Westminster Hall
Wednesday 15th July 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
09:30
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Social mobility. And thank you, sir Roger, for chairing this debate. Uh, the way we speak reveals so much about us. So long before we explain our politics, our profession, or our background, the moment we open our mouths, our accents instantly signal a core part of who we are. Accents carry traces of our communities, our upbringing, and our lived experience. They are part of our story. So I grew up in as a working class woman from Salford.
So my accent has always been woven into my identity just as much as my values or my politics. And after more than 20 years living in Leigh, it has naturally taken on a Lancashire lilt. I say belting when it's something is brilliant, isn't it?When I agree and lovely when instead of lovely. But. However, what is harder to confront is the pressure that many people feel to change the way they speak in order to progress. Accents can be a barrier, and it's a barrier that not many people speak about.
There is a hierarchy of accent, prestige deeply rooted in British society. Yet we should remind ourselves of a simple truth everybody has an accent. There is no such thing as speaking without one. What we often describe as a neutral accent is simply an accent that has historically been associated with power and prestige. There is no linguistic basis for ranking accents. No accent is inherently more intelligent, professional, articulate, or correct than another. These are social judgments, not linguistic facts.
Our life chances are too often defined by our backgrounds, so those from poorer backgrounds are almost twice as likely to end up in low paid jobs, and those from more privileged backgrounds. We know that accent bias can then become another barrier to social mobility. So our accent produces a judgement instantly. Often it happens unconsciously. Research shows that people form impressions from someone's voice within seconds. People make assumptions about our background, our capability, and our education. We often think we are judging competence or professionalism when in reality we may be responding to deeply ingrained social stereotypes associated with a particular way of speaking.
And if you're like me, from a northern city, that assumption has sometimes been that I'm less intelligent, rough, or uncultured. Issue is not how people speak. It is how we respond to how they speak. So the Sutton Trust report in 2022 highlighted that less than 10%. With different accents worry about the impact of their accent on their career prospects. They think twice before they dream big. Research by co-op similarly found that many people have been mocked, criticised or singled out because of the way they speak.
So together, these studies show how accent is often used as a proxy for social class, leading to unfair assumptions and discrimination. And it's sad to think about the number of young people who missed out on opportunities because of their accent, self-consciousness, and anxiety about accent bias are highest during university and early professional life, which should be the very moment when ambition grows rather than shrinks. They see their peers at university succeed, but they themselves may feel held back. And I challenge anyone to watch UK Youth Parliament in action.
It is energising to hear young people from every corner of the UK speaking confidently in their own voices. So the answer is not to talk their accents out of them. It is to talk our biases out of ourselves. So accent diversity is part of Britain's cultural richness. It's not a problem to be solved. So in a country with such a remarkable variety of accents within a relatively small geographical space, our linguistic diversity should be celebrated as part of our national heritage.
And I will admit, there was a time when I wondered whether softening my accent might make me sound more credible or more professional, more Westminster and less Salford. And even in my first marketing job as an apprentice, it was in central Manchester. I worried that the way I spoke would limit my prospects, so I did. I toned my accent down. And of course, all of us now. I worried that the way I spoke would limit my prospects. So your voice, why are you speaking like that?So that experience reflects research showing many people change the way they speak when applying for jobs.
And of course, all of us naturally adapt aspects of how we speak depending on who we are talking to or the setting that we are in. It was in central Manchester. I worried that the way I spoke would limit my prospects, so I did. I toned my accent down. My friends used to say, why are you. Why have you changed your voice?Why are you speaking like that?So that experience reflects research showing many people change the way they speak when applying for jobs.
And of course, all of us naturally adapt aspects of how we speak depending on who we are talking to or the setting that we are in. So our telephone voice, or in the chamber here, we all do it. That is entirely normal. The problem comes when people feel pressure to change the way they speak, not out of choice, but because they fear prejudice, exclusion, or lost opportunities. And before I arrived in Westminster, I worried about whether I would fit in. After all, many of the politicians that we see occupying the highest offices of state have rarely sounded like me.
With notable exceptions, of course, our Secretary of State for education and our great speaker, whose Lancashire voice is heard loud and proud in this place every day. But the more time I have spent in Parliament, Parliament, the more I realise that beneath the public image lies an increasingly diverse collection of accents, accents, backgrounds and life experiences. Give way.
So my accent has always been woven into my identity just as much as my values or my politics. And after more than 20 years living in Leigh, it has naturally taken on a Lancashire lilt. I say belting when it's something is brilliant, isn't it?When I agree and lovely when instead of lovely. But. However, what is harder to confront is the pressure that many people feel to change the way they speak in order to progress. Accents can be a barrier, and it's a barrier that not many people speak about.
There is a hierarchy of accent, prestige deeply rooted in British society. Yet we should remind ourselves of a simple truth everybody has an accent. There is no such thing as speaking without one. What we often describe as a neutral accent is simply an accent that has historically been associated with power and prestige. There is no linguistic basis for ranking accents. No accent is inherently more intelligent, professional, articulate, or correct than another. These are social judgments, not linguistic facts.
Our life chances are too often defined by our backgrounds, so those from poorer backgrounds are almost twice as likely to end up in low paid jobs, and those from more privileged backgrounds. We know that accent bias can then become another barrier to social mobility. So our accent produces a judgement instantly. Often it happens unconsciously. Research shows that people form impressions from someone's voice within seconds. People make assumptions about our background, our capability, and our education. We often think we are judging competence or professionalism when in reality we may be responding to deeply ingrained social stereotypes associated with a particular way of speaking.
And if you're like me, from a northern city, that assumption has sometimes been that I'm less intelligent, rough, or uncultured. Issue is not how people speak. It is how we respond to how they speak. So the Sutton Trust report in 2022 highlighted that less than 10%. With different accents worry about the impact of their accent on their career prospects. They think twice before they dream big. Research by co-op similarly found that many people have been mocked, criticised or singled out because of the way they speak.
So together, these studies show how accent is often used as a proxy for social class, leading to unfair assumptions and discrimination. And it's sad to think about the number of young people who missed out on opportunities because of their accent, self-consciousness, and anxiety about accent bias are highest during university and early professional life, which should be the very moment when ambition grows rather than shrinks. They see their peers at university succeed, but they themselves may feel held back. And I challenge anyone to watch UK Youth Parliament in action.
It is energising to hear young people from every corner of the UK speaking confidently in their own voices. So the answer is not to talk their accents out of them. It is to talk our biases out of ourselves. So accent diversity is part of Britain's cultural richness. It's not a problem to be solved. So in a country with such a remarkable variety of accents within a relatively small geographical space, our linguistic diversity should be celebrated as part of our national heritage.
And I will admit, there was a time when I wondered whether softening my accent might make me sound more credible or more professional, more Westminster and less Salford. And even in my first marketing job as an apprentice, it was in central Manchester. I worried that the way I spoke would limit my prospects, so I did. I toned my accent down. And of course, all of us now. I worried that the way I spoke would limit my prospects. So your voice, why are you speaking like that?So that experience reflects research showing many people change the way they speak when applying for jobs.
And of course, all of us naturally adapt aspects of how we speak depending on who we are talking to or the setting that we are in. It was in central Manchester. I worried that the way I spoke would limit my prospects, so I did. I toned my accent down. My friends used to say, why are you. Why have you changed your voice?Why are you speaking like that?So that experience reflects research showing many people change the way they speak when applying for jobs.
And of course, all of us naturally adapt aspects of how we speak depending on who we are talking to or the setting that we are in. So our telephone voice, or in the chamber here, we all do it. That is entirely normal. The problem comes when people feel pressure to change the way they speak, not out of choice, but because they fear prejudice, exclusion, or lost opportunities. And before I arrived in Westminster, I worried about whether I would fit in. After all, many of the politicians that we see occupying the highest offices of state have rarely sounded like me.
With notable exceptions, of course, our Secretary of State for education and our great speaker, whose Lancashire voice is heard loud and proud in this place every day. But the more time I have spent in Parliament, Parliament, the more I realise that beneath the public image lies an increasingly diverse collection of accents, accents, backgrounds and life experiences. Give way.
09:37
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Giving way. I'm sure I'll be using a slightly different accent this evening when I'm watching the football. There's a few expletives come out as I'm shouting at the TV. I just wondered if she agrees with me that actually part of public life has been authentic. And one way that you build trust and authenticity is to just be yourself. And how important that is for diversity. And as she says, for our national culture.
09:37
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I cannot agree more with that statement. And I think more and more, I think we are sort of grasping that, isn't it?It's about representing the very communities that we come from. And it's not to say that you have to come from the place. I don't come from the place that I represent, but I think just that representation does matter. It's about being yourself. And I thank my colleague for that, that intervention. Across both houses are proud of where they come from, and they are proud of the voices that reflect it.
And that diversity is something that we should celebrate. But let us not pretend that the battle has been won. So the way the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-lyne has been mocked and criticised for the way she spoke demonstrates that accent prejudice remains alive and well in our politics. If somebody can reach one of the highest offices in the land and still face those attitudes, there is clearly lots more work to do. So my experience has shaped my interest in how regional accents influence people's opportunities and representation.
And that is why I was delighted to host a parliamentary drop in a drop in session for the Westminster Voices project, and to support the important research being led by professor Rob Drummond of Manchester Metropolitan University, and Doctor Amanda Cole of the University of Cambridge. And I want to pay tribute to them both for leading the conversation on this. So the turnout was exceptional. Every MP, peer and member of staff who attended had their own story about their accent, their background and their journey into Westminster.
And all of this is why I felt it was important to hold a debate on this very issue today, because we do all have a story to tell. But we should be clear communication skills and accent are not the same thing. We should judge people on what they say and how effectively they communicate, not how closely they sound like an outdated idea of professionalism. And this applies in Westminster and the rest of the country. Action to tackle accent bias should be recognised as an important diversity issue.
And that means tackling bias through training, research and a greater appreciation of accent diversity in workplaces and education. The recent Commission on the Future Future of Education in England made an important point. Communication is not about sounding a particular way. Every child should develop the confidence to communicate effectively in their own authentic voice. I will give way.
And that diversity is something that we should celebrate. But let us not pretend that the battle has been won. So the way the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-lyne has been mocked and criticised for the way she spoke demonstrates that accent prejudice remains alive and well in our politics. If somebody can reach one of the highest offices in the land and still face those attitudes, there is clearly lots more work to do. So my experience has shaped my interest in how regional accents influence people's opportunities and representation.
And that is why I was delighted to host a parliamentary drop in a drop in session for the Westminster Voices project, and to support the important research being led by professor Rob Drummond of Manchester Metropolitan University, and Doctor Amanda Cole of the University of Cambridge. And I want to pay tribute to them both for leading the conversation on this. So the turnout was exceptional. Every MP, peer and member of staff who attended had their own story about their accent, their background and their journey into Westminster.
And all of this is why I felt it was important to hold a debate on this very issue today, because we do all have a story to tell. But we should be clear communication skills and accent are not the same thing. We should judge people on what they say and how effectively they communicate, not how closely they sound like an outdated idea of professionalism. And this applies in Westminster and the rest of the country. Action to tackle accent bias should be recognised as an important diversity issue.
And that means tackling bias through training, research and a greater appreciation of accent diversity in workplaces and education. The recent Commission on the Future Future of Education in England made an important point. Communication is not about sounding a particular way. Every child should develop the confidence to communicate effectively in their own authentic voice. I will give way.
09:40
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
She's making a very important and interesting speech. I just want to come in on that point on confidence, because I think this is incredibly important for young people, especially. We've got a huge youth unemployment crisis in this country, and part of it, I think, is young people not having the confidence. So does she agree with me?One, we've got to make sure that there is an accent bias so people don't lose confidence. And two, we've got to build young people's confidence partly through work experience and other schemes like that.
09:41
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I think he's absolutely right. It is about confidence. Um you know, we I think as politicians have a lot of work to do. Um, in um supporting. Our constituents, including our children and young people. And, and that includes into, in our schools and obviously within the workplace. Um, and I hope this is a conversation that we can continue with the department to, to ensure that that happens.
Um, the co-op, um, who have done a lot of research on this is they're calling for socio economic background to become a legally protected characteristic, helping to ensure that accent bias and related forms of discrimination are confronted head on. So our accents carry who we are, our identities, our communities, and our lived experiences. And that diversity enriches our country. Criticism about the way someone speaks is rarely just about language. More often, it reflects assumptions about class, region, and identity. We cannot solve every form of social inequality by addressing accent bias alone, but we can ensure that the way people speak is one less barrier to opportunity.
And we should stop asking people to change the way they speak, and instead change the way we as a society listen. So from Parliament to every workplace, university and institution across the country, every voice deserves to be heard, respected and represented. When every voice can rise, our nation rises with it louder, prouder and stronger than ever.
Um, the co-op, um, who have done a lot of research on this is they're calling for socio economic background to become a legally protected characteristic, helping to ensure that accent bias and related forms of discrimination are confronted head on. So our accents carry who we are, our identities, our communities, and our lived experiences. And that diversity enriches our country. Criticism about the way someone speaks is rarely just about language. More often, it reflects assumptions about class, region, and identity. We cannot solve every form of social inequality by addressing accent bias alone, but we can ensure that the way people speak is one less barrier to opportunity.
And we should stop asking people to change the way they speak, and instead change the way we as a society listen. So from Parliament to every workplace, university and institution across the country, every voice deserves to be heard, respected and represented. When every voice can rise, our nation rises with it louder, prouder and stronger than ever.
09:42
09:42
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you very much, Roger, for giving me the chance to participate. And and, and to the honourable lady for Lee and and Atherton, for my cousin. Across the sea, for across the shock, as we would say back in Northern Ireland. Um, for highlighting this issue, it's been a real pleasure to, to speak in this, I suppose this one has come here some. And to Roger, I'm sure there's a time when we had our friendship and I learned to value your, your advice and many things you would have said to me, what's that boy saying?You know, and you said that you never said it to a friend, of course, but you might just have to ask yourself that question.
But when we talk about diversity, about inclusion, about breaking down barriers to social mobility in the country, we rightly talk about race, gender, background, and socio economic status. But there is also a silent accountability I think is touched upon that in a reduction, there's a silent, pervasive form of prejudice that remains entirely socially acceptable in corporate boardrooms and academic institutions, and possibly, possibly within the corridors of power in this place. I'm talking about accent. That's what I have an accent. Very clear accent.
Uh, I think it's very normal. Um, but when you come over here, you realise you're maybe the only one with the accent. Um, the judging of a person's intelligence. Uh, competence and worth based entirely on how they sound. I say I give an example, sir. Roger, I've sent to to the honourable lady in front of me about this one. Whenever I ask a question in the adjournment debate one night, it's the last term of of this place and the honourable lady, the minister, she says, oh, that's a great question.
I'll come back to you with the answer. And I just thought that's what she meant and never had any any reason to think otherwise. She happened to meet one of my colleagues, David Simpson, who used to be an MP here. She says, uh, Jim asked me a question in the chamber. I have no idea what he said, but I just had to tell him I would come back to him with a written response. Again, it illustrates, perhaps in the early days, uh, one of the things that takes me a bit longer to, to understand, I stand here today as a proud son of County Down.
I speak with the voice of my constituency. All my constituents can understand it. And I suppose that's a really important thing. Sir Roger. Um, a voice heavily shaped by our rich Ulster-Scots linguistic heritage. And to me and the people of Strangford and Northern Ireland, this is a language of our hearts, our history and our homes. It's a dialect full of warmth, I believe, of character and deep rooted culture. But step outside of Northern Ireland and that same voice is too often treated as a barrier.
Sometimes the advance on. I don't speak for me. I speak for some of my constituents who have come here to university. You've come here to seek employment studies and the accent bias such as. Landmarks speaking up report by the Sutton Trust, as one example, have shown that regional working class accents, including those from Northern Ireland, are consistently ranked lower for prestige and perceived professional capability compared to received pronunciation or standard BBC English. Um, I remember a school as a young boy.
Um, I my work, my lot of my early words would have been Ulster-Scots. And I remember Mr. Whittaker and by the way, it was a different educational time at that time. Sir. Roger, um, whenever you said something wrong, he says, that's not proper English. I says, but that's what my granny, words my granny uses. And that's the words that my mum used. Well, in those days, of course, you get a clipper in the air and that sort of.
Uh. That's how it happened. That was not not a criticism, by the way. It didn't do me any harm. Uh, but, um, that's how teaching was done in a different, a different way. So young people from traveling across the world to study at top universities or apply for corporate roles in London are routinely told, sometimes subtly, sometimes brutally, that they need to soften their accents if they want to be taken seriously. And this is, I believe, a damning indictment of our social mobility framework.
Why should why should a young person have to trade away their identity just to get a foot on the career ladder?Kate Hoy of course, when the member for Vauxhall, she told me and she told many others the same story, she says, uh, Jim from Northern Ireland, we speak pretty fast, sir Roger. And maybe that's part of the problem with the speed of words. But Kate Hoey, she says Jim Shannon gets more words to the minute than any other MP. And. I always remember she told me that in all honesty, and I always took it as a compliment.
I'm sure it was. Uh, but but the, the, the fact is, we do talk a wee bit fast now. The House will know. Of course, I'm not a man who is shy about speaking up for his constituents, uh, along with the member, honourable member for Harlow, I mentioned Strangford almost as many times as he does. Harlow. Uh, so I make a point of principle to participate in as many debates. You'll notice, sir Roger, uh, urgent questions and statements as I humanly can, but I've lost count of the number of times the brilliant, the brilliant, hard working, uh, staff from.
Hansard who, um, had to maybe gently chase me down, uh, down the corridors sometimes. And, Mr. Sherman, if you give me a minute, please. Um, could you send me your notes again?And who was that person you mentioned?And where was that place again?And would you spell it, please?You know, so they do it. An urgent clarification. The names of people of local townlands or specific phrases I've used in a debate. Now I say that and I say that also with the utmost fondness and kindness to the Hansard staff, who are incredibly, um, understanding.
And I respect all of them. They do an absolutely heroic job. And I know for me, they go the extra mile to make sure that the things are correct. Uh, I'm happy to yes, of course.
But when we talk about diversity, about inclusion, about breaking down barriers to social mobility in the country, we rightly talk about race, gender, background, and socio economic status. But there is also a silent accountability I think is touched upon that in a reduction, there's a silent, pervasive form of prejudice that remains entirely socially acceptable in corporate boardrooms and academic institutions, and possibly, possibly within the corridors of power in this place. I'm talking about accent. That's what I have an accent. Very clear accent.
Uh, I think it's very normal. Um, but when you come over here, you realise you're maybe the only one with the accent. Um, the judging of a person's intelligence. Uh, competence and worth based entirely on how they sound. I say I give an example, sir. Roger, I've sent to to the honourable lady in front of me about this one. Whenever I ask a question in the adjournment debate one night, it's the last term of of this place and the honourable lady, the minister, she says, oh, that's a great question.
I'll come back to you with the answer. And I just thought that's what she meant and never had any any reason to think otherwise. She happened to meet one of my colleagues, David Simpson, who used to be an MP here. She says, uh, Jim asked me a question in the chamber. I have no idea what he said, but I just had to tell him I would come back to him with a written response. Again, it illustrates, perhaps in the early days, uh, one of the things that takes me a bit longer to, to understand, I stand here today as a proud son of County Down.
I speak with the voice of my constituency. All my constituents can understand it. And I suppose that's a really important thing. Sir Roger. Um, a voice heavily shaped by our rich Ulster-Scots linguistic heritage. And to me and the people of Strangford and Northern Ireland, this is a language of our hearts, our history and our homes. It's a dialect full of warmth, I believe, of character and deep rooted culture. But step outside of Northern Ireland and that same voice is too often treated as a barrier.
Sometimes the advance on. I don't speak for me. I speak for some of my constituents who have come here to university. You've come here to seek employment studies and the accent bias such as. Landmarks speaking up report by the Sutton Trust, as one example, have shown that regional working class accents, including those from Northern Ireland, are consistently ranked lower for prestige and perceived professional capability compared to received pronunciation or standard BBC English. Um, I remember a school as a young boy.
Um, I my work, my lot of my early words would have been Ulster-Scots. And I remember Mr. Whittaker and by the way, it was a different educational time at that time. Sir. Roger, um, whenever you said something wrong, he says, that's not proper English. I says, but that's what my granny, words my granny uses. And that's the words that my mum used. Well, in those days, of course, you get a clipper in the air and that sort of.
Uh. That's how it happened. That was not not a criticism, by the way. It didn't do me any harm. Uh, but, um, that's how teaching was done in a different, a different way. So young people from traveling across the world to study at top universities or apply for corporate roles in London are routinely told, sometimes subtly, sometimes brutally, that they need to soften their accents if they want to be taken seriously. And this is, I believe, a damning indictment of our social mobility framework.
Why should why should a young person have to trade away their identity just to get a foot on the career ladder?Kate Hoy of course, when the member for Vauxhall, she told me and she told many others the same story, she says, uh, Jim from Northern Ireland, we speak pretty fast, sir Roger. And maybe that's part of the problem with the speed of words. But Kate Hoey, she says Jim Shannon gets more words to the minute than any other MP. And. I always remember she told me that in all honesty, and I always took it as a compliment.
I'm sure it was. Uh, but but the, the, the fact is, we do talk a wee bit fast now. The House will know. Of course, I'm not a man who is shy about speaking up for his constituents, uh, along with the member, honourable member for Harlow, I mentioned Strangford almost as many times as he does. Harlow. Uh, so I make a point of principle to participate in as many debates. You'll notice, sir Roger, uh, urgent questions and statements as I humanly can, but I've lost count of the number of times the brilliant, the brilliant, hard working, uh, staff from.
Hansard who, um, had to maybe gently chase me down, uh, down the corridors sometimes. And, Mr. Sherman, if you give me a minute, please. Um, could you send me your notes again?And who was that person you mentioned?And where was that place again?And would you spell it, please?You know, so they do it. An urgent clarification. The names of people of local townlands or specific phrases I've used in a debate. Now I say that and I say that also with the utmost fondness and kindness to the Hansard staff, who are incredibly, um, understanding.
And I respect all of them. They do an absolutely heroic job. And I know for me, they go the extra mile to make sure that the things are correct. Uh, I'm happy to yes, of course.
09:50
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
The honourable member for giving way would agree with me that it is a very serious issue, and we must ensure that people with any type of of accent aren't disadvantaged. But would you agree with me that there is sometimes a humorous side and that we saw this week in the European Parliament, a Sinn Féin MEP was complaining that they weren't allowed to speak in Irish in the chair reminded them that they could speak in Irish and Sinn Féin MEP then said well, I'm sorry, I wasn't prepared to speak or speak in English instead.
So it can be sometimes very humorous, even if slightly embarrassing at times. Yeah.
So it can be sometimes very humorous, even if slightly embarrassing at times. Yeah.
09:50
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
It certainly isn't. Appreciate that. Interjection. By my friend and colleague as well. Uh, the hands have stopped. Heroic job. They're always happy to write down the names of my local farmers or my community groups of the townlands. Like Ballywalter, Kircubbin or, or Ballywalter as we know it as Whitkirk, uh, or my son's names, uh, just last week, I got a message. Could you just spell your son's name, please?Uh, so we did, but it perfectly illustrates, I believe, the point of this debate, the very center and core of what the honourable lady is.
If a member of Parliament, with over two decades of public service, still faces hurdles, just being understood because of his or her regional tongue, what hope does a 21 year old graduate from a working class Ulster-Scots background have when trying to navigate an interview panel of elites?How challenging and hard that could be. One of my favorite stories. Sir Roger is one that back in the time of the assembly of. And I served in. And, uh, it's to do with the the accent again, it's been hard to understand.
I had an American guess out for a meal at the Northern Ireland Assembly in the in the dining room. Uh, this lady was a professor in prestigious American University, and she really was really interested in the Ulster Scots accent and, and the words that we were saying, uh, we were served by a young, a young boy that I knew probably grew up with in Ballywalter or Whitkirk. So I, um, I chatted with him and afterwards, mum and dad, did you do in your small talk of conversation?Uh, that lovely, intelligent lady from Philadelphia in the United States of America leaned over to Naomi, my p s, and said to me, that's wonderful.
Jim speaking in Ulster Scots. And she says, no, he always speaks to God, you know. So so again, it's an illustration. Perhaps that lady was was a. That wasn't really the Ulster Scots, uh, two words, but it was a way that I talked in the way that I speak. Um, that's how we speak and why that story may be humorous in a way. It does highlight the issues that an accent can bring when someone has to constantly repeat themselves.
Coming back to the seriousness of this issue and why it's important when someone has to constantly repeat themselves, when they are met with blank stares, and sometimes with Roger. Being ignorant or ignoring it. But sometimes they just don't follow it. Or when they're asked to please just maybe say it again or speak more clearly if possible. It chips away at their confidence and ability referred to that. And the intervention that the honourable gentleman gave referred to that as well.
I think that's a key issue of where I am. It breeds a form of of imposter syndrome that tells our young people they do not belong in high flying professions. It pushes them out of the rooms where decisions are made. And the very thing that gentleman referred to. And I finished with this, sir Roger, and I thank you for your patience. Linguistic diversity is the ultimate sign of a rich and vibrant democracy. We should be celebrating the fact that the United Kingdom is a tapestry of different voices, of different dialects, of different accents.
I think that's what enriches us all. And there's some people in this room, and I'm thinking of one in particular, and he knows who it is. Uh, and I'm looking forward very much to hearing him, uh, because I just love listening to his accent. And there's some other MPs in the far side. Uh, have you listened to the polite comedy ones, for example?Oh, I just love it when they speak in a way because their voices and their words, it's almost like singing.
If you listen to it and the way they comes over and The Scotsman I remember my colleague Angus MacNeil mentioned, because he's no longer a member, I think he used his name. He was speaking one day in the chamber, and Gregory said to me, do you understand him?I said, I understand every word he said, and he looks at me and says, I suppose you probably would, and I. Angus speaks fast, and his words were at a rate of knots similar to my own. Uh, but I again, it goes underlying issue.
So what do we need?We need the employers. We need the universities. We need the civil services to actively train interviewers to look past the phonetic wrapper and focus purely on the substance of what has been said. And with that, I will leave you with an Ulster Scots phrase. It's going to leave you with one. The challenge, of course, and Ulster Scots phrase for you to work out. And it is. Keep it.
Thank you very much.
If a member of Parliament, with over two decades of public service, still faces hurdles, just being understood because of his or her regional tongue, what hope does a 21 year old graduate from a working class Ulster-Scots background have when trying to navigate an interview panel of elites?How challenging and hard that could be. One of my favorite stories. Sir Roger is one that back in the time of the assembly of. And I served in. And, uh, it's to do with the the accent again, it's been hard to understand.
I had an American guess out for a meal at the Northern Ireland Assembly in the in the dining room. Uh, this lady was a professor in prestigious American University, and she really was really interested in the Ulster Scots accent and, and the words that we were saying, uh, we were served by a young, a young boy that I knew probably grew up with in Ballywalter or Whitkirk. So I, um, I chatted with him and afterwards, mum and dad, did you do in your small talk of conversation?Uh, that lovely, intelligent lady from Philadelphia in the United States of America leaned over to Naomi, my p s, and said to me, that's wonderful.
Jim speaking in Ulster Scots. And she says, no, he always speaks to God, you know. So so again, it's an illustration. Perhaps that lady was was a. That wasn't really the Ulster Scots, uh, two words, but it was a way that I talked in the way that I speak. Um, that's how we speak and why that story may be humorous in a way. It does highlight the issues that an accent can bring when someone has to constantly repeat themselves.
Coming back to the seriousness of this issue and why it's important when someone has to constantly repeat themselves, when they are met with blank stares, and sometimes with Roger. Being ignorant or ignoring it. But sometimes they just don't follow it. Or when they're asked to please just maybe say it again or speak more clearly if possible. It chips away at their confidence and ability referred to that. And the intervention that the honourable gentleman gave referred to that as well.
I think that's a key issue of where I am. It breeds a form of of imposter syndrome that tells our young people they do not belong in high flying professions. It pushes them out of the rooms where decisions are made. And the very thing that gentleman referred to. And I finished with this, sir Roger, and I thank you for your patience. Linguistic diversity is the ultimate sign of a rich and vibrant democracy. We should be celebrating the fact that the United Kingdom is a tapestry of different voices, of different dialects, of different accents.
I think that's what enriches us all. And there's some people in this room, and I'm thinking of one in particular, and he knows who it is. Uh, and I'm looking forward very much to hearing him, uh, because I just love listening to his accent. And there's some other MPs in the far side. Uh, have you listened to the polite comedy ones, for example?Oh, I just love it when they speak in a way because their voices and their words, it's almost like singing.
If you listen to it and the way they comes over and The Scotsman I remember my colleague Angus MacNeil mentioned, because he's no longer a member, I think he used his name. He was speaking one day in the chamber, and Gregory said to me, do you understand him?I said, I understand every word he said, and he looks at me and says, I suppose you probably would, and I. Angus speaks fast, and his words were at a rate of knots similar to my own. Uh, but I again, it goes underlying issue.
So what do we need?We need the employers. We need the universities. We need the civil services to actively train interviewers to look past the phonetic wrapper and focus purely on the substance of what has been said. And with that, I will leave you with an Ulster Scots phrase. It's going to leave you with one. The challenge, of course, and Ulster Scots phrase for you to work out. And it is. Keep it.
Thank you very much.
09:57
09:57
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you. Used to serve under your chair. And of course may I congratulate my friend and honourable friend, the member for Leigh and Atherton on securing today's debate. And I've spent a fair bit of time in her patch, over the nearer patch over the last couple of months, and we bang on about Yorkshire, Lancashire, Lancashire rivalry. We are united by a few things. Some of the best food in the country and the finest pies, and of course, the warmth and friendliness that we're all proud of, of which she is one of the finest examples in this house.
Um, sir Roger, I want to be crystal clear. Judging someone on their accent is an attitude that belongs firmly in the history books. And I must admit that when I first arrived here in Parliament, I often felt out of place like I didn't belong, all because of my accent. Like many colleagues here today, I was not elected because I sounded polished. I was elected through hard graft and to represent the people who sent me here. I've done my best though, to get a few Yorkshire phrases into Hansard because that's how my constituents speak.
So I'll kick off by giving a few more. After turning to Facebook for some inspiration, there is, though still some disagreement. I know I'm risking controversy, but I stand firmly with saying over general, some things you've got to get right. And what came through clearly, though, is that the Yorkshire dialect is not just colourful, it's precise because when someone is either in, you know exactly what they're doing. If they have a Maddie, you know what that means. And if they have a monk on, well, you know, to say, well, clear.
And when someone says, oh, it's gone, right. You know, it's gone properly. Well, but many of these words carry real history. Like in Beck Fells. They're all actually rooted. Sir Roger in Old Norse, long before Westminster caught up with the North, we were already shaping a language of our own. And yet, too often these words can draw blank looks on even within our own region. Mention a snicket, a ten foot or a fuddle, and you'll quickly find out who understands proper Yorkshire.
But sir Roger, it was not just Parliament where I felt out of place. It was also at Oxford. Now look, I'm incredibly proud to be a state school kid who worked hard to get there, but when I did, some tutors, often some of the older ones actually mocked the way I spoke. There were correcting my grammar or debating my ideas. They were judging whether somebody who said nowt really belonged in their so-called hallowed halls. And research shows that nearly a third of university students have been mocked because of their accent, and almost half of workers say that they face jokes or jibes about the way they speak in workplace settings, including sir Roger.
In my own experience at the Bank of England, look, when I started doing national media as an MP, I felt it there as well. You turn up ready to talk about serious issues like getting a station in my constituency funded, tackling anti-social behaviour, standing up for your constituents. But too often I felt like it was only clipped southern voices that were sounding suitably authoritative. And I wasn't. Not originally always invited on to these programmes, and although, strangely enough, there was never any shortage of invitations to the ones where the producers would tell me how much they loved a proper thick Yorkshire accent.
And I really appreciate that. And those producers, well, they know who they are. I'm especially grateful to broadcasters like Matt Chorley, who is really helping to challenge some of these assumptions when it comes to national broadcasting and getting these regional accents on air. But the real success, of course, will be hearing someone from Yorkshire or Lancashire on national radio or TV, and it won't be worth commenting on at all. Look, I'm immensely proud to be from God's own county. I've always tried to stay authentic to my roots, a West Yorkshire family, North Yorkshire upbringing, always proud to represent York, but I'd be lying if I said I hadn't softened my accents at the time, including working in the city, because I thought that's what you had to do if people wanted to take me seriously.
I don't want my two boys, Robin and Louis, growing up believing that if they want to pass an interview or land a graduate job, the first thing they've got to do is change how they speak. Because when a young person starts believing they have to hide or change their accent, it chips away at their confidence. And I believe also we're wasting talent. And businesses across Britain are facing a productivity hit. If they're overlooking good, honest craft for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
Look, a young person from Haxby or Bishopthorpe should not be marked down because they don't sound like they grew up in Belgravia. And by the way, I should also give a special mention to Bradford. Or as some may say, Bradford. And the same, of course, applies. If the best jobs in finance, law or politics still mean moving to London. And that's got to change. By the way, sounding like you've always lived there, well, we've not solved the problem, have we?I'll end by saying I want children watching Parliament on television to hear someone who sounds like them, not sound like someone they feel they have to become.
Otherwise, too many young people will carry on believing that making it means leaving part of themselves behind. So whether you grow up saying aye up nowt or summat, whether you call an alleyway a snicket, whether you tell your mates it'll be RI, or whether you are simply chuffed to bits, your voice is never something to be ironed out. It's part of who you are.
Um, sir Roger, I want to be crystal clear. Judging someone on their accent is an attitude that belongs firmly in the history books. And I must admit that when I first arrived here in Parliament, I often felt out of place like I didn't belong, all because of my accent. Like many colleagues here today, I was not elected because I sounded polished. I was elected through hard graft and to represent the people who sent me here. I've done my best though, to get a few Yorkshire phrases into Hansard because that's how my constituents speak.
So I'll kick off by giving a few more. After turning to Facebook for some inspiration, there is, though still some disagreement. I know I'm risking controversy, but I stand firmly with saying over general, some things you've got to get right. And what came through clearly, though, is that the Yorkshire dialect is not just colourful, it's precise because when someone is either in, you know exactly what they're doing. If they have a Maddie, you know what that means. And if they have a monk on, well, you know, to say, well, clear.
And when someone says, oh, it's gone, right. You know, it's gone properly. Well, but many of these words carry real history. Like in Beck Fells. They're all actually rooted. Sir Roger in Old Norse, long before Westminster caught up with the North, we were already shaping a language of our own. And yet, too often these words can draw blank looks on even within our own region. Mention a snicket, a ten foot or a fuddle, and you'll quickly find out who understands proper Yorkshire.
But sir Roger, it was not just Parliament where I felt out of place. It was also at Oxford. Now look, I'm incredibly proud to be a state school kid who worked hard to get there, but when I did, some tutors, often some of the older ones actually mocked the way I spoke. There were correcting my grammar or debating my ideas. They were judging whether somebody who said nowt really belonged in their so-called hallowed halls. And research shows that nearly a third of university students have been mocked because of their accent, and almost half of workers say that they face jokes or jibes about the way they speak in workplace settings, including sir Roger.
In my own experience at the Bank of England, look, when I started doing national media as an MP, I felt it there as well. You turn up ready to talk about serious issues like getting a station in my constituency funded, tackling anti-social behaviour, standing up for your constituents. But too often I felt like it was only clipped southern voices that were sounding suitably authoritative. And I wasn't. Not originally always invited on to these programmes, and although, strangely enough, there was never any shortage of invitations to the ones where the producers would tell me how much they loved a proper thick Yorkshire accent.
And I really appreciate that. And those producers, well, they know who they are. I'm especially grateful to broadcasters like Matt Chorley, who is really helping to challenge some of these assumptions when it comes to national broadcasting and getting these regional accents on air. But the real success, of course, will be hearing someone from Yorkshire or Lancashire on national radio or TV, and it won't be worth commenting on at all. Look, I'm immensely proud to be from God's own county. I've always tried to stay authentic to my roots, a West Yorkshire family, North Yorkshire upbringing, always proud to represent York, but I'd be lying if I said I hadn't softened my accents at the time, including working in the city, because I thought that's what you had to do if people wanted to take me seriously.
I don't want my two boys, Robin and Louis, growing up believing that if they want to pass an interview or land a graduate job, the first thing they've got to do is change how they speak. Because when a young person starts believing they have to hide or change their accent, it chips away at their confidence. And I believe also we're wasting talent. And businesses across Britain are facing a productivity hit. If they're overlooking good, honest craft for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
Look, a young person from Haxby or Bishopthorpe should not be marked down because they don't sound like they grew up in Belgravia. And by the way, I should also give a special mention to Bradford. Or as some may say, Bradford. And the same, of course, applies. If the best jobs in finance, law or politics still mean moving to London. And that's got to change. By the way, sounding like you've always lived there, well, we've not solved the problem, have we?I'll end by saying I want children watching Parliament on television to hear someone who sounds like them, not sound like someone they feel they have to become.
Otherwise, too many young people will carry on believing that making it means leaving part of themselves behind. So whether you grow up saying aye up nowt or summat, whether you call an alleyway a snicket, whether you tell your mates it'll be RI, or whether you are simply chuffed to bits, your voice is never something to be ironed out. It's part of who you are.
10:02
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Thank you, sir Roger. And it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I to give thanks to my honourable friend for Leigh and Atherton for bringing this important debate. I'm really proud to speak today. Um, not just as a member of Parliament for Wolverhampton North East, but someone who too has felt the pressure to turn down the dial on my accent from very much the day one of entering this house, many here, I'm sure very well intentioned, would make a comment about how they could hear my accent usually, then followed by a Peaky Blinders comment.
But I'm absolutely fine with that because I'm a huge fan of Peaky Blinders in isolation. It's absolutely fine, but when you hear it again and again and again, you can't help but feel self-conscious and it can become quite tiresome. But after my maiden speech, shortly after I was elected, it was all put into context because as a former teacher, I received a message from a former student and she said, miss, because I'm always a miss to my former student. Miss, I am so proud that I can see and hear somebody on the telly, somebody in Parliament who looks and sounds like me.
And that was it. That gave me the confidence, um, to just plow forward and to continue to speak as loud and proud with my Wolverhampton not so dulcet tones. But this is why representation matters for young people growing up in Wolverhampton and Willenhall, hearing voices that sound like theirs in Parliament and in positions of leadership sends a powerful message you belong here too. It tells them that they do not have to change who they are to succeed, and that matters because there is a clear link between accents and social mobility.
Research for the Sutton Trust describes accents as one of the strongest signals of socio economic background, and found that accent bias continues to affect people's experience throughout their education and employment. The evidence is striking. A Sutton Trust study found that 30% of university students and 29% of university applicants reported being mocked, criticised or singled out because of their accent. I was recently told of a young man who withdrew from his first day of his university interview at university. Of Birmingham. He went to apply to study medicine, but he felt belittled by the peers within his group.
I've heard of a university student who, on a placement in a scientific lab, day in, day out, had other people mocking his accent. Um, and it caused him to withdraw and become a shell of a person rather than bring the the best in the brilliant that he usually is. 29% of senior managers from working class backgrounds said that they had been mocked or criticised because of their accent at work. These throwaway comments can affect people's self-esteem, question their value in the workplace, and when people do all that is asked of them, they can work hard, achieve good qualifications, secure professional jobs and climb that career ladder, but still feel the pressure to hide the sound of where they come from.
Social mobility should mean expanding opportunity and not conformity. The challenge for all of us is to broaden our understanding of what professionalism sounds like, and talent does not speak with one accent. The more our institutions, including Parliament, reflects the full diversity of voices across Britain, the stronger we all become. As someone from Wolverhampton North East, I want every person listening to know this. Our accent is not something to overcome, it's something to be proud of. It connects us with our community, our family, our stories, our values.
So social mobility should not mean conformity. We must ensure that people are judged on their ability, their attitude, their correct, their character, and their potential. Not on whether they sound like they belong. And I urge the government to carry on their work to equalise opportunity and build on social mobility practices.
But I'm absolutely fine with that because I'm a huge fan of Peaky Blinders in isolation. It's absolutely fine, but when you hear it again and again and again, you can't help but feel self-conscious and it can become quite tiresome. But after my maiden speech, shortly after I was elected, it was all put into context because as a former teacher, I received a message from a former student and she said, miss, because I'm always a miss to my former student. Miss, I am so proud that I can see and hear somebody on the telly, somebody in Parliament who looks and sounds like me.
And that was it. That gave me the confidence, um, to just plow forward and to continue to speak as loud and proud with my Wolverhampton not so dulcet tones. But this is why representation matters for young people growing up in Wolverhampton and Willenhall, hearing voices that sound like theirs in Parliament and in positions of leadership sends a powerful message you belong here too. It tells them that they do not have to change who they are to succeed, and that matters because there is a clear link between accents and social mobility.
Research for the Sutton Trust describes accents as one of the strongest signals of socio economic background, and found that accent bias continues to affect people's experience throughout their education and employment. The evidence is striking. A Sutton Trust study found that 30% of university students and 29% of university applicants reported being mocked, criticised or singled out because of their accent. I was recently told of a young man who withdrew from his first day of his university interview at university. Of Birmingham. He went to apply to study medicine, but he felt belittled by the peers within his group.
I've heard of a university student who, on a placement in a scientific lab, day in, day out, had other people mocking his accent. Um, and it caused him to withdraw and become a shell of a person rather than bring the the best in the brilliant that he usually is. 29% of senior managers from working class backgrounds said that they had been mocked or criticised because of their accent at work. These throwaway comments can affect people's self-esteem, question their value in the workplace, and when people do all that is asked of them, they can work hard, achieve good qualifications, secure professional jobs and climb that career ladder, but still feel the pressure to hide the sound of where they come from.
Social mobility should mean expanding opportunity and not conformity. The challenge for all of us is to broaden our understanding of what professionalism sounds like, and talent does not speak with one accent. The more our institutions, including Parliament, reflects the full diversity of voices across Britain, the stronger we all become. As someone from Wolverhampton North East, I want every person listening to know this. Our accent is not something to overcome, it's something to be proud of. It connects us with our community, our family, our stories, our values.
So social mobility should not mean conformity. We must ensure that people are judged on their ability, their attitude, their correct, their character, and their potential. Not on whether they sound like they belong. And I urge the government to carry on their work to equalise opportunity and build on social mobility practices.
