Westminster Hall
Wednesday 21st October 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 2 weeks ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
09:30
09:30
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Of e-scooters and e-bikes. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Stringer. I am absolutely pleased to have secured this debate, and really grateful for the opportunity to raise this issue that needs urgently progressing. It is a timely debate because last week I hosted a round table on this very topic. There were 25 individuals that attended. They were senior ranking representatives from nine police forces from across the country, five police and crime commissioners, one borough commander, one assistant chief constable and the officers of the present were from the met, Derbyshire, Merseyside, Surrey, Lancashire, Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, Hertfordshire, Devon and Cornwall.
They were industry representatives, campaigners, policy experts, academics, doctors and MPs and I am thankful to all those who attended and shared their insights and expertise with me and those other MPs that were there. The fact that so many individuals representing diverse groups and interests travelled across the UK to London to speak about this issue highlights the urgency and the need for action. So how did this issue become so important to me? It all first started when I was canvassing to become an MP, and I met so many constituents who raised the issue of e-scooters and e-bikes in my constituency in Epsom and Ewell.
It became a top issue, and one of my constituents, Ed Dark, told me that his little boy is now too scared to go to the park. The beautiful park that's next to his house due to. I will.
They were industry representatives, campaigners, policy experts, academics, doctors and MPs and I am thankful to all those who attended and shared their insights and expertise with me and those other MPs that were there. The fact that so many individuals representing diverse groups and interests travelled across the UK to London to speak about this issue highlights the urgency and the need for action. So how did this issue become so important to me? It all first started when I was canvassing to become an MP, and I met so many constituents who raised the issue of e-scooters and e-bikes in my constituency in Epsom and Ewell.
It became a top issue, and one of my constituents, Ed Dark, told me that his little boy is now too scared to go to the park. The beautiful park that's next to his house due to. I will.
09:31
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Thank the honourable member for giving way. Many people in my constituency of Wolverhampton West feel frightened and intimidated. Intimidated when just walking out on the pavement can run the risk of being in collision with an e-scooter or e-bike and I have raised the matter with the police. But they say that they are unable to take action unless the riders are caught riding the vehicle. So does my hon. Friend agree that we need greater enforcement powers, clearer national guidance and stronger controls on the sales of illegal e-scooters and e-bikes so that we can better protect our residents and restore confidence in our neighbourhoods.
09:32
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable member for his intervention. I agree with everything and I will be talking about these points in my speech. So Edward Dark's son, he was walking home from school one day and he was nearly hit by an e-scooter. Now, this could have been fatal. Thankfully it wasn't. Another constituent told me that they've even considered moving house. Just consider that moving house because of the e-scooter misuse in their neighbourhood.
One told me that her. Yes, I thank the member for.
One told me that her. Yes, I thank the member for.
09:32
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Giving way and she is rightfully got a debate on an extremely important topic in the summer in Tamworth we had an extremely serious collision between a six year old girl and an E motorbike. She is in. She was in a critical condition but fortunately she did not die as a result. But I wondered whether or not she will be obviously pressing the Minister to find out what more can be done to give resources to policing and to help clarify the situation around the legislation for e-bikes and motorbikes.
09:33
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I'm really sorry to hear about the member's constituents, and I hope she's okay now, but I will absolutely be raising these issues. Thank you. So one constituency constituent told me that her car was hit by an illegally ridden e-bike on the wrong side of the road. She got the individual's details. She reported it to the police, and she was told that they'll keep a lookout rather than seize the bike from the known address. But this issue goes far beyond Epsom and Ewell, as members have raised already. What we're seeing across the country is young people on e-scooters riding at high speed through red lights, parks and in pedestrianised areas.
09:33
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I thank the honourable lady for giving way and for the excellent seminar she held last week, which I was able to attend. Illegal motorbikes are also a blight on my community in Shipley constituency, but having spoken to the police and the lead police officers that she convened last week, this is a preferred vehicle of choice for organised crime and criminals. So does she agree, and will she help press the minister to work with dbus to make sure these non-compliant conversion kits are banned from sale as soon as possible?
09:34
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the member for her intervention. Absolutely agree. And this is one of the matters that we need to take forward to the minister. So we have illegally modified e-scooters that can now reach speeds of up to 70 miles an hour. We have the issue of e-bikes, which are catching fire due to uncertified lithium ion batteries. The use of e-vehicles and criminal activities and anti-social behaviour. As the members alluded to, fundamentally, pedestrians have the right to feel safe. They shouldn't need to feel worried about being hit or knocked over when they're just simply walking in the park or on the streets.
And this is particularly important for vulnerable groups, especially those with vision, vision, loss or mobility needs.
And this is particularly important for vulnerable groups, especially those with vision, vision, loss or mobility needs.
09:34
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Thank you for giving away. She's making such a strong argument. I recently met with the guide Dogs. I know the members here did too. They made a strong case for the visually impaired and the blind, who are often put off going out onto their own streets because of the silent nature of these e-scooters and e-bikes. Doesn't she agree that on that point alone underscores the need to enforce the law properly in this area?
09:35
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend and in my constituency, I sway a house right in the centre of Epsom, where we have a huge amount of people living there who are visually impaired, and this is a critical issue for them. So there are currently flaws in the current collision data. In 2023, there were at least 1299 collisions involving e-scooters. But these statistics don't show the full picture. How can they? Because the data is not consistently collected or clearly identified. Data on death and injuries in reported collisions is reported to the Department for Transport by Police Forces in Great Britain via stats 19.
A new personal powered transport category was introduced. This covers e-scooters, but not all forces are currently using the new stats 19 specifications, so I urge the Minister to enforce the use of the new stats 19 specification for all police forces, so that they can understand exactly what is going on.
A new personal powered transport category was introduced. This covers e-scooters, but not all forces are currently using the new stats 19 specifications, so I urge the Minister to enforce the use of the new stats 19 specification for all police forces, so that they can understand exactly what is going on.
09:36
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable member for his contribution. I'm sure he can put those issues forward to the Minister. Thank you. So e-bikes aren't currently distinguished from pedal cycle or electric motorcycle categories, depending on their power rating. And the government has stated that there aren't any plans to change stats 19 data to introduce specific categories for e-bikes. So I urge the minister today to reassess introducing a specific category for e-bikes within stats 19.
But yeah.
But yeah.
09:37
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Thanks very much. And the reason I intervene at this point is I went into Qmc, which is the main hospital in Nottingham, specifically to meet the paediatric teams, and they told me that there had been ten acquired brain injuries, serious brain injuries since April this year. They're looking at two a month and the curve is on an upward trajectory. And so actually the data on the ground is clear. This is a problem. And the lag in the data is something that ministers need to get beyond and start taking the action that people are calling for, like the medics that I met.
So would you agree with me that the human cost and the long term impact on these young people needs to be prioritised?
So would you agree with me that the human cost and the long term impact on these young people needs to be prioritised?
09:37
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I absolutely agree with the honourable member, and I will be talking more about the Human Cost Amendment. Thank you. So these changes will provide an accurate oversight of the scale and distribution of the issue, which would effectively lead to more effective enforcement and legislation. How can we begin to address this issue if we don't even fully understand the full picture? But behind these limited statistics, there's an unacceptable price of injury and death, and particularly for children. At my roundtable, I spoke to Doctor Durand. She's a consultant in paediatric emergency medicine, and her research from the Emergency Medical General analysed e-scooter injury data over six years from three major children trauma centres in Manchester, Liverpool and Sheffield, and what it found was 447 children attended hospital following an e-scooter related injury.
1 in 10 had serious head injuries requiring hospital admission and surgery, 95% of injuries involved the rider, and the average age of an injured child was 12 years old. Half were aged between 10 and 13. Annual cases rose from less than 10 in 2019 to almost 150 by 2024. 74% of the injured children also live in areas with the greatest socioeconomic deprivation. Less than 2% of riders were wearing a helmet. I'm going to tell you about Jacob. Jacob's journey , because behind each of these statistics is a child with possibly life ending injuries and permanently changed families.
And one of these families is the Calland family. I was fortunate to meet Carly for the second time at my round table. The Calland family tragically lost their son Jacob, in an e-scooter incident on the 19th of March 2025. Jacob left his home and just met up with another boy, his friend. He decided to ride as a passenger on the back of that boy's e-scooter without any protective gear. And this decision cost him his life because at 359, the e-scooter collided with the car. Jacob was thrown into the other side of the road and landed in front of oncoming traffic.
He suffered a catastrophic head injury and was brought into the ICU and put in a coma. He underwent multiple surgeries to try to control the bleeding and swelling on the brain, but his condition began to deteriorate and there was nothing more that could be done to save his life. Jacob Calland passed away at 5:18 a.m. on Thursday, 25th of March 2025. He was just 14 years and nine months old. How many more children need to die for the government to take this issue seriously? There was no mention of e-scooter and e-bike legislation in The King's Speech, and DFT say the earliest legislation could be considered is May 2027.
This is unacceptable. The lack of time in the parliamentary calendar is not an excuse for failing to act to save our children's lives.
1 in 10 had serious head injuries requiring hospital admission and surgery, 95% of injuries involved the rider, and the average age of an injured child was 12 years old. Half were aged between 10 and 13. Annual cases rose from less than 10 in 2019 to almost 150 by 2024. 74% of the injured children also live in areas with the greatest socioeconomic deprivation. Less than 2% of riders were wearing a helmet. I'm going to tell you about Jacob. Jacob's journey , because behind each of these statistics is a child with possibly life ending injuries and permanently changed families.
And one of these families is the Calland family. I was fortunate to meet Carly for the second time at my round table. The Calland family tragically lost their son Jacob, in an e-scooter incident on the 19th of March 2025. Jacob left his home and just met up with another boy, his friend. He decided to ride as a passenger on the back of that boy's e-scooter without any protective gear. And this decision cost him his life because at 359, the e-scooter collided with the car. Jacob was thrown into the other side of the road and landed in front of oncoming traffic.
He suffered a catastrophic head injury and was brought into the ICU and put in a coma. He underwent multiple surgeries to try to control the bleeding and swelling on the brain, but his condition began to deteriorate and there was nothing more that could be done to save his life. Jacob Calland passed away at 5:18 a.m. on Thursday, 25th of March 2025. He was just 14 years and nine months old. How many more children need to die for the government to take this issue seriously? There was no mention of e-scooter and e-bike legislation in The King's Speech, and DFT say the earliest legislation could be considered is May 2027.
This is unacceptable. The lack of time in the parliamentary calendar is not an excuse for failing to act to save our children's lives.
09:40
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
The honourable member for giving way, would you agree with me that just in advance of any change, that there needs to be seen to be across the country, a consistency of approach? Because I have heard parents say to me, senior police officers in one part of the country take one attitude to this ongoing and worsening problem compared to other compatriots, and we need to see a consistency of approach in advance of the change that we all want.
09:40
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Absolutely. And that's something I'll be going on to, which is police powers and the actual acts that they have to act. I have three children myself, and Jacob could have been one of mine or any of our children in this room. Today, as MPs, we have a duty to ensure that we keep our children safe. And for the Prime Minister. Jacob lived in Wythenshawe, Manchester, close to Macclesfield. So if he is listening today, I urge him to act now. So this brings me on to the unending rental e-scooter trials. Trials began in July 2020 and intended to run until November 2021.
They were launched to review if e-scooters reduce pressure on public transport, motor traffic and their safety impacts. The trials were then extended until March 2022 to allow more time for evidence to be gathered due to Covid. They were then extended again until November 2022 due to the DFT issuing guidance to enhance safety measures. They were then extended again to May 2025 for the DFT to reflect on further analysis, and it's now been extended again until May 2028 to help fill evidence gaps to inform legislation. This will be eight years of trials with no action. Why are these trials unending?
What are we trying to achieve in this period of time? In Ireland, they had a six month trial. In Germany, they had 180 day trial in France and Spain. They didn't even have trials. And these countries were able to implement legislation and improve road safety in a fraction of the time. So my question to the minister is, why can't we?
They were launched to review if e-scooters reduce pressure on public transport, motor traffic and their safety impacts. The trials were then extended until March 2022 to allow more time for evidence to be gathered due to Covid. They were then extended again until November 2022 due to the DFT issuing guidance to enhance safety measures. They were then extended again to May 2025 for the DFT to reflect on further analysis, and it's now been extended again until May 2028 to help fill evidence gaps to inform legislation. This will be eight years of trials with no action. Why are these trials unending?
What are we trying to achieve in this period of time? In Ireland, they had a six month trial. In Germany, they had 180 day trial in France and Spain. They didn't even have trials. And these countries were able to implement legislation and improve road safety in a fraction of the time. So my question to the minister is, why can't we?
09:42
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I thank the honourable lady for giving way. Derbyshire Constabulary have seized and crushed over 1000 illegal electric scooters, some capable of traveling at speeds of 50 miles an hour and being ridden by children. At speeds like that. The the damage that can be done is catastrophic, and I've also had older constituents who told me that they are afraid to go into Derby city centre for fear of being hit, and that's not even to mention the house fires that we have seen due to e-scooter batteries. So does the honourable member agree with me that the sooner that we legislate to tackle illegal scooters and protect the public, the better.
09:43
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I absolutely agree with the honourable member and Derbyshire Police have been doing that standing job seizing e-scooters and e-bikes, so I do congratulate them on that. So since the start of these trials in 2020 to December 2025, there have been 7591 reported casualties in collisions involving e-scooters. In 2025 alone, there were 1477 reported collisions and ten deaths. The time for data collection has long passed. Legislation is now needed to save lives on our roads, so looking at policing, e-scooters and e-bikes, the lack of government action is currently forcing police forces to deal with this issue on their own because there's no centralised guidance on operational tactics.
And so police are adapting seizing powers. So Derbyshire Police have got a system at the moment called see it sees it, and they're empowering PCSOs under section one, six, five A of the Road Traffic Act to seize and remove e-scooters within 24 hours. But this isn't consistent across the country. Every police force is doing it differently.
And so police are adapting seizing powers. So Derbyshire Police have got a system at the moment called see it sees it, and they're empowering PCSOs under section one, six, five A of the Road Traffic Act to seize and remove e-scooters within 24 hours. But this isn't consistent across the country. Every police force is doing it differently.
09:44
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
I thank her for giving way and calling this debate, which is very timely. Does she agree with me that this is a particular problem where policing borders meet? My constituency is under the West Mercia jurisdiction, but Cofton Hackett, a village where we have an acute problem with e-bikes. The bikes often originate from Birmingham, which is under the jurisdiction of West Midlands Police. It feels that some areas fall between the cracks and that increasingly the e-bike.
The e-bike problem is one where we're increasingly living in a society without consequences.
The e-bike problem is one where we're increasingly living in a society without consequences.
09:44
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable member for his intervention and I agree. When police forces are using different tactics, there absolutely will be across boundary border issue. So Derbyshire Police also implemented a huge public awareness campaign with the fire brigade, housing providers, schools and retailers. And what's really important is that we inform the public more about this because they're incredibly confused about e-scooters, because they can be bought legally, but they can't be used on our on our public roads or in parks. Only the e-scooter trials can be used legally. And right now, we're entering the Christmas season, where many parents will be thinking maybe about an e-scooter or an e-bike as a gift.
So I urge the government to put safety first and to reconsider. Since implementing the scheme in Derbyshire, they've seized 30 e-scooters a month, a total of 1060. This strategy is effective. It's seen a reduction in e-scooter crime by 40% and a reduction in e-bike crime by 11%. Now, recently, Surrey Police have announced Operation Scramble, where illegal e-bikes and e-scooters will be seized and destroyed. The government must support police forces. Police forces are calling for this and they're calling for workable legislation. That's why there were so many representatives from police forces around the country at my round table the other day.
To be clear, I'm not against e-scooters or e-bikes because the benefits of them are clear. They're affordable transport alternatives. They make difficult routes accessible. The impact on the environment is less than cars. They improve public health, local air quality, and they cut congestion. And they support the hard workers in the gig economy. But they must be properly regulated, legislated and this must be enforced to protect all members of the public. So, in conclusion, there is currently no practical legislation on the use of e-scooters and e-bikes. There is no coordinated guidance for police forces. There is no effective regulation on the import or sale.
There's no control of the online or grey marketplace, and there's no public understanding of what is and what isn't legal failure to act is not just lives, but it's also lost revenue to HMRC further strain and costs on our hospitals and on the NHS, increased pressure on precious police forces and confusion to retailers, consumers and parents. So will the Minister today commit to ending the ongoing trials? Commit to outlining the next steps for legislation. Commit to the safety of our children and young people in the UK so that another parent doesn't need to spend this Christmas without their child.
So I urge the government to put safety first and to reconsider. Since implementing the scheme in Derbyshire, they've seized 30 e-scooters a month, a total of 1060. This strategy is effective. It's seen a reduction in e-scooter crime by 40% and a reduction in e-bike crime by 11%. Now, recently, Surrey Police have announced Operation Scramble, where illegal e-bikes and e-scooters will be seized and destroyed. The government must support police forces. Police forces are calling for this and they're calling for workable legislation. That's why there were so many representatives from police forces around the country at my round table the other day.
To be clear, I'm not against e-scooters or e-bikes because the benefits of them are clear. They're affordable transport alternatives. They make difficult routes accessible. The impact on the environment is less than cars. They improve public health, local air quality, and they cut congestion. And they support the hard workers in the gig economy. But they must be properly regulated, legislated and this must be enforced to protect all members of the public. So, in conclusion, there is currently no practical legislation on the use of e-scooters and e-bikes. There is no coordinated guidance for police forces. There is no effective regulation on the import or sale.
There's no control of the online or grey marketplace, and there's no public understanding of what is and what isn't legal failure to act is not just lives, but it's also lost revenue to HMRC further strain and costs on our hospitals and on the NHS, increased pressure on precious police forces and confusion to retailers, consumers and parents. So will the Minister today commit to ending the ongoing trials? Commit to outlining the next steps for legislation. Commit to the safety of our children and young people in the UK so that another parent doesn't need to spend this Christmas without their child.
09:47
09:47
09:47
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Right? It's obviously a huge amount of interest in this debate. I remind honourable members that if they wish to speak to Bob , and I will be imposing to start with a time limit of 2.5 minutes on speeches. I'd also like to ask members to keep their interventions brief if they're going to make interventions. The question is that this House has considered the regulation of e-scooters and e-bikes. Dame Siobhan McDonagh.
09:48
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. And can I congratulate the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell? She. You can. The chair can see just how big an issue this is for constituencies across the country. In 2017, the London Fire Brigade attended just seven e-bike fires. Last year, the number reached a record 206. That's an e-bike fire somewhere in the capital . Every other day since 2023, six people have lost their lives in e-bike and e-scooter fires in London. Of those, six were not themselves charging the vehicles responsible for the fires. These are people who lost their lives because of a danger they had absolutely no control over, and they may not even have known existed in my constituency alone, 14 fires have been lost due to fire.
And just last week at my advice surgery, I met Mr. and Mrs. Gifford, whose home was devastated by an e-bike fire on Lewes Road in Mitcham in October last year. They lived next door to the property where the battery was being charged. Almost a year later, they are still unable to return to their home. Imagine losing your home through no fault of your own, losing everything you know. Own all your memories, where your children grew up and a year later you're still unable to return. This is the lasting devastation these fires can cause. But the reality is that some people caught up in these fires never make it out of their homes.
At a round table I also held last week, we heard the devastating story of Sophia Duarte. Sofia was just 21 years old when she died on New Year's Day in 2023. As a result of spending the night at her boyfriend's flat in Old Kent Road when a converted e-bike charging in the communal area caught fire. Everyone else got out. She didn't, and she didn't see another year. That shouldn't be the consequence of anybody who is not doing anything wrong, but being subject to some illegal and unauthorised battery exploding.
And just last week at my advice surgery, I met Mr. and Mrs. Gifford, whose home was devastated by an e-bike fire on Lewes Road in Mitcham in October last year. They lived next door to the property where the battery was being charged. Almost a year later, they are still unable to return to their home. Imagine losing your home through no fault of your own, losing everything you know. Own all your memories, where your children grew up and a year later you're still unable to return. This is the lasting devastation these fires can cause. But the reality is that some people caught up in these fires never make it out of their homes.
At a round table I also held last week, we heard the devastating story of Sophia Duarte. Sofia was just 21 years old when she died on New Year's Day in 2023. As a result of spending the night at her boyfriend's flat in Old Kent Road when a converted e-bike charging in the communal area caught fire. Everyone else got out. She didn't, and she didn't see another year. That shouldn't be the consequence of anybody who is not doing anything wrong, but being subject to some illegal and unauthorised battery exploding.
09:50
09:50
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Thank you. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. Mr. Stringer, I congratulate the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell on securing this important debate. In Stockton West, the plague of balaclava clad yobs on illegal immortals comes up constantly on the doorsteps. And in my surgery three years ago in this hall, I named Thornaby as a hotspot and warned that we could not wait for someone else to lose their life. On the 31st of January this year in Thornaby, a 15 year old on a Saron ploughed into a father of seven, riding a Pushbike months later he still in hospital with life changing injuries, needing round the clock care, the boys got driving bans and referral orders and were ordered to pay just £495 in compensation.
The recent changes to seizure powers are welcome, but they go nowhere near far enough. I tabled amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill to give the police greater powers to enter properties, to seize these bikes, to destroy illegal bikes rather than sell them on and to register and control sales. The government rejected them all. Meanwhile, anyone can buy a machine that's illegal to ride on a public road or a kit that turns a legal e-bike into an unregistered motorbike and have it delivered the next day. So I asked the minister, will the government control the sale of these vehicles and of the kits used to modify them?
And will they now give the police the power? We propose to seize these bikes wherever they are hidden. My constituents simply want the law to be on the side of the law abiding majority. It's time for the government to make sure that it is.
The recent changes to seizure powers are welcome, but they go nowhere near far enough. I tabled amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill to give the police greater powers to enter properties, to seize these bikes, to destroy illegal bikes rather than sell them on and to register and control sales. The government rejected them all. Meanwhile, anyone can buy a machine that's illegal to ride on a public road or a kit that turns a legal e-bike into an unregistered motorbike and have it delivered the next day. So I asked the minister, will the government control the sale of these vehicles and of the kits used to modify them?
And will they now give the police the power? We propose to seize these bikes wherever they are hidden. My constituents simply want the law to be on the side of the law abiding majority. It's time for the government to make sure that it is.
09:52
09:52
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
Congratulate the honourable leader of securing the debate. I'd like to focus comments on the cycle hire regulations in Southwark, because we should be a success story. More lanes, more users. But and I have a big butt, which makes me a very wobbly cyclist. Complaints are colossal and rising, and increasingly from other cyclists. The need to regulate is only too apparent when you visit any transport interchange in Southwark. In my constituency, bikes dumped, even blocking the only pedestrian crossing from London Bridge station onto the onto the bridge itself. Saturday last week, not in rush hour on a Saturday lunchtime.
I get so many complaints, including Steven about bike dumping at Canada Water, Sasha and bikes in pedestrian areas, local parks, Sanjiban insurance after a recent collision. And then there is a pub in Rotherhithe with a bike bait outside that overflows, regularly blocking the way of customers blocking a bus stop. But most worryingly, bikes being dumped that block the delivery of beer to that pub. A pub without beer cannot stay open very long. This is a red route. Alternatives are very limited. I'm working with lime and others to get this addressed and raise it directly with the City Hall's cycling commissioner last week.
But a business and jobs are at risk through the failure of lime and others to regulate themselves. Regulations are necessary and welcome. I hope the Minister will tell us this morning when the next consultation, secondary legislation will come forward. But. But I hope Mr. also recognises that some solutions are available now. Southwark Council could replicate Ealing and remove bikes at cost to providers constructively. The council could move the bay outside woodlands to the verges on the opposite side of Rotherhithe. Old Road council inaction is inexcusable, especially under a green leader who last year filmed a promotional video for lime inside the council office breaking its rules.
And I await the council investigation into that with some interest. Inaction is also an inexcusable because the council announced a new deal for discounted bike use three months ago in an arrangement that has delivered no better management of bikes, and not one person has yet had a discounted fare. It's an amateur premature fanfare of a scheme, and conditions should have been set for clearing bikes, with the providers. Lime claim they have 400 staff to clear bays and more need directing to those sites, but they claim Southwark council sends no one to them. Council inaction is even more inexcusable because lime have a £5 million fund to provide bays that local authorities can bid for.
Southwark has embarrassingly bid for nothing, the summit of their aspiration for our community. It seems the Greens and the Lib Dem sidekicks in Southwark are too busy obsessing over Israel and international affairs to get on with helping people in our community in Southwark. It is incompetent, frankly, and I'll be pushing further to help everyone affected.
I get so many complaints, including Steven about bike dumping at Canada Water, Sasha and bikes in pedestrian areas, local parks, Sanjiban insurance after a recent collision. And then there is a pub in Rotherhithe with a bike bait outside that overflows, regularly blocking the way of customers blocking a bus stop. But most worryingly, bikes being dumped that block the delivery of beer to that pub. A pub without beer cannot stay open very long. This is a red route. Alternatives are very limited. I'm working with lime and others to get this addressed and raise it directly with the City Hall's cycling commissioner last week.
But a business and jobs are at risk through the failure of lime and others to regulate themselves. Regulations are necessary and welcome. I hope the Minister will tell us this morning when the next consultation, secondary legislation will come forward. But. But I hope Mr. also recognises that some solutions are available now. Southwark Council could replicate Ealing and remove bikes at cost to providers constructively. The council could move the bay outside woodlands to the verges on the opposite side of Rotherhithe. Old Road council inaction is inexcusable, especially under a green leader who last year filmed a promotional video for lime inside the council office breaking its rules.
And I await the council investigation into that with some interest. Inaction is also an inexcusable because the council announced a new deal for discounted bike use three months ago in an arrangement that has delivered no better management of bikes, and not one person has yet had a discounted fare. It's an amateur premature fanfare of a scheme, and conditions should have been set for clearing bikes, with the providers. Lime claim they have 400 staff to clear bays and more need directing to those sites, but they claim Southwark council sends no one to them. Council inaction is even more inexcusable because lime have a £5 million fund to provide bays that local authorities can bid for.
Southwark has embarrassingly bid for nothing, the summit of their aspiration for our community. It seems the Greens and the Lib Dem sidekicks in Southwark are too busy obsessing over Israel and international affairs to get on with helping people in our community in Southwark. It is incompetent, frankly, and I'll be pushing further to help everyone affected.
09:55
09:55
09:55
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
Real pleasure to speak. Under your chairmanship. A big thank you to the Honourable Lady for Epsom and Ewell for raising this debate. I want to give a Northern Ireland perspective that we can. And a senior doctor in the Belfast Trust has aptly described the number of children being injured by e-scooters as an epidemic. It is an epidemic, not just in in Northern Ireland but indeed across this whole United Kingdom. More than 120 children within the Belfast Trust area have been treated for injuries sustained in accidents involving e-bikes and e-scooters in the past 24 months. Similar picture is emerging in England, where a study estimates that some nearly 500 children have been injured in e-scooter accidents since 2019.
Sadly, these figures don't surprise me. From my own constituency office in Strangford, I regularly see e-scooters practically fly past the window in front of my office and along the footpath, pedestrians jumping aside to avoid a collision and to avoid being injured. Across the UK, 59 deaths have been reported as involving e-scooters, ten of which were under 18. We can't wait for another child or an older person to be hit and suffer life altering injuries or worse. We must do everything we can to prevent a 60th death. I welcome the minister's place. It's good to see him back in harness again, so to speak.
Pedestrians are not the only ones at risk. Riders themselves are vulnerable to serious injury. Research into major trauma case highlights the potential for devastating head injuries and damage to internal organs. Meanwhile, reports suggest that fewer than 6% of e-scooter riders in Northern Ireland wear helmets. In England, this figure is estimated below 2%. So again, the threat of injury and and and maybe long lasting injury is. I'm on a two and a half. I don't think it'd be fair to everybody else. It remains a serious concern that demands immediate attention. I must commend the police service in Northern Ireland for the work they have done and continue to do, to raise awareness that is currently illegal to use e-scooters on public roads and footpaths in Northern Ireland.
I'm aware that the Irish police in my own constituency have made several seizures of e-scooters. Some 20 have been seized so far. Give you an idea of the of the problems that we have in our territory and that were being driven illegally. However, the clear further legislation is needed to address the scale of this issue. So when the minister gets up to speak, can he give us an idea of legislative change and and the engagement that would be with the the Assembly and the PSNI, PSNI and Northern Ireland? So I call the Minister to take stronger action to regulate e-scooter use, to consider more appropriate age restrictions and a mandatory helmet requirement.
E scooters may seem like a more convenient mode of transport for money, but the fact is they're danger and their danger to the general public. Thank you.
Sadly, these figures don't surprise me. From my own constituency office in Strangford, I regularly see e-scooters practically fly past the window in front of my office and along the footpath, pedestrians jumping aside to avoid a collision and to avoid being injured. Across the UK, 59 deaths have been reported as involving e-scooters, ten of which were under 18. We can't wait for another child or an older person to be hit and suffer life altering injuries or worse. We must do everything we can to prevent a 60th death. I welcome the minister's place. It's good to see him back in harness again, so to speak.
Pedestrians are not the only ones at risk. Riders themselves are vulnerable to serious injury. Research into major trauma case highlights the potential for devastating head injuries and damage to internal organs. Meanwhile, reports suggest that fewer than 6% of e-scooter riders in Northern Ireland wear helmets. In England, this figure is estimated below 2%. So again, the threat of injury and and and maybe long lasting injury is. I'm on a two and a half. I don't think it'd be fair to everybody else. It remains a serious concern that demands immediate attention. I must commend the police service in Northern Ireland for the work they have done and continue to do, to raise awareness that is currently illegal to use e-scooters on public roads and footpaths in Northern Ireland.
I'm aware that the Irish police in my own constituency have made several seizures of e-scooters. Some 20 have been seized so far. Give you an idea of the of the problems that we have in our territory and that were being driven illegally. However, the clear further legislation is needed to address the scale of this issue. So when the minister gets up to speak, can he give us an idea of legislative change and and the engagement that would be with the the Assembly and the PSNI, PSNI and Northern Ireland? So I call the Minister to take stronger action to regulate e-scooter use, to consider more appropriate age restrictions and a mandatory helmet requirement.
E scooters may seem like a more convenient mode of transport for money, but the fact is they're danger and their danger to the general public. Thank you.
09:57
09:57
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
Thank you very much. Mr. Stringer. It's a pleasure to speak in this debate, and I'm very grateful to the member for Epsom and Ewell for bringing it, and particularly for underlining the potential impact of catastrophic injuries from these illegal vehicles. I would add a couple of other problems that we are seeing resulting from the lack of regulation in this area. We have seen a reduction in sales of legal e-bikes, surely not something we want to see, but that is because the proliferation of these illegal ones we are also seeing, unfortunately, links with exploitation in the gig economy as well as with criminality.
And we have seen a catastrophic drop in the sales of L1 category motorbikes. Two. And for me, this problem is really symbolic of people's feelings, that there is a lack of control over their local area. This is exactly the kind of thing that the Prime Minister is getting a grip on right now. So I think it's really important that we show leadership on this. My questions, Mr. Stringer, are all going to be about solutions in this area. First, when is the Department of Transport going to be releasing its research into illegal e-bikes and food delivery?
Will they push for parliamentary time to talk about that? I believe it's due in the spring. Secondly, what progress has there been on the national Work Related Road Safety Charter? Can we see some details of that please and hear about them? Thirdly, we need to see more control over the supply chain and the sales of these illegal e-bikes and e-scooters and the conversion kits, oversight and enforcement. One mechanism for that, of course, would be through the Product Regulation and Metrology Act 2025. I know that a number of us have been pushing on this. There has been three months since the consultation on that.
When are we going to see some outcomes from this, please? We need to see action now. I'm sorry, I won't because I want to be fair to everybody else. And finally, can we please have a commitment for the Department of Transport to be convening other departments on this? I know the minister cares passionately about this. He really cares about local people having control over their areas. He showed that in every role that he has had, will he, with his department, take the initiative to bring together all the departments concerned about this? Can they do it before Christmas?
Can they make a big splash about it so people hear about it in the media, so people aren't buying their kids these dangerous kits and products before Christmas, and leading to those kind of injuries that we just heard about.
And we have seen a catastrophic drop in the sales of L1 category motorbikes. Two. And for me, this problem is really symbolic of people's feelings, that there is a lack of control over their local area. This is exactly the kind of thing that the Prime Minister is getting a grip on right now. So I think it's really important that we show leadership on this. My questions, Mr. Stringer, are all going to be about solutions in this area. First, when is the Department of Transport going to be releasing its research into illegal e-bikes and food delivery?
Will they push for parliamentary time to talk about that? I believe it's due in the spring. Secondly, what progress has there been on the national Work Related Road Safety Charter? Can we see some details of that please and hear about them? Thirdly, we need to see more control over the supply chain and the sales of these illegal e-bikes and e-scooters and the conversion kits, oversight and enforcement. One mechanism for that, of course, would be through the Product Regulation and Metrology Act 2025. I know that a number of us have been pushing on this. There has been three months since the consultation on that.
When are we going to see some outcomes from this, please? We need to see action now. I'm sorry, I won't because I want to be fair to everybody else. And finally, can we please have a commitment for the Department of Transport to be convening other departments on this? I know the minister cares passionately about this. He really cares about local people having control over their areas. He showed that in every role that he has had, will he, with his department, take the initiative to bring together all the departments concerned about this? Can they do it before Christmas?
Can they make a big splash about it so people hear about it in the media, so people aren't buying their kids these dangerous kits and products before Christmas, and leading to those kind of injuries that we just heard about.
09:59
09:59
09:59
09:59
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
Pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I thank my hon. Friend the member for Epsom and Ewell to bring this important debate to the House. It's worth starting my contribution to make it clear that I am a huge fan of e-bikes. I rode my cargo bike to the station this morning and in term time would have dropped my two boys at school, first using the bike, and I've covered more than 18,000km over the last six years. But our discussion today should focus on illegal e-bikes and scooters, and we need to be clear and careful that we support the contribution that e-bikes make to active travel, to taking cars off our roads, reducing emissions congestion and also reducing road danger.
I differ slightly from the honourable member. I believe that e-scooters are far too dangerous to be considered for regulation, and legalisation do not in any way qualify as active travel. They should be banned and removed from our streets entirely. Like many other members here, I've spoken in this hall repeatedly about the the need for tougher regulation on illegally modified e-bikes. These vehicles plague the high street in Sutton and sadly deter many local residents from visiting the shops. My town centre has to offer delivery drivers on these bikes treat the stretch of Sutton High Street like a racetrack.
They rampage along pavements at speed with no consideration for pedestrians around them. With the nights now getting darker, many even ride without light, endangering pedestrians and riders themselves. My constituents should not have to spend their weekly shop looking over their shoulder, worried they might be mown down by a vehicle that should never have been on the road or the pavement in the first place. The dangers do not end when the bike stops moving. E-bike batteries are causing fires across the capital, as we saw recently locally in Mitcham fire that ripped through homes. As the honourable member for Mitchell Maude has already mentioned, the increase in illegal e-bike conversions, fires and accidents on our streets are driven by two main causes the sales of high powered e-bikes like sirens and secondly, the multi-million pound delivery companies who incentivise riders to use faster vehicles but take no responsibility for ensuring their vehicles are legal and being ridden legally.
We Liberal Democrats want to see delivery platforms required to verify the bikes being used by their riders are road legal. Regular checks should be in place to ensure that illegally modified vehicles are not being used to complete food orders for pay. There must be clear consequences for companies that repeatedly fail to act to protect the public. Corporate giants of the gig economy world cannot continue to hide behind the self-employed status of their riders to seek impunity from responsibility, they already have the technology to track their drivers, identify them and verify that they are using the right account.
They must be required to take reasonable steps to ensure the vehicle is being used to make delivery orders are legal. Thank you .
I differ slightly from the honourable member. I believe that e-scooters are far too dangerous to be considered for regulation, and legalisation do not in any way qualify as active travel. They should be banned and removed from our streets entirely. Like many other members here, I've spoken in this hall repeatedly about the the need for tougher regulation on illegally modified e-bikes. These vehicles plague the high street in Sutton and sadly deter many local residents from visiting the shops. My town centre has to offer delivery drivers on these bikes treat the stretch of Sutton High Street like a racetrack.
They rampage along pavements at speed with no consideration for pedestrians around them. With the nights now getting darker, many even ride without light, endangering pedestrians and riders themselves. My constituents should not have to spend their weekly shop looking over their shoulder, worried they might be mown down by a vehicle that should never have been on the road or the pavement in the first place. The dangers do not end when the bike stops moving. E-bike batteries are causing fires across the capital, as we saw recently locally in Mitcham fire that ripped through homes. As the honourable member for Mitchell Maude has already mentioned, the increase in illegal e-bike conversions, fires and accidents on our streets are driven by two main causes the sales of high powered e-bikes like sirens and secondly, the multi-million pound delivery companies who incentivise riders to use faster vehicles but take no responsibility for ensuring their vehicles are legal and being ridden legally.
We Liberal Democrats want to see delivery platforms required to verify the bikes being used by their riders are road legal. Regular checks should be in place to ensure that illegally modified vehicles are not being used to complete food orders for pay. There must be clear consequences for companies that repeatedly fail to act to protect the public. Corporate giants of the gig economy world cannot continue to hide behind the self-employed status of their riders to seek impunity from responsibility, they already have the technology to track their drivers, identify them and verify that they are using the right account.
They must be required to take reasonable steps to ensure the vehicle is being used to make delivery orders are legal. Thank you .
10:02
10:02
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
Thank you chair. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I pay tribute to the honourable lady for bringing this important debate. On May 16th, 2025, just before 1 p.m., 86 year old Gloria Stevenson was walking her daughter's dog using the zebra crossing when she was hit by an 18 year old riding a sir on e-bike. Gloria died at the scene. My constituent, Julie Francis, lost her mother that day, and she has a petition for more police funding and has been a vocal campaigner for more action to get these bikes off the road.
In September, I brought her to this place to meet the Policing Minister, and Julie's ask of all of us is simple don't let my mother's death be in vain. The rise of these e-bikes e-scooters in Darlington is a major problem. It's obvious by the cross-section of representation here today that we are not alone. Balaclava wearing men tearing through our town, deliberately intimidating everyone else on and off the road is a visible degradation of our collective social contract. They are literally running amok. Minister and I and my constituents have had enough. Ban them is the most tempered and appropriate for this place.
Call from residents. Many have suggested other measures that I won't go into here, but the truth is they are banned. It's already illegal to ride these dirt bikes, motocross bikes and e-scooters on our roads. But aside from seizing them and crushing them, which Durham Police are doing a great job of, and I attended a scrapyard recently and crushed 70 of them with the police. They do not have the powers alone to tackle this issue. One of the reasons this issue has become so prolific is that it requires a multi-department approach. So my ask of the minister today is that will the minister review the dirt bike licensing regime because it is clearly ineffective.
And in the North East we currently have 34 licensed, sir, on bikes. I saw more than that crushed two weeks ago. So would he consider mirroring the gun licensing regulation to enforce stricter requirements for UK legitimate purchasers? Would he consider increasing the penalty for driving these dirt bikes without a licence? Would he consider banning the sale of e-scooters entirely from our high street retailers? And finally, would he bring together a cross-departmental task force to regulate the importing of these dangerous kits and ultimately, these illegal bikes from our streets?
In September, I brought her to this place to meet the Policing Minister, and Julie's ask of all of us is simple don't let my mother's death be in vain. The rise of these e-bikes e-scooters in Darlington is a major problem. It's obvious by the cross-section of representation here today that we are not alone. Balaclava wearing men tearing through our town, deliberately intimidating everyone else on and off the road is a visible degradation of our collective social contract. They are literally running amok. Minister and I and my constituents have had enough. Ban them is the most tempered and appropriate for this place.
Call from residents. Many have suggested other measures that I won't go into here, but the truth is they are banned. It's already illegal to ride these dirt bikes, motocross bikes and e-scooters on our roads. But aside from seizing them and crushing them, which Durham Police are doing a great job of, and I attended a scrapyard recently and crushed 70 of them with the police. They do not have the powers alone to tackle this issue. One of the reasons this issue has become so prolific is that it requires a multi-department approach. So my ask of the minister today is that will the minister review the dirt bike licensing regime because it is clearly ineffective.
