Business of the House

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 11th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business, please?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 15 June will include:

Monday 15 June—The Chairman of Ways and Means is expected to name opposed private business for consideration, followed by a debate on a motion on NHS dentistry. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Tuesday 16 June—Remaining stages of the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill.

Wednesday 17 June—Consideration of an allocation of time motion, followed by all stages of the National Security (State Threats) Bill.

Thursday 18 June—General debate on the infected blood compensation scheme, followed by a further debate, the subject of which has yet to be confirmed. The subjects for these debates are determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Friday 19 June—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 22 June includes:

Monday 22 June—Remaining stages of the Armed Forces Bill.

Colleagues may also wish to be aware that on Monday 29 June and Tuesday 30 June the House is expected to debate estimates.

[John Lamont]

My thoughts, and I am sure those of the whole House, are with the man who was critically injured in the dreadful knife attack in Belfast on Monday evening. The bravery shown by members of the public who stepped in to help was nothing short of extraordinary.

May I wish all those taking part in the common ridings and festivals across the Scottish Borders a successful and enjoyable season? Communities are gathering to celebrate traditions that have been passed down through generations. Last week, I was in Hawick for the Hawick common riding. I pay tribute to the Hawick cornet, Jordan Nuttall and his lass, Alix Martin, for the dignified way in which they carried out their duties. Tomorrow, I will be in Selkirk for its common riding. I hope that the standard bearer, Sam Coltherd, has a successful and enjoyable day. These celebrations are a reminder of the strength of local identity, community spirit and public service that continue to define our part of Scotland.

On matters of wider public concern, can the leader of the House find time for a debate on standards in public life and accountability in Government, particularly in the light of the continuing questions surrounding the Scottish National party and the Peter Murrell scandal? Following Peter Murrell’s conviction for embezzling hundreds of thousands of pounds, many people across Scotland remain deeply concerned that significant questions remain unanswered, particularly given reports that public money may have been involved. The Scottish Conservatives, led by Russell Findlay, have rightly called for a full and independent inquiry into what happened and who knew what.

The Scottish public deserve answers. They deserve to know how such substantial sums of money could disappear over such a prolonged period without detection. They deserve to know what oversight and governance arrangements were in place within the SNP, and why those arrangements appear to have failed so comprehensively. They deserve to know what role senior figures in the party played during the period and what information was available to them.

There are also serious questions about the handling and timing of the wider investigation and about decisions taken throughout the process. Why did it take so long for these matters to come to light? Why were concerns not identified earlier? Why have so many questions continued to go unanswered despite years of scrutiny and investigation?

At a time when public confidence in politics is already fragile, the perception that there is one rule for those in positions of power and another for everyone else is profoundly damaging. Transparency is not optional. Accountability is not optional. The public have a right to know that those who seek elected office are subject to proper scrutiny and that serious failings will be investigated openly and thoroughly. Will the Leader of the House therefore consider providing Government time for a debate on transparency and accountability in public institutions, and in doing so support calls for all outstanding questions surrounding the scandal to be properly examined?

While the media and the Labour party are busy poring over every twist and turn of the by-election in Makerfield, the election that may tell us far more about the future direction of Scottish politics is the one taking place next week in Aberdeen South. There, the contest is now clearly a straight fight between the SNP and the Scottish Conservative candidate Douglas Lumsden. As public confidence in the SNP continues to be undermined by scandal and mismanagement, there is a growing recognition that only the Scottish Conservatives can defeat the SNP and send a message to both of Scotland’s Governments that the jobs of thousands of workers in Aberdeen’s vital oil and gas sector must be protected.

The people of Scotland deserve a politics that is open, accountable and focused on delivering results, rather than being distracted by scandal. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the importance of transparency in public life, and of ensuring that the many unanswered questions surrounding the affair are not simply brushed aside but receive the scrutiny and answers that the Scottish and the British public rightly deserve?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Let me join the deputy shadow Leader of the House in sending our best wishes to the man who was injured in the Belfast attack; we wish him and his family well. Let me also place on the record our thanks to and support for the brave police officers and the wider community, who have shown incredible bravery in the face of such intimidation.

I want to start by mentioning some of the anniversaries that will take place before the next scheduled business question. Next Tuesday marks 10 years since the murder of Jo Cox. Jo was a relentless campaigner for equality, human rights and social justice, and a powerful champion for the world’s most vulnerable and marginalised. Members will have the opportunity to pay tribute to Jo and her long-lasting legacy in this afternoon’s debate, and I hope they will take the opportunity to do so.

This Sunday will mark the ninth anniversary of 72 people losing their lives in the Grenfell tower fire. I know that the thoughts of the whole House remain with the families of those who died in the Grenfell tower fire, the survivors and the wider community.

Let me turn to matters that have been raised with me previously during these sessions and report back on progress that has been made. An issue that has been raised frequently is driving tests, so Members will be pleased to see this week that further changes have been made to how and where driving tests can be booked. This is a final step in a series of changes that we are taking to make it easy to get a test and to stop the exploitation of learner drivers by online bots and reselling.

Similarly, a constant theme in these sessions has been the state of our roads and the plague of potholes. This week, we have unveiled new rules to get potholes fixed. Councils will be required to reveal exactly how well they repair their roads, thereby letting the public hold them to account. Long-term preventive repairs will be prioritised over costly patch-up fixes, saving motorists hundreds of pounds a year on pothole-related repairs.

Last week, the Modernisation Committee launched a new opportunity for Members to directly shape the work of the Committee by pitching ideas for what we should do next. More information is available on ParliNet, and I strongly encourage Members to take part and share ideas.

As the House will know, the world cup kicks off today, and I am sure the whole House will join me in wishing England and Scotland the very best of luck. Members will be pleased to know that pubs across the country are set to benefit from extensions to licensing hours and special screenings. As I have said before, England has only ever won a world cup under a Labour Government; I expect that theory to be tested in not just this world cup but the next one.

Let me turn to the remarks of the deputy shadow Leader of the House. He talked about the importance of the common ridings and festivals, and he is absolutely right that events such as the Borders common ridings are a reminder and a display of local identity and community spirit that have endured for centuries. I am pleased that he is able to attend and take part in such events, and join him in wishing all those taking part an enjoyable season.

The hon. Gentleman says he will be at the Selkirk common ridings, which I believe takes place tomorrow. It commemorates the town’s last and only survivor of the battle of Flodden in 1513. I hope the weather is better tomorrow than it was on the day of the battle.

The hon. Gentleman raised two substantive points, the first of which was on standards in public life. I absolutely agree with him that it is important that the public get the answers they deserve when there are scandals like the one we have seen north of the border. I encourage people to be open about what has happened. If the authorities need to carry out further investigations, it is right that they do so.

Not surprisingly, in the context of next week’s by-election, the hon. Gentleman talked about the important question of oil and gas. Let me point out two things. First, this Government are absolutely committed to new clean energy and to energy independence, and we will bring forward measures on the latter shortly, but oil and gas will continue to flow for many years ahead as we make the transition. The international situation has again underlined the importance of that transition.

Finally, we should be concerned about what happens to jobs in the transition, but I gently point out to the hon. Gentleman that in 14 years of Conservative Government, 70,000 jobs were lost in oil and gas. I am sure that the voters of Aberdeen will want to bear that in mind.

[Paulette Hamilton (Birmingham Erdington) (Lab)]

My constituents in Gravelly Hill in Erdington continue to raise serious concerns about the impact of air pollution on health and quality of life around the A38 spaghetti junction interchange. With almost 200,000 vehicles passing through the junction each day, residents remain concerned about the cumulative impact of emissions on surrounding communities. Despite repeated requests, a ministerial visit to discuss their concerns has yet to be arranged. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on air quality in urban communities, and ask the relevant Minister to visit spaghetti junction to see at first hand the challenges faced by local residents?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a doughty fighter for her community and the wider region, and she raises serious matters. There are opportunities for her to apply for a debate to hear directly from a Minister—perhaps in a Westminster Hall or Adjournment debate—but I will certainly take up her request that a Minister considers visiting to see the issue for themselves.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I associate myself with the remarks of the Leader of the House and the shadow deputy Leader of the House on the knife attack in Belfast this week. I also thank the Leader of the House for the business.

I need to put on the record that this is a momentous weekend, with Scotland’s first world cup match since 1998. I had just completed my final exam at university on the day of our match against Brazil in Paris, so it really was a long time ago. As Scotland take to the field against Haiti in the wee hours of Sunday morning, I trust that all Members will be cheering us on. I know my English colleagues and those from elsewhere are very good at doing that for Scotland. I wish Scott McTominay, John McGinn, Andy Robertson and the rest of the team the very best of luck. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] Thank you.

I want to highlight the fact that FIFA has done its level best to overshadow what should be a brilliant celebration and experience for fans, who are being squeezed until the pips squeak. Scotland fans are paying $80 just for the privilege of catching a train to the match this weekend, and some cannot even get there due to late updates to ESTAs. In one report, someone found out an hour before their flight was due to take off that they were no longer able to travel, meaning they are being prevented from travelling at all to the matches, having spent thousands of pounds. Liberal Democrats are calling for an international fans charter to protect against FIFA ever trying this racket again. I hope the Leader of the House will consider scheduling a debate on FIFA’s treatment of fans at the world cup.

This week, Liberal Democrats set out fully funded plans to overhaul energy pricing and to permanently lower bills for millions of households across the UK. Families were already struggling with their bills before Trump started his war with Iran, and now, with the announcement that the energy price cap will rise by 13% from July, it is time for the Government to act. By clawing back the unexpected windfall made by energy network operator companies—a windfall made possible only by weak regulation by Ofgem—we can give every household in Britain a basic energy allowance at a discounted rate, cutting the average bill by £100. I ask the Leader of the House to raise these proposals with the Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, and to schedule a debate on them in Government time.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join the hon. Lady in wishing Scotland well in the world cup. On the cost of attending for fans, the Prime Minister—himself a keen football fan—has already raised his concerns. The hon. Lady raises an interesting question about international action on the matter, and she may wish to do so again at Culture, Media and Sport questions on 18 June.

On the important question on energy bills, I should point out that the Government are taking action. We have frozen fuel duty for the rest of the year. We are delinking the price of electricity from the price of gas, which will protect many households and businesses from gas price spikes, and we are extending and expanding our scheme to recoup excess profits made during periods of high gas prices. There is also extra support, particularly £53 million for heating oil for rural communities. However, we keep these matters under review. The Chancellor takes a keen interest in them, and where we can further support people, I am sure the Government will want to do so.

[Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)]

Wales is not going to the world cup, but I will definitely be supporting both Scotland and England in the weeks ahead—good wishes to everybody.

I welcome the Government’s programme to help young people into education, employment or training. In Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney we have two new hubs to boost their opportunities. May we please have an update on what progress has been made with the new jobs guarantee scheme to foster the talent of even more young people?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I echo my hon. Friend’s sentiment regarding the work that the Government have done on this important matter, but as he suggests, there is much more to do. We look forward to responding to the Milburn review once its full recommendations are published, and I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions will want to keep the House updated once that process concludes.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, on Thursday 18 June there will be a statement from the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, followed by a statement from the Justice Committee, on their reports. Until yesterday we understood that there would be Government business on 18 June. We will instead have a debate on the infected blood compensation scheme, and we are asking colleagues who are on the waiting list whether they would like to take up the additional debate. If we are allocated Thursday 25 June, there will be a statement from the Work and Pensions Committee, followed by a debate on Windrush Day, followed by a debate on PANS and PANDAS—that is the short title. These will take place in the Chamber.

Turning to Westminster Hall, next Tuesday there will be a debate on community hospitals. Next Thursday there will be a debate on safeguarding human rights in supply chains, followed by a debate on public toilet provision for people living with a stoma. On Tuesday 23 June there will be a debate on fly-tipping in residential areas and the associated impacts, and on Thursday 25 June there will be a statement from the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee, followed by a debate on ports and port connectivity and a further debate to be announced. As the Leader of the House has announced that estimates day debates are coming up, I should remind the House that tomorrow is the last day to submit applications, and the Backbench Business Committee will be considering those applications next Tuesday. Obviously, it is key that people who want to submit applications do so speedily, and we intend to offer as many debates as we possibly can.

Pakistan’s illegal occupation of part of the Kashmir valley has been going on since 1947, and many MPs in this House have supported that position. However, the Joint Awami Action Committee, which operates in the illegally occupied part of Kashmir, has recently been demonstrating for basic rights to food, electricity and healthcare. The Pakistani authorities have launched a severe crackdown; they report that at least 11 people have been killed and many others injured, but the protester groups report 20 to 30 deaths and over 200 injuries. I believe a number of British nationals have been injured during these protests. There have been arbitrary arrests, and Pakistani forces have fired live ammunition at peaceful protesters.

I understand that 30 colleagues from the all-party parliamentary group on Kashmir have written to the Foreign Secretary to demand action. I echo that we want to see action from the Foreign Secretary, and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office calling out Pakistan for taking this despicable action against peaceful protesters. Will the Leader of the House arrange for a statement on this issue next week from the Foreign Secretary?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the work of his Committee and for the strong leadership that he shows. He has announced an impressive list of debates, underlining the importance of his Committee’s work. He mentions—as I did when outlining the business—the fact that there is a topic yet to be decided on 18 June. We will obviously publicise that in the usual way as soon as possible.