10:05
10:06
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Um, sir. Roger. And. A big thank you to my honourable friend, the member for Leigh and Atherton, for bringing this really important debate to the House this morning. Uh, it's something which I'm really. Keen on. Really keen to discuss. Um, someone who was forged in the coalfield community of Ashington, which was the biggest coal mining community in the world. And and after more than 16 years in this place, some people might say, I've lost my own accent.
I remain proudly, proudly. That's. How can I say it with regard to my. I'm really proud of my accent, um, and I. Think it represents who you are, where you're from, who you represent. It's your identity. That's what your accent is. And I think. There's two issues here, and I think it's been already mentioned. There's a humorous side to it, but there's also a very important, serious issue with regards to this, of course.
I remain proudly, proudly. That's. How can I say it with regard to my. I'm really proud of my accent, um, and I. Think it represents who you are, where you're from, who you represent. It's your identity. That's what your accent is. And I think. There's two issues here, and I think it's been already mentioned. There's a humorous side to it, but there's also a very important, serious issue with regards to this, of course.
10:07
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
And. Sir Roger, I love his accent and and a betrays the person who you are betrays the history, the culture, the locality. They come from. Every word that the honourable gentleman speaks. Sir Roger as a word from his constituency and from his people. And that's why I like him as a person, by the way. But just to say that I love the accent as well.
10:08
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Well, that's very kind of you. And sir Roger. Um, we're talking about people's access. My son, one of me, my youngest son, Liam, speaks, uh, with a much harsher dialect than me, but he speaks five times faster than the honourable gentleman from Strangford. Can you imagine what problems that causes us in it when we when we travel abroad, or even we travel to Yorkshire, for example?People haven't got a clue what he's saying, but he's university educated. Absolutely fantastic in the work that he does.
But I mean, my my accent's pitmatic. It's from the pits, from the coal mines. That's where my accent's from. Every little village. Every town had their own pit. Some had more than one pit. And whilst we're different in one town, we spoke different. We had our own language, our own dialect. What?And you know what?I'm proud of that. Really proud of the fact that when I left school with very few qualifications, I went to work seven miles under the North Sea with some of the finest people you would have.
Ever meet some of the brightest people you would ever meet?The miners. Not many of them went. Never got the opportunity on a university, by the way. But you should hear the way they speak. And when you look at, um some of the, the videos and recordings of the miners and my past from days gone by, I can hardly understand what they're saying, but it's so rich in heritage. It's, you know, it's absolutely wondrous, to be honest with you.
But just an anecdote. Before I get on to the serious poll we had in my party, um, 2 or 3 years ago, we had a whole group of asylum seekers. Sir Roger, at a meeting with the shadow minister, um, to discuss, uh, the situations that were facing in towns like mine in one of the big barriers in the towns like mine was the, the dialect, but they said it was okay. They could understand what we were saying, but the big problem was the children were going to school and the children were picking up the dialect.
And when the children were coming in from school and they were speaking to the mums in the best dialect, the parents didn't have a clue what they were talking about. And that's how serious. And that's that. That's the the situation in in areas like mine and like areas up and down the country. But, you know, I've been in this place, this place is easily intimidates people. Unfortunately, I'm not one of the, the type of persons to be intimidated this.
But, you know, I have faced be fair share of hostility in this place. Uh, and it's as if someone with an accent like mine shouldn't be in here. And if anything should underline the lack of correlation between competence and dialect, you only need to look, for example, um, sir Roger at. The dialect of the. Eden educated former Prime ministers, which we've had. Yeah. Didn't do much good for my community and my constituency were are proud of where they come from and the you know subtle and not often not so subtle patterns of speech that mark communities which I mentioned before only miles apart.
Many people are now forced to choose between maintaining an accent. They're proud of, or indeed ditching, ditching the accent to try to just even move on in life. I mean, it's just not right. It's the the last form of acceptable discrimination, which is absolutely ridiculous in this country where you speak, how you speak, where you're from, how the how people identify and discriminate against you because of what you say, because you know, this country, despite some of the recent setbacks, has done fantastically well to rid us of many, many prejudice.
But the one that I've just remained is the one which we suffer from the most, and that is the social markers, the local dialect, who we are and where you where you should be in life because of how you, how you speak. And before seeing anything more, the sentence people from Ashington, Blyth, uh, Bedlington, Newbiggin by the sea or Chapman stick for um, those people in my part refuse to compromise their dialects. At the same time that judged every single day by the dialects. Uh, and this is something which, which you have got to, to tackle the North East accent often acts as a proxy for social class.
And colours. The opportunities for far too many, mainly younger, mainly younger people. There are some areas where a local accent can be positively viewed, but they're too few in number. Trade unions, community organisations, social work, youth work, skilled trades, emergency services, sport and local journalism. Are, albeit a part. But even there, the class prejudices that follow your accent can limit opportunities. Nobody should be forced to ditch your accent for a job or to reach their potential.
Uh. As I mentioned, as a former Pitman, I met some of the finest singers, uh, in the world. Listen to their political analysis. Um, while sitting in the pitch black, um, under seven mile under the North Sea. But, you know, these are the people who built our nation but continue to be looked down upon by those who see themselves as arbiters. Uh, their accents are a proud part of the heritage and legacy of those who went before us.
The, the, the, the giants of our movement of which we stand, um, with should never be forgotten. And you know, that well known Red Clydeside, John McLean said, rise with your class not out of it. And that should include maintaining your accent as a whole number of, of um issues, which point which have been raised in some of the briefings which have been sent out. And I think it's worth just mentioning 2 or 3 stats at this point in time, 69% people change their accent to fit in, 27% change the way they speak for a job interview.
24% of the people changed the way they speak at work, 26% have been teased for their accent in the workplace, 11% believe they missed out on a job because of class and social status. 10% felt discriminated against when applying for a job because of their background and social class, 61% of people would support making discrimination on socio economic background illegal and. In a number of things, professor Rob Drummond, um said that people across England expressed positive views about regional accents but still rated northern accented speakers as less intelligent and less correct when hearing identical speech.
Uh, earlier research found lower working class speakers were 40% less intelligent, 4% less friendly, and 5% less trustworthy than upper middle class speakers. So, you know, there is this, um, huge. Prejudice with people, uh, with. Accents, people with accents like mine. I've often, you know, said Roger been asked if I'm Dutch, if um um Ukrainian, if I'm Russian if um um what, what part of Europe. I'm, I'm a German. Um I'm Irish. Uh, and it, it's, although it's quite humorous, although it's quite humorous, it's a serious point to it and I'll never, ever change my accent.
I'm actually speaking when I say I'll never change it, sir. Roger. I'm speaking my best Queen's English, as we say. And I'm really, really slowed down for this contribution today because I'm not far behind my honourable friend from Strangford in terms of how fast we speak. When you get a group of people from where I live and we've had a few pints, believe me, there's nobody can understand what's being said. Nobody has got any clue. And I think my honourable friend from Strangford mentioned before, in this place you can be speaking to people on very serious issues, issues facing your own constituents, and you can tell that the person you're talking to is not taking it in in the.
Yes. Yep. That's right. You can say some of the most extraordinary things and they'll just say yes, yes, yes, yes. Because they're not taking it in because of your accent. That's a serious issue. But, you know, as I've said before, um, and in concluding that we've, uh, I'm, I'm, I'm a proud member of the Northumbrian Language Society, who since 1983 have championed the diverse dialects of Northumberland and north west Durham and Tyneside, and one who did more to to mark this organisation.
Um was the Ashton dialect put Fred Read and Fred Read is he's got some fantastic poetry those people to to read it you'll not understand it, you'll not. But it's worth it. It Highlands a century. It's a point very proud of the mining community which he came from a new working people created the wealth of the nation, and in his own words, dividends were wound by the Pitman's blood. And I think that's a fantastic saying by a fantastic individual individual. The legacy, the miners in the workers who left us are rich.
Dialects should be the eradication of that final, acceptable prejudice in breaking down the barriers for brilliant working class kids who, given the opportunity, can change the world.
But I mean, my my accent's pitmatic. It's from the pits, from the coal mines. That's where my accent's from. Every little village. Every town had their own pit. Some had more than one pit. And whilst we're different in one town, we spoke different. We had our own language, our own dialect. What?And you know what?I'm proud of that. Really proud of the fact that when I left school with very few qualifications, I went to work seven miles under the North Sea with some of the finest people you would have.
Ever meet some of the brightest people you would ever meet?The miners. Not many of them went. Never got the opportunity on a university, by the way. But you should hear the way they speak. And when you look at, um some of the, the videos and recordings of the miners and my past from days gone by, I can hardly understand what they're saying, but it's so rich in heritage. It's, you know, it's absolutely wondrous, to be honest with you.
But just an anecdote. Before I get on to the serious poll we had in my party, um, 2 or 3 years ago, we had a whole group of asylum seekers. Sir Roger, at a meeting with the shadow minister, um, to discuss, uh, the situations that were facing in towns like mine in one of the big barriers in the towns like mine was the, the dialect, but they said it was okay. They could understand what we were saying, but the big problem was the children were going to school and the children were picking up the dialect.
And when the children were coming in from school and they were speaking to the mums in the best dialect, the parents didn't have a clue what they were talking about. And that's how serious. And that's that. That's the the situation in in areas like mine and like areas up and down the country. But, you know, I've been in this place, this place is easily intimidates people. Unfortunately, I'm not one of the, the type of persons to be intimidated this.
But, you know, I have faced be fair share of hostility in this place. Uh, and it's as if someone with an accent like mine shouldn't be in here. And if anything should underline the lack of correlation between competence and dialect, you only need to look, for example, um, sir Roger at. The dialect of the. Eden educated former Prime ministers, which we've had. Yeah. Didn't do much good for my community and my constituency were are proud of where they come from and the you know subtle and not often not so subtle patterns of speech that mark communities which I mentioned before only miles apart.
Many people are now forced to choose between maintaining an accent. They're proud of, or indeed ditching, ditching the accent to try to just even move on in life. I mean, it's just not right. It's the the last form of acceptable discrimination, which is absolutely ridiculous in this country where you speak, how you speak, where you're from, how the how people identify and discriminate against you because of what you say, because you know, this country, despite some of the recent setbacks, has done fantastically well to rid us of many, many prejudice.
But the one that I've just remained is the one which we suffer from the most, and that is the social markers, the local dialect, who we are and where you where you should be in life because of how you, how you speak. And before seeing anything more, the sentence people from Ashington, Blyth, uh, Bedlington, Newbiggin by the sea or Chapman stick for um, those people in my part refuse to compromise their dialects. At the same time that judged every single day by the dialects. Uh, and this is something which, which you have got to, to tackle the North East accent often acts as a proxy for social class.
And colours. The opportunities for far too many, mainly younger, mainly younger people. There are some areas where a local accent can be positively viewed, but they're too few in number. Trade unions, community organisations, social work, youth work, skilled trades, emergency services, sport and local journalism. Are, albeit a part. But even there, the class prejudices that follow your accent can limit opportunities. Nobody should be forced to ditch your accent for a job or to reach their potential.
Uh. As I mentioned, as a former Pitman, I met some of the finest singers, uh, in the world. Listen to their political analysis. Um, while sitting in the pitch black, um, under seven mile under the North Sea. But, you know, these are the people who built our nation but continue to be looked down upon by those who see themselves as arbiters. Uh, their accents are a proud part of the heritage and legacy of those who went before us.
The, the, the, the giants of our movement of which we stand, um, with should never be forgotten. And you know, that well known Red Clydeside, John McLean said, rise with your class not out of it. And that should include maintaining your accent as a whole number of, of um issues, which point which have been raised in some of the briefings which have been sent out. And I think it's worth just mentioning 2 or 3 stats at this point in time, 69% people change their accent to fit in, 27% change the way they speak for a job interview.
24% of the people changed the way they speak at work, 26% have been teased for their accent in the workplace, 11% believe they missed out on a job because of class and social status. 10% felt discriminated against when applying for a job because of their background and social class, 61% of people would support making discrimination on socio economic background illegal and. In a number of things, professor Rob Drummond, um said that people across England expressed positive views about regional accents but still rated northern accented speakers as less intelligent and less correct when hearing identical speech.
Uh, earlier research found lower working class speakers were 40% less intelligent, 4% less friendly, and 5% less trustworthy than upper middle class speakers. So, you know, there is this, um, huge. Prejudice with people, uh, with. Accents, people with accents like mine. I've often, you know, said Roger been asked if I'm Dutch, if um um Ukrainian, if I'm Russian if um um what, what part of Europe. I'm, I'm a German. Um I'm Irish. Uh, and it, it's, although it's quite humorous, although it's quite humorous, it's a serious point to it and I'll never, ever change my accent.
I'm actually speaking when I say I'll never change it, sir. Roger. I'm speaking my best Queen's English, as we say. And I'm really, really slowed down for this contribution today because I'm not far behind my honourable friend from Strangford in terms of how fast we speak. When you get a group of people from where I live and we've had a few pints, believe me, there's nobody can understand what's being said. Nobody has got any clue. And I think my honourable friend from Strangford mentioned before, in this place you can be speaking to people on very serious issues, issues facing your own constituents, and you can tell that the person you're talking to is not taking it in in the.
Yes. Yep. That's right. You can say some of the most extraordinary things and they'll just say yes, yes, yes, yes. Because they're not taking it in because of your accent. That's a serious issue. But, you know, as I've said before, um, and in concluding that we've, uh, I'm, I'm, I'm a proud member of the Northumbrian Language Society, who since 1983 have championed the diverse dialects of Northumberland and north west Durham and Tyneside, and one who did more to to mark this organisation.
Um was the Ashton dialect put Fred Read and Fred Read is he's got some fantastic poetry those people to to read it you'll not understand it, you'll not. But it's worth it. It Highlands a century. It's a point very proud of the mining community which he came from a new working people created the wealth of the nation, and in his own words, dividends were wound by the Pitman's blood. And I think that's a fantastic saying by a fantastic individual individual. The legacy, the miners in the workers who left us are rich.
Dialects should be the eradication of that final, acceptable prejudice in breaking down the barriers for brilliant working class kids who, given the opportunity, can change the world.
10:18
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you, sir Roger. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this morning. And can I thank my honourable friend for Leigh and Atherton for bringing this debate and for hosting the excellent event recently on regional accents. So yesterday we celebrated Black Country Day, a moment to recognise the history, heritage and everything wonderful about the Black Country, including our distinctive accent and dialect. But in various polls over the years, the Black Country and Birmingham accents are frequently cited as the least favoured in the UK and face unfair stigma, classism and stereotyping.
And I will take this opportunity to clarify that black Country and Brummie are not the same thing. And as any black country person will tell you, our Brummie. I'm from the Black Country, however, and as my honourable friend for Wolverhampton North East said, we are often mocked and judged for our accent. And when I tell people I'm from Stourbridge, I'm often met with a blank look. But when I say it's near Dudley I can hear in their brain what they're thinking before they even say Dudley one time.
Um, it's funny, but repeatedly it can become demeaning. However, it is one of the oldest and most historically preserved dialects in the UK, retaining roots from Old English and early Middle English. And surely that is something to be proud of. The Black Country accent has been associated with laziness, lower intelligence, a lack of sophistication, but it is far from the truth. Our accent is history. You can hear in every single word shaped by hundreds of years of grit and graft, the sound of proud, hard working folk who led the industrial revolution, helping to develop the modern world.
In fact, Shakespeare himself would probably have understood black country people better than Londoners, as our dialect is so closely linked to Old English, with phrases like Albizia and Boston fiddle. I remember my parents and teachers discouraging my accent due to biases and stigma, leading to beliefs that I could face discrimination or be seen as inferior in the working world. And other members have alluded to similar prejudices with their accents. I'd be criticised for saying buzz instead of Bus or Dua instead of door, and told my accent could impact my chances of getting on in life.
The Sutton Trust report on accents highlighted a case in 2013 of a primary school in the Black Country that banned students from talking in Black Country dialect. No wonder some feel the need to tone down their accents. And when I came to this place, my accent got a mixed reception from constituents with comments such as no one will listen to you with that stupid accent, but also many people saying how great it was to see someone in Parliament who sounds like them. And my view is definitely more of the latter.
And as I've got older, I've become prouder of my accent and what it represents. But I still find myself slipping into that telephone voice or spiking proper. The hangover of years of being told by accident my accent would hold me back or cause me to be judged. No one should be judged for how they speak, and neither should it affect their life chances. And it's heartening that in recent years, we hear a broader representation in the media of the wonderful range of accents up and down our country.
But we would be naive to think that prejudice is not still harboured in some quarters in this place there are of a variety of accents, as we have heard this morning, to represent the towns, villages and regions up and down the country. And I think that helps elected members to be more relatable to their constituents and encourage aspiration. We are not inferior for how we speak, and nor should we hide it. And I will continue to champion the busting black country for as long as I am here.
And I will take this opportunity to clarify that black Country and Brummie are not the same thing. And as any black country person will tell you, our Brummie. I'm from the Black Country, however, and as my honourable friend for Wolverhampton North East said, we are often mocked and judged for our accent. And when I tell people I'm from Stourbridge, I'm often met with a blank look. But when I say it's near Dudley I can hear in their brain what they're thinking before they even say Dudley one time.
Um, it's funny, but repeatedly it can become demeaning. However, it is one of the oldest and most historically preserved dialects in the UK, retaining roots from Old English and early Middle English. And surely that is something to be proud of. The Black Country accent has been associated with laziness, lower intelligence, a lack of sophistication, but it is far from the truth. Our accent is history. You can hear in every single word shaped by hundreds of years of grit and graft, the sound of proud, hard working folk who led the industrial revolution, helping to develop the modern world.
In fact, Shakespeare himself would probably have understood black country people better than Londoners, as our dialect is so closely linked to Old English, with phrases like Albizia and Boston fiddle. I remember my parents and teachers discouraging my accent due to biases and stigma, leading to beliefs that I could face discrimination or be seen as inferior in the working world. And other members have alluded to similar prejudices with their accents. I'd be criticised for saying buzz instead of Bus or Dua instead of door, and told my accent could impact my chances of getting on in life.
The Sutton Trust report on accents highlighted a case in 2013 of a primary school in the Black Country that banned students from talking in Black Country dialect. No wonder some feel the need to tone down their accents. And when I came to this place, my accent got a mixed reception from constituents with comments such as no one will listen to you with that stupid accent, but also many people saying how great it was to see someone in Parliament who sounds like them. And my view is definitely more of the latter.
And as I've got older, I've become prouder of my accent and what it represents. But I still find myself slipping into that telephone voice or spiking proper. The hangover of years of being told by accident my accent would hold me back or cause me to be judged. No one should be judged for how they speak, and neither should it affect their life chances. And it's heartening that in recent years, we hear a broader representation in the media of the wonderful range of accents up and down our country.
But we would be naive to think that prejudice is not still harboured in some quarters in this place there are of a variety of accents, as we have heard this morning, to represent the towns, villages and regions up and down the country. And I think that helps elected members to be more relatable to their constituents and encourage aspiration. We are not inferior for how we speak, and nor should we hide it. And I will continue to champion the busting black country for as long as I am here.
10:21
10:21
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Thank you, sir Roger. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I'd like to thank the honourable member for Leigh and Atherton for bringing this really interesting debate. And actually, I don't think I've been in a debate for such a long time. It's actually brought such a lovely smile to my face and in a way that because we're celebrating diversity, and I think that that's what regional accents are really about, they give us an opportunity to celebrate diversity, and we should be doing much more of that, rather than trying to tell people to do things differently.
So I think it's a real opportunity to celebrate that. So I genuinely have been really enjoying listening to, to this debate. Um, I would say that I probably have a more, a fairly neutral accent. Um, but, um, that doesn't mean to say that I've been immune in my life to people telling me to change it. So I represent Chelmsford in Essex. Essex is a fairly well known accent thanks to programs such as The Only Way Is Essex and Gavin and Stacey, and which obviously celebrates other parts of the country as well.
Um, and I actually, I actually really like the Essex accent because I think it's really interesting and not just the, the tone of voice that people use, but also the, the way that they, they say certain words just as other members from across the country have talked about phrases that they use. But I'm originally from Devon and, um, growing up in the West Country, that has quite a strong accent as well. And, and even I remember as a child, I think one of the honourable members, I think it was the member for Stourbridge talked about, um teachers encouraging their students to tone down their accent.
I was told that as well. I used to, I was privileged to be able to take part in um in readings in the cathedral that we celebrated every year at my school when I was like 12, 13 years old. And I remember doing a practice run. And I remember there was a line in the reading I had to do that said the old, the old, the old man's. Well, the old man's passed it. I actually said in the practice the old man's passed it because that's what we would say in Devon.
And I was told by a teacher that, oh, you know, that was very good. But you do need to tone that down a little bit, and I did. I remember another word as I, as I got older, my parents, my parents have always said tooth. So they always said tooth. Um, and, uh, and I remember being mocked about that once. And so I now say tooth, I'm slightly ashamed to say because I corrected my accent. So I've not been immune to that, but I'm also a linguist as well.
Um, and I know that as much as I might think I've got a fairly neutral accent in this country, when I have lived abroad and tried to speak another language than my accent is, you know, stands out a mile. Because as much as I like to think that I might have a good French accent or a good German accent, actually, compared to native speakers, I stand out a mile. Um, and so, and that's, I know how difficult that, that, that can feel and, and how uncomfortable that can be for people.
And we need to make sure that, that people feel comfortable in whatever job they're doing. We are incredibly privileged here to be able to do this, this job. I think it's incredibly important, as other honourable members have said, um, how important it is that, that we represent the people that have elected us here into this place and that we give people the opportunity to see people who look and sound like them. And many honourable members have spoken very passionately about how important it is to them and how important it is to their constituents to see people here standing up, being heard, speaking and sounding exactly like the constituents that elected them.
And I think that's incredibly important. The honourable member for York Outer mentioned the mentioned broadcasters and how important it is that more broadcasters are encouraging more regional accents, and I'd like to commend those broadcasters, because we can't, um, it's hard to be inspired. Um, if you only see people who look like, who look and sound like something completely different to you. So if you are seeing something that's familiar to you, then I think it's more inspirational and gives you more courage to, to take part.
So I commend those broadcasters for giving a platform to that as well. Um, the honourable member for Strangford said that talks talked about blank stares when we hear an accent that we don't completely understand. Um, and I think I think he's right to point that out and I think, um, that when we have those blank stares, it's hard to make a connection. Um, but the more that we hear different accents, the more we get used to them. And I would say that familiarity breeds friendship.
And that's why it's so important that we expose ourselves to, to lots of different accents and regions and customs and traditions. Um, there was various honourable members have mentioned the Sutton Trust's 2022 report, and there was a particular statistic in that, that I just wanted to highlight, which was that, um, it was mentioned about university students. Um, so the report found that across all stages of life, individuals are concerned about how their accent affects their ability to succeed, which is worrying enough, but also went on to say that 33% of university students felt like this, 19% of employees and 18% of university applicants.
And the bit I wanted to draw out is there's a difference between university applicants and. 18% being concerned and university students at 33%. So something goes wrong between applying for university and. When you're actually at university, it gets worse. And that's something that we really need to tackle and that I would encourage all universities to reflect really deeply on that and say, what can we do?Because that's not the way round. It should be going. It should be a place that we go to university and go, hey, isn't this great?I fit in, I'm accepted.
Um, and in fact, not just fit in, I should stand out in a good way. Um, so I think we should definitely be looking more at that. Other honourable members have mentioned other studies that have been done. Um, and, uh, including there's a research from the University of Edinburgh which, which said that individuals with regional accents find themselves code switching to be taken seriously. And other honourable members have mentioned something similar, tone altering their pronunciation to avoid negative judgement. Um, I would also just go back to the idea of, of linguistics.
And as much as I like reading and I can see, um, words in front of me, you know, even when I'm just speaking, I can kind of see the way that the word is written. So I think about how it's going to be pronounced. Um, but a lot of the time things, don't they pronunciation changes over time. And as a, as a linguist, as much as I find that a little bit frustrating sometimes I have to understand that actually language is constantly, constantly evolving.
And I think we should embrace that. If we think back 200 years, there are many words that we don't even use now or that have changed over time. And I think that's something to, to embrace and to be joyful about, about how things, um, change. Over time. But of course they will.
So I think it's a real opportunity to celebrate that. So I genuinely have been really enjoying listening to, to this debate. Um, I would say that I probably have a more, a fairly neutral accent. Um, but, um, that doesn't mean to say that I've been immune in my life to people telling me to change it. So I represent Chelmsford in Essex. Essex is a fairly well known accent thanks to programs such as The Only Way Is Essex and Gavin and Stacey, and which obviously celebrates other parts of the country as well.
Um, and I actually, I actually really like the Essex accent because I think it's really interesting and not just the, the tone of voice that people use, but also the, the way that they, they say certain words just as other members from across the country have talked about phrases that they use. But I'm originally from Devon and, um, growing up in the West Country, that has quite a strong accent as well. And, and even I remember as a child, I think one of the honourable members, I think it was the member for Stourbridge talked about, um teachers encouraging their students to tone down their accent.
I was told that as well. I used to, I was privileged to be able to take part in um in readings in the cathedral that we celebrated every year at my school when I was like 12, 13 years old. And I remember doing a practice run. And I remember there was a line in the reading I had to do that said the old, the old, the old man's. Well, the old man's passed it. I actually said in the practice the old man's passed it because that's what we would say in Devon.
And I was told by a teacher that, oh, you know, that was very good. But you do need to tone that down a little bit, and I did. I remember another word as I, as I got older, my parents, my parents have always said tooth. So they always said tooth. Um, and, uh, and I remember being mocked about that once. And so I now say tooth, I'm slightly ashamed to say because I corrected my accent. So I've not been immune to that, but I'm also a linguist as well.
Um, and I know that as much as I might think I've got a fairly neutral accent in this country, when I have lived abroad and tried to speak another language than my accent is, you know, stands out a mile. Because as much as I like to think that I might have a good French accent or a good German accent, actually, compared to native speakers, I stand out a mile. Um, and so, and that's, I know how difficult that, that, that can feel and, and how uncomfortable that can be for people.
And we need to make sure that, that people feel comfortable in whatever job they're doing. We are incredibly privileged here to be able to do this, this job. I think it's incredibly important, as other honourable members have said, um, how important it is that, that we represent the people that have elected us here into this place and that we give people the opportunity to see people who look and sound like them. And many honourable members have spoken very passionately about how important it is to them and how important it is to their constituents to see people here standing up, being heard, speaking and sounding exactly like the constituents that elected them.
And I think that's incredibly important. The honourable member for York Outer mentioned the mentioned broadcasters and how important it is that more broadcasters are encouraging more regional accents, and I'd like to commend those broadcasters, because we can't, um, it's hard to be inspired. Um, if you only see people who look like, who look and sound like something completely different to you. So if you are seeing something that's familiar to you, then I think it's more inspirational and gives you more courage to, to take part.
So I commend those broadcasters for giving a platform to that as well. Um, the honourable member for Strangford said that talks talked about blank stares when we hear an accent that we don't completely understand. Um, and I think I think he's right to point that out and I think, um, that when we have those blank stares, it's hard to make a connection. Um, but the more that we hear different accents, the more we get used to them. And I would say that familiarity breeds friendship.
And that's why it's so important that we expose ourselves to, to lots of different accents and regions and customs and traditions. Um, there was various honourable members have mentioned the Sutton Trust's 2022 report, and there was a particular statistic in that, that I just wanted to highlight, which was that, um, it was mentioned about university students. Um, so the report found that across all stages of life, individuals are concerned about how their accent affects their ability to succeed, which is worrying enough, but also went on to say that 33% of university students felt like this, 19% of employees and 18% of university applicants.
And the bit I wanted to draw out is there's a difference between university applicants and. 18% being concerned and university students at 33%. So something goes wrong between applying for university and. When you're actually at university, it gets worse. And that's something that we really need to tackle and that I would encourage all universities to reflect really deeply on that and say, what can we do?Because that's not the way round. It should be going. It should be a place that we go to university and go, hey, isn't this great?I fit in, I'm accepted.
Um, and in fact, not just fit in, I should stand out in a good way. Um, so I think we should definitely be looking more at that. Other honourable members have mentioned other studies that have been done. Um, and, uh, including there's a research from the University of Edinburgh which, which said that individuals with regional accents find themselves code switching to be taken seriously. And other honourable members have mentioned something similar, tone altering their pronunciation to avoid negative judgement. Um, I would also just go back to the idea of, of linguistics.
And as much as I like reading and I can see, um, words in front of me, you know, even when I'm just speaking, I can kind of see the way that the word is written. So I think about how it's going to be pronounced. Um, but a lot of the time things, don't they pronunciation changes over time. And as a, as a linguist, as much as I find that a little bit frustrating sometimes I have to understand that actually language is constantly, constantly evolving.
And I think we should embrace that. If we think back 200 years, there are many words that we don't even use now or that have changed over time. And I think that's something to, to embrace and to be joyful about, about how things, um, change. Over time. But of course they will.
10:28
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you. And I thank her for giving way. It was just on that point. It made me think about the fact that a lot of regional dialects and accents have been lost over the years, simply because people have moved away or been forced to tone it down. And that's another reason why it's important to embrace our regional differences so that we don't lose any more of these precious dialects and accents.
10:28
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I thank the honourable member for for that intervention. She reminds me that so, very sadly, my aunt lost her partner a few months ago. He was three days off his 90th birthday, and he was a true Cornishman. Um, he had lived in Cornwall his entire life, in fact, in a very small area of Cornwall. He was incredibly well known. And I used to, I used to love I had the privilege of being able to love spending time with him and listening to just the way that he spoke was just, just beautiful, the stories that he used to tell, but the phrases that he used to use which which unfortunately are dying out, they will, they will be lost over time.
So I think we also have to take advantage of the modern technology that we have to be able to record some of these things as well, so they aren't lost, but also to continue to encourage them within our schools, within, you know, spoken histories as well, I think. But yeah, thank you so much. Thank you to the member for raising that. Yeah, of course I will.
So I think we also have to take advantage of the modern technology that we have to be able to record some of these things as well, so they aren't lost, but also to continue to encourage them within our schools, within, you know, spoken histories as well, I think. But yeah, thank you so much. Thank you to the member for raising that. Yeah, of course I will.
10:29
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
When you referred to the, your partner's father and the 90 year old reminds me of my own dad, uh, who is dead and gone, but he's a very proud Donegal man. And one of the, the wee poems or he had told me when I was small, was, uh, were you Fay Donegal?How's your 30s?Great or small?How do you eat them?Skins and all our skins and. Ah. And those wee versus if they're not retained by someone or written down or whatever it may be, they're going to be lost forever.
So it's important to retain, uh, some of those stories from, from days gone, days past, but also the fact that potatoes was what it was all about. Potatoes in Donegal, that's what they lived on for their for their dinner and their day. Just a wee step back in time.
So it's important to retain, uh, some of those stories from, from days gone, days past, but also the fact that potatoes was what it was all about. Potatoes in Donegal, that's what they lived on for their for their dinner and their day. Just a wee step back in time.
10:30
10:30
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I thank the honourable member for Strangford for that intervention. There were so many lovely stories to tell about this and that's why it's such a such a lovely debate. And we genuinely should be continuing to encourage this. Um, so I thank you very much for bringing it in. In conclusion, I just wanted to say that, um, um. I, I, as a liberal Democrat, my Liberal Democrat colleagues believe, um, very. Much. Very strongly in a society was strong social mobility and regional accents and our backgrounds and experiences should never hold us back from that social mobility.
Um, and someone's opportunities should definitely never, ever be limited by their accent. I thank the honourable lady for bringing this debate.
Um, and someone's opportunities should definitely never, ever be limited by their accent. I thank the honourable lady for bringing this debate.
10:31
10:31
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
It's a pleasure to have been listening and taking part in this debate, sir Roger. And it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship on behalf of His Majesty's loyal opposition. Um, I want to congratulate the member for Leigh and Atherton on securing this debate. Um, a personal, informative and engaging opening to this debate. And I had the pleasure of welcoming the Youth Parliament last year to my county. And I was delighted to hear from all of the young people from across the country.
And it's a pleasure to listen to them. The honourable lady from Chelmsford. I was born on the 4th of June. I had to continually be corrected on that one. Um I. Must declare an interest, sir Roger, as co-chair of the all party Group on Youth Employment, and I have the pleasure of working with Youth Employment UK on promoting youth employment in all its forms. The role of young people within the economy and ensuring that young people's voices are rightly heard, and also need to declare that I'm the co-chair of the all party men and Boys group and men and boys issues, and it's a pleasure to work with the Centre of Centre for Policy Research on men and boys in this role, improving the well-being and opportunities and life chances for our boys.
And I think you get the feel of one of the things that drives me in politics now, a regional accent has to be rightly heard. Today. Must never be seen as a badge of shame, and I will come on to that. In terms of my mother very shortly. Um, every single one from the northeast to the southwest to the Welsh valleys, the highlands of Scotland, Merseyside through to the Black Country and down to the Thames Estuary. Every single one of our regional accents is a reminder of the people and places that make this country so special.
And I think that's why we've enjoyed this debate so much today. And after ten years of living and working in Wales, I have had a very messy accent myself in my own county of Sussex. We have our own native accent, largely been replaced in latter years, except for a few old place names and words. Twitter and uh, for is obviously an ally for those that know. But the rise of mass education and accent correction in favour of perceived better pronunciation has had an impact.
Otherwise I would be speaking more akin to the West Country accent and using the rhotic R. Um, and that was an accident that my dad had as a Sussex farmer and as two Cornish people in my office would highly recognize. Now, my dad married my mum from Stoke who had elocution lessons at grammar school, where she had to wear a boater, not eat in the street, and most certainly chew gum in the street. Um, and when she took dad to football, most people presumed she was in the wrong end watching the wrong team.
Um, but pride where she came from was undermined by the fact that her accent as a youngster was deemed to need to be ironed out. Um, as the honourable member for Blyth and Ashington pointed out, now I have the pleasure of serving as a DWP Minister for over five years and a title I fought for and had the honour of, was serving as Minister for Social Mobility. So I know there is a huge amount of talent in every part of Britain and that is why I care so much about making sure that everybody has a chance to succeed, no matter where they come from, their postcode and of course, their accent.
Now, um, a couple of, uh. A couple of things I'd like to share from my time as a minister is that my very liberal Liverpudlian private office lead had a way of saying no to many of my bright ideas in about 15 different ways, which I learnt meant how much she liked my ideas. But at DWP, um, we created 140 youth hubs, which I'm delighted this government is continuing to take forward and confidence for our young people has been what has been highlighted, and that was led by learning from the Birmingham model, from another well known and very well thought of former Mayor Andy Street and Manchester ism, of course, is now extremely fashionable.
So I think we're all delighted about the highlights of the fact that there is so much talent and ability across the country. DWP is unique in the fact that it's in every single community.
And it's a pleasure to listen to them. The honourable lady from Chelmsford. I was born on the 4th of June. I had to continually be corrected on that one. Um I. Must declare an interest, sir Roger, as co-chair of the all party Group on Youth Employment, and I have the pleasure of working with Youth Employment UK on promoting youth employment in all its forms. The role of young people within the economy and ensuring that young people's voices are rightly heard, and also need to declare that I'm the co-chair of the all party men and Boys group and men and boys issues, and it's a pleasure to work with the Centre of Centre for Policy Research on men and boys in this role, improving the well-being and opportunities and life chances for our boys.
And I think you get the feel of one of the things that drives me in politics now, a regional accent has to be rightly heard. Today. Must never be seen as a badge of shame, and I will come on to that. In terms of my mother very shortly. Um, every single one from the northeast to the southwest to the Welsh valleys, the highlands of Scotland, Merseyside through to the Black Country and down to the Thames Estuary. Every single one of our regional accents is a reminder of the people and places that make this country so special.
And I think that's why we've enjoyed this debate so much today. And after ten years of living and working in Wales, I have had a very messy accent myself in my own county of Sussex. We have our own native accent, largely been replaced in latter years, except for a few old place names and words. Twitter and uh, for is obviously an ally for those that know. But the rise of mass education and accent correction in favour of perceived better pronunciation has had an impact.
Otherwise I would be speaking more akin to the West Country accent and using the rhotic R. Um, and that was an accident that my dad had as a Sussex farmer and as two Cornish people in my office would highly recognize. Now, my dad married my mum from Stoke who had elocution lessons at grammar school, where she had to wear a boater, not eat in the street, and most certainly chew gum in the street. Um, and when she took dad to football, most people presumed she was in the wrong end watching the wrong team.
Um, but pride where she came from was undermined by the fact that her accent as a youngster was deemed to need to be ironed out. Um, as the honourable member for Blyth and Ashington pointed out, now I have the pleasure of serving as a DWP Minister for over five years and a title I fought for and had the honour of, was serving as Minister for Social Mobility. So I know there is a huge amount of talent in every part of Britain and that is why I care so much about making sure that everybody has a chance to succeed, no matter where they come from, their postcode and of course, their accent.
Now, um, a couple of, uh. A couple of things I'd like to share from my time as a minister is that my very liberal Liverpudlian private office lead had a way of saying no to many of my bright ideas in about 15 different ways, which I learnt meant how much she liked my ideas. But at DWP, um, we created 140 youth hubs, which I'm delighted this government is continuing to take forward and confidence for our young people has been what has been highlighted, and that was led by learning from the Birmingham model, from another well known and very well thought of former Mayor Andy Street and Manchester ism, of course, is now extremely fashionable.
So I think we're all delighted about the highlights of the fact that there is so much talent and ability across the country. DWP is unique in the fact that it's in every single community.
10:35
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Every single community in our second HQ was in Leeds, but for me, one thing I found that certainly my reflections of working with the amazing civil service. It does still feel that too many people can't progress in that department or wider because if you haven't got the ability to get to London and be supported in London and perhaps not have the right accent, that you don't get, the social mobility and the opportunities that you need to progress. So I certainly work with the the care leavers that we had in our department and really listened and learned from them.
And I hope that that is what is continuing. And I know that this is a focus for the government. Now, I'd like to mention a few speeches from members today who've spoken rightly, passionately in their wonderful accents about their constituencies. Now, as the honourable member for York outer and the mover of the motion, spoke about the BBC accent in this debate. Now, when I worked at the BBC as someone who was also a Croydon schoolgirl, they briefly tried to train that out of me and again, it was about softening an accent.
Or maybe it was about improving it. We need to read between those lines. Now, the honourable member for Strangford, I mean, good luck, Hansard, on capturing all the magical recollections that he shared once again today, shows off his magnificent accent. And once you've had time to tune in, frankly, we never get a chance to tune out. And it was lovely to hear about the learning of phrases cross generation. I think that is something that when we hold on to our past and we hold on to our family, hold on to our area, it really makes a difference.
Now, research has found that in cases where interview candidates demonstrated a technical knowledge or spoke confidently, they were subject to less accent based differential treatment. So it's important to challenge the government on the fact that it's lowering its ambitions around vocational qualifications and moving away from high standards and specialist knowledge. So I'll just leave that with the minister to to think about. And in regard to being part of a party which is very much about meritocracy, we rightly should be raising everyone up, people up, giving our young people the best start skills and knowledge they need to succeed instead of lowering expectations and pushing them down to the bottom.
And I think that's been highlighted in speeches today. And I, I've said this before in the House. I'll say it again. You will do great when you are your true, authentic self. It will serve you. It will all. And I will always reiterate that confidence in being you is everything that you need. Now, my right hon. Friend the leader of the opposition has rightly said diversity and inclusion should never put any individual or group at a disadvantage and should never damage cohesion and morale in the workplace, and that anti-discrimination should not be used as a mechanism to undermine meritocracy.
And I think that's the nub of what we're talking about today. What is the point of pushing for us all to be the same as the honourable lady for Wolverhampton North East said, this is not about conformity. We might look at approaching this differently, but the challenge is there for all of us and we need to seek to find a way to to fix that. We need to insist on not seeing people as victims who need saving, rather about seeing people as talented individuals with agency.
Or we do risk reinforcing stereotypes and pulling up the ladder on social mobility. So the new legal duties may make us politicians at times feel good about ourselves, but all too often the actual outcomes fail to live up to the talk. And this is again what's been highlighted today. And we need to, as we've seen with the public sector equality duty, that can lead to more harm being done in the name of equality. And we need to recognise that. Now, the ongoing obsession of putting people into boxes and categorizing them according to their characteristics is not the answer.
I think we all agree on that. It only leads to more division and frankly, we need less of that. So instead, we should be celebrating achievement, holding up examples of excellence, and promoting role models in every walk of life. Now, a man named Wilfred Pickles is a somewhat unlikely role model in the age of social media influencers, but it was the reading of the news on BBC radio during the war. In his broad Yorkshire accent, which broke barriers and redefined an area who could of who could actually be on a national broadcaster.
And young people today, no matter where they're from, should feel confident that their accent will never be a barrier for them reaching their potential. And that will only be possible by building society focused on individual merit and access to opportunity for all, rather than group characteristics and tick box exercises. So a couple of questions for the Minister in regard to the socio economic duty. Will the Minister commit to a full assessment of its implementation in Scotland and Wales, and can she update on what conversations she's had with devolved administrations on it?And what impact does the minister think that devolution has had on promoting social mobility in regions and nations?Um, I certainly have my views on that, and I'd be interested to hear what the minister says.
Now, in conclusion, on this side of the House, we truly do believe people should be supported and everyone should have the same opportunity to succeed in life, regardless of background or accent. With the opportunity that people can go as far as their talent and hard work takes them. We should not ever be judging people on solely protected characteristics or limiting their chances and ambition based on where they are from. And I agree with the mother of the motion. It's not how you speak, it truly is how you listen and crucially, act to make a difference on social mobility and open the doors for others.
And I hope that that is what is continuing. And I know that this is a focus for the government. Now, I'd like to mention a few speeches from members today who've spoken rightly, passionately in their wonderful accents about their constituencies. Now, as the honourable member for York outer and the mover of the motion, spoke about the BBC accent in this debate. Now, when I worked at the BBC as someone who was also a Croydon schoolgirl, they briefly tried to train that out of me and again, it was about softening an accent.
