(1 week, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberThe right hon. Gentleman is a doughty champion of his constituents, as we just saw. The Government have published criteria against which the proposals have been judged, and the decisions are being taken. The decision for Lincolnshire give Lincoln the space to grow; it allows economic and housing growth, which will benefit people right across the council, and will strike the best balance on service delivery, reflecting both urban and rural needs across the county. That is why we have taken the decision.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
The announcement today and the proposals in it are completely unacceptable. I reject them in the strongest terms—[Interruption.] Don’t heckle me. I have been saying this all along, so let me finish; I speak for my constituents. There is nothing in the proposals that reflects the views that I have consistently put to Ministers, or any acknowledgment of the concerns I have heard from thousands of people in Newcastle-under-Lyme.
How does the Secretary of State think we can protect the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme from the debt held by Staffordshire county council, Staffordshire Moorlands district council and Stoke-on-Trent city council? Why should any of my constituents have faith in the proposals, which they do not want? It is utterly unacceptable and a disgrace that the statement has been put to the House on the final day of term, four days before a new Prime Minister takes office. It is not too late to stop and think again. The Secretary of State said a minute ago that he was going to pause to get other proposals right, and I urge him to do the same on this one.
It is important that we get the process moving, because we will not realise the benefits of economic growth, job opportunities and money in people’s pockets if we keep delaying it. We need to get it completed in this Parliament and get areas ready for the mayoral devolution that will follow. I am happy to meet my hon. Friend, and support him in ensuring that his constituents will benefit from the changes. I know from earlier conversations that he is keen to ensure that we maintain the unique heritage and identity of those communities, and I will support him in doing that.
(2 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Last time I checked, my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield had, in fact, been elected.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
The Minister will know the strength of feeling in Newcastle-under-Lyme in support of a Newcastle-only unitary. Will she confirm that Members of this House have not been told about any proposed boundaries or confirmed plans? The idea that some members of the LGA have been notified of some confirmed proposals before this House beggars belief. Also, what steps will the Minister take to ensure that local identity, civic heritage and a sense of community will be protected? In my view, we should support local communities like mine in establishing town councils to do just that.
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I have set out the process by which this House will be updated on the decisions, but if my hon. Friend has evidence of anything else that he is concerned about, he may well want to write to me to share that information directly.
(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Nesil Caliskan
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important point. Community cohesion is an important aspect of how we allocate money through MHCLG, but I recognise that it is not the only important aspect. I am therefore happy to meet him and other Members of Parliament who want to talk about how we allocate money in a fair and transparent way.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I am grateful to the Minister for issuing invitations to meet to colleagues. My constituency did not get Pride in Place funding, and I would be grateful if she could find some time to have a cup of tea with me so that I can make the case for it to her before too long.
(3 months ago)
Commons ChamberI do agree with the use of article 4 to put HMOs through the planning process. I have forced my local council to do that, but unfortunately it is doing it only in certain areas. I would like to see it being done throughout the constituency.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. Does he agree with me, and indeed with the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire (Mr Mohindra), that the Conservative-run council in Newcastle-under-Lyme should also be applying article 4, sooner rather than later?
I think it is a matter for local councils to decide. In my constituency, HMOs are a big problem, and I am glad that my council has used article 4 in some areas, although I would like to see it rolled out to the whole constituency.
We have druggies, criminals and other wrong’uns living—sometimes six in one small house—in streets that were once considered good places to live. The decent folk who can afford to leave those streets are leaving, in their droves, but the problem is that the investors—the landlords—then buy up their houses and turn them into HMOs. Other decent people, however, cannot afford to move, and have to stay and put up with a life of misery.
The problem is becoming worse and worse. Labour Front Benchers, and indeed Back Benchers, bang on about emptying the hotels that are full of illegal migrants, and no one wants a hotel full of illegal migrants in their area. Nobody wants young, fighting-age males—400 of them sometimes—from backward cultures that treat our women as second-class citizens roaming our streets, but the hotels are now being emptied. Where are these young men going to go? I will tell you where they are going to go: they are going to go into an HMO on a street near people in this Chamber; near my family, near my friends, near my neighbours. We have had enough of this. We have enough of our own home-grown nuisances in this country without importing even more to live in HMOs.
(6 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, although it sounds like it was more for the Minister than for me. He has given the Minister time to prepare for his inevitable question, which I hope she addresses in her speech.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for letting me take the debate from Surrey to Staffordshire. There is concern in Newcastle-under-Lyme about what a potential new unitary may look like and about whether the debt of current councils will be carried over to it. I want to add my concerns to his. This is not a party political issue; it is about ensuring that people are not forced to pay off the debt accrued by others.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. He is exactly right: through local government reform, all areas could be affected by the debt and other commitments of neighbouring authorities.