And in the North East we currently have 34 licensed, sir, on bikes. I saw more than that crushed two weeks ago. So would he consider mirroring the gun licensing regulation to enforce stricter requirements for UK legitimate purchasers? Would he consider increasing the penalty for driving these dirt bikes without a licence? Would he consider banning the sale of e-scooters entirely from our high street retailers? And finally, would he bring together a cross-departmental task force to regulate the importing of these dangerous kits and ultimately, these illegal bikes from our streets?
10:05
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I thank the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell for securing this vital debate. Every time I speak to people right across Broxbourne, this is on top of their minds. If you were to ask someone about the regulation of e-scooters and e-bikes, they would say quite simply, what regulation? As far as they're concerned, there is none. All of us know the day to day anti-social behaviour linked to e-bikes and e-scooters, and are familiar with the horrific stories of their misuse. I have seen it many times gangs of masked up hooligans riding in packs, terrorizing our high streets with no regard to anyone else's safety.
It makes a mockery of law and order and we need to see a proper crackdown. So what are the regulations? I checked the government's website before this debate. Not something anyone would do. Who's riding an e-bike? Antisocially the fastest e-bikes need to be registered, taxed and insured, and riders need a licence and a helmet. But you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out the individuals hiding their identity with a balaclava would not do any of that. We need to see a joined up approach right across government, including the Department of Transport. In the other place, the Transport Minister said the government recognises the role that electric bicycles and scooters can play in supporting growth, improving health and reducing emissions.
What a load of nonsense. This is far from the reality faced by people right across the United Kingdom, including my constituency of Broxbourne. The government needs to get a grip and use the full force of the law to stop illegal use of e-bikes and e-scooters. Yeah.
It makes a mockery of law and order and we need to see a proper crackdown. So what are the regulations? I checked the government's website before this debate. Not something anyone would do. Who's riding an e-bike? Antisocially the fastest e-bikes need to be registered, taxed and insured, and riders need a licence and a helmet. But you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out the individuals hiding their identity with a balaclava would not do any of that. We need to see a joined up approach right across government, including the Department of Transport. In the other place, the Transport Minister said the government recognises the role that electric bicycles and scooters can play in supporting growth, improving health and reducing emissions.
What a load of nonsense. This is far from the reality faced by people right across the United Kingdom, including my constituency of Broxbourne. The government needs to get a grip and use the full force of the law to stop illegal use of e-bikes and e-scooters. Yeah.
10:06
10:06
10:06
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
To serve under your chair, and I congratulate the member for bringing this important debate. I will confine my remarks to e-bikes, and let me begin by emphasising that legal e-bikes do have an important role to play in sustainable transport and active travel, but vehicles that do not meet the definition of an electrically assisted pedal cycle and are used on the highway are illegal road vehicles and should, in my view, be banned from sale. Earlier this year, I presented a bill that proposed exactly that illegal e-bikes, whether sold as such or converted using kits, posed serious safety risks.
As we've already heard, they reach speeds for which their frames and braking systems were never designed. They kill pedestrians and endanger other road users. Their batteries catch fire and cause devastating house fires and death. They facilitate criminal activity such as phone theft, drug dealing and there are persistent nuisance in parks, pavements and around stations. Their ready availability online also undermines legitimate markets. As we've heard, they depress the sale of legal testing, oepkes and low powered motorcycles. Meanwhile, the Motor Insurance Bureau is settling millions of pounds in claims every single year for accidents involving these illegal bikes, and the cost of that is borne by law abiding motorists through higher premiums.
Mr. Stringer, The government must act with urgency to tackle this problem, and it has the means to do so. The Product Safety and Metrology Act gives ministers powers to designate the products that are unsafe and regulate to remove them from sale. So can I ask the Minister to therefore tell members what discussions he has had with colleagues in the Department for business about using those powers, and does he agree with me that the continued availability of illegal e-bikes is undermining confidence in legitimate cycling, and risks tarnishing the cycling celebration that is the tour de France when it comes to Britain and, more importantly, my constituency of Carlisle next year.
As we've already heard, they reach speeds for which their frames and braking systems were never designed. They kill pedestrians and endanger other road users. Their batteries catch fire and cause devastating house fires and death. They facilitate criminal activity such as phone theft, drug dealing and there are persistent nuisance in parks, pavements and around stations. Their ready availability online also undermines legitimate markets. As we've heard, they depress the sale of legal testing, oepkes and low powered motorcycles. Meanwhile, the Motor Insurance Bureau is settling millions of pounds in claims every single year for accidents involving these illegal bikes, and the cost of that is borne by law abiding motorists through higher premiums.
Mr. Stringer, The government must act with urgency to tackle this problem, and it has the means to do so. The Product Safety and Metrology Act gives ministers powers to designate the products that are unsafe and regulate to remove them from sale. So can I ask the Minister to therefore tell members what discussions he has had with colleagues in the Department for business about using those powers, and does he agree with me that the continued availability of illegal e-bikes is undermining confidence in legitimate cycling, and risks tarnishing the cycling celebration that is the tour de France when it comes to Britain and, more importantly, my constituency of Carlisle next year.
10:09
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Thank you, and thank you to the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell. She's a legend for bringing this debate forward and giving us all the opportunity to speak about this issue that blights our communities. 150 years ago, the fastest vehicle that you would find on Eastbourne seafront was a horse drawn bathing machine taking people down to the sea. Today it is an e-bike or e-scooter, a legal e-bike or e-scooter jockeyed by a balaclava wearing rider. And the same is true of places like Terminus Road, our High Street or indeed King's Drive, where the Eastbourne mobility scooter no longer rules the pavement.
But it is the vehicles that we have been mentioning, and Sussex Police recorded a 53.7% rise in reports of illegal e-bike and e-scooter use in the year to June, and seized 321 vehicles between January and July. NASA has been rightly said by many, including the member for Sutton and Cheam. We're fans of active travel and encouraging people to use more environmentally friendly means to get from A to B, but the dangerous minority of these riders, and indeed these vehicles, put pedestrians at risk and give responsible users of active travel a bad name. And more than this, failed e-bike and e-scooter batteries have been responsible for devastating fires like that in Whitley Road in Eastbourne.
And indeed, the fire service have said that we've seen people forced into jumping from windows as they cannot get out of their front doors as the bike or scooter, which has caught fire, is in front of it. There are enormous safety risks, but other jurisdictions are showing the way and leadership on this issue. In New York City, banning the sale of uncertified e-bikes, or deaths from battery fires fall from 18 to just 1 in 2 years in New South Wales. In Australia, police now test bikes at the roadside and crush illegal ones on the spot, so I hope the minister will consider granting our police and law enforcement the same kind of tools will regulate this sector adequately.
Of course.
But it is the vehicles that we have been mentioning, and Sussex Police recorded a 53.7% rise in reports of illegal e-bike and e-scooter use in the year to June, and seized 321 vehicles between January and July. NASA has been rightly said by many, including the member for Sutton and Cheam. We're fans of active travel and encouraging people to use more environmentally friendly means to get from A to B, but the dangerous minority of these riders, and indeed these vehicles, put pedestrians at risk and give responsible users of active travel a bad name. And more than this, failed e-bike and e-scooter batteries have been responsible for devastating fires like that in Whitley Road in Eastbourne.
And indeed, the fire service have said that we've seen people forced into jumping from windows as they cannot get out of their front doors as the bike or scooter, which has caught fire, is in front of it. There are enormous safety risks, but other jurisdictions are showing the way and leadership on this issue. In New York City, banning the sale of uncertified e-bikes, or deaths from battery fires fall from 18 to just 1 in 2 years in New South Wales. In Australia, police now test bikes at the roadside and crush illegal ones on the spot, so I hope the minister will consider granting our police and law enforcement the same kind of tools will regulate this sector adequately.
Of course.
10:11
10:11
10:12
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Of course, the costs are financial, but the costs are to human life and livelihood as well. And so I hope the minister will recognise that and commit to meeting representatives of Sussex Police who hold the national brief for road crime, in order to look at how we can best tackle this in Sussex and the town of Eastbourne.
10:12
10:12
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's a pleasure to serve under your chair. Chairship and the human impact of the illegal use of e-bikes was powerfully set out by the member for Epsom and Ewell at the beginning of this debate, and this is certainly something we're aware of in my constituency, where Peggy Maxwell, who is 94, was mown down by a teenager on a Soron e-bike. Peggy suffered a broken neck, back, clavicle and ribs, and she was hospitalised for three months. Many people would not have expected Peggy to come back from those injuries at her age, but she's determined and she is formidable.
And she did, and she attended a public meeting on e-bikes we held in Lahore last month with her family, who are now also campaigning for new laws on their use. And can I add to the calls which have been made right across this chamber this morning? For more action on enforcement, on point of sale and regulation, and also diversion from the illegal use of e-bikes as well in Scotland, this requires action from both Westminster and Holyrood. I have been working on this issue with David Barrett, MSP for Cowdenbeath. I am pleased he secured a commitment from the Scottish Government that any bikes seized by police will be destroyed and not sold on.
I think that should be the course of action by all police forces. This government has taken more action to give police more powers to seize e-bikes. It's vital we have that action by the Scottish Government as well for forces in Scotland, and it is also very, very important that we consider what action we need to take at point of sale as well. Many people buying these bikes will be unaware they can't be used on public roads. There needs to be information from vendors to keep those buying these bikes at that point, often for their children.
And we also have to consider further action on regulation and registration as well. I very much support the comments made by both the member for Darlington and Carlisle . In this area. Vendors need to have more responsibilities on this issue placed on them by government. And finally, on diversion. We've got a great charity in my constituency, kingdom of off road, who give people who have used e-bikes illegally previously the chance to use them safely and legally on a purpose designed track, often on bikes which have been seized by the police. Which sounds to me a really good approach to take, and I hope we can see that supported across the country the enjoyment and the convenience of e-bikes and e-scooters for some, is now seriously outweighed by the harms caused by for many.
And that is why it is now time for this government to take further action.
And she did, and she attended a public meeting on e-bikes we held in Lahore last month with her family, who are now also campaigning for new laws on their use. And can I add to the calls which have been made right across this chamber this morning? For more action on enforcement, on point of sale and regulation, and also diversion from the illegal use of e-bikes as well in Scotland, this requires action from both Westminster and Holyrood. I have been working on this issue with David Barrett, MSP for Cowdenbeath. I am pleased he secured a commitment from the Scottish Government that any bikes seized by police will be destroyed and not sold on.
I think that should be the course of action by all police forces. This government has taken more action to give police more powers to seize e-bikes. It's vital we have that action by the Scottish Government as well for forces in Scotland, and it is also very, very important that we consider what action we need to take at point of sale as well. Many people buying these bikes will be unaware they can't be used on public roads. There needs to be information from vendors to keep those buying these bikes at that point, often for their children.
And we also have to consider further action on regulation and registration as well. I very much support the comments made by both the member for Darlington and Carlisle . In this area. Vendors need to have more responsibilities on this issue placed on them by government. And finally, on diversion. We've got a great charity in my constituency, kingdom of off road, who give people who have used e-bikes illegally previously the chance to use them safely and legally on a purpose designed track, often on bikes which have been seized by the police. Which sounds to me a really good approach to take, and I hope we can see that supported across the country the enjoyment and the convenience of e-bikes and e-scooters for some, is now seriously outweighed by the harms caused by for many.
And that is why it is now time for this government to take further action.
10:15
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
Thank you, Mr. Springer, and I want to thank my honourable friend for securing this debate and all the campaigning she's been doing on this really important issue. Illegal modified e-bikes and scooters have become more and more of a problem in Yeovil. Peter lives on Sherborne Road, which is a very, very busy road out of Yeovil. He is always very careful when he crosses. He always sticks to the pavement. But for Peter, payments have become just as dangerous as the roads. Not for the first time he was left one step away from A&E after someone came crashing by on an e-scooter doing 30mph.
Sadly, Peter is not alone because the problem isn't just 1 or 2 troublemakers in the oval. This is happening at a scale across our communities and often comes with other forms of anti-social behaviour. Carol has been telling me how she keeps seeing people on modified e-bikes, travelling at speed down Middle Street in the wrong direction, dodging pedestrians. Nicky told me about how it's unsafe to take her seven year old nephew to the park because kids are crashing up and down on e-scooters. Katrina has told me about the near misses involving dogs, young children and the elderly.
I mean, just the other day I was out canvassing and three lads shot past me on e-scooters in balaclava shouting abuse out of a residence. It is just a matter of time before someone gets really badly hurt, including the people riding these, as we've heard today. So it goes without saying that we need to get our police to carry out forced, focused enforcement interventions. So we need interventions from the government in the form of training and funding. I think we also need proper education campaigns on this and that by I do not just mean going into schools and giving them more work to do.
We need something on the scale of think campaign, particularly on social media in Parliament. We need to be pushing clearer legislation on this, because the current legal framework for e-bikes is confusing, outdated and rarely enforced. And the most importantly, government needs to proper crack down on the supply chain and unregulated online marketplaces that are selling floods and flood streets with these illegal vehicles. To get anywhere in Somerset, you pretty much have to drive. That means road tax, insurance and sticking to the rules. People in Yeovil are rightly angry that these people on illegal e-bikes and scooters and those that sell them do none of that put people at risk and get away with it.
That cannot be able to go on anymore. Thank you.
Sadly, Peter is not alone because the problem isn't just 1 or 2 troublemakers in the oval. This is happening at a scale across our communities and often comes with other forms of anti-social behaviour. Carol has been telling me how she keeps seeing people on modified e-bikes, travelling at speed down Middle Street in the wrong direction, dodging pedestrians. Nicky told me about how it's unsafe to take her seven year old nephew to the park because kids are crashing up and down on e-scooters. Katrina has told me about the near misses involving dogs, young children and the elderly.
I mean, just the other day I was out canvassing and three lads shot past me on e-scooters in balaclava shouting abuse out of a residence. It is just a matter of time before someone gets really badly hurt, including the people riding these, as we've heard today. So it goes without saying that we need to get our police to carry out forced, focused enforcement interventions. So we need interventions from the government in the form of training and funding. I think we also need proper education campaigns on this and that by I do not just mean going into schools and giving them more work to do.
We need something on the scale of think campaign, particularly on social media in Parliament. We need to be pushing clearer legislation on this, because the current legal framework for e-bikes is confusing, outdated and rarely enforced. And the most importantly, government needs to proper crack down on the supply chain and unregulated online marketplaces that are selling floods and flood streets with these illegal vehicles. To get anywhere in Somerset, you pretty much have to drive. That means road tax, insurance and sticking to the rules. People in Yeovil are rightly angry that these people on illegal e-bikes and scooters and those that sell them do none of that put people at risk and get away with it.
That cannot be able to go on anymore. Thank you.
10:17
10:17
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Under your chairmanship, Mr. Stringer, and I thank the honourable member for bringing this debate from commuters trying to get to South Pole Station in the morning, to my 82 year old constituent trying to get to Ealing Hospital along Boston Road. E-bikes on the pavement are a daily annoyance in Ealing, Southall. Now people think that the council is to blame, but the truth is that the council has almost no powers when it comes to e-bikes and e-scooters. In fact, anyone in Ealing could set up an e-bike company in the morning. I could do it myself and there is nothing the council could do to stop me.
All the council can do is try to agree a voluntary memorandum of understanding with e-bike companies. But this is just a gentleman's agreement. It's not the law. In reality, e-bike companies can do whatever they want. This has led to a Wild West situation in London, a patchwork of companies all operating in different boroughs. It's why you've got bikes piled up at borough boundaries, and it's almost impossible to hold companies to account for bad parking or massive oversupplies of bikes in some areas. In Ealing, Ealing made a voluntary agreement with two companies, Forest and Lime, but a third company, voi, is refusing to leave the borough and there's really not a lot the council can do about it, so I'm absolutely delighted that this Labour government has actually already taken concrete action.
After years of inaction by the previous government and the English Devolution Act, which was passed before the summer, will finally give councils and mayors the powers to license e-bikes and hopefully also e-scooter companies. Although there are still some steps needed to be taken in Parliament to formally pass these powers to the Mayor of London, it will mean we can set London wide rules for e-bikes, including on mandatory parking spaces. Age limits for riders and insurance will also be able to fine companies who don't play by these rules. The previous government just didn't have the courage to act.
But Labour is doing what we promised, devolving powers to local communities so they can make the rules in their areas now. All we need now, and I look at the minister, is for him to hop on his e-scooter and pick up the pace a bit so that we can get these powers transferred to the Mayor of London as soon as possible. Thank you.
All the council can do is try to agree a voluntary memorandum of understanding with e-bike companies. But this is just a gentleman's agreement. It's not the law. In reality, e-bike companies can do whatever they want. This has led to a Wild West situation in London, a patchwork of companies all operating in different boroughs. It's why you've got bikes piled up at borough boundaries, and it's almost impossible to hold companies to account for bad parking or massive oversupplies of bikes in some areas. In Ealing, Ealing made a voluntary agreement with two companies, Forest and Lime, but a third company, voi, is refusing to leave the borough and there's really not a lot the council can do about it, so I'm absolutely delighted that this Labour government has actually already taken concrete action.
After years of inaction by the previous government and the English Devolution Act, which was passed before the summer, will finally give councils and mayors the powers to license e-bikes and hopefully also e-scooter companies. Although there are still some steps needed to be taken in Parliament to formally pass these powers to the Mayor of London, it will mean we can set London wide rules for e-bikes, including on mandatory parking spaces. Age limits for riders and insurance will also be able to fine companies who don't play by these rules. The previous government just didn't have the courage to act.
But Labour is doing what we promised, devolving powers to local communities so they can make the rules in their areas now. All we need now, and I look at the minister, is for him to hop on his e-scooter and pick up the pace a bit so that we can get these powers transferred to the Mayor of London as soon as possible. Thank you.
10:19
10:19
10:19
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
Mr. Stringer, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I thank my hon. Friend for Ewell, Epsom and Ewell for securing this debate and her excellent speech. Like all of us here today, the dangerous misuse of e-bikes and e-scooters is being raised with me more and more and my Witney constituency. Current regulations are not working well and lead to a lot of confusion. One of my constituents wrote to me saying that their friend had been arrested for riding an e-scooter. It turns out they had no idea that that a privately owned e-scooters are illegal on roads, cycle paths and pavements in the UK.
Another constituent wrote to me saying that they had seen e-bikes advertised on Argos website, and only in the questions and comments did it say, oh, this is only for private land use and Thames Valley locally are finding bikes and seizing them, which are able to go 120 miles an hour. So, and this problem keeps growing. By some estimates, there's more than a million e-scooters now in use across the country, with no standards for speed, brakes or batteries. High powered e-bikes and conversion kits are being sold for off road use and then ridden on roads. Uncertified batteries sold online cause deadly fires.
Victims of illegal machines face an insurance gap, and rental scooter trials, as my friend has mentioned, has been extended again and again for the last since 2020. There is some good news. Since June, the Crime and Policing Act has let police seize antisocially ridden e-bikes without a warning, and seizures nearly doubled to about 7000 last year. But overall legislation is outdated and hard to enforce. I believe we should do what many others, many other countries have done already. Private e-scooters should be legalised and regulated with a speed cap, product standards, lights and a minimum age so police can concentrate on machines that don't comply over spec e-bikes and conversion kits should be stopped at the point of sale.
That means making online marketplaces legally responsible, funding trading standards appropriately and requiring battery certification faster or modified bikes could be required to carry registration or plates and delivery platforms required to check that their riders bikes are legal, and the police also need practical help funding for testing equipment and specialist teams, cheaper storage and quick crushing of seized bikes, fixed penalties for lower level offences and compulsory insurance for faster e-bikes.
Another constituent wrote to me saying that they had seen e-bikes advertised on Argos website, and only in the questions and comments did it say, oh, this is only for private land use and Thames Valley locally are finding bikes and seizing them, which are able to go 120 miles an hour. So, and this problem keeps growing. By some estimates, there's more than a million e-scooters now in use across the country, with no standards for speed, brakes or batteries. High powered e-bikes and conversion kits are being sold for off road use and then ridden on roads. Uncertified batteries sold online cause deadly fires.
Victims of illegal machines face an insurance gap, and rental scooter trials, as my friend has mentioned, has been extended again and again for the last since 2020. There is some good news. Since June, the Crime and Policing Act has let police seize antisocially ridden e-bikes without a warning, and seizures nearly doubled to about 7000 last year. But overall legislation is outdated and hard to enforce. I believe we should do what many others, many other countries have done already. Private e-scooters should be legalised and regulated with a speed cap, product standards, lights and a minimum age so police can concentrate on machines that don't comply over spec e-bikes and conversion kits should be stopped at the point of sale.
That means making online marketplaces legally responsible, funding trading standards appropriately and requiring battery certification faster or modified bikes could be required to carry registration or plates and delivery platforms required to check that their riders bikes are legal, and the police also need practical help funding for testing equipment and specialist teams, cheaper storage and quick crushing of seized bikes, fixed penalties for lower level offences and compulsory insurance for faster e-bikes.
10:22
10:22
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
And could I also thank the member for Epsom and Ewell for securing today's very important debate? I am aware of the pressure on time, so I'll try to be brief, and I should say that I strongly support cycling and legal use of electric bicycles where permitted. However, Mr. Stringer, I'm afraid to say that the irresponsible use of e-bikes and e-scooters is a serious problem in my constituency of Reading Central, and there are a range of issues that have been raised with me by residents on a on a range of fronts. So first of all, intimidating behaviour on footpaths and pavements, in particular near parks and in parks as causing a serious level of concern in many parts of the town.
This includes e-scooters whizzing down narrow streets where the pavements are less than a metre wide. E-bike riders riding over bridges the two bridges across the two road bridges over the Thames on the pedestrian footpaths and intimidating residents. The lack of use of bells, the speed with which people are riding these bikes and also it includes high powered electric motorbikes. I think it's the only way to describe them, and I myself have seen two absolutely shocking incidents relating to these types of vehicles. In one case, I saw a group of young people, black clad with black balaclavas, on riding around the Reading Inner distribution road, which is a major highway around the town centre, pulling wheelies in front of cars.
And another occasion I saw another group , similarly dressed, doing dangerous stunts, jumps in a park close to where families were picnicking with toddlers. This is absolutely irresponsible and utterly unacceptable. Mr. Stringer, I am pleased. However, there is some good news. Thames Valley Police is one of the other members mentioned earlier are taking a very firm line on this. They have been crushing these bikes. They've been using drones to follow them in parks and to use the new legislation introduced by the government recently to arrive at people's houses and confiscate them immediately, rather than having to issue a warning, which was previously the case also in our area.
Our local council has secured a public space protection Order, which gives local council officers more powers to address this very serious problem. So I would like to praise the police and the council for the action they're taking. But I would also like to ask the Minister to see what further powers could be used to try to constrain this very, very serious problem. Thank you, Mr. Stringer.
This includes e-scooters whizzing down narrow streets where the pavements are less than a metre wide. E-bike riders riding over bridges the two bridges across the two road bridges over the Thames on the pedestrian footpaths and intimidating residents. The lack of use of bells, the speed with which people are riding these bikes and also it includes high powered electric motorbikes. I think it's the only way to describe them, and I myself have seen two absolutely shocking incidents relating to these types of vehicles. In one case, I saw a group of young people, black clad with black balaclavas, on riding around the Reading Inner distribution road, which is a major highway around the town centre, pulling wheelies in front of cars.
And another occasion I saw another group , similarly dressed, doing dangerous stunts, jumps in a park close to where families were picnicking with toddlers. This is absolutely irresponsible and utterly unacceptable. Mr. Stringer, I am pleased. However, there is some good news. Thames Valley Police is one of the other members mentioned earlier are taking a very firm line on this. They have been crushing these bikes. They've been using drones to follow them in parks and to use the new legislation introduced by the government recently to arrive at people's houses and confiscate them immediately, rather than having to issue a warning, which was previously the case also in our area.
Our local council has secured a public space protection Order, which gives local council officers more powers to address this very serious problem. So I would like to praise the police and the council for the action they're taking. But I would also like to ask the Minister to see what further powers could be used to try to constrain this very, very serious problem. Thank you, Mr. Stringer.
10:24
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. Within my constituency of Newquay, the communications I recently held on anti-social behaviour with residents have highlighted major concerns about e-bikes and other powered bikes being ridden not just around town but in abandoned China, clay pits on footpaths and along other rights of way. My constituents have rightly raised concerns about safety and the impact on those shared spaces on anti-social behaviour, where rules are deliberately ignored by riders. These concerns should not be dismissed and our constituents are right to expect the law to be enforced effectively. So I welcome this government's additional powers to seize and dispose of dangerous vehicles being used unlawfully, and the wider efforts to tackle the sale of unsafe and illegal products.
Those measures should help us ensure that the enforcement agencies can respond much more effectively. But at the same time, I think there is a wider point to contribute to this debate, particularly when it comes to young people. Many young people are drawn to e-bikes because of the freedom they offer and the independence and a sense of community that they offer, and now that interest in itself is not a problem to be regulated as strict as we must be. In some of the other measures that we've described today. And that is something that an interest that can be channelled into sports, into skills, into training and volunteering opportunities.
And that's why I want to highlight the work of the Cornwall Bicycle Project in PA, which provides those vital skills development, volunteering and community engagement opportunities, engaging people from a wide range of backgrounds, including those who have struggled in mainstream education and are looking for routes into employment and training. So the model ensures that the enthusiasm for e-bikes can be channelled into a positive way. It can be a practical route into learning new skills, it can build confidence and responsibility. It can create connections within those communities. I should lastly, recognise the role that Emerus has played more broadly in supporting access to nature, outdoor recreation and sports within the China clay area.
But it shouldn't be down to one company to solve this huge issue in our area. Mr. Stringer, This means that government, local authorities, police, business, community organisations and education providers need to be supported by our government in a strategic manner to play their part.
Those measures should help us ensure that the enforcement agencies can respond much more effectively. But at the same time, I think there is a wider point to contribute to this debate, particularly when it comes to young people. Many young people are drawn to e-bikes because of the freedom they offer and the independence and a sense of community that they offer, and now that interest in itself is not a problem to be regulated as strict as we must be. In some of the other measures that we've described today. And that is something that an interest that can be channelled into sports, into skills, into training and volunteering opportunities.
And that's why I want to highlight the work of the Cornwall Bicycle Project in PA, which provides those vital skills development, volunteering and community engagement opportunities, engaging people from a wide range of backgrounds, including those who have struggled in mainstream education and are looking for routes into employment and training. So the model ensures that the enthusiasm for e-bikes can be channelled into a positive way. It can be a practical route into learning new skills, it can build confidence and responsibility. It can create connections within those communities. I should lastly, recognise the role that Emerus has played more broadly in supporting access to nature, outdoor recreation and sports within the China clay area.
But it shouldn't be down to one company to solve this huge issue in our area. Mr. Stringer, This means that government, local authorities, police, business, community organisations and education providers need to be supported by our government in a strategic manner to play their part.
10:26
10:27
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairship. And can I thank my hon. Friend the member for Epsom and Ewell for setting out the case for regulation of e-bikes and e-scooters with great passion and conviction. She spoke very movingly of the loss of her constituents life, Jacob, and she highlighted how there is an enormous geographical range of police forces that are very concerned about this issue, and honourable members from across the country spoke with great thought on some of the key themes of this debate. First and foremost, the human impact of this problem of illegally modified and used e-bikes and e-scooters, the deaths, the injuries, but also the fear that so many people have, particularly people with disabilities or who may be partially sighted.
And the fact that this problem means that pavements are no longer thought of by everybody as a place of refuge from motor traffic, somewhere that can be relied upon to safely complete the journey. And some honourable members also highlighted the growing financial impact of this problem in terms of insurance payouts as a result of users of these vehicles who are not insured, and therefore everybody else is bearing the cost of that through increased premiums. Honourable members also highlighted the problems of battery fires and how this growing problem sometimes leads to loss of life. And they also, quite rightly highlighted the need for greater enforcement, more support for our police and more resources for our police in dealing with this issue.
Now, part of that comes from the complexity of what an e-bike or an e-scooter is, or isn't. A legally illegal e-bike is has as pedal assisted electric power up to a speed of 15.5 miles an hour, no more. And e-scooters. There is a in some places, parts of the country. There are trials that have been going on for very long, but in most places there aren't. And that adds to the complexity of this topic. Now, on battery fires, the vast majority, according to statistics from the office for Product Safety and Standards, do arise from conversion kits and unknown brands of e-bike, highlighting the need for much greater product regulation.
In 2025, London's Metropolitan Police seized more than 2200 illegal e-bikes and e-scooters across London in the first seven months of 2026, it seized more than 2500 already, exceeding the whole of 2025.
And the fact that this problem means that pavements are no longer thought of by everybody as a place of refuge from motor traffic, somewhere that can be relied upon to safely complete the journey. And some honourable members also highlighted the growing financial impact of this problem in terms of insurance payouts as a result of users of these vehicles who are not insured, and therefore everybody else is bearing the cost of that through increased premiums. Honourable members also highlighted the problems of battery fires and how this growing problem sometimes leads to loss of life. And they also, quite rightly highlighted the need for greater enforcement, more support for our police and more resources for our police in dealing with this issue.
Now, part of that comes from the complexity of what an e-bike or an e-scooter is, or isn't. A legally illegal e-bike is has as pedal assisted electric power up to a speed of 15.5 miles an hour, no more. And e-scooters. There is a in some places, parts of the country. There are trials that have been going on for very long, but in most places there aren't. And that adds to the complexity of this topic. Now, on battery fires, the vast majority, according to statistics from the office for Product Safety and Standards, do arise from conversion kits and unknown brands of e-bike, highlighting the need for much greater product regulation.
In 2025, London's Metropolitan Police seized more than 2200 illegal e-bikes and e-scooters across London in the first seven months of 2026, it seized more than 2500 already, exceeding the whole of 2025.
10:29
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
In the first seven months of 2026, it seized more than 2500 already, exceeding the whole of 2025. In March 2026, a two day enforcement operation seized 52 illegal e-bikes and mopeds. London's fire brigade reports that e-bike fires have doubled between 2022 and 2025, with most fires caused by illegally modified or designed e-bikes and their batteries. And many people see some food delivery couriers using e-bikes, sometimes illegally modified in a reckless and inconsiderate manner. But, Mr. Stringer, there is also a great opportunity if we can get e-bikes right. In 2024, the UK sold just 2.1 e-bikes per 1000 people, compared to 8.5 in France and a staggering 36.1 in Denmark.
And if we don't buck that trend, it means we're unlikely to achieve the continuation of cycling into older age. That still happens in the Netherlands, with e-bike travel accounting for over 50% of cycling distance in the 6765 to 75 age bracket. So there is an opportunity here, as well as a problem that needs to be solved now, as well as the many honourable members from many parties who have spoken on this issue. The all party parliamentary Group for cycling and walking conducted an inquiry into this issue last year and produced a very thoughtful and wide ranging report at the Liberal Democrat conference in September.
That's still last month. How thyme. Thyme is a very strange concept in this job. I find our party conference. We. We pass definitive policy on the need to take much tougher action on this on this issue of illegally modified e-bikes and their use and the strength of feeling in this room shows that there is a widespread lack of confidence that the current government is taking the coordinated, sustained action that we need to see on this issue. It's a multifaceted problem that covers, that straddles many government departments, and we know from many select committee reports and the Institute for government that, alas, problems that straddle multiple departments are not always ones that we have been good at tackling.
But hopefully the Minister will give us some assurance that this multi pronged multi-departmental approach will be taken on this issue. Our ask of the government are as follows. We need to tackle the root cause which is the supply chains. We need to make online retailers police and stop the sale of all nonconforming e-bikes. Conversion kits, batteries and chargers deal with the problem at its source. We need to deal with the perverse incentives created by the gig economy. The phenomenon of worker substitution makes makes avoiding individual identification and accountability too easy, and the paper delivery model used by many of the delivery platforms incentivizes reckless and illegal behaviour, and delivery platforms should be undertaking their own speed and e-bike checks.
They need to take some responsibility of the issue. I give way to the honourable lady.
And if we don't buck that trend, it means we're unlikely to achieve the continuation of cycling into older age. That still happens in the Netherlands, with e-bike travel accounting for over 50% of cycling distance in the 6765 to 75 age bracket. So there is an opportunity here, as well as a problem that needs to be solved now, as well as the many honourable members from many parties who have spoken on this issue. The all party parliamentary Group for cycling and walking conducted an inquiry into this issue last year and produced a very thoughtful and wide ranging report at the Liberal Democrat conference in September.
That's still last month. How thyme. Thyme is a very strange concept in this job. I find our party conference. We. We pass definitive policy on the need to take much tougher action on this on this issue of illegally modified e-bikes and their use and the strength of feeling in this room shows that there is a widespread lack of confidence that the current government is taking the coordinated, sustained action that we need to see on this issue. It's a multifaceted problem that covers, that straddles many government departments, and we know from many select committee reports and the Institute for government that, alas, problems that straddle multiple departments are not always ones that we have been good at tackling.
But hopefully the Minister will give us some assurance that this multi pronged multi-departmental approach will be taken on this issue. Our ask of the government are as follows. We need to tackle the root cause which is the supply chains. We need to make online retailers police and stop the sale of all nonconforming e-bikes. Conversion kits, batteries and chargers deal with the problem at its source. We need to deal with the perverse incentives created by the gig economy. The phenomenon of worker substitution makes makes avoiding individual identification and accountability too easy, and the paper delivery model used by many of the delivery platforms incentivizes reckless and illegal behaviour, and delivery platforms should be undertaking their own speed and e-bike checks.
They need to take some responsibility of the issue. I give way to the honourable lady.
10:32
10:33
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
I thank the honourable lady for her intervention, and those statistics absolutely highlight the problem and the fact that these delivery companies, they need to take ownership of this rather than dumping the problem on everybody else, leading to the demonisation of their workforce and expecting the government to clear up their mess. They need to take action as well. And if they won't, then they need to be regulated much more toughly. The government also needs to get on with legislating to clearly and consistently regulate e-scooters. The current postcode lottery of arrangements is unhelpful for everybody. We also need a government backed e-bike safety safety certification scheme.
Building on actions being taken by the cycling industry to come up with their own kitemark, showing that an e-bike is indeed safely manufactured and compliant with legal standards, our police need much greater support, they need greater powers, they need more training on how to identify illegal e-bikes, and they need appropriate resources. And we should also consider a national swap or amnesty scheme for illegally modified or designed e-bikes and e-scooters so that people can come forward. And we heard a little bit about that from the honourable member for Glenrothes and Midwife, about how seized vehicles seized by e-bikes can be used for positive purpose.
And there are good examples from New York of where such amnesty schemes have been done. Now, of course, the biggest issue, the biggest reason why this needs to be tackled is the human impact that we've heard, both in terms of deaths and injuries and the increase in fear and nervousness for using our streets. I shall give way to lady.
Building on actions being taken by the cycling industry to come up with their own kitemark, showing that an e-bike is indeed safely manufactured and compliant with legal standards, our police need much greater support, they need greater powers, they need more training on how to identify illegal e-bikes, and they need appropriate resources. And we should also consider a national swap or amnesty scheme for illegally modified or designed e-bikes and e-scooters so that people can come forward. And we heard a little bit about that from the honourable member for Glenrothes and Midwife, about how seized vehicles seized by e-bikes can be used for positive purpose.
And there are good examples from New York of where such amnesty schemes have been done. Now, of course, the biggest issue, the biggest reason why this needs to be tackled is the human impact that we've heard, both in terms of deaths and injuries and the increase in fear and nervousness for using our streets. I shall give way to lady.
10:34
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
The honourable member for giving way. I spoke recently to an A&E doctor in my constituency who was witnessing the rising catastrophic injuries, particularly to children and young people, as a as a consequence of these, does he not agree with me that we have to get to the source of this. Ban the conversion kits and stop these deadly bikes?
10:53
10:53
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
To that. There is a real risk that if this problem isn't dealt with, it will undermine the government's commendable aims of increasing walking, cycling and wheeling and all of the health and congestion reduction benefits that result from that. So I look forward to hearing the minister's comments, and I hope to see the multi-departmental tough action we need on this issue.
10:53
10:53
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. A pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I commend the Honourable Lady for Epsom and Ewell for securing this debate. We have all heard from constituents about the problems caused by the illegal use of these vehicles, whether that is people riding e-bikes on the pavement, e-bikes clearly operating in violation of existing rules, private scooters on the road and the serious issues that has come out in this debate of lithium ion fires on public safety. The concerns we hear from the public about these devices underscore why effective and proportionate regulation is necessary.
People need to know that those using these vehicles are following the rules of the road. However, I do think it's worth acknowledging that combining the two issues in this debate does risk being somewhat redundant, given that where we are not discussing dockless rental schemes, the regulatory regimes governing the two types of vehicle are very different. When it comes to e-bikes, there is a clear set of rules that govern their use. The technical limits set out in the electrically assisted pedal cycles, regulations and standards sets out a reasonably robust framework for their use. But as we've heard in this debate, there is a need to go further.
This raises the fundamental point that we need to consider when examining the regulation of these vehicles. Are the regulations we already have in place being followed? That is why we must address the need for much stronger approach to enforcement of the existing laws and regulations. Over the last couple of years, several local and national news organisations have highlighted the increased illegal use of e-bikes and e-scooters. For example, Mr. Stringer data obtained under Freedom of Information Requests revealed that the number of crimes committed on e-bikes in London alone exceeded 10,000 in 2025, but only 221 of them resulted in the perpetrator being caught and charged.
A pretty poor rate of 2.2%. If we are to be completely honest, it would not take long to spot an e-bike flouting the law or someone riding an e-bike flouting the law. If you were to walk out of Parliament right now and observe a nearby crossing.
People need to know that those using these vehicles are following the rules of the road. However, I do think it's worth acknowledging that combining the two issues in this debate does risk being somewhat redundant, given that where we are not discussing dockless rental schemes, the regulatory regimes governing the two types of vehicle are very different. When it comes to e-bikes, there is a clear set of rules that govern their use. The technical limits set out in the electrically assisted pedal cycles, regulations and standards sets out a reasonably robust framework for their use. But as we've heard in this debate, there is a need to go further.
This raises the fundamental point that we need to consider when examining the regulation of these vehicles. Are the regulations we already have in place being followed? That is why we must address the need for much stronger approach to enforcement of the existing laws and regulations. Over the last couple of years, several local and national news organisations have highlighted the increased illegal use of e-bikes and e-scooters. For example, Mr. Stringer data obtained under Freedom of Information Requests revealed that the number of crimes committed on e-bikes in London alone exceeded 10,000 in 2025, but only 221 of them resulted in the perpetrator being caught and charged.
A pretty poor rate of 2.2%. If we are to be completely honest, it would not take long to spot an e-bike flouting the law or someone riding an e-bike flouting the law. If you were to walk out of Parliament right now and observe a nearby crossing.
10:53
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
Having been out with my local police, it's clear that they do not have the powers to pursue these very fast, illegal e-bikes in order to detain people, and the evidence is not possible because of balaclavas. So does he recognise that this government's action to give police stronger powers to seize and destroy bikes from garages and lock ups is a really proportionate response to tackling this problem at source and helping the police do their job.
10:53
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
I'm grateful to the honourable lady. I don't think we are a million miles away on this, but there has been a debate in this chamber this morning of colleagues from all parties in the House, all setting out serious concerns and greater powers and greater enforcement abilities for the police is always to be welcomed. But as my honourable friend for Stockton West set out, he tried to get much stronger regulations and enforcement powers put in to legislation during this parliament, and the government resisted it. So I think it would be in one second. I think it would be foolish to pretend that all the powers that are needed are out there.
We would not literally not be stood in Westminster Hall this morning debating it, if all was fine and rosy, and I'll happily give way.
We would not literally not be stood in Westminster Hall this morning debating it, if all was fine and rosy, and I'll happily give way.
10:53
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable gentleman for giving way on this point. Obviously, after 14 years in a position of power to do something about this issue, we would expect that the party opposite would be supporting our next stage of policing regulation. That should be coming down the line in this King's speech. Does he agree with me that it would be great if we could see some of the amendments in the policing Bill, the upcoming policing bill that relate to the regulation of off road bikes?
10:54
10:54
10:54
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
I accept the honourable lady's point on off road bikes and dirt bikes, but the point I was addressing was one of e-bikes and e-scooters, the technology of which did not exist. These products were not even for sale for a large proportion of that of that time. I said I was. I said I was going to only give way once more. I fully appreciate it's a debate, and I do give way a lot in debates, but I do need to make the rest of my comments . So almost as if it had been pre-written for the intervention I took first.