Or maybe it was about improving it. We need to read between those lines. Now, the honourable member for Strangford, I mean, good luck, Hansard, on capturing all the magical recollections that he shared once again today, shows off his magnificent accent. And once you've had time to tune in, frankly, we never get a chance to tune out. And it was lovely to hear about the learning of phrases cross generation. I think that is something that when we hold on to our past and we hold on to our family, hold on to our area, it really makes a difference.
Now, research has found that in cases where interview candidates demonstrated a technical knowledge or spoke confidently, they were subject to less accent based differential treatment. So it's important to challenge the government on the fact that it's lowering its ambitions around vocational qualifications and moving away from high standards and specialist knowledge. So I'll just leave that with the minister to to think about. And in regard to being part of a party which is very much about meritocracy, we rightly should be raising everyone up, people up, giving our young people the best start skills and knowledge they need to succeed instead of lowering expectations and pushing them down to the bottom.
And I think that's been highlighted in speeches today. And I, I've said this before in the House. I'll say it again. You will do great when you are your true, authentic self. It will serve you. It will all. And I will always reiterate that confidence in being you is everything that you need. Now, my right hon. Friend the leader of the opposition has rightly said diversity and inclusion should never put any individual or group at a disadvantage and should never damage cohesion and morale in the workplace, and that anti-discrimination should not be used as a mechanism to undermine meritocracy.
And I think that's the nub of what we're talking about today. What is the point of pushing for us all to be the same as the honourable lady for Wolverhampton North East said, this is not about conformity. We might look at approaching this differently, but the challenge is there for all of us and we need to seek to find a way to to fix that. We need to insist on not seeing people as victims who need saving, rather about seeing people as talented individuals with agency.
Or we do risk reinforcing stereotypes and pulling up the ladder on social mobility. So the new legal duties may make us politicians at times feel good about ourselves, but all too often the actual outcomes fail to live up to the talk. And this is again what's been highlighted today. And we need to, as we've seen with the public sector equality duty, that can lead to more harm being done in the name of equality. And we need to recognise that. Now, the ongoing obsession of putting people into boxes and categorizing them according to their characteristics is not the answer.
I think we all agree on that. It only leads to more division and frankly, we need less of that. So instead, we should be celebrating achievement, holding up examples of excellence, and promoting role models in every walk of life. Now, a man named Wilfred Pickles is a somewhat unlikely role model in the age of social media influencers, but it was the reading of the news on BBC radio during the war. In his broad Yorkshire accent, which broke barriers and redefined an area who could of who could actually be on a national broadcaster.
And young people today, no matter where they're from, should feel confident that their accent will never be a barrier for them reaching their potential. And that will only be possible by building society focused on individual merit and access to opportunity for all, rather than group characteristics and tick box exercises. So a couple of questions for the Minister in regard to the socio economic duty. Will the Minister commit to a full assessment of its implementation in Scotland and Wales, and can she update on what conversations she's had with devolved administrations on it?And what impact does the minister think that devolution has had on promoting social mobility in regions and nations?Um, I certainly have my views on that, and I'd be interested to hear what the minister says.
Now, in conclusion, on this side of the House, we truly do believe people should be supported and everyone should have the same opportunity to succeed in life, regardless of background or accent. With the opportunity that people can go as far as their talent and hard work takes them. We should not ever be judging people on solely protected characteristics or limiting their chances and ambition based on where they are from. And I agree with the mother of the motion. It's not how you speak, it truly is how you listen and crucially, act to make a difference on social mobility and open the doors for others.
10:40
10:40
10:40
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
Sir Roger. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I want to begin by thanking my honourable friend, the member for Leigh and Atherton, for securing this incredibly important debate, which I, too, have thoroughly enjoyed listening to. And I think with all the stories shared, recognize how powerful and rich the debate is and to thank her for the work that she has done in Parliament. This is one of those topics, sir Roger, where in a sense, you wonder why we haven't had the conversation before.
And it is a mark of it being its time that it has captured the imagination of Parliament so effectively and so powerfully, and is already, I think, achieving the goals that the honourable member wanted in wanting to see that important culture change. A shift in attitudes and an understanding that where accent ism may be holding back social mobility, it is our responsibility to do all that we can to tackle it. And I also want to pay tribute to professor Rob Drummond and Doctor Amanda Cole, sir Roger and the accent ISM project for their Westminster Voices initiative, as well as their other important work in this field, particularly that this is English project with the British Council, which champions the very powerful idea that English language belongs to everyone who speaks it in all its rich, diverse and indeed regional variations.
And too often debates in this House are defined by columns of statistics, spreadsheets and policy levers. But today, my honourable friend and all who have taken part in this debate are giving our debate a rare and special thing. The place, the space to tell stories, to talk about identity and belonging, and what it can be like for our constituents to navigate modern Britain. I do want to, uh. Some of the, um, uh, the points that were raised in the debate, including how, um, accents have such an important relationship to identity, how accents.
From also what has been shared, how they can be a barrier. Um, the importance of recognising that everyone has an accent, uh, and that there is, as my honourable friend said, no linguistic basis for a hierarchy of accents. And where we are starting to see through the research that life chances may be defined by background with accent bias. It is incredibly important for us to tackle that unconscious bias, and it is important to see that as what my honourable friend described. Um, importance for tackling culture.
Um, that is driving that and also making sure that we are looking at the importance of tackling it to encourage the confidence of young people and not result in a lack of confidence for young people in them feeling able to achieve their ambitions. And I do want to thank the honourable members for. Sanford, York. Wolverhampton, North East, uh, Blyth and Ashington, Stourbridge and also the front bench, uh, spokes, uh, spokes women today. Uh, and and indeed, um, the honourable members for Doncaster East, Glasgow South and East Londonderry for their contributions.
And just to highlight a couple of things, which I will also refer to during the course of my remarks. Um the, the message that to young people being told to soften their accents, uh, came across from across the UK, uh, in this contribution. And I will say to the honourable member for Strangford, uh, in his very relatable point on Hansard, uh, that I have found that Hounslow has also fallen into that and needing some clarity on place names and names. But it is important that we get that right.
And it is important that Hansard records correctly, because it is then on record for posterity. Everyone wants their name spelt right, their places spelt right, and that is important for respect. Um, and so I'm grateful for Hansard to checking with us, um, and making sure that there is, um, an important and, and an accurate representation. Uh, but I will also, um. Uh, recognise, um, in other contributions, um, that attitudes such as we have heard about do belong in the history books, as my hon.
Friend the member for York outer, um, has shared, uh, and also I'm grateful that he bravely risked controversy in his, uh, in his comments, in his speeches that were in his speech that I think were important for the House. Um, about, um, uh. Local dialects and language. Uh, but also for relaying his experience at Oxford. And that was incredibly important for this House and for his constituents. Uh, and I am grateful to the pupils of my honourable friend, the member for Wolverhampton North East.
Um, her pupil spoke for all of us on the importance of seeing um people with uh, who represent them, who look like them, who sound like them in this house. Um, I will make further comments, but I do want to, um, continue with some of my remarks as well too, because what the Sutton trust research also demonstrated in that landmark, um, report. Was why this really matters because they're speaking up. Uh, report states that accent remains the primary single signal of socio economic status in this country.
And some of their research has been shared in this debate. But I also just wanted to pull out a few, um, of their findings, which around how 35% of university students feel deeply self-conscious about their accent and 41% from the north of England fear their voice will negatively affect their future success. I was grateful as well for the contribution from my honourable friend for Blyth and Ashington, and I think I have had conversations with him after he's had a pint or two. Uh, he does speak much faster.
Uh, but I would say that that was, you know, a really powerful contribution. Um, and an important one and one that I hope will be replayed across the northeast. Um, because, um, it did share why it's so important, uh, to be proud of your accent, to be proud of who you are and why we need the confidence in young people, particularly in what we see in the data from the North East, to know that all opportunities should be open to them. And it is important to have that respect for each other.
Um, but also shockingly, and this is, I think, a really staggering statistic that nearly 30% of senior managers from working class backgrounds report having their, um, having been openly mocked for their accent in the workplace. And as this data shows, accent ism remains an outdated snobbery that reduces, um, a person's intellect, capability and potential to their accent and the way that they speak. Um, that is unacceptable. And it is important to be shining a new light on the issue, uh, that for generations, um, the message has been to those who want to maybe enter public life or elite professions.
It's been that if you want to get on, you must sound like everybody else. We know that when Margaret Thatcher became leader of her party in the 1970s, she famously underwent intensive elocution lessons with a tutor from the National Theatre Authority. Had to sound a certain way, and the message, particularly at that time, was, if you wanted power, you had to shed your origins. Uh, but, um, making it shouldn't mean, as my hon. Friend for York outer made in. His powerful contribution leaving part of you behind decades later, we must recognise.
While noting the much greater diversity of this place and our country, that progress can and must still be made. I may say, sir Roger that. It could be that progress is. We find it accelerates, uh, with Manchester, Manchester tourism, uh, becoming a part of our national conversation. Studies also regularly show that regional accents such as Welsh or Yorkshire, are rated by the public. Interestingly, as also trustworthy, warm and honest. Yet when those same studies measure perceived intelligence or employability, standard Southern English and received Pronunciation, received pronunciation invariably then top the metrics.
We are effectively telling working class people, we trust you to work on the front line in our schools and NHS, but we do not trust you to lead our boardrooms or teach in our elite universities, or perhaps to represent us in this place. And yet the diversity of British speech is a mark of our cultural richness. Our language is vibrant and alive, and depending on where you stand in this country, a bread roll is a cob. I may get these accents. Uh, maybe in a house or accent.
A bread roll is a cob, a bap, a balm or a stottie or a muffin. But no matter what you call it, it's still pretty tasty. Um, and to flatten our regional dialects into a single homogenised corporate drone is to strip Britain of its character. Now, I want to just say a few words about why this debate really matters here, sir Roger, because Parliament is a workplace, but it is also the engine room of our democracy. If we genuinely believe in representation, then that representation must extend to how the chamber sounds.
Our constituents do not want a parliament of homogenous voices. They want to hear their own lives, their regions, their communities, reflected from the green benches and every part of debate debating across this House. And when a member stands up in any debate in the House and speaks with their own unvarnished accent, whether they represent constituencies the North East, Yorkshire, the Midlands, the Black Country, North Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, um or working class London, um, Essex and Sussex has also reflected in this debate. They are undertaking on equal terms their democratic duty in this House.
They are telling every young person or constituent in their communities who are watching at home, your voice belongs in the rooms where power resides. And social mobility, as I would agree with, uh, the honourable, the Right Honourable member, social mobility should not mean conformity. And indeed, I want to also highlight that these barriers do not start at the doors of this house. We see them much earlier when working class young people arrive at our world leading universities. They have worked, sir Roger staggeringly hard to earn their places.
Yet the culture shock can be. They face is frequently linguistic, met with eyebrows or mimicking, as has also been relayed very powerfully in this debate. We also do want to take practical action to challenge some of this and to change access to opportunity. That's why, and far from limiting and lowering ambition, as has been referenced in this House from 2028, I am proud that we are reintroducing means tested maintenance grants of up to £1,000 a year, putting vital cash back into the pockets of students who need it the most, often from working class backgrounds, without increasing their debt.
We are also investing £20 million this year into Uni Connect to build local partnerships between schools, colleges and employers. Whether a young person chooses a degree or a trade, their journey must be determined by by merit and by their potential. Never by whether they have to change their voice or pretend to be someone else in order to fit in. And as Minister for equalities with a responsibility on race and women, I know that those. In this House will know how important it is that this government is working to ensure that whoever you are, wherever you come from, uh, Britain is a country that will respect your contribution.
That is a guiding principle of the work we are doing in this Labour government and the Equality Act 2010, brought together and built upon 40 years of hard won progress. And while the Act may not directly reference place or accent based inequality, its protections against discrimination related to sex, race and age frequently intersect with those issues, and intersectionality also matters very much, because what we also know is that accent ism can intersect with race and gender. And for a working class woman, a regional accent can be unfairly, unfairly stereotyped as a lack of professionalism or authority.
And when an ethnic minority person speaks with a regional working class accent or a multi-ethnic dialect like multicultural London English, they face a double layer of prejudice. And these are based on evidence that we cannot ignore. But it's also important that we recognise the importance of rewarding talent, which is why our gender pay gap reporting will be built on to introduce mandatory ethnic ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting. And to close, sir Roger, an important step in this space will also be our commitment to ensure that everyone can succeed, no matter their background, and we will be working to commence the socio economic duty on public bodies in section one of the Equality Act, to require public authorities to put addressing socio economic disadvantage at the heart of their strategic decision making.
And there will be more on that to follow. So let me again thank the honourable member. My honourable friend the member for, uh, for. How to say also how impactful this debate has been and why it is a clarion call for a fundamental culture shift so that we start to see a world in which everyone can succeed based on their talents, their drive, their potential, never held back by their background, their postcode, or the sound of their voice. We need our world class institutions, our elite universities, our media, and our employers to stop listening so much to people's accents and how they speak and start listening much more to what they have to say.
Thank you.
And it is a mark of it being its time that it has captured the imagination of Parliament so effectively and so powerfully, and is already, I think, achieving the goals that the honourable member wanted in wanting to see that important culture change. A shift in attitudes and an understanding that where accent ism may be holding back social mobility, it is our responsibility to do all that we can to tackle it. And I also want to pay tribute to professor Rob Drummond and Doctor Amanda Cole, sir Roger and the accent ISM project for their Westminster Voices initiative, as well as their other important work in this field, particularly that this is English project with the British Council, which champions the very powerful idea that English language belongs to everyone who speaks it in all its rich, diverse and indeed regional variations.
And too often debates in this House are defined by columns of statistics, spreadsheets and policy levers. But today, my honourable friend and all who have taken part in this debate are giving our debate a rare and special thing. The place, the space to tell stories, to talk about identity and belonging, and what it can be like for our constituents to navigate modern Britain. I do want to, uh. Some of the, um, uh, the points that were raised in the debate, including how, um, accents have such an important relationship to identity, how accents.
From also what has been shared, how they can be a barrier. Um, the importance of recognising that everyone has an accent, uh, and that there is, as my honourable friend said, no linguistic basis for a hierarchy of accents. And where we are starting to see through the research that life chances may be defined by background with accent bias. It is incredibly important for us to tackle that unconscious bias, and it is important to see that as what my honourable friend described. Um, importance for tackling culture.
Um, that is driving that and also making sure that we are looking at the importance of tackling it to encourage the confidence of young people and not result in a lack of confidence for young people in them feeling able to achieve their ambitions. And I do want to thank the honourable members for. Sanford, York. Wolverhampton, North East, uh, Blyth and Ashington, Stourbridge and also the front bench, uh, spokes, uh, spokes women today. Uh, and and indeed, um, the honourable members for Doncaster East, Glasgow South and East Londonderry for their contributions.
And just to highlight a couple of things, which I will also refer to during the course of my remarks. Um the, the message that to young people being told to soften their accents, uh, came across from across the UK, uh, in this contribution. And I will say to the honourable member for Strangford, uh, in his very relatable point on Hansard, uh, that I have found that Hounslow has also fallen into that and needing some clarity on place names and names. But it is important that we get that right.
And it is important that Hansard records correctly, because it is then on record for posterity. Everyone wants their name spelt right, their places spelt right, and that is important for respect. Um, and so I'm grateful for Hansard to checking with us, um, and making sure that there is, um, an important and, and an accurate representation. Uh, but I will also, um. Uh, recognise, um, in other contributions, um, that attitudes such as we have heard about do belong in the history books, as my hon.
Friend the member for York outer, um, has shared, uh, and also I'm grateful that he bravely risked controversy in his, uh, in his comments, in his speeches that were in his speech that I think were important for the House. Um, about, um, uh. Local dialects and language. Uh, but also for relaying his experience at Oxford. And that was incredibly important for this House and for his constituents. Uh, and I am grateful to the pupils of my honourable friend, the member for Wolverhampton North East.
Um, her pupil spoke for all of us on the importance of seeing um people with uh, who represent them, who look like them, who sound like them in this house. Um, I will make further comments, but I do want to, um, continue with some of my remarks as well too, because what the Sutton trust research also demonstrated in that landmark, um, report. Was why this really matters because they're speaking up. Uh, report states that accent remains the primary single signal of socio economic status in this country.
And some of their research has been shared in this debate. But I also just wanted to pull out a few, um, of their findings, which around how 35% of university students feel deeply self-conscious about their accent and 41% from the north of England fear their voice will negatively affect their future success. I was grateful as well for the contribution from my honourable friend for Blyth and Ashington, and I think I have had conversations with him after he's had a pint or two. Uh, he does speak much faster.
Uh, but I would say that that was, you know, a really powerful contribution. Um, and an important one and one that I hope will be replayed across the northeast. Um, because, um, it did share why it's so important, uh, to be proud of your accent, to be proud of who you are and why we need the confidence in young people, particularly in what we see in the data from the North East, to know that all opportunities should be open to them. And it is important to have that respect for each other.
Um, but also shockingly, and this is, I think, a really staggering statistic that nearly 30% of senior managers from working class backgrounds report having their, um, having been openly mocked for their accent in the workplace. And as this data shows, accent ism remains an outdated snobbery that reduces, um, a person's intellect, capability and potential to their accent and the way that they speak. Um, that is unacceptable. And it is important to be shining a new light on the issue, uh, that for generations, um, the message has been to those who want to maybe enter public life or elite professions.
It's been that if you want to get on, you must sound like everybody else. We know that when Margaret Thatcher became leader of her party in the 1970s, she famously underwent intensive elocution lessons with a tutor from the National Theatre Authority. Had to sound a certain way, and the message, particularly at that time, was, if you wanted power, you had to shed your origins. Uh, but, um, making it shouldn't mean, as my hon. Friend for York outer made in. His powerful contribution leaving part of you behind decades later, we must recognise.
While noting the much greater diversity of this place and our country, that progress can and must still be made. I may say, sir Roger that. It could be that progress is. We find it accelerates, uh, with Manchester, Manchester tourism, uh, becoming a part of our national conversation. Studies also regularly show that regional accents such as Welsh or Yorkshire, are rated by the public. Interestingly, as also trustworthy, warm and honest. Yet when those same studies measure perceived intelligence or employability, standard Southern English and received Pronunciation, received pronunciation invariably then top the metrics.
We are effectively telling working class people, we trust you to work on the front line in our schools and NHS, but we do not trust you to lead our boardrooms or teach in our elite universities, or perhaps to represent us in this place. And yet the diversity of British speech is a mark of our cultural richness. Our language is vibrant and alive, and depending on where you stand in this country, a bread roll is a cob. I may get these accents. Uh, maybe in a house or accent.
A bread roll is a cob, a bap, a balm or a stottie or a muffin. But no matter what you call it, it's still pretty tasty. Um, and to flatten our regional dialects into a single homogenised corporate drone is to strip Britain of its character. Now, I want to just say a few words about why this debate really matters here, sir Roger, because Parliament is a workplace, but it is also the engine room of our democracy. If we genuinely believe in representation, then that representation must extend to how the chamber sounds.
Our constituents do not want a parliament of homogenous voices. They want to hear their own lives, their regions, their communities, reflected from the green benches and every part of debate debating across this House. And when a member stands up in any debate in the House and speaks with their own unvarnished accent, whether they represent constituencies the North East, Yorkshire, the Midlands, the Black Country, North Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, um or working class London, um, Essex and Sussex has also reflected in this debate. They are undertaking on equal terms their democratic duty in this House.
They are telling every young person or constituent in their communities who are watching at home, your voice belongs in the rooms where power resides. And social mobility, as I would agree with, uh, the honourable, the Right Honourable member, social mobility should not mean conformity. And indeed, I want to also highlight that these barriers do not start at the doors of this house. We see them much earlier when working class young people arrive at our world leading universities. They have worked, sir Roger staggeringly hard to earn their places.
Yet the culture shock can be. They face is frequently linguistic, met with eyebrows or mimicking, as has also been relayed very powerfully in this debate. We also do want to take practical action to challenge some of this and to change access to opportunity. That's why, and far from limiting and lowering ambition, as has been referenced in this House from 2028, I am proud that we are reintroducing means tested maintenance grants of up to £1,000 a year, putting vital cash back into the pockets of students who need it the most, often from working class backgrounds, without increasing their debt.
We are also investing £20 million this year into Uni Connect to build local partnerships between schools, colleges and employers. Whether a young person chooses a degree or a trade, their journey must be determined by by merit and by their potential. Never by whether they have to change their voice or pretend to be someone else in order to fit in. And as Minister for equalities with a responsibility on race and women, I know that those. In this House will know how important it is that this government is working to ensure that whoever you are, wherever you come from, uh, Britain is a country that will respect your contribution.
That is a guiding principle of the work we are doing in this Labour government and the Equality Act 2010, brought together and built upon 40 years of hard won progress. And while the Act may not directly reference place or accent based inequality, its protections against discrimination related to sex, race and age frequently intersect with those issues, and intersectionality also matters very much, because what we also know is that accent ism can intersect with race and gender. And for a working class woman, a regional accent can be unfairly, unfairly stereotyped as a lack of professionalism or authority.
And when an ethnic minority person speaks with a regional working class accent or a multi-ethnic dialect like multicultural London English, they face a double layer of prejudice. And these are based on evidence that we cannot ignore. But it's also important that we recognise the importance of rewarding talent, which is why our gender pay gap reporting will be built on to introduce mandatory ethnic ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting. And to close, sir Roger, an important step in this space will also be our commitment to ensure that everyone can succeed, no matter their background, and we will be working to commence the socio economic duty on public bodies in section one of the Equality Act, to require public authorities to put addressing socio economic disadvantage at the heart of their strategic decision making.
And there will be more on that to follow. So let me again thank the honourable member. My honourable friend the member for, uh, for. How to say also how impactful this debate has been and why it is a clarion call for a fundamental culture shift so that we start to see a world in which everyone can succeed based on their talents, their drive, their potential, never held back by their background, their postcode, or the sound of their voice. We need our world class institutions, our elite universities, our media, and our employers to stop listening so much to people's accents and how they speak and start listening much more to what they have to say.
Thank you.
10:56
10:56
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Sir Roger, for chairing this, uh, this debate, it's been enlightening, humorous, but also serious in its cause. And can I thank also the Minister for her response and acknowledging the importance of ensuring accents are not a barrier. Um, and to tackle the unconscious bias that she mentioned that exists in society today. Um, can I also thank all members that contributed to this debate?Um, as I said, it was humorous. Um, but also serious. And can I thank the member, the honourable member for Strangford.
Um, he's a coined a new term. I don't know if it's a new term, but phonetic rapper I am going to use again. Um, can I thank the members for York and Wolverhampton North East, who spoke so passionately about the barriers in education and in particular university. And it's something I think we need to continue that conversation on. Um, and again, the member for Blyth and Ashington and Stourbridge, um, they both spoke about how the giants from our industrial past has shaped our accents and dialects from the factories, the mills and the mines, from communities such as ours.
Um, so I'd just like to close the debate to, to say to the minister that, um, I'll enjoy continuing the conversation with an accent about how we close these barriers.
Um, he's a coined a new term. I don't know if it's a new term, but phonetic rapper I am going to use again. Um, can I thank the members for York and Wolverhampton North East, who spoke so passionately about the barriers in education and in particular university. And it's something I think we need to continue that conversation on. Um, and again, the member for Blyth and Ashington and Stourbridge, um, they both spoke about how the giants from our industrial past has shaped our accents and dialects from the factories, the mills and the mines, from communities such as ours.
Um, so I'd just like to close the debate to, to say to the minister that, um, I'll enjoy continuing the conversation with an accent about how we close these barriers.
10:58
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Thank you very much. The whole house will have appreciated the contribution by Stanford's own answer to Professor Henry Higgins. The question is that this House has considered regional accents and social mobility. Many of that opinion say I don't really know. The ayes have it. Order!Quick!Changeover, please. Before I call Esther McVey to move the motion and the Minister to respond, can I remind members that they can only make a speech with the prior permission of the member in charge of the debate?And no, no, no such notice has been given there.
Will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention, with 30 minutes debates. Esther McVey to move the motion.
Will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention, with 30 minutes debates. Esther McVey to move the motion.
11:01
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Thank you, sir Roger Gale, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I beg to move that this House has considered the impact of the peak cluster pipeline and project, and it is good to see the minister in his place. I do hope at the end of today's debate, I get some meaningful answers from him on this project. Up until now, that has all been proved to be too elusive from his department and this government. The peak cluster is a carbon capture and storage project.
It will take carbon dioxide from cement and lime plants in Derbyshire and Staffordshire, pressurize it and then transfer it 125 miles across Cheshire, Wirral and then off the coast from where it will be stored beneath the seabed. The project is wrong minded and wholly unnecessary has which has been made clear to me by scientists and engineers. I will indeed.
It will take carbon dioxide from cement and lime plants in Derbyshire and Staffordshire, pressurize it and then transfer it 125 miles across Cheshire, Wirral and then off the coast from where it will be stored beneath the seabed. The project is wrong minded and wholly unnecessary has which has been made clear to me by scientists and engineers. I will indeed.
11:03
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Fully support. Efforts on behalf of her constituents, I have an understanding of the issues and. Does the honourable lady not agree that any final approval for the peak cluster project must include cast iron, legally binding guarantees to protect landowners rights, and further, that local environmental objections and community safety fears must be genuinely addressed, rather than just bypassed by central government.
11:04
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I agree with what the hon. Member has to say, but none of this has been forthcoming to the public. No matter how hard they try. And in fact, the public don't want it right across the region. It is. There has been demonstrations. Councils have voted against it. In fact, at a recent public meeting in Bailiff Close, close to one of the proposed pipeline routes, the failings were laid bare. The local communities of Cheshire, Wirral and Derbyshire know this and that is why they are calling for this project to be stopped.
The reason being, this project is completely unnecessary. It is a madness of a project, a net zero vanity project and I stand here today on behalf of all of those members of the public calling for the peak cluster project to be stopped. I call two for the government to answer the most basic of questions about the project, and then to stop treating the public like mushrooms, keeping in the dark and feeding them absolute rubbish. The government cannot dodge responsibility and accountability for this project, as it seeks to do by ducking answers from parliamentary questions or freedom of information.
In fact, last week I raised a point of order on the floor of the House about the woeful responses on this matter, only for the minister to reply. The project is nothing to do with government. It is a private project. Really, Minister. For if one delves a little bit deeper into the peak cluster project, it is revealed that this project has deep, direct, structural and financial links to government with the final sign off being from no other than the Secretary of State for energy.
And so if the government is still trying to say it has done, if this is the case, that it has done no estimate on the overall costs or that it has not worked out at all, how much of the bill will land on the taxpayer that the government has done no cost benefit analysis for it, that it has done no assessment of the environmental impact. In fact, it has not even bothered to work out whether this project is necessary at all, then that is a disgrace. If the government is really trying to say it has done no homework whatsoever on this project, then it really does need to do so.
Because if it did, it would come to the same conclusion as the public that it is not necessary, instead of which the government, in ignorance or in full throttle support, is pushing ahead with this project. In fact, it has deemed it a national, nationally significant infrastructure project, meaning that the local authorities cannot either approve or reject this project despite significant objections from its local constituents. Rather, it falls for the sign off by government. The storage of the carbon dioxide beneath the seabed will require approval from the North Sea Transition Authority, another government quango with responsibility for offshore carbon dioxide storage.
Wholly owned by the UK government. 28 I will indeed give way.
The reason being, this project is completely unnecessary. It is a madness of a project, a net zero vanity project and I stand here today on behalf of all of those members of the public calling for the peak cluster project to be stopped. I call two for the government to answer the most basic of questions about the project, and then to stop treating the public like mushrooms, keeping in the dark and feeding them absolute rubbish. The government cannot dodge responsibility and accountability for this project, as it seeks to do by ducking answers from parliamentary questions or freedom of information.
In fact, last week I raised a point of order on the floor of the House about the woeful responses on this matter, only for the minister to reply. The project is nothing to do with government. It is a private project. Really, Minister. For if one delves a little bit deeper into the peak cluster project, it is revealed that this project has deep, direct, structural and financial links to government with the final sign off being from no other than the Secretary of State for energy.
And so if the government is still trying to say it has done, if this is the case, that it has done no estimate on the overall costs or that it has not worked out at all, how much of the bill will land on the taxpayer that the government has done no cost benefit analysis for it, that it has done no assessment of the environmental impact. In fact, it has not even bothered to work out whether this project is necessary at all, then that is a disgrace. If the government is really trying to say it has done no homework whatsoever on this project, then it really does need to do so.
Because if it did, it would come to the same conclusion as the public that it is not necessary, instead of which the government, in ignorance or in full throttle support, is pushing ahead with this project. In fact, it has deemed it a national, nationally significant infrastructure project, meaning that the local authorities cannot either approve or reject this project despite significant objections from its local constituents. Rather, it falls for the sign off by government. The storage of the carbon dioxide beneath the seabed will require approval from the North Sea Transition Authority, another government quango with responsibility for offshore carbon dioxide storage.
Wholly owned by the UK government. 28 I will indeed give way.
11:10
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Surely she would agree. Thank you, sir Roger. Um, the North Sea Transition Authority deals with um many, many private sector companies around oil and gas drilling. And I agree with her that it's a it's a public quango, isn't it?But surely she would agree that it doesn't have responsibility over what shell or BP do in the North Sea any more than they have responsibility over what peat cluster may or may not do through through Cheshire and underneath the Liverpool Bay.
11:12
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I want to thank my neighbour for asking that question, because if he listens to the debate so far and the rest of the debate, he will see that the government is not it is not a private project. It has deep structural ties, financial ties and and sign off by the government. It is not, as he wrongly refers to it, as a shell or a BP. This is not true. This is the myth that we've got to dispel today in this chamber.
In fact, £28 million so far to fund the project. Nearly half of the money to date has come from the National Wealth Fund, which is wholly owned by the government. The National Wealth Fund own website, when announcing this project, said it has an important role to play in helping to amplify government's policy. And on the gov.uk website, the Energy Secretary cluster does a landmark investment. The issues I am raising are not highly technical or obscure. They are straight basic questions on safety, cost and the use of taxpayers money, and the cost.
Sir Roger is billions of pounds resting on the shoulders of the taxpayer. The amount spent today is in the region of about £60 million. And that's just to get to the point of planning permission, getting that secured. But the full construction costs are estimated to be £5 billion, although the full cost is likely to exceed that. And I'll give reference to a similar high net project, which has cost £2.5 billion for just 31km of new pipeline in comparison to 200km of.
Pipeline planned for the peak cluster. As the government has so far committed 28 million. Through the National Wealth Fund. Um, can the Minister say what process was followed before the National Wealth Fund invested in this project?How was it approved, and what role did the minister or ministers play in this?There are huge concerns about the cost effectiveness of the technology to. Last year, the Public Accounts Committee warned of a high degree of uncertainty over whether carbon capture project would deliver value for money.
So I can see why the government's ducking away and not doing anything here. The chief executive of Octopus Energy also questioned whether carbon capture represents a worthwhile use of taxpayers money, so surely the department responsible for energy infrastructure did a value for money assessment before committing public money to it?If so, what is that?Assessment?Residents that I have spoken to are rightly and understandably concerned about the health and safety hazards to what if a leak were to happen?What emergency procedures are in place?What assessments have been made of the risks to nearby communities and to the maritime environment?It could cause untold damage to agricultural land, sites of scientific interest and to some of our towns and villages.
It is ironic that the government considers this to be an environmental project, when it could very well, and is already destroying the environment. Laughable if it weren't so serious. And am I yet to receive any reassurances on those health and safety matters?No, I have not. Has the government even taken this into account?The the government cannot wash its hands of this project if something goes wrong, the public will want answers and. Another claim by this government and by some of the people who might be getting a.
Tenders from the government paid for by the taxpayer is that it will support around 3500 jobs. Well, what will those jobs actually be?How many will be permanent rather than temporary construction roles?How many will go to local people and how many will require specialist contractors brought in from elsewhere other than the UK and from overseas?Regarding the future of this project, how long is the infrastructure guaranteed for?I hear the pipes are only guaranteed for 30 years. Can the minister confirm or deny this?The North West should not be a dumping ground for carbon dioxide from not only elsewhere in the country, but elsewhere in the world.
Because while the project says it will initially be used to store carbon dioxide capture from Derbyshire and Staffordshire, it has been reported that the infrastructure will be designed to allow it to import and transport carbon dioxide from other countries in the future. Can the Minister confirm if these reports are correct, and what additional approval the government would then require to grant these permissions?All this project will do is store up problems for the future, for future generations to pay for, to deal with and to tackle with the physicists and scientists who have contact me mock the government's ignorance on this matter, saying carbon dioxide is needed.
And if the government really wants to do something, it could actually just plant some trees. But I'm afraid the government have been suckered into a multibillion pound waste of a project that the government, as we know, has absolutely no business acumen or know how at all. Before the minister rises to his feet and dismisses the questions I have asked, as he did last week from the floor of the House, saying, this government has nothing to do with this project, I will remind him again and he can reflect on this point.
The peak Cluster project has deep, direct, structural and financial links to the government, with the final sign off coming via a development consent order by the Secretary of State for energy, the private company. He refers to the Peak Cluster Limited. The government is a stakeholder in it. Local authorities cannot object to the project, as the government has deemed it a nationally significant infrastructure project. The money invested in it comes from the National Wealth Fund, wholly owned by the government. And with that in mind, will the government and the Minister kindly give some meaningful answers to this?If he cannot do it today, if he needs to go away and the government needs to go away and do some homework on them matter, then I will happily accept a written response.
But he cannot. The government cannot keep using obfuscation and excuses to try and hoodwink the public. The public demand answers today.
In fact, £28 million so far to fund the project. Nearly half of the money to date has come from the National Wealth Fund, which is wholly owned by the government. The National Wealth Fund own website, when announcing this project, said it has an important role to play in helping to amplify government's policy. And on the gov.uk website, the Energy Secretary cluster does a landmark investment. The issues I am raising are not highly technical or obscure. They are straight basic questions on safety, cost and the use of taxpayers money, and the cost.
Sir Roger is billions of pounds resting on the shoulders of the taxpayer. The amount spent today is in the region of about £60 million. And that's just to get to the point of planning permission, getting that secured. But the full construction costs are estimated to be £5 billion, although the full cost is likely to exceed that. And I'll give reference to a similar high net project, which has cost £2.5 billion for just 31km of new pipeline in comparison to 200km of.
Pipeline planned for the peak cluster. As the government has so far committed 28 million. Through the National Wealth Fund. Um, can the Minister say what process was followed before the National Wealth Fund invested in this project?How was it approved, and what role did the minister or ministers play in this?There are huge concerns about the cost effectiveness of the technology to. Last year, the Public Accounts Committee warned of a high degree of uncertainty over whether carbon capture project would deliver value for money.
So I can see why the government's ducking away and not doing anything here. The chief executive of Octopus Energy also questioned whether carbon capture represents a worthwhile use of taxpayers money, so surely the department responsible for energy infrastructure did a value for money assessment before committing public money to it?If so, what is that?Assessment?Residents that I have spoken to are rightly and understandably concerned about the health and safety hazards to what if a leak were to happen?What emergency procedures are in place?What assessments have been made of the risks to nearby communities and to the maritime environment?It could cause untold damage to agricultural land, sites of scientific interest and to some of our towns and villages.
It is ironic that the government considers this to be an environmental project, when it could very well, and is already destroying the environment. Laughable if it weren't so serious. And am I yet to receive any reassurances on those health and safety matters?No, I have not. Has the government even taken this into account?The the government cannot wash its hands of this project if something goes wrong, the public will want answers and. Another claim by this government and by some of the people who might be getting a.
Tenders from the government paid for by the taxpayer is that it will support around 3500 jobs. Well, what will those jobs actually be?How many will be permanent rather than temporary construction roles?How many will go to local people and how many will require specialist contractors brought in from elsewhere other than the UK and from overseas?Regarding the future of this project, how long is the infrastructure guaranteed for?I hear the pipes are only guaranteed for 30 years. Can the minister confirm or deny this?The North West should not be a dumping ground for carbon dioxide from not only elsewhere in the country, but elsewhere in the world.
Because while the project says it will initially be used to store carbon dioxide capture from Derbyshire and Staffordshire, it has been reported that the infrastructure will be designed to allow it to import and transport carbon dioxide from other countries in the future. Can the Minister confirm if these reports are correct, and what additional approval the government would then require to grant these permissions?All this project will do is store up problems for the future, for future generations to pay for, to deal with and to tackle with the physicists and scientists who have contact me mock the government's ignorance on this matter, saying carbon dioxide is needed.
And if the government really wants to do something, it could actually just plant some trees. But I'm afraid the government have been suckered into a multibillion pound waste of a project that the government, as we know, has absolutely no business acumen or know how at all. Before the minister rises to his feet and dismisses the questions I have asked, as he did last week from the floor of the House, saying, this government has nothing to do with this project, I will remind him again and he can reflect on this point.
The peak Cluster project has deep, direct, structural and financial links to the government, with the final sign off coming via a development consent order by the Secretary of State for energy, the private company. He refers to the Peak Cluster Limited. The government is a stakeholder in it. Local authorities cannot object to the project, as the government has deemed it a nationally significant infrastructure project. The money invested in it comes from the National Wealth Fund, wholly owned by the government. And with that in mind, will the government and the Minister kindly give some meaningful answers to this?If he cannot do it today, if he needs to go away and the government needs to go away and do some homework on them matter, then I will happily accept a written response.
But he cannot. The government cannot keep using obfuscation and excuses to try and hoodwink the public. The public demand answers today.
11:25
11:26
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Thank you, sir. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, although I will say that I think the debate has probably not been conducted in the best way to actually discuss this particular topic. And I draw her attention to the adjournment debate that was held recently, which I think she wasn't able to attend by her colleague, the member for Chester South and Eddisbury.
11:26
11:26
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
That's not what I said at all, sir. Roger. The debate has been perfectly in order, but I don't think the public watching this will have got very much from it. And that's my assessment of this, and I'm sure many others that have been watching. And as I was saying, I'd encourage her if she didn't see the debate on this topic recently to to look at the remarks from her honourable friend who raised, rightly, concerns about local communities. But in a way, I think that was slightly more based, in fact, rather than rhetoric.
I will come to her questions. First of all, let me no, I won't just now because she's just given a speech. I think if I can respond to some of her points. I. Of all. First of all, let me just respond to the point that she's now accused me twice in this house of being elusive and of obfuscation. I have answered every single one of her written parliamentary questions. I am not responsible for the fact that she may or may not like the answers that I give, but I have answered every single one of her questions, and I have responded to her point of order in the House of Commons, and I resent the implication that I have not done that because I take my responsibilities to Parliament very seriously.
Can I just firstly, just maybe come back a little bit from the peak cluster itself to just make some points around why carbon capture is important?And I say that partly because carbon capture has been a technology that's been around for a long time. But under the last government, the government did that. She served briefly as as ministers in various roles. It drove forward the investment in carbon capture, which we have continued. This isn't something that has just appeared in July last year.
It's a technology that governments have recognised will play an important part in decarbonising our. Energy system, but it is also really important for particular parts of our industry, which are now competing against imports from other parts of Europe that are being able to use CCUs. Cement is a particular example which the peat cluster project is looking at, but other clusters which the previous government supported, like the Viking cluster and the Acorn cluster, which we are taking forward, is important. And decarbonizing cement might not seem like a particularly important topic to a lot of people, but it's actually absolutely critical.
Around 40% of UK cement and lime production takes place in Derbyshire and Staffordshire. Cement is one of the foundational heavy industries that underpins growth around our economy. It's one of the most important substances we have to grow our economy. In fact, the industry was recognised in the industrial strategy as a foundational input for growth, and it's an economically important sector. Around £350 million in gross value added and thousands of jobs in that industry. The challenge we have is how we future proof that industry for the future, because there are a number of businesses who now want to buy low carbon cement in order to construct their projects, but we also have cement production elsewhere in the world that is low carbon.
And therefore, in order for us to be competitive in that market, it is important that we find ways to do that as well. As I said in the adjournment debate, there are other technologies around how we might create low carbon cement, but they are not at a stage yet where that deployment can be delivered at scale. And so carbon capture is important. There is no route to net zero that does not involve carbon capture technology. And just a reminder why net zero is important.
I know not everyone will agree on this, but given the fact that we are living through climate change at a scale at which we as a country should be taking seriously our responsibilities to do everything we can. This is an important part of how we tackle it, but it is also an economic opportunity, not just creating thousands of jobs in in carbon capture, but protecting thousands of jobs in the heavy industry that we do not want to see leaving this country to go elsewhere. And so it plays a strategically important part broadly in how we are going to deliver net zero, but also our economic growth and industrial strategy.
Now, um, I do want to come just specifically to some of her points on the peat cluster, but I would just first of all, repeat a point that I made in the debate, the adjournment debate, and which she has, has made rightly around the voice of local communities. And just clarify, first of all, her point about the Nsip regime, which I think was designed to try and suggest the point that she made, and maybe I misunderstood her, that somehow the government has contrived for the Secretary of State to make a decision on a particular project.
The the Nationally Significant Infrastructure project regime exists and indeed existed under the previous government. To recognise that there are some projects of a scale of which local councils can individually decide on, and that should be decided at a national level. That is a process that's been undertaken for many, many years. I want to be really clear, though, that does not in any way suggest that any outcome from a process, not only has there been no decision from government on this project, but it has not even been submitted for a decision by government at this stage.
It is a long way from that process. So I'll give way. Just I give way in just a second and I'll give way in just a second. And so the point about the Nsip regime, I think, is quite wrong. Decisions are made based on applications that are submitted. No application has been submitted and they are based on all of the facts, including. And I'll come back to this point after I have given way to her on the community engagement that takes place, which has to demonstrate genuine community engagement, learning from the views of communities, not just a listening exercise, but a shaping exercise that hasn't been concluded yet.
I will come to her questions. First of all, let me no, I won't just now because she's just given a speech. I think if I can respond to some of her points. I. Of all. First of all, let me just respond to the point that she's now accused me twice in this house of being elusive and of obfuscation. I have answered every single one of her written parliamentary questions. I am not responsible for the fact that she may or may not like the answers that I give, but I have answered every single one of her questions, and I have responded to her point of order in the House of Commons, and I resent the implication that I have not done that because I take my responsibilities to Parliament very seriously.