On the hon. Gentleman’s substantive question about Kashmir, India and Pakistan are both long-standing important partners of this country, and our long-standing position is that India and Pakistan should find a lasting political resolution on this issue, while respecting the wishes of the Kashmiri people. The Government encourage both nations to engage in dialogue and to pursue lasting political solutions to support regional stability. I will draw his remarks to the attention of the Foreign Secretary, because this is an important matter.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

From Hawkslade to Buckingham Park, there are parked vehicles that sit abandoned for months on our roads, causing obstruction and danger to local residents, and even attracting fly-tipping and antisocial behaviour. They are usually untaxed and without an MOT, so when we try to have them removed we are passed between Buckinghamshire council, the police and other local authorities, with no one taking responsibility for having these vehicles removed. Will the Leader of the House allocate parliamentary time to see what more we can do in government to expand enforcement and get these vehicles off our roads?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The situation in my hon. Friend’s constituency sounds untenable. The police and local authorities have legal powers to deal with dangerous, abandoned and obstructive vehicles, and they work closely with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency to target untaxed vehicles. Should my hon. Friend wish to apply for a Westminster Hall debate or an Adjournment debate, I am sure that it would be well attended. She could then hear directly from the Minister what the Government could do further.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Ofcom is an important regulator, and it is something that my residents regularly raise, whether it is failings in the postal service, the lack of internet in suburban areas, concerns about bias on TV or political interference on social media. We now have elderly people plagued by scams and frauds on landlines, when Ofcom could easily intervene to block ghost numbers. Ofcom is now looking to take on the issues around nudity, children online and the potential social media ban, but the public is already being failed in so many areas. May we have a debate in Government time on the role and effectiveness of Ofcom?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady talks about the matters that Ofcom is looking into, such as nudity and social media, and I am sure she shares the view that those are important. They are the first step that the Government are taking to address a wider issue. On the success of Ofcom, or lack thereof, she could seek an Adjournment or Westminster Hall debate, where she could make these points directly to the Government. It is important that Ofcom does a good job, and if it is being given important jobs to do, it must do so with the confidence of this House.

[Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)]

I have been campaigning alongside healthcare professionals who are concerned about risks arising from the unsafe handling of hazardous medicinal products. The BBC broadcast footage last month inadvertently showing a nurse handling a potentially hazardous new cancer drug without the correct protective equipment. Will the Leader of the House find time for a debate on introducing a framework to protect healthcare workers from exposure to hazardous medicinal products?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for his work campaigning on this issue. The safety of NHS staff is non-negotiable. There are clear legal duties on employers to ensure that healthcare workers handling hazardous medicinal products are properly protected at all times. I understand that the Health and Safety Executive is actively reviewing whether any further action or clearer guidance is needed, and I am sure that the Department will come forward with an update on that at some point.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

The Royal Mail is failing my constituents. Letters are arriving late, and as a result hospital appointments are being missed. We have even had travel documents arriving on the day of departure. When I raised those concerns with Royal Mail directly, it took five months to send me a wholly inadequate reply, and it was not even lost in the post. Will the Government please ensure that a statement is made announcing real consequences for Royal Mail for it failing in its statutory duties?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman raises an important matter. I know that Royal Mail listens closely to these sessions, and I hope that it has heard what he has said this morning. The Business and Trade Committee has previously called Royal Mail into Parliament over its performance, and I know that the Secretary of State takes these matters very seriously. I hope that Royal Mail is listening, and if the hon. Gentleman seeks a meeting with the relevant Minister to make his points, I will help him to arrange it.

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

I have been working with the Met police on stolen mobile phones. We are making some progress, but the mobile phone companies need to be held to account. The Met commissioner is now calling on the Government to introduce legislation to ensure that mobile phone companies implement a kill switch so that mobile phones, once stolen, are not valuable. Will the Leader of the House make time for us to discuss this matter and pursue legislation?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

There are important developments in this matter. The Met police are working with the mobile phone companies, because they are absolutely crucial in supporting the delivery of this endeavour, and I am sure they want to make it less worthwhile for people to steal phones. I will raise the matter with the relevant Minister and see if we can get an update for the House on what the plan is, and on what further measures we can introduce.

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)]

As the Leader of the House is only too well aware, there has been a big political change in Havering, with a new Reform council and 23 Reform councillors elected in my constituency. Despite that, outer Greater London boroughs are still subject to the Labour mayor’s plan, which mandates boroughs such as mine pursuing astronomical building targets that necessitate huge high-rise buildings that do not fit in a town like Romford. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the Floor of the House on these disproportionate plans, so that local people in areas like mine have the autonomy and a stronger voice, enabling them to defend their way of life and the character of our town and country borough?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As the hon. Gentleman showed last week, he is very keen—I understand his keenness—to say what happened at the local elections in his patch and to mention the Reform victory. But as I pointed out to him, he should get his campaigning shoes out, because Reform councillors sometimes discover that they do not want to be councillors or that their local authority decides that they are ineligible to be councillors. Collectively across the country, they usually underperform and let people down. I congratulate Reform on its success in the local elections, but I advise the party to prepare for by-elections, as we are seeing elsewhere in the country, particularly when local residents find out what it has done.

The hon. Gentleman made his point about Greater London last week, and nothing has changed between then and this week. His area is still part of Greater London. If he wishes to campaign, that is a fair thing to do—I know he did so when he sat on the Conservative Benches. He has campaigned in order to get an independent voice, and I know that he will always be an independent voice for his area, but it is still part of the same set-up.

The wider point is that it is very tempting to go down the route of the politics of division, but it is not very helpful. I would urge caution.

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

Two local sisters in Breaston are seeking to turn the former Hidden Ivy garden centre into a new nursery to provide much-needed childcare for local families, but they face a lengthy and costly change-of-use process, including the requirement for a professional bat survey. Although proper environmental protections are important, many small community projects are being discouraged by burdensome planning requirements and excessive costs. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the planning rules surrounding change-of-use applications and the barriers they create for great projects such as the proposed new nursery in Breaston?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government agree with my hon. Friend that there must be a balance between planning rules and practicality, and we did consult on changes to the national planning policy framework to emphasise the need for proportionality in these matters. Through the nature restoration fund, we will also remove the need for site-by-site approaches to mitigation to support protected species at the strategic level. My hon. Friend may wish to raise this issue directly with Ministers at Housing, Communities and Local Government questions on Monday to get the latest thinking.

[Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)]

Across the country, children’s football teams often do not have access to a toilet. This issue disproportionately affects girls, and I have been told that girls in my constituency have stopped playing football because they cannot use the loo. Will the Leader of the House make time in the Chamber to discuss my constituent Natalie’s campaign calling for the provision of these essential facilities?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this matter—she is a champion for sports and inclusion—and I am sorry to hear of the experience of some girls in her constituency. The Government are committed to ensuring that everyone has access to high-quality grassroots sports facilities, which are such an important part of our local communities, and we are investing £85 million in those facilities to increase participation, particularly among women and girls. That includes providing funding for clubhouses and changing rooms, and I hope that clubs will pay attention to that and make it a success. I encourage my hon. Friend to raise this matter at Culture, Media and Sport questions next week.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

A constituent of mine who runs a small specialist defence and security business in my patch carried out £250,000 of work on a nationally significant submarine disposal programme for the Submarine Delivery Agency during a contract renewal period. The work was accepted and used, as has happened at contract boundary times on seven occasions in the past four years, but this time payment has not been made on the grounds that no purchase order was issued. Would the Leader of the House ask the Defence Secretary to look into the agency’s failure to pay for this work, which was delivered and accepted, even though it is the agency lead and all operational stakeholders have said that the work was of value and should be compensated? Could he also arrange for my constituent and me to have a meeting with the relevant Minister to resolve the matter of this outstanding bill?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

This Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that, wherever possible, we use British businesses for our contracts. I am sorry to hear of the experiences of the hon. Lady’s constituent, and I will raise the matter with the Secretary of State, if she gives me the details later. Following that, should a meeting be necessary, I am sure I can help to arrange one.

[Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)]

Abandoned caravans are causing an eyesore across Hastings, particularly along St Helens Road and Cinque Ports Way, which are being treated as a dumping ground. It is very frustrating for local residents, and the police tell me they are getting higher levels of antisocial behaviour in those areas. For the past 18 months, I have been writing to East Sussex county council, run by Reform, and Hastings borough council, run by the Greens, urging them to act. Instead, they are dragging their heels, and not using the powers in section 143 of the Highways Act 1980. I want to get this issue sorted for local residents, so I am organising a meeting with the two local councils and local residents to hear what the councils are going to do to sort this out, and I will try to knock heads together to get it sorted out. Does the Leader of the House agree with me that those local councils must treat this issue with the urgency it deserves?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Yes, I do. My hon. Friend raises an important matter, and I am concerned that she has not had the engagement from the councils that they should be offering. I hope they do respond with the seriousness that this warrants and take an active role in ensuring that such problems are sorted out on behalf of residents. Unfortunately, this is yet further evidence of Reform councils underperforming.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

The democratically elected majority of the Scottish Parliament has once again voted in favour of holding a referendum on Scottish independence. Therefore, the UK Government cannot simply continue to ignore the demands of Scottish people and hope that they will go away. Can we have a statement from the Government on how they plan to implement the democratic wishes of the people of Scotland, outlining the democratic route and timetable for the independence referendum that they voted for?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

There has been no change in this Government’s position, and therefore there is no need for the statement that the hon. Gentleman is asking for.

[Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) (Lab)]

Manchester city council has done a great job of bringing empty homes back into use in recent years, but too many properties still sit empty while people need accommodation. Will the Leader of the House join me in welcoming the council’s latest campaign to tackle this issue, and in encouraging Manchester residents to report long-term empty properties to the empty homes team through the council website? May we have time for a debate in this place on what more we can do to bring empty homes back into use?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I welcome the approach of my hon. Friend’s local council, because the Government share the ambition of wanting to see more empty homes brought back into use. Local authorities have access to a range of powers and incentives to bring empty homes back into use, including grant funding, and levers to take ownership of a property. We have also implemented high street rental auctions, bringing long-term vacant high street properties back into use. In the King’s Speech, we announced legislation to bring further reforms to housing, including the improvement of the stock of social housing. I look forward to the Government working with his local council and other local councils to take this issue forward.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

I have a constituent whose 15-year-old daughter is living with acute functional neurological disorder, a too often misunderstood condition that has profoundly diminished her quality of life. Despite the severity of her symptoms, the pair have been refused disability living allowance and receive no support, whether through carer’s allowance or otherwise. Will the Leader of the House find space for a debate in Government time on the urgent need to establish a critical pathway and improve support for people living with functional neurological disorder, and to raise the profile of this very debilitating condition?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

If the hon. Lady gives me the details of that case, I will certainly raise it with Government colleagues. She is right to raise these matters, which will be of huge concern to the family. If she wishes to have a meeting with the relevant Minister to explain why such a pathway and change is necessary, I will help her to arrange one.

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

I was delighted when the Labour Government supported Church Street GP surgery in Bishop’s Stortford with the funding for much-needed improvements last year. I recently had the opportunity to visit the surgery and see at first hand how its modern improvements are delivering for patients and supporting staff to expand capacity. We know that bricks and mortar are not the sum total of our health service; it is the people on the ground who make it happen. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking Dr Sian Stanley, Leigh Evans, Sarah Carter and everyone at Church Street not only for delivering this project, but for keeping the surgery open for more than 16,000 patients while work was ongoing?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

It is heartening to hear of the success of schemes to ensure local people have access to local services. I certainly pay tribute to everyone involved and thank them for making it a success in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

The rebuild at the Royal Berkshire hospital has been delayed twice: six years by the Conservatives and seven years by this Government. At Prime Minister’s questions, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), asked whether the Government were considering slashing the hospital building programme to fund the defence investment plan. He did not receive an answer. Will the Leader of the House make time for a statement to the House to find out the Government’s intention to fund both the new hospital building programme and our national defence?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman will know that the Prime Minister was very clear at Prime Minister’s questions. We are putting more money into the health service. However, we are not always able to move with the speed the situation demands, not least because we inherited a whole series of plans from the previous Government that were simply not funded at all. We are making sure that where plans exist, the funding exists too. The Prime Minister was very clear that it is not a choice between funding the NHS or funding defence. We intend to fund both properly.

[Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)]

In March, I met the Women’s Health Minister, Baroness Merron, to discuss how women’s voices must be central to policymaking and clinical care. I was glad to see that clearly reflected in the refreshed women’s health strategy. However, after the Holyrood election, the role of Scottish Minister for women’s health was abolished and a single, dedicated voice on women’s health was lost. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on women’s health inequalities across the UK and the need to centre women’s voices in their care?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend has been a champion for women’s health issues, particularly as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis, and I pay tribute to her for that. The news she brings is disappointing. Our renewed strategy will tackle the issues that women face every day and ensure that no woman is left behind in fighting to be heard. I encourage her to apply for a Westminster Hall or Adjournment debate to allow other hon. Members to share their views on the matter. The Scottish Government’s decision to not continue with that particular role is a matter for that Government, but I have to say that it shows their priority—or in this case, their lack of priority.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

I have submitted a series of precise written questions to the Minister for Trade to confirm whether the terms of licences for UK arms exports to Israel are being adhered to. Each time I have received an evasive answer. I am driven to conclude that if the Minister is correct that he is genuinely unable to usefully answer any of those questions, he must also admit to having no clue about the final use of sensitive military materials, which would mean that the whole notion of Government control over arms exports is an illusion. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate so that we can establish once and for all if the UK arms export rules—whether to Israel or anywhere else—are doing their job?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

With respect, the hon. Gentleman may be jumping to the wrong conclusion on the matter, but he has been around long enough to know that if he does not get the answer that he wants first time—or indeed second time—he can keep going. It is also up to him; if he wants to hear directly from Ministers on those matters and put those questions to them, then there are Adjournment and Westminster Hall debates. I am sure there would be a lot of interest in the topic from across the House.

[Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)]

The north-east has the highest number of young people not in education, employment or training anywhere in the country—64,000 in total. I recently joined the Centre for Social Justice and Fenwick Newcastle for a “Big Listen”, with 120 employers and frontline charities all committed to tackling the crisis. The CSJ will publish its findings later in the year, alongside the Milburn review, so will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on youth inactivity, and ensure the House has an opportunity to consider the recommendations?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the issue of NEETs. She is a great champion for her constituency, the region that we share, and young people in the area. The Government are committed to taking action, including the biggest reforms to apprenticeships in a decade and extending our youth guarantee, but as she suggests, there is more to be done. We will use Alan Milburn’s interim report to build on our reforms, and we look forward to receiving the full recommendations in the autumn. When that has happened, as I said earlier, the Government will want to update the House and find time for a debate on those matters.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to bring an issue to the Chamber for the Leader of the House to consider. Will he ask the Foreign Secretary to make a statement on the protections of religious leaders in Colombia, following reports that some 11 religious leaders have been assassinated, extrajudicially executed, forcibly disappeared or kidnapped since 2024, and on whether the Government will raise the restoration of protection measures for vulnerable faith leaders with the Colombian authorities?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As ever, the hon. Gentleman raises a serious issue on the freedom of religion or belief. The particular events he refers to are exceptionally concerning. The UK is committed to defending freedom of religion and belief for all. I would encourage him to raise the issue at Foreign Office questions next week, so that he can put it directly to Ministers. I will also take it up with the Department and ensure that he gets the response that he needs.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

Hatfield is a vibrant town, and we have much to be proud of, but we have a serious antisocial behaviour problem in the Parkhouse Court area. There is daytime drinking and visible drug use, and the problem is compounded by the fact that it is happening just yards away from Safari Stars nursery. It is completely unacceptable. I have visited twice and raised it with the chief inspector and the leader of the council, but things are not moving quickly enough, particularly on the need for a public spaces protection order to give the police the powers they need to move people on and sanction them. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on how we can expedite the establishment of a public spaces protection order, especially when there is a risk to children?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend raises a deeply concerning matter. Local agencies already have strong powers, including public spaces protection orders, to address persistent antisocial behaviour and protect communities, and it is for those local agencies to determine whether their use is appropriate. I hope, however, that they will have heard what my hon. Friend has said today as he quite rightly stands up for his constituents. We have also strengthened penalties for breaches of PSPOs through the Crime and Policing Act 2026.

[Nadia Whittome (Nottingham East) (Lab)]

On 21 May, the Government laid the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s draft code of practice for services, public functions and associations before the House. Since then, a litany of trans-led organisations, human rights groups, charities and trade unions have come out in opposition, citing the harm it poses to trans people, the contradictions it contains and how unworkable it will be to implement. Last week I tabled early-day motion 240, which would disapprove the draft code of practice.

[That the draft Code of Practice for Services, public functions and associations, a copy of which was laid before this House on 21 May, be disapproved.]

This is the mechanism set out in the Equality Act 2010 for MPs to be able to prevent the code from coming into force. In less than two weeks, 128 MPs have signed—almost one in five—making it the most-signed early-day motion since the last general election. It is supported by trans-led organisations, Amnesty International, Unison, the GMB and ASLEF. Would the Leader of the House not agree that this level of widespread, cross-party concern warrants the code being debated and voted on, and will the Government therefore allocate time to do so?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am aware of the high level of interest in this matter and of my hon. Friend’s long-standing campaigning and commitment on these issues, and I pay tribute to her for that. As she knows, established mechanisms are available for Members to seek debates, including, as she has alluded to, praying against particular measures. I am sure she will want to press further on this matter through the usual channels, as well as through the other ways in which matters can be discussed in the House.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

One in four women and one in six men experience domestic abuse in their lifetime. Members of Parliament employ more than 4,000 staff in this place, yet there remain minimal protections for staff who are victims of domestic abuse. I thank Mr Speaker for our meeting yesterday to discuss strengthening this policy in the House. Will the Leader of the House join my campaign to encourage every MP’s office to adopt a robust domestic abuse policy and offer training so that we can safeguard our staff from domestic abuse?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to bring this matter to the House today. It often takes tremendous courage for victims of domestic abuse to seek help. She is an assiduous campaigner for the implementation of a formal domestic abuse policy for all Parliament offices, and I certainly join her in that regard. She may wish to raise this specific matter with the Members’ services team, who provide Members’ offices with best practice safeguarding advice.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

Growing numbers of my constituents have been contacting me about e-bikes and e-scooters. They know the law, and they know it is not being enforced on pavements, in parks or in public spaces. There is clearly a need for a debate on this matter. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate not just on the state of the law on e-bikes and e-scooters, but on whether the police have the resources they need to enforce it?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to champion these concerns on behalf of his constituents. The police do have a number of powers to seize e-scooters and e-bikes that are being used illegally or antisocially. We will be consulting further shortly and are committed to pursuing legislative reform in due course. As my hon. Friend points out, it is a question of not just having the legislation but using that legislation. Were he to seek a Westminster Hall or Adjournment debate, he could put his frustration and concerns directly to the relevant Minister.

[Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)]

As Portsmouth is home to one of the largest concentrations of Royal Navy personnel, I regularly hear from service families and the charities supporting them that two weeks’ paternity leave is simply not enough, particularly when deployments can mean missing the birth of a child or losing the chance to take leave meaningfully. With allies such as the United States now offering significantly more generous paid parental leave arrangements, will the Leader of the House grant time for a debate on reforming parental leave for service personnel and addressing the impacts of deployment on family life?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Access to good parental leave is vital to create those initial family bonds, and I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this matter to the House, especially in relation to our brave Navy personnel. I am aware that the question of increasing paternity leave is currently being reviewed within the Ministry of Defence, and I will make sure that the relevant Minister has heard her contribution and gets back to her with a response.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

Powering Futures is a fantastic social enterprise based in Falkirk. Every year its Challenge programme invites pupils to tackle real-life workplace challenges and matches them with workplace mentors from local businesses. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Braes high school and St Mungo’s high school pupils James, Josh and Gabriella, who won Ken Muir awards for exceptional displays of problem solving, communication and teamwork skills through the programme, and can we schedule a debate in Government time on the role that social enterprises such as Powering Futures can play in tackling youth unemployment, especially in Scotland?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in congratulating James, Josh and Gabriella, along with the other students at Braes and St Mungo’s. I thank Powering Futures for its important work.

As my hon. Friend knows, we are committed to turning around the broken system that we inherited and to getting more young people into work. I encourage him to join up with other Members, some of whom have raised these issues today, to look at applying for a Backbench Business debate where he could talk not only about how proud he is of his constituents’ campaigning but about what further action could be taken in future.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

One of my favourite schools in my constituency is Balerno high school, so it was great to visit last week and celebrate it getting gold status as a UNICEF rights respecting school. This is the second time that the young people at the school have won this award, and they were absolutely delighted—so much so that they shared some baking with me. At a time when tensions are so high in communities across the UK, our schools are doing fantastic work to create a more inclusive, respectful society. Does the Leader of the House agree that it is time we had a debate in this House about the role of the rights respecting schools award programme in creating a more inclusive society, both to celebrate its successes and understand how we can build on them?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As an honorary kindness ambassador—I know that is quite hard for some to believe, but it is true—I agree that it is very important to celebrate the contribution of schools to public life and the work of the rights respecting schools award programme. As my hon. Friend points out, schools often rightly take leadership on these matters in local communities, and they take parents and others along with them. For Balerno high school to achieve gold status not once but twice is certainly impressive, and I pay tribute to everything that the school is doing.

Progression of Bills through Parliament

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Monday 8th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart, and I thank the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), for chairing the debate earlier.

I thank the petitioners for their hard work and the Petitions Committee for scheduling this debate, and I thank all the Members who have taken part. This has been a well-attended debate and it makes the case, dare I say it, for petitions to be heard in the main Chamber. However, that is another discussion.

Let me say at the outset that I understand the strength of feeling on this issue and appreciate some of the frustration that has come across this afternoon. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson) for the way in which he introduced the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee. I am also grateful to the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for reminding me of my duties and responsibilities in this place. I make no apology for saying that those are absolutely what I endeavour to carry out on any issue at any time. I am genuinely grateful for the opportunity to listen to the debate and to respond, but given the role I play, I make no apology if I say some unpalatable things. The problem, with an issue of such importance and such division, is that what I have to say will probably end up being unpalatable to both sides, not just one.

There are two interrelated elements to this petition and, subsequently, to this debate: first, the principles surrounding the role of each House and, secondly, the passage of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. I will begin by dealing with the first, which is the primacy of the Commons. The primacy of the elected chamber, the House of Commons, and the way in which it has primacy over the House of Lords, is absolutely fundamental to our constitution. It is reflected in the legislation and the conventions that govern how Parliament works. For instance, the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 reduced and then further reduced the ability of the House of Lords to delay legislation against the will of the Commons. Since its passage, the Parliament Act 1949 has limited the ability of the Lords to delay the will of the Commons to just one year, and I can confirm that that applies to all Public Bills, including private Members’ Bills, as my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central said.

The Government’s democratic mandate and the primacy of the Commons are also reflected in the Salisbury-Addison convention that the House of Lords should not reject on Second Reading any Government legislation that carries out a manifesto commitment and that such legislation will not be subject to “wrecking amendments” in its passage. However, the key fact is that the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was a private Member’s Bill and therefore, unlike the Parliament Act 1949, the Salisbury-Addison convention did not apply.

The will of the Commons is given precedence over the will of the Lords. However, I want to place on record the Government’s view that we greatly value the work of the House of Lords in scrutinising and improving legislation. There have been many occasions where the Members of the other place have drawn on their experience and expertise in their field—whether that is law, science, public service, military matters or indeed medicine—to bring a depth of scrutiny to legislation that sometimes the Commons is unable to.

A great deal of legislation is significantly improved because of the patient, rigorous work done in the Lords, and the Government do not have any plans to further curtail the ability of the Lords to scrutinise legislation passed on by the Commons. It seems to me that it is for the Lords to decide what their rules are, and even if the Government set about trying to change the rules, they do not have a majority in the House of Lords. We need to bear that in mind.

But—it is a very big “but”—there clearly needs to be a balance between how scrutiny takes place and how rules and conventions are respected. History shows that where the House of Lords overrides the expressed will of the elected House and is considered to be preventing legislation from completing its stages, pressure builds to revisit those rules and conventions—that is one of the first and last times I think I will ever have agreed with Tom Brake. [Laughter.]

I want to turn to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. I will not rerun the Bill, its progress and who was right or wrong, but it remains an issue of profound ethical and personal importance to many. As is the convention for matters of conscience, the Government maintained a neutral position throughout the passage of the Bill, except to ensure that, should it have passed, they would assist to make it workable. That position has not changed. All MPs and peers, including Government Ministers, will have had their own personal views, and it is right that, as MPs, we had a free vote on the Bill. On two occasions—on Second Reading, by a majority of 55, and on Third Reading, by a majority of 23—the Commons, including myself, supported the legislation.

In the Commons, the Bill received over 500 amendments and, as we have heard, was in Committee for something like 100 hours. Many of those amendments were agreed to. In the Lords, there were more than 1,200 amendments. There are some key differences, of course, in the way the two Houses can deal with those hundreds of amendments, but I suggest that some Members of the Lords who spent their time putting down amendment after amendment and urging that they be debated genuinely believed that the Bill that left the Commons was not of merit and was flawed. They have a right to scrutinise legislation, and they used that right. I heard some of the examples that were given of some of the amendments, which quite frankly ran the risk of making the process rather farcical, but there were many others that were genuine and sincere attempts to make the Bill right.

Behind all this is an issue that is central to private Members’ Bills: the question of time. Unless rules on private Members’ Bills change, any private Member’s Bill—whether in the House of Commons or the House of Lords—can be timed out because it is simply talked out. The right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse) said, in retrospect, shouldn’t the House of Commons and the Government have made time for this? I remind him that there was time in the House of Commons—the Bill passed there. It was not in the House of Commons that we had the problem; it was in the House of Lords.

However, it is a matter for the Lords themselves, where the Bill had 90 hours and 45 minutes of debate. As a private Member’s Bill both in the Commons and the Lords, it is to a large extent the Bill’s sponsors who decide how that time should be used. As in the Commons stage, that time was allocated and used in such a way in the Lords. It took a very long time in Committee in the House of Commons, and it took quite a long time on Report in the House of Commons. That was time that might otherwise have created some space later in the process, which the Lords might have been able to make better use. However, I suspect that I am being slightly optimistic when I say that.

[Daniel Francis]

I have sat on a Committee for a private Member’s Bill that took 45 minutes, and I sat on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill Committee, which took 100 hours. With an issue like this, we need to look at how the private Members’ Bill process works. As Committee members, we were expected to receive 242 pieces of written evidence and 159 pieces of written correspondence the day before line-by-line scrutiny commenced. We also had no equality impact assessment, human rights assessment or delegated powers memorandum throughout the entire Committee process. All I would ask is that, for these larger, more contentious Bills, we go away and look at how the private Members’ Bill process works.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly will go away and reflect on that, but as my hon. Friend knows, because he is a very distinguished member of the Modernisation Committee, we are looking at how the House of Commons should best use its time. Part of that discussion will relate to when private Members’ Bills are debated and how long they are debated for. He will know that a number of Commons Committees have looked at this question over a period of time—not least the Procedure Committee, which, if memory serves, is looking at it again.

However, limited time is available for private Members’ Bills. There might be a clear decision at the end of a debate—on a time-limited Second Reading, for example, although that would be novel, given that the aim is often to get to 2.30 pm having talked out a Bill, and sometimes the Government of the day help in that process [Interruption.] They do; that is part of how private Members’ Bills are dealt with. The more I look at the issue, the less I am sure whether they are necessarily fit for purpose.