That is why we need to support the police with the resources they need to tackle both the illegal use of these vehicles and their use as enablers to other offences. I appreciate that the government introduced legislative changes last year to make it easier to seize some of these vehicles, but those changes can only be effective if the relevant authorities have the resources to actually enforce them. Furthermore, I hope the minister will ask their colleagues to consider policies that enable the police to intervene whenever they witness dangerous behaviour involving e-bikes and e-scooters, as well as ways to impose tougher penalties.
Illegal behaviour must be appropriately punished. There must be consequences. This must be combined with increased police recruitment to ensure that officers are available to tackle this reckless behaviour, including targeted enforcement in locations where crime is most prevalent. However, under this government we have unfortunately seen a reduction in overall police officer numbers. As such, we should commend the police forces that are using existing regulations to tackle the illegal use of these vehicles and finding innovative ways to discourage illegal behaviour. One recent example is the City of London police use of its so-called sin bin, designed specifically for cyclists who ride through red lights or across zebra crossings.
Those caught are required to watch a safety video, which takes considerably longer than simply waiting for the light to change. Now, of course, this could apply to any bike, but we regularly see users of e-bike schemes engaging in this kind of behaviour by removing the perceived benefit of jumping a red light or riding illegally across a crossing. Measures such as this could help deter such behaviour. At the same time, many of us have seen the increasing use of private e-scooters alongside the illegal use of e-bikes. Figures released by the Metropolitan Police in July showed that it had confiscated more e-scooters in the first seven months of the year than it had in the previous whole calendar year.
Now, some people may ask whom this behaviour harms, but the answer is clear if we cannot enforce the rules we already have in place, we risk endangering the public, particularly disabled people who rely on our road safety infrastructure to protect them. That brings us to the dockless e-bike and e-scooter rental schemes that have also been mentioned in today's debate and have become increasingly prevalent. Disability charities, particularly those representing people with visual impairment, have highlighted the significant challenges posed by these schemes. Research by the Royal National Institute of Blind People has shown that 81% of survey respondents said that bikes , or e-scooters left on pavements made their journeys more difficult.
Therefore, I understand the desire to call for appropriate regulation of these businesses. In fact, a number of these organisations have called on local government, and particularly the Mayor of London, to show leadership on this issue. To be clear, what local government wants to achieve from these schemes. I hope that we should follow the approach set out by the leadership of Westminster City Council. Dockless bikes are here to stay, but poorly parked bikes have become a major headache for pedestrians and businesses, indeed a danger. It is worth noting that at a meeting with the major operators in August, Westminster City Council agreed to share data that would give the authority a much more accurate picture of the thousands of vehicles operating in the borough.
The council also stated that dockless bike operators were considering removing or relocating parking bays near taxi ranks and disabled parking bays to help keep pavements clear. Working with these companies in a way that allows them to operate safely and legally, is the principal way we should approach the problem.
That is why we need to support the police with the resources they need to tackle both the illegal use of these vehicles and their use as enablers to other offences. I appreciate that the government introduced legislative changes last year to make it easier to seize some of these vehicles, but those changes can only be effective if the relevant authorities have the resources to actually enforce them. Furthermore, I hope the minister will ask their colleagues to consider policies that enable the police to intervene whenever they witness dangerous behaviour involving e-bikes and e-scooters, as well as ways to impose tougher penalties.
Illegal behaviour must be appropriately punished. There must be consequences. This must be combined with increased police recruitment to ensure that officers are available to tackle this reckless behaviour, including targeted enforcement in locations where crime is most prevalent. However, under this government we have unfortunately seen a reduction in overall police officer numbers. As such, we should commend the police forces that are using existing regulations to tackle the illegal use of these vehicles and finding innovative ways to discourage illegal behaviour. One recent example is the City of London police use of its so-called sin bin, designed specifically for cyclists who ride through red lights or across zebra crossings.
Those caught are required to watch a safety video, which takes considerably longer than simply waiting for the light to change. Now, of course, this could apply to any bike, but we regularly see users of e-bike schemes engaging in this kind of behaviour by removing the perceived benefit of jumping a red light or riding illegally across a crossing. Measures such as this could help deter such behaviour. At the same time, many of us have seen the increasing use of private e-scooters alongside the illegal use of e-bikes. Figures released by the Metropolitan Police in July showed that it had confiscated more e-scooters in the first seven months of the year than it had in the previous whole calendar year.
Now, some people may ask whom this behaviour harms, but the answer is clear if we cannot enforce the rules we already have in place, we risk endangering the public, particularly disabled people who rely on our road safety infrastructure to protect them. That brings us to the dockless e-bike and e-scooter rental schemes that have also been mentioned in today's debate and have become increasingly prevalent. Disability charities, particularly those representing people with visual impairment, have highlighted the significant challenges posed by these schemes. Research by the Royal National Institute of Blind People has shown that 81% of survey respondents said that bikes , or e-scooters left on pavements made their journeys more difficult.
Therefore, I understand the desire to call for appropriate regulation of these businesses. In fact, a number of these organisations have called on local government, and particularly the Mayor of London, to show leadership on this issue. To be clear, what local government wants to achieve from these schemes. I hope that we should follow the approach set out by the leadership of Westminster City Council. Dockless bikes are here to stay, but poorly parked bikes have become a major headache for pedestrians and businesses, indeed a danger. It is worth noting that at a meeting with the major operators in August, Westminster City Council agreed to share data that would give the authority a much more accurate picture of the thousands of vehicles operating in the borough.
The council also stated that dockless bike operators were considering removing or relocating parking bays near taxi ranks and disabled parking bays to help keep pavements clear. Working with these companies in a way that allows them to operate safely and legally, is the principal way we should approach the problem.
10:55
10:55
Speaker 28
-
Speaker 28
Is he on the point about Westminster Council and that data issue? Is he supporting the Mayor of London's request that the new regulations coming from the government do actually require all providers to share the information on how many bikes and vehicles they have on the road in our capital and and wherever they're operated elsewhere. Obviously, I have a London interest.
10:55
10:55
10:55
10:55
10:55
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Of course, Mr. Stringer, I recognize the honourable gentleman's point and data sharing as as as led by Westminster City Council. And if the Mayor of London is doing that, that is something that is straightforward and sensible to be done. We need real action from this government. We need the serious problems that have been identified by all sides of the House in this debate to be taken seriously, and that means listening to all sides of the House and ensuring that the sensible suggestions that have been put down during this debate are actually met.
10:55
10:55
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
Thank you. Mr. Stringer. It is a pleasure to see you in the chair this morning. Can I start by thanking the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell for securing this debate, and for the many honourable members who have made contributions this morning. Although this is billed as a transport debate, as clearly a number of other government departments who have some influence and interest in this matter, not least the Home Office, as I think a lot of the debate has talked about the impact of reckless and illegal use of e-scooters and e-bikes in all of our constituencies, ranging from nuisance to anti-social behaviour to downright criminality.
And of course, we've heard a number of tragic stories about the serious harm that misuse can cause, including serious life changing injuries and indeed , fatalities. So I want to start by reassuring honourable members that I and the government do understand the importance of the issues raised today, and it is correct to say, as a number of members have said, that e-bikes and e-scooters have a role to play in our communities. They do provide another transport option, and they have the potential to improve individuals health and reduce emissions. But as we've heard very clearly today, an inconsistent approach to regulations and sales over the years has left loopholes that at best confuse people and at worst, leave this area open for criminal abuse.
And as the honourable member for Carlisle said, this illegal activity is undermining the positive story that we would want to be talking about for the use of these vehicles. I will. Yes. Thank you.
And of course, we've heard a number of tragic stories about the serious harm that misuse can cause, including serious life changing injuries and indeed , fatalities. So I want to start by reassuring honourable members that I and the government do understand the importance of the issues raised today, and it is correct to say, as a number of members have said, that e-bikes and e-scooters have a role to play in our communities. They do provide another transport option, and they have the potential to improve individuals health and reduce emissions. But as we've heard very clearly today, an inconsistent approach to regulations and sales over the years has left loopholes that at best confuse people and at worst, leave this area open for criminal abuse.
And as the honourable member for Carlisle said, this illegal activity is undermining the positive story that we would want to be talking about for the use of these vehicles. I will. Yes. Thank you.
10:55
10:55
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
As people across this debate, indeed across the chamber are facing huge problems in my constituency with bike gangs and those who are causing real harm to my community. I'd like to thank the minister, the government, for all the work they've done. The more police, the more powers, the more local work as well. Banning balaclavas. Careless. So short. Careless bike riding, banning as well, as well as getting TikTok accounts taken down. Winning for all of us. Building a safer community. But can the minister assure me that this is not the end that will keep going further and further to stop these bike gangs and keep my community safe?
10:55
10:55
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Just quickly, Minister, when it comes to the legislative change and we all look for that there, there has to be something within the system that purchase of bikes to ensure that young people don't enter those who have the e-bikes. We have had over 100 people in Belfast Trust who have been injured, young people driving them. Is it not important to have some sort of regulation and some sort of guidance for those people who perhaps don't want to break the law, but end up doing so and injuring themselves?
10:56
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
I'm grateful to the honourable member for his intervention. There is an awful lot we need to be looking at in terms of the retail element of this, which I'll come on to shortly. Mr. Stringer, we've heard a number of contributions from members today, from the member for Oxford East, honourable members for Darlington, Mitcham and Morden, Bermondsey and Old Southwark, Carlisle, Glenrothes, Fife, Ealing and Southall, reading, Central, Saint Austell and Newquay, Rushcliffe, Leeds Southwest Morley, Tamworth, Derby North, Wolverhampton West, Shipley, Broxbourne, Stockport, Stockton West, Eastbourne, Sutton and Yeovil, Witney, Strangford and East Londonderry, which I think explains quite clearly that this is a nationwide issue that members across the House are particularly interested in.
So if members will forgive me, I won't be able to address every single comment that's been made, but I'll pick out a few that I can address now, and we will respond in writing, either from myself or the relevant minister, for other issues that we are not able to pick up. My hon. Friend the Mitcham and Morden, who I know has campaigned for a long time on this, has mentioned the E bike fires issue, which, as the former minister responsible for Product Regulation Metrology Act, I personally well aware of and have met Sophia Doherty's mother and absolutely agree and the importance that we bring forward the regulations and that.
And I will address that in due course. My hon. Friend the member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark probably shared a little bit too much information about his body shape with the with the house, but he did ask an important question about the national licensing framework, and I can confirm that the consultation will be beginning on that imminently. My hon. Friend the member for Darlington mentioned the tragic circumstances of her constituent, Gloria, and I absolutely hear what her daughter Julie has said and you know, and can reassure her that we will act on that. She mentioned a review of the dirt bike licensing regime.
That's something I'll come back to her in writing on. But she was also right, as were the honourable members for Glenrothes, Fife and Drum for Witney and indeed several of the members mentioned about the responsibility of retailers in this area. Frankly, Mr. Stringer, putting in small print that these vehicles are only for use on private land is not good enough. It is not the action of a responsible retailer. So let me be clear we expect retailers to clean up their act, and if they are not able to do that, then there are more levers available for us to deal with that.
I think it would help Mr. Stringer, if I briefly set out the current legislative framework, the Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle Regulations 1983 sets out the parameters for what is legal and what is not. The power of the electric motor on a legal e-bike cannot exceed 250W, and the maximum assisted speed cannot exceed 15.5 miles an hour. Anything faster or more powerful is an electric motorbike and therefore should be approved and registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency , taxed and insured, and the rider must also wear a safety helmet and hold a driving licence, a vehicle that is too fast or too powerful and which is not properly registered as an electric motorbike, is illegal for use on public roads and we need to absolutely state that.
But as honourable members for Epsom and Ewell has mentioned, some of the concerns that the police do not have enough powers, I think it is fair to say, as a number of honourable members recognise, that the government have made this process easy for the police to act thanks to measures in the Crime and Policing Act, which the opposition spokesperson forgot to mention his party voted against at third reading. But the police can now seize vehicles without first having to issue a warrant. And I think my friend for Reading Central mentioned there are a range of different tactics that police forces are using, and I think that we are keen to learn from experiences up and down the country.
And I'm pleased to report that actually there is a lot of cracking down in different forces there . Tackling this . From London to Liverpool, Operation Gears and Merseyside Police seized 500 illegal electric motorbikes and e-scooters in 2025. Only last week. In my own constituency of Ellesmere Port, the local constabulary seized around 13 illegal vehicles alongside one of my local councillors, Katie Kendrick. Because this is an issue that really matters to people, this is an issue that we all see on the streets, balaclavas and on bikes. Is criminality hiding in plain sight? It is an equivalent to the dodgy vape shop, and it is important that we support the police to use the powers they have , and to look at whether there are more powers that are needed to deal with this issue.
But of course, that's only one side of the problem. As we've discussed, it is far too easy to get hold of these vehicles, which means looking at doing more at the point of sale. And this isn't just the bikes, it's the e-bike conversion kits, which, as we've heard, have the potential to pose real harm to cyclists and indeed others. E-bike batteries, as we know, can be dangerous if they're not properly installed, and they must be properly regulated to keep people safe. So, as members will be aware, the Department of Business, Innovation, Science and Trade consulted on a range of updates to the product safety framework over the summer, including clear duties for online marketplaces to take due care to identify, prevent and remove unsafe products from their sites, such as unsafe or non-compliant batteries and their use in e-bikes and conversion kits.
And as members will be aware, that consultation is now closed. Best officials are considering responses as part of the drafting the government response, and as members will probably be aware, as the minister who originally brought that enabling legislation through, I'm keener than most to make sure that we make the best use of that. And I think I probably need to remind the opposition spokesperson yet again, his party voted against that particular set of laws. So I want to turn briefly to the issue of e-scooters. Mr. Stringer, the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell, told us about the tragic death of Jacob Calland and my sympathies are with his family and I understand that they have actually met my predecessor and I'm keen to continue that dialogue.
And as has been pointed out by members, it is the case that private e-scooters are illegal for use on public roads. They can only be legally used through the government's trials, which have been extended to May 2028. This trial system was implemented originally back in 2020, but as members have pointed out, it has never been placed on a statutory footing. But we are making a firm commitment that we will legislate to define e-scooters in law, which will provide certainty that we currently have not got, and people will know what is legal and what is not, and what can be enforced against I.
If you don't mind, the honourable will have an opportunity to respond at the end. It is fair to say, though, that there is no international consensus on the right package of regulations for e-scooters, which is why our trial extension is important. We recognise that there will be trade offs when regulating e-scooters, which is why we will consult next year on detailed proposals on on my final comments, Mr. Stringer, because I know the honourable member will want an opportunity to respond. My hon. Friend the member for Darlington, the Right Honourable member for Oxford East, a vast.
If I will use my convening power in the Department to get action across government, and I am pleased to confirm that I am working with colleagues across the Home Office and the Department for business, innovation, Science and Trade and we are setting up a cross-party cross-departmental working group to look at this issue because we consider this an important matter to be tackled across the range of government. So I'll be shortly meeting with colleagues across the House of Representatives on this, and I hope to be able to provide regular updates, because this is an important matter to honourable members, and we are determined to tackle it.
So if members will forgive me, I won't be able to address every single comment that's been made, but I'll pick out a few that I can address now, and we will respond in writing, either from myself or the relevant minister, for other issues that we are not able to pick up. My hon. Friend the Mitcham and Morden, who I know has campaigned for a long time on this, has mentioned the E bike fires issue, which, as the former minister responsible for Product Regulation Metrology Act, I personally well aware of and have met Sophia Doherty's mother and absolutely agree and the importance that we bring forward the regulations and that.
And I will address that in due course. My hon. Friend the member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark probably shared a little bit too much information about his body shape with the with the house, but he did ask an important question about the national licensing framework, and I can confirm that the consultation will be beginning on that imminently. My hon. Friend the member for Darlington mentioned the tragic circumstances of her constituent, Gloria, and I absolutely hear what her daughter Julie has said and you know, and can reassure her that we will act on that. She mentioned a review of the dirt bike licensing regime.
That's something I'll come back to her in writing on. But she was also right, as were the honourable members for Glenrothes, Fife and Drum for Witney and indeed several of the members mentioned about the responsibility of retailers in this area. Frankly, Mr. Stringer, putting in small print that these vehicles are only for use on private land is not good enough. It is not the action of a responsible retailer. So let me be clear we expect retailers to clean up their act, and if they are not able to do that, then there are more levers available for us to deal with that.
I think it would help Mr. Stringer, if I briefly set out the current legislative framework, the Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle Regulations 1983 sets out the parameters for what is legal and what is not. The power of the electric motor on a legal e-bike cannot exceed 250W, and the maximum assisted speed cannot exceed 15.5 miles an hour. Anything faster or more powerful is an electric motorbike and therefore should be approved and registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency , taxed and insured, and the rider must also wear a safety helmet and hold a driving licence, a vehicle that is too fast or too powerful and which is not properly registered as an electric motorbike, is illegal for use on public roads and we need to absolutely state that.
But as honourable members for Epsom and Ewell has mentioned, some of the concerns that the police do not have enough powers, I think it is fair to say, as a number of honourable members recognise, that the government have made this process easy for the police to act thanks to measures in the Crime and Policing Act, which the opposition spokesperson forgot to mention his party voted against at third reading. But the police can now seize vehicles without first having to issue a warrant. And I think my friend for Reading Central mentioned there are a range of different tactics that police forces are using, and I think that we are keen to learn from experiences up and down the country.
And I'm pleased to report that actually there is a lot of cracking down in different forces there . Tackling this . From London to Liverpool, Operation Gears and Merseyside Police seized 500 illegal electric motorbikes and e-scooters in 2025. Only last week. In my own constituency of Ellesmere Port, the local constabulary seized around 13 illegal vehicles alongside one of my local councillors, Katie Kendrick. Because this is an issue that really matters to people, this is an issue that we all see on the streets, balaclavas and on bikes. Is criminality hiding in plain sight? It is an equivalent to the dodgy vape shop, and it is important that we support the police to use the powers they have , and to look at whether there are more powers that are needed to deal with this issue.
But of course, that's only one side of the problem. As we've discussed, it is far too easy to get hold of these vehicles, which means looking at doing more at the point of sale. And this isn't just the bikes, it's the e-bike conversion kits, which, as we've heard, have the potential to pose real harm to cyclists and indeed others. E-bike batteries, as we know, can be dangerous if they're not properly installed, and they must be properly regulated to keep people safe. So, as members will be aware, the Department of Business, Innovation, Science and Trade consulted on a range of updates to the product safety framework over the summer, including clear duties for online marketplaces to take due care to identify, prevent and remove unsafe products from their sites, such as unsafe or non-compliant batteries and their use in e-bikes and conversion kits.
And as members will be aware, that consultation is now closed. Best officials are considering responses as part of the drafting the government response, and as members will probably be aware, as the minister who originally brought that enabling legislation through, I'm keener than most to make sure that we make the best use of that. And I think I probably need to remind the opposition spokesperson yet again, his party voted against that particular set of laws. So I want to turn briefly to the issue of e-scooters. Mr. Stringer, the honourable member for Epsom and Ewell, told us about the tragic death of Jacob Calland and my sympathies are with his family and I understand that they have actually met my predecessor and I'm keen to continue that dialogue.
And as has been pointed out by members, it is the case that private e-scooters are illegal for use on public roads. They can only be legally used through the government's trials, which have been extended to May 2028. This trial system was implemented originally back in 2020, but as members have pointed out, it has never been placed on a statutory footing. But we are making a firm commitment that we will legislate to define e-scooters in law, which will provide certainty that we currently have not got, and people will know what is legal and what is not, and what can be enforced against I.
If you don't mind, the honourable will have an opportunity to respond at the end. It is fair to say, though, that there is no international consensus on the right package of regulations for e-scooters, which is why our trial extension is important. We recognise that there will be trade offs when regulating e-scooters, which is why we will consult next year on detailed proposals on on my final comments, Mr. Stringer, because I know the honourable member will want an opportunity to respond. My hon. Friend the member for Darlington, the Right Honourable member for Oxford East, a vast.
If I will use my convening power in the Department to get action across government, and I am pleased to confirm that I am working with colleagues across the Home Office and the Department for business, innovation, Science and Trade and we are setting up a cross-party cross-departmental working group to look at this issue because we consider this an important matter to be tackled across the range of government. So I'll be shortly meeting with colleagues across the House of Representatives on this, and I hope to be able to provide regular updates, because this is an important matter to honourable members, and we are determined to tackle it.
10:57
10:57
10:57
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Mr. Stringer and I thank everyone who's attended this incredibly important debate here today and for all their contributions. And just to highlight a few. So the member for Mitcham and Morden and her constituents, Sophia Dorothy, who sadly died following a fire. My heart goes out to her and her family. The MP for Oxford East mentioned about bringing the departments together. And this is absolutely critical because this is a cross-departmental issue. And fundamentally, governments are not usually not very well at working across departments. So I hope that the minister really takes us on board and we can really find some solutions.
The MP for member for Sutton and Cheam spoke about immunity from responsibility for employers in the gig economy. This is absolutely vital that we resolve this. The MP for Eastbourne also spoke about some interesting measures in New South Wales and New York, and I think it's really important that we don't just look here, but we look abroad at what's been done and what's been successful in other places as well. And I know the member for Carlisle mentioned about the depression of sales of legal motorbikes as a result of this, and this is a consequence also for the Treasury.
You know, there's less income coming in as a result of that. Incredibly important. The member for Yeovil spoke about the blatant ignorance of individuals not paying, not paying road tax and just being able to get get about, flout the rules. And again, this impacts the Treasury. The. The member for Reading Central spoke about intimidating behaviour, and I'm sure many members across the House have seen that we need stronger police powers. That's been raised by many members today so that they can not only enforce on the streets and roads, but also identify what is legal and what's not.
We need point of sale responsibility and that isn't taking place at the moment. We also need a decision about the trials, and I welcome that. The minister said he's going to bring some people together and that and that there will be legislation at some point, but we need that to be time framed. We can't have this trial going on for another two years. We need action and we need decisions. We need to fundamentally end this confusion at the moment about what is legal and what is not, because there's no legal legality. Legal retailers do not have to provide information about that when people purchase.
And fundamentally, we need to make our streets and parks safe again for our constituents. And I hope that the minister will take away all of the contributions that have been made here today. Thank you.
The MP for member for Sutton and Cheam spoke about immunity from responsibility for employers in the gig economy. This is absolutely vital that we resolve this. The MP for Eastbourne also spoke about some interesting measures in New South Wales and New York, and I think it's really important that we don't just look here, but we look abroad at what's been done and what's been successful in other places as well. And I know the member for Carlisle mentioned about the depression of sales of legal motorbikes as a result of this, and this is a consequence also for the Treasury.
You know, there's less income coming in as a result of that. Incredibly important. The member for Yeovil spoke about the blatant ignorance of individuals not paying, not paying road tax and just being able to get get about, flout the rules. And again, this impacts the Treasury. The. The member for Reading Central spoke about intimidating behaviour, and I'm sure many members across the House have seen that we need stronger police powers. That's been raised by many members today so that they can not only enforce on the streets and roads, but also identify what is legal and what's not.
We need point of sale responsibility and that isn't taking place at the moment. We also need a decision about the trials, and I welcome that. The minister said he's going to bring some people together and that and that there will be legislation at some point, but we need that to be time framed. We can't have this trial going on for another two years. We need action and we need decisions. We need to fundamentally end this confusion at the moment about what is legal and what is not, because there's no legal legality. Legal retailers do not have to provide information about that when people purchase.
And fundamentally, we need to make our streets and parks safe again for our constituents. And I hope that the minister will take away all of the contributions that have been made here today. Thank you.
10:59
10:59
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
The question is that this House has considered the regulation of e-scooters and e-bikes, as many as are of that opinion, say I have the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. Order, order! Can members leave as quickly and as quietly as possible? We need to start the next debate. If members can leave quickly. Order! I will call Mark Vickers to move the motion, and then we'll call the minister to respond. I remind other members that they may only make a speech with prior permission from the member in charge of the debate and the minister.
I've had no notice that such permissions have been given. There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30 minute debates. Order, order! Mark Vickers to move the motion.
I've had no notice that such permissions have been given. There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30 minute debates. Order, order! Mark Vickers to move the motion.
11:01
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
Thank you. I beg to move that this House considers the future of University Hospital of North Tees. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Stringer. And I am grateful to the Minister for being here to respond. I was born in North East Hospital. So were tens of thousands of my constituents, and so were many of their children and grandchildren. For nearly 60 years, it's been where Stockton goes when something goes wrong. It's where we stitched up after an accident, where we welcome our own children into the world and where we sit beside our parents in their final days.
There are very few families in our town whose story does not run at some point through North Tees. I want to begin by thanking the incredible people who work there the doctors, the nurses, the porters, the cleaners, and everyone who keeps our hospital going day and night. I've seen their dedication for myself, and I've seen the challenges they face in a building that makes an already difficult job harder. They deserve decent facilities. Their patients deserve them too. And I have to tell the minister plainly, the building they work in is running out of time. When we were in government, our campaign for a new diagnostic centre in Stockton, thousands of residents.
Some are petition and backed that campaign and around 25 million were secured, with a further 8.4 million from the Community Diagnostic Fund, bringing scans and tests into the heart of our town. For somebody waiting to find out whether they have cancer. That means answers, and it means treatment can begin. Alongside it came 3 million for the new mental health hub at Brookhouse, a new respiratory unit, upgrades to the urgent care centre and 4.3 million in robotic and emergency maternity theatres, where a woman who needs urgent surgery and labour can now get it next door to the delivery suite.
That's what investment can achieve. But you can't keep bought in 21st century medicine onto a 1960s frame forever. I will.
There are very few families in our town whose story does not run at some point through North Tees. I want to begin by thanking the incredible people who work there the doctors, the nurses, the porters, the cleaners, and everyone who keeps our hospital going day and night. I've seen their dedication for myself, and I've seen the challenges they face in a building that makes an already difficult job harder. They deserve decent facilities. Their patients deserve them too. And I have to tell the minister plainly, the building they work in is running out of time. When we were in government, our campaign for a new diagnostic centre in Stockton, thousands of residents.
Some are petition and backed that campaign and around 25 million were secured, with a further 8.4 million from the Community Diagnostic Fund, bringing scans and tests into the heart of our town. For somebody waiting to find out whether they have cancer. That means answers, and it means treatment can begin. Alongside it came 3 million for the new mental health hub at Brookhouse, a new respiratory unit, upgrades to the urgent care centre and 4.3 million in robotic and emergency maternity theatres, where a woman who needs urgent surgery and labour can now get it next door to the delivery suite.
That's what investment can achieve. But you can't keep bought in 21st century medicine onto a 1960s frame forever. I will.
11:03
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Bring this forward. And it's not just specific to one corner of the mainland. Indeed, our South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust has found savings of £50.7 million, just as an example. But does the honourable member acknowledge that these capital and resource crises are interconnected across our United Kingdom and what should always be paramount should be patient safety so as to ensure that the resources are made available and that they need to keep the patients safe.
That should be the priority of the NHS at all times.
That should be the priority of the NHS at all times.
11:03
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
I think it's a very, very valid point, actually, where we've seen that investment. We talked about those robotic theatres actually now part of the world. Not only are they the facilities that the staff deserve to work with in that space, but actually that that investment in technology means there can be more safely. It means their recovery times are reduced. It means more people can be more quickly. And there's a real value in looking after those patients at the worst times of their life all too often. I made the case for a new hospital when my own party was in government.
I held a similar debate to this five years ago and backed the trust bid for one of the new hospitals. I was devastated when in 2023, those places went instead to hospitals built from raq the concrete that put them at risk of collapse. I understood why when a roof could fall in, safety must come first. But it pushed North tees back in the queue and have kept pressing ministers ever since. North Tees opened in 1968, the trust's own board papers identified 2031 as the point by which its main buildings would be beyond their useful economic life.
That's just five years away, and parts of the estate are already past it. The maintenance backlog stands at £126 million, despite around £100 million being spent on repairs in the past decade, and it's projected to reach £300 million by 2033. Staff working around leaky roofs, broken ceiling panels and pipes that freeze in winter. This is not a hospital that needs a lick of paint. It's a hospital whose fabric is failing. On the 2nd of June this year, heavy rain hit Stockton and the drainage at North Tees could not cope. The trust's chief executive has told me that every one of the hospital theatres for inpatient surgery, bar one, was flooded.
More than 400 patients had their surgery cancelled. Repairs have cost £1.5 million and re providing that surgery a further £1 million. That's £2.5 million gone. Not on treating a single extra patient, but on catching up after a rainstorm. Think about the person waiting for that operation. They've arranged time off work. Their family have made plans to look after them. They spent weeks preparing themselves. Then they're told to wait again because the theatre is flooded. That was not a freak event. It's what happens when a hospital runs past its design life and it will happen again unless something changes.
So what are local people seeing under this government? Not a new hospital, not a place in the hospital programme. What they're seeing is job losses. Around 600 posts are to go across hospital trusts with a voluntary redundancy scheme and a vacancy freeze. The trust's own figures raise further questions. Since 2024, total staffing has fallen from 6084 to 5958 over the same period. The number of managers and senior managers has risen from 91 to 110, 2% fewer staff, 21% more managers. Of course, hospital needs good management. But when vacancies are frozen and a £2.5 million flood bill comes out of the same budget, that increase needs explaining.
Every year we wait. The bill gets bigger. A few years ago, replacement hospital was expected to cost around 380 million. The trust now puts it at between 1 billion and 2 billion before the election. The honourable member for Ilford North, then the shadow health secretary, came to North Tees and said there is no doubt we need a new hospital here. I agreed with him then and I agree with him now. But when his government reset the new hospital programme in January last year, not a single hospital on Teesside was in it. When asked last October what assessment has been made of replacing North Tees, the answer was none, and that there were no plans to invite further schemes into the programme.
North Tees is failing in a different way from those hospitals. Its problems not one dangerous material. It's a whole building past its life. It's not on the list and there is no list. It can join a hospital whose theatres flood and whose backlog is heading for £300 million , should not be left without a route, simply because it's failing in the wrong way. Meanwhile, the Tees Valley mayor has written 25 times asking for a meeting about this hospital. Mr. Street in's answer was that the mayor could show him the colour of his money. Three health secretaries later.
They're still not been one. Meeting a hospital that's running out of time cannot wait for the government's revolving door to stop spinning. The trust is drawing up plans, but a plan with no route to capital is just a very expensive document. So I have five questions for the minister. First, what has changed since that answer last October? If the new hospital programme is closed, what route is open? Will the government assess the case for replacement and set out a timetable? Secondly, will she commit to resilience funding to keep the current building safe until then so that flooded theatres do not become an annual event?
Thirdly, will she guarantee that North Tees keeps its offering? It's in E and its core services while the future is decided. Fourthly, will she look at why management numbers have risen by 21% while overall staffing has fallen, and ensure that cuts never come at the expense of frontline care? And fifthly, will she make sure with the Secretary of State finally meets the mayor along with me, members from across Teesside and the trust before the end of the year? Or better still, come visit our hospital to see first hand the challenges our incredible workforce are facing.
People across our area, whatever their politics want. The same thing a hospital that they can rely on when someone they love needs help. I'll work with anybody who wants to make that happen. North Tees are seen as born, patched us up and cared for the people we love. At the end, its staff have kept caring through every challenge put in front of them. The honourable member for Ilford North was right. There is no doubt we need a new hospital. What my constituents want to hear today is not whether, but when, where and how it will be paid for.
Our staff deserve it, our patients need it and our community has waited long enough.
I held a similar debate to this five years ago and backed the trust bid for one of the new hospitals. I was devastated when in 2023, those places went instead to hospitals built from raq the concrete that put them at risk of collapse. I understood why when a roof could fall in, safety must come first. But it pushed North tees back in the queue and have kept pressing ministers ever since. North Tees opened in 1968, the trust's own board papers identified 2031 as the point by which its main buildings would be beyond their useful economic life.
That's just five years away, and parts of the estate are already past it. The maintenance backlog stands at £126 million, despite around £100 million being spent on repairs in the past decade, and it's projected to reach £300 million by 2033. Staff working around leaky roofs, broken ceiling panels and pipes that freeze in winter. This is not a hospital that needs a lick of paint. It's a hospital whose fabric is failing. On the 2nd of June this year, heavy rain hit Stockton and the drainage at North Tees could not cope. The trust's chief executive has told me that every one of the hospital theatres for inpatient surgery, bar one, was flooded.
More than 400 patients had their surgery cancelled. Repairs have cost £1.5 million and re providing that surgery a further £1 million. That's £2.5 million gone. Not on treating a single extra patient, but on catching up after a rainstorm. Think about the person waiting for that operation. They've arranged time off work. Their family have made plans to look after them. They spent weeks preparing themselves. Then they're told to wait again because the theatre is flooded. That was not a freak event. It's what happens when a hospital runs past its design life and it will happen again unless something changes.
So what are local people seeing under this government? Not a new hospital, not a place in the hospital programme. What they're seeing is job losses. Around 600 posts are to go across hospital trusts with a voluntary redundancy scheme and a vacancy freeze. The trust's own figures raise further questions. Since 2024, total staffing has fallen from 6084 to 5958 over the same period. The number of managers and senior managers has risen from 91 to 110, 2% fewer staff, 21% more managers. Of course, hospital needs good management. But when vacancies are frozen and a £2.5 million flood bill comes out of the same budget, that increase needs explaining.
Every year we wait. The bill gets bigger. A few years ago, replacement hospital was expected to cost around 380 million. The trust now puts it at between 1 billion and 2 billion before the election. The honourable member for Ilford North, then the shadow health secretary, came to North Tees and said there is no doubt we need a new hospital here. I agreed with him then and I agree with him now. But when his government reset the new hospital programme in January last year, not a single hospital on Teesside was in it. When asked last October what assessment has been made of replacing North Tees, the answer was none, and that there were no plans to invite further schemes into the programme.
North Tees is failing in a different way from those hospitals. Its problems not one dangerous material. It's a whole building past its life. It's not on the list and there is no list. It can join a hospital whose theatres flood and whose backlog is heading for £300 million , should not be left without a route, simply because it's failing in the wrong way. Meanwhile, the Tees Valley mayor has written 25 times asking for a meeting about this hospital. Mr. Street in's answer was that the mayor could show him the colour of his money. Three health secretaries later.
They're still not been one. Meeting a hospital that's running out of time cannot wait for the government's revolving door to stop spinning. The trust is drawing up plans, but a plan with no route to capital is just a very expensive document. So I have five questions for the minister. First, what has changed since that answer last October? If the new hospital programme is closed, what route is open? Will the government assess the case for replacement and set out a timetable? Secondly, will she commit to resilience funding to keep the current building safe until then so that flooded theatres do not become an annual event?
Thirdly, will she guarantee that North Tees keeps its offering? It's in E and its core services while the future is decided. Fourthly, will she look at why management numbers have risen by 21% while overall staffing has fallen, and ensure that cuts never come at the expense of frontline care? And fifthly, will she make sure with the Secretary of State finally meets the mayor along with me, members from across Teesside and the trust before the end of the year? Or better still, come visit our hospital to see first hand the challenges our incredible workforce are facing.
People across our area, whatever their politics want. The same thing a hospital that they can rely on when someone they love needs help. I'll work with anybody who wants to make that happen. North Tees are seen as born, patched us up and cared for the people we love. At the end, its staff have kept caring through every challenge put in front of them. The honourable member for Ilford North was right. There is no doubt we need a new hospital. What my constituents want to hear today is not whether, but when, where and how it will be paid for.
Our staff deserve it, our patients need it and our community has waited long enough.
11:10
11:10
11:10
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
And I congratulate the honourable member for Stockton West for securing this important debate, and it is good to hear him rightly put across the strength of feeling that I'm sure many people in Stockton and elsewhere nearby feel in support of the staff of the hospital and how people feel about it. It's very important to the communities that it serves, and patients and staff rightly deserve facilities that are safe, modern and fit to deliver high quality care. I must just offer a brief apology to the member. I'm obviously not the minister directly for this area. We have a clash, unfortunately, which is why I am responding to him.
But I will make sure that the minister, with direct responsibility, hears all of the points that he makes, and I'm going to do my best to respond to the questions as as he asks them. I will, of course.
But I will make sure that the minister, with direct responsibility, hears all of the points that he makes, and I'm going to do my best to respond to the questions as as he asks them. I will, of course.
11:11
Speaker 30
-
Speaker 30
Thank you, Minister. This is a seaside wide issue, and it is felt by communities across the region . And all of us, as MPs representing the Tees Valley, believe there needs to be a long term future for this hospital. I know the honourable member for Stockton North is also supporting the Trust's strategic outline case for the future of the hospital, so we do need to see a future here. But there are also other hospitals within the trust's area which are sitting and rotting. And I see one in my constituency in East Cleveland, which is controlled by property services.
So there are huge parts of that building that are sitting empty, which could have more services in. So I'd urge her to meet with us collectively to talk about the future for hospitals across the region.
So there are huge parts of that building that are sitting empty, which could have more services in. So I'd urge her to meet with us collectively to talk about the future for hospitals across the region.
11:11
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. I'd like to thank my friend for that question. And as I just was mentioning, I will make sure that that the the minister responsible hears his point, the discussion that we've had in this debate and that is able to take forward that strategic discussion about the future. I hope and anticipate that I'll be able to answer the questions that the member has put in, the contribution that I'm going to make. If that's not the case, we'll certainly follow up in writing with him and with other members in in tees as well.
Now we recognise the need to plan for the hospital's long term future, for all the reasons that members have set out and that are understood. This requires three things more investment in the NHS estate, greater certainty so that investment can be planned over the long term, and greater autonomy for local leaders to decide how it's best used. And that is the approach we have set out in our ten year capital plan for health and social care. The challenges that North Tees reflect a much wider problem across the NHS estate. For too long, capital investment was insufficient and short term, with capital budgets repeatedly raided to meet day to day pressures.
The result is an estate carrying the consequences of years of underinvestment, and the members have set out the consequences of that which people are living with. Previous governments allowed these pressures to build, leaving too many NHS buildings ageing and in poor condition. Patients and staff across the country are living with the consequences. We cannot undo that legacy overnight, but we can change the way the NHS invests in its buildings, moving away from short term fixes towards sustained investment and proper long term planning. First, we are investing more. After years of underinvestment, we are providing the largest health capital budget in NHS history, with annual spending rising to 15 billion by the end of this spending review period.
And within this, we are targeting funding where the need is greatest. The Estates Safety Fund, established in 2526, will be provided with £6.75 billion over the next nine years to tackle the poorest quality parts of the NHS estate and to ensure safe environments for patients and staff. And this sits alongside around 21 billion in operational capital over the spending review period, empowering local health organisations to invest in their priorities, including their estates. We're also investing about five point about around 5 billion over the spending review period to expand and modernise diagnostic, elective mental health and emergency services, helping to increase capacity, cut waiting times and improve urgent and emergency care performance.
As mentioned by members in this debate already. Second, we're providing greater certainty over that investment. We're providing £65 billion over ten years for operational capital and estate maintenance, giving the NHS unprecedented long term certainty to plan and improve its estate. For the first time, providers have multi-year operational capital allocations alongside longer term certainty over estate maintenance funding. Instead of having to plan from one year to the next, NHS leaders can look ahead, prioritise investment over several years and develop longer term plans for their estates and services. And third, we're giving local leaders greater autonomy about how their investment is used.
We're devolving more control to the front line, streamlining capital approvals, giving local leaders greater freedom to invest according to local need, helping projects move forward more quickly and delivering better value for money for taxpayers. Now, Mr. Stringer, this matters because those closest to patients are best placed to understand what their communities need, and we're giving them more investment, greater certainty over resources available and greater freedom to decide how those resources can best support local services. Which brings me back to North Tees. Now, I've heard the case that honourable members have made about the University Hospital of North Tees to become part of the new hospitals programme, and as he's mentioned, there are currently no plans to invite further schemes to join the programme as our focus is on delivering the existing schemes set out in the plan for implementation.