Can I just firstly, just maybe come back a little bit from the peak cluster itself to just make some points around why carbon capture is important?And I say that partly because carbon capture has been a technology that's been around for a long time. But under the last government, the government did that. She served briefly as as ministers in various roles. It drove forward the investment in carbon capture, which we have continued. This isn't something that has just appeared in July last year.
It's a technology that governments have recognised will play an important part in decarbonising our. Energy system, but it is also really important for particular parts of our industry, which are now competing against imports from other parts of Europe that are being able to use CCUs. Cement is a particular example which the peat cluster project is looking at, but other clusters which the previous government supported, like the Viking cluster and the Acorn cluster, which we are taking forward, is important. And decarbonizing cement might not seem like a particularly important topic to a lot of people, but it's actually absolutely critical.
Around 40% of UK cement and lime production takes place in Derbyshire and Staffordshire. Cement is one of the foundational heavy industries that underpins growth around our economy. It's one of the most important substances we have to grow our economy. In fact, the industry was recognised in the industrial strategy as a foundational input for growth, and it's an economically important sector. Around £350 million in gross value added and thousands of jobs in that industry. The challenge we have is how we future proof that industry for the future, because there are a number of businesses who now want to buy low carbon cement in order to construct their projects, but we also have cement production elsewhere in the world that is low carbon.
And therefore, in order for us to be competitive in that market, it is important that we find ways to do that as well. As I said in the adjournment debate, there are other technologies around how we might create low carbon cement, but they are not at a stage yet where that deployment can be delivered at scale. And so carbon capture is important. There is no route to net zero that does not involve carbon capture technology. And just a reminder why net zero is important.
I know not everyone will agree on this, but given the fact that we are living through climate change at a scale at which we as a country should be taking seriously our responsibilities to do everything we can. This is an important part of how we tackle it, but it is also an economic opportunity, not just creating thousands of jobs in in carbon capture, but protecting thousands of jobs in the heavy industry that we do not want to see leaving this country to go elsewhere. And so it plays a strategically important part broadly in how we are going to deliver net zero, but also our economic growth and industrial strategy.
Now, um, I do want to come just specifically to some of her points on the peat cluster, but I would just first of all, repeat a point that I made in the debate, the adjournment debate, and which she has, has made rightly around the voice of local communities. And just clarify, first of all, her point about the Nsip regime, which I think was designed to try and suggest the point that she made, and maybe I misunderstood her, that somehow the government has contrived for the Secretary of State to make a decision on a particular project.
The the Nationally Significant Infrastructure project regime exists and indeed existed under the previous government. To recognise that there are some projects of a scale of which local councils can individually decide on, and that should be decided at a national level. That is a process that's been undertaken for many, many years. I want to be really clear, though, that does not in any way suggest that any outcome from a process, not only has there been no decision from government on this project, but it has not even been submitted for a decision by government at this stage.
It is a long way from that process. So I'll give way. Just I give way in just a second and I'll give way in just a second. And so the point about the Nsip regime, I think, is quite wrong. Decisions are made based on applications that are submitted. No application has been submitted and they are based on all of the facts, including. And I'll come back to this point after I have given way to her on the community engagement that takes place, which has to demonstrate genuine community engagement, learning from the views of communities, not just a listening exercise, but a shaping exercise that hasn't been concluded yet.
11:37
11:37
11:38
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
I think I just said that in my remarks, sir. Roger that. The nationally significant infrastructure regime exists to make decisions at a national level by different secretaries of state. In this case, it is an energy project. So, yes, it's made by the Secretary of State for energy, but she seems to be implying that somehow that is a predetermined outcome. It hasn't even been submitted for consideration. So I just think that's not a sensible position to take before the application has even been submitted.
She also cast aspersions on the North Sea Transition Authority, which is an independent regulator, was the Oil and Gas Authority for many years. It's now the North Sea Transition Authority. It has operated under governments of all political persuasions to make decisions about how we steward the North Sea and how we steward the licensing regime for oil and gas, but also increasingly for carbon capture. It makes those decisions independent from government. Ministers do not interfere in the decision making of the nsta, and again, she seems to be drawing conclusions from an independent regulator.
She also cast aspersions on the North Sea Transition Authority, which is an independent regulator, was the Oil and Gas Authority for many years. It's now the North Sea Transition Authority. It has operated under governments of all political persuasions to make decisions about how we steward the North Sea and how we steward the licensing regime for oil and gas, but also increasingly for carbon capture. It makes those decisions independent from government. Ministers do not interfere in the decision making of the nsta, and again, she seems to be drawing conclusions from an independent regulator.
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:41
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Therefore no ministerial decision. But that community engagement is a really important part of that decision making process. My concern on behalf of my constituents is that they don't feel engaged with. They don't feel that they have a voice in this process, and they don't feel that they're getting information at all. I appreciate it is not the minister's job to provide that information, but can he be extremely clear about the level of engagement that is required?
11:41
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
My hon. Friend and this was the point. I was going to come to. Community engagement is absolutely critical. It is an absolutely firm expectation from ministers that any of these kind of large scale infrastructure projects should have meaningful engagement with communities, but it is also absolutely critical for any project that wants to succeed in the process, to demonstrate not only that, they have carried out consultation, but actually that that has a meaningful impact on the shaping of the project. And that is one of the key factors in decision making in nsip applications.
I wanted to echo a point that was made in the adjournment debate on this subject, and many members have raised with me outside of debates in Parliament as well, about the need for extensive consultation on this particular project. I think criticisms have been levelled at the peak cluster that that consultation has not yet been good enough with communities. I understand that they are planning to do more, but it is not for me to direct them. To do that, they must engage meaningfully with communities because once a proposal has been submitted, if that engagement has not been meaningful, it will count against that project.
Does that?There is a wider argument. I will just just a second. There is a wider argument here, though, about just in principle. It is important that the government has said this from day one coming into office, that we build things as a country again, that we do not become a country that spends decades talking about important infrastructure but never builds it. But that should never be done without proper engagement with communities and communities feeling like they have had their say, and that the say has been listened to.
And this, this project is one example I would give of that, where much more of that has to happen, and I will give way to my honourable friend.
I wanted to echo a point that was made in the adjournment debate on this subject, and many members have raised with me outside of debates in Parliament as well, about the need for extensive consultation on this particular project. I think criticisms have been levelled at the peak cluster that that consultation has not yet been good enough with communities. I understand that they are planning to do more, but it is not for me to direct them. To do that, they must engage meaningfully with communities because once a proposal has been submitted, if that engagement has not been meaningful, it will count against that project.
Does that?There is a wider argument. I will just just a second. There is a wider argument here, though, about just in principle. It is important that the government has said this from day one coming into office, that we build things as a country again, that we do not become a country that spends decades talking about important infrastructure but never builds it. But that should never be done without proper engagement with communities and communities feeling like they have had their say, and that the say has been listened to.
And this, this project is one example I would give of that, where much more of that has to happen, and I will give way to my honourable friend.
11:45
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you, sir Roger, and thank the Minister for giving way. I think the important thing for for my residents is, um is this does this project work and is it safe?I think those are the two key points I know my hon. Friend for Wirral West is in his place. I know he's been um, challenging these plans on behalf of his community, as have I, as has my hon. Friend the member for Congleton. And I think the important thing here is that this isn't a done deal and that, um, Pete Cluster needs to listen and they need to act on the community's concerns.
Would he agree with all of those points?
Would he agree with all of those points?
11:46
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Well, let me come to both of those points. First of all, let me just start with this point around this somehow being a government project, it is absolutely not. And that is why my answers to the right hon. Lady reflected the fact that private developers across the country right now in a whole range of sectors, are developing private propositions for all sorts of things until they come to government, either with a request for funding or as part of the Nsip regime. The government does not have a view on whether they are government projects or not.
They are not delivered by government. It is a private investment and therefore it is for those those companies engaged in it to to put forward their proposition, and then government will take a view on it, as we do in all nationally significant infrastructure projects. So that's the first point about being a government project. It is absolutely not. And it is not one of the clusters that the government has initially taken forward. We are taking forward two clusters initially to drive forward carbon capture and storage.
The peak cluster is not one of them. And and and I make that point again on the record. The second point my hon. Friend makes, which I wanted to come back to, is this question about safety. And it is really important to make the case that carbon capture and storage is not a new technology. It has been tried and tested across industry and across power generation at scale for a long time. Geological carbon dioxide storage has been in operation for decades.
Norway has stored CO2 since 1996. More than 20 million tonnes stored so far, and our regulatory regime exists precisely to make sure that there is a safe and robust regulatory regime to ensure those high safety standards as there possibly can be, and that will be at the forefront of any decisions about how we take this forward. Safety is absolutely critical, but it is not some novel technology. I'll give you in just a second. It is not a novel technology in which we don't understand the safety considerations.
It is managed, understood and regulated effectively at the moment. I'll give way.
They are not delivered by government. It is a private investment and therefore it is for those those companies engaged in it to to put forward their proposition, and then government will take a view on it, as we do in all nationally significant infrastructure projects. So that's the first point about being a government project. It is absolutely not. And it is not one of the clusters that the government has initially taken forward. We are taking forward two clusters initially to drive forward carbon capture and storage.
The peak cluster is not one of them. And and and I make that point again on the record. The second point my hon. Friend makes, which I wanted to come back to, is this question about safety. And it is really important to make the case that carbon capture and storage is not a new technology. It has been tried and tested across industry and across power generation at scale for a long time. Geological carbon dioxide storage has been in operation for decades.
Norway has stored CO2 since 1996. More than 20 million tonnes stored so far, and our regulatory regime exists precisely to make sure that there is a safe and robust regulatory regime to ensure those high safety standards as there possibly can be, and that will be at the forefront of any decisions about how we take this forward. Safety is absolutely critical, but it is not some novel technology. I'll give you in just a second. It is not a novel technology in which we don't understand the safety considerations.
It is managed, understood and regulated effectively at the moment. I'll give way.
11:47
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
The minister might not know this, and I see the member for Wirral West in his seat, and I appreciate he might not be able to speak today. But just to confirm that Wirral Council in its entirety across all parties, objected to the Peak cluster project. Does the minister know that with his P s sitting behind him?
11:47
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
I am aware of that and councils can take their view on a whole range of things. I don't think there's anything controversial about a council making their views known on on a particular project. They're very welcome to do that. That is why we have democratically elected councillors in this country. Can I just come to the to to one final point. The Right Honourable Lady has made a number of times and other members have as well, about government funding for this project.
And I know she draws a connection and I understand entirely why, between investment. The National Wealth Fund makes. And the fact that it is wholly owned by by the government. So I understand the connection, but it is equally not correct to say that that represents my Department or the government's financial support for a particular project, the National Wealth Fund was set up to provide investment for important infrastructure projects, and they make the decisions independently from government. Ministers do not. I have not seen or signed off any funding applications for the peak cluster.
NWF makes those decisions in their own framework, as set out by by the Treasury and by Parliament, and it should not be taken as any indication of my department's support or otherwise for for particular projects. Of course, I will very, very briefly.
And I know she draws a connection and I understand entirely why, between investment. The National Wealth Fund makes. And the fact that it is wholly owned by by the government. So I understand the connection, but it is equally not correct to say that that represents my Department or the government's financial support for a particular project, the National Wealth Fund was set up to provide investment for important infrastructure projects, and they make the decisions independently from government. Ministers do not. I have not seen or signed off any funding applications for the peak cluster.
NWF makes those decisions in their own framework, as set out by by the Treasury and by Parliament, and it should not be taken as any indication of my department's support or otherwise for for particular projects. Of course, I will very, very briefly.
11:47
11:47
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Well, I can write to her with the specifics of the investment committee, but the National Wealth Fund is set up independent from government to take stakes in projects on behalf of the British public. So we would own a stake in some of these projects, instead of just handing out grants to things, we would actually own part of it as an investment committee that sets up these decisions. And the Treasury is the body responsible for the national wealth fund. But I can write to her with the with the specifics on it.
No, I'm going to very briefly.
No, I'm going to very briefly.
11:47
11:47
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
The principle of the National Wealth Fund is that we can make financial investments in projects. And in some of those cases, that means taking an equity stake. Sometimes it doesn't, but sometimes it does. And the National Wealth Fund has been around for long enough. I am sure members are aware of that. Can I just, um, close, sir?Roger?Partly by reflecting something from from the adjournment debate from the honourable member for Chester South and Eddisbury and a number of other members who spoke in that debate, that I just want to say I understand any large scale infrastructure project comes with concerns from local communities, and it is right and proper that local communities can voice those concerns in any way that they can.
I would say that that has to be a respectful exchange of views, and I know that some of that has not been in so far, but I also understand why there is a strength of feeling on this, and that's absolutely understandable. I think that exchange of views is important, and everyone who is listening to this debate or not should know that the government takes very seriously that community engagement, and therefore we would expect to see meaningful engagement with communities. But I would also say at the same time that the government has set out an ambitious plan to decarbonise our economy.
That is important for a whole range of reasons, but it is also a hugely important economic opportunity for us as a country, decarbonising hard to abate sectors such as cement and lime, which are critical to our economy, is difficult. CCUs is a route to do that. So it is not only essential for meeting our climate commitments, but it also economic opportunities that it offers. Future project proposals are subject to scrutiny and high standards, and a tough regulatory regime. And the government will look at all of this in the round on individual projects.
And I repeat the point that I made at the beginning, sir Roger, this is not a project that the government is driving forward. It is not a project that we are saying we support or don't support, because at this point in time, no proposal has come before us to do that. In due course, we will do that. And in the meantime, I encourage everyone in the local community, members of Parliament and others to engage with the process and for the peak cluster themselves to engage with the process.
I am just rounding up to engage with the process, and in the end, I hope that we will come to a view where communities do feel that they have been heard, where projects can move forward on their individual merits, and that will be part of a process when we come to it.
I would say that that has to be a respectful exchange of views, and I know that some of that has not been in so far, but I also understand why there is a strength of feeling on this, and that's absolutely understandable. I think that exchange of views is important, and everyone who is listening to this debate or not should know that the government takes very seriously that community engagement, and therefore we would expect to see meaningful engagement with communities. But I would also say at the same time that the government has set out an ambitious plan to decarbonise our economy.
That is important for a whole range of reasons, but it is also a hugely important economic opportunity for us as a country, decarbonising hard to abate sectors such as cement and lime, which are critical to our economy, is difficult. CCUs is a route to do that. So it is not only essential for meeting our climate commitments, but it also economic opportunities that it offers. Future project proposals are subject to scrutiny and high standards, and a tough regulatory regime. And the government will look at all of this in the round on individual projects.
And I repeat the point that I made at the beginning, sir Roger, this is not a project that the government is driving forward. It is not a project that we are saying we support or don't support, because at this point in time, no proposal has come before us to do that. In due course, we will do that. And in the meantime, I encourage everyone in the local community, members of Parliament and others to engage with the process and for the peak cluster themselves to engage with the process.
I am just rounding up to engage with the process, and in the end, I hope that we will come to a view where communities do feel that they have been heard, where projects can move forward on their individual merits, and that will be part of a process when we come to it.
11:47
14:31
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
With you in the chair today. And I beg to move that this House considers the matter. Thank you, Mr. Morrison. It is a pleasure to serve of the impact of waste management sites in local communities. For nearly three years, the people of Fleetwood have been forced to live with an intolerable smell from the Jameson Road landfill site. They have complained, protested and reported the effects of their health to the council. The Environment Agency, the government and to me as their Member of Parliament.
In March of this year alone, more than 4000 complaints were made. The central point I wish to name and at times recently it has been worse than ever. This year alone, more than 4000 complaints were made. The central point I wish to make today is that this is proof of a broken regulatory system that residents can make thousands of complaints that people locally in the process. And still the smell remains. And as time and at times recently, it has been worse than ever.
In March of this year alone, more than 4000 complaints were made. The central point I wish to make today is that this is proof of a broken regulatory system that residents can make thousands of complaints, that people and businesses can be forced to leave an area, all because of an operator acting unlawfully, and residents are still being left breathing the same foul air. If the system we have cannot prevent that from happening, then it is broken. If the purpose of the regulatory system is that it can record suffering, issue notices and hold meetings, but not prevent suffering by the local community, then the purpose and objectives of the system are the wrong way round.
In Fleetwood it is as simple as this. A private company is making money from stinking out the entire town and damaging livelihoods, breaking the law in the process. While the British state appears too weak, too slow and too broken to stop it. To give way.
In March of this year alone, more than 4000 complaints were made. The central point I wish to name and at times recently it has been worse than ever. This year alone, more than 4000 complaints were made. The central point I wish to make today is that this is proof of a broken regulatory system that residents can make thousands of complaints that people locally in the process. And still the smell remains. And as time and at times recently, it has been worse than ever.
In March of this year alone, more than 4000 complaints were made. The central point I wish to make today is that this is proof of a broken regulatory system that residents can make thousands of complaints, that people and businesses can be forced to leave an area, all because of an operator acting unlawfully, and residents are still being left breathing the same foul air. If the system we have cannot prevent that from happening, then it is broken. If the purpose of the regulatory system is that it can record suffering, issue notices and hold meetings, but not prevent suffering by the local community, then the purpose and objectives of the system are the wrong way round.
In Fleetwood it is as simple as this. A private company is making money from stinking out the entire town and damaging livelihoods, breaking the law in the process. While the British state appears too weak, too slow and too broken to stop it. To give way.
14:33
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you doctor. I'm very grateful to my honourable friend from Blackpool for giving way, as she knows, because we've discussed this many times. We in Newcastle I know all about the impact of profit over people, the consequences that landfill sites can have on the health and well-being of communities like hers. And like mine. She's right to say that, um, that this is a case of the state missing in action. And I look forward to working with her in the head to make sure we get the policies needed to keep our community safe, to keep our air clean, and to keep our people living in the situations we want them to.
14:33
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I agree, and hopefully we'll get that done today or start on the battle to do that. Observe absurdly, none of the waste is even delivered to fleet. None of the waste is even from Fleetwood. It seems that the waste can be transported from across the country to any landfill site. Happy to take it. This is a form of waste tourism coming from outside of Lancashire, harming people and the environment in the process. Of course. It's the working class northern communities like mine that are allowed to be the collateral damage, and it is not just Fleetwood.
Communities across the country have found themselves trapped in the same nightmare that we've experienced.
Communities across the country have found themselves trapped in the same nightmare that we've experienced.
14:34
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, and I congratulate her on securing this debate. But she she may be aware that in my constituency, Warwick and Leamington, we have a plastics recycling facility. It's been there for several years, but only when it opened up. Uh, did we suffer this awful issue of flies infestation across the town, and also this horrendous odour. And this is on an industrial estate, just normal industrial estate, but right immediate to a residential area.
Surely the Environment Agency should have had some sort of involvement in the decision to allow that to open.
Surely the Environment Agency should have had some sort of involvement in the decision to allow that to open.
14:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I do believe that you are correct. I agree with you. And again, this is something that I want to address today. Communities across the country have found themselves trapped in the same nightmare that we have experienced living beside waste sites, making complaint after complaint, and discovering that the system is better at documenting. Their suffering than ending it. People have reported headaches, nausea, nosebleeds, vomiting and breathing difficulties, with some requiring hospital treatment. The prolonged stress is also harming my residents mental health.
Children do not want to play outside. Parents have to keep the windows shut even during the recent hot weather. Businesses are losing customers and some residents are considering leaving town, in which they have lived all their lives. Others have already left. I also want to take this opportunity to raise the case of my honourable friend, the member for Carlisle, who unfortunately cannot join us today as she is attending a select committee. I know that her constituents also have had to keep their windows shut and stay indoors due to the awful smell coming from a landfill site.
My hon. Friend the member of Lancaster and Wyre has constituents who can also smell the landfill site from my constituency. As the order blows across the wire estuary to not end in Preesall. Nobody should have to live like this in Fleetwood or anywhere else. I want to share with this House some of the experiences residents have reported to me. One wrote to me to say that the landfill had affected her already severe COPD. She feels like a prisoner in her own home because when the smell is at its worst, she cannot leave her house for days on end.
Like many in Fleetwood, she moved to the area for the fresh sea air. Instead, she says, it has ruined her life. Another wrote to me to say that their family had to leave Fleetwood because of the smell. One member of the family, who suffers from M.S., found the additional strain impossible to cope with and that adult disabled daughter experienced throat irritation and disruptive sleep. They could not put up with it any longer and had to move away. That meant leaving behind their daughters established social and support network, registering with a risk.
But their monitoring site is not downwind of the site. It is to the west. So whilst that is welcome, the strong evidence of odour annoyance that they did acknowledge that people may be experiencing will cause headaches or throat irritation, stress and sleep disruption, and finding that exposure, whilst may be not as toxic as we expect, it is not acceptable, especially for people with respiratory conditions. The issue seems to be that the responsibility is completely fragmented. The Environment Agency monitors permit compliant UK HSA assesses the health risk, but the local authority considers the statutory nuisance.
So residents are having to navigate an institutional maze while the smell continues. So I would ask the minister whether she would introduce clearer joint response framework, with one leading responsible for coordinating, monitoring and health advice. But we also need to understand why this is happening. The Environment Agency identified an issue around the trommel fines, which contain the sulphur bearing materials that contribute to the hydrogen sulphate when mixed with organic waste, and the operators. Whilst they are changing the way they handle it.
What was extremely worrying to me was that when I asked, the Environment Agency did not seem to be aware of where the responsibility lies for testing, how much of the wrong type of materials are going into these trommel fines as they go on to the landfill site?So I would ask the minister to consider who is responsible for independent sampling and whether the compositional controls can be better implemented. And I also wish to raise a second issue, which is affecting the same constituents, which is this of the fires around lithium ion batteries.
These recent fires have been, in theory, caused by this type of issue, where crushing of these lithium ion batteries sparks a long term fire, which is very difficult to put out, and that is putting the waste workers at risk. The firefighters, as well as nearby residents. And I feel that the government must start to properly at enforce the existing retailer take back duties, but also try and make the return schemes more convenient and more visible so that producers are meeting the full cost of collection and treatment.
And finally, drawing on my 20 odd years as an architect and my experience in local government, I really do believe that as a planning system, we need to be properly assessing the risks. As was mentioned by a previous colleague of building our homes, schools and care facilities near these waste infrastructure waste sites are necessary, but communities should not be expected to tolerate unacceptable odour, risk of pollution and fire. And my constituents have shown extraordinary patience, but they should not be having to fight to be heard any more than those of the honourable member.
Thank you.
Children do not want to play outside. Parents have to keep the windows shut even during the recent hot weather. Businesses are losing customers and some residents are considering leaving town, in which they have lived all their lives. Others have already left. I also want to take this opportunity to raise the case of my honourable friend, the member for Carlisle, who unfortunately cannot join us today as she is attending a select committee. I know that her constituents also have had to keep their windows shut and stay indoors due to the awful smell coming from a landfill site.
My hon. Friend the member of Lancaster and Wyre has constituents who can also smell the landfill site from my constituency. As the order blows across the wire estuary to not end in Preesall. Nobody should have to live like this in Fleetwood or anywhere else. I want to share with this House some of the experiences residents have reported to me. One wrote to me to say that the landfill had affected her already severe COPD. She feels like a prisoner in her own home because when the smell is at its worst, she cannot leave her house for days on end.
Like many in Fleetwood, she moved to the area for the fresh sea air. Instead, she says, it has ruined her life. Another wrote to me to say that their family had to leave Fleetwood because of the smell. One member of the family, who suffers from M.S., found the additional strain impossible to cope with and that adult disabled daughter experienced throat irritation and disruptive sleep. They could not put up with it any longer and had to move away. That meant leaving behind their daughters established social and support network, registering with a risk.
But their monitoring site is not downwind of the site. It is to the west. So whilst that is welcome, the strong evidence of odour annoyance that they did acknowledge that people may be experiencing will cause headaches or throat irritation, stress and sleep disruption, and finding that exposure, whilst may be not as toxic as we expect, it is not acceptable, especially for people with respiratory conditions. The issue seems to be that the responsibility is completely fragmented. The Environment Agency monitors permit compliant UK HSA assesses the health risk, but the local authority considers the statutory nuisance.
So residents are having to navigate an institutional maze while the smell continues. So I would ask the minister whether she would introduce clearer joint response framework, with one leading responsible for coordinating, monitoring and health advice. But we also need to understand why this is happening. The Environment Agency identified an issue around the trommel fines, which contain the sulphur bearing materials that contribute to the hydrogen sulphate when mixed with organic waste, and the operators. Whilst they are changing the way they handle it.
What was extremely worrying to me was that when I asked, the Environment Agency did not seem to be aware of where the responsibility lies for testing, how much of the wrong type of materials are going into these trommel fines as they go on to the landfill site?So I would ask the minister to consider who is responsible for independent sampling and whether the compositional controls can be better implemented. And I also wish to raise a second issue, which is affecting the same constituents, which is this of the fires around lithium ion batteries.
These recent fires have been, in theory, caused by this type of issue, where crushing of these lithium ion batteries sparks a long term fire, which is very difficult to put out, and that is putting the waste workers at risk. The firefighters, as well as nearby residents. And I feel that the government must start to properly at enforce the existing retailer take back duties, but also try and make the return schemes more convenient and more visible so that producers are meeting the full cost of collection and treatment.
And finally, drawing on my 20 odd years as an architect and my experience in local government, I really do believe that as a planning system, we need to be properly assessing the risks. As was mentioned by a previous colleague of building our homes, schools and care facilities near these waste infrastructure waste sites are necessary, but communities should not be expected to tolerate unacceptable odour, risk of pollution and fire. And my constituents have shown extraordinary patience, but they should not be having to fight to be heard any more than those of the honourable member.
Thank you.
14:55
14:55
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you. Thank you very much for calling me. I'm grateful to my honourable friend from Blackpool for securing this debate. As I said in my intervention earlier, I know that she's committed to working on the issues that I spent much of my first couple of years in this House working on. In my first speech in this Westminster Hall, and as the MP for Newcastle under Lyme, I said that I will not stop going on about Walleys Quarry landfill site until it's closed caps and restored.
Its now closed. Capping is, broadly speaking, in operation and soon all being well will be able to get it restored. So local people in my community can use it. And I'm proud that after um, almost. A year and a half since the closure notice was issued, we finally chased the cowboy operator, that landfill site out of our town, and we shut Woolies for good because for far too long, my community was blighted by a marble fence, said. And as the minister knows, because how many times have I told her?Uh, by by respiratory irritation, headaches, disrupted sleep, mental health strain, and a constant foul odour in the air at high levels of hydrogen sulphide, otherwise known as it blights us with pollution and with constant worry.
Children couldn't play outside, schools couldn't open their windows. It even disgracefully reached the corridors at the Royal Stoke Hospital and many, many older people were left housebound. As my hon. Friend put it over polluters, I say profits over people because they took. And I'm afraid to say this, but I'll be as polite as I can. They took the proverbial out of my constituents, and the sooner we hold those who did so to account, the better for all of us.
They had no interest in operating safely, no regard for the community and no idea how to be a good neighbour. To those who suffered the worst excesses of their, may I say, criminality?Now, my relationship with the Environment Agency has changed in recent years because 147 days after my party won the election, with our zero tolerance approach to waste crime, we finally got walleys closed at this transformed life for my community. And it's a shame to say this, Doctor Morton, but for years we had a conservative government, a conservative MP, a conservative county council and Staffordshire, a conservative council at Newcastle Borough Council, and nothing changed.
To quote the former Prime minister, it should not have taken a change in government for action to be taken, for the criminals to be held to account, and for the dam site to be closed. And I do acknowledge the campaigning work of my predecessor. I'm sorry his colleagues were missing in action. And the shadow ministers, a friend of mine, so I'm not directing it at him personally, but my community was let down by the previous conservative government. And we're not going to let your colleagues forget it now, it's unforgivable that local people in Blackpool and Newcastle and across the country, in other parts of the country too, are left living in situations, unlivable.
Situations like this. So I'd be grateful if my hon. Friend the minister would think about touching on, in her remarks the benefits of a fit and proper person test for those seeking a permit to operate a landfill site. Can I also urge the Minister to engage with her colleagues in the Department for housing, Communities and Local Government regarding planning permissions?As the member opposite noted, for homes being built in the shadows or should I say, fumes of landfill sites?Because until we get a grip of the waste sector and the crime that we find in it, we should not be building homes around them.
I'd like to put on record my thanks, as I've done many times since we got Walleys Quarry closed to all those who helped get the job done, including my colleagues in government and as I say, colleagues at the Environment Agency for working with us to make sure that we were able to clean our air and give the people, the good people of Newcastle Lyme, that the kind of quality of life that they deserve. There's more to do, and I look forward to working with colleagues in Blackpool and around the country to make sure we do just that.
Its now closed. Capping is, broadly speaking, in operation and soon all being well will be able to get it restored. So local people in my community can use it. And I'm proud that after um, almost. A year and a half since the closure notice was issued, we finally chased the cowboy operator, that landfill site out of our town, and we shut Woolies for good because for far too long, my community was blighted by a marble fence, said. And as the minister knows, because how many times have I told her?Uh, by by respiratory irritation, headaches, disrupted sleep, mental health strain, and a constant foul odour in the air at high levels of hydrogen sulphide, otherwise known as it blights us with pollution and with constant worry.
Children couldn't play outside, schools couldn't open their windows. It even disgracefully reached the corridors at the Royal Stoke Hospital and many, many older people were left housebound. As my hon. Friend put it over polluters, I say profits over people because they took. And I'm afraid to say this, but I'll be as polite as I can. They took the proverbial out of my constituents, and the sooner we hold those who did so to account, the better for all of us.
They had no interest in operating safely, no regard for the community and no idea how to be a good neighbour. To those who suffered the worst excesses of their, may I say, criminality?Now, my relationship with the Environment Agency has changed in recent years because 147 days after my party won the election, with our zero tolerance approach to waste crime, we finally got walleys closed at this transformed life for my community. And it's a shame to say this, Doctor Morton, but for years we had a conservative government, a conservative MP, a conservative county council and Staffordshire, a conservative council at Newcastle Borough Council, and nothing changed.
To quote the former Prime minister, it should not have taken a change in government for action to be taken, for the criminals to be held to account, and for the dam site to be closed. And I do acknowledge the campaigning work of my predecessor. I'm sorry his colleagues were missing in action. And the shadow ministers, a friend of mine, so I'm not directing it at him personally, but my community was let down by the previous conservative government. And we're not going to let your colleagues forget it now, it's unforgivable that local people in Blackpool and Newcastle and across the country, in other parts of the country too, are left living in situations, unlivable.
Situations like this. So I'd be grateful if my hon. Friend the minister would think about touching on, in her remarks the benefits of a fit and proper person test for those seeking a permit to operate a landfill site. Can I also urge the Minister to engage with her colleagues in the Department for housing, Communities and Local Government regarding planning permissions?As the member opposite noted, for homes being built in the shadows or should I say, fumes of landfill sites?Because until we get a grip of the waste sector and the crime that we find in it, we should not be building homes around them.
I'd like to put on record my thanks, as I've done many times since we got Walleys Quarry closed to all those who helped get the job done, including my colleagues in government and as I say, colleagues at the Environment Agency for working with us to make sure that we were able to clean our air and give the people, the good people of Newcastle Lyme, that the kind of quality of life that they deserve. There's more to do, and I look forward to working with colleagues in Blackpool and around the country to make sure we do just that.
14:58
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Thank you. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I congratulate the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this debate. I've got several waste management sites in my constituency of Ely and East Cambridgeshire. Most of them, you just get the odd problem now and again and talking to them, you can deal with it. But I have one that causes particular problems. Grunty Fen sits in the heart of the countryside. Access from narrow fen roads.
In normal operation, the residents of the nearest village, Witchford, suffer large numbers of heavy lorries and litter blowing from those lorries. The Fen Rose, used by the lorries, sit on peat soils which expand when it's wet and contract when it's dry. The combination of the changing subsoil and regular heavy lorries corrugate these roads vertically and horizontally breaks the road edges away and creates ever growing potholes. So these roads are virtually unusable for ordinary cars, let alone cyclists. The residents feel they've got no say in the timing and volume of this traffic, and nor do they see extra funding for road maintenance.
This would all be bad enough, but there have recently been several fires at this site. One such fire in April burned for around 17 hours, generated significant black smoke, which spread over witchford and required extensive fire and rescue response. The Environment Agency recently published the findings of its inspection. It found that the emissions from the fire breached one of the permit conditions. It also found that the fire Risk Assessment, Emergency Management Plan and SEL 11 Environmental Action Plan failed to adequately identify and control the risks associated with fires.
The operator, East Waste Limited, has to rectify these issues or the Environmental Environment Agency says it will take enforcement action. Meanwhile, the residents have suffered from these fires, especially those, as we've heard, with pre-existing respiratory illness such as asthma. And they fear further fires. They would like to see the site closed, at least temporarily, until all these changes are in place. As part of the plans for the new Unitaries, government must ensure that councils have adequate powers and funding to maintain to monitor the waste sites and the Environment Agency really needs to have the powers and the funding to enforce the proper management of these sites.
And as we've heard already. I would ask the Minister to confirm that the plans are to make sure that the Environment Agency does indeed have those powers and the capacity, and that it will use them.
In normal operation, the residents of the nearest village, Witchford, suffer large numbers of heavy lorries and litter blowing from those lorries. The Fen Rose, used by the lorries, sit on peat soils which expand when it's wet and contract when it's dry. The combination of the changing subsoil and regular heavy lorries corrugate these roads vertically and horizontally breaks the road edges away and creates ever growing potholes. So these roads are virtually unusable for ordinary cars, let alone cyclists. The residents feel they've got no say in the timing and volume of this traffic, and nor do they see extra funding for road maintenance.
This would all be bad enough, but there have recently been several fires at this site. One such fire in April burned for around 17 hours, generated significant black smoke, which spread over witchford and required extensive fire and rescue response. The Environment Agency recently published the findings of its inspection. It found that the emissions from the fire breached one of the permit conditions. It also found that the fire Risk Assessment, Emergency Management Plan and SEL 11 Environmental Action Plan failed to adequately identify and control the risks associated with fires.
The operator, East Waste Limited, has to rectify these issues or the Environmental Environment Agency says it will take enforcement action. Meanwhile, the residents have suffered from these fires, especially those, as we've heard, with pre-existing respiratory illness such as asthma. And they fear further fires. They would like to see the site closed, at least temporarily, until all these changes are in place. As part of the plans for the new Unitaries, government must ensure that councils have adequate powers and funding to maintain to monitor the waste sites and the Environment Agency really needs to have the powers and the funding to enforce the proper management of these sites.
And as we've heard already. I would ask the Minister to confirm that the plans are to make sure that the Environment Agency does indeed have those powers and the capacity, and that it will use them.
15:01
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Thank you. Speaker, and I'd like to thank my honourable friend, the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this debate and each of us as parliamentarians recognise the necessity of waste facilities and the function that they perform. With that being said, local communities should not have to tolerate the conditions that residents of mine in here would have been far support with, most notably in recent years due to the prevailing wind direction. In my part of the world, my constituents continue to endure appalling orders emitted from Valencia waste management site on Pilsworth Road.
The landfill there opened over 50 years ago and as it has gradually filled, it has become increasingly unbearable for local residents, which has led to the creation of the group Harewood Against landfill. I would like to take this opportunity to commend them for their enduring activism. The site also hosts a recycling centre, which I understand is also now significantly contributing towards current issues. Harewood Against Landfill has made clear to Valencia, as have I, that the operation of the site has driven so many nearby to the point of utter dismay, with stark implications on their quality of life.
Windows have had to remain shut. People couldn't put washing out to dry, and many even began to question the elevated number of respiratory illnesses in the town. Harewood Against Landfill, rightly urged members of the public to raise their concerns with the Environment Agency and lobbied themselves for action to be taken. We eventually ensured that the site was closed whilst remedial action was taken, lasting for about 18 months, demonstrating the scale of what local people had been forced to deal with. And it would, in my view, be legitimate to say, as we've heard from the honourable member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood, that working class communities like mine are having to disproportionately bear the brunt of these impacts.
This is something, despite the supposed remedial action that has been taken, and the supposed Environment Agency monitoring of the site that my constituents are now having to contend with yet again, it's truly like Groundhog Day for people in Harewood. Following the sites reopening and the order from it continuing to affect the wellbeing of local people, the tireless campaign group met with Valencia on the 1st of June, but the company continues to say that no breaches are taking place. Of course.
The landfill there opened over 50 years ago and as it has gradually filled, it has become increasingly unbearable for local residents, which has led to the creation of the group Harewood Against landfill. I would like to take this opportunity to commend them for their enduring activism. The site also hosts a recycling centre, which I understand is also now significantly contributing towards current issues. Harewood Against Landfill has made clear to Valencia, as have I, that the operation of the site has driven so many nearby to the point of utter dismay, with stark implications on their quality of life.
Windows have had to remain shut. People couldn't put washing out to dry, and many even began to question the elevated number of respiratory illnesses in the town. Harewood Against Landfill, rightly urged members of the public to raise their concerns with the Environment Agency and lobbied themselves for action to be taken. We eventually ensured that the site was closed whilst remedial action was taken, lasting for about 18 months, demonstrating the scale of what local people had been forced to deal with. And it would, in my view, be legitimate to say, as we've heard from the honourable member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood, that working class communities like mine are having to disproportionately bear the brunt of these impacts.
This is something, despite the supposed remedial action that has been taken, and the supposed Environment Agency monitoring of the site that my constituents are now having to contend with yet again, it's truly like Groundhog Day for people in Harewood. Following the sites reopening and the order from it continuing to affect the wellbeing of local people, the tireless campaign group met with Valencia on the 1st of June, but the company continues to say that no breaches are taking place. Of course.
15:04
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Representative sections very well. I actually just wanted usually in this debate to put on record an example of good practice of waste management company in my constituency, the community engagement team, led by a woman called Karen Pierre Verdier, do excellent work working with local schools and the local community to make sure that they are aware of what is happening. And does she agree with me?That is the kind of practice we should see across the country.
15:04
15:04
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I absolutely agree, I would like to see more of that, not least in my constituency of Harewood, because the Environment Agency countenanced the site's reopening, they were adamant that they had the means to monitor the air quality and order levels there. And yet, less than a year down the line, we're back to where we started. And it's my constituents and many represented here today that are suffering the consequences of the agency's inability to address problems at their core. And this is because we at present don't have the means to handle nuisance concerns around recycling in the same way that we do landfill in situations like this, lived experience matters.
The executives of Valencia wouldn't live anywhere near one of these sites themselves, but our constituents are just expected to suck it up and put up with this entirely unacceptable conditions. Harewood Against Landfill have now designed an online order complaint reporting log, which now sends each instance directly to the Environment Agency, something which is great, but they would rather not spend their valuable time doing. Their efforts will once again highlight the scale of the issue in Harewood, but it remains clear that there needs to be enforcement action to match this level of ongoing outrage.
I understand that the waste strategy is due for review in this Parliament, and from speaking with local residents, it's clear that they are desperate to see this reviewed to greater. Consider the impacts of poorly managed sites that also take recycling. They would like to see legislation put in place to safeguard local people. The really seems to be no avenue in many cases to really scrutinise the operations of these sites. As other honourable members have suggested, with much of the so-called enforcement action being toothless and ineffective, I would therefore like to ask the Minister what consideration has been given to delivering a bold and transformative waste strategy that protects people in Harewood from living in such conditions, and specifically factors in poorly performing sites that handle recycling waste?What assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the Environment Agency?And I do appreciate the point made about successive conservative governments cutting its funding and staff.
But what what has been given to strengthening the penalties for the executives of waste operators that pay no mind to the communities in which they function, and also what consideration has been given to making community engagement mandatory for those operators like Valencia, and the implementation of robust standards. In this respect, the people of Harewood should not have to put up with this any longer. They shouldn't have had to put up with it in the first place. And my honourable friend is right. As I say, working class communities are the ones shouldering the burden of regulators being without the will and the means to engage with the lived experience of those affected by this sort of behaviour from operators.
I hope the Minister can offer some clarity on these points and make clear to residents in Harewood that they are not without a voice, that the government is listening and that living in these conditions should not be a collateral consequence, that those in power seem all too willing to accept.
The executives of Valencia wouldn't live anywhere near one of these sites themselves, but our constituents are just expected to suck it up and put up with this entirely unacceptable conditions. Harewood Against Landfill have now designed an online order complaint reporting log, which now sends each instance directly to the Environment Agency, something which is great, but they would rather not spend their valuable time doing. Their efforts will once again highlight the scale of the issue in Harewood, but it remains clear that there needs to be enforcement action to match this level of ongoing outrage.
I understand that the waste strategy is due for review in this Parliament, and from speaking with local residents, it's clear that they are desperate to see this reviewed to greater. Consider the impacts of poorly managed sites that also take recycling. They would like to see legislation put in place to safeguard local people. The really seems to be no avenue in many cases to really scrutinise the operations of these sites. As other honourable members have suggested, with much of the so-called enforcement action being toothless and ineffective, I would therefore like to ask the Minister what consideration has been given to delivering a bold and transformative waste strategy that protects people in Harewood from living in such conditions, and specifically factors in poorly performing sites that handle recycling waste?What assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the Environment Agency?And I do appreciate the point made about successive conservative governments cutting its funding and staff.
But what what has been given to strengthening the penalties for the executives of waste operators that pay no mind to the communities in which they function, and also what consideration has been given to making community engagement mandatory for those operators like Valencia, and the implementation of robust standards. In this respect, the people of Harewood should not have to put up with this any longer. They shouldn't have had to put up with it in the first place. And my honourable friend is right. As I say, working class communities are the ones shouldering the burden of regulators being without the will and the means to engage with the lived experience of those affected by this sort of behaviour from operators.
I hope the Minister can offer some clarity on these points and make clear to residents in Harewood that they are not without a voice, that the government is listening and that living in these conditions should not be a collateral consequence, that those in power seem all too willing to accept.
15:07
15:07
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I would also like to thank the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this debate. In my constituency of Melksham and Devizes. Residents of my part of Calne have long been reporting strong and unpleasant sulfurous odours coming from the Lower Compton landfill, and it has at times been severe enough for people stuck in their homes to keep the windows shut. Not a pleasant situation with the current heatwave and has been reported in the local BBC as calling causing illness.
This has been a periodic problem in Calne and other towns, and I am pleased to report that with the help of my neighbour, my hon. Friend the member for Chippenham getting the Environment Agency on the case. The offending landfill vaults are being closed and additional landfill gas wells will be installed to increase gas capture and reduce emissions from the site. Additionally, at Lower Compton Landfill, there have been a recent spate of fires caused by batteries in vapes, endangering residents and staff every week in the UK, over 6 million vapes are thrown away instead of being recycled.