That brings me to the point I was about to make, which is that it really is not fair that my constituents in Runnymede could have to pay for the failed decisions of Woking politicians—both those in power and those who failed in their duty to scrutinise decisions—because those constituents never got to vote for them. The scale of the remaining debt, when combined with the debt of other local authorities, means that the new west Surrey unitary will be bankrupt from day one. New local authorities should be established on a sound and equal footing, so that the provision of services can be determined by local need. The Government need urgently to introduce a sound long-term financial plan for both unitaries in Surrey.
(7 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI am pleased to hear that the right hon. Gentleman has been in touch with local authority leaders. They will have heard what he has said, and I am sure that they can take his views into consideration when they respond to our letter.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
In Newcastle-under-Lyme and in Staffordshire, there is real discussion about what the future may look like. It is clear that some things have to change, because councils are not operating as effectively as they might. That said, can the Minister assure me that the views of local people, and the history, traditions and identity of communities, will be the driving force behind any discussion about what the future may look like?
Of course those things are taken into consideration. We have set out some criteria by which the decisions on reorganisation are taken, and I refer my hon. Friend to those, but effective local government is built out of a strong sense of community. I am sure that will be reflected in his constituency, as elsewhere.
(7 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
Thank you very much, Dr Murrison. I am grateful to the hon. Member for South Leicestershire (Alberto Costa) for securing the debate and giving me the opportunity to speak about the impact of quarries once permission for them has been granted. Newcastle-under-Lyme has regrettably been tarnished in this place for far too long by the events at Walley’s quarry landfill site. I look forward to the day, as do my neighbours back home, when we can finally put this disgraceful situation behind us.
When Walley’s quarry was granted a licence to operate as a landfill site, the assumption was that the site would be managed safely, responsibly and with the local community in mind. But we know all too painfully that that did not happen. Odour complaints began many years ago, but from 2020 onwards they surged to intolerable levels. The experiences of my constituents were beyond comprehension: respiratory irritation, headaches, disrupted sleep and mental health strain, with children unable to play outside, elderly residents housebound and families unable to open their windows. That is not to mention the disgraceful experience of my young constituent Matthew. I pay tribute to him, his mother Becky Currie and their family for all they have done to shine a light on the disgraceful situation at Walley’s quarry.
It is clear that the impact of the hydrogen sulphide emitting from Walley’s quarry was not just a nuisance; it was a public health crisis that the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme were forced to live with. Although we cannot go back in time, we must ensure that our experiences are not repeated anywhere else in the United Kingdom.
Walley’s quarry reveals a fundamental gap in the UK’s planning system. Even when technically compliant, planning permission does not guarantee that a waste site in a former quarry will remain safe or tolerable for those who live around it. Too much trust was placed in conditions that lacked enforceability and, in our case, an operator who consistently failed to do the right thing. In my working life I have never seen cowboy operators as irresponsible, as greedy, as reckless and—to put it bluntly—as criminal as those in the details I shall share with the House today.
I have received news that Nigel Bowen, who was once responsible for the operations at Walley’s quarry, died last month. I of course acknowledge the impact on his family, but I am also concerned about what this means for the criminal investigation. We cannot be in a situation where people who know what happened, who can provide answers and who must be held accountable avoid justice for whatever reason. I hope that the criminal investigation reaches its conclusion sooner rather than later.
I have received reports, which I have raised with His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, that the former operators at Walley’s quarry owe in the region of £80 million. I urge all relevant authorities to go after every single penny, because the people of Newcastle-under-Lyme deserve no less.
The Environment Agency has been clear in its assessments. It recorded repeated breaches by the operator, identified poor management, and concluded that Walleys Quarry Ltd had failed to demonstrate that it could control fugitive landfill emissions. Between 2021 and 2024 the Environment Agency undertook more than 180 inspections—far more than would be considered normal for a landfill site—and still the problems persisted.
The problem is not simply a bad operator or political leaders at all levels of government who fail to act when needed; it is a system that allows a badly managed site to continue operating for years, even as the harm grows and enforcement escalates. Planning permissions granted decades ago no longer reflect modern environmental standards, population densities or public health evidence, and the law does not make it easy to intervene when things go wrong. Two weeks ago we celebrated a year since Walley’s quarry was closed down, and I am grateful to all those who campaigned so hard to help to make that happen.
Local planning authorities must require far more vigorous assessments of the long-term environmental and public health risks associated with converting quarries into waste sites. Before any waste site is granted permission, operators must provide fully protected bonds or trust funds that are capable of covering decades of aftercare. When companies collapse, the public must not inherit their liabilities.