But the new hospital programme is not the only route through which we're investing in the NHS estate. As I've set out, we're providing long, significant long term capital investment through the Estate Safety Fund, operational capital programmes to expand and modernize services. Alongside that certainty and flexibility that I've mentioned, and over the next nine years, more than 1.1 billion is planned through the Estate Safety Fund for the North East and Yorkshire region. Importantly, the fund gives local NHS leaders greater flexibility to prioritise that investment against the most pressing infrastructure risks across the region. So the member asked me a couple of questions on funding and what route is open.
And this this funding means that the case for further investment at North Tees can be considered through that process, making sure that it's those local priorities that drive decision making. The longer term funding certainty we have provided means that those decisions can be based on strategic plans for the estate, rather than short term pressures alone, although I acknowledge absolutely the point that has been made about flooding and so on. North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust has already been allocated more than three point more than 3.2 million through the Estate Safety Fund for vital repairs at North Tees and Hartlepool hospitals over the next four years, and this sits alongside more than 78 million in operational capital for local priorities, including repairs at North Tees.
But I will just say again that I will make sure that ministers responsible and others are aware of this debate taking place and the points that members have quite rightly raised about the consequences of the position right now and what staff are dealing with. The government has recently announced £1 million to refurbish the emergency department at North Tees over two years, part of a 140 million boost to NHS urgent care. And this builds on 2.7 million already invested in the Emergency Assessment Unit to increase capacity and improve patient flow, safety and experience. We're also.
We're also investing directly in services across the wider Tees Valley. And in 2025, the trust received more than 4 million to expand the Tees Valley Community Diagnostic Centre that we've discussed as part of our £343 million expansion of community and crisis mental health services. New facilities are planned in Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Redcar and Cleveland, alongside a dedicated mental health emergency department at Roseberry Park. And together this sits within 671 million of planned capital investment to support improved NHS performance in secondary and emergency care across the North East and Yorkshire region. Over the next four years.
I will, of course.
Now we recognise the need to plan for the hospital's long term future, for all the reasons that members have set out and that are understood. This requires three things more investment in the NHS estate, greater certainty so that investment can be planned over the long term, and greater autonomy for local leaders to decide how it's best used. And that is the approach we have set out in our ten year capital plan for health and social care. The challenges that North Tees reflect a much wider problem across the NHS estate. For too long, capital investment was insufficient and short term, with capital budgets repeatedly raided to meet day to day pressures.
The result is an estate carrying the consequences of years of underinvestment, and the members have set out the consequences of that which people are living with. Previous governments allowed these pressures to build, leaving too many NHS buildings ageing and in poor condition. Patients and staff across the country are living with the consequences. We cannot undo that legacy overnight, but we can change the way the NHS invests in its buildings, moving away from short term fixes towards sustained investment and proper long term planning. First, we are investing more. After years of underinvestment, we are providing the largest health capital budget in NHS history, with annual spending rising to 15 billion by the end of this spending review period.
And within this, we are targeting funding where the need is greatest. The Estates Safety Fund, established in 2526, will be provided with £6.75 billion over the next nine years to tackle the poorest quality parts of the NHS estate and to ensure safe environments for patients and staff. And this sits alongside around 21 billion in operational capital over the spending review period, empowering local health organisations to invest in their priorities, including their estates. We're also investing about five point about around 5 billion over the spending review period to expand and modernise diagnostic, elective mental health and emergency services, helping to increase capacity, cut waiting times and improve urgent and emergency care performance.
As mentioned by members in this debate already. Second, we're providing greater certainty over that investment. We're providing £65 billion over ten years for operational capital and estate maintenance, giving the NHS unprecedented long term certainty to plan and improve its estate. For the first time, providers have multi-year operational capital allocations alongside longer term certainty over estate maintenance funding. Instead of having to plan from one year to the next, NHS leaders can look ahead, prioritise investment over several years and develop longer term plans for their estates and services. And third, we're giving local leaders greater autonomy about how their investment is used.
We're devolving more control to the front line, streamlining capital approvals, giving local leaders greater freedom to invest according to local need, helping projects move forward more quickly and delivering better value for money for taxpayers. Now, Mr. Stringer, this matters because those closest to patients are best placed to understand what their communities need, and we're giving them more investment, greater certainty over resources available and greater freedom to decide how those resources can best support local services. Which brings me back to North Tees. Now, I've heard the case that honourable members have made about the University Hospital of North Tees to become part of the new hospitals programme, and as he's mentioned, there are currently no plans to invite further schemes to join the programme as our focus is on delivering the existing schemes set out in the plan for implementation.
But the new hospital programme is not the only route through which we're investing in the NHS estate. As I've set out, we're providing long, significant long term capital investment through the Estate Safety Fund, operational capital programmes to expand and modernize services. Alongside that certainty and flexibility that I've mentioned, and over the next nine years, more than 1.1 billion is planned through the Estate Safety Fund for the North East and Yorkshire region. Importantly, the fund gives local NHS leaders greater flexibility to prioritise that investment against the most pressing infrastructure risks across the region. So the member asked me a couple of questions on funding and what route is open.
And this this funding means that the case for further investment at North Tees can be considered through that process, making sure that it's those local priorities that drive decision making. The longer term funding certainty we have provided means that those decisions can be based on strategic plans for the estate, rather than short term pressures alone, although I acknowledge absolutely the point that has been made about flooding and so on. North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust has already been allocated more than three point more than 3.2 million through the Estate Safety Fund for vital repairs at North Tees and Hartlepool hospitals over the next four years, and this sits alongside more than 78 million in operational capital for local priorities, including repairs at North Tees.
But I will just say again that I will make sure that ministers responsible and others are aware of this debate taking place and the points that members have quite rightly raised about the consequences of the position right now and what staff are dealing with. The government has recently announced £1 million to refurbish the emergency department at North Tees over two years, part of a 140 million boost to NHS urgent care. And this builds on 2.7 million already invested in the Emergency Assessment Unit to increase capacity and improve patient flow, safety and experience. We're also.
We're also investing directly in services across the wider Tees Valley. And in 2025, the trust received more than 4 million to expand the Tees Valley Community Diagnostic Centre that we've discussed as part of our £343 million expansion of community and crisis mental health services. New facilities are planned in Hartlepool, Middlesbrough and Redcar and Cleveland, alongside a dedicated mental health emergency department at Roseberry Park. And together this sits within 671 million of planned capital investment to support improved NHS performance in secondary and emergency care across the North East and Yorkshire region. Over the next four years.
I will, of course.
11:19
Speaker 30
-
Speaker 30
Again, there isn't yet much clarity on where some of that funding will go in terms of setting up those mental health services in Redcar and Cleveland in particular. It seems to me as a no brainer. If we've got a hospital with a wing sitting empty, that that that be a site for some of those services. But obviously I'd just like to have the conversation with the department to understand if there are any plans and if not, whether we can get some confirmation on that.
11:19
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. And I'd like to thank my friend for asking me a question that is actually within my direct responsibilities, which does make my life slightly easier. So I would just say to him that the issue that he mentions about the suitability of location is very important. It's one that I'm considering through our work on the mental health strategy, and if he would like to have a discussion with me about it alongside local leaders, I'd be more than happy to do that. Now, just in in addition to that, I would say decisions about the future of local services and estates should be shaped by those who understand them best.
And I might just take this opportunity to say on the record, that includes members of Parliament, because I think too often we haven't seen Members of Parliament playing that role. We often, as local MPs, have a huge amount of Intel about how to make services work best. And I would encourage all of my colleagues in the NHS to, to work with and use that knowledge that MPs have. North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation trusts working with the local NHS, though, is best placed to assess the needs of its patients, determine the right model of care and plan the infrastructure required to deliver it.
And the member for Stockton West asked me some questions about A and E and management numbers, and I would just say to him that I've said what I've said about the importance that MPs and the insights that MPs have, and I would encourage leaders to listen to what he and colleagues have said in this discussion as they're taking decisions. We do want to make sure that local leaders have that strong foundation for taking decisions on multiyear funding, allows them to look beyond immediate pressures, consider investment across their state and develop credible plans over a longer period.
And given what he has said in this debate, there's clearly two jobs here, which is to try to deal with the problems that are in front of us at North Tees and plan that longer term future in a credible way, and I hope that some of the decisions that we've taken will enable them to do that. We know that these are significant problems, and I am realistic. As I've said in my speech, Mr. Stringer, I'm realistic about our ability to deal with what is a substantial and strategic problem overnight, but we must use the opportunity to plan for the longer term future of North Tees to get that clinically led, affordable plan that is supported by a clear business case not planning one year at a time, but being able to look to the long term with that investment, greater certainty and more autonomy as tools to properly plan for the future for the services and the estate.
And I'd just like to finish.
And I might just take this opportunity to say on the record, that includes members of Parliament, because I think too often we haven't seen Members of Parliament playing that role. We often, as local MPs, have a huge amount of Intel about how to make services work best. And I would encourage all of my colleagues in the NHS to, to work with and use that knowledge that MPs have. North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation trusts working with the local NHS, though, is best placed to assess the needs of its patients, determine the right model of care and plan the infrastructure required to deliver it.
And the member for Stockton West asked me some questions about A and E and management numbers, and I would just say to him that I've said what I've said about the importance that MPs and the insights that MPs have, and I would encourage leaders to listen to what he and colleagues have said in this discussion as they're taking decisions. We do want to make sure that local leaders have that strong foundation for taking decisions on multiyear funding, allows them to look beyond immediate pressures, consider investment across their state and develop credible plans over a longer period.
And given what he has said in this debate, there's clearly two jobs here, which is to try to deal with the problems that are in front of us at North Tees and plan that longer term future in a credible way, and I hope that some of the decisions that we've taken will enable them to do that. We know that these are significant problems, and I am realistic. As I've said in my speech, Mr. Stringer, I'm realistic about our ability to deal with what is a substantial and strategic problem overnight, but we must use the opportunity to plan for the longer term future of North Tees to get that clinically led, affordable plan that is supported by a clear business case not planning one year at a time, but being able to look to the long term with that investment, greater certainty and more autonomy as tools to properly plan for the future for the services and the estate.
And I'd just like to finish.
11:22
Speaker 23
-
Speaker 23
Because there was a point raised there about the fact that the mayor's written 25 times. We haven't managed to get a meeting together yet. I wonder whether she might be able to cajole or commit her ministerial colleague, or even the shadow secretary of state, to meet with local members, and that mayor and representatives of the trust to see where we go next and have that sort of a discussion.
11:23
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Thank you, Mr. Stringer. I meet members of Parliament of all parties regularly. Very happy to always agree to meetings with ministers, and I'm sure my colleagues with Members of Parliament and I'm sure my colleagues, likewise the mayor. Obviously, we have built in new institutions like the mayoral Council and other things so that mayors can make representations directly to government. And I'm sure that the mayor is is capable of doing that. I will also make sure that the Secretary of State is aware of the question that he has asked in the follow up to this debate, and I'd like to return, Mr.
Stringer, just as I finish my remarks, just on the comments that that the member for Stockton West opened with about the importance of hospital facilities to local communities, wherever they are in the country. I hear him in the importance that North Tees has to the people that it serves. I think that just goes to show what a foundational role the NHS plays for all of us in our family life. I commend him for bringing this debate today. We've got a lot of work to do to get the NHS back to what it should be. We are in a turnaround process.
It will be hard, but I feel if we work together collaboratively, one eye on the immediate, one eye on the long term will get the job done. Thanks. Mr. Stringer.
Stringer, just as I finish my remarks, just on the comments that that the member for Stockton West opened with about the importance of hospital facilities to local communities, wherever they are in the country. I hear him in the importance that North Tees has to the people that it serves. I think that just goes to show what a foundational role the NHS plays for all of us in our family life. I commend him for bringing this debate today. We've got a lot of work to do to get the NHS back to what it should be. We are in a turnaround process.
It will be hard, but I feel if we work together collaboratively, one eye on the immediate, one eye on the long term will get the job done. Thanks. Mr. Stringer.
11:24
14:30
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Thank you, Miss Lull. I beg to move that this house has considered the performance of Royal Mail. It is indeed a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Miss Lowell. And indeed, I thank all the members and right honourable members who have turned out today. But any one of you in truth could deliver this debate today, because we are all facing the same issues, no matter where we are in the United Kingdom. I want to start by recognising the business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee and its chair, the Right Honourable Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill and Solihull North.
In May, the committee concluded that the Royal Mail Service was unacceptable and that Ofcoms approach had failed to secure the improvement needed. They've kept up the pressure and the chair wrote to Ofcom again just yesterday, and I will draw upon that letter. Even just today at PMQs, the Prime Minister himself acknowledged the systemic and continued feelings with Royal Mail. But I want to start with my constituents in Lagan Valley. First, in Lagan Valley, the post doesn't arrive reliably. It comes in batches. People tell me they get no mail for 2 or 3 weeks, and then a whole month's worth arrives at once.
A letter sent across Lisburn can take over a week. People tell me that there's no difference between first and second class anymore. It just arrives when it arrives. I know second class mail can now be delivered every other day. That's fine, but it is still supposed to arrive within three working days. Waiting weeks isn't an alternate day service, but it is causing real harm. Northern Ireland has by far the worst health waiting lists in the UK because of postal delays. My constituents are missing MRI and CT scans. Indeed, one Constituent's mother was taken off an orthopaedic waiting list because she never got the letter.
These people are already waiting in pain and when a letter fails to show up, the system blames them and every missed appointment lengthens the queue for everybody. But it happens elsewhere, too. A constituent got her jury summons after the deadline passed. She spent days terrified that she'd get fined for something that wasn't her fault. Driving licences, benefit checks, bank cards and insurance documents just go missing so people pay extra for special delivery.
But items still sit for days marked in office. Important legal documents go missing or show up opened. I will indeed.
In May, the committee concluded that the Royal Mail Service was unacceptable and that Ofcoms approach had failed to secure the improvement needed. They've kept up the pressure and the chair wrote to Ofcom again just yesterday, and I will draw upon that letter. Even just today at PMQs, the Prime Minister himself acknowledged the systemic and continued feelings with Royal Mail. But I want to start with my constituents in Lagan Valley. First, in Lagan Valley, the post doesn't arrive reliably. It comes in batches. People tell me they get no mail for 2 or 3 weeks, and then a whole month's worth arrives at once.
A letter sent across Lisburn can take over a week. People tell me that there's no difference between first and second class anymore. It just arrives when it arrives. I know second class mail can now be delivered every other day. That's fine, but it is still supposed to arrive within three working days. Waiting weeks isn't an alternate day service, but it is causing real harm. Northern Ireland has by far the worst health waiting lists in the UK because of postal delays. My constituents are missing MRI and CT scans. Indeed, one Constituent's mother was taken off an orthopaedic waiting list because she never got the letter.
These people are already waiting in pain and when a letter fails to show up, the system blames them and every missed appointment lengthens the queue for everybody. But it happens elsewhere, too. A constituent got her jury summons after the deadline passed. She spent days terrified that she'd get fined for something that wasn't her fault. Driving licences, benefit checks, bank cards and insurance documents just go missing so people pay extra for special delivery.
But items still sit for days marked in office. Important legal documents go missing or show up opened. I will indeed.
14:32
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I thank the honourable member for giving way. She has given a great speech. One constituent of mine has not received post for entire month. Despite accepting time sensitive correspondence relating to the death of her partner, who sadly passed away earlier this year. This is totally unacceptable. Does the honourable member agree that Ofcom needs to be pushing Royal Mail to speed up improvements to regulated deliveries, because our residents have waited long enough?
14:32
14:32
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I absolutely do, and I thank the honourable member for that intervention, and I think that's extremely distressing. A very poignant example indeed. But in Northern Ireland, confidential mail matters. Local groups supporting vulnerable people tell me they're deeply concerned about letters ending up at the wrong address. A letter in the wrong hands in Northern Ireland can put people in real danger. Businesses are hurting, too. In my constituency of Lagan Valley, we have a fantastic local business called the Pie Shop that sells pies, and they had a chance recently to bid for a contract that would see their product stocked in Harrods, something that in itself carries an invaluable commercial amount that it would be almost virtually impossible to estimate.
But due to the delays in Royal Mail, they missed the deadline to participate in the trial. They lost that, a huge blow to that small business, and that will be replicated right across the UK. We've also heard mention already from honourable members about the real life impacts that this failing service has. A woman wrote to me recently, and she said a handwritten card marking the anniversary of her mother's death took nine days to arrive for her. That wasn't minor. It was another blow on a day that was already hard. A sympathy letter, a birthday note, a Christmas card.
These are careful, deliberate actions we make to say I care about you. You matter, I love you. You aren't alone when the post fails. That is what goes missing. And in this. Absolutely.
But due to the delays in Royal Mail, they missed the deadline to participate in the trial. They lost that, a huge blow to that small business, and that will be replicated right across the UK. We've also heard mention already from honourable members about the real life impacts that this failing service has. A woman wrote to me recently, and she said a handwritten card marking the anniversary of her mother's death took nine days to arrive for her. That wasn't minor. It was another blow on a day that was already hard. A sympathy letter, a birthday note, a Christmas card.
These are careful, deliberate actions we make to say I care about you. You matter, I love you. You aren't alone when the post fails. That is what goes missing. And in this. Absolutely.
14:34
Speaker 4
-
Speaker 4
Giving way and having an important debate, I held one on the 4th of February earlier this year, very similar, and I raised the points with Royal Mail about , particularly W.V. 15 and W.V. 16 postcodes in my constituency that are waiting two, three, sometimes four weeks to get mail. Does she agree this is completely unacceptable? It has to change because my constituents, as well as many others, are feeling they really don't matter to Royal Mail.
14:34
14:34
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Indeed, and I thank the honourable member for his work on this subject today. It's very much valued and appreciated by all of us in this House, and I think that illustrates the point perfectly. And we've had the discussion in the debate around what items matter in terms of Royal Mail service parcels still managed to turn up on time. Online orders arrive straight away, while letters sit in sorting offices. Everyone can see what Royal Mail is prioritising.
14:35
14:35
14:35
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
I thank the honourable member for giving way and for such powerful testimony about the impact of lost and delayed letters under Royal Mail. I've been flagging issues in my 11, ten and nine constituent postcodes, like many honourable members here have as well. And I think what concerns me most is that Royal Mail responses to the issues we raise are, at best generic, at worst deceptive. So does the honourable member agree with me that this is totally unacceptable and Royal Mail needs to do better eastward?
14:36
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable Lady has perfectly anticipated the next paragraph of my speech. And I think you're absolutely right. And I do think it makes an already bad situation worse. Whenever we know that we are in a situation where our business or our organisation is already under fire. I can't, for the life of me, understand why Royal Mail simply have not sought to improve how they respond to complaints. And indeed, some constituents have told me what happens whenever they try to complain. The online complaints form has gone, the phone line has already outlined by the Honourable Lady is a generic national number that can take up to an hour to get through.
You're given a complaint number and promised a reply within three days, but weeks later you are still waiting for an answer. So they use an email provided, diligently setting out the issue once more, and eventually get a reply saying the address is no longer monitored. A complaint system that tells you nobody is listening is not a complaint system. I will indeed.
You're given a complaint number and promised a reply within three days, but weeks later you are still waiting for an answer. So they use an email provided, diligently setting out the issue once more, and eventually get a reply saying the address is no longer monitored. A complaint system that tells you nobody is listening is not a complaint system. I will indeed.
14:37
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
I thank the honourable lady for giving way and for making such an excellent speech regarding the way that Royal Mail is dealing with the complaints by email, via the website, which you agree with me that we, members of this House of Commons seem to be doing a better job than them at highlighting the problems. And thanks to the excellent work of my brilliant team, we actually have a page on my website where people can plot in where they live and the type of problem they've been having, which strikes me as something that Royal Mail really ought to be doing themselves, and perhaps we should encourage them to do so.
14:37
14:37
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I think that's an excellent suggestion from the honourable member. And you're quite right. It should not be upon members of this House to conduct such an extensive and ongoing campaign in terms of feeding the complaints, almost as it were, and I thank him for his leadership on that. Speaking of leadership, I now want to turn to the Royal Mail leadership themselves, and I want to be fair to Royal Mail. They deserve a right of reply, but I can't tell you what their leadership thinks because they won't meet me.
I wonder why I will indeed.
I wonder why I will indeed.
14:38
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
I thank the way and following a meeting that I held with Labour MPs and the head of Ofcom this week and the CEO of Royal Mail, has invited a number of us to meet him off site at 9:30 on a random Wednesday in a couple of weeks time. Do you agree with me that actually it would be much better for him to recognise that MPs across the House, across every single type of constituency, have got major concerns here, and he needs to get himself into Parliament to listen to our questions directly, rather than trying to suggest that we traipse halfway across London into a room that he's in charge of and an agenda that's entirely his, and not the one that our constituents want to be.
14:38
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Stood here or here. I really thank the honourable member for that intervention. And actually, in all honesty, I was reluctant today to say that they had continued to not engage with me. I felt that it was gaslighting, and I was scared to to mention that because they did manage to meet at a local level with some of my colleagues in Northern Ireland, which I thought was generous. However, this is a reserved matter. It does sit within this House and I think honourable and right honourable members, and, you know, the frontbench as well have gone an awfully long way to accommodate Royal Mail when, as you say yourself, they should be making themselves presentable to this House, not the other way around.
I want to turn now to the post days and I have to declare an interest. My stepdad many, many years ago in Sheffield was a postman and he has permanent back problems as a result. And I think many people underestimate just how difficult a job that was at any time. But now I dread to think about the stress and pressure that those posts are under. I had the privilege, absolutely.
I want to turn now to the post days and I have to declare an interest. My stepdad many, many years ago in Sheffield was a postman and he has permanent back problems as a result. And I think many people underestimate just how difficult a job that was at any time. But now I dread to think about the stress and pressure that those posts are under. I had the privilege, absolutely.
14:39
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
I thank the member for giving way. Before joining Parliament in 2019, I had 22 years of service with Royal Mail as an engineer, and I can tell you that the working conditions were on a decline then, and now we're hearing over 400 postmen, postal workers are leaving the business every week, and that's due to workload and working conditions. A two tier workforce cannot work for any organisation, and the workforce needs to be rewarded accordingly. Do you agree with me.
14:40
14:40
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I absolutely agree with the the honourable member? And I do really feel that you've hit upon the crux of the matter here. And we're being told on one hand that there are issues that Royal Mail have identified, and they're now trying to rectify through some issues around recruitment, etc.. But if people already know that the workers that are holding up this once great British institution are being treated in the way that they are, that will not be an advertisement for anybody to work within that organization. And that troubles me. Our postal workers are not the problem.
Our post days are doing their absolute best to hold things together, but as just highlighted, they are leaving in their droves. I will indeed.
Our post days are doing their absolute best to hold things together, but as just highlighted, they are leaving in their droves. I will indeed.
14:41
14:41
14:41
Speaker 8
-
Speaker 8
In areas like mine, these people are a lifeline in the most rural areas of our country are often the only people that older people may meet in a day. I've had a postman in my constituency being taken to an employment tribunal because he helped to deliver a local parish magazine, just to be helpful in the middle of nowhere. These are the only people that my constituents sometimes meet. So as she campaigns on this issue, will she press for the social role that those women and men make throughout the country ? On behalf of many of our constituents?
14:42
14:42
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Absolutely, I thank the honourable member for his intervention. And my constituency is actually still classed as a rural constituency, and I think that's a point that's really, really well made in this day and age. We've already discussed the delays in terms of the actual letters arriving, but in this day and age, whenever so many people are isolated, almost sending an old fashioned letter as an act of rebellion in itself against such a non-personalized society. And indeed, sometimes people right across the UK in every constituency will have their postie as their only point of contact. And I think that's an absolute shame if we lose sight of that in all of this.
Postal workers are seriously worried . And tell me some of my own constituents who work for the Royal Mail tell me that management simply isn't listening. Experienced staff are gone and new workers are brought in on worse terms, as we've already heard. Workers have ideas to fix this, but they're being shut out and treated as if they are part of the problem. I will.
Postal workers are seriously worried . And tell me some of my own constituents who work for the Royal Mail tell me that management simply isn't listening. Experienced staff are gone and new workers are brought in on worse terms, as we've already heard. Workers have ideas to fix this, but they're being shut out and treated as if they are part of the problem. I will.
14:43
Speaker 9
-
Speaker 9
Thank the honourable lady for giving way. She's giving a typically powerful and empathetic speech amidst the deluge of letters that are not arriving in my constituency. One constituent waiting for an important letter, waited 12 days, went to the sorting office and was told that it hadn't been delivered along with another pile of mail because the person who was on leave, and this kind of management at the local level, never mind that the leadership of the organisation shows to me that there is an adequate support behind our postal workers. Does she agree with me that what we need is a reset in the culture, so that there isn't this division between the postal workers, many of whom have great ideas to improve the quality of service and management, who seem to be pressing down new reforms on them without a real understanding of the challenges of the role.
14:43
14:43
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Absolutely. I thank the honourable member for that intervention. And I think, again, you've got to the real nub of the issue here, where it does almost feel like it's handy and it's convenient for Royal Mail to pit worker against worker and person against person. And I think by doing so, they are seeking to evade their responsibility and role in all of this, and we must not lose sight of that. Royal mail is rolling out a new delivery model by Christmas. Apparently that the CW reports is causing huge problems in hundreds of offices right up and down the country.
Is it not better to fix what is broken before you make it bigger? And why rule it out right before the busiest time of the year? I will.
Is it not better to fix what is broken before you make it bigger? And why rule it out right before the busiest time of the year? I will.
14:44
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
In her excellent speech. I recently visited one of my delivery offices in Bradford that serves my constituents to understand how this new delivery model will work for. Management reassured me that this would solve many of the litany of complaints of late deliveries and infrequent deliveries that my constituents experience, along with many members here. Does she agree with me that if this new delivery model, as it rolls out, does not lead to more reliable postal services that we need to be looking at other options, including renationalisation of Royal Mail eastward.
14:45
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable lady for that intervention, and I absolutely agree, and I may be pre-empting the conclusion of my remarks here, but I think that's something that we all have to now consider, and I'm sort of slightly sidetracking myself now as a result of this, but I think it's a point worth making. The Royal Mail is simply more than a postal service. The red pillar box, the small way red van up and down, country lanes going down to, you know, our small family farm as well.
It is more than just a letter.
It is more than just a letter.
14:45
14:45
14:45
14:45
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Congratulate her . And bringing a really important debate which is clearly affecting all of us. And certainly Royal Mail are also badly failing. Constituents in Maidstone and Malling in Kent, where I am, and I feel. And the honourable lady touched on it talking about the red post boxes. ET cetera. ET cetera. The affection for our post is it should be a national treasure. Absolutely it should be, but it's not. And my concern is that it's getting worse, not better. There have been fined 37 million for poor performance in recent years. There's an Ofcom investigation and I think many of us feel that they are just not fit for purpose and there's no change happening.
So does the honourable lady agree with me that perhaps the government do need to do more in terms of action, enforcement action, and really put some more pressure on the leadership.
So does the honourable lady agree with me that perhaps the government do need to do more in terms of action, enforcement action, and really put some more pressure on the leadership.
14:46
14:46
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Absolutely. I thank the honourable lady for that intervention, and I wholeheartedly agree with that. Royal Mail's say quality is improving, believe it or not. To be fair, recent quarterly figures showed a slight pick up, but they have not met their annual delivery targets in six years. And my constituents don't read quarterly reports. They rely on social media to see if the post is coming. I completely unacceptable situation. And we also hear that stamp prices keep going up. Citizens advice suggested capping stamp prices if delivery targets are not met. It's a simple rule if you don't deliver the service, you can't raise your prices.
Will the government back that plan? So who is supposed to fix this? Ofcom, as we've heard, has fined Royal Mail over £37 million in three years. If fines changed behaviour, this would be fixed by now. Even Ofcom says persistent failure may raise fundamental questions about the long term provision of the universal service. I agree we are at that point, as the best chair puts it. The current position leaves unanswered. Who will take responsibility for identifying and closing the gaps in postal regulation. Ofcom points to the government. The government points at Ofcom and the post sits in the delivery office.
The best committee gave Royal Mail and Ofcom until the 22nd of November to show real improvement. If they don't, the Secretary of State should consult on changing Ofcom's powers and I would be. Yes.
Will the government back that plan? So who is supposed to fix this? Ofcom, as we've heard, has fined Royal Mail over £37 million in three years. If fines changed behaviour, this would be fixed by now. Even Ofcom says persistent failure may raise fundamental questions about the long term provision of the universal service. I agree we are at that point, as the best chair puts it. The current position leaves unanswered. Who will take responsibility for identifying and closing the gaps in postal regulation. Ofcom points to the government. The government points at Ofcom and the post sits in the delivery office.
The best committee gave Royal Mail and Ofcom until the 22nd of November to show real improvement. If they don't, the Secretary of State should consult on changing Ofcom's powers and I would be. Yes.
14:48
14:48
14:48
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I thank the honourable member for that intervention, and I do think that is a real challenge and a real question that we must seriously investigate. I do note that there are many other remits for Ofcom, which I'm sure other members and right honourable members throughout this House would also attest to wanting further robust mechanisms for Ofcom to indeed challenge successfully. But I do wonder if we will hear today if the Minister will commit to consulting on changing Ofcom's powers. Finally, Madam Chair, the bigger picture, as we've heard from Honourable and Right Honourable members today, this is about much more than just simply Royal Mail and letters.
For the first time in its 500 year history, Royal Mail is owned by an overseas company, the highly profitable AP Group. The government did indeed approve the takeover, but serious questions remain about our sovereignty. This is a British institution. It delivers to every address in the UK for the same price, whether that's a farm in Northern Ireland, a flat in Cardiff or a cottage in Scotland. It is critical, essential infrastructure as much as any road or cable. When it was privatised in 2013, we were promised better service and investment. Instead, we have six years of missed targets.
A company unanswerable to its owners will always be tempted to favour its most profitable work. And the universal service obligation is meant to guard against that. Fines have not been enough. Other countries subsidise their postal providers or bring them into public ownership, as Ofcom itself notes. I go further here than the committee has, but I believe it is time to review Royal Mail's ownership and governance so that the universal service obligation is protected in the public interest. So I ask the House today, who do we want to be as a society, a country that can no longer promise a card, will reach a grieving daughter, or a hospital letter will reach a patient, or one that treats the post as what it has always been, a promise to every address to protect it.
As I said earlier, this is about more than just letters. What are we as a country if we can no longer rely upon a service that's nearly as old as time itself? I also feel that it would be remiss if I did not put on the record at this time, given the instability of the geopolitical situation within which we are operating. I have serious and grave concerns about critical national infrastructure being overseas rather than in our own country. Final requests. I am asking the government for four things today, Madam Chair. Number one, if service has not improved by the committee's deadline of the 22nd of November, will the government consult on changing Ofcom's part number two?
Will the government consider linking stamp prices to delivery performance as Citizens Advice has proposed? Number three, what guarantees do we have for Christmas deliveries this year? And finally, number four, will the government review Royal Mail's ownership model to protect the universal service for the long term, the public holds up their end of the bargain. They buy the stamps, post letters on time, and wait. The system is letting them down. My constituents want to trust the post again. The government, Ofcom and Royal Mail all have the power to put this right and this Christmas is the time to show it.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
For the first time in its 500 year history, Royal Mail is owned by an overseas company, the highly profitable AP Group. The government did indeed approve the takeover, but serious questions remain about our sovereignty. This is a British institution. It delivers to every address in the UK for the same price, whether that's a farm in Northern Ireland, a flat in Cardiff or a cottage in Scotland. It is critical, essential infrastructure as much as any road or cable. When it was privatised in 2013, we were promised better service and investment. Instead, we have six years of missed targets.
A company unanswerable to its owners will always be tempted to favour its most profitable work. And the universal service obligation is meant to guard against that. Fines have not been enough. Other countries subsidise their postal providers or bring them into public ownership, as Ofcom itself notes. I go further here than the committee has, but I believe it is time to review Royal Mail's ownership and governance so that the universal service obligation is protected in the public interest. So I ask the House today, who do we want to be as a society, a country that can no longer promise a card, will reach a grieving daughter, or a hospital letter will reach a patient, or one that treats the post as what it has always been, a promise to every address to protect it.
As I said earlier, this is about more than just letters. What are we as a country if we can no longer rely upon a service that's nearly as old as time itself? I also feel that it would be remiss if I did not put on the record at this time, given the instability of the geopolitical situation within which we are operating. I have serious and grave concerns about critical national infrastructure being overseas rather than in our own country. Final requests. I am asking the government for four things today, Madam Chair. Number one, if service has not improved by the committee's deadline of the 22nd of November, will the government consult on changing Ofcom's part number two?
Will the government consider linking stamp prices to delivery performance as Citizens Advice has proposed? Number three, what guarantees do we have for Christmas deliveries this year? And finally, number four, will the government review Royal Mail's ownership model to protect the universal service for the long term, the public holds up their end of the bargain. They buy the stamps, post letters on time, and wait. The system is letting them down. My constituents want to trust the post again. The government, Ofcom and Royal Mail all have the power to put this right and this Christmas is the time to show it.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
14:52
14:52
14:52
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Miss Lou. And it's a real pleasure to be speaking in this debate and very grateful above all to the honourable member for Lagan Valley for bringing this debate. And, of course, this is not the first debate that we have had even in this chamber on this subject. Some of us have spoken on this matter many times, and in fact, it feels very sadly like some of the rest of the country is now catching up with some of the issues that we've had in Oxford East over many years, and indeed which have been shown by the Select Committee, as was mentioned by the member for Lagan Valley, and indeed, as indicated by the meeting, that a number of us had recently with Ofcom and the CW, organised by the by my friend from Litchfield, Brentwood and the villages.
Certainly in my area. The root of the challenge relates to recruitment and retention, and I very much agree with comments that have been made. I have to say, in the case of my area, there has been actually, over time, increased transparency after a certain amount of denial that there was a problem, there is now better communication, I would say at least with my regional Royal Mail and indeed sometimes with National Royal Mail as well. But there is a huge, huge challenge. I am concerned to hear that the model that was developed in Oxford around privatisation of NHS mail does not seem to be operating everywhere.
Perhaps the Minister can look into that. That was devised by Oxford Post to pull out that NHS mail and the. Again, the approaches to prioritisation of mail and mail rotation that is being used at Oxford that needs to be used because of the amount of absence, sadly, that we have in. And failures in recruitment and retention that that again does not seem to be being used everywhere. But I think yes, happy to.
Certainly in my area. The root of the challenge relates to recruitment and retention, and I very much agree with comments that have been made. I have to say, in the case of my area, there has been actually, over time, increased transparency after a certain amount of denial that there was a problem, there is now better communication, I would say at least with my regional Royal Mail and indeed sometimes with National Royal Mail as well. But there is a huge, huge challenge. I am concerned to hear that the model that was developed in Oxford around privatisation of NHS mail does not seem to be operating everywhere.
Perhaps the Minister can look into that. That was devised by Oxford Post to pull out that NHS mail and the. Again, the approaches to prioritisation of mail and mail rotation that is being used at Oxford that needs to be used because of the amount of absence, sadly, that we have in. And failures in recruitment and retention that that again does not seem to be being used everywhere. But I think yes, happy to.
14:54
14:54
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
For giving way. And she's making a really important point. Royal mail recently wrote to me when I complained about the lack of service in a coastal area, Selsey, where there seems to be absolutely no mail being delivered, and they said we prioritise medical letters and we have this rotation system. And yet that's not evidenced on the ground where people in Selsey are being asked to go to the sorting office to collect their own mail, and then it's only open for two hours a day. Does she agree with me that Royal Mail need to turn their words with their communication with MPs into actual action, so our residents can see the changes that we're asking for?
14:54
14:54
Speaker 5
-
Speaker 5
Yes, I certainly agree with that. And I think many of us have been very frustrated that we're getting stock letters back often about the problems that are being experienced, indeed, that our constituents are having to go to sorting offices, and they were not seeing the change that we urgently need to see. I've been trying to promote vacancies, actually myself as a local MP, given the challenges around recruitment and retention, but I think there are three things that we really need to see happening related to those that have already been mentioned. First of all, we need the national management to listen to the local posties to listen to the CW, because they do have ideas about how to deal with this.
Secondly, we need to get a grip on the unlevel playing field that exists, especially when it comes to parcels. I think we all know that the volume of letters is going down. It's not just happening in the UK, it's happening right across Europe and across other industrialized countries. That means the parcel trade is really important, and we have a farcical situation where 98% of all male employees are employees. They are workers who are employed on permanent contracts, and yet they're doing effectively exactly the same job as people who are not employed, people who are on terrible terms and conditions, people who are treated as if they're self-employed.
Well, we all know that's bogus and it needs to be dealt with because it's leading to an unlevel playing field. So I want to ask the minister, with her great experience of working rights legislation, will she ensure that bogus employment consultation that is going on at the moment is going to lead to change on this? That is so needed. And finally, can I urge her and the government to really focus on the potential for Royal Mail? Of course, we're talking about the challenges right now. We're representing our constituents concerns on those, but we have an amazing network in the UK from the most northerly points, the most southerly point, they proved their worth during the Covid period.
We should be doing everything we can to recognise that, to build on that potential. Please listen to the proposals on that in particular. Thank you.
Secondly, we need to get a grip on the unlevel playing field that exists, especially when it comes to parcels. I think we all know that the volume of letters is going down. It's not just happening in the UK, it's happening right across Europe and across other industrialized countries. That means the parcel trade is really important, and we have a farcical situation where 98% of all male employees are employees. They are workers who are employed on permanent contracts, and yet they're doing effectively exactly the same job as people who are not employed, people who are on terrible terms and conditions, people who are treated as if they're self-employed.
Well, we all know that's bogus and it needs to be dealt with because it's leading to an unlevel playing field. So I want to ask the minister, with her great experience of working rights legislation, will she ensure that bogus employment consultation that is going on at the moment is going to lead to change on this? That is so needed. And finally, can I urge her and the government to really focus on the potential for Royal Mail? Of course, we're talking about the challenges right now. We're representing our constituents concerns on those, but we have an amazing network in the UK from the most northerly points, the most southerly point, they proved their worth during the Covid period.
We should be doing everything we can to recognise that, to build on that potential. Please listen to the proposals on that in particular. Thank you.
14:56
14:56
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you. Mr.. Well, it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I thank the honourable member for Lagan Valley for bringing this fantastic debate. It's so important and also speaking so well on it. So thank you very much. And also for, for for calling out the business, innovation, Science and Trade Committee, select committee, of which I remember and our chair and the work we've been doing on it. And let's see what November brings on that. So thank you. The turnover rate of new Royal Mail employees is extremely high, and the work practices are incredibly harsh and they're getting harsher.
And yet we rely on our local posties to, to, to serve us and help us. And we rely on them so much. And it is really depressing to see how they are treated. So my local postie, Tony, after years and years of work, has just taken redundancy and it's hard not to feel that he was pushed out by by giving , given a new round and which eminently didn't suit. And they knew that. And this is something that's happening in Witney and in other areas up and down the country, and it's really harsh and cruel. And those numbers of how many people are losing their jobs every week, it's not by accident, it's by design.
I in in our select committee's investigation into Royal Mail's letter delivery service noted, we noted that only 74.9% of first class mail was delivered on time so far this year, against a target of 93%. That translates into approximately 126,000,001st class letters arriving late over the year. At present, missing targets is cheaper than meeting them. Fines totaled about £37 million over the last three years, while first class reached only 75.7% next day delivery against a 93% target. And that's a real problem in terms of if you just take the fines, that is not helping anybody here.
And the path to fixing this is by focusing on two things that the owner values most price rises, i.e. stamp price rises and taking cash out of the Royal Mail business itself. And here are some ideas on how we could achieve that. There should be, as others have mentioned already, there should be no stamp price rises until targets are met. We have to get that link. Absolutely firm. That hits revenue directly. That will make them pay attention. Second, Royal Mail's cash should be ring fenced. No dividends, intergroup loans or management fees to the parent company.
While targets are missed, as oft can do with water companies, this stops letters subsidising parcels. Third, fines should be escalated and linked to turnover and paid into service improvement when we receive them. Fourth, automatic compensation for customers when mail is late like delay and repay. Fifth, no executive bonuses no executive bonuses while targets are missed. Sixth transparency performance by postcode, area letters and parcels shown separately staffing levels published that is absolutely critical. They hide behind a fug of of lack of data. We need it at a granular level so we can see what is going on where.
And finally there should there should be.
