation in care, so that issues cannot be hidden and action can be taken quickly.
Rare and less common cancers, including neuroendocrine cancers, are a priority for this Government, and this is the first ever national cancer plan with a dedicated chapter on rare cancers. We know that one of the most effective ways to improve survival from cancers, including neuroendocrine cancers, is to catch them early and treat them quickly. We know that raising awareness of symptoms is an essential part of that, which is why the NHS in England runs campaigns to increase knowledge of cancer symptoms and address barriers to acting on them. My hon. Friend mentioned the number of women who are told that it is menopause symptoms when they first present to their GPs. As a woman who has been in that position myself, I think he made a good point about how many different conditions are blamed on the menopause.
The campaigns have focused on recognising a range of symptoms, as well as on encouraging general body awareness to help people spot symptoms across a wide range of cancers at an earlier point. Cancer alliances across the country are also engaging with their local communities to deliver campaigns, community engagement and partnership activity to increase symptom knowledge and encourage people to come forward as soon as possible if they notice a change in their health.
I want to be clear that I have never had a cancer diagnosis blamed on the menopause, but there are lots of other things I might have gone to my GP about that have been blamed on the menopause. I know that my hon. Friend has done work on ovarian cancer as well—he took over the hosting of an event on ovarian cancer from me when I was made a Minister—and the symptoms of ovarian cancer are constantly blamed on irritable bowel syndrome, constipation or a bad back. It happens with so many cancers, so he made a really important point.
In addition to improving awareness of neuroendocrine cancers, we are targeting improvements to support diagnosis. The NHS in England has rolled out non-specific symptom pathways nationally, designed to speed up the diagnosis of cancer. Those pathways are intended to cover the cohort of patients who do not fit clearly into a single urgent cancer referral pathway but who are none the less at risk of being diagnosed with cancer. They benefit the detection of all cancers, including rarer cancers such as neuroendocrine cancers.
As announced in the national cancer plan earlier this year, we are prioritising access to specialist treatment and multidisciplinary teams for all patients diagnosed with rare cancers, which will ensure that patients with neuroendocrine cancer and other rare cancers benefit from the best evidence-based care. Furthermore, we have invested £70 million in 28 new LINAC—linear accelerator—radiotherapy machines to replace older, less efficient machines. Those new machines will reduce waiting times, provide 15% more treatments and enable 27,500 more patients to be treated each year. Going forward, the NHS is also harnessing the power of artificial intelligence to support oncologists to plan radiotherapy more quickly and accurately, improving contouring, reducing the risk of damage to healthy tissue and minimising complications.
We know that research and innovation are crucial to tackling cancer, which is why we remain committed to investing in cancer research. Cancer is a major area of National Institute for Health and Care Research spending, totalling £141.6 million in 2024-25, which reflects its high priority. The NIHR supports research into neuroendocrine cancers, spanning research to better understand and diagnose them through to research to advance treatment options for patients. Between 2020-21 and 2024-25, the NIHR has committed £3.5 million to new research projects, alongside supporting infrastructure, into neuroendocrine cancer.
Activity is under way through the NIHR James Lind Alliance, in partnership with the UK and Ireland Neuroendocrine Tumour Society and Neuroendocrine Cancer UK, to identify priority research questions regarding neuroendocrine cancer care and treatment. That will ensure that future research focuses on the areas that matter most to patients, families and clinicians. Our research investments have the potential to shift the dial and position the UK as a leading location for cancer research.
As set out in our 10-year health plan, we will make the UK a global leader in clinical research. Clinical research is one of the most powerful tools we have to improve healthcare. It helps us prevent, diagnose and treat cancer more effectively. Our vision is to embed research across the NHS, giving patients greater choice and control over their healthcare. To hold us accountable across these commitments and drive forward progress for rare cancer patients, we will appoint a national clinical lead for rare cancers, who will provide independent advice on improving outcomes.
The actions I have listed make up just a small part of our plan, which will turn cancer from one of the biggest killers into a chronic condition that is treatable. That will fulfil our desire to improve outcomes for all cancer patients, including neuroendocrine cancer patients.
In closing, I once again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West for securing this important debate. It looks like we are going to finish early after all, but I do not want anybody to think that that is through lack of interest in this important topic. It is Thursday, and Members have their constituencies to get back to, so I will not delay the House any further. I thank my hon. Friend for all the work he does on rare cancers.
Question put and agreed to.