I have two specific requests of the Minister. First, no quarry with the potential to become a landfill site should be opened within 500 metres of any homes, and no planning application should be approved. Secondly, I urge Ministers to create an excess of supply for the responsible disposal of gypsum. All planning permissions for landfills should require separate stable non-reactive hazardous material cells to be constructed, because this will help to deter the mixing and misclassifying of such waste. What happened at Walley’s quarry must never be allowed to happen again.
(1 year ago)
Commons Chamber
Daniel Francis
I agree absolutely with my hon. Friend. We work very closely together on these issues, as parents of disabled children. I will turn to such training in relation to some of my own horror stories in due course.
In May, PAMIS announced that it is updating its Changing Places practical guidance, a resource that helps support the design and management of Changing Places toilets. I think I missed out that there were 799 toilets 10 years ago, so there has been significant growth since that time.
I should also note the changes made by the previous Government when they amended the Building Regulations 2010, under which it is now compulsory for some new large buildings to have Changing Places toilets installed in them. In addition, a Changing Places toilets fund of £30.5 million was made available in 2023, which has provided 600 Changing Places across England.
I have seen the real impact that that growth has had in London and the home counties as a south-east London MP. I see that now in central London, as compared with 10 years ago, in train stations, at cultural venues, along the South Bank and, very recently, in Oxford Street. The Need2Change campaign, spearheaded by Bromley resident Katrina O’Leary who I worked with before I was elected to this place, has allowed an increase in toilets in parks, hospitals and coastal towns to ensure her family, my family and other families can have the days out that others take for granted.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and I congratulate him on securing this important debate. It is typically human-focused, compassionate and decent, which sums him up in every way. Will he join me in highlighting the current Changing Places toilets in Newcastle-under-Lyme at Keele services on the M6 southbound, Morrisons, the Jubilee 2 gym and sports centre, and our local library? That is four, but we need many more and government has an important role to play in making that happen.
Daniel Francis
I thank my hon. Friend. I absolutely agree. We have seen that growth, but we need to see more.
(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend is absolutely right. The evidence shows that when young people participate in politics, it positively affects them through their lifetime and increases participation. Young people can pay tax and join the Army at 16, so it is right that they should have a say in how our country is governed.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)
We are committed to improving how we assess need to ensure that central Government funding is distributed fairly to the places that need it most. We began at the last settlement with the £600 million recovery grant, and subject to the fair funding review 2.0 consultation, our proposed reforms mean that the most relatively deprived places will see larger increases in income than the least deprived places.
Adam Jogee
Newcastle-under-Lyme is at the heart of our industrial heartlands. In communities such as Silverdale, Knutton and Cross Heath, we see higher levels of health inequality and lower levels of life expectancy than in many wealthier areas. These communities were let down by those who went before us and were left behind. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how best to support industrial communities like mine in Newcastle-under-Lyme, so that we can finally tackle this entrenched inequality?
My hon. Friend makes a very fair point. There are two aspects to this. First, we must make sure that places get the investment they need to realise their full potential. We are working on that with our plan for communities, which the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North and Kimberley (Alex Norris) is engaged in. But that has to be built on fair funding at the base of what the local authority does. There was nothing fair at all about the previous Government impoverishing councils in the most deprived communities, sending many to the wire. We are putting that right.
(1 year ago)
Commons Chamber
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) on getting this Bill to its Third Reading and getting both sides of the House behind it, although I note that there are no SNP Members in the Chamber. I am a proud Member for an English constituency, but we in Newcastle-under-Lyme have seen the benefit of a system that defends and supports the franchise and ensures that people are able to have their say. As such, I wanted to gently contribute to this debate, to give my support to my hon. Friend and encourage colleagues to get behind the Bill.
Democracy is important. It is so important that we discuss the Bill, ensuring that people up and down the United Kingdom, including in Wales and Scotland, are able to hold their elected politicians to account to ensure that their decisions reflect their views. We do so on the first anniversary of this Labour Government—that speaks very much to the power of the vote. The Bill is about ensuring that people have as much support as possible to vote, to have their say, to shape the future and, as I say, to hold their elected representatives to account at local and devolved level in Scotland and Wales.
I used to work for a Welsh MP, and I lived in Scotland and also worked for a Scottish MP before my election to this House, so I well recall the challenges and experiences.
John Grady
My hon. Friend is the Member of Parliament for the wonderful place of Newcastle-under-Lyme. Does he agree that the purpose of the Bill is to bring some much-needed consistency to voting arrangements across our family of nations? Voters in Newcastle-under-Lyme, Newcastle upon Tyne or the wonderful Newcastleton in Scottish Borders should all be able to vote in a reasonably consistent way.