And yet we rely on our local posties to, to, to serve us and help us. And we rely on them so much. And it is really depressing to see how they are treated. So my local postie, Tony, after years and years of work, has just taken redundancy and it's hard not to feel that he was pushed out by by giving , given a new round and which eminently didn't suit. And they knew that. And this is something that's happening in Witney and in other areas up and down the country, and it's really harsh and cruel. And those numbers of how many people are losing their jobs every week, it's not by accident, it's by design.
I in in our select committee's investigation into Royal Mail's letter delivery service noted, we noted that only 74.9% of first class mail was delivered on time so far this year, against a target of 93%. That translates into approximately 126,000,001st class letters arriving late over the year. At present, missing targets is cheaper than meeting them. Fines totaled about £37 million over the last three years, while first class reached only 75.7% next day delivery against a 93% target. And that's a real problem in terms of if you just take the fines, that is not helping anybody here.
And the path to fixing this is by focusing on two things that the owner values most price rises, i.e. stamp price rises and taking cash out of the Royal Mail business itself. And here are some ideas on how we could achieve that. There should be, as others have mentioned already, there should be no stamp price rises until targets are met. We have to get that link. Absolutely firm. That hits revenue directly. That will make them pay attention. Second, Royal Mail's cash should be ring fenced. No dividends, intergroup loans or management fees to the parent company.
While targets are missed, as oft can do with water companies, this stops letters subsidising parcels. Third, fines should be escalated and linked to turnover and paid into service improvement when we receive them. Fourth, automatic compensation for customers when mail is late like delay and repay. Fifth, no executive bonuses no executive bonuses while targets are missed. Sixth transparency performance by postcode, area letters and parcels shown separately staffing levels published that is absolutely critical. They hide behind a fug of of lack of data. We need it at a granular level so we can see what is going on where.
And finally there should there should be.
15:00
15:00
15:00
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Thank the member for Lagan Valley for this debate, and I want to put on record my appreciation. First off, to Royal Mail staff, particularly those I met on Monday in Rottingdean, in my constituency at the delivery office, where I saw how hard they're working to improve the local service. And of course, Madam Chair, we all want Royal Mail to succeed because it's a universal postal service is something we all rely on. It is a truly national service and it is a source of good unionised jobs. We should celebrate that more, and frankly, we should be doing more to encourage other providers in the sector to match those employment standards and expectations.
But we've also got to ask how we can better support Royal Mail staff to do the job we all need them to, and how our constituents can be sure they will receive reserve, sorry, receive the service they rely on , because right now this is the single issue I get the most. I was going to say letters, but actually emails about it's about problems with Royal Mail. I'll just give two very quick examples. One constituent from Woodingdean in my constituency told me the following from the 1st of August, the 16th of August this year, no deliveries.
17th of August, 29 pieces of mail delivered. 18th of August to 28th of August. No deliveries. 29th of August. 13 items of mail delivered. When I raised this directly with my local Royal Mail, they told me the following quote. There are no current issues with the delivery of mail to your constituents. Address deliveries take place six days a week regularly. Frankly, it is hard to know how to relay that to constituents.
But we've also got to ask how we can better support Royal Mail staff to do the job we all need them to, and how our constituents can be sure they will receive reserve, sorry, receive the service they rely on , because right now this is the single issue I get the most. I was going to say letters, but actually emails about it's about problems with Royal Mail. I'll just give two very quick examples. One constituent from Woodingdean in my constituency told me the following from the 1st of August, the 16th of August this year, no deliveries.
17th of August, 29 pieces of mail delivered. 18th of August to 28th of August. No deliveries. 29th of August. 13 items of mail delivered. When I raised this directly with my local Royal Mail, they told me the following quote. There are no current issues with the delivery of mail to your constituents. Address deliveries take place six days a week regularly. Frankly, it is hard to know how to relay that to constituents.
15:02
15:02
15:02
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
I just wanted to share that in my constituency of Rushcliffe in West Bridgford, I was given a piece of paper from a constituent who had received a letter from the TV times telling them that because the Royal Mail had become so unreliable, they were going to use a second party, a third party, I should say, who was going to be delivering the the TV times separately from the Royal Mail to make sure that they got it on time. Doesn't that just say everything about the reliability of the Royal Mail?
15:02
15:02
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
I'm afraid it does. And some constituents, as that point shows, are now routinely missing letters informing them of NHS appointments, legal affairs, fines. One even contacted me on Saturday to say that he'd only just received his Labour Party conference pass, so I'm four weeks late now. Members might think that's a blessing in disguise and that we should be praising Royal Mail. But he wasn't too pleased. And look, the truth is, Madam Chair, we're now in a cycle of despair with Royal Mail, where constituents report unacceptable delays all the time, MPs across the House coming here, or to raise it, successive governments will say how terrible it all is.
They'll demand Ofcom act. Royal Mail improves, but Ofcom doesn't have the powers it needs and it keeps finding Royal Mail for failure, despite the fact that Royal Mail can't make a profit anyway, Royal Mail has no chance of hitting its legally mandated targets, and it has no hope of competing on a level playing field because operators in the same sector simply don't have the same regulatory or employment standards that we ask of them, and the result is rising anger on all sides, a loss of faith in our national delivery service, and frankly, a belief that in this country we can't even get the post to run on time.
So what I'd urge the minister, who I know cares very deeply about this and is working very hard on it, is to break that cycle. Look at what more we can do in Parliament to level the playing field for Royal Mail, empower the regulator more, and give Royal Mail staff the power they need, the opportunity they need to improve and modernise the service. Because if we do that in this Parliament, there is a majority for it. There's cross-party support and we can finally get our National Postal Service back on track and serving the constituents as they should.
They'll demand Ofcom act. Royal Mail improves, but Ofcom doesn't have the powers it needs and it keeps finding Royal Mail for failure, despite the fact that Royal Mail can't make a profit anyway, Royal Mail has no chance of hitting its legally mandated targets, and it has no hope of competing on a level playing field because operators in the same sector simply don't have the same regulatory or employment standards that we ask of them, and the result is rising anger on all sides, a loss of faith in our national delivery service, and frankly, a belief that in this country we can't even get the post to run on time.
So what I'd urge the minister, who I know cares very deeply about this and is working very hard on it, is to break that cycle. Look at what more we can do in Parliament to level the playing field for Royal Mail, empower the regulator more, and give Royal Mail staff the power they need, the opportunity they need to improve and modernise the service. Because if we do that in this Parliament, there is a majority for it. There's cross-party support and we can finally get our National Postal Service back on track and serving the constituents as they should.
15:04
15:04
Speaker 15
-
Speaker 15
A special thank you to the Honourable Lady for Lagan Valley for setting the scene incredibly on a subject matter, which is incredibly important to us all. The Honourable Lady and I will share. We we share being an MP in northern. But we also share the frustration in relation to Royal Mail. I'm a letter writer. I can't do technology. That's just a fact of life. I'm a very, very old school, but I write regularly and nothing impresses or helps a person or encourages a constituent as much as a handwritten letter, perhaps in the yellow envelope from the House of Commons go to their house.
They appreciate that. And that's the reason why I do it now, obviously, in business and the rest of the office, that's all done by email. But day after day, my office is dealing with phone calls, emails from people who are going weeks without seeing a postal delivery worker. Letters are piling up and sorting depots, vital documents are vanishing into a black hole, and the public has completely lost faith in the service they have relied upon for generations. So I want to be entirely clear about where the blame lies. Blame does not lie with the hard working, dedicated local postmen and postwoman.
They're working themselves to the absolute bone. They're doing long hours, working under immense pressure, facing the brunt of public anger on the doorsteps. Through no fault of their own, they're being completely let down by senior management, by a failed operational model, and by a chronic lack of investment. A couple of things that I have noticed, and I mean, I've always when I became a member of the Legislative Assembly, always a visit to the Royal Mail Depot, Newtownards at Christmas time, since I've been the MP, it's been a regular visit before. Every Christmas when we go down , the retaining staff is incredibly important.
I met a guy just before Christmas. He worked for the Royal Mail for 20 years and it was awesome how he was getting on. He says, Jim, I'm leaving next week. I said, well, where are you going? He's going up the road to Tonga, to Lakeview or Lakeland Dairies because the wages were better. So I think what what Royal Mail have got to do is address the issue of retention of staff and to ensure that the right payment is given to them. When I spoke to local staff on the ground in Strangford, they told me a very consistent and proceeding story.
They believe partially in their public duty, they're being asked to fight a losing battle with one hand tied behind their back without targeting funding to build or upgrade a dedicated sorting office in our area, our local policies will continue to drown under the backlog. So, Minister, what discussions have taken place with the owners of Royal Mail in relation to antiquated sorting centres, modern technology as well, and what can be done to ensure that the the guys who work in those places are able to do so in something modern and suitable. It's not just about missing birthday cards or delayed bank statements, it's much more direct.
It's about not getting your your, your appointment for your for your hospital and my constituents missing long awaited cancer screenings, urgent surgical consultation, vital diagnostic scans, all these things happen. And it means that a person who's on the waiting list for for six months could be waiting for two years. It just doesn't work. So I think this debate today comes at a timely point when we can discuss what's absolutely important having kids with a former health minister and to ensure that the priority envelope system for urgent medical mail was done, not to help for us in Northern Ireland, but it doesn't go the whole way we need.
Royal mail cannot keep cutting corners, they can't keep on reducing delivery days and the banning is universal obligation while senior executives line their pockets. We need accountability for service that is currently feeling the sick, the vulnerable and the elderly. Thank you.
They appreciate that. And that's the reason why I do it now, obviously, in business and the rest of the office, that's all done by email. But day after day, my office is dealing with phone calls, emails from people who are going weeks without seeing a postal delivery worker. Letters are piling up and sorting depots, vital documents are vanishing into a black hole, and the public has completely lost faith in the service they have relied upon for generations. So I want to be entirely clear about where the blame lies. Blame does not lie with the hard working, dedicated local postmen and postwoman.
They're working themselves to the absolute bone. They're doing long hours, working under immense pressure, facing the brunt of public anger on the doorsteps. Through no fault of their own, they're being completely let down by senior management, by a failed operational model, and by a chronic lack of investment. A couple of things that I have noticed, and I mean, I've always when I became a member of the Legislative Assembly, always a visit to the Royal Mail Depot, Newtownards at Christmas time, since I've been the MP, it's been a regular visit before. Every Christmas when we go down , the retaining staff is incredibly important.
I met a guy just before Christmas. He worked for the Royal Mail for 20 years and it was awesome how he was getting on. He says, Jim, I'm leaving next week. I said, well, where are you going? He's going up the road to Tonga, to Lakeview or Lakeland Dairies because the wages were better. So I think what what Royal Mail have got to do is address the issue of retention of staff and to ensure that the right payment is given to them. When I spoke to local staff on the ground in Strangford, they told me a very consistent and proceeding story.
They believe partially in their public duty, they're being asked to fight a losing battle with one hand tied behind their back without targeting funding to build or upgrade a dedicated sorting office in our area, our local policies will continue to drown under the backlog. So, Minister, what discussions have taken place with the owners of Royal Mail in relation to antiquated sorting centres, modern technology as well, and what can be done to ensure that the the guys who work in those places are able to do so in something modern and suitable. It's not just about missing birthday cards or delayed bank statements, it's much more direct.
It's about not getting your your, your appointment for your for your hospital and my constituents missing long awaited cancer screenings, urgent surgical consultation, vital diagnostic scans, all these things happen. And it means that a person who's on the waiting list for for six months could be waiting for two years. It just doesn't work. So I think this debate today comes at a timely point when we can discuss what's absolutely important having kids with a former health minister and to ensure that the priority envelope system for urgent medical mail was done, not to help for us in Northern Ireland, but it doesn't go the whole way we need.
Royal mail cannot keep cutting corners, they can't keep on reducing delivery days and the banning is universal obligation while senior executives line their pockets. We need accountability for service that is currently feeling the sick, the vulnerable and the elderly. Thank you.
15:07
15:07
15:08
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
To you. As chair, can I also congratulate the member for Lagan Valley on securing this vital debate and on her excellent speech to open these proceedings. My office has been inundated with complaints from residents, particularly in Glenrothes, dealing with unacceptable delays to Royal Mail deliveries. So I put out an appeal for information on social media. We had around 400 people come back to that one post with their experiences in just a few days, and what's been made clear is that even after the revisions to the universal service obligation to reduce the frequency of second class deliveries, we found 7 in 10 of those people who contacted us said they were waiting a fortnight or more for their mail deliveries, and residents also reported post being delivered in bundles dating back weeks.
As the member for Lagan Valley said, and this is simply not acceptable, I will give very briefly.
As the member for Lagan Valley said, and this is simply not acceptable, I will give very briefly.
15:09
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
You for giving way on that point. I too have been running a local survey on this issue, and up to 80% of respondents have reported delays in south east Cornwall as a rural and coastal area with a large amount of elderly relatives, this is a huge cause for concern. And as the daughter of a postie, I know firsthand just how hard our frontline workers are working to make sure that those elderly residents get what they deserve in a timely manner, but what more can we do to make sure that this problem is addressed?
15:09
Speaker 16
-
Speaker 16
I couldn't agree more with those important points. It shows that from Cornwall right up to Scotland, the problems are the same and they need to be addressed by the Royal Mail. And I'll come on to some of the proposals that I have in my in my speech. But we heard from people whose credit had been affected by this bill, people who missed jury citations, people who penalised after car tax reminders never arrived. But a number of members have also mentioned already the issues around health service appointments. Most worryingly for me, 100 constituents received late NHS letters.
Unacceptably, 45 constituents miss an appointment or received a letter after the date. A constituent waited three years to get on a consultant's priority list, never received the letter and subsequently lost her place on the list. A primary school aged child missed a vital appointment at Edinburgh Sick Kids Hospital. A teenager was struck off from the Victoria Hospital's dermatology department for not turning up entirely outwith their control, and 17 people only managed to attend an appointment because of a reminder of a text or call. The letter had not received been received in time. And Royal Mail have said to us that there have this priority barcode for NHS letters.
I have checked with NHS Fife, they are using that code. These letters are still not arriving on time, so it is a situation that Royal Mail must address urgently and it's become obvious to all those who are aware of this situation that the new delivery system, which management said was going to make a big difference, is in fact failing, particularly for second class mail. My constituents have been told that the counter that parcels, which are more lucrative, simply are being prioritised over letters. But it is striking that not a single constituent who has complained got in contact with us has put any blame on our overworked local posties.
As many members have said, our postal office staff are being put under unacceptable pressure at work because of this situation. Understaffing and longer routes means they are being asked to do the impossible, driving up absence rates and it only makes the situation worse. According to the CW, who have done so much work to campaign on this issue, Royal Mail is losing around 400 postal staff a week, so I again take this opportunity to urge management to get round the table with the union and end this recruitment and retention crisis. I think so many of the problems we faced in the in the service today are because of those issues around recruitment, around retention, and supporting our hardworking postal staff.
To conclude, Miss Lu, the situation in Glenrothes has improved marginally of late, but only in the short term basis because workers were brought in temporarily from Dundee. That is clearly not a sustainable solution. A root and branch change is required, not quick fixes, not plastering over the cracks. I would urge Royal Mail to listen to contributions from across the chamber today, and to the thousands of people across Glenrothes and midwife who need this lifeline service. It's a lifeline service and they need to know it's a service which they can rely on.
Unacceptably, 45 constituents miss an appointment or received a letter after the date. A constituent waited three years to get on a consultant's priority list, never received the letter and subsequently lost her place on the list. A primary school aged child missed a vital appointment at Edinburgh Sick Kids Hospital. A teenager was struck off from the Victoria Hospital's dermatology department for not turning up entirely outwith their control, and 17 people only managed to attend an appointment because of a reminder of a text or call. The letter had not received been received in time. And Royal Mail have said to us that there have this priority barcode for NHS letters.
I have checked with NHS Fife, they are using that code. These letters are still not arriving on time, so it is a situation that Royal Mail must address urgently and it's become obvious to all those who are aware of this situation that the new delivery system, which management said was going to make a big difference, is in fact failing, particularly for second class mail. My constituents have been told that the counter that parcels, which are more lucrative, simply are being prioritised over letters. But it is striking that not a single constituent who has complained got in contact with us has put any blame on our overworked local posties.
As many members have said, our postal office staff are being put under unacceptable pressure at work because of this situation. Understaffing and longer routes means they are being asked to do the impossible, driving up absence rates and it only makes the situation worse. According to the CW, who have done so much work to campaign on this issue, Royal Mail is losing around 400 postal staff a week, so I again take this opportunity to urge management to get round the table with the union and end this recruitment and retention crisis. I think so many of the problems we faced in the in the service today are because of those issues around recruitment, around retention, and supporting our hardworking postal staff.
To conclude, Miss Lu, the situation in Glenrothes has improved marginally of late, but only in the short term basis because workers were brought in temporarily from Dundee. That is clearly not a sustainable solution. A root and branch change is required, not quick fixes, not plastering over the cracks. I would urge Royal Mail to listen to contributions from across the chamber today, and to the thousands of people across Glenrothes and midwife who need this lifeline service. It's a lifeline service and they need to know it's a service which they can rely on.
15:12
15:12
Speaker 6
-
Speaker 6
Miss Loyal and it's an honour to serve under your chairmanship. And may I also thank the member for Lagan Valley for securing this debate and for her excellent speech in opening it, the performance of Royal Mail in Camborne and Redruth and Hayle in the southwest of Cornwall has been simply woeful. Constituents regularly tell me they've gone weeks without post, just as we've heard several times to receive a large backlog all at once. One constituent, Sharon from Hayle, was waiting a year for an operation when she received a call from the hospital, asking whether she intended to attend the appointment letter.
Together with the swabs required. Pre-surgery had never arrived. Thankfully, the arrangements were later confirmed by phone and email, but the letter itself was delivered three days after the operation had taken place. On another occasion, a constituent was sent a letter for a hospital appointment. 19 days after the appointment was scheduled. Delays like this risk vulnerable people missing essential treatment and in doing so, additionally place a burden on our overstretched NHS in Cornwall, our remote coastal geography and patchy digital connectivity, to say the least, mean many of us still rely heavily on the Universal Postal Service, but I worry this situation will only get worse.
In recent weeks, I have had several Royal Mail workers contact me with concerns about the new M26 delivery model. They report unmanageable workloads, experienced workers leaving morale at rock bottom and substantial volumes of mail sitting undelivered. Three workers completing four rounds does not sound like a credible way of improving reliability and restoring the public's trust in Royal Mail. I echo the points that have just been made. The issue here is not one of posties, it is one of management. Nor should Royal Mail continue to respond, if at all, to our constituents with the template responses or hide behind impossible to navigate AI chat bots whilst the reality on the ground slips further behind.
I would therefore ask the Minister what discussions the government have had with Royal Mail about the M26 and what action will be taken to ensure my constituents receive a postal service worthy of the word royal? Because if Royal Mail are going to treat this House and elected members with such arrogance, the government must take direct, firm and urgent action.
Together with the swabs required. Pre-surgery had never arrived. Thankfully, the arrangements were later confirmed by phone and email, but the letter itself was delivered three days after the operation had taken place. On another occasion, a constituent was sent a letter for a hospital appointment. 19 days after the appointment was scheduled. Delays like this risk vulnerable people missing essential treatment and in doing so, additionally place a burden on our overstretched NHS in Cornwall, our remote coastal geography and patchy digital connectivity, to say the least, mean many of us still rely heavily on the Universal Postal Service, but I worry this situation will only get worse.
In recent weeks, I have had several Royal Mail workers contact me with concerns about the new M26 delivery model. They report unmanageable workloads, experienced workers leaving morale at rock bottom and substantial volumes of mail sitting undelivered. Three workers completing four rounds does not sound like a credible way of improving reliability and restoring the public's trust in Royal Mail. I echo the points that have just been made. The issue here is not one of posties, it is one of management. Nor should Royal Mail continue to respond, if at all, to our constituents with the template responses or hide behind impossible to navigate AI chat bots whilst the reality on the ground slips further behind.
I would therefore ask the Minister what discussions the government have had with Royal Mail about the M26 and what action will be taken to ensure my constituents receive a postal service worthy of the word royal? Because if Royal Mail are going to treat this House and elected members with such arrogance, the government must take direct, firm and urgent action.
15:15
15:16
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
Thank you, Miss Lewis. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And can I congratulate the member for Lagan Valley for securing this debate and for making such an excellent speech. My constituents in Dartford welcome today's debate. The performance of Royal Mail has been a running sore for many residents in Dartford and the surrounding towns and villages, and the growing delays are having a real world impact on their lives. This isn't about the hard work of staff working at the Dartford delivery office, but as we all know, Royal Mail has a target for local performance of, in our case, 87% of first class mail to be delivered the next working day, and these are palpably not being met for the Da postcode, which covers Dartford for the last year 2526, the figure was well below that at 74.6%, nine by no means the worst in the country, but still a very long way off hitting the target.
Given what we know that the performance of Royal Mail in Dartford, like so much of the country, is well below what you'd expect. I want to share one very notable example of the impact this is having. I recently received an email from the manager of the North Kent Diagnostic Centre on East Hill, who has been seeing a very significant increase in the number of patients not attending their appointments, with many patients telling them they aren't receiving their appointment letters. Notwithstanding the priority that is supposed to be given to NHS correspondence one weekend earlier this month, out of 90 patients booked in for appointments, with letters sent three weeks in advance, almost half did not arrive for their appointments.
This is people missing scans and critical tests, which are vital for their journey to treatment and their pathway to better health, and these are having a real world impact on these people who are unable to receive the treatment they need, often urgent treatment. So what is the problem? Clearly, there is a problem with the changing structure of the postal and parcel market, which is causing problems for Royal Mail. Some of the problem is clearly about the lack of powers for Ofgem. Sorry for Ofcom or their lack of ability to use those powers. Much of it is clearly about the culture and the management of Royal Mail.
Whichever combination of those issues it is, we really need the government to start to address this problem and sort the matter out on behalf of my constituents in Dartford.
Given what we know that the performance of Royal Mail in Dartford, like so much of the country, is well below what you'd expect. I want to share one very notable example of the impact this is having. I recently received an email from the manager of the North Kent Diagnostic Centre on East Hill, who has been seeing a very significant increase in the number of patients not attending their appointments, with many patients telling them they aren't receiving their appointment letters. Notwithstanding the priority that is supposed to be given to NHS correspondence one weekend earlier this month, out of 90 patients booked in for appointments, with letters sent three weeks in advance, almost half did not arrive for their appointments.
This is people missing scans and critical tests, which are vital for their journey to treatment and their pathway to better health, and these are having a real world impact on these people who are unable to receive the treatment they need, often urgent treatment. So what is the problem? Clearly, there is a problem with the changing structure of the postal and parcel market, which is causing problems for Royal Mail. Some of the problem is clearly about the lack of powers for Ofgem. Sorry for Ofcom or their lack of ability to use those powers. Much of it is clearly about the culture and the management of Royal Mail.
Whichever combination of those issues it is, we really need the government to start to address this problem and sort the matter out on behalf of my constituents in Dartford.
15:18
15:18
15:18
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I thank the honourable member for Lagan Valley for securing this debate on Royal Mail performance. Royal Mail's reliability has become a big problem nationally, as we can all see and alongside many parliamentary colleagues, I wrote to the minister to raise serious concerns regarding delivery. It simply hasn't been good enough. I noticed it myself when I tried to invite my constituents to a local tea with your MP event, and half of them failed to arrive before the actual event, which caused much consternation. So I can completely understand why people are getting deeply worried about missing critical, time sensitive mail.
And my casework shows this one constituent, as others received a letter from the hospital caused after a vital medical appointment. So she missed it. An elderly resident had her phone cut off by BT because Royal Mail failed to deliver her paper bills. She doesn't have internet, and so she's now relying entirely on the post to stay connected. Others have resorted to getting their own mail from sorting offices. But in Cornwall, where there are, where it's very hard to get around by public transport, particularly to sorting offices and limited opening hours, that's caused a real issue .
Nationally. The picture is just as concerning Citizens Advice reported over Christmas. 2516 million people experience letter delays, a 50% jump on the previous year and 5.7 million adults missed vital letters about health appointments, benefit decisions and legal notices. I. I will give way.
And my casework shows this one constituent, as others received a letter from the hospital caused after a vital medical appointment. So she missed it. An elderly resident had her phone cut off by BT because Royal Mail failed to deliver her paper bills. She doesn't have internet, and so she's now relying entirely on the post to stay connected. Others have resorted to getting their own mail from sorting offices. But in Cornwall, where there are, where it's very hard to get around by public transport, particularly to sorting offices and limited opening hours, that's caused a real issue .
Nationally. The picture is just as concerning Citizens Advice reported over Christmas. 2516 million people experience letter delays, a 50% jump on the previous year and 5.7 million adults missed vital letters about health appointments, benefit decisions and legal notices. I. I will give way.
15:20
15:20
15:20
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
About medical appointments and I was horrified to hear from a constituent of mine in his 80s who didn't have post for a whole month recently. He was waiting for bank cards, but also medical correspondence and missed an appointment in the in the because of that. So as you say in rural areas, would you agree with me that it makes not receiving post makes makes people a lot more vulnerable?
15:20
15:20
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
Yes, indeed. Particularly some of my elderly residents who simply can't get around. And it will be the same in the honourable member's area. I want to say, as other members have said, that I've visited my local delivery offices. The staff are doing an incredible job, but they are under-resourced and there just isn't enough of them. Royal mail does continue to fall short under both its original and renegotiated universal service obligation. Even with those lowered targets, performance is well below the standard. I welcome the road map to rebuild the targets, but there are still really serious structural concerns about that.
We must make sure that these regulatory and service improvements are delivered without delay, so we can make sure our constituents aren't disconnected from their communities, missing their hospital appointments, or unable to make their their important bills.
We must make sure that these regulatory and service improvements are delivered without delay, so we can make sure our constituents aren't disconnected from their communities, missing their hospital appointments, or unable to make their their important bills.
15:21
15:21
15:21
Speaker 20
-
Speaker 20
Could I refer the House to my register of interest? I'm a member of the CW. Can I also thank the honourable member for Lagan Valley for securing this important debate? And of course, it's a pleasure to serve in in this debate with you. Can I just say that if you need an example of disaster and chaos in terms of privatizing a public asset, you don't need to look any further than Royal Mail. I mean, the water industry is a close challenge, but I think we'll have an even longer debate if we were to discuss the issues in Royal Mail versus the issues in the privatised water industry.
And I think we need to recognise that in 2013, Royal Mail was privatised by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition. And, you know, I think it's really important to know that the root cause of these issues is the privatisation. It has been a disaster. One of the colleagues mentioned that one of the options that we should look at is Renationalising Royal Mail, and I support that. Can I also say that in my constituency of Stockport, I conducted a survey, an online survey, because I don't need to reiterate the points about doing postal service. It probably never get there or come back in time.
But an online survey and 89% of respondents to my survey experienced a service disruption or delays to Royal Mail deliveries and were dissatisfied with Royal Mail. And I don't want to repeat the points that have already been made, but I have also been to my local delivery office on a number of occasions. And the postal workers, the men and women do a fantastic job. None of us in this House, on a cross-party basis have issues with our postal workers. The issue is with the toxic management. The issue is with how the business is run and the issue is with lack of lack of governance.
You could argue in terms of the fine is better. Your Royal Mail management are better off paying off the fine than actually meeting their obligations to to, to, to the public. And a suggestion was made by a colleague that stamp prices keep going up, but the service delivery letter deliveries consistently keep getting worse and worse. And he made the point that actually no further stamp price stamp prices. We should see no further rise in price of stamps going forward. Until Royal Mail can can demonstrate on a long term basis that they have consistently improved letter delivery standards.
Just this week, a resident reported that a first class letter took over ten days to arrive and they received birthday cards a week later. Another constituent from Ainsdale Grove in Reddish in my constituency, contacted me to say that their entire street received large batches of of delayed post, with some letters dating back to 25th of September. This is completely unacceptable. And as I said, I'm a proud member of the CW, but I want to see Royal Mail management working with CW. And there have been reports that almost 400 postal workers are leaving their jobs in Royal Mail.
I mean, you must have an extremely toxic culture to be sort of coming up with those numbers of people leaving. I could say a lot more, but time is limited. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And I think we need to recognise that in 2013, Royal Mail was privatised by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition. And, you know, I think it's really important to know that the root cause of these issues is the privatisation. It has been a disaster. One of the colleagues mentioned that one of the options that we should look at is Renationalising Royal Mail, and I support that. Can I also say that in my constituency of Stockport, I conducted a survey, an online survey, because I don't need to reiterate the points about doing postal service. It probably never get there or come back in time.
But an online survey and 89% of respondents to my survey experienced a service disruption or delays to Royal Mail deliveries and were dissatisfied with Royal Mail. And I don't want to repeat the points that have already been made, but I have also been to my local delivery office on a number of occasions. And the postal workers, the men and women do a fantastic job. None of us in this House, on a cross-party basis have issues with our postal workers. The issue is with the toxic management. The issue is with how the business is run and the issue is with lack of lack of governance.
You could argue in terms of the fine is better. Your Royal Mail management are better off paying off the fine than actually meeting their obligations to to, to, to the public. And a suggestion was made by a colleague that stamp prices keep going up, but the service delivery letter deliveries consistently keep getting worse and worse. And he made the point that actually no further stamp price stamp prices. We should see no further rise in price of stamps going forward. Until Royal Mail can can demonstrate on a long term basis that they have consistently improved letter delivery standards.
Just this week, a resident reported that a first class letter took over ten days to arrive and they received birthday cards a week later. Another constituent from Ainsdale Grove in Reddish in my constituency, contacted me to say that their entire street received large batches of of delayed post, with some letters dating back to 25th of September. This is completely unacceptable. And as I said, I'm a proud member of the CW, but I want to see Royal Mail management working with CW. And there have been reports that almost 400 postal workers are leaving their jobs in Royal Mail.
I mean, you must have an extremely toxic culture to be sort of coming up with those numbers of people leaving. I could say a lot more, but time is limited. Thank you, Madam Chair.
15:24
15:24
Speaker 10
-
Speaker 10
Many thanks, and it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Miss Lewis and I would like to add my thanks to the member for Lagan Valley for securing this debate. Like many colleagues who have spoken in this debate across the House, I've also received a litany of complaints from constituents. I visited the depot locally, the delivery office, back in the summer with a massive dossier of those complaints. That was just at the beginning of them rolling out the new delivery model, known as DM 26, and the management there reassured me that this was going to solve all of my constituents postal delays.
Well, Madam Chair, unfortunately I continue to receive testimonies from constituents about the impact that late deliveries of having, and I just want to share a couple of the most impactful. One, a person wrote to me whose elderly parents live in Cottingley. Their father is 82. The mother has an onset of dementia. At 79, they don't use a computer. They've missed three NHS appointments. They've incurred additional charges on mobile phones. And when they have tried to raise this as a complaint, the children that is online, they've found that to be very difficult. The second area, Madam Chair, is in Crossflatts, where again, a constituent of mine has had three hospital appointments delivered after the appointment date.
And as we've heard from other members, missing birthday cards too. None of us blame the posters. They do a fantastic job, Madam Deputy, Madam Chair, but we do need to make sure that working in an environment that supports their health and wellbeing, that and we can see low morale and high sickness absence. And that is something I hope the Minister will address in her remarks, together with the fact that we must not level down. And I think, Madam Chair, there is a real problem with the wider gig economy, and I would echo the challenge from the member for Oxford East in saying, how is the Minister going to address bogus self-employment in the wider parcel delivery market, so the Royal Mail and its workers have a chance.
But, Madam Chair, I would also urge the Minister, in her remarks to to really focus on the fact that it seems that Royal Mail is a failing company. It's a company in financial distress. We have a regulatory model with Ofcom that is clearly not working. The financial penalties are not working. Ofcom is at almost at the limit of its powers to force Royal Mail management to actually get its act together and address these problems. We have changed the USO once we've introduced this new delivery model, or at least Royal Mail, are introducing this new delivery model model.
If we get to this time or indeed April next year, and we continue to have a failure to meet that USO, will the minister look at radical options, including consideration of nationalisation of Royal Mail?
Well, Madam Chair, unfortunately I continue to receive testimonies from constituents about the impact that late deliveries of having, and I just want to share a couple of the most impactful. One, a person wrote to me whose elderly parents live in Cottingley. Their father is 82. The mother has an onset of dementia. At 79, they don't use a computer. They've missed three NHS appointments. They've incurred additional charges on mobile phones. And when they have tried to raise this as a complaint, the children that is online, they've found that to be very difficult. The second area, Madam Chair, is in Crossflatts, where again, a constituent of mine has had three hospital appointments delivered after the appointment date.
And as we've heard from other members, missing birthday cards too. None of us blame the posters. They do a fantastic job, Madam Deputy, Madam Chair, but we do need to make sure that working in an environment that supports their health and wellbeing, that and we can see low morale and high sickness absence. And that is something I hope the Minister will address in her remarks, together with the fact that we must not level down. And I think, Madam Chair, there is a real problem with the wider gig economy, and I would echo the challenge from the member for Oxford East in saying, how is the Minister going to address bogus self-employment in the wider parcel delivery market, so the Royal Mail and its workers have a chance.
But, Madam Chair, I would also urge the Minister, in her remarks to to really focus on the fact that it seems that Royal Mail is a failing company. It's a company in financial distress. We have a regulatory model with Ofcom that is clearly not working. The financial penalties are not working. Ofcom is at almost at the limit of its powers to force Royal Mail management to actually get its act together and address these problems. We have changed the USO once we've introduced this new delivery model, or at least Royal Mail, are introducing this new delivery model model.
If we get to this time or indeed April next year, and we continue to have a failure to meet that USO, will the minister look at radical options, including consideration of nationalisation of Royal Mail?
15:27
15:27
15:27
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
Chair, may I say it is a privilege and honor to to serve under your chairmanship today. And may I congratulate the member for Lagan Valley for her speech, which was incredible and actually getting this as an issue debated here today, because it is from the discussion that we've heard from around all four corners of the United Kingdom, it is a significant challenge for our constituents up and down the country. Something that happens with all of us, I'm sure, is you're getting towards Christmas. In your diary is the visit to the sorting centre, and it feels always a little bit poignant to me because one of my heroes, David Penhaligon from Cornwall, died on the way to Sorting Center in 1986, discharging his duties as a community MP as he was.
But I've been offered Torquay twice and on the second occasion I said no, I'd like to go to Paignton and strangely enough, I discovered that the painted office was somewhat crowded and unruly , and despite, you know, this chaos within it, the Posties were doing incredible work getting or attempting to get the post out to people. So it does feel as if there's a bit of gamesmanship by Royal Mail of what they want members to see or don't see. I'm aware the member for Newton Abbot visiting a sorting centre and postings advising him that the post that was undelivered was hidden at the back of the office.
So there are some sharp practices occurring that I'm well aware of in my own constituency. Nikki tells me that she got an enhanced parking fine because the notice was three weeks late. She actually then received post from eventually post from an enforcement organisation that were chasing her up around this unpaid parking fine, which is utterly shameful. Again, echoing what we've heard from around the chamber about delays around finances, whether it's statements or whether it's cards and people not being able to complete transactions that are desperately needed, it is perhaps the most poignant one. The impact on people's health, where it is those missed appointments, and I won't rehearse that again, because I'm aware of a number of examples in my own constituency where people have missed those opportunities.
And it isn't just the residents, it's the impact on the hospitals and other opportunities where we know there is challenges with our health services. And so the Royal Mail effectively vandalising this by failing to deliver pre post in timely manner is is utterly shocking. And then we go to the most vulnerable colleagues have talked about people who may be in remote areas. I know I am shocked but no longer surprised of the number of older folk when I go around former council estates who just don't have access to the internet, don't have a smartphone. And so the reality of the way they communicate is by post and, and a very, very poor postal system.
So the ability of those individuals to be able to access digitally is non-existent. So we desperately do need this. The the minister and I look forward to the comments from the minister as to how they are looking to hold Royal Mail to account, because it is far from the post his fault. Colleagues from different sides of the political spectrum have talked about surveys that they've undertaken, and I've, along with them, have heard from dozens of people about challenges. And again, the most worrying one was big batches of post that had arrived with people. Again, my experience is, is that when I've raised this with Royal Mail, it was effectively bureaucratic, bureaucratic drivel that I received from the minister.
I will say to be to be diplomatic. It was disappointing that the lack of backbone that we received in that letter. I'm hoping that we're going to hear better today from Ofcom. I'm still waiting to hear, as well as the the Communication Workers Union. I'm looking forward to working with those to hold people to account. But,
But I've been offered Torquay twice and on the second occasion I said no, I'd like to go to Paignton and strangely enough, I discovered that the painted office was somewhat crowded and unruly , and despite, you know, this chaos within it, the Posties were doing incredible work getting or attempting to get the post out to people. So it does feel as if there's a bit of gamesmanship by Royal Mail of what they want members to see or don't see. I'm aware the member for Newton Abbot visiting a sorting centre and postings advising him that the post that was undelivered was hidden at the back of the office.
So there are some sharp practices occurring that I'm well aware of in my own constituency. Nikki tells me that she got an enhanced parking fine because the notice was three weeks late. She actually then received post from eventually post from an enforcement organisation that were chasing her up around this unpaid parking fine, which is utterly shameful. Again, echoing what we've heard from around the chamber about delays around finances, whether it's statements or whether it's cards and people not being able to complete transactions that are desperately needed, it is perhaps the most poignant one. The impact on people's health, where it is those missed appointments, and I won't rehearse that again, because I'm aware of a number of examples in my own constituency where people have missed those opportunities.
And it isn't just the residents, it's the impact on the hospitals and other opportunities where we know there is challenges with our health services. And so the Royal Mail effectively vandalising this by failing to deliver pre post in timely manner is is utterly shocking. And then we go to the most vulnerable colleagues have talked about people who may be in remote areas. I know I am shocked but no longer surprised of the number of older folk when I go around former council estates who just don't have access to the internet, don't have a smartphone. And so the reality of the way they communicate is by post and, and a very, very poor postal system.
So the ability of those individuals to be able to access digitally is non-existent. So we desperately do need this. The the minister and I look forward to the comments from the minister as to how they are looking to hold Royal Mail to account, because it is far from the post his fault. Colleagues from different sides of the political spectrum have talked about surveys that they've undertaken, and I've, along with them, have heard from dozens of people about challenges. And again, the most worrying one was big batches of post that had arrived with people. Again, my experience is, is that when I've raised this with Royal Mail, it was effectively bureaucratic, bureaucratic drivel that I received from the minister.
I will say to be to be diplomatic. It was disappointing that the lack of backbone that we received in that letter. I'm hoping that we're going to hear better today from Ofcom. I'm still waiting to hear, as well as the the Communication Workers Union. I'm looking forward to working with those to hold people to account. But,
15:32
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
As well as the sea. The Communication Workers Union. I'm looking forward to working with those to hold people to account. But, Minister, as Liberal Democrats, we really need to make sure that you're maximizing the powers of Ofcom, giving them teeth and encouraging them to use those teeth to make sure that we've got that firm hand on the tiller, so that we can navigate the stormy waters that are posties are faced with, and make sure that this is sorted by Christmas.
Thank you.
Thank you.
15:32
15:32
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Thank you, Miss Lewis. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And I thank the honourable member for Loddon Valley for calling this important debate. She's clearly delivering for her constituents in a way that Royal Mail are not. Royal mail, they're clearly failing in their universal service obligations. And it's clear from comments across the House today that there is universality in those failings. From my own casework, I came into this debate well aware of the widespread failures affecting our postal services and knowing that action is long overdue. After hearing the compelling story shared by members from across the House, it is undeniable that we cannot wait any longer and answers are well overdue.
It's only 65 days until Christmas. It's not quite time to put the tree up, but for service providers and logistics teams, this is right around the corner and the mail bags will surge. We all know that Christmas is one of the most demanding times of the year for the postal services, especially for our hard working postmen and women. And I too want to echo my thanks to them. I don't think any of us are frustrated with the hard working posties. There are failings with management and as my right hon. Friend the member for Skipton and Ripon pointed out, all year round, Posties are often a lifeline for some of the most vulnerable members of our society, and sometimes they're the only person that they may see or have social contact or contact with.
I will give way.