The lithium batteries, which when crushed, can spark smoke or catch fire, creating danger to waste facilities. Those who work on them and those who live near them. And I would urge the government to increase public awareness of how to safely dispose of vapes, single use plastic waste is another long standing issue that needs to be addressed. None of us like seeing waste plastic in the environment where it can become a serious hazard to wildlife. It's bad enough seeing plastic waste on our streets and countryside, but with the UK exporting around 600,000 tonnes a year, much of this ends up in the developing world, where it can become an environmental hazard of massive proportions.
A few years ago, a company in Swindon attempted to address the use of single use plastic recycling using a pyrolysis process that chemically reduced the waste plastic into its polymer constituents, where it could be used again and again to create fresh plastics each time. Whilst that company went bust due to the difficult economics, another company called Neurotechnologies, is investing in a similar process in Newcastle. The holy grail of cyclical plastic economy will. However, it seems, only be reached when the economics are right, so it's timely that the government look into the single.
Use a single use plastic tax to generate sufficient funds to invest in this process. What is needed are chemical recycling plants locally in every county in the UK, and in the spirit of the polluter pays a tax on the production and use of single use plastics is a must if we're to make the economics work for plastic recycling and thus stop this scourge on the environment. Thank you.
This has been a periodic problem in Calne and other towns, and I am pleased to report that with the help of my neighbour, my hon. Friend the member for Chippenham getting the Environment Agency on the case. The offending landfill vaults are being closed and additional landfill gas wells will be installed to increase gas capture and reduce emissions from the site. Additionally, at Lower Compton Landfill, there have been a recent spate of fires caused by batteries in vapes, endangering residents and staff every week in the UK, over 6 million vapes are thrown away instead of being recycled.
The lithium batteries, which when crushed, can spark smoke or catch fire, creating danger to waste facilities. Those who work on them and those who live near them. And I would urge the government to increase public awareness of how to safely dispose of vapes, single use plastic waste is another long standing issue that needs to be addressed. None of us like seeing waste plastic in the environment where it can become a serious hazard to wildlife. It's bad enough seeing plastic waste on our streets and countryside, but with the UK exporting around 600,000 tonnes a year, much of this ends up in the developing world, where it can become an environmental hazard of massive proportions.
A few years ago, a company in Swindon attempted to address the use of single use plastic recycling using a pyrolysis process that chemically reduced the waste plastic into its polymer constituents, where it could be used again and again to create fresh plastics each time. Whilst that company went bust due to the difficult economics, another company called Neurotechnologies, is investing in a similar process in Newcastle. The holy grail of cyclical plastic economy will. However, it seems, only be reached when the economics are right, so it's timely that the government look into the single.
Use a single use plastic tax to generate sufficient funds to invest in this process. What is needed are chemical recycling plants locally in every county in the UK, and in the spirit of the polluter pays a tax on the production and use of single use plastics is a must if we're to make the economics work for plastic recycling and thus stop this scourge on the environment. Thank you.
15:10
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thank you, Doctor Nelson. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I want to congratulate the honourable member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this very important debate. I want to speak about a case in my constituency that shows both the problem and, importantly, what a solution can look like. Last July, business owners near the Hurstwood Caught recycling centre on Raikes Lane in Brandon contacted me about traffic and road safety queues for the site. We're backing up onto Saint Petersburg and spilling onto Manchester Road.
Access to local businesses was being blocked and there was a real safety risk and it was happening day after day. So I brought together Bolton Council, recycled for Greater Manchester and the operator Suez, to address the problem. And to their credit, all parties acted. I had two yellow box had been painted at the entrance and an exit to keep it clear. The entrance itself has been reprofiled so more vehicles can now wait on the site. While speaking to the gate attendant, rather than queuing on the public road.
And a new turning space has been created for vehicles leaving without entering the centre and cones have been installed to stop the parking that was blocking the sight lines. Now I want to be honest, these measures have not solved the problem completely, but they have mitigated some of the worst of it and it has made a real difference to the residents and businesses. Alongside the physical changes we cycle for, Greater Manchester has been suggesting alternatives. Less busy sites and advising people on when the centre is quiet.
There are over 20 recycling centres across Greater Manchester and spreading business across them eases the pressure on a single site. But here's my wider point chair traffic builds up as waste site is not a one off, it is a recurring and entirely foreseeable pattern, particularly at older sites that were simply never designed for today's volumes of traffic and waste. Yet too often the response is reactive. Action comes only after residents, businesses or members of parliament push for it. Communities should not have to run a campaign to get a yellow box painted on the road, so I have three.
Questions for the minister. First, would the Department encourage joined up working between councils, waste authorities and operators as standard practice rather than something that happens only when it's locally demanded?Second, what support and funding is available to Council for Physical Improvement at older sites such as the Reprofiled entrances and turning spaces that made the difference in Bolton. And third, will the government look at establishing a clearer ongoing channel for residents and businesses near waste sites to raise concern, rather than relying on ad hoc local campaigns, Raikes Lane shows what can be achieved when everyone gets around the table, and how much further.
But we still have a lot further to go. What is missing in the system that act before communities have to fight for it?
Access to local businesses was being blocked and there was a real safety risk and it was happening day after day. So I brought together Bolton Council, recycled for Greater Manchester and the operator Suez, to address the problem. And to their credit, all parties acted. I had two yellow box had been painted at the entrance and an exit to keep it clear. The entrance itself has been reprofiled so more vehicles can now wait on the site. While speaking to the gate attendant, rather than queuing on the public road.
And a new turning space has been created for vehicles leaving without entering the centre and cones have been installed to stop the parking that was blocking the sight lines. Now I want to be honest, these measures have not solved the problem completely, but they have mitigated some of the worst of it and it has made a real difference to the residents and businesses. Alongside the physical changes we cycle for, Greater Manchester has been suggesting alternatives. Less busy sites and advising people on when the centre is quiet.
There are over 20 recycling centres across Greater Manchester and spreading business across them eases the pressure on a single site. But here's my wider point chair traffic builds up as waste site is not a one off, it is a recurring and entirely foreseeable pattern, particularly at older sites that were simply never designed for today's volumes of traffic and waste. Yet too often the response is reactive. Action comes only after residents, businesses or members of parliament push for it. Communities should not have to run a campaign to get a yellow box painted on the road, so I have three.
Questions for the minister. First, would the Department encourage joined up working between councils, waste authorities and operators as standard practice rather than something that happens only when it's locally demanded?Second, what support and funding is available to Council for Physical Improvement at older sites such as the Reprofiled entrances and turning spaces that made the difference in Bolton. And third, will the government look at establishing a clearer ongoing channel for residents and businesses near waste sites to raise concern, rather than relying on ad hoc local campaigns, Raikes Lane shows what can be achieved when everyone gets around the table, and how much further.
But we still have a lot further to go. What is missing in the system that act before communities have to fight for it?
15:13
15:13
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Chairman, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I would also like to congratulate the member for Fleetwood for securing the debate. It's so important for me to speak on this issue in my constituency of Runcorn and Helsby, we have an incinerator operated by a company called Viridor. It's been in operation for the last 12 years. And just like the example of Fleetwood, it processes waste from all around the country, very little produced by the actual residents of Runcorn.
Local residents have to live with all of the similar problems we've talked about this afternoon. The dreadful smells at times, rubbish strewn around the approaching roads from the HGVs that deliver the the waste that needs to be processed. Noise 24 hours a day. The HGV. Actually have an operational licence for 24 hours a day. And. There's also the mechanical noise from the actual plant itself. 275 HGVs go in and out are allowed to go in and out of that plant every day, and I've stood there endlessly watching one after the other, after the other.
The noise, the smell is horrific. 3000 tonnes of waste is processed in that plant today. The air pollution at times is a disgrace. You can't hang your washing out. As we've heard others say. Also, layers of dust on cars, even. There is the, of course effect physical effect on health, the mental effect on people's health. Local residents, again can't sleep. They can't open their windows and there's light pollution constantly through the night of the headlights of the HGV coming down the road.
Particularly a worse problem in the winter. Of course, as a consequence, local house prices are severely devalued. Residents in reality, why should they have to move?Some of these residents have lived there all their life, but now, even if they wanted to move because of this incinerator, they can't sell their homes. They feel trapped. And actually, on this particular note, I would like to ask the minister to consider offering financial support to those families unable to move because they can't sell their homes because of the proximity of these incinerators, like the one in Runcorn in my constituency.
Returning to the operator, Viridor Viridor paid in in December 2023, Viridor paid out £1 million across 180 local households to keep them quiet. They signed an NDA so that they could never, ever talk to the press about the conditions within which they live. Now, 4500 pounds per household was given out. That is a lot of money for some of my residents in Runcorn, and it was given to them at Christmas time, which I'm sure was a very welcome time to give them that sort of amount of money to keep them quiet.
It's a disgrace. Turning to the Environment Agency, I would also like to echo the points already made. They need to be timely in their response. It's no good residents ringing them and the Environment Agency coming out a week later, when the particular smog or the particular smell has gone. Not only that, there's issues now with vermin, flies, rats, even concerns about the disease spreading through birds flying in and out of doors left open, operating doors which are meant to shut in between each delivery but are just left open with birds flying in and out and potentially spreading disease.
The burden of proof is always on the residents to to clock all of this document. All of this. Why should it be that way?And I again would ask the minister to shift the burden of proof from the residents to give the environment a the power to shut down the operation until the complaints or the issue. Particular issue is sorted and it's often not just one major incident that happens like a fire or other things we've heard about. It's the continual build up wearing down of residents until they are just desperate, they feel forgotten and they feel unheard.
Deprived towns like Runcorn have been used as a dumping ground for the nation's rubbish. The least the government can do is listen to residents, let them have their voice, let them be heard and compensate them for what is happening to their day to day lives. Thank you.
Local residents have to live with all of the similar problems we've talked about this afternoon. The dreadful smells at times, rubbish strewn around the approaching roads from the HGVs that deliver the the waste that needs to be processed. Noise 24 hours a day. The HGV. Actually have an operational licence for 24 hours a day. And. There's also the mechanical noise from the actual plant itself. 275 HGVs go in and out are allowed to go in and out of that plant every day, and I've stood there endlessly watching one after the other, after the other.
The noise, the smell is horrific. 3000 tonnes of waste is processed in that plant today. The air pollution at times is a disgrace. You can't hang your washing out. As we've heard others say. Also, layers of dust on cars, even. There is the, of course effect physical effect on health, the mental effect on people's health. Local residents, again can't sleep. They can't open their windows and there's light pollution constantly through the night of the headlights of the HGV coming down the road.
Particularly a worse problem in the winter. Of course, as a consequence, local house prices are severely devalued. Residents in reality, why should they have to move?Some of these residents have lived there all their life, but now, even if they wanted to move because of this incinerator, they can't sell their homes. They feel trapped. And actually, on this particular note, I would like to ask the minister to consider offering financial support to those families unable to move because they can't sell their homes because of the proximity of these incinerators, like the one in Runcorn in my constituency.
Returning to the operator, Viridor Viridor paid in in December 2023, Viridor paid out £1 million across 180 local households to keep them quiet. They signed an NDA so that they could never, ever talk to the press about the conditions within which they live. Now, 4500 pounds per household was given out. That is a lot of money for some of my residents in Runcorn, and it was given to them at Christmas time, which I'm sure was a very welcome time to give them that sort of amount of money to keep them quiet.
It's a disgrace. Turning to the Environment Agency, I would also like to echo the points already made. They need to be timely in their response. It's no good residents ringing them and the Environment Agency coming out a week later, when the particular smog or the particular smell has gone. Not only that, there's issues now with vermin, flies, rats, even concerns about the disease spreading through birds flying in and out of doors left open, operating doors which are meant to shut in between each delivery but are just left open with birds flying in and out and potentially spreading disease.
The burden of proof is always on the residents to to clock all of this document. All of this. Why should it be that way?And I again would ask the minister to shift the burden of proof from the residents to give the environment a the power to shut down the operation until the complaints or the issue. Particular issue is sorted and it's often not just one major incident that happens like a fire or other things we've heard about. It's the continual build up wearing down of residents until they are just desperate, they feel forgotten and they feel unheard.
Deprived towns like Runcorn have been used as a dumping ground for the nation's rubbish. The least the government can do is listen to residents, let them have their voice, let them be heard and compensate them for what is happening to their day to day lives. Thank you.
15:18
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Thank you, Doctor Morrison. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Thank you very much to my hon. Friend for Blackpool North and Fleetwood, who has brought this very, very timely debate. I have two separate areas of my constituency that are suffering from difficulties at present. The first is West Heath in Congleton, where there is a awful, awful fly problem. Residents report having difficulty. They're unable to have barbecues, do not wish to open their windows, do not wish to open their doors.
It appears that the problem may be associated with a local metal recycling plant, although they have issued a statement saying they are cooperating with the council and the Environment Agency, and they don't believe it emanates from them. But certainly the long standing feeling amongst local people is that it may very well be an issue with the recycling plant, although they'd also like the Environment Agency to investigate standing water nearby and other sources. So I don't want to pin the blame to two specifically on any one factor at the moment, but it is really important that the Environment Agency has the resources, the powers and the inclination to investigate this thoroughly as soon as possible.
My residents report very similar experiences to many of the people in this room, talking about how it's making their houses really, really difficult to enjoy, particularly in the summer months that they're worried about disease, about they're worried about opening their children's bedroom windows at night, which in the current environment is straightforwardly dangerous. So I would absolutely call on the minister to encourage the Environment Agency to be taking steps very rapidly, because this really is a very significant ongoing problem. The other area of concern in my constituency is a former landfill.
Site that is now a golf course. It was set up as a golf course by Cheshire East Council. Again, I want to be quite circumspect in what I say here, because Cheshire East Council say absolutely adamantly that this is safe for its current use and that there is no reason to doubt that the current operators are operating appropriately. So I don't want to do anything or say anything that might damage their business. But the Guardian has reported significant amounts of dumping, both conventional landfill dumping during the 1950s and 1960s, but also chemical dumping by ICI and shell in the 1970s with forever type chemicals.
Again, there has been extensive testing. There is clearly a disputed set of facts here. What I'm really concerned about is that Cheshire East, when asked about this, apparently, and I have not seen these documents myself, have stated that actually remediating the whole site fully would cost over £1 billion. Now, it seems to me that although Cheshire East are currently trying to manage this problem, that it would properly belong with the Environment Agency and potentially central government, because actually that scale of problem, if it is the scale of problem that is alleged by some parties, is absolutely massive and beyond the capacity of a local authority to properly investigate and manage, we need to be very sure about what exact chemicals are entering the the water system.
Again, it's believed that they're being retained within the site and are not currently entering the wider water system. I do not want to create alarm, but I do want to make sure that this is being properly investigated for my local residents so that their minds can either be put at rest or appropriate steps to remediate can be taken if necessary. But I do want to emphasise that there is nothing to suggest that the golf course is not safe for use as it is at the moment, but nonetheless, the lack of proper landfill capping is noted and it does not feel as if this has been investigated in the way that I would hope it would be.
So I would like to encourage the minister very much. I know she is passionate about the environment and water courses and all of these topics, but I would echo what my honourable friend, the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood said it is so important that we put people before polluters.
It appears that the problem may be associated with a local metal recycling plant, although they have issued a statement saying they are cooperating with the council and the Environment Agency, and they don't believe it emanates from them. But certainly the long standing feeling amongst local people is that it may very well be an issue with the recycling plant, although they'd also like the Environment Agency to investigate standing water nearby and other sources. So I don't want to pin the blame to two specifically on any one factor at the moment, but it is really important that the Environment Agency has the resources, the powers and the inclination to investigate this thoroughly as soon as possible.
My residents report very similar experiences to many of the people in this room, talking about how it's making their houses really, really difficult to enjoy, particularly in the summer months that they're worried about disease, about they're worried about opening their children's bedroom windows at night, which in the current environment is straightforwardly dangerous. So I would absolutely call on the minister to encourage the Environment Agency to be taking steps very rapidly, because this really is a very significant ongoing problem. The other area of concern in my constituency is a former landfill.
Site that is now a golf course. It was set up as a golf course by Cheshire East Council. Again, I want to be quite circumspect in what I say here, because Cheshire East Council say absolutely adamantly that this is safe for its current use and that there is no reason to doubt that the current operators are operating appropriately. So I don't want to do anything or say anything that might damage their business. But the Guardian has reported significant amounts of dumping, both conventional landfill dumping during the 1950s and 1960s, but also chemical dumping by ICI and shell in the 1970s with forever type chemicals.
Again, there has been extensive testing. There is clearly a disputed set of facts here. What I'm really concerned about is that Cheshire East, when asked about this, apparently, and I have not seen these documents myself, have stated that actually remediating the whole site fully would cost over £1 billion. Now, it seems to me that although Cheshire East are currently trying to manage this problem, that it would properly belong with the Environment Agency and potentially central government, because actually that scale of problem, if it is the scale of problem that is alleged by some parties, is absolutely massive and beyond the capacity of a local authority to properly investigate and manage, we need to be very sure about what exact chemicals are entering the the water system.
Again, it's believed that they're being retained within the site and are not currently entering the wider water system. I do not want to create alarm, but I do want to make sure that this is being properly investigated for my local residents so that their minds can either be put at rest or appropriate steps to remediate can be taken if necessary. But I do want to emphasise that there is nothing to suggest that the golf course is not safe for use as it is at the moment, but nonetheless, the lack of proper landfill capping is noted and it does not feel as if this has been investigated in the way that I would hope it would be.
So I would like to encourage the minister very much. I know she is passionate about the environment and water courses and all of these topics, but I would echo what my honourable friend, the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood said it is so important that we put people before polluters.
15:22
15:22
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Mr. chairman, real pleasure to serve on your ship. And thank you to the Honourable Lady for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for setting the scene to address a matter that has been an overwhelming source of anxiety and frustration for my constituents. The physical, the environmental, the social limits of waste management sites on our local community. I just want to welcome the minister to her place, and we're very fortunate to have the minister here and to the minister will have all the answers that we're seeking.
Uh, and hopefully that'll be something that you'll be able to give us some encouragement with. I wish to give an ordinary perspective of where we are, if not the responsibility of the honourable lady, the Minister. But I would like her help and maybe, um, my request to her would be to enter into discussions with the relevant Minister in in Northern Ireland, Andrew Muir, at the Northern Ireland Assembly, to ensure that we can work together on these things. So what this debate on Westminster strategy in this House, we often get bogged down in talking about percentages, targets, air line frameworks.
Um, I'm going to bring something to this chamber at the ground level. It's the Ards and North Down Borough Council. In my constituency of Strangford. Been known that the people of Ards and North Down are not against recycling. Just to give that example, I'm reaching recycling rates of nearly 56% have been reached by the commitment of nearly every house and every house in Ards and North down. They separate their glass and compost. They wash it, their plastics.
But there's a tipping point. And that's what we're talking about today. That's what the honourable lady has brought forward, both literally and metaphorically, where the burden placed on local communities by waste management sites becomes entirely unsustainable. Daera have quite clearly that there's simply not enough waste infrastructure in Northern Ireland to handle what we throw away. So my request, Minister, please. I know you're always very amenable to my request and everybody's requests is to ask, would the minister have some discussion with the relevant minister to see how actions and methods gained here, and experience and knowledge here can be used for us back home.
Transfer station. A heavy commercial recycling depot or landfill boundary straight up against residential lines. The community pays the price. My concern is that areas like ours and Cumbria and parts of the Ards Peninsula are dealing with the harsh reality of these limits. Every day excessive heavy goods, vehicle traffic pounding down narrow rural roads that can never were never built to handle 30 ton waste trucks. Persistent issues with odour, airborne litter and the psychological strain of living next to an expanding footprint of regional refuge and the Ark 21 Waste Management Plan has faced years of delay in delivering modern infrastructure.
Local sites have been pushed to their limits to manage or manage the waste money for local facilities, or hydrologically linked to the uniquely sensitive ecosystem of Strangford Loch. And I live on the edge of that, so I understand what it means. An immediate economic, ecological, ecological threat to a globally recognized marine conservation zone. In an effort to curb waste, tourism and management costs, the council has had to introduce rigid online booking systems, have taken many steps to try and address the issue, and residents at that latex r nine household recycling centres.
When council makes makes local standards too complicated to use and restrict the hours, then it becomes a knock on crisis. What does the knock on crisis?Mr. chairman, it's fly tipping in the rural countryside and the agricultural fields, and the farmers are left holding the bill and environmental protection and planning policies are devolved to Northern Ireland Executive. So we need a planning framework that respects the proximity principle, the very thing that the Honourable Lady has introduced in her in her contribution. Can I ask the Minister what helps?
Uh, and hopefully that'll be something that you'll be able to give us some encouragement with. I wish to give an ordinary perspective of where we are, if not the responsibility of the honourable lady, the Minister. But I would like her help and maybe, um, my request to her would be to enter into discussions with the relevant Minister in in Northern Ireland, Andrew Muir, at the Northern Ireland Assembly, to ensure that we can work together on these things. So what this debate on Westminster strategy in this House, we often get bogged down in talking about percentages, targets, air line frameworks.
Um, I'm going to bring something to this chamber at the ground level. It's the Ards and North Down Borough Council. In my constituency of Strangford. Been known that the people of Ards and North Down are not against recycling. Just to give that example, I'm reaching recycling rates of nearly 56% have been reached by the commitment of nearly every house and every house in Ards and North down. They separate their glass and compost. They wash it, their plastics.
But there's a tipping point. And that's what we're talking about today. That's what the honourable lady has brought forward, both literally and metaphorically, where the burden placed on local communities by waste management sites becomes entirely unsustainable. Daera have quite clearly that there's simply not enough waste infrastructure in Northern Ireland to handle what we throw away. So my request, Minister, please. I know you're always very amenable to my request and everybody's requests is to ask, would the minister have some discussion with the relevant minister to see how actions and methods gained here, and experience and knowledge here can be used for us back home.
Transfer station. A heavy commercial recycling depot or landfill boundary straight up against residential lines. The community pays the price. My concern is that areas like ours and Cumbria and parts of the Ards Peninsula are dealing with the harsh reality of these limits. Every day excessive heavy goods, vehicle traffic pounding down narrow rural roads that can never were never built to handle 30 ton waste trucks. Persistent issues with odour, airborne litter and the psychological strain of living next to an expanding footprint of regional refuge and the Ark 21 Waste Management Plan has faced years of delay in delivering modern infrastructure.
Local sites have been pushed to their limits to manage or manage the waste money for local facilities, or hydrologically linked to the uniquely sensitive ecosystem of Strangford Loch. And I live on the edge of that, so I understand what it means. An immediate economic, ecological, ecological threat to a globally recognized marine conservation zone. In an effort to curb waste, tourism and management costs, the council has had to introduce rigid online booking systems, have taken many steps to try and address the issue, and residents at that latex r nine household recycling centres.
When council makes makes local standards too complicated to use and restrict the hours, then it becomes a knock on crisis. What does the knock on crisis?Mr. chairman, it's fly tipping in the rural countryside and the agricultural fields, and the farmers are left holding the bill and environmental protection and planning policies are devolved to Northern Ireland Executive. So we need a planning framework that respects the proximity principle, the very thing that the Honourable Lady has introduced in her in her contribution. Can I ask the Minister what helps?
15:26
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Local country. Regards and North Down. When it comes to moving forward to have hyper local low carbon circular economies that do not require massive, sprawling, intrusive regional. Depots and that if we can work hand in hand together, I think then we can find a solution, perhaps helps us all. Thanks so much.
15:26
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you. It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Doctor Morrison. And I thank the honourable member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this very important debate. And I must emphasise that this is a nationwide issue. It doesn't just affect working class constituencies. It also does affect leafy Surrey and Surrey of Epsom and Ewell. So I'm just going to set the scene. It's a peaceful early morning and the residential community on the edge of Epsom Downs, a picturesque 600 acre area of unspoilt chalk downland with panoramic views of London.
We're right next to the Chalk Pit, a waste processing site in Epsom in Surrey. Crash. Bang boom. Residents are suddenly awoken. It's 6:00 on the 20th of July. They hear the scraping, the clanking and banging of metal, the humming of industrial machinery, the roaring of the trommel workmen shouting loudly. Car horns honking, dust choking the air, lorries speeding up and down the road. It doesn't end until late in the evening. And this goes on and on all day, every single working day.
I ask, could the minister and all those in the room here today live with this constant noise, dust and disruption?Would the minister be willing to accept this lack of action and lack of change?Because my residents have no choice. Their homes are here. Their lives are here now. This site was never meant to become what it is now. When it went to planning ten years ago, moving from a waste transfer site to a waste processing site.
The management of this site is unacceptable and my constituents, the residents, have long deserved better. Action must be taken and it must be taken now. Now there are four systemic failures planning Surrey County Council Enforcement, Epsom and Ewell Borough Council environment. Whether that's dust, noise or the potential contamination of water, the Environment Agency and accountability because there is no single lead on this and one agency passes the buck from one organisation to another. This has disrupted my residents lives for over ten years.
Excessive dust now the atmosphere average is ten micrograms per cubic metre. The chalk pit average is a concentration of 40. On multiple occasions it has exceeded. What is the quality standard of 50. But let's remember that what is normal is ten. There's been persistent noise breaches of permitted operating hours. Lorries leaving the site as early as 540 in the morning, when the operational hours shouldn't be till seven in the morning, seven till 6 p.m.. There's the impact of heavy vehicles, lorries regularly exceeding the speed limit of 30 miles an hour on roads that simply aren't designed for such heavy lorries.
And the tests really can't fully capture the human impact. The unintended disruption to daily lives. For years, constituents have said to me, I hope for a peaceful afternoon in the garden. No chance with the chalk pit at full throttle. So much for a quiet, relaxing Saturday morning. My day off completely ruined. It feels like the trommel is at work in my living room. Our table is covered in dust. No chance of going outside yet again.
When there has been monitoring. I've been told that operators are informed in advance when this will occur. So guess what happens?Well, there's suddenly no noise. There's suddenly no dust. The site doesn't operate. How is this effective monitoring or true accountability?There's been planning conditions, environmental permits, monitoring equipment for noise and dust. Thousands of complaints, multiple inspection reports, statutory guidance. Yet the same problems continue. The issue isn't a lack of legislation.
It's a repeated failure of enforcement, a repeated failure of leadership. There is none. It's a repeated failure of accountability. Why are my residents being forced to continually fight this?Why aren't the authorities taking action?There are three agencies that are responsible for this issue. Surrey County Council, Epsom Borough Council and the Environment Agency. The unending buck passing must stop. Someone must take the lead and act now. The government is completely divided, with Surrey County Council being responsible for the planning there.
The Waste Planning Authority, the Environment Agency responsible for dust and noise, and making sure that water is safe to drink. Epsom Borough Council, responsible for enforcement. The result?No single authority leading, no organisation accountable for resolving the overall problem. Separate investigations instead of coordinated action and residents forced to navigate multiple regulators. And the planning is a planning system that rewards non-compliance. The lack of enforcement leads to a situation of retrospective planning applications. So what does this encourage?Well, it encourages operators who will build first and apply later.
It leaves planners mitigating impacts rather than deciding whether a development should occur in the first place or not, it creates a perception that compliance is optional. How can compliance be optional when it's impacting my residents daily?And in the case of planning, economic growth is often given greater weight than things like residential amenity, environmental impact, long term public costs, and community wellbeing. Local views and experience in my residence has been overridden since the site changed its use over ten years ago. Residents have objected.
Local councils have objected. Planning officers have raised concerns and elected representatives have opposed appeals, and the Environment Agency described the site as wildly out of character in a residential area. Despite this, permissions continue to be granted. This undermines confidence that local views and feedback carry any meaningful weight at all. So let's talk about enforcement. There's been many planning conditions that could be regulated like the operating hours. But as you've heard, my residents are continually woken up at 606 or even earlier in the morning when they're meant to start at seven.
There's continual noise, clear noise, nuisance, and the operator flouting the abatement notice. There's dust on a regular basis, and residents see that either on their tables or chairs outside or on the washing, hanging on the washing line, and there are regular vehicle movements before 7:00. And the numbers of lorries that go in and out sometimes exceed the permitted amount. But enforcement is only work if they're actually enforced. To help with this, residents have provided complaints. They've provided photographs, they've provided videos, they've provided witness evidence.
In fact, authorities have gathered noise monitoring data, CCTV site inspections and monitoring reports. Yet residents continue to report the same again and again. Breaches are happening again and again, over and over. But these repeated breaches don't lead to any action. And so understandably, residents believe that breaches don't lead to any consequences, or their efforts are just in vain. They feel like giving up. Why should they continue if there's no action?There's repeated findings without resolution.
Those who are meant to regulate have repeatedly identified concerns. As I've mentioned, dust, noise, operating hours, site management, residential impacts. But instead of action, the response has included more inspections, more monitoring, more meetings, revised management plans, additional planning conditions, permit reviews. Still, nothing changes. The same complaints continue. So I ask how many complaints are needed to trigger change?How many reports need to be conducted?How many dust tests do we need?How many noise tests do we need?Because the lives of my residents are being affected every single day.
And all the authorities keep showing them is their unwillingness to improve their lives. A regulatory system should not simply document non-compliance. It should enforce compliance. Success must be measured by improvements in people's quality of life. Because effective performance is not the number of meetings held. It's not the number of reports produced. It's not the number of warnings issued. Surely a high number of ongoing complaints highlights the need for urgent action. The true measure of success for site management is where conditions and outcomes have actually improved.
The people affected. Rightly expect and deserve their elected representatives to help resolve persistent problems in practice, councillors have limited to no influence. MPs cannot direct regulators and residents can't demand action. This creates a democratic gap. Those making enforcement decisions are not directly accountable to the communities affected by by them. So there's understandably a loss of public confidence. And over time, residents are questioning whether planning conditions have real value, whether environmental permits provide meaningful protection, whether complaints make any difference at all, or whether regulators are measuring activity rather than results.
So residents become exhausted and they stop reporting incidents. And yet the reduced complaint numbers are sometimes treated as evidence that the problem has been sorted. It's not. They're just exhausted and they're fed up of dealing with this issue day in and day out. Now, the Liberal Democrats believe that community engagement in waste management is an essential part of the journey towards a more sustainable and circular economy. This means ensuring that local councils can operate waste management sites effectively without unnecessarily impacting the lives of nearby residents.
As I've explained, residents shouldn't experience excessive environmental effects, health impacts or disruption. We also believe that local communities must have a genuine stake in planning decisions that affect them. Proper consultation and community engagement must be at the heart of proposals for new waste management sites. Full consideration must be given to the environmental, health and quality of impacts of waste management sites on local residents. We must go further as the best waste management system is one that generates less waste in the first place.
This is why we support embedding circular economy principles across the UK's industrial strategy and product design, reducing the amount of waste that communities and councils need to manage effective regulation of waste management sites also requires a properly resourced oversight body, ensuring our environment is protected and health risks are mitigated. This is why we support increased funding to the EA to ensure that it can enforce environmental standards and hold operators to account where sites cause harm to local communities, like in Epsom. The government must also commit to an independent review into the waste crime system.
So in conclusion, the chalk pit in Epsom exposes wider weaknesses within the planning and environmental regulatory system that a fragmented governance, no single accountable authority, poor coordination between regulators, retrospective planning, planning, reducing the consequences of unauthorised development, appeals that weaken local decision making. Enforcement powers that are not consistently exercise, and residents whose concerns are not listened to. The issue is not just the absence of legislation, it's an issue of leadership, accountability and enforcement because without effective enforcement planning conditions and environmental permits become protections that exist only on paper but not in practice.
The EA, Surrey County Council Epsom Borough Council can conduct their site visits and tests and just go home. The contractors can clock in and do a day's work and then clock out and go home. My residents don't have that privilege. Their lives and their homes are here. They're entitled to a high quality of life in their community. I urge the minister to listen to the contributions made by myself and others here today, and take action to end the suffering of my constituents in Epsom.
We're right next to the Chalk Pit, a waste processing site in Epsom in Surrey. Crash. Bang boom. Residents are suddenly awoken. It's 6:00 on the 20th of July. They hear the scraping, the clanking and banging of metal, the humming of industrial machinery, the roaring of the trommel workmen shouting loudly. Car horns honking, dust choking the air, lorries speeding up and down the road. It doesn't end until late in the evening. And this goes on and on all day, every single working day.
I ask, could the minister and all those in the room here today live with this constant noise, dust and disruption?Would the minister be willing to accept this lack of action and lack of change?Because my residents have no choice. Their homes are here. Their lives are here now. This site was never meant to become what it is now. When it went to planning ten years ago, moving from a waste transfer site to a waste processing site.
The management of this site is unacceptable and my constituents, the residents, have long deserved better. Action must be taken and it must be taken now. Now there are four systemic failures planning Surrey County Council Enforcement, Epsom and Ewell Borough Council environment. Whether that's dust, noise or the potential contamination of water, the Environment Agency and accountability because there is no single lead on this and one agency passes the buck from one organisation to another. This has disrupted my residents lives for over ten years.
Excessive dust now the atmosphere average is ten micrograms per cubic metre. The chalk pit average is a concentration of 40. On multiple occasions it has exceeded. What is the quality standard of 50. But let's remember that what is normal is ten. There's been persistent noise breaches of permitted operating hours. Lorries leaving the site as early as 540 in the morning, when the operational hours shouldn't be till seven in the morning, seven till 6 p.m.. There's the impact of heavy vehicles, lorries regularly exceeding the speed limit of 30 miles an hour on roads that simply aren't designed for such heavy lorries.
And the tests really can't fully capture the human impact. The unintended disruption to daily lives. For years, constituents have said to me, I hope for a peaceful afternoon in the garden. No chance with the chalk pit at full throttle. So much for a quiet, relaxing Saturday morning. My day off completely ruined. It feels like the trommel is at work in my living room. Our table is covered in dust. No chance of going outside yet again.
When there has been monitoring. I've been told that operators are informed in advance when this will occur. So guess what happens?Well, there's suddenly no noise. There's suddenly no dust. The site doesn't operate. How is this effective monitoring or true accountability?There's been planning conditions, environmental permits, monitoring equipment for noise and dust. Thousands of complaints, multiple inspection reports, statutory guidance. Yet the same problems continue. The issue isn't a lack of legislation.
It's a repeated failure of enforcement, a repeated failure of leadership. There is none. It's a repeated failure of accountability. Why are my residents being forced to continually fight this?Why aren't the authorities taking action?There are three agencies that are responsible for this issue. Surrey County Council, Epsom Borough Council and the Environment Agency. The unending buck passing must stop. Someone must take the lead and act now. The government is completely divided, with Surrey County Council being responsible for the planning there.
The Waste Planning Authority, the Environment Agency responsible for dust and noise, and making sure that water is safe to drink. Epsom Borough Council, responsible for enforcement. The result?No single authority leading, no organisation accountable for resolving the overall problem. Separate investigations instead of coordinated action and residents forced to navigate multiple regulators. And the planning is a planning system that rewards non-compliance. The lack of enforcement leads to a situation of retrospective planning applications. So what does this encourage?Well, it encourages operators who will build first and apply later.
It leaves planners mitigating impacts rather than deciding whether a development should occur in the first place or not, it creates a perception that compliance is optional. How can compliance be optional when it's impacting my residents daily?And in the case of planning, economic growth is often given greater weight than things like residential amenity, environmental impact, long term public costs, and community wellbeing. Local views and experience in my residence has been overridden since the site changed its use over ten years ago. Residents have objected.
Local councils have objected. Planning officers have raised concerns and elected representatives have opposed appeals, and the Environment Agency described the site as wildly out of character in a residential area. Despite this, permissions continue to be granted. This undermines confidence that local views and feedback carry any meaningful weight at all. So let's talk about enforcement. There's been many planning conditions that could be regulated like the operating hours. But as you've heard, my residents are continually woken up at 606 or even earlier in the morning when they're meant to start at seven.
There's continual noise, clear noise, nuisance, and the operator flouting the abatement notice. There's dust on a regular basis, and residents see that either on their tables or chairs outside or on the washing, hanging on the washing line, and there are regular vehicle movements before 7:00. And the numbers of lorries that go in and out sometimes exceed the permitted amount. But enforcement is only work if they're actually enforced. To help with this, residents have provided complaints. They've provided photographs, they've provided videos, they've provided witness evidence.
In fact, authorities have gathered noise monitoring data, CCTV site inspections and monitoring reports. Yet residents continue to report the same again and again. Breaches are happening again and again, over and over. But these repeated breaches don't lead to any action. And so understandably, residents believe that breaches don't lead to any consequences, or their efforts are just in vain. They feel like giving up. Why should they continue if there's no action?There's repeated findings without resolution.
Those who are meant to regulate have repeatedly identified concerns. As I've mentioned, dust, noise, operating hours, site management, residential impacts. But instead of action, the response has included more inspections, more monitoring, more meetings, revised management plans, additional planning conditions, permit reviews. Still, nothing changes. The same complaints continue. So I ask how many complaints are needed to trigger change?How many reports need to be conducted?How many dust tests do we need?How many noise tests do we need?Because the lives of my residents are being affected every single day.
And all the authorities keep showing them is their unwillingness to improve their lives. A regulatory system should not simply document non-compliance. It should enforce compliance. Success must be measured by improvements in people's quality of life. Because effective performance is not the number of meetings held. It's not the number of reports produced. It's not the number of warnings issued. Surely a high number of ongoing complaints highlights the need for urgent action. The true measure of success for site management is where conditions and outcomes have actually improved.
The people affected. Rightly expect and deserve their elected representatives to help resolve persistent problems in practice, councillors have limited to no influence. MPs cannot direct regulators and residents can't demand action. This creates a democratic gap. Those making enforcement decisions are not directly accountable to the communities affected by by them. So there's understandably a loss of public confidence. And over time, residents are questioning whether planning conditions have real value, whether environmental permits provide meaningful protection, whether complaints make any difference at all, or whether regulators are measuring activity rather than results.
So residents become exhausted and they stop reporting incidents. And yet the reduced complaint numbers are sometimes treated as evidence that the problem has been sorted. It's not. They're just exhausted and they're fed up of dealing with this issue day in and day out. Now, the Liberal Democrats believe that community engagement in waste management is an essential part of the journey towards a more sustainable and circular economy. This means ensuring that local councils can operate waste management sites effectively without unnecessarily impacting the lives of nearby residents.
As I've explained, residents shouldn't experience excessive environmental effects, health impacts or disruption. We also believe that local communities must have a genuine stake in planning decisions that affect them. Proper consultation and community engagement must be at the heart of proposals for new waste management sites. Full consideration must be given to the environmental, health and quality of impacts of waste management sites on local residents. We must go further as the best waste management system is one that generates less waste in the first place.
This is why we support embedding circular economy principles across the UK's industrial strategy and product design, reducing the amount of waste that communities and councils need to manage effective regulation of waste management sites also requires a properly resourced oversight body, ensuring our environment is protected and health risks are mitigated. This is why we support increased funding to the EA to ensure that it can enforce environmental standards and hold operators to account where sites cause harm to local communities, like in Epsom. The government must also commit to an independent review into the waste crime system.
So in conclusion, the chalk pit in Epsom exposes wider weaknesses within the planning and environmental regulatory system that a fragmented governance, no single accountable authority, poor coordination between regulators, retrospective planning, planning, reducing the consequences of unauthorised development, appeals that weaken local decision making. Enforcement powers that are not consistently exercise, and residents whose concerns are not listened to. The issue is not just the absence of legislation, it's an issue of leadership, accountability and enforcement because without effective enforcement planning conditions and environmental permits become protections that exist only on paper but not in practice.
The EA, Surrey County Council Epsom Borough Council can conduct their site visits and tests and just go home. The contractors can clock in and do a day's work and then clock out and go home. My residents don't have that privilege. Their lives and their homes are here. They're entitled to a high quality of life in their community. I urge the minister to listen to the contributions made by myself and others here today, and take action to end the suffering of my constituents in Epsom.
15:41
15:41
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
To serve under your chairmanship today. Can I congratulate the honourable member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this important debate, as she has strongly articulated today, she has had significant issues locally with sites in her constituency, and this debate is an excellent opportunity for her to share these concerns again with the minister. We've heard powerful contributions from across the House and indeed across the country urban, rural and as ever, from Northern Ireland. Talking about the important sort of health and human impacts as well.
Um, we've heard today from the member for Chippenham talked about fire issues from batteries. The honourable member for Newcastle. Under Lyme, the health impacts affecting people, young and old, the member for Ely and East Cambridgeshire, the fire issue again, Heywood and Middleton North odour and wellbeing issues. The member for Melksham and Devices again talking about some of the odour issues, but also some of the hazards from plastics in terms of wildlife and the environment. The member for Bolton South and Walkden access issues in terms of traffic build up at sites.
The member for Runcorn and Helsby very powerfully articulated the mental health impacts of some of these sites. The member for Congleton talking about some of the issues related to flies as well, and as ever, the member for Strangford talking about some of the heavy traffic issues, but also the knock on consequences of these sites in terms of leading people into fly tipping as well. Um, I'm very proud of the previous conservative government's record on this issue. The 2018 Resources and Waste Strategy, the 2023 Waste Prevention programme, and a statutory target to halve residual waste per person by 2042.
It's essential that the current government builds on that record with an approach that remains sensible and pragmatic. By taking account of the concerns of local residents, whilst ensuring the UK reuses more and wastes less. While all types of waste sites can affect local communities, the worst harm comes from those operating illegally, whether illegal from the outset or having drifted into illegality over time. These sites degrade local environments, creating safety hazards can be damaging to health and in some cases, cutting off access to community spaces altogether.
Sites that are managed poorly and left to get out of hand by the authorities can then lead to a vicious cycle where unscrupulous operators move in. Fly tipping is exacerbated and local communities and the environment are negatively impacted. The Countryside Alliance, his recent report on waste crime is useful here. It identifies major illegal fly tips, such as the horrendous 100ft of 150 metre dump beside the River Cherwell and A34 near Kidlington. It also highlights the Walleys quarry closed in 2024 after years of complaints.