Adam Jogee
My hon. Friend makes an important point. I am an English MP; we are talking about Scotland and Wales; and my wife is from Northern Ireland. Our four nations are very much represented in my short contribution to this debate.
I have seen personally the ease of the postal and proxy vote system. I love to vote in person, but those in the west midlands Labour party are hard taskmasters and encourage us to vote by post so that we can be knocking on doors, seeing my hon. Friend the Minister beating Torys where and when we can. However, making it easier to vote for people who have health or family issues, or who are called away for work and the rest, is vital. We have seen the consequences—the threats to our democracy—of people not thinking that politics represents them and their issues, and does not involve or include them. We must think about what we can do to neutralise those concerns and those fears, as my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) has done so brilliantly in her Bill, notwithstanding her technical amendment, which was supported by the House. It speaks for itself.
I am grateful to you for calling me, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am here to support my hon. Friend before I get the train home, and I look forward to the Bill successfully passing its Third Reading.
First, I congratulate the hon. Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) on her tenacity in getting this Bill through its parliamentary stages. It is timely that the hon. Lady has today—on the first anniversary of an election that I might care to forget, but that she will definitely care to remember for the rest of her career—made such a great change to our democratic structures through our Bill. If she has achieved this much in the first 12 months, I, for one, look forward to seeing what she will achieve in the next four years. I would like to genuinely congratulate her on behalf of the official Opposition and Members across the House on the way she has conducted herself in getting this legislation on the statute books. Her constituents will also quite rightly be proud.
I also want to take this opportunity to wish Members across the House a happy first anniversary—although, technically, the anniversary is tomorrow. We were all tired in the early hours of that morning; for me, it was 4.36 am, as I remember. I wish a happy anniversary to all new MPs across the House on their first anniversary of serving in this place. I look forward to working with them on a cross-party basis over the next four years, and maybe beyond.
I was just about to refer to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), but I will let him go first.
Well, I thank the hon. Gentleman—my friend—for what I know are warm and genuine congratulations. I was about to say that I even congratulate the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme a happy anniversary on his election. I am still utterly convinced that while he is the most sartorially elegant MP on the Labour Benches—[Interruption.] The Whip on duty, the hon. Member for Bury South (Christian Wakeford), who has not even bothered to wear a tie, is somehow shouting “Shame”. I say to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme that I am still convinced that deep down, he is a secret Conservative, and we look forward to seeing his slow conversion to this side of the House over the next four years.
Adam Jogee
Wishful thinking is all I will say, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am very proud of my Labour party membership card, thank you very much.
Thou doth protest too much—I think we will just keep it to the fact that the hon. Gentleman is the most sartorially elegant member of the Labour parliamentary party, and I would be grateful, after this debate, if he could tell me where he gets his ties.
By the way, I also want to say happy anniversary to those of us who survived the last election, too—especially my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), who is sitting on the Front Bench next to me.
I welcome the Minister being in her place. The Conservatives completely agree with her remarks on the amendment that was tabled. It is perfectly straightforward, and we support it. In a rare moment of cross-party unity, we completely echo what the Minister has said, and therefore we do not need to say much more on that.
I will just pay tribute to the four Back-Bench contributors for their remarks. The hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme has said he is making a habit of beating Conservatives, but let us just see what happens in four years’ time—I will not predict what will happen at the next election. As I said earlier, he is a genuine friend, and I genuinely like his engaging contributions to many debates in this House; they are always backed up by the principled aims he has in any area of policy in this House—long may that continue.
The hon. Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) gave a great speech. She set out the full scope of the Bill clearly and how it will make a tangible change to many people who live in Scotland. I congratulate her on that.
Even though the hon. Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) is from a rival city down the Solent from me, I thought she made an excellent contribution. She made important points on the changes to the legislation to ensure that veterans cards can be used as official ID for voting. I represent many veterans in my community, particularly naval veterans—as I know the hon. Lady does, with the home of the Royal Navy in Portsmouth North—and I know that that is a vital change that is being made. It was a commitment of the previous Government; I think it is fair to say that parliamentary time ran out, so we were unable to do that, so I am pleased that that the new Government took that forward.
The hon. Member for Crawley (Peter Lamb) was right to share his expertise on devolution, and gave fascinating historical context for this Bill. I remember being in the Stag’s Head pub on the University of Southampton’s campus in 2006, when he was chairman of the university’s Labour Society and I was chairman of its Conservative Association. For transparency, I will declare that it was a lot smaller than the Labour Society. I am not sure whether he ever imagined that we would share a Chamber today. As we saw from his speech, he is a fierce defender of democracy, a fierce supporter of devolution, and a passionate defender of his beliefs and principles. I wish him well going forward.