It's only 65 days until Christmas. It's not quite time to put the tree up, but for service providers and logistics teams, this is right around the corner and the mail bags will surge. We all know that Christmas is one of the most demanding times of the year for the postal services, especially for our hard working postmen and women. And I too want to echo my thanks to them. I don't think any of us are frustrated with the hard working posties. There are failings with management and as my right hon. Friend the member for Skipton and Ripon pointed out, all year round, Posties are often a lifeline for some of the most vulnerable members of our society, and sometimes they're the only person that they may see or have social contact or contact with.
I will give way.
15:34
15:34
15:34
15:34
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
I thank the honourable member for her intervention. She is correct. I think the current model is not working as it should. It's also having social implications , and it's clearly adversely affecting the service even further. And it's crucial that this is addressed. So as we get close to the Christmas period from shoppers completing their final online orders, families sending gifts, cards to loved ones, friends and family, the busiest time of the year. The country needs confidence that postal services will deliver and that is one thing. If they can deliver, it's one worry ticked off the the list at a busy time of year.
But in recent years, many of us and our constituents have found that there is a certain elusiveness around this all year round. For my constituents, it's the recurring experience of no post for two weeks, followed by a large bundle of outdated letters. Hospital appointments missed. We've heard many stories along that theme today DVLA reminders, overdue credit cards reported, lost in mail, even legal issues which rumble on because court summons and other legal documents haven't been received in time.
I will give way.
But in recent years, many of us and our constituents have found that there is a certain elusiveness around this all year round. For my constituents, it's the recurring experience of no post for two weeks, followed by a large bundle of outdated letters. Hospital appointments missed. We've heard many stories along that theme today DVLA reminders, overdue credit cards reported, lost in mail, even legal issues which rumble on because court summons and other legal documents haven't been received in time.
I will give way.
15:35
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
But the the health letters that come through the post and I know when I had the meeting with the. The former health minister in Northern Ireland, he had given us that undertaking. But the Frank. The envelopes would be a way forward if the Post Office were to do. The Royal Mail were to do their job correctly, they would see the letters coming in and then expedite them through the system. I know my constituency. It seems to be working because the postal workers, by and large, are very effective in relation to that. But does the honourable gentleman agree with me that perhaps, maybe when it comes to ensuring that health letters come in time and they are frank, they are obviously medical letters that perhaps maybe the Royal Mail and those who are responsible need to focus that as a priority, as it should be.
15:36
15:36
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
I thank him for his intervention. I think this is in the same spirit as one of the comments from the right hon. Member for Oxford East. She was talking about an example with NHS letters being prioritised. I think there's a really pressing need for the Royal Mail to look at best practice from all parts of the country and ensure that that is part of their standard methods of operation to ensure that they deliver for their customers and for our constituents. We know that a malfunctioning postal service has a profound domino effect on many important aspects of residents lives.
In March, it was announced that Royal Mail will deliver 219 million letters late this year, and this comes despite the seventh stamp price rise in four years. This statistic will come as no surprise to members here today. It's been quoted by many, and it solidifies their constituents lived experiences. But predictability should not should not be mistaken for acceptability. Our constituents should not have to tolerate this escalating issue. And I ask the minister to outline here today a tangible plan to deliver a swift solution rather than continuing to pass the buck to Ofcom. I am aware of Ofcom's role as the regulator, but the government cannot expect this nationwide problem to fall exclusively on their shoulders, and I suspect the minister has received that message loud and clear from members across the House today.
So what action is the government taking to materially address the service problem? Does the government believe that Ofcom is still fit for purpose with regard to regulating postal services? These are difficult questions to answer, but they're ones that my constituents and all of our constituents want answers to. The minister has made clear the frank discussions being held with the CEO of Royal Mail and Royal Mail have emphasised that its Quality of Service Improvement Plan sets out, allegedly sets out a clear path towards meeting Ofcom's new delivery targets. We saw how important this issue is today when it was raised at Prime Minister's Questions as well, but I would question what good a more discussions and promises if they are never fulfilled or if they fail to improve the service, so does the Minister believe that the operational issues with Royal Mail are being addressed fast enough?
What discussions have taken place not only concerning the implementation of the improvement plan, but also the success achieved so far. Royal mail is a key piece of British identity. With over 500 years of history, it's endured challenges and played a key role in some of our nation's most difficult times. It is a service to appreciate, but such recognition is only warranted when an acceptable standard of service is provided. The purpose of this debate to highlight the unacceptable service being supplied by Royal Mail and Fast Track finding a solution. Can the Minister share the immediate steps that she will take to ensure that Royal Mail service is corrected and customer confidence is restored?
In March, it was announced that Royal Mail will deliver 219 million letters late this year, and this comes despite the seventh stamp price rise in four years. This statistic will come as no surprise to members here today. It's been quoted by many, and it solidifies their constituents lived experiences. But predictability should not should not be mistaken for acceptability. Our constituents should not have to tolerate this escalating issue. And I ask the minister to outline here today a tangible plan to deliver a swift solution rather than continuing to pass the buck to Ofcom. I am aware of Ofcom's role as the regulator, but the government cannot expect this nationwide problem to fall exclusively on their shoulders, and I suspect the minister has received that message loud and clear from members across the House today.
So what action is the government taking to materially address the service problem? Does the government believe that Ofcom is still fit for purpose with regard to regulating postal services? These are difficult questions to answer, but they're ones that my constituents and all of our constituents want answers to. The minister has made clear the frank discussions being held with the CEO of Royal Mail and Royal Mail have emphasised that its Quality of Service Improvement Plan sets out, allegedly sets out a clear path towards meeting Ofcom's new delivery targets. We saw how important this issue is today when it was raised at Prime Minister's Questions as well, but I would question what good a more discussions and promises if they are never fulfilled or if they fail to improve the service, so does the Minister believe that the operational issues with Royal Mail are being addressed fast enough?
What discussions have taken place not only concerning the implementation of the improvement plan, but also the success achieved so far. Royal mail is a key piece of British identity. With over 500 years of history, it's endured challenges and played a key role in some of our nation's most difficult times. It is a service to appreciate, but such recognition is only warranted when an acceptable standard of service is provided. The purpose of this debate to highlight the unacceptable service being supplied by Royal Mail and Fast Track finding a solution. Can the Minister share the immediate steps that she will take to ensure that Royal Mail service is corrected and customer confidence is restored?
15:39
15:39
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
Good afternoon. Well, it's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I'd like to congratulate the honourable member for Lagan Valley for securing today's debate about the performance of Royal Mail. She very clearly outlined the issues in her constituency and that she's heard directly from constituents about the inadequate service, and I thank her for for bringing that to the chamber today. As with many colleagues, I know this is not the first debate brought by colleagues to the House. However, it is my first debate as a minister responsible. So it's a pleasure to do so. And I take this part of my brief extremely seriously and hear very loud and clearly the challenges that we are working through.
Royal mail should be a cornerstone of our national infrastructure, serving every address in the UK under its universal service obligation, people and businesses, as we've all heard, and continue to rely on its services every single day. And the policies are such valued members of the communities they serve. Royal mail is an independent business. The government is not involved in its day to day operations nor in resolving specific service issues. However, Patience is wearing thin with their performance. Colleagues will have heard that loud and clearly from the Prime Minister at the despatch box earlier this afternoon, and customers have every right to expect better.
Royal mail must do more to restore confidence in its service, and that's why I was frank in my meeting with the chief executive of Royal Mail last month, and will continue to be for as long as necessary, whereas clear that the service has been unacceptable for too long and the pace of improvement must increase and quickly. Churchwell letter volumes have fallen from 20 billion items per year in the mid 2000 to 6.5 billion in 2025. The number of addresses served by the Universal Postal Service has continued to grow, and we should also reflect on that.
But postal services remain essential, delivering everything, as we've heard from colleagues today. Of course.
Royal mail should be a cornerstone of our national infrastructure, serving every address in the UK under its universal service obligation, people and businesses, as we've all heard, and continue to rely on its services every single day. And the policies are such valued members of the communities they serve. Royal mail is an independent business. The government is not involved in its day to day operations nor in resolving specific service issues. However, Patience is wearing thin with their performance. Colleagues will have heard that loud and clearly from the Prime Minister at the despatch box earlier this afternoon, and customers have every right to expect better.
Royal mail must do more to restore confidence in its service, and that's why I was frank in my meeting with the chief executive of Royal Mail last month, and will continue to be for as long as necessary, whereas clear that the service has been unacceptable for too long and the pace of improvement must increase and quickly. Churchwell letter volumes have fallen from 20 billion items per year in the mid 2000 to 6.5 billion in 2025. The number of addresses served by the Universal Postal Service has continued to grow, and we should also reflect on that.
But postal services remain essential, delivering everything, as we've heard from colleagues today. Of course.
15:41
Speaker 11
-
Speaker 11
Thank you. I thank the Minister for giving way. I wanted to raise the issue of prioritising parcels. As you say, the volume of letters may have gone down, but the overall volume of items to deliver hasn't. And I know that you'll be as worried as me, Minister, that the number of people working in the Royal Mail has reduced significantly, and many people are leaving because of the low morale in the system. So please, can you share with us what you can do to make Ofcom do more as well in this situation? For example, spot checks because fines as well obviously aren't working.
Thank you Minister.
Thank you Minister.
15:42
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention and for raising those very important points, I reassure her, and turning to Ofcom very soon and the work we are doing in the engagement I've had with them so far, because postal services remain absolutely essential, delivering everything from medical letters to financial information and, of course, birthday and greeting cards from loved ones and soon Christmas cards at the same time. The rapid increase from e-commerce over recent years has transformed the postal sector. Parcel parcel volumes for 2020 526 reached 1.44 billion, a 7% increase from 2425. And I'm really conscious, as we've heard from colleagues, with Christmas coming up soon, Royal Mail will be entering its busiest period of the year, and it is vital they deliver a reliable service for its customers as an independent business, responsibility for managing delivery operations, workforce deployment and local performance does rest with their management and they are best placed to investigate localised problems.
However, I'm all too aware that customers across the country continue to be let down by Royal Mail's postal Service. I know many honourable members receive correspondence from constituents highlighting their concerns and frustrations, and colleagues have risen today about Royal Mail's performance, not least as I have to, of course.
However, I'm all too aware that customers across the country continue to be let down by Royal Mail's postal Service. I know many honourable members receive correspondence from constituents highlighting their concerns and frustrations, and colleagues have risen today about Royal Mail's performance, not least as I have to, of course.
15:43
15:43
Speaker 14
-
Speaker 14
Minister, for giving way. I'm sure many members in the debate today will have already raised localised issues with Royal Mail, and just got what feels very much like a stock letter as I got back. What advice would you give to members as to hold them to account for such an appalling service? Thank you Minister.
15:43
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I thank the Liberal Democrats for his intervention. I will turn to this in more detail regarding my engagement with Royal Mail and the expectations that I put to them on how they engage with us as colleagues in this House, with appropriate details and information to follow up. So I will turn to that very shortly. On the important correspondence that we've touched on. Chair, I do just want to reflect on this very quickly, because the consequences can be especially significant when delays after important time sensitive correspondence have not been received. And that can cause great effect, whether it's hospital appointments.
As we've heard bills, legal documents, correspondence and driving licences, I really share the frustrations and concerns from honourable members and their constituents, and exactly why Royal Mail must do more to deliver a reliable service. Before I reflect on my engagements with the chief executive and correspondence with colleagues in this chamber and outside, I just want to turn to Ofcom before I do so. Ofcom, as the independent regulator for postal services, is responsible, as colleagues know, for setting and enforcing Royal Mail service standards. I met with them yesterday to share feedback that I've received from colleagues across the House ahead of this debate, but will reflect on contributions today to to discuss the wider postal sector.
As colleagues have mentioned, Ofcom has fined Royal Mail £37 million over three years for not meeting quality of service targets. They've assured me in the government that it continues to monitor Royal Mail service data closely and will take further regulatory action where needed, to hold the company to account. Ofcom is also investigating Royal Mail's performance against quality of service targets in the last financial year, and I know several honourable members inside this chamber today and outside met with Ofcom on Wednesday the 15th of October to raise their frustrations about the continued poor service from Royal Mail.
Ofcom have shared those key themes from the discussion with me and my officials, and I want to thank colleagues for taking the time to do so last week. I'm under no doubt that Ofcom will have heard and understood the strength of feeling about the service our constituents have been experiencing. At this point. I just want to turn briefly to costs, particularly the cost of stamps, as lots of colleagues have raised this. During the debate last week, Ofcom launched a consultation on extending the current second class letter price cap until 2028. Of course, when every single pound that counts, when people are still struggling with a cost of living crisis and at the same time they aren't getting that reliable service with their posts that rely on, I hope, of course, that would be a key consideration, but recognize it is for Royal Mail to set prices of its stamp as an independent business.
But we did discuss this yesterday. And the regulator Sponsorship Charter, which the government published in July, reaffirms our role in setting strategic direction for regulators and hold them to account. And we will continue to work with Ofcom closely on its approach to regulation and the outcomes it is delivering for customers. We would consider, pragmatically any future requests for additional powers where they are needed to support improved outcomes for customers and for our constituents, and will actively hold Ofcom and other regulators to account as appropriate.
I will, of course.
As we've heard bills, legal documents, correspondence and driving licences, I really share the frustrations and concerns from honourable members and their constituents, and exactly why Royal Mail must do more to deliver a reliable service. Before I reflect on my engagements with the chief executive and correspondence with colleagues in this chamber and outside, I just want to turn to Ofcom before I do so. Ofcom, as the independent regulator for postal services, is responsible, as colleagues know, for setting and enforcing Royal Mail service standards. I met with them yesterday to share feedback that I've received from colleagues across the House ahead of this debate, but will reflect on contributions today to to discuss the wider postal sector.
As colleagues have mentioned, Ofcom has fined Royal Mail £37 million over three years for not meeting quality of service targets. They've assured me in the government that it continues to monitor Royal Mail service data closely and will take further regulatory action where needed, to hold the company to account. Ofcom is also investigating Royal Mail's performance against quality of service targets in the last financial year, and I know several honourable members inside this chamber today and outside met with Ofcom on Wednesday the 15th of October to raise their frustrations about the continued poor service from Royal Mail.
Ofcom have shared those key themes from the discussion with me and my officials, and I want to thank colleagues for taking the time to do so last week. I'm under no doubt that Ofcom will have heard and understood the strength of feeling about the service our constituents have been experiencing. At this point. I just want to turn briefly to costs, particularly the cost of stamps, as lots of colleagues have raised this. During the debate last week, Ofcom launched a consultation on extending the current second class letter price cap until 2028. Of course, when every single pound that counts, when people are still struggling with a cost of living crisis and at the same time they aren't getting that reliable service with their posts that rely on, I hope, of course, that would be a key consideration, but recognize it is for Royal Mail to set prices of its stamp as an independent business.
But we did discuss this yesterday. And the regulator Sponsorship Charter, which the government published in July, reaffirms our role in setting strategic direction for regulators and hold them to account. And we will continue to work with Ofcom closely on its approach to regulation and the outcomes it is delivering for customers. We would consider, pragmatically any future requests for additional powers where they are needed to support improved outcomes for customers and for our constituents, and will actively hold Ofcom and other regulators to account as appropriate.
I will, of course.
15:47
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
In addition to meeting with Ofcom, as she mentioned, we also had the opportunity to meet with the leadership of the CWU and it's really clear that postal workers are coming forward with ideas about how this business could be reformed, and I do hope that the minister will assure us that she's also urging Royal Mail leadership to sit down with the CWU and consider some of these more radical and long term options for reform of our Royal Mail.
15:47
15:47
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I thank my honourable friend for her intervention and will absolutely provide that update on our next steps and engagement with the unions and Royal Mail very shortly, because all honourable members present agree that Royal Mail needs to step up and improve its performance. Colleagues reflected on the improvement plan that was published by Royal Mail to address the primary cause of service issues, and has committed to investing £500 million to increase its frontline resourcing and the availability of working hours for part time employees. And at this point, I just want to reflect on the suitable sorting offices using modern technology.
And we've, of course, secured those legally binding commitments from the new owners, committing to sufficient investment to ensure that the USO can be delivered. I will.
And we've, of course, secured those legally binding commitments from the new owners, committing to sufficient investment to ensure that the USO can be delivered. I will.
15:48
15:48
Speaker 7
-
Speaker 7
Minister for a response. Very comprehensive response. I appreciate that very much. Each one of us does. Minister, one of the massive issues in my constituency of Strangford is the retention of staff. There comes a certain time of age whenever the weather goes again, you. And as the. As the years creep upon you and some of those who joined early and have done maybe 20 years or 30 years, find themselves coming to a stage where they no longer can do it. But one of the major reasons why they're not able to do it, apart from the weather factor, is the fact that up the road they're able to get a better wage.
So when it comes to the retention of staff wages that are that are reflect the rising costs of inflation, that reflect the fact that you have to travel to work. So what discussions has the minister had with the chief executive to ensure that the wages will improve and that will retain staff just by its very nature?
So when it comes to the retention of staff wages that are that are reflect the rising costs of inflation, that reflect the fact that you have to travel to work. So what discussions has the minister had with the chief executive to ensure that the wages will improve and that will retain staff just by its very nature?
15:49
15:49
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I thank the honourable member for his intervention. Just before I turn to his point, I do want to put on record that Royal Mail have informed me that they have increased. They've invested £470 million since 2021 in automation and delivery and infrastructure updates, and just reflecting on his remarks and his local visits to sorting offices and what he's hearing from policies themselves. And of course, when it comes to pay and conditions, we work really closely with the trade unions represented. And when we're looking at that wider support and sustainable future for Royal Mail, supporting our policies is absolutely essential to that.
And I just want to take an opportunity to reflect on my meeting recently with the chief exec, as I raised specifically engagement with colleagues in the chamber and outside the chamber, too, and have urged Royal Mail to be much more proactive with MPs and detailed in their assessments around what's happening on a constituency level, particularly providing those clear details, taking every complaint seriously that colleagues are raising directly with them, whether it is on performance, on service, on staffing levels, sickness and absences. It's really important that as colleagues in this chamber and members across the House have that relevant information to hand.
When colleagues and myself included, are receiving numerous complaints from constituents, it is really important that colleagues have the appropriate and relevant information to hand to make that assessment. So I will always reiterate that when I meet them going forwards and reassure members here today. Very briefly.
And I just want to take an opportunity to reflect on my meeting recently with the chief exec, as I raised specifically engagement with colleagues in the chamber and outside the chamber, too, and have urged Royal Mail to be much more proactive with MPs and detailed in their assessments around what's happening on a constituency level, particularly providing those clear details, taking every complaint seriously that colleagues are raising directly with them, whether it is on performance, on service, on staffing levels, sickness and absences. It's really important that as colleagues in this chamber and members across the House have that relevant information to hand.
When colleagues and myself included, are receiving numerous complaints from constituents, it is really important that colleagues have the appropriate and relevant information to hand to make that assessment. So I will always reiterate that when I meet them going forwards and reassure members here today. Very briefly.
15:50
15:50
15:50
15:50
Speaker 24
-
Speaker 24
I thank the honourable member for his intervention. Hopefully, he would have reflected on my remarks in terms of my engagement with Ofcom and particularly around their recent consultation on stamps, really reflecting on the cost of living crisis and service ability and targets. So really hear his remarks today and we'll take that forward. In my conversations, particularly around that service. And it has to improve and it has to improve very, very, very quickly, as the Prime Minister reiterated today. But I thank him again for putting his his reflections on record on USL reform. The company is currently implementing a new delivery model, as we all know and have discussed.
Royal mail subsequently agreed on its new delivery model and was approved by the CW in their membership. But I recognise that this model has been implemented across the network, and colleagues have reflected different feedback from whether it is their constituents to posties to to local management. Royal Mail's performance against its quality of service targets has been improving. So is it important that any final issues in rolling out the new approach is resolved urgently between the company and its workforce? And today I want to reconfirm the Secretary of State's commitment yesterday that we are meeting with the CWU and Royal Mail the week after next to press for progress.
And of course, keep colleagues updated on that meeting in this chamber and outside. And I also want to reflect on what colleagues have mentioned regarding our important and absolutely essential postal workers, who are an essential part of every city, town and village that we all represent and are integral to the community's future success too. They work tirelessly every single day for our constituents and for customers, and Royal Mail must ensure that these workers and those workers remain at the heart of the business that is delivering to all of our expectations. So I want to put on record my appreciation for our postal workers and posters across the country.
My grandad was a very proud postie. He loved his community and he loved that job because it's much more about delivering letters and parcels, isn't it? They are part of our communities. They serve, they know the rounds, they know the customers, and they're often one of those familiar faces that people see every day, sometimes the only familiar face. So I do want to take time to express my appreciation for them. It's in everyone's interest to to get round the table, to resolve the issues that we've reflected on today with the quality of service improvement, and we need to make sure that it happens quickly.
And that is my commitment to all colleagues here today. Before I conclude, I want to talk about parcels and imbalances in the postal sector. That's a really important part of next steps of the wider postal sector, and update colleagues on the work that we're doing in the department. In this space, we are improving the working conditions, standards and rights of workers across the economy, including in the delivery sector, and that's really important to me. Last week, we published a consultation on proposals to make targeted reforms to the Employment Status Framework for employment rights, because we recognise that self-employment arrangements can provide flexibility for some people.
But we are also aware of the concerns that the current Employment Status framework can leave vulnerable workers without core and basic employment protections . And right. So our consultation hopes to address these issues, particularly on self-employment. I know colleagues have reflected that today, taking into account the impact on key sectors of the economy, including the postal services industry. Yesterday, I attended a really interesting roundtable with colleagues on work and employment in the UK regarding parcel delivery with Sheffield University Management School on exactly these issues, and their research is really important to our work in this space and we'll feed in directly across the sector.
Ofcom has reacted to growing concerns as well about delivery performance by reminding operators of their obligations, and they have also engaged with all major parcel companies to ensure their compliance with the regulatory framework. While today's debate focuses on Royal Mail's performance, it is also important to recognise that reliable deliveries matter across the postal and parcel market, particularly for constituents who are vulnerable because service failures can have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable consumers, including disabled people who might often struggle to to leave their homes. Ofcom have introduced targeted protections requiring operators to have appropriate policies in place for the fair treatment of disabled customers, alongside strengthened guidance on complaints handling.
I know lots of colleagues have mentioned that today and I will continue to take that away and press Ofcom and Royal Mail, of course, where I need to. So the way we we communicate might be changing, but post remains an essential service for people and businesses across the United Kingdom. I've made it clear that the government believes Royal Mail's performance has been unacceptable. The Prime Minister has. And the Secretary of State has to in his Select Committee yesterday. So we will continue to press Royal Mail and its management to improve the quality of service they provide that customers rightly respect, that colleagues across this chamber expect for their constituents to and deserve a reliable postal Service .
And Royal Mail absolutely must deliver this and deliver it soon. Again, I want to pay a tribute and thanks our incredible posties all across the country, who I know are working tirelessly for our constituents to deliver for them and support their communities. And we want Royal Mail to to succeed. It is an absolute key part of our identity and national institution, and that's what we're all focused and passionate about here today. That Universal Postal Service is what we all rely on, and I hope colleagues hear my passion in ensuring we get as many people around the table to make sure we can deliver a better service for our constituents and for the wider postal sector and Royal Mail in the future.
So I thank colleagues for their reflections and contributions today. And again, my honourable member for securing this debate. Thank you, chair.
Royal mail subsequently agreed on its new delivery model and was approved by the CW in their membership. But I recognise that this model has been implemented across the network, and colleagues have reflected different feedback from whether it is their constituents to posties to to local management. Royal Mail's performance against its quality of service targets has been improving. So is it important that any final issues in rolling out the new approach is resolved urgently between the company and its workforce? And today I want to reconfirm the Secretary of State's commitment yesterday that we are meeting with the CWU and Royal Mail the week after next to press for progress.
And of course, keep colleagues updated on that meeting in this chamber and outside. And I also want to reflect on what colleagues have mentioned regarding our important and absolutely essential postal workers, who are an essential part of every city, town and village that we all represent and are integral to the community's future success too. They work tirelessly every single day for our constituents and for customers, and Royal Mail must ensure that these workers and those workers remain at the heart of the business that is delivering to all of our expectations. So I want to put on record my appreciation for our postal workers and posters across the country.
My grandad was a very proud postie. He loved his community and he loved that job because it's much more about delivering letters and parcels, isn't it? They are part of our communities. They serve, they know the rounds, they know the customers, and they're often one of those familiar faces that people see every day, sometimes the only familiar face. So I do want to take time to express my appreciation for them. It's in everyone's interest to to get round the table, to resolve the issues that we've reflected on today with the quality of service improvement, and we need to make sure that it happens quickly.
And that is my commitment to all colleagues here today. Before I conclude, I want to talk about parcels and imbalances in the postal sector. That's a really important part of next steps of the wider postal sector, and update colleagues on the work that we're doing in the department. In this space, we are improving the working conditions, standards and rights of workers across the economy, including in the delivery sector, and that's really important to me. Last week, we published a consultation on proposals to make targeted reforms to the Employment Status Framework for employment rights, because we recognise that self-employment arrangements can provide flexibility for some people.
But we are also aware of the concerns that the current Employment Status framework can leave vulnerable workers without core and basic employment protections . And right. So our consultation hopes to address these issues, particularly on self-employment. I know colleagues have reflected that today, taking into account the impact on key sectors of the economy, including the postal services industry. Yesterday, I attended a really interesting roundtable with colleagues on work and employment in the UK regarding parcel delivery with Sheffield University Management School on exactly these issues, and their research is really important to our work in this space and we'll feed in directly across the sector.
Ofcom has reacted to growing concerns as well about delivery performance by reminding operators of their obligations, and they have also engaged with all major parcel companies to ensure their compliance with the regulatory framework. While today's debate focuses on Royal Mail's performance, it is also important to recognise that reliable deliveries matter across the postal and parcel market, particularly for constituents who are vulnerable because service failures can have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable consumers, including disabled people who might often struggle to to leave their homes. Ofcom have introduced targeted protections requiring operators to have appropriate policies in place for the fair treatment of disabled customers, alongside strengthened guidance on complaints handling.
I know lots of colleagues have mentioned that today and I will continue to take that away and press Ofcom and Royal Mail, of course, where I need to. So the way we we communicate might be changing, but post remains an essential service for people and businesses across the United Kingdom. I've made it clear that the government believes Royal Mail's performance has been unacceptable. The Prime Minister has. And the Secretary of State has to in his Select Committee yesterday. So we will continue to press Royal Mail and its management to improve the quality of service they provide that customers rightly respect, that colleagues across this chamber expect for their constituents to and deserve a reliable postal Service .
And Royal Mail absolutely must deliver this and deliver it soon. Again, I want to pay a tribute and thanks our incredible posties all across the country, who I know are working tirelessly for our constituents to deliver for them and support their communities. And we want Royal Mail to to succeed. It is an absolute key part of our identity and national institution, and that's what we're all focused and passionate about here today. That Universal Postal Service is what we all rely on, and I hope colleagues hear my passion in ensuring we get as many people around the table to make sure we can deliver a better service for our constituents and for the wider postal sector and Royal Mail in the future.
So I thank colleagues for their reflections and contributions today. And again, my honourable member for securing this debate. Thank you, chair.
15:56
15:56
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Thank you, Miss Lill. I want to thank. All right, honourable, honourable members, the Minister, the shadow front bench, Lib Dem spokesperson and everybody who contributed to this really good debate today. I think we've really fleshed out some of the core issues at play here, and I just want to briefly recap on some of those and some of the really helpful suggestions from from colleagues right across the House today, specifically in terms of the price of stamps linked to targets, the fact that executive bonuses were never targets are continuing to be missed, are still being paid.
The fact that we do need to give serious consideration to the privatisation of Royal Mail at all. But lastly, this is absolutely not the fault of the Posties. I thank them and their service and it is incumbent on all of us to listen to them. Thank you, Madam Chair.
The fact that we do need to give serious consideration to the privatisation of Royal Mail at all. But lastly, this is absolutely not the fault of the Posties. I thank them and their service and it is incumbent on all of us to listen to them. Thank you, Madam Chair.
15:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
The question is that this House has considered the performance of Royal Mail, as many are of that opinion, say I. Of the contrary. No, I think the ayes have it. Order, order! I will call Andrew George to move the motion. I will then call the minister to respond. I remind other members that they may only make a speech with prior permission from the member in charge of the debate, and the Minister. There will not be an opportunity for the member in charge to wind up, as is the convention, for 30 minute debates. Order, order! Andrew George to move the motion.
16:00
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I'm delighted to have had the opportunity to raise the. This issue today, which is the government's housing costs, in other words, specifically local housing allowance. And the way that that is part of the of Universal Credit and the calculations which are made therein. And I know that the honourable member for York, North East Hertfordshire, has let me know and and the Minister know that he would like to make a very short speech as as well, and I understand others wish to make interventions, too. I mean, this isn't the first time that I've raised this issue.
Indeed, I was looking back at the records and on the 9th of November 2010, even I had a debate in in this in this chamber , on on a related matter, if anyone wishes to check the the the records. Anyway, I start on a more somber note, which is I'll just give you a couple of examples from my constituency recent casework, where I've met constituents who've had difficulties with their with their benefits. One one constituent with a history of undiagnosed neurodiversity and mental health problems who struggles to hold down regular employment is quite capable but but has been rejected for for Pi, for for Pip and receives approximately £900 a month in Universal Credit, but must pay what is pretty much the average for.
For his private rent in in the constituency, which is £850 a month, which leaves him with £50 for the whole month to live on to cover all of his bills to to feed himself and travel and do everything else as well. So, you know, it makes the point about the difficulties and the poverty trap which people find themselves in a mother of . And three children have been benefit capped despite paying almost £1,200 per month in rent out of approximately £1,500 per month. She receives in Universal Credit and is in debt with her utility providers and cannot afford to work due to the high cost of childcare.
I mean, these are just examples of what this means to families who have to live on. On the current rates of local housing allowance. I'll give way to the honourable gentleman.
Indeed, I was looking back at the records and on the 9th of November 2010, even I had a debate in in this in this chamber , on on a related matter, if anyone wishes to check the the the records. Anyway, I start on a more somber note, which is I'll just give you a couple of examples from my constituency recent casework, where I've met constituents who've had difficulties with their with their benefits. One one constituent with a history of undiagnosed neurodiversity and mental health problems who struggles to hold down regular employment is quite capable but but has been rejected for for Pi, for for Pip and receives approximately £900 a month in Universal Credit, but must pay what is pretty much the average for.
For his private rent in in the constituency, which is £850 a month, which leaves him with £50 for the whole month to live on to cover all of his bills to to feed himself and travel and do everything else as well. So, you know, it makes the point about the difficulties and the poverty trap which people find themselves in a mother of . And three children have been benefit capped despite paying almost £1,200 per month in rent out of approximately £1,500 per month. She receives in Universal Credit and is in debt with her utility providers and cannot afford to work due to the high cost of childcare.
I mean, these are just examples of what this means to families who have to live on. On the current rates of local housing allowance. I'll give way to the honourable gentleman.
16:02
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
I thank the honourable member for giving way. Does he agree with me that in places like Cornwall, there needs to be a much better understanding of housing affordability and that the issue that we have is where we have a benefit system that does not recognise the cost of housing. We find that those people who are, who are, who most desperately need this support are most disadvantaged compared with houses, areas where housing is much, where housing affordability is much lower.
16:03
16:03
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
George indeed. And I, and I thank my my hon. Friend, neighbor in that in that regard, and certainly what the Minister will be well aware of, because he will understand these these these matters very well, is that is that those places of particularly high housing costs in places like Cornwall, but not just Cornwall, where, where, where, where scarcity of private rented accommodation makes it very difficult for local families to find anything which is affordable. Then, then certainly the gap between local housing allowance and the actual rental levels within that area is particularly stark. Well, I will.
16:04
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Thank you so much. honourable friend. Thank you so much and for securing this debate. So I have an example where Annette in her 70s, she cares for her son. She's been forced to move twice when landlords have sold up and fears that she can't afford the next rise. And he talks about those costs. Citizens advice locally highlight that the frozen local housing allowance is now about 20 to 25% lower than local rents, and with record levels of people at risk of homelessness. So absolutely would that would my hon. Friend agree that this reiterates the case?
The government must look at unfreezing local housing allowance and link it to local rent.
The government must look at unfreezing local housing allowance and link it to local rent.
16:04
16:04
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
George, I'm very grateful to honourable friend and seems to anticipate what I shall certainly say. And one of the main messages which I'm sure the government are not, will not be surprised at. And certainly I've given the Minister some advance notice of the questions I was planning to raise in this debate is, is the impact of the freezing of of housing allowance back in 2024? And although the system is that it's supposed to be set at the 30th percentile percentile, in other words, that there should be 30% of properties available in the market which are below that particular level and therefore 70% above.
I would say that certainly in places like Cornwall, we're talking about it being a -30% percentile effectively, because what I'll just let me finish this point. I will is what we're finding is that, in fact, in an area like, like, like mine, the local housing allowance is 30% below the lowest available rental property within, within the marketplace. So the 30% is is relevant, but sadly not at the levels that we require. But I'll give way to the honourable lady.
I would say that certainly in places like Cornwall, we're talking about it being a -30% percentile effectively, because what I'll just let me finish this point. I will is what we're finding is that, in fact, in an area like, like, like mine, the local housing allowance is 30% below the lowest available rental property within, within the marketplace. So the 30% is is relevant, but sadly not at the levels that we require. But I'll give way to the honourable lady.
16:05
Speaker 26
-
Speaker 26
I thank the honourable member for his important speech. And on that point, in my constituency of Bristol Central, only 2.3% of rental homes are affordable within local housing allowance, a far cry from the 30% that it's meant to be. And of course, that means many more families, including families with children, are forced into rent arrears. Poverty and homelessness. Now, according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, introducing rent controls would reduce the cost of unfreezing local housing allowance by more than £1 billion by 2030. So does the honourable member agree with me, therefore, that the Chancellor should, as well as unfreezing local housing allowance at the budget, also introduce an emergency brake on rents to address that gross distortion and inequality and unfairness in the housing market.
16:06
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
Well, the honourable lady makes a very, very good point. And indeed, I'll be coming on to to obviously, the extremely difficult decisions which which any government needs to make about how, how this policy adds up with with the available resource. And certainly , if one wants to avoid driving private landlords out of the market altogether, one has to form a, you know, an understanding of how the market the market works. But I entirely agree with the principle of what the honourable lady is saying. And, and, and indeed, I'll come on to the point about how we can how we can pay for it.
A very difficult question, which I know that opposition politicians generally avoid whilst asking for more money, but not necessarily explaining where they're going to get it from. But the primary message really from from the debate, which I have today, is that is that the the current government policy is not working. It's driving the poorest into debt, food banks, homelessness, and indeed in many cases, sadly, into destitution. I set for the minister a number of questions which which he he he has in advance. And if the government, for example, knows that a person's private rental is bound to be at least X, y in areas like Kernow West, which is one of the the the the areas well, the area that covers my, my area where the, the the the, the valuation office assesses the these, these, these factors.
Why why is the, is the benefit level set at at at X -30 to 40% as I described earlier, which then leaves people in the kind of poverty which I described in the two cases outlined earlier. Has the government reviewed the adequacy of the present methodology for for LH calculations and our ministers confident that the present arrangements do not risk tipping families and individuals in areas of high priced private rental accommodation into rent arrears and potential. Destitution. I understand that the Valuation Office Agency collect the rental data from landlords to determine the LH. A. However, how accurate and up to date is this data collection and.
And are they using historic cases where people have been living in accommodation for a very long period of time? And it wouldn't reflect that actually, the price of that accommodation were to be coming back on onto the market. There are a large number of questions which I believe that the government needs to needs to address in this area, and I know that the minister is sympathetic to the issues which are raised. One one example which was raised with me by Citizens Advice Cornwall is, for example, if, for example, you have a family in Penzance consisting of either a couple or a single parent with two children of different sexes, one of whom is a ten, so they need separate bedrooms.
They would technically require a three bedroom house to be living in the LH states, that they can have a maximum of £812.76 per month, the lowest price for a privately rented three bedroom house in the Penzance area, according to Rightmove. Last night is in Marazion, I there's a few miles away and is at £1,800, making a gap of £987.24 per month for that particular family. So there are a large number of cases which I could kind of go through.
I don't have time now to. I will give way very briefly. Okay.
A very difficult question, which I know that opposition politicians generally avoid whilst asking for more money, but not necessarily explaining where they're going to get it from. But the primary message really from from the debate, which I have today, is that is that the the current government policy is not working. It's driving the poorest into debt, food banks, homelessness, and indeed in many cases, sadly, into destitution. I set for the minister a number of questions which which he he he has in advance. And if the government, for example, knows that a person's private rental is bound to be at least X, y in areas like Kernow West, which is one of the the the the areas well, the area that covers my, my area where the, the the the, the valuation office assesses the these, these, these factors.
Why why is the, is the benefit level set at at at X -30 to 40% as I described earlier, which then leaves people in the kind of poverty which I described in the two cases outlined earlier. Has the government reviewed the adequacy of the present methodology for for LH calculations and our ministers confident that the present arrangements do not risk tipping families and individuals in areas of high priced private rental accommodation into rent arrears and potential. Destitution. I understand that the Valuation Office Agency collect the rental data from landlords to determine the LH. A. However, how accurate and up to date is this data collection and.
And are they using historic cases where people have been living in accommodation for a very long period of time? And it wouldn't reflect that actually, the price of that accommodation were to be coming back on onto the market. There are a large number of questions which I believe that the government needs to needs to address in this area, and I know that the minister is sympathetic to the issues which are raised. One one example which was raised with me by Citizens Advice Cornwall is, for example, if, for example, you have a family in Penzance consisting of either a couple or a single parent with two children of different sexes, one of whom is a ten, so they need separate bedrooms.
They would technically require a three bedroom house to be living in the LH states, that they can have a maximum of £812.76 per month, the lowest price for a privately rented three bedroom house in the Penzance area, according to Rightmove. Last night is in Marazion, I there's a few miles away and is at £1,800, making a gap of £987.24 per month for that particular family. So there are a large number of cases which I could kind of go through.
I don't have time now to. I will give way very briefly. Okay.
16:10
16:10
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
Well, I'm grateful to my old friend from the next neighbouring constituency to the south of my constituency for raising the issue, because indeed, the point I was going to come on and make was that was that was that although last night over over 1700 Airbnbs and that's just Airbnb, not all holiday lets are available in the constituency were available in the constituency last night. There were there were zero private rental properties available within the LH a rates last night when we checked on on the on the on the way in which the market is operating and, and the reason why I compare this with the, with with, with holiday letting, which I'll come on to how we're going to pay for any kind of increase is that is that for the, for the last ten, 12 or 13 years, we have been paying out multi-million pounds to, to second home owners through small business rate relief and other tax loopholes, which are available to people with second properties, those people with second properties that don't let them to local people because they don't get any tax concessions.
Those people that that don't get any small business rate relief is that they, they, those people with second homes and flip them from council tax to, to business rates were able to, to, to, to apply for small business rate relief and pay nothing at all. That is cost in Cornwall alone, over half £1 billion in the last decade just in Cornwall alone. Now, if we're going to be. If the government wants to invest in homes for local people, desperately needed homes for local people may well actually incentivise private landlords by providing tax concessions to landlords who provide decent homes with security and and an agreed negotiated rent cap to actually bring it within the scope of of what is affordable to the to the government.
That would be a far better way of spending the resources which which the government has. So I would I would urge the Minister to look very carefully at at the issues which I've been. I've been raising, and that he looks at freezing the local sorry end the freeze on the local housing allowance rates, restore and maintain the link between local housing allowance and the 30th percentile of local market and commit to an annual LA rating. Introduce measures to mitigate the impact of the benefit cap and continue wider housing reforms, including as the government wants to delivering more social housing.
So I do hope that that the minister will consider these matters. I want to give time for the honourable member for her to to speak as well. But thank you, Madam Chair.
Those people that that don't get any small business rate relief is that they, they, those people with second homes and flip them from council tax to, to business rates were able to, to, to, to apply for small business rate relief and pay nothing at all. That is cost in Cornwall alone, over half £1 billion in the last decade just in Cornwall alone. Now, if we're going to be. If the government wants to invest in homes for local people, desperately needed homes for local people may well actually incentivise private landlords by providing tax concessions to landlords who provide decent homes with security and and an agreed negotiated rent cap to actually bring it within the scope of of what is affordable to the to the government.