Here I paid tribute to my honourable friend, the member for Newcastle under Lyne, for his efforts and work on this and indeed following on the good work of his predecessor in this regard. Moreover, the report also finds that compliant waste sites can also drive fly tipping if they are made too costly or inconvenient to use. I'd be grateful if the minister could confirm whether she has looked at the report's recommendations on vehicle vehicle owner liability and access to municipal sites. Now turning to incineration.
Specifically, prior to the general election, the previous government issued a moratorium on new environmental permits for waste incineration, giving Defra the chance to properly consider the role incineration should play in managing residual waste in England. That moratorium applied regardless of whether a site already held planning permission, though it rightly excluded hazardous and clinical waste facilities, small incinerators and those seeking permit variations for carbon capture. In December 2024, the current government announced that new waste incinerators would only receive planning approval if they met strict new local and environmental conditions.
As the minister may be aware, friends of the earth oppose incinerators for environmental reasons. The contribution to climate change through carbon emissions. They destroy materials which could be reused, and they fail to provide an incentive for reducing waste. Moreover, it is important that we consider the human element of incinerators and the consequences that they can have on local residents, potentially on their physical health, including respiratory conditions, but also, as we've heard today, their mental health. Does the minister accept that even a small rise in local air pollutants can affect residents?Mental health?Studies suggest that environmental contamination can bring heightened stress and anxiety to the point of dread.
In. Indeed, the UK Health Security Agency has found it is not possible to rule out adverse health effects from municipal waste incinerators completely, which will offer little reassurance to constituents living near one. What is the government doing to support the health, both mental and physical, of these communities?Friend the member for South West Wiltshire, Doctor Murison, who by some quirk of fate, is in the chair today for this debate, has long campaigned on the issue of waste incinerators. And I note a point that he has raised.
You have raised, Mr. Chair, that the incineration of plastic produces 175 times as much CO2 as landfill, and the emissions per unit of energy produced from burning mixed waste is the same as coal and nearly double that of gas. Now, on the issue of energy, which is pertinent today, given that incinerators provide around 3% of the UK's total energy generation, much of the Britain's total energy needs are still met by oil and gas. Now, both the government and the Climate Change Committee have admitted that we still need oil and gas for decades to come and it is vital, therefore, that we make the North Sea an investable basin, reducing domestic production will not mean we consume any less oil and gas.
It will simply make us more dependent on imports that mean we do not benefit more from jobs, investment or higher tax revenues. It will also increase our carbon footprint if we import liquefied natural gas from countries such as the US or Qatar. It is therefore much better for both our economy and indeed the environment that we harvest our own oil and gas. Regrettably, we now won't hear from the incoming Prime Minister for many, many weeks as to what his new government's approach to domestic oil and gas might be.
Now, turning to recycling, which we've heard about today, it was disappointing to see London's recycling rate show no improvement in 2020 425, down 0.9% since 2020 and at 32.7%, the lowest since 2016. It is welcome that the government has continued the simpler recycling measures begun under the previous conservative government. There should be no postcode lottery for what can and cannot be recycled, and we, His Majesty's most loyal official opposition, support a more consistent, streamlined system. Put simply, waste that is not recycled is destined for incineration or landfill.
To conclude, the government should follow the previous government's lead in carefully assessing the need for new incinerators so that we do not end up with more capacity than we need. It also needs to make sure that operators of waste sites are operating legally and with due regard to their environmental responsibilities, such that they do not blight local communities. As we have heard powerfully from across the House and across the country today. Very briefly, yes.
Um, we've heard today from the member for Chippenham talked about fire issues from batteries. The honourable member for Newcastle. Under Lyme, the health impacts affecting people, young and old, the member for Ely and East Cambridgeshire, the fire issue again, Heywood and Middleton North odour and wellbeing issues. The member for Melksham and Devices again talking about some of the odour issues, but also some of the hazards from plastics in terms of wildlife and the environment. The member for Bolton South and Walkden access issues in terms of traffic build up at sites.
The member for Runcorn and Helsby very powerfully articulated the mental health impacts of some of these sites. The member for Congleton talking about some of the issues related to flies as well, and as ever, the member for Strangford talking about some of the heavy traffic issues, but also the knock on consequences of these sites in terms of leading people into fly tipping as well. Um, I'm very proud of the previous conservative government's record on this issue. The 2018 Resources and Waste Strategy, the 2023 Waste Prevention programme, and a statutory target to halve residual waste per person by 2042.
It's essential that the current government builds on that record with an approach that remains sensible and pragmatic. By taking account of the concerns of local residents, whilst ensuring the UK reuses more and wastes less. While all types of waste sites can affect local communities, the worst harm comes from those operating illegally, whether illegal from the outset or having drifted into illegality over time. These sites degrade local environments, creating safety hazards can be damaging to health and in some cases, cutting off access to community spaces altogether.
Sites that are managed poorly and left to get out of hand by the authorities can then lead to a vicious cycle where unscrupulous operators move in. Fly tipping is exacerbated and local communities and the environment are negatively impacted. The Countryside Alliance, his recent report on waste crime is useful here. It identifies major illegal fly tips, such as the horrendous 100ft of 150 metre dump beside the River Cherwell and A34 near Kidlington. It also highlights the Walleys quarry closed in 2024 after years of complaints.
Here I paid tribute to my honourable friend, the member for Newcastle under Lyne, for his efforts and work on this and indeed following on the good work of his predecessor in this regard. Moreover, the report also finds that compliant waste sites can also drive fly tipping if they are made too costly or inconvenient to use. I'd be grateful if the minister could confirm whether she has looked at the report's recommendations on vehicle vehicle owner liability and access to municipal sites. Now turning to incineration.
Specifically, prior to the general election, the previous government issued a moratorium on new environmental permits for waste incineration, giving Defra the chance to properly consider the role incineration should play in managing residual waste in England. That moratorium applied regardless of whether a site already held planning permission, though it rightly excluded hazardous and clinical waste facilities, small incinerators and those seeking permit variations for carbon capture. In December 2024, the current government announced that new waste incinerators would only receive planning approval if they met strict new local and environmental conditions.
As the minister may be aware, friends of the earth oppose incinerators for environmental reasons. The contribution to climate change through carbon emissions. They destroy materials which could be reused, and they fail to provide an incentive for reducing waste. Moreover, it is important that we consider the human element of incinerators and the consequences that they can have on local residents, potentially on their physical health, including respiratory conditions, but also, as we've heard today, their mental health. Does the minister accept that even a small rise in local air pollutants can affect residents?Mental health?Studies suggest that environmental contamination can bring heightened stress and anxiety to the point of dread.
In. Indeed, the UK Health Security Agency has found it is not possible to rule out adverse health effects from municipal waste incinerators completely, which will offer little reassurance to constituents living near one. What is the government doing to support the health, both mental and physical, of these communities?Friend the member for South West Wiltshire, Doctor Murison, who by some quirk of fate, is in the chair today for this debate, has long campaigned on the issue of waste incinerators. And I note a point that he has raised.
You have raised, Mr. Chair, that the incineration of plastic produces 175 times as much CO2 as landfill, and the emissions per unit of energy produced from burning mixed waste is the same as coal and nearly double that of gas. Now, on the issue of energy, which is pertinent today, given that incinerators provide around 3% of the UK's total energy generation, much of the Britain's total energy needs are still met by oil and gas. Now, both the government and the Climate Change Committee have admitted that we still need oil and gas for decades to come and it is vital, therefore, that we make the North Sea an investable basin, reducing domestic production will not mean we consume any less oil and gas.
It will simply make us more dependent on imports that mean we do not benefit more from jobs, investment or higher tax revenues. It will also increase our carbon footprint if we import liquefied natural gas from countries such as the US or Qatar. It is therefore much better for both our economy and indeed the environment that we harvest our own oil and gas. Regrettably, we now won't hear from the incoming Prime Minister for many, many weeks as to what his new government's approach to domestic oil and gas might be.
Now, turning to recycling, which we've heard about today, it was disappointing to see London's recycling rate show no improvement in 2020 425, down 0.9% since 2020 and at 32.7%, the lowest since 2016. It is welcome that the government has continued the simpler recycling measures begun under the previous conservative government. There should be no postcode lottery for what can and cannot be recycled, and we, His Majesty's most loyal official opposition, support a more consistent, streamlined system. Put simply, waste that is not recycled is destined for incineration or landfill.
To conclude, the government should follow the previous government's lead in carefully assessing the need for new incinerators so that we do not end up with more capacity than we need. It also needs to make sure that operators of waste sites are operating legally and with due regard to their environmental responsibilities, such that they do not blight local communities. As we have heard powerfully from across the House and across the country today. Very briefly, yes.
15:46
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
And his speech mentioned the Countryside Alliance, um, Alliance. Of course is a country sports organisation, but they are a very credible and influential organisation. And they highlight things like rural crime. They highlight things like waste sites as well. And does he recognise that Countryside Alliance has a good role and an important role to play in the countryside, and they should be commended for doing so?
15:47
15:47
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
My hon. Friend the member for Strangford, and it's always a pleasure to be intervened by him. Um, he's been very kind to me over the years, very much from from my very my my maiden speech. He was so kind and came across the chamber and spoke to me straight after that. And so I'll always take his intervention, as I'm sure everyone else will today. I totally agree with him. I think the Countryside Alliance is a powerful organisation.
The report that I cited in my earlier remarks highlighting waste, crime and the impacts on Flytipping, but highlighting some of the key issues across the country, including from my hon. Friend's constituency in Newcastle under Lyme, show that they are a powerful voice. They do their research and the rural voice does need to be listened in this debate. This is an issue that affects the whole country urban, suburban and rural, and we need to listen to that. Finally, Doctor Murison, this current government should look hard at what can be done before waste ever reaches these sites.
And above all, it should listen to local residents take seriously the effect that these sites have on people, on their mental and on their physical health. And they must, with all the authorities that they have, keep monitoring the health data closely and act to help people in their daily lives.
The report that I cited in my earlier remarks highlighting waste, crime and the impacts on Flytipping, but highlighting some of the key issues across the country, including from my hon. Friend's constituency in Newcastle under Lyme, show that they are a powerful voice. They do their research and the rural voice does need to be listened in this debate. This is an issue that affects the whole country urban, suburban and rural, and we need to listen to that. Finally, Doctor Murison, this current government should look hard at what can be done before waste ever reaches these sites.
And above all, it should listen to local residents take seriously the effect that these sites have on people, on their mental and on their physical health. And they must, with all the authorities that they have, keep monitoring the health data closely and act to help people in their daily lives.
15:48
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
Thank you, Sir Andrew, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And just to begin with, an apology, of course, for the delay in arriving to my hon. Friend and to the rest of the House and yourself. And I thank the honourable member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for securing this debate. You may notice I'm not the Minister for nature, but I hope I will do her justice in responding to this debate, because I know personally how hard she has worked in this area and how seriously she takes it, and I thank the honourable members across the House who made valuable points today.
And this debate reminds me, Mr. Chairman, of why it is so important to deal properly with rubbish and why all in this House support bins, whether their accounts or not. And yes, sorry for my throwaway comments there. Um, so people rightly expect to live in communities that are safe, clean and pleasant places to live. They expect clean air, thriving natural spaces and confidence that waste is being managed responsibly. And most importantly, they expect the environmental regulation and waste management are working in the interests of local people, and I absolutely agree with them.
And so does this government. So just to quickly summarize some of the actions that the government has taken, indeed led by my honourable friend, the Minister for nature with the Waste Crime Action Plan, commitments and achievements. She has already reformed the carriers, brokers and dealers regimes that was debated in the House of Commons just last week, introduced digital waste tracking, which. The necessary legislation was debated on the 16th of June. In March, she published updated statutory guidance and a code of practice for local authorities on litter enforcement powers and how to use them.
She has also published best practice guidance for local authorities and using their powers to seize vehicles related to fly tipping, as well as that, she has overseen the doubling of the Environment Agency's waste crime enforcement budget, with an additional £45 million over the next three years, because that was, quite rightly pointed out by my hon. Friends, it is difficult for the Environment Agency to do their job when they face 14 years of austerity and cuts. They are getting that additional money in order to carry out their duties.
The Environment Agency is also building a new Waste Intelligent Analysis Unit and has already started interviewing new staff for this unit. The Environment Agency secured access to key land Registry data sets, allowing quicker identification of the landowner where new illegal waste sites appear, and also securing powers in the Crime and Policing Act 2026 to let courts put points on driving licence of those guilty of fly tipping and we will make fly tippers, clear up their own mess and consult how to make that commitment a reality. Also started clearing up some of the worst legal waste sites already blighting communities up and down the country and moving quickly through the clear up at the site at Bolton House road, Wigan, and installing fire and security mitigations.
So I would say that it isn't time for reviews of waste. It is time for more action. And that's exactly what this government is doing. And in that context, I thank my hon. Friend the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for her tireless efforts in raising attention to Jameson Road landfill in her constituency. Her constituents made a fantastic choice at the last election in really voting for a tireless champion for their community and somebody who I know from my own experience, does not let an issue go once she gets on with it.
So we know that we're going to have to do exactly what we're told when it comes to my honourable friend. And as she set out, far too many of her constituents have struggled with persistent odour complaints for far too long. Nobody should feel trapped in their homes, workplaces or schools because bad smells mean they cannot go outside or even open their windows. We're obviously keeping a very close eye on sites like Jameson Road and through the Environment Agency, using its regulatory powers to ensure operators are held accountable for poor compliance.
As my hon. Friend knows, because she's mentioned she meets with the Environment Agency every week. So she really is doing a brilliant job holding them to account. They've already served enforcement notices to mitigate the worst effects of the odour. And in May earlier this year, it varied the permit to restrict the site to accepting only low risk waste such as soil, concrete and bricks. A regulatory notice is also enforced, requiring the operator to remediate the site, including temporary covering and subsequent permanent capping works.
These measures, alongside enhanced inspections, expanded monitoring arrangements, are expected to lead to a reduction in the incident, reports associated with the sites. The Environment Agency will continue to maintain close regulatory oversight of the site, hold the operator to account and I know my honourable friend will as well for delivering improvements to the local communities. Rightly expect the operator must continue to deliver the required improvements and local communities should be confident that regulatory intervention will follow if standards are not met. Let me be clear where compliance falls short at any way site, the regulator is prepared to take further action as necessary and will work closely with the government to ensure communities are protected from serious harm.
But I also recognise there are many other honourable members in attendance today who have poor performing waste sites in their constituencies, and I will do my absolute best to answer as many of the questions that were raised as as possible. My hon. Friend the member for Lancashire and Wear raised concerns about her landfill and what's happening there, and as she will know, we've already got the extra £45 million that should be helping in her area as well. My hon. Friend the member for Warwick and Leamington.
We have had a meeting regarding the flies, and I know flies was mentioned by a couple of other people, and it really is awful when we see a huge sort of swarm of them and how they enter people's homes. And we've had a meeting about that a number of times, and I know that's something we're staying quite close in contact, in contact with. Um, so in answer another question from my honourable friend, our analysis is that the Environment Agency does need. More better enforcement powers.
Um, so that is why we've committed the cap to spend more powers than the EA is a priority for the teams and why we're going on giving an extra £45 million. As we've already mentioned. Um, the on my honourable friend the member for Newcastle under Lyme and I have to pay tribute to his campaigning because he says he hasn't, I think, missed an opportunity in the voting lobby or seeing me around Parliament to raise what's happening in Walleys Quarry. The latest information I have for him is following the operator's liquidation.
The Environment Agency is managing the site to prevent pollution risks. Work is focused on site stability, maintaining, capping, managing leachate, developing longer term engineering solutions. While the odour reports remain very low, the Environment Agency monitors are continuing to monitor the site to see if there's any increase in the odour. But again, I know he'll be back on the case and mentioning it to me if anything changes there. There was two honourable members for Chippenham and I. Hope I've said that correctly.
Mentioned the Lower Compton landfill site. The latest I can tell you on that site is permanent capping of the operational areas being completed and new gas infrastructure is due to be installed and the monitoring identified. Occasional exceedances of odour annoyance guidelines, but no exceedance of the WHO human health guidelines and the waste permits. Uh, no. That's. Yes, the waste permits specify acceptance controls and this can include sampling and testing. And let me see who else I've got on my list here.
My honourable friend for Ely and East Cambridgeshire, this site has had 30 fires since reopening in February 2025. I believe most of those to be arson and most outside the site. The Environment Agency is working closely with the operator and other partners and investigating the fires that have been happening on the site. My honourable friend the member for Heywood and Middleton North and this government is committed in its manifesto to move the UK towards a circular economy. We're going to be publishing our circular economy growth plan soon on the Pilsworth site in the honourable friend's constituency, the Environment Agency continued to closely monitor odour issues which remain below World Health Organization levels of concern, but that is not sufficient to reassure my hon.
Friends, constituents and that is why we are investing in the EA with new enforcement powers and new funding, and I absolutely champion her local constituents, as she mentioned, who have got together to campaign on this issue, and I want to reassure them and her that they absolutely do have a voice with this government, and we are listening to them and taking them seriously. And I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the member for Bolton South and Walden Walden. Thank you. Um, I mean, we know each other from, um, from previous campaigns together.
So I know what a brilliant campaigner, uh, she is. And I'm pleased that some mitigations have been made. I'm pleased that things are starting to show that they're improving. And of course. I'll just finish. But I'm really pleased that mitigations have been made and I support her. Call for more joined up work across the different agencies, and if I can support her in helping to get that joined up work, I absolutely will.
And this debate reminds me, Mr. Chairman, of why it is so important to deal properly with rubbish and why all in this House support bins, whether their accounts or not. And yes, sorry for my throwaway comments there. Um, so people rightly expect to live in communities that are safe, clean and pleasant places to live. They expect clean air, thriving natural spaces and confidence that waste is being managed responsibly. And most importantly, they expect the environmental regulation and waste management are working in the interests of local people, and I absolutely agree with them.
And so does this government. So just to quickly summarize some of the actions that the government has taken, indeed led by my honourable friend, the Minister for nature with the Waste Crime Action Plan, commitments and achievements. She has already reformed the carriers, brokers and dealers regimes that was debated in the House of Commons just last week, introduced digital waste tracking, which. The necessary legislation was debated on the 16th of June. In March, she published updated statutory guidance and a code of practice for local authorities on litter enforcement powers and how to use them.
She has also published best practice guidance for local authorities and using their powers to seize vehicles related to fly tipping, as well as that, she has overseen the doubling of the Environment Agency's waste crime enforcement budget, with an additional £45 million over the next three years, because that was, quite rightly pointed out by my hon. Friends, it is difficult for the Environment Agency to do their job when they face 14 years of austerity and cuts. They are getting that additional money in order to carry out their duties.
The Environment Agency is also building a new Waste Intelligent Analysis Unit and has already started interviewing new staff for this unit. The Environment Agency secured access to key land Registry data sets, allowing quicker identification of the landowner where new illegal waste sites appear, and also securing powers in the Crime and Policing Act 2026 to let courts put points on driving licence of those guilty of fly tipping and we will make fly tippers, clear up their own mess and consult how to make that commitment a reality. Also started clearing up some of the worst legal waste sites already blighting communities up and down the country and moving quickly through the clear up at the site at Bolton House road, Wigan, and installing fire and security mitigations.
So I would say that it isn't time for reviews of waste. It is time for more action. And that's exactly what this government is doing. And in that context, I thank my hon. Friend the member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood for her tireless efforts in raising attention to Jameson Road landfill in her constituency. Her constituents made a fantastic choice at the last election in really voting for a tireless champion for their community and somebody who I know from my own experience, does not let an issue go once she gets on with it.
So we know that we're going to have to do exactly what we're told when it comes to my honourable friend. And as she set out, far too many of her constituents have struggled with persistent odour complaints for far too long. Nobody should feel trapped in their homes, workplaces or schools because bad smells mean they cannot go outside or even open their windows. We're obviously keeping a very close eye on sites like Jameson Road and through the Environment Agency, using its regulatory powers to ensure operators are held accountable for poor compliance.
As my hon. Friend knows, because she's mentioned she meets with the Environment Agency every week. So she really is doing a brilliant job holding them to account. They've already served enforcement notices to mitigate the worst effects of the odour. And in May earlier this year, it varied the permit to restrict the site to accepting only low risk waste such as soil, concrete and bricks. A regulatory notice is also enforced, requiring the operator to remediate the site, including temporary covering and subsequent permanent capping works.
These measures, alongside enhanced inspections, expanded monitoring arrangements, are expected to lead to a reduction in the incident, reports associated with the sites. The Environment Agency will continue to maintain close regulatory oversight of the site, hold the operator to account and I know my honourable friend will as well for delivering improvements to the local communities. Rightly expect the operator must continue to deliver the required improvements and local communities should be confident that regulatory intervention will follow if standards are not met. Let me be clear where compliance falls short at any way site, the regulator is prepared to take further action as necessary and will work closely with the government to ensure communities are protected from serious harm.
But I also recognise there are many other honourable members in attendance today who have poor performing waste sites in their constituencies, and I will do my absolute best to answer as many of the questions that were raised as as possible. My hon. Friend the member for Lancashire and Wear raised concerns about her landfill and what's happening there, and as she will know, we've already got the extra £45 million that should be helping in her area as well. My hon. Friend the member for Warwick and Leamington.
We have had a meeting regarding the flies, and I know flies was mentioned by a couple of other people, and it really is awful when we see a huge sort of swarm of them and how they enter people's homes. And we've had a meeting about that a number of times, and I know that's something we're staying quite close in contact, in contact with. Um, so in answer another question from my honourable friend, our analysis is that the Environment Agency does need. More better enforcement powers.
Um, so that is why we've committed the cap to spend more powers than the EA is a priority for the teams and why we're going on giving an extra £45 million. As we've already mentioned. Um, the on my honourable friend the member for Newcastle under Lyme and I have to pay tribute to his campaigning because he says he hasn't, I think, missed an opportunity in the voting lobby or seeing me around Parliament to raise what's happening in Walleys Quarry. The latest information I have for him is following the operator's liquidation.
The Environment Agency is managing the site to prevent pollution risks. Work is focused on site stability, maintaining, capping, managing leachate, developing longer term engineering solutions. While the odour reports remain very low, the Environment Agency monitors are continuing to monitor the site to see if there's any increase in the odour. But again, I know he'll be back on the case and mentioning it to me if anything changes there. There was two honourable members for Chippenham and I. Hope I've said that correctly.
Mentioned the Lower Compton landfill site. The latest I can tell you on that site is permanent capping of the operational areas being completed and new gas infrastructure is due to be installed and the monitoring identified. Occasional exceedances of odour annoyance guidelines, but no exceedance of the WHO human health guidelines and the waste permits. Uh, no. That's. Yes, the waste permits specify acceptance controls and this can include sampling and testing. And let me see who else I've got on my list here.
My honourable friend for Ely and East Cambridgeshire, this site has had 30 fires since reopening in February 2025. I believe most of those to be arson and most outside the site. The Environment Agency is working closely with the operator and other partners and investigating the fires that have been happening on the site. My honourable friend the member for Heywood and Middleton North and this government is committed in its manifesto to move the UK towards a circular economy. We're going to be publishing our circular economy growth plan soon on the Pilsworth site in the honourable friend's constituency, the Environment Agency continued to closely monitor odour issues which remain below World Health Organization levels of concern, but that is not sufficient to reassure my hon.
Friends, constituents and that is why we are investing in the EA with new enforcement powers and new funding, and I absolutely champion her local constituents, as she mentioned, who have got together to campaign on this issue, and I want to reassure them and her that they absolutely do have a voice with this government, and we are listening to them and taking them seriously. And I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the member for Bolton South and Walden Walden. Thank you. Um, I mean, we know each other from, um, from previous campaigns together.
So I know what a brilliant campaigner, uh, she is. And I'm pleased that some mitigations have been made. I'm pleased that things are starting to show that they're improving. And of course. I'll just finish. But I'm really pleased that mitigations have been made and I support her. Call for more joined up work across the different agencies, and if I can support her in helping to get that joined up work, I absolutely will.
15:57
15:57
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
I thank the honourable gentleman. And I'm conscious I'm speaking outside of my briefing, responding to this debate, but I will ensure that my honourable friend has had his comment and that she gets back to him with with thoughts on on that one. I do not want to miss anyone out. My hon. Friend the member for Congleton raised the work the Environment Agency are doing, and again, the problems that people have with flies, and I totally agree with her point that we put people before profits and it should never be the other way round.
There is a land Remediation Pathfinder scheme launching this autumn, and there is support available by the local authority to support work if needed, and this will fund additional local authority resource. So there is this additional money coming in for some local authorities. And I am conscious I want to give my hon. Friend the time to respond, so I will speed up. Um, my hon. Friend the member for Strangford will waste. Policy is devolved on the Northern Irish circumstances.
Unique. We enjoy a strong relationship with our colleagues in Northern Ireland and we soon to commission new research on the drivers and regulatory factors underpinning waste and actively working with Northern Ireland colleagues, and a design of that research. Um, so I hope I've responded to most of the comments made by honourable people. I know that you will continue to, um, speak to. My hon. Friend, where necessary and make sure this continues to be a priority for her and the rest of government.
And just in case, Mr. Chairman, just in case this is my last time addressing everyone, can I say thank you to my wonderful officials?Thank you to all the team I've worked with. It's been an absolute pleasure. Hopefully I'll be back in the new year, but we never know. In which case, I will say for the moment, over and out.
There is a land Remediation Pathfinder scheme launching this autumn, and there is support available by the local authority to support work if needed, and this will fund additional local authority resource. So there is this additional money coming in for some local authorities. And I am conscious I want to give my hon. Friend the time to respond, so I will speed up. Um, my hon. Friend the member for Strangford will waste. Policy is devolved on the Northern Irish circumstances.
Unique. We enjoy a strong relationship with our colleagues in Northern Ireland and we soon to commission new research on the drivers and regulatory factors underpinning waste and actively working with Northern Ireland colleagues, and a design of that research. Um, so I hope I've responded to most of the comments made by honourable people. I know that you will continue to, um, speak to. My hon. Friend, where necessary and make sure this continues to be a priority for her and the rest of government.
And just in case, Mr. Chairman, just in case this is my last time addressing everyone, can I say thank you to my wonderful officials?Thank you to all the team I've worked with. It's been an absolute pleasure. Hopefully I'll be back in the new year, but we never know. In which case, I will say for the moment, over and out.
15:59
15:59
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
Firstly, thank. You for your chairmanship today. Doctor Morrison and thanks to all members who have spoken and intervened and to the Minister for her response. I would also like to again pay tribute to the tireless campaigners who have never given up in their struggle against trans waste, disdain for our community. Over the coming months. I will keep pushing in Parliament for the closures of this site once and for all, and for the enforcement needed to tackle the epidemic of waste crime across this country.
Not only will I work with the new Prime Minister to ensure that working class communities like mine and Hayes are no longer an afterthought for those in Westminster, delivering on issues as fundamental as this is a mission of the Labour government, it is a test of our ability to change things for the better. I came into politics to fight for justice at every level. Social and environmental justice are part of the same struggle, and I will not stop fighting until we deliver both for the British people.
Not only will I work with the new Prime Minister to ensure that working class communities like mine and Hayes are no longer an afterthought for those in Westminster, delivering on issues as fundamental as this is a mission of the Labour government, it is a test of our ability to change things for the better. I came into politics to fight for justice at every level. Social and environmental justice are part of the same struggle, and I will not stop fighting until we deliver both for the British people.
16:00
16:01
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Thank you very much, Mr. Morrison. And it's Doctor Morrison as a chair to serve under your chairmanship. Can I beg to move that this House is considered the potential merger of a VAT reduction pilot for hospitality businesses in Northern Ireland. And indeed, I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of a pilot scheme to reduce VAT for the hospitality and food sectors in Northern Ireland. This proposal enjoys support from across the political spectrum and commercial sector. It has the backing of businesses, Hospitality Ulster, the Northern Ireland Food to Go Association, ministers of the Northern Ireland Executive, members of the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Assembly's all party group on food to go where my party colleagues, John Stewart and Diana Armstrong are both officers.
This is not a request for special treatment. It's a request for fairness, for economic common sense and the opportunity to test a policy that can actually strengthen businesses, protect jobs, and support communities across every part of Northern Ireland, while actually providing valuable evidence for policy makers across the United Kingdom. Because hospitality is one of our most important industries in Northern Ireland, it contributes approximately 1.4 billion in gross value added to our economy. It accounts for 2.5% of our economic activity and supports roughly 50,000 jobs.
Doctor Morrison these are not simply statistics. They represent family businesses, local employers, tourism operators, cafes, restaurants, hotels, pubs and food to go outlets. They are the very lifeblood of our towns, villages and cities. Yet the sector is under immense pressure. Businesses have faced a perfect storm of rising energy costs. Inflation, increased national insurance contributions, increases in the minimum wage and a continuing cost of living crisis that is reducing the disposable income of their customers. Many businesses, businesses that I have met in my constituency of South Antrim, from the Stone Hound in from Town to browns, Coffee and Ballyclare, the McKeever Group, which has seven hotels and many more businesses that I don't have time to mention, are actually being forced to make difficult decisions.
Oh well.
This is not a request for special treatment. It's a request for fairness, for economic common sense and the opportunity to test a policy that can actually strengthen businesses, protect jobs, and support communities across every part of Northern Ireland, while actually providing valuable evidence for policy makers across the United Kingdom. Because hospitality is one of our most important industries in Northern Ireland, it contributes approximately 1.4 billion in gross value added to our economy. It accounts for 2.5% of our economic activity and supports roughly 50,000 jobs.
Doctor Morrison these are not simply statistics. They represent family businesses, local employers, tourism operators, cafes, restaurants, hotels, pubs and food to go outlets. They are the very lifeblood of our towns, villages and cities. Yet the sector is under immense pressure. Businesses have faced a perfect storm of rising energy costs. Inflation, increased national insurance contributions, increases in the minimum wage and a continuing cost of living crisis that is reducing the disposable income of their customers. Many businesses, businesses that I have met in my constituency of South Antrim, from the Stone Hound in from Town to browns, Coffee and Ballyclare, the McKeever Group, which has seven hotels and many more businesses that I don't have time to mention, are actually being forced to make difficult decisions.
Oh well.
16:03
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Grateful to my hon. Friend because he knows he is my friend for giving way, and I'm enjoying listening to the introduction of his his remarks. And whilst I won't comment on the specifics of the pilot, I do want to just say, as someone who got married at the Dunadry Hotel in his constituency of Antrim, Doctor Morrison, that um. I'll take any opportunity to elevate the hospitality sector in Northern Ireland. It's world renowned, it's loved by all those who get to enjoy it.
And its it rivals second only to Staffordshire.
And its it rivals second only to Staffordshire.
16:03
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Thank you very much, Douglas Morrison. It was agreeing with the honourable member up until his last point. But when we are talking about those hospitality sectors and sectors in Northern Ireland, providers, the McKeever Group, the group I mentioned, is actually the owner of the hotel where the honourable member had his wedding reception, as did I in one of their hotels in the group as well, and they're just celebrating 40 years in anniversaries. Uh, but talking to them, they are being forced to the hotel, by the way, is 40 years.
Not my marriage. Just to be clear, the honourable member for Strangford, but they themselves are being forced to make difficult decisions, looking at staff numbers, reducing opening hours, counselling or even stalling investment plans, or simply fighting to survive the Northern Ireland Food to Go Organisation have told me that over 200 of their businesses have closed in 2026. That's this year to date, but Northern Ireland faces an additional challenge, a challenge that does not exist elsewhere in the United Kingdom. We share a land border with another jurisdiction.
I'll give way to the member.
Not my marriage. Just to be clear, the honourable member for Strangford, but they themselves are being forced to make difficult decisions, looking at staff numbers, reducing opening hours, counselling or even stalling investment plans, or simply fighting to survive the Northern Ireland Food to Go Organisation have told me that over 200 of their businesses have closed in 2026. That's this year to date, but Northern Ireland faces an additional challenge, a challenge that does not exist elsewhere in the United Kingdom. We share a land border with another jurisdiction.
I'll give way to the member.
16:04
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
First of all, commend the honourable gentleman for South Antrim as an honourable friend and colleague for securing this vital debate, and I rise to support the UK wide That's a Problem campaign alongside our local champions and Hospitality Ulster. When we look at the hospitality sector in Northern Ireland, we're looking at an industry trapped in an impossible competitive vise. This month, the Republic of Ireland dropped its VAT on food and cafe catering to 9%, meaning our border communities face a 120% tax disparity compared to neighbours just a short drive away.
So does my honourable friend and colleague not agree that we're only asking for our hospitality sector to get a fair fighting chance?
So does my honourable friend and colleague not agree that we're only asking for our hospitality sector to get a fair fighting chance?
16:05
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
And I thank the member for Strangford for raising that point. Because of the point that we do share a land border with another jurisdiction. And, as he has said, the Republic of Ireland hospitality businesses already benefit from a significantly lower VAT rate of 13.5%, where the Irish government have gone further by moving towards a 9% rate for food led hospitality. So that creates a clear competitive imbalance.
16:05
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Um, thank the honourable member for giving way and for securing this debate. Um, what is a very important issue?Would the member agree with me that right across Northern Ireland and in my North Down constituency, many pubs, cafes, hotels, B&Bs and local attractions are operating on extremely narrow margins. Targeting that relief would improve cash flows and strengthen their resilience, particularly amid rising wage energy, food and insurance costs.
16:06
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
And I agree with the member, and I think that's why many of those organisations, representative organisations, think that VAT reduction would be a key enabler. It won't solve all those problems, but would definitely help in regards to the cross-border imbalance. So a family deciding where to spend their money, a couple booking a wedding reception, an organisation booking an event or a visitor choosing accommodation is increasingly influenced by price, so businesses on either side of the border enjoy a tax advantage that can amount to tens or even hundreds of thousands of pounds each year, depending on their size.
So the result is obvious. Northern Ireland businesses are competing with one hand tied behind their back, and this problem is about to get worse. Unless action is taken, and what is especially striking is that the United Kingdom's 20% VAT rate for hospitality is increasingly an outlier across Europe. France supplies 10%, Italy implies 10%, Croatia applies 13%, and Germany is moving towards a reduced hospitality rate. So across Europe. Government recognises hospitality as a strategically important sector, deserving of support because of its role in employment, tourism and local economic development.
So the question we are asking for government is simple. If other countries are using VAT policy to support growth, jobs and investment, why are they unwilling even to test whether such an approach could work in Northern Ireland?And that is why the proposal for a Northern Ireland VAT pilot is so compelling, because a pilot is not a permanent commitment, a pilot is not a leap in the dark, and a pilot is evidence driven policy making. It would allow the Treasury to assess whether a reduced rate actually increases economic activity, protects employment, boosts tourism and indeed stimulates wider tax revenues through income tax.
National insurance contributions and corporation tax. The advantages could be substantial. First, it would help businesses remain viable and for many hospitality operators, a VAT reduction would improve margins at a time where costs are rising dramatically. Some businesses would pass savings directly to customers through lower prices, while others may reinvest those savings into staffing, wages, training or expansion. Either way, the money would remain within the real economy. Secondly, it would support jobs. Hospitality is one of the largest employers of our young people and provides opportunities for people entering the workforce, developing skills or indeed returning to employment.
So protecting hospitality means protecting livelihoods in every constituency across our country. Thirdly, it would strengthen tourism. Visitors do not separate hotels, restaurants, cafes and attractions from the overall experience of Northern Ireland. So more competitive hospitality sector helps create a stronger visitor economy. Recent successes in attracting major international events have demonstrated that Northern Ireland's potential to attract visitors and generate significant economic returns are actually in. The more competitive VAT regime would help build on that success. Fourthly, it would support our high streets and local communities, hospitality businesses create footfall.
They bring people into town centres. They occupy premises that might otherwise stand vacant, and every restaurant, cafe or takeaway that survives and prospers contributes to the wider vitality of our communities. But Doctor Morrison. There's another important question can this be done legally?And the answer is yes, because too often discussions around Northern Ireland are dominated by what cannot be done because of the protocol or indeed the Windsor framework. So in this occasion, the legal advice is clear. It is clear that neither the VAT provisions applying to Northern Ireland nor state aid considerations would prevent the UK government from introducing a reduced fat pilot for the hospitality sector in Northern Ireland.
Indeed, article eight of the Northern Ireland Protocol specifically envisages a situation where VAT arrangements may diverge to address competitive imbalances with the Republic of Ireland, which this is through the legal route exists. The economic case exists and the practical mechanism exists. What is required now is the political will to act. Of course, we have to be honest about the challenges, a reduction of VAT would have an upfront fiscal cost, and the purpose of such a pilot is precisely to measure whether increased economic activity could offset some or all of that additional revenue loss over time, actually, through growth, investment and employment.
So the question before us is not whether there is a cost. The question is whether the cost of doing nothing is greater. So what is the cost of businesses closing?What is the cost of jobs being lost?What is the cost of investment leaving Northern Ireland?And indeed, what is the cost of allowing a widening competitive gap between businesses north and south of the border?Those questions deserve answers and in Northern Ireland, pilot would provide them because Northern Ireland has often been described as being unique.
In this case or unique circumstances provide a unique opportunity. We have a clearly defined geographical market. We face a distinct cross-border competitive challenge and we have an obvious comparator in the Republic of Ireland that makes Northern Ireland the ideal test bed for hospitality. VAT pilot. So if successful, the lessons learned could help inform policy across the wider United Kingdom. So this proposal is actually pro-business. It's pro-worker, it's pro tourism and it's pro-growth. More importantly, it is a practical and evidence based proposal that deserves to be tested rather than dismissed.
Douglas Mawson, the incoming prime minister, talks of more devolution. Here's an opportunity for the minister to put such a case in front of him. The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has actually opened an evidence call for an inquiry on this subject. So it is not something that will simply end at the close of today's debate. So I therefore urge the government and the Treasury to work with the Northern Ireland Executive, industry representatives and local businesses to establish a reduce VAT pilot for hospitality businesses in Northern Ireland.
So let us give this vital sector a fair chance to compete. Let us protect jobs and investment. Let us strengthen our tourism offering and let us demonstrate that creative economic policy can actually help unlock Northern Ireland's full economic potential. Doctor Morrison, I commend this motion to the House.
So the result is obvious. Northern Ireland businesses are competing with one hand tied behind their back, and this problem is about to get worse. Unless action is taken, and what is especially striking is that the United Kingdom's 20% VAT rate for hospitality is increasingly an outlier across Europe. France supplies 10%, Italy implies 10%, Croatia applies 13%, and Germany is moving towards a reduced hospitality rate. So across Europe. Government recognises hospitality as a strategically important sector, deserving of support because of its role in employment, tourism and local economic development.
So the question we are asking for government is simple. If other countries are using VAT policy to support growth, jobs and investment, why are they unwilling even to test whether such an approach could work in Northern Ireland?And that is why the proposal for a Northern Ireland VAT pilot is so compelling, because a pilot is not a permanent commitment, a pilot is not a leap in the dark, and a pilot is evidence driven policy making. It would allow the Treasury to assess whether a reduced rate actually increases economic activity, protects employment, boosts tourism and indeed stimulates wider tax revenues through income tax.
National insurance contributions and corporation tax. The advantages could be substantial. First, it would help businesses remain viable and for many hospitality operators, a VAT reduction would improve margins at a time where costs are rising dramatically. Some businesses would pass savings directly to customers through lower prices, while others may reinvest those savings into staffing, wages, training or expansion. Either way, the money would remain within the real economy. Secondly, it would support jobs. Hospitality is one of the largest employers of our young people and provides opportunities for people entering the workforce, developing skills or indeed returning to employment.
So protecting hospitality means protecting livelihoods in every constituency across our country. Thirdly, it would strengthen tourism. Visitors do not separate hotels, restaurants, cafes and attractions from the overall experience of Northern Ireland. So more competitive hospitality sector helps create a stronger visitor economy. Recent successes in attracting major international events have demonstrated that Northern Ireland's potential to attract visitors and generate significant economic returns are actually in. The more competitive VAT regime would help build on that success. Fourthly, it would support our high streets and local communities, hospitality businesses create footfall.
They bring people into town centres. They occupy premises that might otherwise stand vacant, and every restaurant, cafe or takeaway that survives and prospers contributes to the wider vitality of our communities. But Doctor Morrison. There's another important question can this be done legally?And the answer is yes, because too often discussions around Northern Ireland are dominated by what cannot be done because of the protocol or indeed the Windsor framework. So in this occasion, the legal advice is clear. It is clear that neither the VAT provisions applying to Northern Ireland nor state aid considerations would prevent the UK government from introducing a reduced fat pilot for the hospitality sector in Northern Ireland.
Indeed, article eight of the Northern Ireland Protocol specifically envisages a situation where VAT arrangements may diverge to address competitive imbalances with the Republic of Ireland, which this is through the legal route exists. The economic case exists and the practical mechanism exists. What is required now is the political will to act. Of course, we have to be honest about the challenges, a reduction of VAT would have an upfront fiscal cost, and the purpose of such a pilot is precisely to measure whether increased economic activity could offset some or all of that additional revenue loss over time, actually, through growth, investment and employment.
So the question before us is not whether there is a cost. The question is whether the cost of doing nothing is greater. So what is the cost of businesses closing?What is the cost of jobs being lost?What is the cost of investment leaving Northern Ireland?And indeed, what is the cost of allowing a widening competitive gap between businesses north and south of the border?Those questions deserve answers and in Northern Ireland, pilot would provide them because Northern Ireland has often been described as being unique.
In this case or unique circumstances provide a unique opportunity. We have a clearly defined geographical market. We face a distinct cross-border competitive challenge and we have an obvious comparator in the Republic of Ireland that makes Northern Ireland the ideal test bed for hospitality. VAT pilot. So if successful, the lessons learned could help inform policy across the wider United Kingdom. So this proposal is actually pro-business. It's pro-worker, it's pro tourism and it's pro-growth. More importantly, it is a practical and evidence based proposal that deserves to be tested rather than dismissed.
Douglas Mawson, the incoming prime minister, talks of more devolution. Here's an opportunity for the minister to put such a case in front of him. The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has actually opened an evidence call for an inquiry on this subject. So it is not something that will simply end at the close of today's debate. So I therefore urge the government and the Treasury to work with the Northern Ireland Executive, industry representatives and local businesses to establish a reduce VAT pilot for hospitality businesses in Northern Ireland.
So let us give this vital sector a fair chance to compete. Let us protect jobs and investment. Let us strengthen our tourism offering and let us demonstrate that creative economic policy can actually help unlock Northern Ireland's full economic potential. Doctor Morrison, I commend this motion to the House.