However, if we were to get to that point, that would not address the issue raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) about how long the House should take to consider these matters. This House rose to the occasion on Second Reading—recall the great fear that there would be a great row, which would show the House at its worst. The House rose to that occasion, but we had at least five hours of debate on Second Reading, so I worry slightly about what would happen if the process were curtailed.

At the heart of the issue, although I am not commenting on the Bill in this context, is the fact that Members need to reflect on whether a private Member’s Bill is the route for certain legislation, particularly when it concerns a big issue and there is a question of conscience.

[Kit Malthouse]

I understand the point that the Leader of the House is making. However, if the House of Commons is determined that even a private Member’s Bill should go through, even in the face of a Government-attempted filibuster, does he agree that it has tools at its disposal to allow it to do so? As he will remember, even in the assisted dying debate, we had to move that the Question now be put. If the House of Commons, in convocation, has the majority to override the Government, it can do so, even in those circumstances. What we have found is that in the Lords that is not the case.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

That is the case in the Commons. I am trying to recall Second Reading, but I assume that is what happened. If there is a majority in favour of a Bill and a motion to bring the debate to an end, that motion will succeed—it does not matter what the Government of the day say. I was talking about other Bills that the Government might dispute, rather than distinctly private Members’ Bills where there is a matter of conscience and a free vote.

The right hon. Member for North West Hampshire is drawing out the contrast, and there is a wider debate about how the House of Lords conducts its business. As I have said before, at the end of the day if the House of Lords to carry out independent scrutiny, it is not for the Government of the day to set those rules. It might be for them to look at an issue in the context of the Parliament Act, for example, but it is not for them to set the day-to-day rules. Unless the Government had a majority in the House of Lords, they would not be able to do that.

[Tom Tugendhat]

The right hon. Gentleman is making the entirely valid point that democracy is not just what happens in either Chamber, whether it is the Lords or the Commons, and democracy cannot be reduced to a number, whether it is an electoral number at a general election or a number in the Chamber. Democracy is what we do between times.

I keep hearing that we Conservatives had 14 years in government—I do not deny that, and I recognise many of the errors that we made. But is it not also true that there were 10 years between the first and second votes on this campaign? Much of the democratic process could have been done in those 10 years through public debate, engagement and lobbying, instead of its being reduced to the actions that happened in the Chamber? Frankly, that is reducing democracy to a game of mathematics.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

This is cold comfort to people who want to see the Bill pass, and pass soon, but I would say to the right hon. Gentleman that this has all been part of that process. I do not want to play with hypothetical situations, but let us imagine that this legislation was taken forward. I have no evidence to suggest this will happen, other than the fact that it could, but if one of the MPs near the top of this year’s private Members’ Bills ballot decided to pick up the assisted dying Bill and run with it, there would be lessons to be learned. There would be lessons about how we use time, and about how wide the scope of the Bill should be because of the amendments that would be tabled. There would be a lesson about how the Lords should deal with the situation, even though it would be deeply uncomfortable for them.

I gently say to the proponents and opponents of the Bill that, if someone picks it up and runs with it, and prays in aid the Parliament Act—as I have said, our view is that it falls within the scope of that Act—there would be rules around that, too. Lessons need to be learned on top of what the right hon. Member for Tonbridge is getting at, which is about how we take public opinion with us and build consensus, which, as we have heard, takes time.

[Andrew George]

The Leader of the House said earlier that he felt that a private Member’s Bill was not necessarily the most suitable vehicle for legislation of this nature and gravity; as someone who has come out fairly high in this year’s ballot, I am interested in his remarks in that regard.

Leaving that aside, does the right hon. Gentleman not feel that, even if a private Member’s Bill is not the most suitable vehicle, it is now incumbent on the Government to find the time and the means through which the legislation can now be delivered, given that the Bill has the overwhelming support of the House of Commons?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

No, I do not, although who is to say whether in future the Government—or a Government—will decide to make the issue part of their manifesto, bring it forward and deal with it differently in that way? It is rather unfair for the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) to expect this Government to pick up this Bill—or his Bill, if he picked it up and it failed. The hon. Gentleman has been through this before: he had a private Member’s Bill, which had quite a lot of public support. It got through its Second Reading and to Committee, and he got through clause 1. The reason why it did not get any further was that the Government of whom he was part—the coalition Government—stopped it. I have to say, in this well-tempered debate, that it is a bit rich for him to talk about Governments picking up Bills and running with them when he knows full well that it is much more complicated than that.

[Dr Chowns]

Would the Leader of the House agree that there may be a way to respect both the principle of the primacy of the Commons and the importance of parliamentary scrutiny, including full scrutiny in the Lords, by coming to the point of a vote? That would not be the Government taking forward the Bill, but him, in his role as Leader of the House—the role of representing the Commons to the Government—reintroducing this Bill in the Commons so that it could be sent directly to the Lords to complete the process of parliamentary scrutiny: to the point of a vote in the Lords. That would fulfil the fundamental democratic principles that have been argued for on both sides of the debate today.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady makes an interesting point, but it is not for me, or for the Government, to tell the Lords how to conduct their affairs. It is not the Government’s job to pick up this Bill, after it has been through this first, stalled, failed, stage—

[Sir John Hayes]

rose—

[Sir Andrew Mitchell]

rose—

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Hang on. As we have already said, we have just been through the private Members’ Bill ballot again. We will have to wait and see. With respect, the hon. Lady does not know whether somebody is going to pick up the Bill and run with it in future.

[Dr Chowns]

rose—

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Hang on. I would want to see what happened here. We talk about private Members’ Bills changing the law on matters of profound conscience and social policy, such as, for example, abortion or capital punishment; I was not around at the time, but I doubt that those got through at the first go. I do understand that many people rightly regard this issue as a matter of life and death, but there were many people at the time who regarded abortion or capital punishment as matters of life and death. We have to be slightly patient and see what progress any future private Member’s Bill, if that is the route taken, might make.

[Dr Chowns]

Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I will give her one more go and then I am moving on.

[Dr Chowns]

I thank the Leader of the House for allowing me to clarify my point. My point is not about the specific content of the Bill; it is about the constitutional crisis caused its blockage. Is it really okay that the only way out of that is to wait for another private Member’s Bill? Is there a role in ensuring that it comes through the Commons?

[Pete Wishart (in the Chair)]

Order.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Thank you, Mr Wishart.

I am sorry if it was not explicit, but implicit in what I said was that I think the Lords need to reflect on what they have done. [Interruption.] Hang on. The stakes are quite high and we need to be careful that the conventions and rules in place are being used properly, so that the trust that we want to see is engendered in our political system. I want to address something else: the constant theme that, despite however many hundreds of Lords there are, there was a cabal—a handful of people—in the House of Lords who somehow managed to hijack this process and stop it all.

[Luke Taylor]

That is exactly what happened.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman says that that is exactly what happened. There have been five private Members’ Bills and one amendment on this matter in the House of Lords. They did not go anywhere. That was not because the person proposing them at the time did not believe that they had merit. That person did not push them because they did not think there was support in the House of Lords.

We can pick whichever side we want on this issue. We have talked all afternoon about how the issue was never tested. My hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) explained why it was never tested. Members can say, “Oh, it was never tested. We do not know.” If I wanted to, I could argue that it was never tested and we do not know either. We do not know whether there was a majority in the House of Lords for the Bill. Let us just be careful before we go out chasing those arguments.

I will conclude because I want to leave my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central some time. Business managers made it clear that had the Bill returned from the Lords before the end of the Session, the Government would have sought to provide time to consider changes. As I have already said, the Lords play an important role in scrutinising legislation, but it is clear that people do not view the Commons and the Lords as being in isolation from each other. The actions of each House directly impact on the perceptions of this place more broadly. It is about what my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central described as a question of trust. I am sure that Members of both Houses will wish to reflect on that and ensure that the actions of one House do not detrimentally affect the other.

I am sure that this debate will continue. I welcome that because at its heart is a Bill of profound importance to many of us, whatever side we sit on. It is also a debate of profound importance when it comes to the relationship between the elected House and the upper House. I am sure the debate will continue.

[Pete Wishart (in the Chair)]

Mr Atkinson, as you can see you have two and a half minutes.

Business of the House

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for next week is as follows:

Monday 8 June—Committee of the whole House of the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill (day one).

Tuesday 9 June—Conclusion of Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill.

Wednesday 10 June—Remaining stages of the Railways Bill.

Thursday 11 June—General debate on the legacy of Jo Cox.

Friday 12 June—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 15 June includes:

Monday 15 June—The Chairman of Ways and Means is expected to name opposed private business for consideration, followed by a debate on a motion on NHS dentistry. The subject for this debate was determined by the Backbench Business Committee.

Tuesday 16 June—Remaining stages of the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill.

[Jesse Norman]

May I welcome my guests to the Gallery?

Part of our job at business questions is to act as a place of record, and this has been a grim week and a week of mourning for us all. First, we mourn for Henry Nowak. The whole House will know the terrible circumstances of his murder and will feel the deepest respect for the dignity of his family in the face of such a loss.

We mourn, too, the tragic loss of the three Royal Navy crew killed yesterday when their helicopter crashed in Devon, and the loss of Lance Corporal James Freeman of the Royal Anglian Regiment, who died on Sunday during a training exercise in Erbil.

We mourn the early death of Sir Alex Younger, as has already been mentioned in this Chamber. He was a friend to many in and around this House and did so much to protect this country in his long tenure as chief of the Secret Intelligence Service.

Finally, I hope I may record my personal sadness at the recent deaths of two true Conservative parliamentarians: Sir Alan Haselhurst and Sir Jeremy Hanley, who were both great public servants. In all these cases, we send our deepest condolences to their families, friends and comrades.

I have two matters to raise with the Leader of the House. The first is a matter of housekeeping. Colleagues will know of my deep concerns about the current plans for the rebuild of the Palace of Westminster, the lack of scrutiny they have received to date, and in particular the prospect of an uncapped budget potentially running up to an astounding £20 billion to £40 billion. The restoration and renewal client board last met on 2 March. At that meeting, I requested information, and I understood that my request had been agreed. Three months later, nothing has happened, as far as I am aware. I cannot even check the status of my request, because the minutes have not been published in either of the two parallel and apparently unconnected places on the parliamentary website. This is just not good enough. It is a disrespect to the Chamber and to the Palace as a whole.

Very soon, the Government are expected to bring forward a motion asking colleagues to endorse a programme that could cost more than the original budget for High Speed 2. Just think about that, Madam Deputy Speaker— I hope all Members will think about it. At present, colleagues are manifestly under-informed and under- prepared. Can the Leader of the House therefore reassure us that there will be proper time for scrutiny, both in the Public Accounts Committee and on the Floor of the House, and that at least three weeks’ notice will be given of any motion so that both Houses may prepare properly?

Secondly, I raise a matter of both local and national importance. The Leader of the House will know that thanks to the Hay festival and now HowTheLightGetsIn, every year at the end of May, Hay and its environs in my constituency become the world capital of ideas. As Arthur Miller once described it, Hay is the “Woodstock of the mind”, but it is also Hay-on-Wye, and the Wye—one of the loveliest rivers in Britain—remains in deep ecological distress. I have been campaigning on this issue for six years and progress, alas, has been fitful at best. The previous Government published a River Wye action plan, with up to £35 million earmarked to help deal with poultry manure and nutrient pollution, only for it to be discarded after the general election. But Herefordshire council and neighbouring councils have been working hard with farmers, conservation bodies and local partners, most recently through a new charter for the River Wye, an evocative statement of shared purpose across the catchment.

The root problem is a lack of joined-up collective action and a regulatory system that remains woefully insufficient. The river runs through England and Wales, but pollution does not stop at the border, and neither should policy. We have always needed one single approach that brings everyone together, and one source of authority for the river. That is why I am proposing statutory River Wye commissioners, an inexpensive cross-border body for the whole catchment that would be created by an Order in Council, with a single recovery plan, proper shared data, published milestones and the authority to bring all parties—businesses, farmers, campaigners, ecologists, planning, conservation and enforcement—to the same table. May we have a debate in Government time on River Wye commissioners? Perhaps the Government can pick up my River Wye (Cleaning) Bill, so that this wonderful river can be given the clear, accountable and empowered cross-border support that it so urgently needs.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

May I join the right hon. Gentleman in mentioning Henry Nowak? I thank him and many Members from across the House who have dealt with this tragic matter in a sensitive and responsible way. Unfortunately, it is not universal in this House, but in many ways Members have risen to the occasion. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, we need to respect the wishes of Henry’s family, but above all, we need to respect Henry himself. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the way in which he has raised this issue.

The right hon. Gentleman has also given a list of other tragic events, and I want to mention some of them. As he says, we send our deepest condolences to the friends and families of the Navy personnel who were tragically killed during the helicopter training exercise yesterday. We also pay tribute to Lance Corporal James Freeman, who was killed in a training exercise in northern Iraq. I know that the thoughts of the whole House are with his family and his unit at this desperately sad time. It underlines just how important it is that we respect our men and women of the services, who do so much on behalf of our country.

Like the right hon. Gentleman, I was saddened to hear of the death of Lord Haselhurst. Alan Haselhurst was a distinguished Deputy Speaker, Chairman of Ways and Means and Chair of the Administration Committee. He was a dedicated parliamentarian and was an MP for more than 47 years. I served with him on the Honours Committee from time to time, but more lately I met up with him in the Tea Room, where we invariably discussed cricket, about which he knew a great deal and I clearly did not.

I also pay tribute to Alex Younger, the former head of MI6, who passed away this week. He was a distinguished and dedicated public servant—and the longest serving MI6 chief in 50 years—and our thoughts are with his family at this very sad time.