That would be a far better way of spending the resources which which the government has. So I would I would urge the Minister to look very carefully at at the issues which I've been. I've been raising, and that he looks at freezing the local sorry end the freeze on the local housing allowance rates, restore and maintain the link between local housing allowance and the 30th percentile of local market and commit to an annual LA rating. Introduce measures to mitigate the impact of the benefit cap and continue wider housing reforms, including as the government wants to delivering more social housing.
So I do hope that that the minister will consider these matters. I want to give time for the honourable member for her to to speak as well. But thank you, Madam Chair.
16:13
16:13
16:13
Speaker 28
-
Speaker 28
Thank you, miss Lord. It's an honour to serve with you in the chair, and I congratulate you on my honourable friend, for securing this important debate and for an excellent speech. As always, I just want to very briefly encourage the Minister today to speak to colleagues in Mhclg about reconsidering the merits of a potential cap on rental increases. I know the government is determined to do everything they can to give the British public breathing space on the cost of living, and for almost all of us, the cost of our home is far and away the largest item on our monthly bills.
Private renters spend on average 36% of their income on rent. And while I fully support the drive for a new generation of council housing, it is clear that this will not substantially bring down costs for the nearly 5 million private renters in England. In this Parliament. The housing crisis is a crisis and demands immediate action. Research by the Autonomy Institute has shown that an emergency short term measure which. While we build the. The genuinely affordable homes we need, holding rents at 2027 levels would save renters. Over the next four years more than £14 billion, and that would, of course, substantially reduce the burden on public spending to support those who need housing allowance in private rental as well.
So I hope the minister will take that away to Mhclg colleagues. Thank you. Yeah.
Private renters spend on average 36% of their income on rent. And while I fully support the drive for a new generation of council housing, it is clear that this will not substantially bring down costs for the nearly 5 million private renters in England. In this Parliament. The housing crisis is a crisis and demands immediate action. Research by the Autonomy Institute has shown that an emergency short term measure which. While we build the. The genuinely affordable homes we need, holding rents at 2027 levels would save renters. Over the next four years more than £14 billion, and that would, of course, substantially reduce the burden on public spending to support those who need housing allowance in private rental as well.
So I hope the minister will take that away to Mhclg colleagues. Thank you. Yeah.
16:15
16:15
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
Miss Lou. Delighted to be serving under your chairmanship this afternoon. And I congratulate the honourable member for Saint Ives on securing this timely debate. Just a the week before the the budget stable, affordable, good quality housing is fundamental to individual wellbeing, to economic stability and to public health. So the government has set out the ambition to deliver as members no. 1.5 million new homes. We're supporting that with a record £39 billion investment in social and affordable homes. The programme that my honourable friend from North East Hertfordshire referred to, and also with our £16 billion National Housing Bank and securing an adequate number of decent, affordable homes, is our priority and that people have wanted to do that for a long time.
What we are doing is making sure that the investment is actually going in to deliver those homes. That delivery won't happen overnight, it's true, but delivery is going to happen. We inherited a very serious housing crisis and we acted quickly in response. Policies in place are having an impact already. There are over 400,000 new homes in England since the start of this Parliament, more than a quarter of the target and new build starts in the year to June this year are up 15% on last year. We're driving forward big reforms of the planning system.
In August, we announced a new planning policy framework with clearer rules based policies to unlock more homes where they're needed. We're investing in construction skills, and my department spent nearly £38 billion last year supporting renters with housing costs via Universal Credit and housing benefit. That's an increase of around £3.5 billion over the last decade. No other OECD country spends a greater proportion of its GDP on housing support than we do, and I recognise the picture that honourable members have set out of the impact of local housing allowance in their local areas, and rental inflation across the country does vary according to specific challenges in each area.
The local housing allowance does determine the maximum financial support for renters in the private rented sector. Households in similar circumstances living in the same area are entitled to the same maximum rent allowance, regardless of the rent which they are required to pay. Local housing allowance was never intended to cover all rents in all areas. The rates for that are set annually by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Future decisions will be based on government's priorities and those are the the priorities the Chancellor will have in mind as he makes his announcements in the budget next week.
The government provides additional discretionary housing support to local authorities to help tenants meet shortfalls in their rent costs through in England, the Crisis and Resilience Fund housing payment. And I do wonder whether, in some of the cases that the honourable member referred to, that his constituents would find it worth their while just to contact the local council to see whether they they would benefit from or could benefit from a discretionary housing payment. And the Crisis and Resilience Fund does include preventative support for preventative wraparound help, as well as assistance for people facing a financial crisis.
And I know that local authorities increasingly are looking at what they can do with those resources to protect people in the kind of situation that he describes. Local housing allowance rates are set within broad rental market areas, determined by rent officers in the Valuation Office across England. Abroad rental market area 192 of them across Great Britain. As he said, Colonel West is the one that includes Saint Ives. A BRM is an area within which a person could reasonably be expected to live, having regard to facilities and services for the purposes of health, education, recreation, banking and shopping, taking account of the needs of travel to and from those services by both public and private transport.
Now rent officers gather a representative sample of private rental data across each brma of all property types and property sizes from a range of sources, including both new and existing tenancies. They survey rents across the full year to capture current market conditions. This includes collecting a representative sample from all the local authority areas within a particular Brma, including any larger urban centres and more sparsely populated rural areas. In that BRM, a and I wonder whether the honourable member might find it useful just to have a conversation with the Valuation Office Agency about. Because he raised perfectly, understandably and properly concerns about whether the data they are using is out of date.
The process is designed to ensure that that is not the case, and that up to date data is provided. And of course, it was only just over two years ago that the local housing allowance was uprated to the 30th percentile of the levels of rents in each BRM. Yes, I'm glad to give it to him.
What we are doing is making sure that the investment is actually going in to deliver those homes. That delivery won't happen overnight, it's true, but delivery is going to happen. We inherited a very serious housing crisis and we acted quickly in response. Policies in place are having an impact already. There are over 400,000 new homes in England since the start of this Parliament, more than a quarter of the target and new build starts in the year to June this year are up 15% on last year. We're driving forward big reforms of the planning system.
In August, we announced a new planning policy framework with clearer rules based policies to unlock more homes where they're needed. We're investing in construction skills, and my department spent nearly £38 billion last year supporting renters with housing costs via Universal Credit and housing benefit. That's an increase of around £3.5 billion over the last decade. No other OECD country spends a greater proportion of its GDP on housing support than we do, and I recognise the picture that honourable members have set out of the impact of local housing allowance in their local areas, and rental inflation across the country does vary according to specific challenges in each area.
The local housing allowance does determine the maximum financial support for renters in the private rented sector. Households in similar circumstances living in the same area are entitled to the same maximum rent allowance, regardless of the rent which they are required to pay. Local housing allowance was never intended to cover all rents in all areas. The rates for that are set annually by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. Future decisions will be based on government's priorities and those are the the priorities the Chancellor will have in mind as he makes his announcements in the budget next week.
The government provides additional discretionary housing support to local authorities to help tenants meet shortfalls in their rent costs through in England, the Crisis and Resilience Fund housing payment. And I do wonder whether, in some of the cases that the honourable member referred to, that his constituents would find it worth their while just to contact the local council to see whether they they would benefit from or could benefit from a discretionary housing payment. And the Crisis and Resilience Fund does include preventative support for preventative wraparound help, as well as assistance for people facing a financial crisis.
And I know that local authorities increasingly are looking at what they can do with those resources to protect people in the kind of situation that he describes. Local housing allowance rates are set within broad rental market areas, determined by rent officers in the Valuation Office across England. Abroad rental market area 192 of them across Great Britain. As he said, Colonel West is the one that includes Saint Ives. A BRM is an area within which a person could reasonably be expected to live, having regard to facilities and services for the purposes of health, education, recreation, banking and shopping, taking account of the needs of travel to and from those services by both public and private transport.
Now rent officers gather a representative sample of private rental data across each brma of all property types and property sizes from a range of sources, including both new and existing tenancies. They survey rents across the full year to capture current market conditions. This includes collecting a representative sample from all the local authority areas within a particular Brma, including any larger urban centres and more sparsely populated rural areas. In that BRM, a and I wonder whether the honourable member might find it useful just to have a conversation with the Valuation Office Agency about. Because he raised perfectly, understandably and properly concerns about whether the data they are using is out of date.
The process is designed to ensure that that is not the case, and that up to date data is provided. And of course, it was only just over two years ago that the local housing allowance was uprated to the 30th percentile of the levels of rents in each BRM. Yes, I'm glad to give it to him.
16:21
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
He a moment ago said that it's not intended that the Lhrh-r should cover all rents in all areas, and encourages me to to talk to the local Valuation Office with regard to the the methodology which they use to to set the Lhrh-r for my own area, Colonel West. I'm. Of course I'll happily do that. My question to him, given the fact that at last night, looking at the marketplace, there were not. There was not a single property anywhere close to actually reaching the the LH A level. Shouldn't he be undertaking a review of whether they're up to the task of actually understanding how the market is working, rather than leaving it entirely to local members of Parliament?
16:22
16:22
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
He he reproves me in a very appropriate way. But but I mean, the point I want to make to him is that I think the LH, a methodology which he was querying is a sound one. When local housing allowance rates are increased, they're implemented in April based on the latest private lettings data for the 12 month period up to the end of September the preceding year. So I don't think there's a problem with the way the LH rates are calculated. However, and as I said in only in 2024, the all the LH was were uprated to the 30th percentile of rates in each BRM a.
But of course, the fact is, there have been significant rent rises even in the two and a bit years since the. The level was last reset, and that, I think, is the phenomenon that he's drawing the House's attention to. There has been a rapid rise in rents in that period, and that is one of the factors that will need to be taken into account in deciding what should happen to the LH A for next year. But tackling homelessness is a very high priority on this government's list of priorities. As the Prime Minister underlined when he took office, the LH A supports those on low income with their rents in the private sector, but the causes of homelessness are complex and the LH is only one measure to tackle this, and we've significant funding that is targeted more specifically at those who are homeless and those who are who are at risk of being homeless as people in the kind of situation that the honourable member described sometimes are, and sustained cross-government action to tackle the causes of homelessness is being taken forward through the National Plan to End Homelessness.
We will be providing over £4 billion in funding for homelessness and rough sleeping services from 2627 to 2829. Councils have £2.7 billion through the homelessness, Rough sleeping and Domestic Abuse grant that they can use to support people at risk of, as well as experiencing homelessness and rough sleeping, including funding for delivery of support on domestic abuse, safe accommodation and councils. What it all means is that councils can do more to prevent homelessness, to reduce reliance on the expensive temporary accommodation that my honourable friend from Truro and Falmouth drew attention to, and target resources where they are needed.
But yes, I will.
But of course, the fact is, there have been significant rent rises even in the two and a bit years since the. The level was last reset, and that, I think, is the phenomenon that he's drawing the House's attention to. There has been a rapid rise in rents in that period, and that is one of the factors that will need to be taken into account in deciding what should happen to the LH A for next year. But tackling homelessness is a very high priority on this government's list of priorities. As the Prime Minister underlined when he took office, the LH A supports those on low income with their rents in the private sector, but the causes of homelessness are complex and the LH is only one measure to tackle this, and we've significant funding that is targeted more specifically at those who are homeless and those who are who are at risk of being homeless as people in the kind of situation that the honourable member described sometimes are, and sustained cross-government action to tackle the causes of homelessness is being taken forward through the National Plan to End Homelessness.
We will be providing over £4 billion in funding for homelessness and rough sleeping services from 2627 to 2829. Councils have £2.7 billion through the homelessness, Rough sleeping and Domestic Abuse grant that they can use to support people at risk of, as well as experiencing homelessness and rough sleeping, including funding for delivery of support on domestic abuse, safe accommodation and councils. What it all means is that councils can do more to prevent homelessness, to reduce reliance on the expensive temporary accommodation that my honourable friend from Truro and Falmouth drew attention to, and target resources where they are needed.
But yes, I will.
16:24
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
Minister earlier mentioned the fact that we we will await the Chancellor's announcements in the budget next week. It sounds to me as if as if the Minister himself was was awaiting those announcements as well. And I just wonder to what extent he's putting pressure on on the the Chancellor to address these these issues and ensure that the sufficient budget for his Department to address this issue, because if the Prime Minister is as he as I'm sure that he is sincerely wants to, to deliver, and I applaud him for it. Reduce and indeed remove entirely homelessness from our from our streets.
I'm afraid that the way in which this system is working is only going to add to that problem.
I'm afraid that the way in which this system is working is only going to add to that problem.
16:25
16:25
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
Well, I think we're all waiting what the Chancellor says next week, and I can certainly assure him that my department, my colleagues in the LG and the Treasury are continually talking about these issues, about the right approach. The last time that the uprating to the 30th percentile happened April 2024, I think over the full spending review period, if I remember rightly, the cost of that was some £7 billion. I think if we're looking at effective measures to tackle homelessness, then the kind of approaches that I've just described, the specific funding to address the problem and the risk of homelessness are the effective way to do that.
And so those are the kind of factors that the Chancellor certainly will be bearing in mind as he reaches his decisions for next week, to drive further the shift from crisis response to prevention. We are setting a national target to increase the proportion of people supported by council homelessness services to stay in their own home or help to find alternative accommodation, and our new duty to collaborate will require public services to work together to identify people at risk of homelessness and consider what action they can take within their existing responsibilities to help prevent it before it happens.
But the key priority for the government in all of this is to secure an adequate number of decent, affordable homes. We've announced the new ten year, £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, the biggest boost to housing grant funding in recent memory, and the aim is to maximise supply, with the target to deliver at least 60% of the homes under the programme as social rent. Initial funding allocations via the programme have been confirmed across England. Excluding London, 33 providers will receive £9.5 billion to invest in new social and affordable housing and deliver 73,000 homes.
Nearly two thirds of the homes built by strategic partners through the programme will be for social rent and for the first time ever, three councils have been awarded strategic partnership status with Homes England. That's Cambridge City Council, Eastleigh Borough Council and Newcastle City Council. So councils increasingly are stepping up to meet the bold ambitions that we've got. There's over £16 billion of funding outside London still yet to allocate in allocating it. The government intends to prioritise social rent, homes and in particular, council homes, to achieve the Prime Minister's ambition for the biggest council house building programme since the postwar boom ended in the early 1980s.
And it's directing funding into that programme. And programs along those lines, in our view, is the way to deal properly and permanently with the very severe housing crisis that we face right across the country, and that he and others have spoken very powerfully about in this debate. The new National Housing Bank that was launched on the 1st of April, backed by up to £16 billion in financial capacity. That bank will we envisage leverage in billions of pounds of private investment to accelerate house building across the country? And it's taking a quite a pioneering approach to its role and the status of it.
As a publicly owned subsidiary of Homes England, designated as a public financial institution, gives it a lot of autonomy for working out how to do this job most effectively. My colleagues in Mhclg have launched the National Housing Delivery Fund, which includes £5 billion grant funding to support housing delivery and address viability challenges, including through remediation of brownfield sites and provision of unlocking infrastructure. The final seconds on rent controls. I know my colleagues in Mhclg have taken the view that they would do more harm than good.
And so those are the kind of factors that the Chancellor certainly will be bearing in mind as he reaches his decisions for next week, to drive further the shift from crisis response to prevention. We are setting a national target to increase the proportion of people supported by council homelessness services to stay in their own home or help to find alternative accommodation, and our new duty to collaborate will require public services to work together to identify people at risk of homelessness and consider what action they can take within their existing responsibilities to help prevent it before it happens.
But the key priority for the government in all of this is to secure an adequate number of decent, affordable homes. We've announced the new ten year, £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, the biggest boost to housing grant funding in recent memory, and the aim is to maximise supply, with the target to deliver at least 60% of the homes under the programme as social rent. Initial funding allocations via the programme have been confirmed across England. Excluding London, 33 providers will receive £9.5 billion to invest in new social and affordable housing and deliver 73,000 homes.
Nearly two thirds of the homes built by strategic partners through the programme will be for social rent and for the first time ever, three councils have been awarded strategic partnership status with Homes England. That's Cambridge City Council, Eastleigh Borough Council and Newcastle City Council. So councils increasingly are stepping up to meet the bold ambitions that we've got. There's over £16 billion of funding outside London still yet to allocate in allocating it. The government intends to prioritise social rent, homes and in particular, council homes, to achieve the Prime Minister's ambition for the biggest council house building programme since the postwar boom ended in the early 1980s.
And it's directing funding into that programme. And programs along those lines, in our view, is the way to deal properly and permanently with the very severe housing crisis that we face right across the country, and that he and others have spoken very powerfully about in this debate. The new National Housing Bank that was launched on the 1st of April, backed by up to £16 billion in financial capacity. That bank will we envisage leverage in billions of pounds of private investment to accelerate house building across the country? And it's taking a quite a pioneering approach to its role and the status of it.
As a publicly owned subsidiary of Homes England, designated as a public financial institution, gives it a lot of autonomy for working out how to do this job most effectively. My colleagues in Mhclg have launched the National Housing Delivery Fund, which includes £5 billion grant funding to support housing delivery and address viability challenges, including through remediation of brownfield sites and provision of unlocking infrastructure. The final seconds on rent controls. I know my colleagues in Mhclg have taken the view that they would do more harm than good.
16:30
16:30
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
Thank you, Miss Lowell. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. And can I please refer members to my register of interests as the trustee of Chichester Festival Theatre that I will be talking about in my contribution, and I beg to move that this House is considered government support for community policing. Today's debate could not be timelier for my constituents in Chichester, because last week a cast member in A Midsummer Night's Dream, which was on at Chichester Festival Theatre, was followed through the city by a group in balaclavas, riding bikes, shouting, abuse and harassing a member of the cast.
Police have subsequently arrested a 16 year old male for a homophobic hate crime. And then earlier this week, the prominent comedian and actor Munya Chawawa spoke out about the experiences of the whole cast he had been performing with at CFT, including racist, homophobic and xenophobic abuse that they had encountered during their six week stay in my city. And it was heartbreaking to hear his and others share their accounts. And I want to start by saying that the hate that they experienced does in no way represent the majority view, and is not the Chichester that I know and love, but the fact that this has happened in a city that I am constantly told has very low levels of crime, should be a cause for concern for all, because I have no doubt that the pipeline of hatred that is fed into our algorithms and screens is feeding this beast, and anti-social behaviour more generally, is a growing theme in my work as the Member of Parliament for Chichester.
I'll happily give way.
Police have subsequently arrested a 16 year old male for a homophobic hate crime. And then earlier this week, the prominent comedian and actor Munya Chawawa spoke out about the experiences of the whole cast he had been performing with at CFT, including racist, homophobic and xenophobic abuse that they had encountered during their six week stay in my city. And it was heartbreaking to hear his and others share their accounts. And I want to start by saying that the hate that they experienced does in no way represent the majority view, and is not the Chichester that I know and love, but the fact that this has happened in a city that I am constantly told has very low levels of crime, should be a cause for concern for all, because I have no doubt that the pipeline of hatred that is fed into our algorithms and screens is feeding this beast, and anti-social behaviour more generally, is a growing theme in my work as the Member of Parliament for Chichester.
I'll happily give way.
16:32
16:32
Speaker 25
-
Speaker 25
Him for securing this debate locally again, it's an area that supposedly has low level of crime, but actually residents in Tring talk about anti-social behaviour. Residents in Harpenden have taken up private security and Anna, from Berkhamsted, says she's never seen a police officer for years. But you mentioned that online crime and the community policing that go hand in hand. So would my hon. Friend also agree that one way of tackling this is looking at it holistically, having a proper online crime agency funded by big tech, so that we can actually then properly fund and resource community policing as well.
16:32
16:32
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I thank my honourable friend for her intervention and she pre-empts one of the things that I will be calling for later in my speech, and when we talk about anti-social behaviour happening in all corners of the country in Chichester, I'm seeing it with balaclava clad young men riding e-bikes at terrifying speeds along pedestrian streets or pavements, people feeling intimidated and threatened when they're out in the evening. The use, the growing use of catapults to harm wildlife, or the shoplifting epidemic that plagues our local businesses. And it's seen across my constituency, whether it's in the city centre or in the towns in Selsey, in Westhampnett or in the Witterings.
Charity venues have told me about young men forcing entry and threatening their volunteers, or elderly members of the public who've gone along to watch a film. Another constituent told me that the local bowls club is struggling to retain members after some of their members were hit with ball bearings that were being shot at pigeons. And today's debate is on community policing, and I do believe that much of this activity is driven by a lack of visible policing in areas like mine.
At that point, I'll give way.
Charity venues have told me about young men forcing entry and threatening their volunteers, or elderly members of the public who've gone along to watch a film. Another constituent told me that the local bowls club is struggling to retain members after some of their members were hit with ball bearings that were being shot at pigeons. And today's debate is on community policing, and I do believe that much of this activity is driven by a lack of visible policing in areas like mine.
At that point, I'll give way.
16:33
16:33
Speaker 18
-
Speaker 18
Honourable member, for giving way and calling this important debate in my constituency of Dorking and Horley , we have a serious problem with anti-social motorbike noise from modified exhausts. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that that we should have more public spaces protection orders to help the police enforce against anti-social behaviour, and also to help fund the trials of acoustic cameras to try and stop this?
16:34
16:34
Speaker 3
-
Speaker 3
I thank my hon. Friend for his important intervention, and I agree with him that we need to have more access to these things like pspos. But I do also recognise that there is an acute challenge in actually policing the spots that we then manage to get in place. That was a suggestion that we had locally to cull the the wildlife crime that we were seeing locally. But the police quite rightly said a pspo is only effective if you've got the police to actually manage it. And I would like to add that this is not the fault of local police officers who are diligent, they're well trained, and they're dedicated to keeping our community safe.
But they are also asked to achieve the impossible. The government's Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee makes all the right noises about making sure policing is local, but in coastal and rural areas like mine, it is near to impossible to have a meaningful presence in the huge areas that they are asked to cover. An area like Selsey has nearly 11,000 residents now that nearly doubles in the summer months with tourism to the area, but they don't magically get any additional police policing during those summer months when the population doubles, I'll happily give way on that point.
But they are also asked to achieve the impossible. The government's Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee makes all the right noises about making sure policing is local, but in coastal and rural areas like mine, it is near to impossible to have a meaningful presence in the huge areas that they are asked to cover. An area like Selsey has nearly 11,000 residents now that nearly doubles in the summer months with tourism to the area, but they don't magically get any additional police policing during those summer months when the population doubles, I'll happily give way on that point.
16:35
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
Thank you for excellent speech painting a very vivid picture of the experience of local constituents. I'd like to associate my myself with her comments about the cast of Midsummer Night Dream as well. No one should be subjected to racist or homophobic abuse anywhere in the country. But on Selsey, my local constituency, Bournemouth West, gets more than 10 million visitors in the summer. It is. One of Dorset Police is one of the lowest funded police forces in the area, and we get no additional resources. The funding formula doesn't take into account adequately the seasonal pressures we get, nor the Rurality and the rest of the county.
So does she agree with me that this needs to change?
So does she agree with me that this needs to change?
16:36
16:36
16:36
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
The formula does not reflect seasonal pressures that I certainly see in my coastal constituency. And when I'm talking about Selsey, to describe it for those that have never been, and if you haven't, I look forward to seeing you in the summer. There is one road in and one road out. It is a very isolated community. Selsey means Seal . They are an island. They have one PC and two PCSOs that are not just covering Selsey. They're also covering Sidlesham, Hunston, North London and some of the harbour villages. On a summer's day, it would take an officer at least an hour to travel from one end of the patch that they're meant to cover to the other, and yet they are meant to have an acute understanding of the area and the problems that arise there.
I went out last summer with a PC who had responsibility for Selsey, and residents in Selsey were turning and staring at us like they'd never seen a police officer walking the streets of Selsey. And when I asked that PC, when was the last time you did a walkabout? He had to admit to me he'd never done one before because of the pressures that he had administratively in managing his workload. And when you go to the other end of my constituency, towards the South Downs National Park, farmers are creating WhatsApp chats to monitor the illegal activity on their land so that they can support each other, whether it's equipment and tool theft or hare coursing.
Because of their isolation and the lack of provision in the rural crime team within Sussex Police. And why do we find ourselves in this position? Well, for starters, our police forces were recklessly hollowed out by the previous government and the number of PCSOs was decimated.
I went out last summer with a PC who had responsibility for Selsey, and residents in Selsey were turning and staring at us like they'd never seen a police officer walking the streets of Selsey. And when I asked that PC, when was the last time you did a walkabout? He had to admit to me he'd never done one before because of the pressures that he had administratively in managing his workload. And when you go to the other end of my constituency, towards the South Downs National Park, farmers are creating WhatsApp chats to monitor the illegal activity on their land so that they can support each other, whether it's equipment and tool theft or hare coursing.
Because of their isolation and the lack of provision in the rural crime team within Sussex Police. And why do we find ourselves in this position? Well, for starters, our police forces were recklessly hollowed out by the previous government and the number of PCSOs was decimated.
16:38
16:38
16:38
16:38
Speaker 30
-
Speaker 30
She's making some very good points in her speech. But would she not agree that the cuts to the police service's budget across the country started in 2010, when her government, when her party went into government with the Conservative Party, and we saw 25% cut across the country. And it is that which decimated neighbourhood policing in all of our constituencies.
16:38
16:38
16:38
Speaker 12
-
Speaker 12
Make an impassioned speech on her point about the effects of those cuts under the conservative and coalition governments on community policing. That's having direct effect on my constituents. Jane, who lives in Ecclesfield, recently told me about a terrifying experience she had where multiple electric bikes sped past her on the pavement as she was crossing the road. She told me that they were going as fast as cars with their speed limiters disabled, and said that if she'd set foot on the pavement a second earlier, she would have been injured or potentially lost her life. Does the honourable member agree with me that it is vital that we roll out the 13,000 neighbourhood officers officers by the end of this Parliament and that our government is working towards to ensure that the dangerous use of e-bikes is properly tackled, including in my constituency.
16:39
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
I thank the honourable member for her intervention and for getting on record how important it is to have that visible community policing that needs to happen as quick as possible, so that the examples that she gives about her constituents and the fear that she must have felt in that moment, are addressed or alleviated somewhat by knowing that there is a police officer that they can contact that understands the local area. I also recognise that crimes are becoming more complicated. Evidence can come in many forms, with the rise of things like ring doorbells and CCTV, and the use of WhatsApp chats being part of an evidence base.
And models for dealing with this administrative burden differ from police force to police force, but we also have a real challenge with reporting. My local police force make operational day to day decisions entirely predicated on the reporting data. And yet, the number of times that I have called to speak to the police about an incident that is being widely discussed online, only to be told that they have no such record of any incident ever occurring. Now, I recognise that frustrations that constituents voiced to me that if they report, nothing happens anyway. But police forces are now so reliant on data that I cannot impress enough on people how important it is to report crimes or anti-social behaviour when they witness it.
So the police have an accurate record of where these hotspots actually are. I will give way.
And models for dealing with this administrative burden differ from police force to police force, but we also have a real challenge with reporting. My local police force make operational day to day decisions entirely predicated on the reporting data. And yet, the number of times that I have called to speak to the police about an incident that is being widely discussed online, only to be told that they have no such record of any incident ever occurring. Now, I recognise that frustrations that constituents voiced to me that if they report, nothing happens anyway. But police forces are now so reliant on data that I cannot impress enough on people how important it is to report crimes or anti-social behaviour when they witness it.
So the police have an accurate record of where these hotspots actually are. I will give way.
16:40
16:40
16:40
16:41
16:41
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
I do agree with the honourable gentleman, and I would also reflect that when I was growing up as a teenager, I knew the name of my local police officer, and it certainly deterred me from hanging around at the duck pond late at night, because I knew that if he spotted me, my mum would probably hear about it. And so that kind of community policing, understanding where the issues are, where people are congregating, where the problems are occurring, is so important for the police officers. And I do come on to that later. And these are vital points of visibility, but they also provide people with a direct route to access, support and report crimes, especially for those who do not want to navigate complex online forms.
And a constituent recently told me that they went to report a crime. They they called. They called to report the crime. They were told that it was an over an hour's waiting time to speak to somebody. So please go online. And then they were asked to provide the exact postcode of where they had seen the incident. They couldn't move forward because they couldn't provide the postcode and they just gave up. They just gave up reporting it. And something else that exacerbates the situation in my constituency is poor decision making at a local level, such as the closure of Chichester Custody Centre that contributes to staffing pressures because it keeps police officers off the streets and away from the communities they serve.
Since its closure in 2018, officers making an arrest have had to undertake a round trip to Worthing and in some cases, when that custody centre is full all the way to Crawley and a recent Freedom of Information request revealed that just last year there were 1100 such trips, even without the traffic on the A27. Each journey would take police officers away from Chichester for hours at a time. It is a monumental waste of time and effort, particularly when there is a purpose built, workable facility in Chichester and I know the Police and Crime Commissioner would like me to stop talking about it, but I will not because to me it is a win win because it puts more police back on the streets.
It increases the time that officers spend out on our streets and provides a credible deterrent that we need. And it is why I ask the minister, in her response today to outline the government's view on mothballed infrastructure, such as our custody centre that could be brought back into use to improve community policing. And beyond this, we need from the government a clear commitment today to a return to to what community policing actually means. Because when the government made their health hubs announcement, for example, with a health hub in every community, the definition used was with a population of 50,000 people.
If something like this was to be used in policing, it would be no comfort to my communities like Selsey that I spoke of earlier, or in the Witterings or in Pagham, who already see resources spread too thin. So would the minister please define neighbourhood and how that is adjusted for my rural and coastal communities? I will give way.
And a constituent recently told me that they went to report a crime. They they called. They called to report the crime. They were told that it was an over an hour's waiting time to speak to somebody. So please go online. And then they were asked to provide the exact postcode of where they had seen the incident. They couldn't move forward because they couldn't provide the postcode and they just gave up. They just gave up reporting it. And something else that exacerbates the situation in my constituency is poor decision making at a local level, such as the closure of Chichester Custody Centre that contributes to staffing pressures because it keeps police officers off the streets and away from the communities they serve.
Since its closure in 2018, officers making an arrest have had to undertake a round trip to Worthing and in some cases, when that custody centre is full all the way to Crawley and a recent Freedom of Information request revealed that just last year there were 1100 such trips, even without the traffic on the A27. Each journey would take police officers away from Chichester for hours at a time. It is a monumental waste of time and effort, particularly when there is a purpose built, workable facility in Chichester and I know the Police and Crime Commissioner would like me to stop talking about it, but I will not because to me it is a win win because it puts more police back on the streets.
It increases the time that officers spend out on our streets and provides a credible deterrent that we need. And it is why I ask the minister, in her response today to outline the government's view on mothballed infrastructure, such as our custody centre that could be brought back into use to improve community policing. And beyond this, we need from the government a clear commitment today to a return to to what community policing actually means. Because when the government made their health hubs announcement, for example, with a health hub in every community, the definition used was with a population of 50,000 people.
If something like this was to be used in policing, it would be no comfort to my communities like Selsey that I spoke of earlier, or in the Witterings or in Pagham, who already see resources spread too thin. So would the minister please define neighbourhood and how that is adjusted for my rural and coastal communities? I will give way.
16:44
Speaker 31
-
Speaker 31
I thank my honourable friend for giving way. She is making a very powerful speech. Would she also agree that neighbourhood police officers fully warranted police officers are being put into civilian jobs to relieve pressure in things like call centres, jobs that civilians should do, and that also, while many of the priorities of the government I support on on policing are police whose job is to do the be are then pulled into different priorities, whatever they may be.
And so that core policing isn't available.
And so that core policing isn't available.
16:44
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
I thank my honourable friend for her intervention, and I think it's right to say that no police officer signed up to be a front line. Frontline service person to spend all their time at a desk. They signed up because they wanted to be making a real, tangible difference in their communities. And so we need them to be not glued to their desks under burdensome paperwork. That's not what they were trained for. And we can free up officers time by. For example, as my honourable friend mentioned, establishing an online crime agency which would relieve local officers of the burden of complex and time consuming work around highly sophisticated online crime.
And finally, chair, I just want to turn to the wider issue of resourcing. I'm sure it is an issue that many members here will discuss, and one that's been raised with me through various channels, including by the Police and Crime Commissioner in Sussex. We know how we got here, but decisions made by this government have contributed to the problem. For example, the consolidation of funding pots has left my residents short changed . The funding model, fails to take proper account of the genuinely rural nature of my constituency, which leaves our residents worse off in funding terms than the national average.
And the government have announced new policies aimed at addressing some of the issues we've discussed, but without providing the resources needed to implement them. For example, the newly introduced respect orders breaching them constitutes a criminal offence, which will once again draw on police resource. This will require additional funding to support it, but it is yet to be seen. The issues facing community policing are not primarily about a lack of powers, because any police officer will tell you that the most powerful tools in their armoury is not one that is given to them through the law.
It is the ability to build relationships, understand the uniqueness of their community. They serve and have a presence that serves in itself as a deterrent. I will give way.
And finally, chair, I just want to turn to the wider issue of resourcing. I'm sure it is an issue that many members here will discuss, and one that's been raised with me through various channels, including by the Police and Crime Commissioner in Sussex. We know how we got here, but decisions made by this government have contributed to the problem. For example, the consolidation of funding pots has left my residents short changed . The funding model, fails to take proper account of the genuinely rural nature of my constituency, which leaves our residents worse off in funding terms than the national average.
And the government have announced new policies aimed at addressing some of the issues we've discussed, but without providing the resources needed to implement them. For example, the newly introduced respect orders breaching them constitutes a criminal offence, which will once again draw on police resource. This will require additional funding to support it, but it is yet to be seen. The issues facing community policing are not primarily about a lack of powers, because any police officer will tell you that the most powerful tools in their armoury is not one that is given to them through the law.
It is the ability to build relationships, understand the uniqueness of their community. They serve and have a presence that serves in itself as a deterrent. I will give way.
16:46
16:46
Speaker 30
-
Speaker 30
Member for giving way, but many of the police officers that I have spoken to have made exactly the point that they do not have enough powers to deal with anti-social behaviour in particular, but also shoplifting, and she was good enough earlier to take responsibility for her party's part in cutting a police office numbers, a police numbers across the country. So would she similarly take responsibility for the 2014 act that her party, the Lib Dems, brought in with the conservatives, which got rid of Asbos and the power that police had to take action against anti-social behaviour, and which also brought in the £200 threshold for shoplifters, which meant people can get away with nicking stuff left, right and centre.
16:47
16:47
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
I thank the honourable member for her contribution, and I would perhaps reflect to her that I'm not confident that her constituents that she represents would appreciate her using her time in this place to talk about things that happened 15 years ago, when they have the power of government and they have the opportunity to do all of the things that she rightly raises, things that need to change. And she now has the opportunity. She has the keys in her hand and the power to make those changes for her constituents. And, and, and the police tell me that it's it's about a lack of resource and always being asked to do more with less.
So I hope that the minister will take the opportunity to grab the bull by the horns and get on top of community policing, but real community policing for the better. Thank you, chair.
So I hope that the minister will take the opportunity to grab the bull by the horns and get on top of community policing, but real community policing for the better. Thank you, chair.
16:48
16:48
16:48
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
Congratulate the Honourable Lady for Chichester in the usual way for securing this debate. I hope she won't mind if I focus on the challenges around community policing in suburban areas of the greatest city in the world, in London, and specifically to ask the minister to encourage councils in the suburbs of London to use their powers. The social. The so-called section 92 powers to fund directly police officers for the local community. There are a number of London councils already doing so, and what I struggle to understand is why Harrow Council, which serves my constituents some of the time well and some of the time not quite so well, aren't funding police officers similarly.
Barking and Dagenham Fund for Police officers. Greenwich two. Hammersmith and Fulham three. Havering almost three. Islington two. Southwark three. Tower hamlets 26. Westminster nine. Why couldn't Harrow Council be part of funding police officers in a very direct way? I welcome the government's commitment to an extra 13,000 additional neighbourhood police in Harrow. We are fortunate to have seen extra police in Wealdstone in my constituency, and effective neighbourhood policing teams across the borough who have helped to drive down particular levels of crime related to shoplifting. There's still more work to do very much in that regard, and also to tackle 1 or 2 of the key gang crime hotspots in in my constituency.
I welcome to the Met's very successful crackdown on mobile phone theft, which has been been very welcome. But there is still, I think, a lot more to do around helping our constituents to actually feel safe and secure in the key shopping districts that serve my constituency. It is true that many councils have their own enforcement operations enforcement officers, but those enforcement officers, such as the Kingdom employed officers in in Harrow, have no powers of arrest. They can't issue criminal charges. They can't issue on the spot fines on occasion, on occasion. So they don't have the same level of powers and they are not seen as being as similarly effective as having direct police officers.
So I do hope the minister will take some time and encourage local authorities, such as Harrow in particular, to go that extra mile and use some of the significant uplift in funding that Harrow in particular, has received under this government to fund some police officers directly in our community. Going. Going forward, I would like to see, in the longer term some investment in Harrow's police station.
Barking and Dagenham Fund for Police officers. Greenwich two. Hammersmith and Fulham three. Havering almost three. Islington two. Southwark three. Tower hamlets 26. Westminster nine. Why couldn't Harrow Council be part of funding police officers in a very direct way? I welcome the government's commitment to an extra 13,000 additional neighbourhood police in Harrow. We are fortunate to have seen extra police in Wealdstone in my constituency, and effective neighbourhood policing teams across the borough who have helped to drive down particular levels of crime related to shoplifting. There's still more work to do very much in that regard, and also to tackle 1 or 2 of the key gang crime hotspots in in my constituency.
I welcome to the Met's very successful crackdown on mobile phone theft, which has been been very welcome. But there is still, I think, a lot more to do around helping our constituents to actually feel safe and secure in the key shopping districts that serve my constituency. It is true that many councils have their own enforcement operations enforcement officers, but those enforcement officers, such as the Kingdom employed officers in in Harrow, have no powers of arrest. They can't issue criminal charges. They can't issue on the spot fines on occasion, on occasion. So they don't have the same level of powers and they are not seen as being as similarly effective as having direct police officers.
So I do hope the minister will take some time and encourage local authorities, such as Harrow in particular, to go that extra mile and use some of the significant uplift in funding that Harrow in particular, has received under this government to fund some police officers directly in our community. Going. Going forward, I would like to see, in the longer term some investment in Harrow's police station.
16:51
Speaker 27
-
Speaker 27
Setting the scene incredibly well, there is no issue more critical to the peace, stability and everyday safety of our citizens in Northern Ireland than the strength and integrity of our community policing. I've always been a believer in community policing. I've supported that as a councillor. In 1985, when I first joined the council as an MLA and now as MP, the true policing is not done from behind the high walls of a fortified station or from the windows of armoured vehicles. It's done on the streets, on the doorsteps, through the painstaking day by day work of building trust with local communities.
Community policing thrives. Our neighbourhoods thrive when that foundation is chipped away. The consequences for our society are severe, and I make this comment, but not to go into detail. Sometimes political decisions are taken that affect community policing. That's one of the issues over the last period of time in Northern Ireland. I won't go into the details. It wouldn't be appropriate for this, but just to say that that will and does have an effect on community policing, I think particularly of our own superb local commander, Superintendent Johnson. For years, Superintendent Meadows and his team have been absolutely pains to engage with the community, to show visible leadership, to keep our streets safe.
They have done incredible work managing complex local tensions and taking drugs off our streets with absolute professionalism. They are at the forefront of community policing. They are the people who work with the the people in the community. Superintendent also achieved these successes despite facing a crippling multi-million pound black hole in the budget, PSNI does need funding. It needs the resources to put the boots on the ground, maintain its fleet, preserve neighbourhood teams. But more than a chequebook, the PSNI needs a government that understands the fragility of policing by consent. We, and I know the Minister often goes to Northern Ireland and direct contact with the Chief Constable and indeed with the Policing and Justice Minister and some of the lessons that we've learned in Northern Ireland.
I know that are helpful to hear because we manage every day. The police manage every day complex. I finish with this here because I'm conscious of others to speak. Madam chair, when the rule of law is compromised by political intervention, it's a local community, police officers who pay the price on the doorstep. So I highlight that government must recognise the damage the political interference causes to community relations, to fully back the independence of local policing, to finally deliver the fair, sustainable funding that our police service needs to keep every single community safe, community policing and behind it all the way.