16:13
16:13
16:13
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
To speak in this debate with you in the chair, doctor Morrison, and I thank the honourable member for South Antrim for securing this debate on an important topic facing hospitality businesses in Northern Ireland, and also for his recent question to me in Treasury rules on the same topic. And I do look forward to meeting with him to discuss this topic further as committed to on the floor of the House. Um, I thank honourable members for their interventions to in the debate and the contributions. I congratulate her, Adam, on his, um, festivities over in Northern Ireland.
Very good. How dare I say, Adam, I congratulate the honourable member.
Very good. How dare I say, Adam, I congratulate the honourable member.
16:14
16:14
16:14
16:14
16:15
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
I think it's important. Uh, Mr. Chairman, that we return to the topic at hand. Um, but I'm very glad that my parliamentary colleague, um, my hon. Friend, um, is happily married. Married to, I'm sure. Fantastic. Uh, partner, the government recognises the important contribution that hospitality businesses make to jobs, growth and local communities across Northern Ireland and across the United Kingdom as a whole. Cafes, pubs, restaurants and hotels do support local economies. And as the honourable member set out, are really important for employment, particularly of young people trying to find their way in the jobs market, get that experience, get that foot in the door.
Um, make sure they're readying themselves for a career of productive work. And they also play a really vital role in our high streets and our town centres too. And I hear the concerns that have been raised about pressures facing the sector in Northern Ireland and across the wider country concerning operating costs, and particularly, though I understand there's a particular challenge in Northern Ireland when it comes to the comparisons with the hospitality VAT rate in the Republic of Ireland and the cross-border competition. Um I, uh I do recognise that that is, I think he said a unique challenge, um facing businesses in Northern Ireland, given consumers do have that choice much more readily available, um to them.
And so I fully understand why, why honourable members and the honourable member in particular is raising this issue and campaigning on it on behalf of his constituents, and I commend him for his sterling work as a constituency MP. Way, of course.
Um, make sure they're readying themselves for a career of productive work. And they also play a really vital role in our high streets and our town centres too. And I hear the concerns that have been raised about pressures facing the sector in Northern Ireland and across the wider country concerning operating costs, and particularly, though I understand there's a particular challenge in Northern Ireland when it comes to the comparisons with the hospitality VAT rate in the Republic of Ireland and the cross-border competition. Um I, uh I do recognise that that is, I think he said a unique challenge, um facing businesses in Northern Ireland, given consumers do have that choice much more readily available, um to them.
And so I fully understand why, why honourable members and the honourable member in particular is raising this issue and campaigning on it on behalf of his constituents, and I commend him for his sterling work as a constituency MP. Way, of course.
16:16
16:16
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
The protocol and the Windsor framework, of course, there are a whole range of challenges and also benefits. And when it comes to, VAT, I do agree with the honourable member that um in this instance it doesn't provide constraints on this, on this um policy choice. And I always find it frustrating when ministers hide behind, you know, legal constraints that maybe aren't always there. Um, and I do want to be up front with him that, you know, if a government did choose to do this, um, that the protocol itself wouldn't be, a barrier to that.
Um, members have focused on the potential merits of a Northern Ireland VAT reduction pilot for hospitality. However, VAT is a broad based tax on consumption that applies to a whole range of different sectors. And it's also a tax that applies on a UK wide basis. And it's the government's view that different VAT rates would create divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and impact the competitiveness of businesses between the two regions. I know and I respect and understand that members are specifically talking about Northern Ireland, but across the country as a whole, and I know that some members did mention the broader campaign around reductions in VAT across the UK, a reduction to 10% in VAT for hospitality would cost around £11 billion a year, which is equivalent, for example, to the total expenditure on the Royal Navy or the annual child benefit bill.
Coming to the specifics of, um a Northern Ireland only and hospitality only pilot, um there would be really quite significant practical challenges that would be associated with introducing a VAT treatment for one part of the United Kingdom businesses, HMRC and consumers would still need to operate in within a system that created different treatment, would then need to operate within a system that created different treatment for otherwise similar transactions. There will be boundary issues and administrative complexity, uh, to work through. To mean though that that by me not announcing this change today at the despatch box, that the government doesn't take this issue really seriously and really understand the representations that are being made today.
And we're also not standing aside. We have over this summer, the Chancellor has introduced the Great British Summer Savings Scheme, which is a temporary reduction in VAT on eligible family attractions, children's children's meals, um helping families with costs and encouraging footfall during the summer holidays in England. The government has also introduced new business rates multipliers for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties and a package of rich transitional reliefs and the supporting small business scheme that combines a 4.3 billion of additional spending. The Barnett formula is applied in the normal way to these changes, and the Northern Ireland Executive received £185 million in consequentials.
Uh, as a result of those decisions, the government and I personally, if I have the honor of staying in this role, will continue to listen carefully to representations from the hospitality sector, from the Northern Ireland Executive and, of course, from honourable members. And we will meet after the summer recess. Um, as good as my word. Um, however, we do not believe that a Northern Ireland specific hospitality pilot is the right approach. As tempting as it is to burnish my devolution credentials ahead of an impending reshuffle, I won't be making a commitment to that.
Um, here.
Um, members have focused on the potential merits of a Northern Ireland VAT reduction pilot for hospitality. However, VAT is a broad based tax on consumption that applies to a whole range of different sectors. And it's also a tax that applies on a UK wide basis. And it's the government's view that different VAT rates would create divergence between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and impact the competitiveness of businesses between the two regions. I know and I respect and understand that members are specifically talking about Northern Ireland, but across the country as a whole, and I know that some members did mention the broader campaign around reductions in VAT across the UK, a reduction to 10% in VAT for hospitality would cost around £11 billion a year, which is equivalent, for example, to the total expenditure on the Royal Navy or the annual child benefit bill.
Coming to the specifics of, um a Northern Ireland only and hospitality only pilot, um there would be really quite significant practical challenges that would be associated with introducing a VAT treatment for one part of the United Kingdom businesses, HMRC and consumers would still need to operate in within a system that created different treatment, would then need to operate within a system that created different treatment for otherwise similar transactions. There will be boundary issues and administrative complexity, uh, to work through. To mean though that that by me not announcing this change today at the despatch box, that the government doesn't take this issue really seriously and really understand the representations that are being made today.
And we're also not standing aside. We have over this summer, the Chancellor has introduced the Great British Summer Savings Scheme, which is a temporary reduction in VAT on eligible family attractions, children's children's meals, um helping families with costs and encouraging footfall during the summer holidays in England. The government has also introduced new business rates multipliers for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties and a package of rich transitional reliefs and the supporting small business scheme that combines a 4.3 billion of additional spending. The Barnett formula is applied in the normal way to these changes, and the Northern Ireland Executive received £185 million in consequentials.
Uh, as a result of those decisions, the government and I personally, if I have the honor of staying in this role, will continue to listen carefully to representations from the hospitality sector, from the Northern Ireland Executive and, of course, from honourable members. And we will meet after the summer recess. Um, as good as my word. Um, however, we do not believe that a Northern Ireland specific hospitality pilot is the right approach. As tempting as it is to burnish my devolution credentials ahead of an impending reshuffle, I won't be making a commitment to that.
Um, here.
16:20
16:20
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
And a very, very good and clear speech. Referred to parts of Europe where there's already consideration been done on VAT reduction, because they recognise that the governments there recognise the importance of the hospitality sector. Is that something that governments are considering. Because, I mean, if there's a factual evidence base for that, is it not something, at least that government and the minister might. Consider at some stage, perhaps, to see what. What could be used to our advantage?
16:21
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Um, I would say that right now we are engaging in what, you know, in some ways could be seen as a, as as a similar proposal to the one being put forward today and that we are doing a time limited reduction in VAT, not for one sector and one part of the country, but for particular leisure and hospitality activities and consumption across the country as a whole. HMRC and others will, I'm sure, conduct thorough evaluations of that. We can see the impact that it had. We're hoping that and we are expecting and we that businesses will pass through the reductions in VAT to consumers and we can see some big organisations.
Merlin Entertainment, for example, have have already done that and set out new ticketing prices for families this summer. I know that many small businesses have been changing the prices on their menus for children's meals, for example, so I hope that at once this great British summer savings period ends. I'm on the 1st of September that we will be able to review that and look at look at the impact, of course, the challenge with any VAT reductions is this question of whether or not they will be passed on to consumers.
Um, I don't begrudge businesses having a more margin. I want to be clear. But the objective I know the honourable member's objective here would be to see prices fall. Um, and you can see in times gone by when VAT changes have been made, that it isn't always the case that the gains flow entirely to the consumers. We have been working really hard as a government to make sure that businesses do pass on the Great British Summer Savings Scheme. As I say, really glad that many have done so, but I look forward to continuing the discussion on this important topic and to continuing to see the impact of the changes that we have made, the temporary and targeted changes we have made to VAT this summer.
Thank you.
Merlin Entertainment, for example, have have already done that and set out new ticketing prices for families this summer. I know that many small businesses have been changing the prices on their menus for children's meals, for example, so I hope that at once this great British summer savings period ends. I'm on the 1st of September that we will be able to review that and look at look at the impact, of course, the challenge with any VAT reductions is this question of whether or not they will be passed on to consumers.
Um, I don't begrudge businesses having a more margin. I want to be clear. But the objective I know the honourable member's objective here would be to see prices fall. Um, and you can see in times gone by when VAT changes have been made, that it isn't always the case that the gains flow entirely to the consumers. We have been working really hard as a government to make sure that businesses do pass on the Great British Summer Savings Scheme. As I say, really glad that many have done so, but I look forward to continuing the discussion on this important topic and to continuing to see the impact of the changes that we have made, the temporary and targeted changes we have made to VAT this summer.
Thank you.
16:30
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
I beg to move that this House has considered estate regeneration, and it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Doctor Martin, I want to use this debate to talk about the principles of estate regeneration, its real life impacts, and the process through which it should be handled. And I will speak specifically about the regeneration currently happening in Buckskin and Southam in my constituency. First, I want to cover what good regeneration looks like when done right. Good estate regeneration has the power to breathe new life into communities, to restore civic pride and to improve quality of life through better infrastructure such as schools, GP surgeries and green spaces.
But in all cases there is a community who live there, often close knit and deeply rooted across generations. And these communities deserve not just respect but full and genuine engagement, shaping and driving the future of their own areas. And that point is at the heart of the Ministry for housing, Communities and Local Government's 2016 guidance on estate regeneration. Although, as I will go on to say, I believe that guidance needs to be refreshed and strengthened. Turning to my constituency, Buckskin and Southam are proud, strongly knit communities where neighbours look out for each other and many have lived for decades.
They were transformed as Basingstoke became a London overspill town post-war, and by 1973/3250 homes had been built in Southam alone, with new housing came new schools and the associations and religious groups that bind an area into a community, each with their own congregations, now running projects like the Community Pantry in Buckskin or the Street Pastors, the Westside Community Association. Following the much mourned closure of its centre, now runs the Ridgeway Centre and the Russell Howard Pavilion hubs known across Basingstoke. They've hosted countless birthday parties, christenings and events, including my own coffee afternoons, but they are so much more than a space for hire.
They house nurseries, run clubs for the over 50 fives at risk of isolation, and I've seen first hand the work that they do, like the food bank at the Ridgeway Centre, supporting people in Buckskin and Southam when they struggle to make ends meet. Today, both areas contain over 4600 households and well over 10,000 residents, and it is here where there is currently regeneration proposal that was first identified for development in the 2016 Local Plan. Later in 2023, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council and Sovereign Network Group signed a memorandum of understanding to take forward, in their words, transformation plans covering community engagement, master planning, working with Hampshire County Council and Transport and infrastructure, land assembly partnerships and funding the Housing Association.
Sovereign network Group then partnered with the Hill Group to form the Sovereign Hill Partnership to deliver the scheme now. There's no doubt that for parts of Buckskin and Southam, change is needed, particularly, for example, the flats on Pinkerton Road identified as a priority. I and many residents recognise that there are clearly homes and areas in need of investment that is not in doubt. The Sovereign Hill Partnership say they have held 33 events, knocked on 1200 doors and received 1800 survey responses as part of the process of regeneration.
And I know staff at S and G and SHP, many based locally have tried hard to engage with residents. This is not about them, but in my surgeries at SHS own drop ins and on the doorstep, too many residents remain frustrated, uncertain and anxious about the future. The issues raised with me focus on three key areas accountability and transparency over finances, uncertainty and trust linked to performance on repairs and maintenance. First, accountability and transparency over finances. Residents are frustrated with what they see as the lack of accountability in this project.
The Memorandum of understanding was updated in 2025. In the council's own words to reflect updated ambitions, aims, objectives and working arrangements of the partners. That being the council and Sovereign Network Group. Although I am not aware that any version has ever been made widely available, which itself raises questions over transparency, but it speaks to a broader issue that residents raised with me time and again. If the council agree that the memorandum of understanding agreed, the Memorandum of Understanding with Sovereign Network Group and are working in partnership together, but the Sovereign Hill Partnership, which is a partnership between Sovereign Network Group and a private house builder, is delivering the regeneration.
Who exactly should residents be holding to account?Many tell me again and again that they feel left in the dark. So does the minister agree that accountability for such schemes should be crystal clear?I believe there needs to be clarity on who is accountable body and greater democratic accountability in London regeneration projects seeking GLA funding involving over 150 dwellings, or the demolition of any social homes, require a resident ballot demonstrating support in Basingstoke. While direct funding isn't involved, a partnership with the local authority exists.
All the same, I believe the party should look at measures to introduce greater democratic accountability, including looking at the use of residential ballots as is increasingly normal practice, and I would ask the minister whether the government would consider including resident ballots or similar mechanisms as standard in updated guidance for schemes with or without government funding. There was then the financial model for the regeneration. SG is a not for profit with a social purpose, but it has, as I have said, formed a joint venture with the private housebuilder Hill Group to help deliver this regeneration.
Many residents want greater clarity on how any surplus will be reinvested, and the details of the financial model underpinning the regeneration. Given the scale of the proposals, it is essential that they are able to understand whether the benefits will be retained locally, particularly for housing, affordable housing, infrastructure and community provision. So does the Minister agree that transparency over the financial model was crucial for resident confidence, and would the Department consider updating national guidance to that effect for all regeneration schemes?Next is the significant uncertainty caused to tenants, both social and private, and to homeowners by the.
By the regeneration proposals following nearly two and a half years of consultation, Sovereign Hill Partnership confirmed in February this year what it calls the priority areas for redevelopment and refurbishment, as well as areas of limited change, the latter covering around a third. Roughly 1500 homes in Buckskin and Southam. That clarity is welcome for those residents, but it leaves nearly 3000 households in areas of further study with no certainty at all. Residents have told me that they are. They are unclear as to why and how these boundaries were determined.
Another example of a lack of clarity and transparency over decision making. So does the Minister agree it is good practice to explain such decisions in an accessible way?But on the point of uncertainty, Sovereign Hill Partnership have acknowledged that wide scale regeneration will take multiple decades. In the meantime, thousands of my constituents have no idea whether they will be asked to move next year, the year after, in ten years or not at all. I have spoken to residents unsure whether to redecorate Les patios, redo gardens and kitchens, or make other home improvements.
They don't know whether they'll see any return on improvements already made, including significant accessibility works with disabled residents and those considering selling have raised concerns about their ability to get a fair price. In short, too many people are having to put big life decisions on hold, so don't residents three years on, deserve clarity and a clear timeline as soon as possible?I urge QP to give that clarity quickly, and I believe updated national guidance should set out what a realistic timeline for such schemes should look like. I would be grateful for the minister's view.
Perhaps most prominently, many residents are deeply fearful about the potential use of compulsory purchase orders. I do not believe widespread use of cpos are justified, and their potential use only strengthens the case for residential ballots. The third area of concern revolves around the lack of trust, driven in large part by sovereign network groups, performance on housing repairs put simply, it is the largest single source of casework in my office since I was elected. I'm afraid it's an all too regular story. Complaints ignored wait times running into months or years, missed appointments, wrong jobs or poor repairs.
That means starting the whole process all over again. Recently, an elderly constituent had scaffolding on their SMG property from November 2025 until this month for a roof repair that never took place for the entire eight months, they were unable to open their windows, including during the recent heat wave. The work has now been cancelled, the scaffolding removed and the problem unsolved. Likewise, a constituent whose depression and anxiety leaves them almost entirely housebound reported a roof leak last November. It remained unresolved until March despite multiple SMG visits, which confirmed the property was extremely damp and infested with mold and woodlice.
These are just samples, but the pattern is borne out in both tenant survey data and the judgment of the social housing regulator in the tenant Satisfaction Measures headline report published last November, SMG performed worse than the national average across a range of measures, including overall satisfaction repair service time taken to complete repairs and maintenance, listening to residents and complaints handling. The regulator has found weaknesses in Smg's delivery of an effective, efficient and timely repairs service and a related failure to meet complaints handling timescales. I'm aware that improvement plans are said to be in place, but this record points to a real issue of trust.
Residents tell me repeatedly that they struggle to believe that SMG can deliver a regeneration of this scale when it is struggling to deliver day to day repairs. And let's remind ourselves, this is one of the largest regenerations in the country. So does the minister agree that improvement is needed on repairs and maintenance?And does she recognise that this record erodes residents trust in Smg's ability to handle a scheme of this size?Might there be scope to update update national guidance on estate regeneration so that minimum standards on repairs must be met?In conclusion, I'd also like to ask the minister how does the department monitor adherence to its 2016 guidance, and what plans are there to update it and make it statutory for both local authorities and housing associations?Doctor Morrison, Chair I recognise the role that estate regeneration can play in restoring civic pride, breathing new life into communities and improving quality of life.
But it must be done with communities, with them shaping and directing the change with clear accountability, with trust between all parties and with the provision of as much certainty as possible. And I will continue to fight for that. For the residents of Buckskin and Southam for as long as is needed, and I look forward to the minister's response here.
But in all cases there is a community who live there, often close knit and deeply rooted across generations. And these communities deserve not just respect but full and genuine engagement, shaping and driving the future of their own areas. And that point is at the heart of the Ministry for housing, Communities and Local Government's 2016 guidance on estate regeneration. Although, as I will go on to say, I believe that guidance needs to be refreshed and strengthened. Turning to my constituency, Buckskin and Southam are proud, strongly knit communities where neighbours look out for each other and many have lived for decades.
They were transformed as Basingstoke became a London overspill town post-war, and by 1973/3250 homes had been built in Southam alone, with new housing came new schools and the associations and religious groups that bind an area into a community, each with their own congregations, now running projects like the Community Pantry in Buckskin or the Street Pastors, the Westside Community Association. Following the much mourned closure of its centre, now runs the Ridgeway Centre and the Russell Howard Pavilion hubs known across Basingstoke. They've hosted countless birthday parties, christenings and events, including my own coffee afternoons, but they are so much more than a space for hire.
They house nurseries, run clubs for the over 50 fives at risk of isolation, and I've seen first hand the work that they do, like the food bank at the Ridgeway Centre, supporting people in Buckskin and Southam when they struggle to make ends meet. Today, both areas contain over 4600 households and well over 10,000 residents, and it is here where there is currently regeneration proposal that was first identified for development in the 2016 Local Plan. Later in 2023, Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council and Sovereign Network Group signed a memorandum of understanding to take forward, in their words, transformation plans covering community engagement, master planning, working with Hampshire County Council and Transport and infrastructure, land assembly partnerships and funding the Housing Association.
Sovereign network Group then partnered with the Hill Group to form the Sovereign Hill Partnership to deliver the scheme now. There's no doubt that for parts of Buckskin and Southam, change is needed, particularly, for example, the flats on Pinkerton Road identified as a priority. I and many residents recognise that there are clearly homes and areas in need of investment that is not in doubt. The Sovereign Hill Partnership say they have held 33 events, knocked on 1200 doors and received 1800 survey responses as part of the process of regeneration.
And I know staff at S and G and SHP, many based locally have tried hard to engage with residents. This is not about them, but in my surgeries at SHS own drop ins and on the doorstep, too many residents remain frustrated, uncertain and anxious about the future. The issues raised with me focus on three key areas accountability and transparency over finances, uncertainty and trust linked to performance on repairs and maintenance. First, accountability and transparency over finances. Residents are frustrated with what they see as the lack of accountability in this project.
The Memorandum of understanding was updated in 2025. In the council's own words to reflect updated ambitions, aims, objectives and working arrangements of the partners. That being the council and Sovereign Network Group. Although I am not aware that any version has ever been made widely available, which itself raises questions over transparency, but it speaks to a broader issue that residents raised with me time and again. If the council agree that the memorandum of understanding agreed, the Memorandum of Understanding with Sovereign Network Group and are working in partnership together, but the Sovereign Hill Partnership, which is a partnership between Sovereign Network Group and a private house builder, is delivering the regeneration.
Who exactly should residents be holding to account?Many tell me again and again that they feel left in the dark. So does the minister agree that accountability for such schemes should be crystal clear?I believe there needs to be clarity on who is accountable body and greater democratic accountability in London regeneration projects seeking GLA funding involving over 150 dwellings, or the demolition of any social homes, require a resident ballot demonstrating support in Basingstoke. While direct funding isn't involved, a partnership with the local authority exists.
All the same, I believe the party should look at measures to introduce greater democratic accountability, including looking at the use of residential ballots as is increasingly normal practice, and I would ask the minister whether the government would consider including resident ballots or similar mechanisms as standard in updated guidance for schemes with or without government funding. There was then the financial model for the regeneration. SG is a not for profit with a social purpose, but it has, as I have said, formed a joint venture with the private housebuilder Hill Group to help deliver this regeneration.
Many residents want greater clarity on how any surplus will be reinvested, and the details of the financial model underpinning the regeneration. Given the scale of the proposals, it is essential that they are able to understand whether the benefits will be retained locally, particularly for housing, affordable housing, infrastructure and community provision. So does the Minister agree that transparency over the financial model was crucial for resident confidence, and would the Department consider updating national guidance to that effect for all regeneration schemes?Next is the significant uncertainty caused to tenants, both social and private, and to homeowners by the.
By the regeneration proposals following nearly two and a half years of consultation, Sovereign Hill Partnership confirmed in February this year what it calls the priority areas for redevelopment and refurbishment, as well as areas of limited change, the latter covering around a third. Roughly 1500 homes in Buckskin and Southam. That clarity is welcome for those residents, but it leaves nearly 3000 households in areas of further study with no certainty at all. Residents have told me that they are. They are unclear as to why and how these boundaries were determined.
Another example of a lack of clarity and transparency over decision making. So does the Minister agree it is good practice to explain such decisions in an accessible way?But on the point of uncertainty, Sovereign Hill Partnership have acknowledged that wide scale regeneration will take multiple decades. In the meantime, thousands of my constituents have no idea whether they will be asked to move next year, the year after, in ten years or not at all. I have spoken to residents unsure whether to redecorate Les patios, redo gardens and kitchens, or make other home improvements.
They don't know whether they'll see any return on improvements already made, including significant accessibility works with disabled residents and those considering selling have raised concerns about their ability to get a fair price. In short, too many people are having to put big life decisions on hold, so don't residents three years on, deserve clarity and a clear timeline as soon as possible?I urge QP to give that clarity quickly, and I believe updated national guidance should set out what a realistic timeline for such schemes should look like. I would be grateful for the minister's view.
Perhaps most prominently, many residents are deeply fearful about the potential use of compulsory purchase orders. I do not believe widespread use of cpos are justified, and their potential use only strengthens the case for residential ballots. The third area of concern revolves around the lack of trust, driven in large part by sovereign network groups, performance on housing repairs put simply, it is the largest single source of casework in my office since I was elected. I'm afraid it's an all too regular story. Complaints ignored wait times running into months or years, missed appointments, wrong jobs or poor repairs.
That means starting the whole process all over again. Recently, an elderly constituent had scaffolding on their SMG property from November 2025 until this month for a roof repair that never took place for the entire eight months, they were unable to open their windows, including during the recent heat wave. The work has now been cancelled, the scaffolding removed and the problem unsolved. Likewise, a constituent whose depression and anxiety leaves them almost entirely housebound reported a roof leak last November. It remained unresolved until March despite multiple SMG visits, which confirmed the property was extremely damp and infested with mold and woodlice.
These are just samples, but the pattern is borne out in both tenant survey data and the judgment of the social housing regulator in the tenant Satisfaction Measures headline report published last November, SMG performed worse than the national average across a range of measures, including overall satisfaction repair service time taken to complete repairs and maintenance, listening to residents and complaints handling. The regulator has found weaknesses in Smg's delivery of an effective, efficient and timely repairs service and a related failure to meet complaints handling timescales. I'm aware that improvement plans are said to be in place, but this record points to a real issue of trust.
Residents tell me repeatedly that they struggle to believe that SMG can deliver a regeneration of this scale when it is struggling to deliver day to day repairs. And let's remind ourselves, this is one of the largest regenerations in the country. So does the minister agree that improvement is needed on repairs and maintenance?And does she recognise that this record erodes residents trust in Smg's ability to handle a scheme of this size?Might there be scope to update update national guidance on estate regeneration so that minimum standards on repairs must be met?In conclusion, I'd also like to ask the minister how does the department monitor adherence to its 2016 guidance, and what plans are there to update it and make it statutory for both local authorities and housing associations?Doctor Morrison, Chair I recognise the role that estate regeneration can play in restoring civic pride, breathing new life into communities and improving quality of life.
But it must be done with communities, with them shaping and directing the change with clear accountability, with trust between all parties and with the provision of as much certainty as possible. And I will continue to fight for that. For the residents of Buckskin and Southam for as long as is needed, and I look forward to the minister's response here.
16:41
16:41
16:41
16:41
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I start by congratulating my hon. Friend for Basingstoke on securing this debate. I want to speak about the importance of housing led regeneration. I think that done well. It transforms lives. It rebuilds communities, unlocks economic growth and creates places where people want to live, work and raise families. Yet for many communities across the north, that aspiration remains out of reach. Too many families live in ageing homes that are expensive to maintain, difficult to modernise and increasingly unfit for today's needs.
In many neighbourhoods, outdated layouts and ageing infrastructure no longer meet the needs of the communities they serve. Without significant intervention, 100 000 social homes could be lost over the coming decade, further reducing the supply of affordable housing. It is against this backdrop that the interim findings of the Renew inquiry are so important, and I declare my interest as chairing the Westminster Group for the inquiry, led by the Northern Housing Consortium. The inquiry highlights the vital role regeneration can play in addressing housing needs, supporting economic development and strengthening communities across the north of England.
The report found that more than half a million good quality homes could potentially be unlocked through regeneration and renewal programmes, demonstrating the scale of the opportunity before us. The renew report highlights the transformative impact regeneration can have on people and places beyond increasing housing supply. It offers an opportunity to create healthier, more sustainable communities, reduce energy costs for residents and improve the overall quality of life in neighborhoods that have experienced years of underinvestment. Importantly, regeneration delivers benefits that extend far beyond housing alone. Investment in homes can help attract investment into infrastructure, into town centres and local services.
It creates jobs, supports skills development and gives communities greater confidence in their future. The impact therefore reaches well beyond the development site itself, generating vital, generating wider social value and helping to create vibrant, sustainable places. However, successful regeneration cannot simply be something that is done to communities. It must be delivered with communities. Residents should be at the heart of regeneration plans, helping to shape the future of the places they call home. A good example of this can be found in the Gleadless Valley Regeneration Project in Sheffield.
Residents involvement has shaped the vision for the Valley to include commercial and community space, improved parks, paths and jobs, and training for local residents. Lara Joyce from the Gleadless Valley Tenants and Residents Association, described the process as making hope feel safe again and I think this clearly demonstrates the importance of building trust with residents and ensuring local voices are heard throughout the process. What is particularly encouraging is the growing recognition of the success that the success of regeneration should not be measured solely by the number of homes delivered.
Its value can also be seen in a stronger, stronger local economy, improved well-being and more resilient community. The challenge now is to turn that ambition into delivery. If we get regeneration right, we will not simply build more homes. We'll build, will rebuild neighbourhoods, revitalise businesses and restore pride in communities. And that is why housing led regeneration matters, and it's why it deserves our continued support. Thank you.
In many neighbourhoods, outdated layouts and ageing infrastructure no longer meet the needs of the communities they serve. Without significant intervention, 100 000 social homes could be lost over the coming decade, further reducing the supply of affordable housing. It is against this backdrop that the interim findings of the Renew inquiry are so important, and I declare my interest as chairing the Westminster Group for the inquiry, led by the Northern Housing Consortium. The inquiry highlights the vital role regeneration can play in addressing housing needs, supporting economic development and strengthening communities across the north of England.
The report found that more than half a million good quality homes could potentially be unlocked through regeneration and renewal programmes, demonstrating the scale of the opportunity before us. The renew report highlights the transformative impact regeneration can have on people and places beyond increasing housing supply. It offers an opportunity to create healthier, more sustainable communities, reduce energy costs for residents and improve the overall quality of life in neighborhoods that have experienced years of underinvestment. Importantly, regeneration delivers benefits that extend far beyond housing alone. Investment in homes can help attract investment into infrastructure, into town centres and local services.
It creates jobs, supports skills development and gives communities greater confidence in their future. The impact therefore reaches well beyond the development site itself, generating vital, generating wider social value and helping to create vibrant, sustainable places. However, successful regeneration cannot simply be something that is done to communities. It must be delivered with communities. Residents should be at the heart of regeneration plans, helping to shape the future of the places they call home. A good example of this can be found in the Gleadless Valley Regeneration Project in Sheffield.
Residents involvement has shaped the vision for the Valley to include commercial and community space, improved parks, paths and jobs, and training for local residents. Lara Joyce from the Gleadless Valley Tenants and Residents Association, described the process as making hope feel safe again and I think this clearly demonstrates the importance of building trust with residents and ensuring local voices are heard throughout the process. What is particularly encouraging is the growing recognition of the success that the success of regeneration should not be measured solely by the number of homes delivered.
Its value can also be seen in a stronger, stronger local economy, improved well-being and more resilient community. The challenge now is to turn that ambition into delivery. If we get regeneration right, we will not simply build more homes. We'll build, will rebuild neighbourhoods, revitalise businesses and restore pride in communities. And that is why housing led regeneration matters, and it's why it deserves our continued support. Thank you.
16:44
16:44
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
And a big thank you to the honourable gentleman for Basingstoke for highlighting this issue. Um, I think something that many of us can be guilty of is forgetting a house is not just a unit or a spreadsheet. It is the anchor of a family's life. And I think I see it that way and I believe others. I think honourable gentleman sees it that way as well. So when we look at our historic post-war social housing estates across Northern Ireland, we're looking at areas that possess an incredible, undeniable community spirit but are too often being choked by generational under-investment, outdated design, and sometimes, unfortunately, structural neglect.
And it's obviously, as always, as a Northern Ireland perspective this year to support the honourable gentleman in his challenge and his focus on what he wants to achieve. Because what the honourable gentleman wants is what I want as well. Um, and nice to see the Minister in her place again. It's becoming quite a regular here in Westminster Hall. So you are. Um and we look forward to your contribution. I stand today here to speak up for the thousands of families living in social housing across my constituency, Strangford.
These estates were built decades ago with the best of intentions, but time, by its very nature, has taken its toll. We're dealing with ageing housing stock that suffers from chronic dampness, from poor insulation, completely outdated, sometimes heating systems as well. In an era when energy prices remain painfully high, it is a tragedy that our lowest income families are living in the hardest to heat homes. Forced to choose between heating their homes or their front rooms even, or feeding their children, but considered estate generation.
Regeneration is about so much more than just putting a new lick of paint on a building, or replacing a roof, or putting insulation in. It's about a holistic blueprint for community renewal, and Norman Gentleman underlined that very much in his contribution, and I thank him for that because it's a community drive I want to focus on as well. I mean, it's looking at the layout of our states to eradicate the dark, poorly lit alleys, alleys that breed antisocial behaviour. It means investing in community infrastructure, the playgrounds where children can play safely.
The community hubs where our elderly residents can find a reprieve from chronic loneliness, and the green spaces that support mental wellbeing. Social interaction as well. So true regeneration must be must be considered, I believe. And by that I mean it must be done with the community, not to the community. So our local communities must be the architects of their own future. Again, the honourable gentleman and his introduction outlined that incredibly well. We must empower local tenant associations and community groups to lead the design process.
That's their it's their project, it's their focus. And if you draw them into that, then you make a community and you make a family atmosphere and you bring people together. And I think that's what I would love to see. As the honourable gentleman moves forward. So if you want to know how to fix a troubled estate, I say this very respectfully. Just ask the grandmother who has lived in that street for some 40 years. She knows exactly where the problems are, and she knows exactly what the neighbourhood needs to thrive.
And her love for that estate, and the fact that she stayed there for 40 years of her life, will be a focus, I believe, uh, or should be a focus. I believe for all and for the future. While housing policy in the Northern Ireland Executive are devolved matters managed by the Minister for Communities at Stormont, the fiscal reality is that our devolved administration cannot deliver the scale of transformation needed on its own, and that's why the consequential on what government gives for Northern Ireland Assembly to to to dish out the housing sector faces a massive multibillion pound maintenance investment deficit over the next decade, just to bring its current stock up to a decent standard.
So we need, I believe, a joined up, UK wide approach to funding capital, infrastructure UK government's levelling up and building frameworks must ensure that Northern Ireland receives its fair, proportionate share of macro investment specifically earmarked for social housing regeneration. What a subject, and it means a lot to me. I've always, when I first got elected to council many, many years back in 1985, um, my issue was a social, uh, bread and butter issues. It was about housing. And still the one of the biggest issues that I get in my constituency office, uh, by mail bag every, every week.
So the day this debate means a lot to me, I congratulate the honourable member for bringing it forward. Look very much forward to what the minister can do to encourage us and, more importantly, to encourage the honourable gentleman.
And it's obviously, as always, as a Northern Ireland perspective this year to support the honourable gentleman in his challenge and his focus on what he wants to achieve. Because what the honourable gentleman wants is what I want as well. Um, and nice to see the Minister in her place again. It's becoming quite a regular here in Westminster Hall. So you are. Um and we look forward to your contribution. I stand today here to speak up for the thousands of families living in social housing across my constituency, Strangford.
These estates were built decades ago with the best of intentions, but time, by its very nature, has taken its toll. We're dealing with ageing housing stock that suffers from chronic dampness, from poor insulation, completely outdated, sometimes heating systems as well. In an era when energy prices remain painfully high, it is a tragedy that our lowest income families are living in the hardest to heat homes. Forced to choose between heating their homes or their front rooms even, or feeding their children, but considered estate generation.
Regeneration is about so much more than just putting a new lick of paint on a building, or replacing a roof, or putting insulation in. It's about a holistic blueprint for community renewal, and Norman Gentleman underlined that very much in his contribution, and I thank him for that because it's a community drive I want to focus on as well. I mean, it's looking at the layout of our states to eradicate the dark, poorly lit alleys, alleys that breed antisocial behaviour. It means investing in community infrastructure, the playgrounds where children can play safely.
The community hubs where our elderly residents can find a reprieve from chronic loneliness, and the green spaces that support mental wellbeing. Social interaction as well. So true regeneration must be must be considered, I believe. And by that I mean it must be done with the community, not to the community. So our local communities must be the architects of their own future. Again, the honourable gentleman and his introduction outlined that incredibly well. We must empower local tenant associations and community groups to lead the design process.
That's their it's their project, it's their focus. And if you draw them into that, then you make a community and you make a family atmosphere and you bring people together. And I think that's what I would love to see. As the honourable gentleman moves forward. So if you want to know how to fix a troubled estate, I say this very respectfully. Just ask the grandmother who has lived in that street for some 40 years. She knows exactly where the problems are, and she knows exactly what the neighbourhood needs to thrive.
And her love for that estate, and the fact that she stayed there for 40 years of her life, will be a focus, I believe, uh, or should be a focus. I believe for all and for the future. While housing policy in the Northern Ireland Executive are devolved matters managed by the Minister for Communities at Stormont, the fiscal reality is that our devolved administration cannot deliver the scale of transformation needed on its own, and that's why the consequential on what government gives for Northern Ireland Assembly to to to dish out the housing sector faces a massive multibillion pound maintenance investment deficit over the next decade, just to bring its current stock up to a decent standard.
So we need, I believe, a joined up, UK wide approach to funding capital, infrastructure UK government's levelling up and building frameworks must ensure that Northern Ireland receives its fair, proportionate share of macro investment specifically earmarked for social housing regeneration. What a subject, and it means a lot to me. I've always, when I first got elected to council many, many years back in 1985, um, my issue was a social, uh, bread and butter issues. It was about housing. And still the one of the biggest issues that I get in my constituency office, uh, by mail bag every, every week.
So the day this debate means a lot to me, I congratulate the honourable member for bringing it forward. Look very much forward to what the minister can do to encourage us and, more importantly, to encourage the honourable gentleman.
16:49
16:49
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Ask the member for Basingstoke for bringing this debate and giving me a chance to talk about the Alton estate in Roehampton in my constituency. It's also a pleasure, as always, to join. To follow on from the member for Strangford, who always brings wisdom and flavour of Northern Ireland to every debate which I fully appreciate. The Alton estate in Roehampton in my constituency, is home to over 13000 people. It's one of the largest housing estates in the country and it was built in 1954.
It's a very beautiful area. It's right next to Richmond Park. It's got some listed stilt blocks designed by Courvoisier and very much a beautiful estate and a fantastic community. And I'm so proud to be the MP for Roehampton. But it's been run down for too long. This estate. There's it's an area of high deprivation. It's an area of high health inequalities. From one side of my Putney constituency to the other in the Alton is a ten year life expectancy difference, and it suffers from poor transport links.
This uncertainty was this this failure of this estate was recognised in 2010 by the then conservative Council of Wandsworth, who said, yes, we need to do some regeneration and we will look into this. So since 2010, the regeneration of the Alton estate has been discussed and as yet has not been delivered to the people of the Alton. There was a very unpopular plan that was developed by the Conservative Council, but widely not not liked the regeneration, having a regeneration very much wanted. But not this plan.
The developer pulled out of that during Covid, pulled out from all the regeneration that it was doing in London, which left the Labour council when it came in in 2022 to look again at the regeneration they. Came the developer. So the council became the developer. And I think that's really key to the success of this plan so far. They employed the T, a architecture and design company which did a community co-design really, really stripped it back, talked to people and have got a really good plan that the community really like.
This plan has got a new library, a new dedicated youth centre. I was a bit obsessed by that part, a dedicated youth centre, because the stripped back of our youth clubs in that regeneration and that whole estate has been dreadful. A new community centre, a shopping parade with shops and I spoke to Lidl only this week, but with shops that will have a affordable fruit and vegetables. Uh, two GP surgeries able to with the space to do preventative health care, really building in healthy living into the regeneration, a new police hub, a new family hub, a nursery and to demolish 177 of the houses which are really substandard now and have been left to run down.
But build 650 new homes. So 473 new homes with priority being given to Alton residents for the homes that they will see being built. The largest regeneration ballot ever in this country was held last October, and the people on the Alton estate voted by 82% for this plan. It's an overwhelming majority, a real yes vote to the plan. This yes vote unlocked an additional £60 million of funding from the Mayor of London. I'm very disappointed that the conservative conservative opposition then campaigned against the Alton Renewal Plan.
Now a few months. A couple of months ago, we had the local elections and the conservatives now run Wandsworth Council. It was by 28 councillors to 29. So a very small margin. And I really hope that the new council will understand how important this regeneration is to the people of the Alton, and will go ahead with the plan. They won't do a whole new round of consultation. They won't do lots of cutbacks or reduced amount to this regeneration, and they will keep the amount of social housing in the plan.
The GLA funding per unit for social housing is 220 zero zero £0 per unit, but the GLA funding is £70,000 per unit for shared ownership. So it really, really makes sense for the new conservative administration to carry on with the high levels of social housing in the regeneration plan. I recently met with the new cabinet member for housing at Wandsworth Council, and I made very clear the residents very strong view that the full plan is needed, and he hasn't said he's going to cut it back. But I just am very worried that he might.
So I hope that the minister will lend full support to the Alton Renewal Project to do anything less than. The full plan will be to let down the residents on the Alton estate. They have waited for so long, and I'd like to end by paying tribute to the. Are Roehampton, an organisation. Our Roehampton provide an amazing support, bringing together brilliant people across the estate to really bring about community social cohesion to the estate, to do anything else than fully go ahead with the plan would be stopping significant growth in opportunity for residents.
This plan will provide a safer, a healthy, revitalised Alton that everyone can be really, really proud of and I hope the minister will be giving her full support to this plan. Thank you very much.
It's a very beautiful area. It's right next to Richmond Park. It's got some listed stilt blocks designed by Courvoisier and very much a beautiful estate and a fantastic community. And I'm so proud to be the MP for Roehampton. But it's been run down for too long. This estate. There's it's an area of high deprivation. It's an area of high health inequalities. From one side of my Putney constituency to the other in the Alton is a ten year life expectancy difference, and it suffers from poor transport links.
This uncertainty was this this failure of this estate was recognised in 2010 by the then conservative Council of Wandsworth, who said, yes, we need to do some regeneration and we will look into this. So since 2010, the regeneration of the Alton estate has been discussed and as yet has not been delivered to the people of the Alton. There was a very unpopular plan that was developed by the Conservative Council, but widely not not liked the regeneration, having a regeneration very much wanted. But not this plan.
The developer pulled out of that during Covid, pulled out from all the regeneration that it was doing in London, which left the Labour council when it came in in 2022 to look again at the regeneration they. Came the developer. So the council became the developer. And I think that's really key to the success of this plan so far. They employed the T, a architecture and design company which did a community co-design really, really stripped it back, talked to people and have got a really good plan that the community really like.
This plan has got a new library, a new dedicated youth centre. I was a bit obsessed by that part, a dedicated youth centre, because the stripped back of our youth clubs in that regeneration and that whole estate has been dreadful. A new community centre, a shopping parade with shops and I spoke to Lidl only this week, but with shops that will have a affordable fruit and vegetables. Uh, two GP surgeries able to with the space to do preventative health care, really building in healthy living into the regeneration, a new police hub, a new family hub, a nursery and to demolish 177 of the houses which are really substandard now and have been left to run down.