I also place on record our tribute to Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale, who, sadly, has passed away. She lived an extraordinary life, and served as a role model to women everywhere. I am sure the whole House will join me in sending condolences to her family and friends.

Lastly, but by no means least, I am sure the whole House will also join me in sending our condolences to the friends and family of Gladys Dickson. She was a much-loved character in the Members Tea Room, and rightly proud of the MBE that she received. She will be deeply missed by Members across the House.

I want to mention two matters before I get on to the right hon. Gentleman’s remarks. Patients across England will benefit from more services, treatments and better access to medicines from their local pharmacy under the new £340 million Government-funded deal we announced last week. We are making the most of our highly skilled pharmacists, while boosting access to services and giving patients more care right on their doorstep. I know this issue has been raised many times in business questions, and indeed elsewhere, and I hope that that pressure has influenced this decision and that this announcement will be welcomed.

At the weekend, the biggest train operator, Govia Thameslink Railway, entered public ownership, which means that publicly owned operators will deliver eight out of 10 passenger rail journeys, and millions of passengers will benefit from more accountability and reliable journeys. Railway services are frequently raised by Members with me, and in other ways as well. By setting up Great British Railways, we are putting passengers first, fixing what is broken and delivering a better railway on behalf of the people.

The right hon. Gentleman raised two specific points. He was right to raise, and it is concerning, that the client board has not yet produced the minutes of its meeting. I am sure there is no great conspiracy behind that; it is just that it has not got around to doing so, but I gave him the assurance that it will. I also agree with him that it is really important that we roll the pitch for any decision on R and R. I truly believe that we will need to make a decision one way or the other, because we cannot tread water for very much longer, not least because it is costing us a great deal of money to do so. Whichever route we take, it will cost a great deal of money, but there will be guidance on these governance and financial matters. Keeping tabs on the money is very important—it is at the heart of what we do—and I will therefore be bringing forward a motion, and I heard what he said about its timing. The PAC is looking at this, and we need to learn lessons from the people who have looked at this matter, so that we get the decision we will make absolutely right.

On the Hay-on-Wye festival and the River Wye, I too was at the Hay-on-Wye festival for a day. It is a tremendous event, and I encourage people to go along to it next year. The right hon. Gentleman talked about the state of our rivers. We have a clean water Bill in the King’s Speech, and we are determined to go on cleaning up our rivers and our seas. The Wye, among others, is a very beautiful river indeed, and it is important that it is cleaned up for communities along its route, but also for those visiting that particularly beautiful part of the world. I offer him a meeting with the water Minister—the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy)—to make his case for the actions that he proposes and so that he can put forward his proposals for commissioners. If the Government are not forthcoming on that, there are other routes he can take. He mentioned his private Member’s Bill, but there are other routes, and I know he is a determined campaigner for improving that situation.

[Alex Davies-Jones (Pontypridd) (Lab)]

When Government Ministers decide to have disappearing messages on their phones as standard, or when Ministers decide to omit certain information because it seems beneficial, is there any wonder that public trust in Government and in politicians is so low? When the institutions that are meant to protect and support the public seemingly defend perpetrators of abuse instead, things need to change. So will the Leader of the House please grant a debate in Government time on the urgent and, frankly, long overdue need for a legal duty of candour and on morality and integrity in public life?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I understand my hon. Friend’s frustration on these matters, but I have to say that Ministers, including the Prime Minister, have complied with the Humble Address by providing all the information that they held. I think that is the right thing for them to have done. Following on from that, the Cabinet Office has then published that information, so I just want to correct the record: as far as anyone knows, nothing is being withheld.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, however, about the duty of candour. She has done a great deal of work—I thank her for it—on the Hillsborough law, at the centre of which is candour. The Bill will be coming forward in due course and she will be able to make her case again then. It is not just candour that everyone in public office should be accountable for; there are ministerial codes and other ways in which people can be held accountable for their actions, and I just want to reassure the House on that matter.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I start by echoing the comments made by both the shadow Leader of the House and the Leader of the House in relation to the murder of Henry Nowak and the comments made by his family. As a former police officer, I would say to those seeking to protest, or indeed encouraging those to protest, that protests involve policing and they take away the very police officers who operate in our communities, trying to tackle the scourge of knife crime. It is important that we remember that. I also echo the comments in relation to the service personnel who have tragically died in recent days, the death of Sir Alex Younger, and the former parliamentarians who we all recognise and remember.

This week, I draw the attention of the House to the Ebola virus outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. Already, more than 60 people have died as a result of the ongoing outbreak, and the head of the World Health Organisation said yesterday that it could have begun as early as January. I fear that drastic cuts to international aid have undermined the international community’s preparedness to identify and respond urgently to such outbreaks. Under the Conservative Government, aid was slashed from 0.7% of GDP to 0.5%; under Labour, it is down to its lowest levels as a proportion of GNI since 1999. We are responding to the Ebola crisis with one hand tied behind our back.

International development is

“important for Britain’s strength abroad”—

not my words, but Tony Blair’s, in his much-commented-on essay last week. I believe it is important to our national security, too. Liberal Democrats enshrined the 0.7% international development target in law while in Government, thanks in large part to the dedication of the now Liberal Democrat leader in the Lords, Lord Purvis. That law has still not been repealed, despite successive Governments flouting it. Will the Leader of the House ask the Foreign Secretary to come before the House to update us on the Government’s compliance with the International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Act 2015?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join the hon. Lady in paying tribute to police officers, particularly those who were hurt in the appalling recent disturbances.

As colleagues will know, the current outbreak of Ebola that the hon. Lady refers to is affecting the DRC and threatening Uganda. Our estimation is that the risk to the UK population is currently low, but we keep that under constant review. We have implemented a package of broader health measures, including live information screens at Heathrow, Gatwick and Manchester airports, and NHS 111 pathways have been updated. We continue to work closely with international partners. Last month, up to £20 million of new UK aid funding helped to contain the recent outbreak in the eastern DRC, but we keep that under constant review.

I could not agree more with the hon. Lady that the aid programme is an important part of our national security. I also think it is a moral cause. We are committed to a target of 0.7% when fiscal circumstances allow. We are committing £1.4 billion a year to tackle human suffering in some of the worst humanitarian crises. We will still be the fifth-biggest funder of development aid and we will invest £850 million in the Global Fund for 2026-28. I understand what she is saying about the need to go further, but we should not ignore the fact that we are doing everything we can.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

More than 15 people have died in water-related incidents in the recent hot weather, including 17-year-old David Tita Junior, who sadly lost his life at Pickmere lake near Northwich last Tuesday. My thoughts, and the thoughts of the entire House, are with David’s family at this difficult time. The tragic incident highlights the importance of water safety education, and particularly the risks associated with cold water shock. Will the Leader of the House arrange to have the Minister responsible look at this and other recent cases, and consider how water safety education in schools might be strengthened?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in sending condolences to all the families of those who have tragically died, including David. As part of the Beat the Heat campaign, the UK Health Security Agency promotes safer choices around where, when and how people swim. As my hon. Friend rightly points out, primary schools are required to provide mandatory swimming instructions. Primary school leavers should be able to swim 25 metres confidently; if there are reasons why that is not happening, I will ask the relevant Department to find out what they are. The number of deaths is tragically high and the issue will affect a number of constituencies, so I urge him and others to attend the Westminster Hall debate next Tuesday, to raise questions directly with the Minister.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

The Backbench Business Committee met on Tuesday afternoon, with six of the eight Members who are due to be on the Committee. Our quorum is four, so I urge both the Government and our Liberal Democrat colleagues to ensure that we are up to full strength as soon as possible so that we can continue. We added a further 12 debates to our waiting list and attempted to use the time we have been allocated effectively.

I understand that we will get a half day on Thursday 18 June, and I ask the Leader of the House for a business of the House motion so that the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee can give a Committee statement. That will be followed by a debate on the infected blood compensation scheme. The business in Westminster Hall on 11 June will be a statement from the Scottish Affairs Committee, followed by debates on freedom of religion and on secondary breast cancer. On Tuesday 16 June there will be a debate on community hospitals, and on Thursday 18 June there will be a debate on safeguarding human rights in supply chains, followed by another debate still to be confirmed.

I understand that we are due for the estimates day debates soon; I would be grateful if the Leader of the House could announce when those will be. The Committee has set a deadline of Friday 12 June for requests for debates, so there is not much time. We invite requests from Select Committees and individuals, and we will determine those debates as soon as we can.

Over the weekend was World No Tobacco Day. This afternoon we will be holding a celebration of 50 years of the all-party parliamentary group on action on smoking and health, a group I have had the honour of chairing for the last 11 years. All Members are welcome to join us in Dining Room A. We will also be celebrating the passing of the Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026, so can the Leader of the House arrange for one of the Health Ministers to give a statement to the House on the next steps after the passing of the Act, in terms of regulations and the path towards a smoke-free England in 2030?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I hear the hon. Gentleman on the business of the House motion and will ensure that that happens. I will announce future business in the usual way but, as he says, we can expect estimates day soon; I will give his Committee as much notice as possible and confirm the dates as soon as I can.

The hon. Gentleman has been an assiduous campaigner on smoking, and I thank him and the APPG on smoking and health for all the work that they have done. I will talk to the relevant Minister to see whether we can get the House an update on the implementation of the Tobacco and Vapes Act.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

On 13 September 2024, Juliana, Giselle and Kyle Prosper were murdered by a family member who was able to buy a shotgun with a forged paper certificate. I recently met Giselle and Kyle’s father—it is a meeting that will stay with me forever. Even before this tragedy, it was unthinkable that anyone could purchase a gun by swapping pieces of paper in a car park. Will the Leader of the House grant time for a debate on the much-needed modernisation and digitisation of firearms licensing, so that the police know exactly who in their area has licensed guns, and where, and can track down and crack down on illegal sales?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that tragic case with the House. It is important that we have strong and effective gun laws. If she wishes to raise her concerns directly with the relevant Home Office Minister, I will arrange for a meeting. She may also wish to seek a Westminster Hall debate so that she and the rest of the House can hear directly from the Minister about what the Government intend to do.

[Steve Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)]

When Lord Mandelson WhatsApped one of the Government’s most senior Ministers to say that growth plans were in the hands of the Chancellor, the now Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister replied:

“It doesn’t fill you with confidence”.

A good illustration of that can be seen in Cambridgeshire. Just last year, after spending £80 million of public money and securing planning permission for the largest brownfield site for 8,500 homes, the Government cancelled the scheme. This week, the Government announced yet another unelected quango, the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation, to lead on housing. That is in addition to the Greater Cambridge Partnership, which leads on housing, the metro mayor, who leads on housing, and the county council and district council, which also lead on housing—and if that is not enough, there is also Cambridge Ahead, which is the voice of civil leadership on issues such as housing. Why should having so many duplicate bodies, which cost taxpayers in my constituency so much money, give anyone confidence that this Government can deliver growth?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

This Government are delivering growth in difficult circumstances—not as fast as we would hope, of course, but we are doing it. We are also building more houses, which is important, because people need somewhere to live and because housing is a driver of growth. The right hon. Gentleman talks about the involvement of various agencies in decision making. The principle from Government is very simple: decisions should be made closer to the people that they affect. It is better that the organisations and agencies that he mentions make those decisions rather than attempts being made to determine those matters here at the centre.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

At the beginning of last month, there were more than 1,600 applicants on the social housing register in Wolverhampton requiring a three-bedroom property, more than 270 of whom required emergency priority. In the previous 12 months, however, only 216 three-bedroom properties became available for let. Will the Leader of the House meet me and the relevant Minister to discuss how the provision of social housing can be improved in my constituency and throughout the country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, who is a champion for his constituents. We are taking action to tackle the lack of social housing, including through the Social Housing Bill, which was introduced to Parliament last month. We are strengthening protections for tenants and giving local authorities the certainty they need to build new and affordable social housing. If he wishes to have a meeting with the Housing Minister to discuss these matters and how they affect his constituency, I will arrange one.

[Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)]

On Tuesday evening, we lost my uncle Rory to cancer. He absolutely adored politics, so I hope it offers a little comfort to my family that we are able to remember him here today. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Thank you. I thank the doctors and nurses who looked after him. Given that one in two of us will develop cancer in our lifetimes, it is so important that we continue to talk about cancer, and in particular rare forms such as blood cancer, which my father is currently fighting—successfully, so far; I keep touching wood—and bone cancer. Could we have a debate in Government time about the importance of raising awareness and what more we can do to fight and eradicate cancer?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I extend, along with the rest of the House, I am sure, our condolences to the hon. Lady’s family at the loss of her uncle, and we certainly wish her father well in his struggle.

The Government have published our national cancer plan, and we are investing £2.3 billion to deliver 9.5 million additional tests by 2029. We realise that this is a priority for people, and it is a priority for the Government, too. I will certainly take away the hon. Lady’s request and see if we can provide an update to the House on our plans.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

I am an active, team-oriented and—some might even say—loyal member of the Labour crew, so I was very glad recently to visit the local McDonald’s at JunctionOne retail park and to be reminded of my time as a McDonald’s crew member at a drive-through in Gloucester. It was good to meet the franchisee and staff, and to see the hard work, high standards, and great training and career opportunities there are at that McDonald’s and others elsewhere.

I also heard about the McDonald’s work experience programme, which gives young people much-needed opportunities, including work experience, help with writing CVs and interview techniques and so on. I believe that this Government have taken their responsibility very seriously, with initiatives such as the youth jobs grant, the jobs guarantee and more, but McDonald’s and many companies like it are also taking their responsibility seriously. May we have a debate in Government time to champion the work of businesses that are taking seriously their responsibility to help our young people get into work?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend knows that it is a priority of this Government to get young people into work. It is a disgrace that there are nearly a million young people not in education, employment or training. That is why we have set up the Milburn review, which has published its interim findings, and we will come up with some recommendations later in the year.