Community policing thrives. Our neighbourhoods thrive when that foundation is chipped away. The consequences for our society are severe, and I make this comment, but not to go into detail. Sometimes political decisions are taken that affect community policing. That's one of the issues over the last period of time in Northern Ireland. I won't go into the details. It wouldn't be appropriate for this, but just to say that that will and does have an effect on community policing, I think particularly of our own superb local commander, Superintendent Johnson. For years, Superintendent Meadows and his team have been absolutely pains to engage with the community, to show visible leadership, to keep our streets safe.
They have done incredible work managing complex local tensions and taking drugs off our streets with absolute professionalism. They are at the forefront of community policing. They are the people who work with the the people in the community. Superintendent also achieved these successes despite facing a crippling multi-million pound black hole in the budget, PSNI does need funding. It needs the resources to put the boots on the ground, maintain its fleet, preserve neighbourhood teams. But more than a chequebook, the PSNI needs a government that understands the fragility of policing by consent. We, and I know the Minister often goes to Northern Ireland and direct contact with the Chief Constable and indeed with the Policing and Justice Minister and some of the lessons that we've learned in Northern Ireland.
I know that are helpful to hear because we manage every day. The police manage every day complex. I finish with this here because I'm conscious of others to speak. Madam chair, when the rule of law is compromised by political intervention, it's a local community, police officers who pay the price on the doorstep. So I highlight that government must recognise the damage the political interference causes to community relations, to fully back the independence of local policing, to finally deliver the fair, sustainable funding that our police service needs to keep every single community safe, community policing and behind it all the way.
16:53
16:53
Speaker 32
-
Speaker 32
I thank the member for Chichester for securing this debate. I want to begin by acknowledging the Nottinghamshire police officer who was shot and injured during working on duty in Nottingham city centre, close to my constituency on Sunday. My thoughts are with the with the officer, their family and friends and colleagues and I wish him a speedy recovery. It is a sobering reminder of the courage our police officers show every day, and the risks they face while working to keep our communities safe. In Broxtowe, our local police service has an insufficient number of officers to tackle the crime and anti-social behaviour, which is significantly impacting our communities.
And even when officers are available, they're not. They don't always have the equipment, the resources or the operational capacity required to intervene safely and effectively across Broxtowe. In particular, Eastwood, Stapleford and Beeston residents are consistently raising concerns about anti-social behaviour and dangerous illegally modified e-bikes and drug related crimes. Nottinghamshire Police do a fantastic job in responding to those issues, but can only operate within the staffing and resources available to them. Teams are stretched so thin that they cannot maintain a visible presence in our communities, which is what the public reasonably expects. Police visibility is a deterrent for those who carry out criminal activity, and the lack of a police presence damages public trust.
Every community deserves an effective and visible police presence so that residents residents can feel confident that their concerns are acted upon. I therefore ask the minister, will she give an update on the commitment to recruit 13,000 additional neighbourhood police officers, and how far have we got? How far have we progressed? Because in Broxtowe we need a sustained police force to tackle the rising crime and anti-social behaviour that is affecting my constituency.
And even when officers are available, they're not. They don't always have the equipment, the resources or the operational capacity required to intervene safely and effectively across Broxtowe. In particular, Eastwood, Stapleford and Beeston residents are consistently raising concerns about anti-social behaviour and dangerous illegally modified e-bikes and drug related crimes. Nottinghamshire Police do a fantastic job in responding to those issues, but can only operate within the staffing and resources available to them. Teams are stretched so thin that they cannot maintain a visible presence in our communities, which is what the public reasonably expects. Police visibility is a deterrent for those who carry out criminal activity, and the lack of a police presence damages public trust.
Every community deserves an effective and visible police presence so that residents residents can feel confident that their concerns are acted upon. I therefore ask the minister, will she give an update on the commitment to recruit 13,000 additional neighbourhood police officers, and how far have we got? How far have we progressed? Because in Broxtowe we need a sustained police force to tackle the rising crime and anti-social behaviour that is affecting my constituency.
16:56
16:56
16:56
16:56
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
I'm grateful to my honourable friend, the member for Chichester for bringing this debate. Community policing is not simply about responding to crime after it happens. It's about prevention, reassurance and building trust. It's about having officers and PCSOs who know their communities, understand local concerns and are recognised by residents, shopkeepers, schools and local organisations. When community policing works well, it prevents crime before it takes hold and helps people feel safe in the places where they live, work and shop. The challenge facing communities across West Yorkshire is significant. Recent crime statistics show Dewsbury continues to experience crime rates above both West Yorkshire and national averages.
As of April this year, the crime rate in Dewsbury was 30% higher than Yorkshire and the Humber and 53% higher than England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with an overall crime rate of reported at 125 crimes per 1000 residents with violent sexual offences, anti-social behaviour and public order being the top crimes. Batley faces similar issues as of April this year, crime rates in Batley are four point were 4.2% higher than Yorkshire and Humber, and 23% higher than England and Wales, with an overall figure with an overall figure of 114 crimes per 1000 residents. That is why government support for neighbourhood policing is so important.
Community. I will give way.
As of April this year, the crime rate in Dewsbury was 30% higher than Yorkshire and the Humber and 53% higher than England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with an overall crime rate of reported at 125 crimes per 1000 residents with violent sexual offences, anti-social behaviour and public order being the top crimes. Batley faces similar issues as of April this year, crime rates in Batley are four point were 4.2% higher than Yorkshire and Humber, and 23% higher than England and Wales, with an overall figure with an overall figure of 114 crimes per 1000 residents. That is why government support for neighbourhood policing is so important.
Community. I will give way.
16:57
16:57
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
Giving way? Nearly 70% of police forces have more police officers now than they did in 2010, whereas in my constituency, Birmingham, Perry Barr, which is within the West Midlands area, actually are 450 police officers less, 500 PCSOs less. Does the honourable member agree that there ought to be some parity across all police forces in terms of numbers?
16:58
16:58
Speaker 29
-
Speaker 29
I thank my honourable friend for his intervention, and I completely agree that the resources for law enforcement and tackling crime should be equally distributed across our nation, and no constituency should be faced with a shortfall compared to others. So I was just concluding, Madam Chair. Community policing is one of the most effective tools we have to reduce crime, improve trust and strengthen community cohesion. It is particularly important in diverse towns such as Dewsbury and Batley, where relationships between local people and the police must be built on familiarity, understanding and mutual respect. So my message today is clear government support for community policing must be at the required level to continue to reduce crime in every constituency across our country.
By investing in visible neighbourhood policing, we can make our town centres safer, support local businesses, reduce crime, tackle anti-social behaviour and restore public confidence. Thank you.
By investing in visible neighbourhood policing, we can make our town centres safer, support local businesses, reduce crime, tackle anti-social behaviour and restore public confidence. Thank you.
16:59
16:59
16:59
Speaker 33
-
Speaker 33
Spend my time talking about those individuals that make up our police force. Community policing is one of the foundations of effective policing in this country. It's far more than preventing crime. It's about building trust, strengthening relationships, ensuring that every resident feels safe, supported, and connected to those who serve. Community policing works because it's rooted in local knowledge. I know my dad was once one. However, for too long that connection has been weakened. We need to restore that vital link between police forces and local people, ensuring that officers are visible and present in their neighbourhoods. We need to see police desks on our high street so that residents can report that crime.
The coalition government woefully underfunded the police. Hampshire police have been have seen an extension in their funding, which has meant that we have exceeded our police tally from 100 114 officers from the 99 that we had. The investment has provided my constituents, named officers for all communities, and I have personally met all of our neighbourhood police have been on the beat and have worked with them in the community hand in hand. PC Smith, Joyce Middleton, Weatherhill, Trend and Goldfinch are the very best of what Portsmouth has and I want to put on record my sincere thanks for the work they do every day to keep my city safe.
Yesterday I was delighted to meet the Hampshire Police Federation in Parliament. The pressures that come with the job, the long hours are difficult instance and the emotional toll that policing can take is one of the main things that we need to talk about. Suicide is a huge health issue in the police. We are rightly shocked and appalled when an officer is killed in the line of duty, but many more take their own lives and yet is not treated in the same importance. We must ensure that the mental health support is available and accessible and embedded throughout a police officer's career.
And one thing I'd like to draw the attention to, which has been seen a rise in mine, is the doxing of police officers in my city. It is not okay and we need to stamp it out. Thank you.
The coalition government woefully underfunded the police. Hampshire police have been have seen an extension in their funding, which has meant that we have exceeded our police tally from 100 114 officers from the 99 that we had. The investment has provided my constituents, named officers for all communities, and I have personally met all of our neighbourhood police have been on the beat and have worked with them in the community hand in hand. PC Smith, Joyce Middleton, Weatherhill, Trend and Goldfinch are the very best of what Portsmouth has and I want to put on record my sincere thanks for the work they do every day to keep my city safe.
Yesterday I was delighted to meet the Hampshire Police Federation in Parliament. The pressures that come with the job, the long hours are difficult instance and the emotional toll that policing can take is one of the main things that we need to talk about. Suicide is a huge health issue in the police. We are rightly shocked and appalled when an officer is killed in the line of duty, but many more take their own lives and yet is not treated in the same importance. We must ensure that the mental health support is available and accessible and embedded throughout a police officer's career.
And one thing I'd like to draw the attention to, which has been seen a rise in mine, is the doxing of police officers in my city. It is not okay and we need to stamp it out. Thank you.
17:01
17:01
Speaker 19
-
Speaker 19
Thanks. Under your chair, and I congratulate my hon. Friend for securing this debate today. A fridge dumped in a field. A car taking a bend too fast. An unauthorised development on a local farm. They all cause harm, but together they wear down residents sense of safety and community. These may seem like small countryside crimes, but they're often evidence of organised networks operating across our country. We know that organised groups dump waste where no one is watching, such as in rural Hampshire's quiet fields. And that same isolation leaves villages vulnerable to illegal developments. In September, one was set up near South Warnborough, and although I visited the site and have been working with the council and police ever since, it is clear that both organisations lack the enforcement powers to stop this here or anywhere else.
Police are facing severe resource pressures and this does cause particular damage with hare coursing. Hare coursing means chasing and killing hares for entertainment and betting, and that betting is linked to international crime networks. Farmers are left with torn up land and violent threats, and officers often can't reach the fields in time. Hare coursers often use stolen vehicles and drive recklessly down country lanes. Dangerous driving is a serious problem across north east Hampshire. Tragically, eight people have died on roads in my constituency this year, so far more than double the national average. This heartbreaking situation cannot continue and unfortunately, Hampshire County Council always responds to my letters to say that this location is of low priority for investigation, despite residents, councillors and me raising the same issues again and again, the solution is clear we need funds for road safety improvements, councils which will implement them, and enough policing resource to prosecute dangerous drivers.
Police are facing severe resource pressures and this does cause particular damage with hare coursing. Hare coursing means chasing and killing hares for entertainment and betting, and that betting is linked to international crime networks. Farmers are left with torn up land and violent threats, and officers often can't reach the fields in time. Hare coursers often use stolen vehicles and drive recklessly down country lanes. Dangerous driving is a serious problem across north east Hampshire. Tragically, eight people have died on roads in my constituency this year, so far more than double the national average. This heartbreaking situation cannot continue and unfortunately, Hampshire County Council always responds to my letters to say that this location is of low priority for investigation, despite residents, councillors and me raising the same issues again and again, the solution is clear we need funds for road safety improvements, councils which will implement them, and enough policing resource to prosecute dangerous drivers.
17:03
17:03
Speaker 34
-
Speaker 34
Thank you. Pleasure to serve your chair. For me, community policing is about whether people feel safe in the neighbourhoods, high streets or town centres. It's about public confidence that when concerns are raised, there's a visible police presence that knows the community and responds effectively. That's why long term, consistent funding matters. Trust takes years to build and minutes to lose. Officers and PCSOs need the stability to develop relationships within communities and become familiar faces. Community policing is also vital in supporting local businesses. And of course, this debate takes place just ahead of us. Does respect for Shopworkers week.
And we all know that retail workers increasingly face abuse, threats and violence simply for doing their jobs. The Crime and Policing Policing Act is crucial to ensure that the police have the powers they need to tackle low level offending, and now we must make sure that this is matched by the resources and policing presence to enforce them. And I'll end on a story of an incredible police constable, Jake Hart, who was chasing suspects down the road in Rhyl when a young boy offered him his bicycle to complete the pursuit. Not the quite the high tech crime fighting equipment usually discussed here, but a wonderful example of community spirit.
And more importantly, it showed a young person who trusted the police enough to want to help. So important that that trust is kept, it's invaluable and it's worth investing in.
And we all know that retail workers increasingly face abuse, threats and violence simply for doing their jobs. The Crime and Policing Policing Act is crucial to ensure that the police have the powers they need to tackle low level offending, and now we must make sure that this is matched by the resources and policing presence to enforce them. And I'll end on a story of an incredible police constable, Jake Hart, who was chasing suspects down the road in Rhyl when a young boy offered him his bicycle to complete the pursuit. Not the quite the high tech crime fighting equipment usually discussed here, but a wonderful example of community spirit.
And more importantly, it showed a young person who trusted the police enough to want to help. So important that that trust is kept, it's invaluable and it's worth investing in.
17:04
17:04
Speaker 35
-
Speaker 35
Thank you. What I'm going to say, two years ago, I was in this place warning about the systematic underfunding of Cleveland police. And I've done so continually over the last couple of years. I'm grateful to the Prime Minister for his time last week to discuss these matters. I'm grateful to the Minister for taking the time over many occasions to discuss them, too, and for the mutual aid we've seen in our region since the tragic deaths of PC Tom Clough and PC Matthew Blades this summer. The fact is, Cleveland Police is one of the most overstretched forces in the country, the hardest hit force in England in terms of cuts to police numbers since 2010, with one of the highest recorded crime rates in England and Wales.
And the Chief Constable, Victoria Fuller, has estimated that the force needs another 500 officers just to get to the national average. But as Lauren Sommerville, who's the chair of the Police Federation in Cleveland, said when I met her this week, Cleveland is a good force and its officers are proud of their work. The new police performance system gave the force level one the highest rating, and it has been recognised as one of the most improved forces in England and Wales too. So the problem is not the hard working, brave officers of Cleveland Police. The fundamental problem is the police funding formula, which doesn't adequately reflect the scale of crime and deprivation and demand in Cleveland.
So I urge the government to overhaul that formula at pace and inject an emergency increase of funding in year so we can tackle the challenges that we have in our region. Thank you.
And the Chief Constable, Victoria Fuller, has estimated that the force needs another 500 officers just to get to the national average. But as Lauren Sommerville, who's the chair of the Police Federation in Cleveland, said when I met her this week, Cleveland is a good force and its officers are proud of their work. The new police performance system gave the force level one the highest rating, and it has been recognised as one of the most improved forces in England and Wales too. So the problem is not the hard working, brave officers of Cleveland Police. The fundamental problem is the police funding formula, which doesn't adequately reflect the scale of crime and deprivation and demand in Cleveland.
So I urge the government to overhaul that formula at pace and inject an emergency increase of funding in year so we can tackle the challenges that we have in our region. Thank you.
17:06
17:06
Speaker 17
-
Speaker 17
This debate. I'm the proud daughter of a police officer, and one of the things that my dad always instilled in me is the importance of community policing. Knowing who your local neighbourhood officer is, building a relationship with them, and seeing them out and about in your local streets. And my constituents share this view too. I'm really pleased that as a result of the actions that this Labour government has taken, there are now more neighbourhood police officers in my community and they're making a big difference. I'd like to say a big thank you in particular to Inspector Betsy Palmer, PC Jo Merritt, Sergeant Andy Murray and PCSo Frazer Sinclair, who I've met with recently who do a brilliant job day in, day out to keep our communities safe.
But one thing they tell me that they spend far too much of their time on is the scourge of illegal bikes. I am fed up. My constituents are fed up of having to pull their children out of the way in a park, when a bike or a sewer on zooms past them at 30mph of having to slam the brakes on when you're driving down the street because someone's doing a wheelie in front of you in a balaclava, it's simply not good enough. And I was very grateful to the minister for her recent correspondence on this issue, and I'm grateful to the government for giving the police additional powers to seize and destroy these bikes.
But we do need to do more, and I'd like to ask the minister, if she wouldn't mind to to think again and to tell me today how we might do more to regulate the sale of these bikes, close the loopholes that mean these sirens are being able to be ridden gleefully around the streets of my constituency and tell me how we can support our local police to tackle this problem.
But one thing they tell me that they spend far too much of their time on is the scourge of illegal bikes. I am fed up. My constituents are fed up of having to pull their children out of the way in a park, when a bike or a sewer on zooms past them at 30mph of having to slam the brakes on when you're driving down the street because someone's doing a wheelie in front of you in a balaclava, it's simply not good enough. And I was very grateful to the minister for her recent correspondence on this issue, and I'm grateful to the government for giving the police additional powers to seize and destroy these bikes.
But we do need to do more, and I'd like to ask the minister, if she wouldn't mind to to think again and to tell me today how we might do more to regulate the sale of these bikes, close the loopholes that mean these sirens are being able to be ridden gleefully around the streets of my constituency and tell me how we can support our local police to tackle this problem.
17:07
Speaker 36
-
Speaker 36
Thank you. Community policing is fundamental to public confidence in our police service. When people know their local officers and PCSOs see them on our streets and can raise concerns directly with them, communities feel safer and more confident that crime and anti-social behaviour will be tackled. And I want to firstly thank the local officers and staff. Importantly, staff do not get the recognition that they deserve. Often enough in the crew LP you both warranted officers, PCSOs and staff, as I mentioned, for the work that they do to keep our communities safe. We have seen a welcome increase in neighbourhood officers in the crew of four officers, additional across my constituency, and that's going to go a long way to tackling some of the problems that we've got.
However, significant challenges remain and many of them have been covered in this debate, including endemic anti-social behaviour that too often is treated as low level offending but needs to be taken on and and taken out at the roots. I want to, in the brief time that I've got left, just acknowledge as well the important work being undertaken by Cheshire Police in relation to the investigation concerning allegations against members of the Ahmadi religion of peace and light, and just ask that consideration is given to urgent, unexpected, complex investigations that sometimes police have to respond to and the extra burden that this place is on police forces.
I welcome the fact I've got a meeting with the minister next week to discuss this, but if if the minister can say something about that in winding up, that would be that would be really welcome. Thank you.
However, significant challenges remain and many of them have been covered in this debate, including endemic anti-social behaviour that too often is treated as low level offending but needs to be taken on and and taken out at the roots. I want to, in the brief time that I've got left, just acknowledge as well the important work being undertaken by Cheshire Police in relation to the investigation concerning allegations against members of the Ahmadi religion of peace and light, and just ask that consideration is given to urgent, unexpected, complex investigations that sometimes police have to respond to and the extra burden that this place is on police forces.
I welcome the fact I've got a meeting with the minister next week to discuss this, but if if the minister can say something about that in winding up, that would be that would be really welcome. Thank you.
17:09
17:09
17:09
Speaker 37
-
Speaker 37
Thank you, Madam Chair. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the member for Chichester for securing this very important debate today. I'd also like to take the opportunity to pay tribute to my excellent police men and women who do a fantastic job keeping us safe. We Liberal Democrats have long called for a return to proper community policing and the visible, trusted police presence this brings for our constituents. During the previous conservative government's programme of cuts, local community policing across our country was torn apart. And I know, Madam Chair, we've heard from some members on the government benches they may need educating on the concept of a coalition where the junior partner making up 15% of the MPs, doesn't have total control on every government policy.
But I would just point out that since Labour took government, over 1000 officers have been cut from our streets . And I'm sure the hike in National Insurance contributions hasn't helped that at all. Certainly my own force of Devon and Cornwall has faced a 50% cut to its recruitment budget. The politicisation of the police service through the conduit of a police and crime Commissioner has done untold further damage to that trust, and I was glad in November of last year to see the government embrace a long running Lib Dem campaign and announce a scrapping of PCCs entirely.
This will save the British taxpayer an estimated £100 million a year, 20 million of which can be funnelled into neighbourhood policing for rural areas like my constituency of North Cornwall. Neighbourhood and Community Policing focuses heavily on tackling the scourge of rural crime. I've prioritised the fight against rural crime on behalf of my constituents. Introducing the Rural Crime Strategy Bill to the House and consistently pushing the government to develop a full strategy to address it country wide. Because for many countryside communities up and down the country, thefts of farm machinery, tools and livestock can be devastating.
At a time when family farms are being hammered by rising costs, a botched SFI payment system, a rise in inheritance tax, bluetongue outbreaks and a severe drought. The loss of just one ATV or expensive farm machinery can set them back tens of thousands of pounds. And sadly, many of my own farming constituents have told me they've lost confidence altogether, that these crimes, when reported, will be dealt with seriously at all, so they no longer report them. It's clear that many forces still lack specialists to deal specifically with these types of rural crimes. The Home Office is planning £365,000 of funding for the entire country's rural crime units, which works out at around 8500 pounds on average per police force.
From my own work on the Home Affairs Committee, I've had the opportunity to quiz officials on police visibility in communities, specifically on the effectiveness of reopening front desks. I was told by one police official from Buckinghamshire how the reopening of a police station in a town that saw a 19% overall reduction in crime, not just because people were going in to report crimes more, but because it gave the local community a more visible police presence presence. I've been requesting that, launched in my own constituency, has its police station's front desk reopened, but Devon and Cornwall Police and Crime Commissioner has refused this time and again, especially disappointing when the cost is around £100,000 and the cost of suspended Devon and Cornwall Police officers is currently around £1.3 million a year.
We have a clear opportunity to bring back this policing visibility and confidence, yet the request of the community are being ignored. One way to ensure these front line officers are left to focus on the communities they serve is to prevent them from being pulled away for other types of crime that fester online. Our Liberal Democrat proposal is to establish an online crime agency funded by £250 million per year, a levy on big tech and AI firms who too often enable this online crime to take place. Our local officers would be freed up and sent back out to our towns and high streets where they belong, combating thefts, shoplifting and other types of local crimes.
We've heard from members across this House. So in winding up, could I please ask the minister to commit to ensuring every community across Britain has a police counter using spaces like libraries, shopping centres, town halls, reopening front desks where it's feasible to do so, establish an online crime agency so that specialists are the ones tackling crimes like deep fakes, revenge porn and other online crimes, ensuring the proposed police reorganisation won't further reduce community policing and building on the NPC's Rural and Wildlife Crime Strategy to tackle the scourge of rural crime.
Thank you.
But I would just point out that since Labour took government, over 1000 officers have been cut from our streets . And I'm sure the hike in National Insurance contributions hasn't helped that at all. Certainly my own force of Devon and Cornwall has faced a 50% cut to its recruitment budget. The politicisation of the police service through the conduit of a police and crime Commissioner has done untold further damage to that trust, and I was glad in November of last year to see the government embrace a long running Lib Dem campaign and announce a scrapping of PCCs entirely.
This will save the British taxpayer an estimated £100 million a year, 20 million of which can be funnelled into neighbourhood policing for rural areas like my constituency of North Cornwall. Neighbourhood and Community Policing focuses heavily on tackling the scourge of rural crime. I've prioritised the fight against rural crime on behalf of my constituents. Introducing the Rural Crime Strategy Bill to the House and consistently pushing the government to develop a full strategy to address it country wide. Because for many countryside communities up and down the country, thefts of farm machinery, tools and livestock can be devastating.
At a time when family farms are being hammered by rising costs, a botched SFI payment system, a rise in inheritance tax, bluetongue outbreaks and a severe drought. The loss of just one ATV or expensive farm machinery can set them back tens of thousands of pounds. And sadly, many of my own farming constituents have told me they've lost confidence altogether, that these crimes, when reported, will be dealt with seriously at all, so they no longer report them. It's clear that many forces still lack specialists to deal specifically with these types of rural crimes. The Home Office is planning £365,000 of funding for the entire country's rural crime units, which works out at around 8500 pounds on average per police force.
From my own work on the Home Affairs Committee, I've had the opportunity to quiz officials on police visibility in communities, specifically on the effectiveness of reopening front desks. I was told by one police official from Buckinghamshire how the reopening of a police station in a town that saw a 19% overall reduction in crime, not just because people were going in to report crimes more, but because it gave the local community a more visible police presence presence. I've been requesting that, launched in my own constituency, has its police station's front desk reopened, but Devon and Cornwall Police and Crime Commissioner has refused this time and again, especially disappointing when the cost is around £100,000 and the cost of suspended Devon and Cornwall Police officers is currently around £1.3 million a year.
We have a clear opportunity to bring back this policing visibility and confidence, yet the request of the community are being ignored. One way to ensure these front line officers are left to focus on the communities they serve is to prevent them from being pulled away for other types of crime that fester online. Our Liberal Democrat proposal is to establish an online crime agency funded by £250 million per year, a levy on big tech and AI firms who too often enable this online crime to take place. Our local officers would be freed up and sent back out to our towns and high streets where they belong, combating thefts, shoplifting and other types of local crimes.
We've heard from members across this House. So in winding up, could I please ask the minister to commit to ensuring every community across Britain has a police counter using spaces like libraries, shopping centres, town halls, reopening front desks where it's feasible to do so, establish an online crime agency so that specialists are the ones tackling crimes like deep fakes, revenge porn and other online crimes, ensuring the proposed police reorganisation won't further reduce community policing and building on the NPC's Rural and Wildlife Crime Strategy to tackle the scourge of rural crime.
Thank you.
17:15
17:15
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
Thank you. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I congratulate the honourable member for Chichester on securing this important debate and thank all the members who have contributed. I want to pay tribute to the officers, the PCSOs, special constables and police staff who serve our communities, including the team from Cleveland Police and Durham Constabulary, who serve the people of Stockton West. Cleveland has the highest crime rate of any police force area in England and Wales, and the highest homicide rate in the country. Yet in the year to March, Cleveland Police lost 17 officers. Our Police and crime commissioner has called out a £2.4 million shortfall, and rightly pointed out that funding is based on population, not crime.
If the government's commitment to community policing means anything, it must mean more officers. Where crime is highest, not fewer. The minister will point to the neighbourhood policing guarantee, but moving police officers between roles is not the same as having more of them. In March 2024, the last conservative government left police numbers at the highest level on record. Today I will.
If the government's commitment to community policing means anything, it must mean more officers. Where crime is highest, not fewer. The minister will point to the neighbourhood policing guarantee, but moving police officers between roles is not the same as having more of them. In March 2024, the last conservative government left police numbers at the highest level on record. Today I will.
17:16
Speaker 36
-
Speaker 36
I anticipated that the shadow minister might want to get into a knockabout about numbers, but would he not acknowledge that the previous conservative government replaced the 20,000 police officers that they cut? Firstly, and secondly, that the police uplift programme actually created perverse incentives that meant that many of those officers that they replaced the 20,000 with ended up behind desks. And that's not where we want them, is it?
17:16
17:16
Speaker 21
-
Speaker 21
We could have a very long debate about that, because we could actually talk about the economic damage and carnage to the public finances done by the last Labour government. We could then arrive at 2010, the tough choices that had to be made. We'd probably eventually arrive at 2024, when there were 147,746 full time equivalent police officers on the streets, and his constituents and mine would like to have seen that number continuing upwards. But it didn't, did it? Today, there are nearly 1900 fewer officers, and this year the government scrapped overall headcount targets, making funding conditional on neighbourhood numbers alone.
If neighbourhood teams grow while the workforce shrinks, those officers have to come from somewhere, and too often that means response teams. Those are the officers who come when a resident rings nine, nine, nine, the woman whose ex-partner is hammering on the door, the family woken by someone breaking in. Neighbourhood policing matters, but it cannot come at the expense of the officers who turn up in someone's hour of need. That's why the conservatives would recruit 10,000 extra officers, deploy hotspot patrolling in the 2000 highest crime neighbourhoods and roll out immediate justice. Those who wreck a public space are seen putting it right, and the problem is getting worse.
The crime survey shows that 40.9% of people experienced or witnessed anti-social behaviour last year, a statistically significant increase. Tackling anti-social behaviour is a pillar of the government's own guarantee. By their own measure, things are moving in the wrong direction. So I have three questions for the minister. First, will the government publish force by force? How many new neighbourhood police officers were moved from response roles? Second, will these changes mean residents wait longer for help when they ring nine nine, nine third on Cleveland. I welcome the fact that the minister is engaging with our forces leadership, but warm words in meetings will not reassure my constituents.
Will she explain why the force with the highest crime rate in the country has 17 fewer officers than it did a year ago? And will she commit that Cleveland police will have more officers at the end of this Parliament than it has today? My constituents are not asking about 2024. They're not asking about 2010. They're asking about the years ahead. And they deserve a straight answer. Our constituents judge policing by whether they see an officer in their street, whether their call is answered, and whether the person who wrecked their neighbourhood faces consequences by that test.
There is much more to do. I look forward to the minister's response, Minister.
If neighbourhood teams grow while the workforce shrinks, those officers have to come from somewhere, and too often that means response teams. Those are the officers who come when a resident rings nine, nine, nine, the woman whose ex-partner is hammering on the door, the family woken by someone breaking in. Neighbourhood policing matters, but it cannot come at the expense of the officers who turn up in someone's hour of need. That's why the conservatives would recruit 10,000 extra officers, deploy hotspot patrolling in the 2000 highest crime neighbourhoods and roll out immediate justice. Those who wreck a public space are seen putting it right, and the problem is getting worse.
The crime survey shows that 40.9% of people experienced or witnessed anti-social behaviour last year, a statistically significant increase. Tackling anti-social behaviour is a pillar of the government's own guarantee. By their own measure, things are moving in the wrong direction. So I have three questions for the minister. First, will the government publish force by force? How many new neighbourhood police officers were moved from response roles? Second, will these changes mean residents wait longer for help when they ring nine nine, nine third on Cleveland. I welcome the fact that the minister is engaging with our forces leadership, but warm words in meetings will not reassure my constituents.
Will she explain why the force with the highest crime rate in the country has 17 fewer officers than it did a year ago? And will she commit that Cleveland police will have more officers at the end of this Parliament than it has today? My constituents are not asking about 2024. They're not asking about 2010. They're asking about the years ahead. And they deserve a straight answer. Our constituents judge policing by whether they see an officer in their street, whether their call is answered, and whether the person who wrecked their neighbourhood faces consequences by that test.
There is much more to do. I look forward to the minister's response, Minister.
17:19
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Thank you, Mrs. Lowell. It's a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today. Can I congratulate the member for Chichester for securing what is a very important debate? This is a very important topic, and as my hon. Friend the member for Clwyd North said in her contribution, community policing is about whether people feel safe. It is the first duty of us as parliamentarians to make sure our constituents do feel safe and that they are safe, and community policing is the front line of that work, so I appreciate the opportunity to debate this topic today, and I want to add my sorrow to hear about the situation that the honourable member for Chichester described in terms of the homophobic, racist, xenophobic abuse that has occurred.
And obviously we are all very sorry for that and hoping that justice will be done in those cases. I also want to join many members who have thanked police and police staff who are often forgotten as well, and we should talk about it more often. And I want to add my thanks to all the police officers and staff that I have met as well and worked with, and we had some really good contributions in this debate. My friend the honourable member for Harrow, I asked about whether the council locally should pay for policing. I think the council in Harrow should do exactly what my hon.
Friend tells them to do. That would be a very good starting point, so I would I would definitely always recommend that the member for Strangford talking about Northern Ireland and as he knows, I met the Chief Constable a couple of weeks ago and was pleased to talk to him. He's obviously doing a very good job in very difficult circumstances. I also wanted to say to to my hon. Friend from Broxtowe that I spoke to Deputy Chief Constable following the incident in Nottingham and the awful shooting of a police officer, and will be keeping in touch with them about what has happened and how that officer is and of course, how all of his team are doing, because they are all very affected by what has happened.
And I know that has been deeply worrying for people. My friend the member for Portsmouth North talked about doxing of policing, which we talked about earlier in the week, and I think is is very worrying and very keen to to hear from the fed or others about sort of what what more we could do as government to sort of help in that space. My friend the member from Cleveland, South Middlesbrough, South and East Cleveland, of course, did talk about the things that we that he is right to talk about. And I know that the fed rep that he spoke to has done some really good work as well, making this case.
And he is right to say that on lots of measures, the force is judged as being really good. And I know the frustration, and we have talked about it before and we are working on that for the for the imbalance that then comes when it comes to funding. My friend from Reading West talks about e-bikes, and this is, I think, a scourge. As she says, we have passed the law. That means that the police have more powers to seize, which is good. But I think absolutely, I am having conversations with honourable members about what more we can do in this space is, is becoming very problematic.
I was talking to the member from Loughborough today who has been campaigning on this issue quite a lot himself. We were talking about some of the struggles and some of the potential solutions. Also, I will take an intervention.
And obviously we are all very sorry for that and hoping that justice will be done in those cases. I also want to join many members who have thanked police and police staff who are often forgotten as well, and we should talk about it more often. And I want to add my thanks to all the police officers and staff that I have met as well and worked with, and we had some really good contributions in this debate. My friend the honourable member for Harrow, I asked about whether the council locally should pay for policing. I think the council in Harrow should do exactly what my hon.
Friend tells them to do. That would be a very good starting point, so I would I would definitely always recommend that the member for Strangford talking about Northern Ireland and as he knows, I met the Chief Constable a couple of weeks ago and was pleased to talk to him. He's obviously doing a very good job in very difficult circumstances. I also wanted to say to to my hon. Friend from Broxtowe that I spoke to Deputy Chief Constable following the incident in Nottingham and the awful shooting of a police officer, and will be keeping in touch with them about what has happened and how that officer is and of course, how all of his team are doing, because they are all very affected by what has happened.
And I know that has been deeply worrying for people. My friend the member for Portsmouth North talked about doxing of policing, which we talked about earlier in the week, and I think is is very worrying and very keen to to hear from the fed or others about sort of what what more we could do as government to sort of help in that space. My friend the member from Cleveland, South Middlesbrough, South and East Cleveland, of course, did talk about the things that we that he is right to talk about. And I know that the fed rep that he spoke to has done some really good work as well, making this case.
And he is right to say that on lots of measures, the force is judged as being really good. And I know the frustration, and we have talked about it before and we are working on that for the for the imbalance that then comes when it comes to funding. My friend from Reading West talks about e-bikes, and this is, I think, a scourge. As she says, we have passed the law. That means that the police have more powers to seize, which is good. But I think absolutely, I am having conversations with honourable members about what more we can do in this space is, is becoming very problematic.
I was talking to the member from Loughborough today who has been campaigning on this issue quite a lot himself. We were talking about some of the struggles and some of the potential solutions. Also, I will take an intervention.
17:23
17:23
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Yes it is. It is a problem everywhere. I have this week been to Hemel Hempstead, Southall and Newcastle under Lyme in a bit of an anti-social behaviour tour in advance of our respective orders coming into force on Monday. And I think everybody in those three areas and everybody I speak to is concerned about this and there are things that the Department of Transport need to do. There are things that the Home Office needs to do. I'm in the space of looking at what we can do from a policing point of view. Was interested that member for Loughborough.
There. PS has rules about the wearing of balaclavas as well, which is also another debate which sort of crosses into the e-bike but also into other areas. And that was quite an interesting innovation that they have done, and.
There. PS has rules about the wearing of balaclavas as well, which is also another debate which sort of crosses into the e-bike but also into other areas. And that was quite an interesting innovation that they have done, and.
17:24
17:24
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
For giving way in my community of Selsey that I spoke of earlier, Amazon was recommending cut price balaclavas recently, which I think speaks to the problem that we're seeing. She mentioned about the e-bikes and the seizing of e-bikes. And it's brilliant that the police have now got the power to seize. What they don't have is the power to catch the people on the in the e-bikes, especially the souped up ones, there's been a there's been a trial of a spray that the police can use from a far distance, which creates almost a fingerprint on an e-bike that's been used for anti-social behaviour.
It's not being used in Sussex, but I know it's being used in police forces around Sussex. Can I ask her to take that away and look as to whether that's working well for those police forces, and then encourage the rollout in other areas?
It's not being used in Sussex, but I know it's being used in police forces around Sussex. Can I ask her to take that away and look as to whether that's working well for those police forces, and then encourage the rollout in other areas?
17:25
17:25
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Can I thank her for the intervention? We talked about this briefly with in a meeting I was in earlier around what more we can do and the sort of new technology that help us follow some of these bikes and some of the individuals who are stealing them or using them in an illegal way, you know, I'm very interested in. And she says there are already things being done in some parts of the country. One of the big reasons for our reform programme is that we have this frustration of some things being done in some parts of the country and not being done in other parts of the country, and we need more consistency, so we have good practice everywhere.
I did want to just point out the reforms that we have introduced already as a government. £2 billion extra has gone into policing, including to cover the cost of the national Insurance rise, which the honourable member raised. I will give way.
I did want to just point out the reforms that we have introduced already as a government. £2 billion extra has gone into policing, including to cover the cost of the national Insurance rise, which the honourable member raised. I will give way.
17:26
17:26
Speaker 13
-
Speaker 13
For giving way. Our Police and Crime Commissioner, Simon Foster, does tremendous work in terms of community engagement. However, he can't do much in terms of reassurance because we've got a 41 million funding gap with 1000 fewer officers than 2010. So can the minister tell us what extra police will be given to West Midlands, and can this government bridge that gap, Minister?
17:26
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Well, I can reassure the honourable member that over the last two years, the West Midlands Police have had millions more in funding than they had the year before. This government has given West Midlands Police more money year on year since it came to power and we are, as everybody hopefully here will know, prioritising a number of areas. Firstly serious crime and knife crime and we have seen massive improvements in knife crime, particularly knife crime murders, since we came to power. We are prioritising neighbourhood policing and we have 4000 odd new and extra neighbourhood police in our communities, which is beginning to make a difference.
We have passed the Police, Crime and Policing Act, which will do, among other things, and introduce on Monday respect orders which are new power for police to go after persistent offenders of anti-social behaviour. We are calling time on those people. We all know who they are in some circumstances and we all know from our constituents the trouble that we have with them. When I was in Hemel Hempstead today, the police force there have a list of 30 people who they are going to put in to the courts to get a respect order on, and they are hoping to go to court on Monday.
On the first day that these orders are introduced. I think that is a powerful tool for the police to use, which I want to see used widely. As far as I can, I will.
We have passed the Police, Crime and Policing Act, which will do, among other things, and introduce on Monday respect orders which are new power for police to go after persistent offenders of anti-social behaviour. We are calling time on those people. We all know who they are in some circumstances and we all know from our constituents the trouble that we have with them. When I was in Hemel Hempstead today, the police force there have a list of 30 people who they are going to put in to the courts to get a respect order on, and they are hoping to go to court on Monday.
On the first day that these orders are introduced. I think that is a powerful tool for the police to use, which I want to see used widely. As far as I can, I will.
17:27
17:28
Speaker 38
-
Speaker 38
Minister I do, and I very much enjoyed visiting my hon. Friend's constituency. I'm aware of the time I had wanted to touch on all kinds of things. Seasonality, Rurality are two things that we are looking at in the review of the funding formula, the entire reform of policing that will set up a national police service that will do things like the organised crime and the online crime. So we will have a place where these things are done. So the police, at a local level can focus on what they need to do. New tech will mean less bureaucracy, more time to be out on our streets.
So we are working at pace to make sure we are delivering the reforms that people want and expect. But I'll come back to the starting point, which is that there is nothing more important, I think, than our good community policing. It makes people feel safe. It makes safe. It makes people safe. It prevents crime. And this government is committed to increasing, not diminishing that resource.
So we are working at pace to make sure we are delivering the reforms that people want and expect. But I'll come back to the starting point, which is that there is nothing more important, I think, than our good community policing. It makes people feel safe. It makes safe. It makes people safe. It prevents crime. And this government is committed to increasing, not diminishing that resource.
17:29
17:29
Speaker 22
-
Speaker 22
Thank you, Miss Lowell. I will take the opportunity to thank all of the members in the room for contributing to what is a really important debate and put on record that we have a local community warden who's employed by Chichester District Council. His name is Jimmy Upton, and he used to be a police officer, and he spent many, many years being a community police officer. And when he retired, he decided, actually, I can still make a fundamental difference to my community. And now he's a community warden doing exactly the things that he actually went into policing to do, which is supporting communities.
They really are the best of us. And I'm very grateful to all of all of those that that work in our police forces to keep us safe.
They really are the best of us. And I'm very grateful to all of all of those that that work in our police forces to keep us safe.
17:29