But build 650 new homes. So 473 new homes with priority being given to Alton residents for the homes that they will see being built. The largest regeneration ballot ever in this country was held last October, and the people on the Alton estate voted by 82% for this plan. It's an overwhelming majority, a real yes vote to the plan. This yes vote unlocked an additional £60 million of funding from the Mayor of London. I'm very disappointed that the conservative conservative opposition then campaigned against the Alton Renewal Plan.
Now a few months. A couple of months ago, we had the local elections and the conservatives now run Wandsworth Council. It was by 28 councillors to 29. So a very small margin. And I really hope that the new council will understand how important this regeneration is to the people of the Alton, and will go ahead with the plan. They won't do a whole new round of consultation. They won't do lots of cutbacks or reduced amount to this regeneration, and they will keep the amount of social housing in the plan.
The GLA funding per unit for social housing is 220 zero zero £0 per unit, but the GLA funding is £70,000 per unit for shared ownership. So it really, really makes sense for the new conservative administration to carry on with the high levels of social housing in the regeneration plan. I recently met with the new cabinet member for housing at Wandsworth Council, and I made very clear the residents very strong view that the full plan is needed, and he hasn't said he's going to cut it back. But I just am very worried that he might.
So I hope that the minister will lend full support to the Alton Renewal Project to do anything less than. The full plan will be to let down the residents on the Alton estate. They have waited for so long, and I'd like to end by paying tribute to the. Are Roehampton, an organisation. Our Roehampton provide an amazing support, bringing together brilliant people across the estate to really bring about community social cohesion to the estate, to do anything else than fully go ahead with the plan would be stopping significant growth in opportunity for residents.
This plan will provide a safer, a healthy, revitalised Alton that everyone can be really, really proud of and I hope the minister will be giving her full support to this plan. Thank you very much.
16:54
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
Thank you, Doctor Wilson. It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, the estate regeneration must be about must be more, must be about more than replacing bricks and mortar. We must restore confidence, strengthen communities and give residents pride in place in what they call their home. In Dunscroft, in my constituency, local people want to see sustained investment in their estates, in their neighbourhoods, not just one off quick fixes that quickly then degrade. They want better quality housing, safer streets, improved green spaces, well maintained public areas and community facilities that bring people together.
Have told me at local positive action groups, these are groups that are resident led where they action local improvements that they believe will make a change, that living in a place where they see reminders of neglect, that that has a real impact on their mental health, their sense of pride, on their local identity. On the day to day lived experience of everyone who calls it home. I want to be clear here. Local people are still doing amazing things in those areas. I recently met with the Dunscroft and Friends community group at the Dunscroft Warriors junior football team's annual gala.
They're all doing great work in really difficult circumstances, but they do need more support. They have the ideas, they have the know how. They know their area. They just need a little bit more help from government. Residents know where that investment is most urgently needed, so regeneration must be shaped by them, not imposed upon them. Pride in place funding gives councils and communities the resources to tackle long standing problems and deliver improvements that people can see in their everyday lives.
That means repairing those neglected spaces, supporting the local shops and the services, improving routes through the community and creating places where children and families feel safe and welcome. However, short term or piecemeal funding will not be enough. Communities such as Dunscroft need a long term commitment and a fair opportunity to benefit from national regeneration programmes. These places aren't looking for continuous handouts, but just a hand up to get back on their feet. Moreover, they do want to do that together. They want to do that as a team.
And for me, that's what pride in place is all about. So I do urge the government, and I ask the minister to consider providing a little bit more pride in place funding in the future to work directly with the residents and to ensure that Dunscroft receives investment. It deserves regeneration, should leave, should leave people not only with better homes and public spaces, but with renewed confidence in the future of their community and the much needed hope that we all need in our lives.
Have told me at local positive action groups, these are groups that are resident led where they action local improvements that they believe will make a change, that living in a place where they see reminders of neglect, that that has a real impact on their mental health, their sense of pride, on their local identity. On the day to day lived experience of everyone who calls it home. I want to be clear here. Local people are still doing amazing things in those areas. I recently met with the Dunscroft and Friends community group at the Dunscroft Warriors junior football team's annual gala.
They're all doing great work in really difficult circumstances, but they do need more support. They have the ideas, they have the know how. They know their area. They just need a little bit more help from government. Residents know where that investment is most urgently needed, so regeneration must be shaped by them, not imposed upon them. Pride in place funding gives councils and communities the resources to tackle long standing problems and deliver improvements that people can see in their everyday lives.
That means repairing those neglected spaces, supporting the local shops and the services, improving routes through the community and creating places where children and families feel safe and welcome. However, short term or piecemeal funding will not be enough. Communities such as Dunscroft need a long term commitment and a fair opportunity to benefit from national regeneration programmes. These places aren't looking for continuous handouts, but just a hand up to get back on their feet. Moreover, they do want to do that together. They want to do that as a team.
And for me, that's what pride in place is all about. So I do urge the government, and I ask the minister to consider providing a little bit more pride in place funding in the future to work directly with the residents and to ensure that Dunscroft receives investment. It deserves regeneration, should leave, should leave people not only with better homes and public spaces, but with renewed confidence in the future of their community and the much needed hope that we all need in our lives.
16:57
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
Thank you, Doctor Morrison, and it's a pleasure to serve the committee. With you in the chair. And I congratulate the honourable member for Basingstoke for securing this debate and his call for minimum repair standards seems very reasonable call, and I'm happy to echo that here today. Um, and I was also pleased to hear the honourable member for Strangford identifying who was a regular attender in this chamber. I'm tempted to say it takes one to know one Doctor Morrison, but I'm sure, I'm sure we will see.
Um, the honourable member again. And it's always a pleasure to have him with us in the debate. Um, clearly it's a shame that the honourable member's constituents don't feel they've been fully consulted, as they should have done in the regeneration project he mentioned, because regeneration, when it's done with genuine community involvement, can change lives and some of the best ways possible community involvement, consent and consultation is a fundamental necessity of that kind of positive and transformative outcome is going to be achieved. Regeneration is one of the best tools we have to help solve the housing crisis, allowing us to build new homes we desperately need and crucially, new social homes.
And on brownfield sites saving precious green fields from development and allowing residents to exchange some of the coldest leakiest housing stock in Europe for better homes that are actually affordable to run, while adding the kind of infrastructure that the honourable gentleman referred to, like GP surgery, school places and play parks of the kind that some estates 60 built 60 years ago are often never had. There are many Liberal Democrat councillors who are showing the way to do this. My Somerset councillor colleagues like Federica Smith Roberts, Tom Deakin and Lee Baker and North Taunton have led the way on the regeneration of that North Taunton Estate 162 defective prefabricated concrete homes unfit for the 21st century are being demolished and replaced with 229 council homes for affordable rent, so 67 more than we had before.
The scheme was built around a resident design group from the outset, not not token consultations or consolidation after the drawings are finished, local community champions like Lesley Council, who has done amazing work at the price of a community centre, helped to lead that involvement and deserve to be credited for a lot of the work. Existing tenants were rehoused during the works, guaranteeing them a right to return. Another example in Kingston upon Thames, in the constituency of my Right Honourable friend, uh constituency, the Cambridge Road estate, where the Liberal Democrat Council insisted upon the subjecting the proposed regeneration scheme to the ballot ballot of the kind the honourable gentleman referred to.
Those involved work hard with local residents and the proposals received overwhelming support, resulting in 2100 new homes, 871 new council houses, 218 more than were there on the site before. These are not marginal examples. They are proof that the choice is not between either going ahead with regeneration and getting community consent, with leadership and real involvement, communities can and do vote for more housing, not less. That's the ambition the Liberal Democrats want to see matched nationally. And we go further. We want to see infrastructure first in those developments.
So that regeneration comes with those GP surgeries, transport, drainage capacity, the extra density demands rather than as an afterthought. No doctors, no development. As we have said, we would also get serious about housing that already exists but sits empty. There are more than 359 homes across the country that have been empty for six months or longer. Addressing that would ease the pressure to drive up to unsustainable densities on other parts of towns and communities, and it will relieve pressure again on greenfield sites.
The same principle applies to our high streets. Liberal Democrats want to see a properly funded high street strategy, one that genuinely brings empty units back into use as accommodation and housing above shops strengthens town centre first in the first principle, and supports those property owners who want to do those conversions. And we will deliver on our ten year Emergency Home upgrade programme, starting with free insulation and heat pumps for low income households. So regeneration is not the only route to warm home. We welcome that the government has made housing a priority.
We have read that the new Prime Minister will want to increase the number of council and social rent homes being built. Does the Minister believe that the new Prime Minister will match the Lib Dem ambition to reach 150,000 new social rent homes per year?I'm sure we'd all be interested to conclude Doctor Morrison. I asked of the minister, are an infrastructure first requirement. So regeneration schemes are properly funded to deliver the GP surgeries, schools and transport links that increased density require a national target for 150,000 social rent homes per year, rather than a market led approach that we have at the moment.
Delivery of a ten year emergency home upgrade programme, starting with free insulation, heat pumps for low income households and regeneration, that that should never be something done to a community. It is done with and by the community. Thank you, Doctor Morrison.
Um, the honourable member again. And it's always a pleasure to have him with us in the debate. Um, clearly it's a shame that the honourable member's constituents don't feel they've been fully consulted, as they should have done in the regeneration project he mentioned, because regeneration, when it's done with genuine community involvement, can change lives and some of the best ways possible community involvement, consent and consultation is a fundamental necessity of that kind of positive and transformative outcome is going to be achieved. Regeneration is one of the best tools we have to help solve the housing crisis, allowing us to build new homes we desperately need and crucially, new social homes.
And on brownfield sites saving precious green fields from development and allowing residents to exchange some of the coldest leakiest housing stock in Europe for better homes that are actually affordable to run, while adding the kind of infrastructure that the honourable gentleman referred to, like GP surgery, school places and play parks of the kind that some estates 60 built 60 years ago are often never had. There are many Liberal Democrat councillors who are showing the way to do this. My Somerset councillor colleagues like Federica Smith Roberts, Tom Deakin and Lee Baker and North Taunton have led the way on the regeneration of that North Taunton Estate 162 defective prefabricated concrete homes unfit for the 21st century are being demolished and replaced with 229 council homes for affordable rent, so 67 more than we had before.
The scheme was built around a resident design group from the outset, not not token consultations or consolidation after the drawings are finished, local community champions like Lesley Council, who has done amazing work at the price of a community centre, helped to lead that involvement and deserve to be credited for a lot of the work. Existing tenants were rehoused during the works, guaranteeing them a right to return. Another example in Kingston upon Thames, in the constituency of my Right Honourable friend, uh constituency, the Cambridge Road estate, where the Liberal Democrat Council insisted upon the subjecting the proposed regeneration scheme to the ballot ballot of the kind the honourable gentleman referred to.
Those involved work hard with local residents and the proposals received overwhelming support, resulting in 2100 new homes, 871 new council houses, 218 more than were there on the site before. These are not marginal examples. They are proof that the choice is not between either going ahead with regeneration and getting community consent, with leadership and real involvement, communities can and do vote for more housing, not less. That's the ambition the Liberal Democrats want to see matched nationally. And we go further. We want to see infrastructure first in those developments.
So that regeneration comes with those GP surgeries, transport, drainage capacity, the extra density demands rather than as an afterthought. No doctors, no development. As we have said, we would also get serious about housing that already exists but sits empty. There are more than 359 homes across the country that have been empty for six months or longer. Addressing that would ease the pressure to drive up to unsustainable densities on other parts of towns and communities, and it will relieve pressure again on greenfield sites.
The same principle applies to our high streets. Liberal Democrats want to see a properly funded high street strategy, one that genuinely brings empty units back into use as accommodation and housing above shops strengthens town centre first in the first principle, and supports those property owners who want to do those conversions. And we will deliver on our ten year Emergency Home upgrade programme, starting with free insulation and heat pumps for low income households. So regeneration is not the only route to warm home. We welcome that the government has made housing a priority.
We have read that the new Prime Minister will want to increase the number of council and social rent homes being built. Does the Minister believe that the new Prime Minister will match the Lib Dem ambition to reach 150,000 new social rent homes per year?I'm sure we'd all be interested to conclude Doctor Morrison. I asked of the minister, are an infrastructure first requirement. So regeneration schemes are properly funded to deliver the GP surgeries, schools and transport links that increased density require a national target for 150,000 social rent homes per year, rather than a market led approach that we have at the moment.
Delivery of a ten year emergency home upgrade programme, starting with free insulation, heat pumps for low income households and regeneration, that that should never be something done to a community. It is done with and by the community. Thank you, Doctor Morrison.
17:02
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
Thank you, Doctor Morrison. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship and to take part in this debate about estate regeneration. And I find myself in agreement with much of what I've heard so far today. So I would like to thank the honourable gentleman, the member for Basingstoke, for securing this important debate and for his opening speech about estate regeneration scheme in his constituency. I thought he made a strong argument. I'd also like to thank the speakers. So far today, um, the honourable member for Putney Mid-cheshire, Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme, um, Taunton and Wellington and Strangford.
Um, I also somewhat belatedly would like to congratulate the honourable lady, the Minister, on her promotion and welcome her to her place. It's the first time I've had the pleasure of facing her in debate. Doctor Morrison, estate regeneration is an important process in delivering the right homes for local people, and this is true across all main types of estate regeneration, be that refurbishments where homes are retrofitted to bring them into line with regulation and make them safe, viable and modern places for people and families to call their home.
Infill developments where new homes are built on previously developed or undeveloped land to increase density and provide housing for the local population, or full redevelopment and regeneration, meaning that entire estates see wholesale demolition and reconstruction to provide fresh stock for residents and new buyers or tenants. That is why estate regeneration, alongside new housing delivery, should be thought about seriously by the government. Across the country, there are thousands of homes with untapped potential for renewal, regeneration and improvement, and alongside the vast and preponderant unrealised space for ripe, ripe for increased density and new homes.
And this is especially true, and I'm sure the minister will agree here in London. It's something I know all too well. As a former conservative leader on the London Assembly and as a member of Parliament for a constituency in Greater London with a population in London that has never been higher and is growing, London is bursting with demand for housing. Greater London has been set a target of 88,000 homes a year by the government. Now that means, on average, the equivalent to one London boroughs worth of homes being delivered every 16 months.
But so far the Mayor of London and his supporters in Emmitsburg are falling very far short of this. According to GLA figures in 2024 2025, just 7124 social rents and London affordable rent homes were completed. Well, of course, this doesn't even come close to helping the 366,000 Londoners on the social housing waiting list. The need for new homes is stark and it is urgent because the government's own figures show that across England, the number of new, new net additional dwellings was just 208,600 in Labour's first year in power.
This is a 6% drop from 2023 2024, during the last conservative government's final year in office, 190,600 new homes were built, a fall of 8000, around 4% on 2324, which suggests that the government is on course to fall well short of their self-imposed target of 1.5 million homes by the end of this parliament. Indeed, the government is on track to build something like 400 000 fewer homes than it promised at the election. By contrast, from 2013 to 2023, under the last government, the nation saw the highest sustained level of new home formations in the past 50 years, surpassing even the levels of the 1970s and between 2010 and 2024, 2.5 million new homes and 750,000 affordable homes were delivered.
Where estate regeneration. The focus of this debate can play a key role, particularly in London, but not just in London. According to London Council's estate regeneration report from November 2025, London's boroughs have the potential to develop over 10,000 new homes in a city that is starved of supply but overflowing with demand. And this isn't true just inside the M25 but across the country, as speakers across the House have noted in today's debate. The estate regeneration is not a silver bullet, but it can certainly make a significant contribution, and that is something the previous government understood as the mover of today's motion noted, they had a national strategy in 2016 to give this issue the national attention that it deserves.
It's also understood that the role of estate generation can play in taking the pressure off our green belt. As the Liberal Democrat spokesman noted in his speech, by prioritising the development, the regeneration of brownfield sites, everyone has heard the lip service the government pays to brownfield development. But Mhclg action since July 2024 have shown a very clear desire to build all over the greenbelt, instead of the undesirable urban sprawl encouraged by this government. Conservatives believe in building where homes are wanted and needed, and where homes can be supported by existing necessary infrastructure, such as in our cities and in urban areas.
Estate regeneration fits this rationale perfectly, as highlighted by the architect Chloe Phelps, director of grounded, who has said, and I quote, estate regeneration schemes are going to be critical to delivering new homes on brownfield sites over the next few years, with estimates that there is capacity for more than 120,000 on small sites in London alone. The minister's honourable friend, the member for Greenwich and Woolwich, is planning and housing minister, is well versed in all aspects of his brief, but his department's social housing bill suggests otherwise. Not only does the bill fail to recognise the importance of delivering social homes on brownfield sites, but estate regeneration remains largely absent from the bill.
This is because the bill is dressed up as a law to support social housing, but is in fact more about destroying right to buy than increasing the supply of social housing. If the government was serious about social housing, they would have actually built some. But in 20% of council areas across England, not one social home was built under this government. Over the last two years.
Um, I also somewhat belatedly would like to congratulate the honourable lady, the Minister, on her promotion and welcome her to her place. It's the first time I've had the pleasure of facing her in debate. Doctor Morrison, estate regeneration is an important process in delivering the right homes for local people, and this is true across all main types of estate regeneration, be that refurbishments where homes are retrofitted to bring them into line with regulation and make them safe, viable and modern places for people and families to call their home.
Infill developments where new homes are built on previously developed or undeveloped land to increase density and provide housing for the local population, or full redevelopment and regeneration, meaning that entire estates see wholesale demolition and reconstruction to provide fresh stock for residents and new buyers or tenants. That is why estate regeneration, alongside new housing delivery, should be thought about seriously by the government. Across the country, there are thousands of homes with untapped potential for renewal, regeneration and improvement, and alongside the vast and preponderant unrealised space for ripe, ripe for increased density and new homes.
And this is especially true, and I'm sure the minister will agree here in London. It's something I know all too well. As a former conservative leader on the London Assembly and as a member of Parliament for a constituency in Greater London with a population in London that has never been higher and is growing, London is bursting with demand for housing. Greater London has been set a target of 88,000 homes a year by the government. Now that means, on average, the equivalent to one London boroughs worth of homes being delivered every 16 months.
But so far the Mayor of London and his supporters in Emmitsburg are falling very far short of this. According to GLA figures in 2024 2025, just 7124 social rents and London affordable rent homes were completed. Well, of course, this doesn't even come close to helping the 366,000 Londoners on the social housing waiting list. The need for new homes is stark and it is urgent because the government's own figures show that across England, the number of new, new net additional dwellings was just 208,600 in Labour's first year in power.
This is a 6% drop from 2023 2024, during the last conservative government's final year in office, 190,600 new homes were built, a fall of 8000, around 4% on 2324, which suggests that the government is on course to fall well short of their self-imposed target of 1.5 million homes by the end of this parliament. Indeed, the government is on track to build something like 400 000 fewer homes than it promised at the election. By contrast, from 2013 to 2023, under the last government, the nation saw the highest sustained level of new home formations in the past 50 years, surpassing even the levels of the 1970s and between 2010 and 2024, 2.5 million new homes and 750,000 affordable homes were delivered.
Where estate regeneration. The focus of this debate can play a key role, particularly in London, but not just in London. According to London Council's estate regeneration report from November 2025, London's boroughs have the potential to develop over 10,000 new homes in a city that is starved of supply but overflowing with demand. And this isn't true just inside the M25 but across the country, as speakers across the House have noted in today's debate. The estate regeneration is not a silver bullet, but it can certainly make a significant contribution, and that is something the previous government understood as the mover of today's motion noted, they had a national strategy in 2016 to give this issue the national attention that it deserves.
It's also understood that the role of estate generation can play in taking the pressure off our green belt. As the Liberal Democrat spokesman noted in his speech, by prioritising the development, the regeneration of brownfield sites, everyone has heard the lip service the government pays to brownfield development. But Mhclg action since July 2024 have shown a very clear desire to build all over the greenbelt, instead of the undesirable urban sprawl encouraged by this government. Conservatives believe in building where homes are wanted and needed, and where homes can be supported by existing necessary infrastructure, such as in our cities and in urban areas.
Estate regeneration fits this rationale perfectly, as highlighted by the architect Chloe Phelps, director of grounded, who has said, and I quote, estate regeneration schemes are going to be critical to delivering new homes on brownfield sites over the next few years, with estimates that there is capacity for more than 120,000 on small sites in London alone. The minister's honourable friend, the member for Greenwich and Woolwich, is planning and housing minister, is well versed in all aspects of his brief, but his department's social housing bill suggests otherwise. Not only does the bill fail to recognise the importance of delivering social homes on brownfield sites, but estate regeneration remains largely absent from the bill.
This is because the bill is dressed up as a law to support social housing, but is in fact more about destroying right to buy than increasing the supply of social housing. If the government was serious about social housing, they would have actually built some. But in 20% of council areas across England, not one social home was built under this government. Over the last two years.
17:08
17:08
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
To the Shadow Minister for giving way. Does he know that since the Wandsworth Council became a conservative council, the main. The only decision has been made by that Council have been to cancel the. All of the housing development on one estate and partially cancel it on another estate. And now we're wondering what's going to happen with the Alton. So does he support actually building more houses and keeping them as social housing, especially on the Alton estate?
17:09
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I'm not going to comment on that particular scheme because I'm not across the detail of it. But of course, I do support building more houses and we need more houses of all tenure. This is something we have said repeatedly in here and also in the chamber as well. So once again, Doctor Whitehall has the wrong priorities targeting our greenbelt, the ideological attack on right to buy and the failing New Towns programme. Before the right priorities such as estate regeneration, replacement rates are too low for social homes and too many councils have been unable to deliver.
So the government will be wise to generate an appetite for regeneration, to feed the desperate hunger for new social housing. But so far to date they have not done that. The conservative opposition believes in building more homes, believes in prioritising brownfield land and believes in making the dream of home ownership a reality. Believes in aspiration and believes in regeneration. Only through these priorities, and by acting on these beliefs can we provide the much needed, much demanded and much wanted, decent and modern social homes that people deserve.
I hope the honourable lady, the Minister, will address these concerns in full and give the confidence to our constituents on the waiting list, to developers in a position to build and to local leaders that the nation needs to see estate regeneration made real.
So the government will be wise to generate an appetite for regeneration, to feed the desperate hunger for new social housing. But so far to date they have not done that. The conservative opposition believes in building more homes, believes in prioritising brownfield land and believes in making the dream of home ownership a reality. Believes in aspiration and believes in regeneration. Only through these priorities, and by acting on these beliefs can we provide the much needed, much demanded and much wanted, decent and modern social homes that people deserve.
I hope the honourable lady, the Minister, will address these concerns in full and give the confidence to our constituents on the waiting list, to developers in a position to build and to local leaders that the nation needs to see estate regeneration made real.
17:10
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Thank you very much, Doctor Morrison. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And can I thank the Shadow Minister for his generous words?Can I also thank the member for Strangford?He and I are competing for appearance in this chamber this week. Um, thank you very much. I have a long way to go. Um, can I thank the member for Basingstoke for bringing this important debate today and for all members for their contribution.
They have each provided an important perspective on the challenges of estate renewal, and generally to the need to build homes in a way that works for communities. As the right hon. Member for Basingstoke spoke so powerfully about the difference between good regeneration and poor examples in his constituency, and the government recognises that good estate regen is critical to delivering our housing target and providing decent homes for everybody to live in, and the truth is that there are many reasons why estate regeneration might be the best thing for existing tenants, or for a local area.
In some cases, years of neglect from a conservative government that has failed to invest in existing estates that mandated council council rent reductions, which meant even less for HRA accounts, has left many estates in dire need of regeneration. I know this too well, having led a local authority that felt the burden of the pressures of a HRA account, social housing was the tenure most affected by damp and mould issues, and my right hon. Friend spoke correctly to highlight the impact that it's having on many of his constituents, and I know that's the case for many other members who represent make cases on the same issue.
Housing. Ageing, an ageing housing stock not only impacts life chances, it costs the taxpayer longer in more in the long term, because we see disrepair having a bigger impact on communities, but also the stock itself. With this context, it might make more sense for an entire estate to be regenerated than a sticking plaster approach, particularly when some buildings reach the end of their life. In other cases, estates are the best place to build more affordable homes, particularly in our towns and cities where there may be fewer development sites available but more social infrastructure in local areas.
The people often forgotten in housing debates are the 1 million families on council housing waiting lists, and the thousands of people trapped in temporary accommodation. I know that my right hon. Friend's local authority in his area, there are something like 4000 on the housing register, a similar figure in my own borough of Barking and Dagenham. Everyone deserves a decent home, a safe home in a clean neighbourhood with decent social infrastructure. And may I pay tribute to my right, the right hon.
Member for Putney, who so passionately and accurately spoke about the importance of those facilities that make a community, whether it's a youth centre and so needed GPS. I pay tribute to her long standing campaign, which reflects the need to build neighbourhoods with homes that are more than just the buildings that home people. It's my view, the simple, most powerful thing that we can do to lift people out of poverty and improve life chances is to provide more decent homes in this country. And the first and foremost thing is to recognise the supply of homes is a foundation to everything.
Indeed, we will only address the housing crisis by building more homes. Period. And I listened to the shadow Minister with great interest and the important points he made about house building and getting on with it. I have to say, having been a council leader in London and a Labour and a Labour member of Parliament in London now, it is a great shame that conservative councils, Lib Dem councils, councillors, MPs frequently object to house building and I have to. I have to say also, yes, of course, brownfield sites are part of the solution.
They are a really important part of the solution. But the idea that we can meet housing need in London or in the rest of the country, only using brownfield sites or doing infill on existing estates is, I'm afraid, misleading. That doesn't just mean that we only look at one aspect of house building. It is a complicated picture, which I recognise, but it takes a multitude of approaches to make sure that regeneration delivers the number of homes we need to the decent homes standard. But I also know that regeneration must be delivered in partnership with communities.
Good regeneration puts those communities in the driving seat. That doesn't mean just being transparent with decision making. It means presenting and allowing real say for those to shape those who live in the community. The proposals that are in front of them, decisions like property size, building height, materials, amenities and timelines for delivery has already been mentioned are really important aspects of getting buy in from a community, and the approach isn't new. Good developers, of which there are many, do this anyway, and the regulatory standards are clear.
Registered providers must communicate with, provide information to, and take the views of tenants into account. All in decision making. This extends to providers undertaking taking estate regeneration on timelines. It would be difficult to set out, in truth, what realistic timelines would look like because each estate regeneration is different and unique, with different sizes. Ambition, good engagement with existing residents may then further change those ambitions. Timelines for estate renewal is also highly dependent on viability phasing planning permission conditions, ground and infrastructure prep.
But I accept the point that not knowing when your home might be knocked down creates huge anxiety for families that live on that estate. Indeed, I know that there are examples in my own constituency of families who have been told they are earmarked for estate renewal and can see their communities being hollowed out, and yet they themselves don't know when they might need to move on. Timelines for estate renewal, as I say, is complicated, but it is important that that engagement takes into account the instability that estate renewal provides.
My hon. Friend asked a valid question about whether the process for decision making should be through a ballot. Um. I led a local authority who had a ballot for an area, um, to say the least. It is hard work, but it is perhaps one of the most important things you can do to in order, in order to be able to secure the buy in from a community, but to say that ballots in themselves is what secured. That, I think is a disservice, really, to the engagement of what that ballot provided ballots in, in and of themselves do not solve trust issues amongst residents.
They can force developers to have meaningful engagement, which is what they should be doing anyway. But it doesn't mean that it will get the outcome that we want. And where providers fall short. There is usually a complaints process, an ombudsman that can follow. But in addition, the government has also committed to introducing social tenant access to information requirements. From this October, it will make mandatory provide. It will make it mandatory for providers to give information about property management and response to information requests.
I'm happy to give way.
They have each provided an important perspective on the challenges of estate renewal, and generally to the need to build homes in a way that works for communities. As the right hon. Member for Basingstoke spoke so powerfully about the difference between good regeneration and poor examples in his constituency, and the government recognises that good estate regen is critical to delivering our housing target and providing decent homes for everybody to live in, and the truth is that there are many reasons why estate regeneration might be the best thing for existing tenants, or for a local area.
In some cases, years of neglect from a conservative government that has failed to invest in existing estates that mandated council council rent reductions, which meant even less for HRA accounts, has left many estates in dire need of regeneration. I know this too well, having led a local authority that felt the burden of the pressures of a HRA account, social housing was the tenure most affected by damp and mould issues, and my right hon. Friend spoke correctly to highlight the impact that it's having on many of his constituents, and I know that's the case for many other members who represent make cases on the same issue.
Housing. Ageing, an ageing housing stock not only impacts life chances, it costs the taxpayer longer in more in the long term, because we see disrepair having a bigger impact on communities, but also the stock itself. With this context, it might make more sense for an entire estate to be regenerated than a sticking plaster approach, particularly when some buildings reach the end of their life. In other cases, estates are the best place to build more affordable homes, particularly in our towns and cities where there may be fewer development sites available but more social infrastructure in local areas.
The people often forgotten in housing debates are the 1 million families on council housing waiting lists, and the thousands of people trapped in temporary accommodation. I know that my right hon. Friend's local authority in his area, there are something like 4000 on the housing register, a similar figure in my own borough of Barking and Dagenham. Everyone deserves a decent home, a safe home in a clean neighbourhood with decent social infrastructure. And may I pay tribute to my right, the right hon.
Member for Putney, who so passionately and accurately spoke about the importance of those facilities that make a community, whether it's a youth centre and so needed GPS. I pay tribute to her long standing campaign, which reflects the need to build neighbourhoods with homes that are more than just the buildings that home people. It's my view, the simple, most powerful thing that we can do to lift people out of poverty and improve life chances is to provide more decent homes in this country. And the first and foremost thing is to recognise the supply of homes is a foundation to everything.
Indeed, we will only address the housing crisis by building more homes. Period. And I listened to the shadow Minister with great interest and the important points he made about house building and getting on with it. I have to say, having been a council leader in London and a Labour and a Labour member of Parliament in London now, it is a great shame that conservative councils, Lib Dem councils, councillors, MPs frequently object to house building and I have to. I have to say also, yes, of course, brownfield sites are part of the solution.
They are a really important part of the solution. But the idea that we can meet housing need in London or in the rest of the country, only using brownfield sites or doing infill on existing estates is, I'm afraid, misleading. That doesn't just mean that we only look at one aspect of house building. It is a complicated picture, which I recognise, but it takes a multitude of approaches to make sure that regeneration delivers the number of homes we need to the decent homes standard. But I also know that regeneration must be delivered in partnership with communities.
Good regeneration puts those communities in the driving seat. That doesn't mean just being transparent with decision making. It means presenting and allowing real say for those to shape those who live in the community. The proposals that are in front of them, decisions like property size, building height, materials, amenities and timelines for delivery has already been mentioned are really important aspects of getting buy in from a community, and the approach isn't new. Good developers, of which there are many, do this anyway, and the regulatory standards are clear.
Registered providers must communicate with, provide information to, and take the views of tenants into account. All in decision making. This extends to providers undertaking taking estate regeneration on timelines. It would be difficult to set out, in truth, what realistic timelines would look like because each estate regeneration is different and unique, with different sizes. Ambition, good engagement with existing residents may then further change those ambitions. Timelines for estate renewal is also highly dependent on viability phasing planning permission conditions, ground and infrastructure prep.
But I accept the point that not knowing when your home might be knocked down creates huge anxiety for families that live on that estate. Indeed, I know that there are examples in my own constituency of families who have been told they are earmarked for estate renewal and can see their communities being hollowed out, and yet they themselves don't know when they might need to move on. Timelines for estate renewal, as I say, is complicated, but it is important that that engagement takes into account the instability that estate renewal provides.
My hon. Friend asked a valid question about whether the process for decision making should be through a ballot. Um. I led a local authority who had a ballot for an area, um, to say the least. It is hard work, but it is perhaps one of the most important things you can do to in order, in order to be able to secure the buy in from a community, but to say that ballots in themselves is what secured. That, I think is a disservice, really, to the engagement of what that ballot provided ballots in, in and of themselves do not solve trust issues amongst residents.
They can force developers to have meaningful engagement, which is what they should be doing anyway. But it doesn't mean that it will get the outcome that we want. And where providers fall short. There is usually a complaints process, an ombudsman that can follow. But in addition, the government has also committed to introducing social tenant access to information requirements. From this October, it will make mandatory provide. It will make it mandatory for providers to give information about property management and response to information requests.
I'm happy to give way.
17:18
17:18
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
For giving way, just briefly on that point on residential ballots, I completely accept the point that she's making that in and of themselves, they are not the answer, but they do drive the behaviour that helps build that community consent. I just wonder whether you she would extend a request to the Housing Minister to for him to meet with me about this issue following this debate.
17:18
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Of course I will. And I think the Department will be would welcome any conversation about that. Um, but I just have to emphasise that the engagement process requires more than just a tick box of yes and no. And actually the best regeneration and estate renewal programmes, um, demonstrate it. It's the long term commitment to engagement with residents, a genuine commitment for them to be able to shape the outcomes. And also, if I might add, a political bravery from leadership locally that says we have to have some homes built and therefore, let's go on this journey together.
Too often we see examples where it just becomes easy to say no to everything, and we end up with the housing crisis that we face across the country. On the point, on transparency and accountability. Um, good question. Was asked about the governance of regeneration schemes. And I agree with members who have raised the point that it's vital that estate regeneration schemes, particularly when they involve public land, um, all public money demonstrate that transparency. Estate renewal can actually be quite easy if you sell off all the land, particularly in a place like London, you'll find you're not short of interest from developers.
Estate regeneration is much harder if you are committed to delivering affordable homes and committed to making sure that you have amenities that make that estate renewal a community. Um, and estate regeneration, estate regeneration, national strategy, guidance helps set out a framework from government to achieve what is needed. The regulator of social housing inspects works to improve standards, and the Ombudsman provides routes for readiness. More effective statutory routes for better estate regeneration. So some important steps have been taken by the government.
But but I recognise that is a longer term commitment and a culture change, if you like, through our support for local authorities to develop a regeneration in a way that works for communities. Can I also address the direct point about lack of trust on repair issues?Because too often you will have two camps of people that talk about housing as though repairs for an estate is a separate task from long term estate renewal. And the truth is, estate regeneration for existing areas is a project that may last decades, and a five year period is a relatively short period of time in terms of estate renewal.
But five years is a period of time. A young person will be in secondary school, and if throughout that time they've got a leak in the roof or they've got damp or there's anti-social behaviour, or there is some basic things that just need to be fixed on their estate, it will have an impact not only on their life chances, but the trust and confidence that they need, that those who are responsible for fixing the basics in their home can also deliver homes for the future, where they may live for the rest of their lives.
So I take the point very, very seriously. Um, and I, and I, and I welcome any further discussions that members might want to have with ministers and Mhclg so that we can further strengthen the guidance that's already in place. Um, and also, um, seek to make any steps that we need to take so that we can see, um, not the erosion of trust and confidence, but a building of trust and confidence so that there can be an endorsement of further house building, um, in this country, like I say.
Chair, I think estate renewal programmes are possibly the most difficult thing that local authorities can do. Um, and I recognise important points made about place making and I really do welcome local authorities being place makers and in many examples where they've decided to be the um master. Developer. It is a tough task for local authority, but with support from a government from Mhclg, I think I would welcome more examples of local authorities acting as a master developer. Um, perhaps also a developer, but the master developer bit in my view is what helps build that trusted relationship between communities so that you can have the buy in to see long term housing delivery, I think estate renewal more than more than any housing delivery requires, as I say, political, local, brave political leadership, a real long term commitment to engaging and shaping it requires money.
And so I'm proud that the government has invested is already allocated almost £40 billion for affordable homes. But none of that matters if you don't have the buy in from the local community. So I genuinely really welcome the debate. Right honourable member has secured. I pay tribute to the passionate campaign and advocacy that he presents on behalf of his constituents. I know that I recognise the amount of casework he receives that relates to repairs and maintenance. Um alongside his commitment to see more homes built for his area because he knows, like I do, that home building is what will change life chances for people in this country.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Too often we see examples where it just becomes easy to say no to everything, and we end up with the housing crisis that we face across the country. On the point, on transparency and accountability. Um, good question. Was asked about the governance of regeneration schemes. And I agree with members who have raised the point that it's vital that estate regeneration schemes, particularly when they involve public land, um, all public money demonstrate that transparency. Estate renewal can actually be quite easy if you sell off all the land, particularly in a place like London, you'll find you're not short of interest from developers.
Estate regeneration is much harder if you are committed to delivering affordable homes and committed to making sure that you have amenities that make that estate renewal a community. Um, and estate regeneration, estate regeneration, national strategy, guidance helps set out a framework from government to achieve what is needed. The regulator of social housing inspects works to improve standards, and the Ombudsman provides routes for readiness. More effective statutory routes for better estate regeneration. So some important steps have been taken by the government.
But but I recognise that is a longer term commitment and a culture change, if you like, through our support for local authorities to develop a regeneration in a way that works for communities. Can I also address the direct point about lack of trust on repair issues?Because too often you will have two camps of people that talk about housing as though repairs for an estate is a separate task from long term estate renewal. And the truth is, estate regeneration for existing areas is a project that may last decades, and a five year period is a relatively short period of time in terms of estate renewal.
But five years is a period of time. A young person will be in secondary school, and if throughout that time they've got a leak in the roof or they've got damp or there's anti-social behaviour, or there is some basic things that just need to be fixed on their estate, it will have an impact not only on their life chances, but the trust and confidence that they need, that those who are responsible for fixing the basics in their home can also deliver homes for the future, where they may live for the rest of their lives.
So I take the point very, very seriously. Um, and I, and I, and I welcome any further discussions that members might want to have with ministers and Mhclg so that we can further strengthen the guidance that's already in place. Um, and also, um, seek to make any steps that we need to take so that we can see, um, not the erosion of trust and confidence, but a building of trust and confidence so that there can be an endorsement of further house building, um, in this country, like I say.
Chair, I think estate renewal programmes are possibly the most difficult thing that local authorities can do. Um, and I recognise important points made about place making and I really do welcome local authorities being place makers and in many examples where they've decided to be the um master. Developer. It is a tough task for local authority, but with support from a government from Mhclg, I think I would welcome more examples of local authorities acting as a master developer. Um, perhaps also a developer, but the master developer bit in my view is what helps build that trusted relationship between communities so that you can have the buy in to see long term housing delivery, I think estate renewal more than more than any housing delivery requires, as I say, political, local, brave political leadership, a real long term commitment to engaging and shaping it requires money.
And so I'm proud that the government has invested is already allocated almost £40 billion for affordable homes. But none of that matters if you don't have the buy in from the local community. So I genuinely really welcome the debate. Right honourable member has secured. I pay tribute to the passionate campaign and advocacy that he presents on behalf of his constituents. I know that I recognise the amount of casework he receives that relates to repairs and maintenance. Um alongside his commitment to see more homes built for his area because he knows, like I do, that home building is what will change life chances for people in this country.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
17:24
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
To drive that some of that engagement that she was referring to can also just thank other members for their contributions. The member for Mid-cheshire, for his point around the value of estate regeneration, both to economy and pride in place, something that I fully recognise, but the community needs a need, needs to be at the heart of any proposals. The Member the honourable member for Strangford, um, who made the point around communities not just being, uh, a number on the spreadsheet, um, and the need for a holistic blueprint for renewal.
And also I think we all agree with that, that need for a UK wide approach on this point. The member for Putney. I heard her pride in the Alton estate. Um, I share the pride in representing Buckskin and Southampton. She mentioned a number of key things actually, which are really important locally in Basingstoke as well in buckskin in South Ham, around the need for a permanent community centre as part of the region, the co-design. And she also mentioned how the way in which the residential ballot had worked as well.
So it was very interested to hear that the member for Doncaster East and Isle of Axholme, and the powerful argument he made around pride in place, but also resident action groups, which is something I'd like to speak to him further about. Appreciated the response to the shadow spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats, the member for Taunton and Wellington, and his agreement on the point around minimum standards and. But also agreement on the need for community consent and what that can help deliver. Um, and, uh, thanking the shadow minister for the conservatives, the member for Orpington, on what he said about my speech, although I would say that I'm old enough to remember when the conservative government cut the budget for affordable housing by two thirds, uh, introduced the unaffordable rent model and decimated the building of social housing, uh, as well.
So I might gently disagree with some of the points he made about the conservative government's record on housing, but I wanted to put on record my thanks to the minister for her response, all members for contributing, but also recognising the ongoing conversations I'm having with SMG, the Sovereign Hill Partnership and the local council. And I want to work constructively with them. I recognise the need for investment and more homes, and many residents recognise that as well. But it has to be done in the right way with the accountability that's needed to build that trust.
Uh as well. And I look forward to, and I will always be a strong voice for the residents and my constituents in Buckskin and Southam. And finally, I'd like to thank the chair for presiding over the debate.
And also I think we all agree with that, that need for a UK wide approach on this point. The member for Putney. I heard her pride in the Alton estate. Um, I share the pride in representing Buckskin and Southampton. She mentioned a number of key things actually, which are really important locally in Basingstoke as well in buckskin in South Ham, around the need for a permanent community centre as part of the region, the co-design. And she also mentioned how the way in which the residential ballot had worked as well.
So it was very interested to hear that the member for Doncaster East and Isle of Axholme, and the powerful argument he made around pride in place, but also resident action groups, which is something I'd like to speak to him further about. Appreciated the response to the shadow spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats, the member for Taunton and Wellington, and his agreement on the point around minimum standards and. But also agreement on the need for community consent and what that can help deliver. Um, and, uh, thanking the shadow minister for the conservatives, the member for Orpington, on what he said about my speech, although I would say that I'm old enough to remember when the conservative government cut the budget for affordable housing by two thirds, uh, introduced the unaffordable rent model and decimated the building of social housing, uh, as well.
So I might gently disagree with some of the points he made about the conservative government's record on housing, but I wanted to put on record my thanks to the minister for her response, all members for contributing, but also recognising the ongoing conversations I'm having with SMG, the Sovereign Hill Partnership and the local council. And I want to work constructively with them. I recognise the need for investment and more homes, and many residents recognise that as well. But it has to be done in the right way with the accountability that's needed to build that trust.
Uh as well. And I look forward to, and I will always be a strong voice for the residents and my constituents in Buckskin and Southam. And finally, I'd like to thank the chair for presiding over the debate.