I, too, have a McDonald’s in my constituency—I am probably not alone in that—and I absolutely agree that McDonald’s should be praised for its work experience programme and its progression programme, which trains people to manage outlets and so on. It is a fantastic organisation in much of what it does. If my hon. Friend would like to apply for an Adjournment debate on this matter, it would be a great opportunity to discuss McDonald’s and to hear from the Minister about our plans for more jobs for young people.

[Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)]

From volunteer gardeners to gardening clubs, litter pickers, Wombles, community groups and church groups, across Aldridge-Brownhills there are some fantastic volunteer organisations. As most across the House know, this is Volunteers Week, so will the Leader of the House join me in recognising all those who do so much to support our local communities? In particular, some in my constituency will be recognised this evening at Manor Farm Community Association.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join the right hon. Lady in thanking volunteers in Aldridge-Brownhills and across our country. I have said before that they are the golden thread holding our communities together, and it is appropriate this week, and indeed every week, that we thank them for the work that they do and pay tribute to them.

[Paulette Hamilton (Birmingham Erdington) (Lab)]

My constituent Ethan Lacey from Castle Vale in Birmingham is fighting for his life in hospital in Thailand following a serious incident. His family are facing unimaginable distress as they seek to support him and navigate the challenges he is facing in dealing with medical issues from thousands of miles away. Given the urgency of the case, will the Leader of the House help me to secure an urgent meeting with the relevant Foreign Office Minister to discuss immediate support for Ethan and his family?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

We send Ethan and his family our best wishes. The direct answer to my hon. Friend’s question about a meeting is yes.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

Last week, Kenneth Law pleaded guilty in Canada to 14 counts of aiding suicide. The toxic packages that he distributed around the world are believed to be linked to the deaths of some 79 Britons, including Tom, the son of my constituent David Parfett, yet Law will not be tried in the UK following a decision by the Crown Prosecution Service. David, other victims’ families and the Molly Rose Foundation have called for a public inquiry into these deaths and similar deaths connected to pro-suicide forums. Will the Leader of the House arrange for the relevant Minister to give a statement to the House on this case and the wider issue?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I offer the hon. Lady a meeting with the relevant Minister to look at the details of the case and see what more can be done.

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

Councillor Harry Atkinson recently marked his final day as civic mayor of the borough of Erewash with a visit to this House. At just 25 years old, he was widely believed to be the youngest mayor in the country during his mayoral year. During that year, he raised over £5,000 for charity, including two grand on an incredible journey driving a Reliant Robin across Europe to Erewash’s twin towns—for the record, they are not built for that. I am incredibly proud of Harry and his work in demonstrating that public service, civic pride and democracy are alive and thriving among the next generation. Will the Leader of the House therefore consider granting time for a debate on the importance of youth involvement in politics?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in recognising the exceptional service of Councillor Harry Atkinson not only to his local community but to charity. I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for a debate as I believe youth involvement in politics would be a popular topic. As for what we do in that regard, it is important that the House reaches out in all sorts of ways, but we should not forget that we also have the Youth Parliament.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I do not know whether the Leader of the House is a boater, but if he is, I invite him to the Shropshire Union canal and, in particular, to visit the Shrewsbury and Newport Canals Trust and the excellent volunteers who do so much to help Shropshire tourism. May we have a debate on England’s canals and their importance for tourism and leisure, along with hotels, pubs, fishing and hiking? The overall offer alongside and connected to canals is worth a huge amount of money to counties such as Shropshire, but will the Government do more?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly praise the work of the right hon. Gentleman’s canals trust and those elsewhere. I agree with him about the importance of canals for tourism and beyond. I encourage him to apply for an Adjournment debate so that he can make the case and see what the appropriate Minister says about further supporting that. As for joining him on the canal—this is the confession of an MP from a coastal constituency— I have a notoriously weak stomach for water. [Interruption.] I am sorry, but I cannot even guarantee that, on a canal, it would not be a problem.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Obstructive pavement parking is a serious and dangerous issue in many areas in my constituency, particularly in the central areas of Luton. I am pleased that our new Labour leader on Luton council, Councillor Tahmina Saleem, has made tackling that one of her priorities, particularly because over 600 people signed my petition calling on Luton council to take up new powers to enforce against pavement parking at the earliest opportunity. Will the Leader of the House provide time for the Secretary of State for Transport to update the House on when the legislation will be introduced, so that we can start to tackle pavement parking as soon as possible?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Pavement parking is a serious issue, and it has been raised a number of times in business questions. The Government’s English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 gives local leaders power to prohibit pavement parking. Local authorities will be given powers through secondary legislation to tackle the worst instances. My hon. Friend may be able to get an answer to her question directly from Ministers, because we will have Transport orals on 11 June.

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

When it comes to planning policy, there is little I agree on with this Government. However, I hope that we can find some consensus on the point of retrospective planning applications. In the villages of Upton and Dinton in my constituency, land the size of football pitch was taken over the weekend and tarmacked, and mobile homes and caravans were installed, with no planning permission. It seems that a retrospective application enables those who breach the rules so egregiously not only to wash that away, but not to have to comply with things such as biodiversity net gain provisions, which a fresh planning application would. May we have a debate in Government time on how we shut down the ability for those who so egregiously breach the rules to obtain retrospective permission?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely understand the hon. Gentleman’s concern and that of his constituents when faced with such situations. I will offer to help to arrange a meeting with the Minister to make the case, which he makes very strongly, to see what further action the Government intend to take.

[Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)]

Last week I visited Newquay Orchard with the Co-operative party to see at first hand how local people have transformed our green space into a thriving community asset that provides environmental education, mental health support, employability services and many more community activities. Projects such as Newquay Orchard show the power of co-operation and community-led action in tackling some of society’s biggest challenges. Will the Leader of the House provide time for a debate on the role of co-operatives and community organisations in building stronger, healthier and more resilient communities?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I pay tribute to Newquay Orchard for the work that it does, which is about not just good outside spaces for people to use, but mental health and other matters. Hon. Members across the House have already raised the theme of volunteering today, so there is scope for someone to seek an Adjournment debate on volunteers and community organisations, including co-ops, so that Members can explore, with Ministers, what further action can be taken.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

Many of my Woking constituents regularly commute to London by train, but they cannot rely on the service provided by South Western Railway. Delays are at the highest level since 2019, and there were 1,000 more cancellations in the second half of last year than there had ever been before. Do the Government admit that nationalisation has not gone to plan, and will the Leader of the House agree to have a debate in Government time to ensure that I can get the service that my constituents pay for?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman in the terms in which he puts the question, because this is a policy that is evolving and is relatively new, and we expect that services and accountability will improve as we go further. As I pointed out in my opening remarks, eight out of 10 journeys will be taken on railways owned by the Government, and that is the right thing. He also has the Railways Bill and other opportunities to raise those concerns if he is able to do so.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

Last week I was pleased to meet with a number of hospitality businesses from across Lincolnshire, including some in my constituency: Riverhead Coffee, Cleethorpes Lettings and the famous Steels fish and chip restaurant. They raised with me the challenging conditions they are facing, including a very burdensome tax regime. Will the Leader of the House indicate the next opportunities for us to discuss the impacts on hospitality businesses and the current overburden of tax?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to raise her concerns, and the Government are absolutely clear about the challenges that face hospitality in her constituency and elsewhere. We are taking action on those matters, but I understand that there is a great deal more to do. If she wishes to meet with a Treasury Minister to explore some of the options, I will help her to arrange that meeting.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

The Government are missing a huge opportunity by not pushing development on brownfield land over green belt. My constituents believe this, and many Members across the House acknowledge it. In fact, if the Government wanted to, they could meet their housing target by prioritising development on brownfield land first. Does the Leader of the House agree that that is of the utmost importance, and that it should be debated on the Floor of the House at the earliest opportunity?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

If the hon. Gentleman seeks an Adjournment or Backbench Business debate, which happens very often following comments made in these sessions, he will know that others share those concerns, and therefore he will hear not just about those concerns, but from the Minister directly.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab/Co-op)]

I hope that my question will be more gentle on the Leader of the House’s stomach than being on water. Madam Deputy Speaker, you may be pleasantly surprised to hear that Peterborough is the beating heart of one of the greatest foodstuffs in our country: fish and chips. Friars Pride, based in Peterborough, is celebrating a pukka achievement, having this year served our fish and chip industry across the United Kingdom for 50 years. This is not just about the scraps of our economy. [Hon. Members: “Ugh!”]. I don’t know if it gets worse. The fish and chip industry is worth more than £1 billion to our economy and employs more than 85,000 people. Will my right hon. Friend therefore join me in congratulating Friars Pride on a great 50 years as a brilliant company in Britain, recognise that it is National Fish and Chip Day tomorrow, and see whether we can have a debate on the value of the fish and chip industry to British culture?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly congratulate Friars Pride on its success over the years. I absolutely join my hon. Friend in celebrating National Fish and Chip Day. As a coastal MP, I may be averse to leaving dry land, but I am not averse to fish and chips; I know that because I have many excellent fish and chip shops in my constituency, some of which win national awards. I pay tribute to fish and chip shops, not just in his constituency and mine, but across the country.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

Wiltshire council has assessed that the combination of the decision to stop the A303 tunnel at Stonehenge—despite £250 million already being committed to that, and spent—confirmation that the UK Health Security Agency will move to Harlow from Porton; the reduction to the rural grant; and Wiltshire having one of the lowest levels of police funding, as the police and crime commissioner tells me, means that Wiltshire’s GDP is at risk of falling by 6%. Could we have a statement from the Government on the effect of combined Government decisions on the Wiltshire economy, and what they propose to do to assist us through this time?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government will be determined to do everything we can to support Wiltshire and the right hon. Gentleman’s constituents, and I am sorry to read of the estimated effects of some of the delays that he describes. Should he seek an Adjournment debate or a Backbench Business debate on these matters, he may be able to get greater reassurance from the Minister about the future.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

Will the Leader of the House—and, through him, the whole House—join me in congratulating Blackheath rugby club on its victory in the championship accession final? That puts it in the second tier of the domestic league for rugby. This is an amazing achievement for Blackheath rugby. It is the oldest rugby club in the world—so old that it is just known as “Club”. In celebrating the achievement of Blackheath rugby club, can we have a debate on sports clubs in our constituencies, so that the whole House has the opportunity to celebrate Blackheath’s achievement, and so that others can talk about the contribution that clubs make in their constituency?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend in thanking Blackheath rugby club, and congratulating it on its promotion and its work, not just on the field but, I am sure, in the wider community. He will know that rugby clubs and other local sporting clubs are at the beating heart of our communities. Should he get a Westminster Hall debate on these matters, he could make the case for Blackheath, and others could make the case for clubs in their area.

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)]

The Leader of the House will be aware that the local elections across Greater London brought seismic change to the political landscape. In my constituency, every single council seat—all 23—was won by Reform UK, and Havering council is now a Reform UK London borough. Does he accept that the political divide between inner-city London and areas that orbit the capital, such as my town and the county borough of Havering, can no longer be ignored after these results? Will he make time for a debate on reform of regional and local government around the capital, so that boroughs like Havering can regain our independence from the bureaucracy and control of City Hall and the Mayor of London—just as Margaret Thatcher, when she abolished the Greater London Council in 1986, gave real power back to local people in local boroughs?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman raised the point about the election results in his patch with the Prime Minister yesterday. It would be wrong of me to say anything other than that the electorate in his area spoke very firmly indeed. I gently point out to him that given that so many Reform councillors were elected, he should prepare himself to campaign in by-elections, because if things go true to form, a number of those councillors will be surprised that they were elected—or surprised that their position involves any work. A number of them may well end up in court, but all of them collectively will be a disappointment to the people of his area.

As for the relationship between the hon. Gentleman’s area and London, he can raise that matter; he raised it before he decided to go off to another party. He is a fierce advocate for his area, but I am not sure that the politics of division is the way forward.

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

I recently attended a Glasgow schools clean air event, organised by Parents for Future Scotland, at which I met pupils from St Charles’, St Mary’s and St Patrick’s primary schools in Glasgow North. They are leading inspiring work to tackle air pollution in their communities. May we have a debate in Government time on how we can better involve young people in addressing the climate crisis, and how we can ensure that their ideas and leadership are reflected in national policy?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a veritable champion for his constituents and on the matter of the climate crisis; I commend him for that. We are committed to improving air quality, and to delivering benefits for public health, the environment and the economy through new air quality targets, which will cut exposure to harmful particles by nearly a third by 2030. Should my hon. Friend wish, he could seek an Adjournment debate on the subject, in which he could expand further on the points he made.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

Could we have a debate in Government time on performance and image-enhancing drugs? Last month, UK Anti-Doping released a survey that looked at 1,000 young people between the ages of 16 and 25; it showed that a third of them had taken IPEDs, and over 40% had seen repeated adverts for them online. This is a growing concern that I have been raising for the last number of years, and I am really concerned that the situation will get worse before it gets better. Could the Leader of the House use his offices to grant a debate on the subject in Government time, in which we could explore this issue as it relates to health, sport and education?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As I have said before, the hon. Gentleman is a real champion on important matters, and I pay tribute to him for his work on the important issue of body image. I will reach out to the relevant Minister and ask them to update him on the Government’s position.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

Constituents in Wynyard Mews in Hartlepool are being ridden roughshod over by their estate management company Praxis, just as residents at Marine Point are by Sela management, along with many others across the town. I met Praxis and secured an agreement that it would meet residents, but it appears to be reneging on that promise.

Time and again, Members of this House hear the same stories of excessive and unjustified charges, poor standards of service, a complete lack of accountability and residents left feeling trapped in their own homes, with nowhere to turn and no chance of selling. The most frustrating element is that Parliament legislated in this area in 2024—the powers exist—yet years later, many of the relevant provisions have still not been brought into force. Will the Leader of the House liaise urgently with colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to establish a timetable for implementation, and will he provide Government time for a debate on the issue, so that hon. Members from across the House can expose the full scale of the financial abuses that many residents continue to face?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to raise the issue of management companies; it has been raised with me regularly. There is a strong case for greater regulation in this area. As he pointed out, we have the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024. A consultation on the implementation of that Act closed in September, and we will respond in due course. It is important that we get this right, because these things can have a huge impact on people’s lives. This is not a final step. In addition, we will continue to reflect on Lord Best’s 2019 report, and I will ensure that my hon. Friend gets an update from the relevant Minister.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

In rural areas like Somerset, poor public transport prevents young people from accessing education, employment and training. At a roundtable that I held in the constituency earlier this week, Strode college representatives told me that enrolments for the next academic year have fallen by 15%, with the lack of reliable public transport playing a significant factor in that. Over 1 million young people are not in education, employment or training, and we cannot afford a lost generation. Every young person deserves a pathway into work, education or training. Will the Leader of the House advise me on how best to secure a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss this urgent matter?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I will help the hon. Lady to arrange a meeting, but I just want to say that the Government absolutely agree with her that no obstacles should stand in the way of young people getting into training and work. As I said before, the Milburn review has published an interim report and will produce recommendations later in the year, but I will get her the meeting she seeks.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)]

Pupils at St Cuthbert’s school are currently without teachers and support staff during their GCSEs. This follows prolonged industrial action at the St Teresa academy trust, where staff are opposing a potentially damaging restructuring of the school. As far as academies are concerned, the Department for Education appears to have little power to ensure that trusts engage meaningfully with parents. May we have an urgent debate on the Department’s ability to intervene in academy trusts, especially where trusts’ decisions are harming children’s attainment?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The disruption will have a significant impact on the children’s education. I remind my hon. Friend and the House that the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 includes measures on the inspection of multi-academy trusts to ensure that decisions are subject to scrutiny, but I am happy to raise her concerns with the Secretary of State and will make sure she gets a response.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

I will be brief because my question has already been asked by the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn). I met exactly the same group of hospitality business at Healing Manor in my constituency and Stallingborough Grange. The list of taxes, charges and levies the hon. Lady referred to reaches a total of 68, which is clearly unsustainable for many businesses. As well as the meeting with a Treasury Minister, which I understand has already taken place, may we have a debate on the subject—preferably in Government time—given that it affects constituencies across the country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I encourage the hon. Gentleman to apply for an Adjournment debate, or perhaps a Backbench Business debate, because these are indeed matters of concern. The Government are doing all we can, but should there be some use in further meetings, I will help him to arrange them.

[Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)]

In a week when Ukraine has come under intense and deadly attacks from Russia, it is especially disappointing that one of the first acts of the new Reform-led Norfolk county council has been to remove from our county hall Ukraine’s flag, which was proudly flown alongside our Union flag. Will the Leader of the House join me in condemning this action?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend in condemning the action. I reiterate our continued and unwavering support for Ukraine during Putin’s illegal invasion. He is right to raise the Reform party’s exceptionally poor record on these matters; its candidate in Makerfield said that the Russians were “within their rights” to invade Crimea. Lowering the flag of Ukraine appears to be part of a pattern.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

First, I add my voice to the tributes to Sir Alex Younger, who died so young and is such a great loss to the nation.

What consideration are the Government giving to re-establishing a European Scrutiny Committee? The dynamic alignment that the Government are proposing is bound to give rise to a large number of regulations coming into force in the UK. As they will have direct applicability and direct effect, they should at least be scrutinised properly. I draw the Leader of the House’s attention to the report published today by the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments, which I Chair. It gives an example—the Customs (Northern Ireland) (EU Exit) (Amendment) Regulations 2026—of how badly the Government can handle such legislation. The regulations were laid very late, and they are being changed while they are being renegotiated with the European Union. Is this a portent of things to come, and does it not underline the need for a European Scrutiny Committee, which could look much further ahead than the Standing Orders governing my Committee allow?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

It is a portent of things to come. The hon. Gentleman knows the Government are to introduce the EU reset Bill, and central to the discussion of that realignment will be how best to scrutinise it. As he knows, I am giving thought to how best to achieve that scrutiny. We do not need to go back to how things were, but we do need an appropriate arrangement to deal with the challenges that clearly will arise in the future, and to hold decision makers to account.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

Blackpool Pride celebrates its 20th anniversary this weekend, and I am proud to be joining Saturday’s parade alongside my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers), local councillors and thousands of residents. I pay special tribute to Councillor Matthew Thomas, our equalities champion, whose leadership and advocacy has ensured that the LGBTQ+ voices are heard, represented and valued across the town. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating everyone involved in the efforts of the past 20 years and all those who have helped to make Blackpool a more inclusive and welcoming place for all?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely join my hon. Friend in congratulating all those who have worked so hard to ensure that Blackpool Pride is a great success this year and in years past, including Councillor Matthew Thomas. I encourage my hon. Friend to participate in the general debate later today, and take this opportunity to wish everyone a happy Pride Month this June.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

I found a really rare thing in Shopshire last week: a new entrant to the dairy sector. However, like lots of small dairy farmers, it is under immense pressure from much bigger companies, whether that is Bute Energy, which is trying to destroy a big chunk of its grassland by planting pylons and an access road though it, or the big supermarkets buying its products at a loss. Can we have a debate in Government time on support for the dairy sector in the light of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee report’s recommendation that the Groceries Code Adjudicator and the supply code of practice be strengthened?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Should the Committee wish it, I am sure there will be an opportunity for that report to be debated in the House. We have just had DEFRA questions, but I am sure the hon. Lady will raise at the next DEFRA questions the points she has raised today.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

Last week during the hot weather, George Dalton, a young man in my constituency who was much loved and admired by family and friends, tragically lost his life in a small lake. He was one of about 15 people, many of them young, across the country who lost their lives in water-related incidents. I am sure that the thoughts of us all remain with his family and friends and others across the country who lost loved ones. Will the Leader of the House join me in sending condolences on their loss to George’s family, and will he, as our hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) asked earlier, consider making time for a debate on how we can prevent the tragic loss of young lives in this way through measures to raise water safety awareness and to improve swimming capacity for young people at primary school and beyond?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sure the whole House joins my hon. Friend in sending our condolences to George’s family. Schools are required to provide mandatory swimming instruction. If that is not happening I will take it up with the relevant Secretary of State to determine why it is not happening and what further action can be taken. I encourage him and others to attend next Tuesday’s Westminster Hall debate on water safety.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

May we have a statement next week from the Lord Chancellor so that he can reassure the House that in cases where a not guilty plea is entered but a guilty verdict is delivered, the sentence will reflect the fact that the offender put the victim through the ordeal of a trial, particularly in cases of rape?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the Lord Chancellor is thinking very carefully indeed about how better the courts can work for victims, not least victims of sexual offences. I will raise the points he makes with my right hon. Friend and get an update.

[Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)]

Last week, I met Chris Hudson, who has just completed three marathons to raise money for Forget Me Not, a children’s hospice that serves my constituents. It provides high-quality care for children with life-shortening conditions and vital services for families living with loss, including Chris and his family, who received compassionate and individualised support as they coped with the grief of losing their child. Hospices such as Forget Me Not face significant financial pressures, so please can we have a Government statement on further help for the sector?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Forget Me Not and other hospices do an incredible job in supporting seriously ill children and their families when they need it most. The Government recognise the financial pressures they are facing, and we are providing £80 million for children and young people’s hospices over the next three years, but my hon. Friend may wish to raise this matter and keep the pressure on Ministers at Health questions next week.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

Thames Water is drowning under £20 billion of debt and surviving only through emergency creditor funding. My constituents are deeply concerned by reports that Ofwat may allow Thames Water to avoid paying fines until 2030 as part of a rescue package. Will the Leader of the House make time for DEFRA Ministers to update the House on the Thames Water and Ofwat deal and the company’s future?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

We are closely watching the situation with Thames Water, and we stand ready for all eventualities. We moved to block bonuses for Thames Water bosses last June, but should the situation change—particularly for the worse—I am sure the relevant Minister will want to update the House.

[Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)]

Altrincham minor injuries unit closed under the previous Government due to a shortage of specialist staff in our national health service, and last year our integrated care board confirmed that it could not be reopened. That was a disappointing decision which I opposed, but I have been campaigning hard for new services at Altrincham hospital ever since. We have a new skin cancer clinic, but I want us to go further and establish a permanent diagnostic centre for my community to relieve pressure on Wythenshawe A&E. Will the Leader of the House and the Government support me in my campaign?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend has been an assiduous campaigner for his local hospital; I know that he has raised his concerns in the House many times, and I pay tribute to him for that. We are committed to community diagnostic services, with a £2.3 billion investment, providing the NHS with the tools it needs to deliver 9.5 million additional tests by 2029, but I will ensure that he gets a meeting with the relevant Minister to bring his concerns forward.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

In such troubled political times, it is reassuring that the House can unite in appreciation of the fine public service of Alex Younger and Meta Ramsay at the Secret Intelligence Service, and Alan Haselhurst, Jeremy Hanley and Gladys Dickson in the service of Parliament. In that spirit, may I appeal to the Leader of the House to use his considerable common sense and influence to get the Government to revisit something that was not in their manifesto—namely, local government reorganisation—and to come forward with a statement that recognises the huge opposition, with nearly 23,000 signatures online so far, to the tearing apart of the New Forest at the behest of party politicians in Southampton city? I would love to be able to go to the New Forest Association of Local Councils AGM tonight and tell them that the Government are going to reconsider this partisan matter for which they had no mandate at the general election.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman that assurance to take back this evening, but I can assure him that if he wishes to raise that directly with Ministers, to put right a wrong, as he describes it, I will arrange a meeting.

I should have said this earlier; it was remiss of me not to do so: the shadow Leader of the House and I read out a long list of people who unfortunately have passed, and the common thread that runs through that list is public service. It is a remarkable list of people, and it is sad that sometimes it is only when we are reading out a list of people whose lives have ended that we recognise the importance of public service. There are lots of very, very good public servants out there doing a good job day in, day out, and I pay tribute to every one of them.

[Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)]

As we look forward to the Railways Bill, it is worth reminding the House that Rossendale remains the only local authority area in the north without any sort of commuter rail link, despite being only 15 miles from central Manchester. The line exists; it just needs reinstating as a commuter line. That would be a game changer for Rossendale and east Lancashire, and it is exactly the sort of project that would maximise the economic impact of Northern Powerhouse Rail, yet when Lancashire combined county authority published its transport implementation plan last month, the project was missing from the list. I find it incomprehensible. No explanation was offered. It feels like, once again, the leadership in Preston have forgotten us in Rossendale. Will the Leader of the House join me in calling on Lancashire combined county authority to think again, and agree to a debate on this specific topic?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sure that those in Lancashire combined county authority will have heard my hon. Friend’s contribution. The Government are committed to delivering simpler, more reliable and better joined-up journeys for people across England, including in his area, and we have recently published our “Better Connected” strategy. I encourage him to keep up the pressure, and there are Transport questions next week.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Leader of the House for his responses to all our questions, which are always chased up. This week, will he ask the Foreign Secretary to make a statement on the situation for Shi’as, Ismailis, Sikhs, Hindus, Christians and other religious minority communities in Afghanistan and on what steps the Government are taking to raise freedom of religion or belief in international engagement on Afghanistan?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are committed to defending freedom of religion or belief for all, and we are major aid donors to Afghanistan, with up to £154 million allocated in the last financial year. As the Foreign Secretary said in February,

“The rights of all Afghans must be protected.”

FCDO officials engage with the Taliban Government in Afghanistan and urge them to reverse their oppressive decrees on human rights, but I will make sure the hon. Gentleman gets a response from the relevant Minister to set out all the actions we are taking.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

Madam Deputy Speaker, I hope you and the Leader of the House will join me in congratulating Bolton Wanderers on their promotion to the championship after beating Stockport recently 4-1 at Wembley. Bolton’s promotion has been a huge effort by the players, the staff and the fans, and the Wanderers’ turnaround has been made possible by the fantastic stewardship of Sharon Brittan, after the previous owners nearly drove the club into the ground. That is why I am proud that this Government have established the Independent Football Regulator, to make sure that what happened to Wanderers can never happen again. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the vital contribution that clubs such as Bolton make to our social fabric?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely join my hon. Friend in celebrating the return of the Wanderers to the championship and in paying tribute to Sharon Brittan for the role she has played. The Government are taking action to promote a more sustainable game and ensure the success of English football in the long term, because, as he rightly points out, our local football clubs are absolutely vital to the communities that support them.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

Our Foreign Secretary is in India today for talks with her Indian counterpart, Mr Jaishankar. My West Dunbartonshire constituent Jagtar Singh Johal has spent more than eight and a half years in arbitrary detention in an Indian prison. On 22 April this year, UN experts concluded that his prolonged detention amounts to torture. International law is unequivocal on the use of torture, and the UN has called for his immediate release. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the Foreign Secretary provides this House with an update or a statement on her return, confirming that not only was my constituent’s case raised today but that she insisted on his immediate release? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that there can be no higher priority for her trip than securing the freedom of a young man from Dumbarton unjustifiably imprisoned for almost nine years?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend has consistently raised his concerns about that case with myself and Foreign Office Ministers, and I pay tribute to him for that. We do continue to raise concerns about Mr Johal’s prolonged detention with the Indian Government and continue to provide consular support to him and his family. I am confident that the Foreign Secretary will want to update the House once she returns from her visit.

If you will allow me, Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to mention one thing before we conclude. The shadow Leader of the House raised in his remarks about the R&R programme the fact that minutes of a meeting had not been published. I can confirm that they have been.

Business of the House

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Monday 1st June 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

With permission, I will make a short business statement about the remainder of this week’s business.

Tuesday 2 June—Committee of the whole House for the Armed Forces Bill.

Wednesday 3 June—General debate on the Government’s response to the Humble Address on the appointment of Lord Mandelson.

Thursday 4 June—General debate on Pride Month.

I will announce further business in the usual way on Thursday.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Leader of the House.

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

I thank the Leader of the House very much for that business update and for the news of the debate on Wednesday. That will be an opportunity for Back-Bench Members to put matters on the record—but for scrutiny of the Government, actually, by far the best way is through the questions that will follow the next statement, although I am afraid that the Mandelson files were released publicly only at 2 pm and, at 1,500 pages, no Back-Bench Member can be expected to have mastered them.

The Leader of the House recognises the importance of parliamentary scrutiny. Since those files could have been put in the public domain at 9.30 this morning, could I register with him that we are all owed a slightly higher quality of scrutiny than this has received?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I do acknowledge what the right hon. Gentleman is saying, but that is precisely why I just announced Wednesday’s debate, which will be a general debate. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister will respond to some of those points shortly.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

I rise only to pass on the frustrations from the Liberal Democrat Benches and from my residents that the important legislation planned for Wednesday will now be delayed, and that the incredibly important improvements to rail services that our residents are calling out for will be further delayed. Parkinson’s law suggests that work expands to fill the space available for its completion. May I suggest Mandelson’s law—that, when he is appointed to a Government, his scandals will expand to fill the time available for their discussion? Does the Leader of the House agree that this scandal will be the defining legacy of the Starmer premiership, and that it shows clearly how the change and service agenda promised after the scandal and sleaze of the last Tory Government were as much empty words as the suggestion that proper process was followed in Mandelson’s appointment?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I will not respond to those empty words. I expect to announce the rescheduling of the remaining stages of the Railways Bill in my statement on Thursday, and I anticipate that the House will be able to consider those stages of the Bill during next week’s business.

Business of the House

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 21st May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jesse Norman (Hereford and South Herefordshire) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 1 June will include:

Monday 1 June—Second Reading of the Health Bill.

Tuesday 2 June—Committee of the whole House on the Armed Forces Bill.

Wednesday 3 June—Remaining stages of the Railways Bill.

Thursday 4 June—General debate on Pride Month.

Friday 5 June—The House will not be sitting.

The provisional business for the week commencing 8 June will include:

Monday 8 June—Committee of the whole House on the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill (day one).

Tuesday 9 June—Conclusion of Committee of the whole House and remaining stages of the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill.

Wednesday 10 June—Remaining stages of the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network And Information Systems) Bill.

Thursday 11 June—General debate on the legacy of Jo Cox.

Friday 12 June—The House will not be sitting.

[Jesse Norman]

It is famously true that our present Prime Minister gets 100 times more animated and passionate about the performance of his football club every weekend than he does about trivial details of social, economic or foreign policy, and still more so when it comes to defeating the enemy from Manchester. So one would have to have a heart of stone not to congratulate the Prime Minister on the success of Arsenal football club in winning the premier league—I notice the astonishing lack of reaction from the Labour Benches. As we United fans say, only 11 more premiership wins to go, and Mikel Arteta will still be one short of Alex Ferguson.

In this world cup year, we remember with deep warmth and affection the heroes of 1966. I refer, of course, to the band of brothers who were so inspired by England’s world cup victory that they set up Westfields football club in Hereford. I pay special tribute to the legend that is Andy Morris—not ignoring his brilliant wife Sandra—who has been synonymous with Westfields ever since.

Whatever happens in Makerfield, it seems inevitable that there will soon be a leadership contest in the Labour party. The markets are spooked, the pundits are pontificating, the pollsters are rampant, but amid all the media speculation, there is one candidate—one extraordinary dark horse—who has not yet even been mentioned. That is why I am delighted, in relation to the leadership of the Labour party, to announce my strong support, in his bid for the top job, for the Leader of the House. Colleagues will have noticed a certain coyness from the Leader of the House about his own position last week in business questions. Make no mistake, Mr Speaker, that is the clear sign of a man preparing to throw his hat into the ring.

For months now, I have lived with a secret fear that the Government will have a reshuffle and the Leader of the House will be relegated from the light of the Chamber back into the stygian depths of the Labour Whips Office. Luckily, the Prime Minister has remained far too weak even to contemplate a reshuffle, but I ask colleagues across the House, and especially on the Labour Benches, to contemplate that hideous prospect—that drastic loss of warmth, and wit and wisdom from these proceedings. As Ben Jonson said of Francis Bacon, when he spoke, the fear of everyone was that he would make an end.

Some foolish and ill-advised people will say that this leadership bid is an improbable one, and possibly even, in this age of botox, TikTok and Justin Trudeau, that a Prime Minister should be constructed on more youthful, foolish, inexperienced and, dare I say it, sleeker lines. To which I cry shame! Fie upon these unimaginative gloomsters and naysayers. What fools they are. It is precisely that apparently diffident Clark Kent exterior that makes my candidate—our candidate—such a politically electrifying prospect. In a world in which a Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer can seriously advance the total economic shambles of supermarket food price caps, any move is on the table. The Leader of the House can therefore immediately become leader of the Labour party. It is simple common sense; we barely even need to change the name.

Mr Speaker, you will be relieved to know that under my steady hand, the Leader of the House’s Labour leadership campaign is ready to roll. The website is in hand, the baseball caps and T-shirts have been ordered. As Hilaire Belloc said of Lord Lundy:

“The stocks were sold; the Press was squared;

The Middle Class was quite prepared.”

Donors are falling over themselves to associate themselves with this extraordinary political intervention.

The one crucial remaining question is what campaign slogan we should use. We thought about “Common sense with Campbell”, “Campbell for the country” or “All in for Alan”, but there are two slogans with which we really cannot fail. When he responds, I know the Leader of the House will want to take the opportunity to formally launch the campaign himself from the Dispatch Box, but perhaps he can also indicate which of these two slogans he prefers: is it to be “Yes, we Cam-bell”, channelling the spirit of Barack Obama, or more inclusively still, “Make Britain Campbell again”? A nation awaits, so may we have a debate in Government time on this vital question?

[Mr Speaker]

I remind the House that the most important game is being played on Sunday, between Bolton Wanderers and Stockport County. Good luck to Bolton!

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I see the shadow Leader of the House has had his Weetabix again this morning.

I extend my sympathies to the family of Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan, who lost her life in a tragic incident last week. It reminds us of the price sometimes paid by the brave men and women who serve our country so well.

Tomorrow is the ninth anniversary of the horrific Manchester Arena attack, which claimed the lives of 22 people and left many more injured. I am sure all those affected remain in the thoughts of the whole House. Last year, Martyn’s law received Royal Assent, delivering on our commitment to strengthen security at public events and venues to help to prevent another tragedy from happening. I thank all the campaigners who were pivotal in delivering that legislation.

At the end of last week, the Treasury announced an independent review on access to banking to assess how changes to in-person banking services are affecting customers. The review will be chaired by Richard Lloyd, whom many Members will know. This issue is regularly raised with me by Members, and the Government are committed to ensuring that everyone has access to the services that they need.

Fly-tipping is also an issue that Members have raised with me frequently. The Government are listening. Laws laid this week will require waste handlers to prove that they are qualified to transport waste. We are tightening the net on waste criminals, with tougher sentences for those illegally dumping waste and advanced background checks to put rogue operators out of business.

Members will also be pleased that we are cracking down on high street crime, rogue barber shops, vape stores, mini-marts and sweet shops linked to organised crime. They will face raids, closures and cash seizures under a new £30 million crackdown targeting money laundering, tax evasion and illegal working. Again, those issues have been raised in these sessions, which underlines the importance of the role that Members play in influencing future policy and decision making.

I hope that Members will be able to spend time in their constituencies over the recess and enjoy the hopefully warmer weather over the bank holiday. As an MP for a coastal constituency, I know how dangerous the sea can be and I want to highlight the Royal National Lifeboat Institution’s annual “Float to Live” campaign. This year’s campaign is being fronted by Euan Gray from Gateshead, who with his brother, Andrew, got caught in a notorious riptide off my constituency at Longsands beach in May last year. I pay tribute to the volunteers of Cullercoats lifeboat and Tynemouth lifeboat, and all the RNLI volunteers who tirelessly provide a critical service in coastal towns and villages across the UK.

Let me turn to the remarks made by the shadow Leader of the House. I am sure that his gratitude for Arsenal beating Manchester City is genuine coming from a dedicated Manchester United supporter—I am sure that it is genuine. He also reminded us about the heroes of 1966, the last time England won the world cup. I remind the House that England has only ever won the world cup under a Labour Government, and therefore I look forward to the world cup, which starts shortly.

On the other matter that the right hon. Gentleman seems preoccupied with—my candidature to be the Prime Minister—let me say that there is no vacancy for a Prime Minister. I thank him for his endorsement, which I am sure is well intentioned, but I should warn the House that there is a double edge here. Every candidate that the right hon. Gentleman has endorsed for the Tory leadership has either failed at the first hurdle or is failing in their leadership now.

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

A number of constituents continue to really struggle as a result of Capita’s delays in processing their civil service pensions. Many of them have been retired for months without income. I know the Paymaster General has been holding Capita to account in various ways, but with it continuing to miss its own deadlines, can we have an update from the Paymaster General?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As we have said before, these delays are unacceptable. That is not the service that people deserve, and resolving this issue is a matter of urgency. We have mandated a deadline of 30 June 2026 for Capita to restore all civil service pension scheme service levels to standard contractual agreements. The Government will continue to monitor this issue closely and press for swift action.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As the Prime Minister acknowledged in real time yesterday, he misspoke about the trade deal, but he was absolutely clear about our relationship with Europe. There will not be a return to the customs union, the single market or freedom of movement, and the Government came into office on that basis. However, we are clear that it is in the national interest to be closer to Europe. That is good for us and good for Europe, and it is good for our security and economy.

As the hon. Lady said, an EU reset Bill will be coming through. I am sure that she will be able to put the points that she raises not just to debate, but to the test of a vote.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Sunflowers Children’s Action Group, a children’s charity in Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, on winning by popular poll on my Facebook page a £2,000 donation from Bacta, the amusement and arcades representative body? Sunflowers provides activities, respite and trips for children with life-limiting illnesses and does amazing work to support families in my local area, and this donation will help it to continue to do just that.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in congratulating Sunflowers Children’s Action Group on its brilliant work supporting children and their families and on winning vital funding. We are taking action in this area with our best start in life strategy by pledging to invest £1.5 billion over the next three years to support early years.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee, who was re-elected unopposed.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

As we approach the end of the domestic football season, it is only right that we congratulate Aston Villa on winning the Europa league last night. Indeed, it was only a year ago that I was celebrating Tottenham winning the Europa league. If I may say so, however, the most vital game on Sunday is Tottenham versus Everton.

I thank the House for re-electing me as Chair of the Backbench Business Committee. I am glad that there will be a motion on the Order Paper to reappoint five Members to the Committee. On that basis, we will try to meet on Tuesday 2 June to consider applications. I understand that there are 11 new applications already, adding to the 42 we had left when Prorogation took place. I note that the Chairman of Ways and Means has granted two of those debates in Westminster Hall to reduce our burden. Will the Leader of the House grant time in the Chamber as soon as possible for the Backbench Business Committee? For those colleagues who are on the existing waiting list, the Committee will decide whether we continue with it or clean it out. I ask colleagues not to reapply until the Committee has made that decision.

Mr Speaker, you will know that I have been a champion of homeless people throughout my parliamentary career, and I was delighted that the Government eventually got through the abolition of the Vagrancy Act 1824 in the last Session. However, a statutory instrument is required to abolish the Vagrancy Act for good. Will the Leader of the House therefore arrange for the relevant Minister to make sure that the statutory instrument is brought forward forthwith, so we can get away from a position where people who are homeless can be prosecuted for being homeless? That is unacceptable and needs to be consigned to the history books.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join the rest of the House in congratulating the hon. Gentleman on his unopposed re-election as Chair of the Backbench Business Committee, not just for the next year but for the rest of this Parliament. I sincerely look forward to continuing to work with him. I will endeavour to give him and the Committee as much forward notice as I can of upcoming Backbench Business days, but I advise Members to listen to his wise words about applications. I will certainly give consideration, as he requests, to using Government time for some of the debates in the queue.

The hon. Gentleman is a staunch advocate for tackling homelessness and I remind the House that he successfully led a private Member’s Bill, which is no mean achievement. I agree that no one should be criminalised for sleeping rough and that the Vagrancy Act has no place in a just society. We have committed to repealing it in full. I will draw the statutory instrument to the attention of the relevant Minister, and I will get him the update that he seeks.

[Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)]

According to recent media reports, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) has taken a £5 million gift from a billionaire living halfway across the world. Without the Guardian investigation, however, we would be none the wiser, and there are no controls on gifts for those campaigning before a general election is called. I remain deeply concerned, as do my constituents, that substantial funds may be making their way into British politics through the back door. Will the Leader of the House ask Ministers to consider how the Representation of the People Bill could tackle undeclared cash gifts and donations?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As my hon. Friend says, the Representation of the People Bill will give greater transparency and security around political donations, but I will draw his concerns about the need, perhaps, to go further to the attention of the very able Minister taking that Bill through. The matters that my hon. Friend alludes to are serious allegations, and I welcome the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards looking into this matter.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

I recently visited the North Cotes shooting club in my neighbouring constituency, where hundreds of my constituents gather every week to participate in their chosen sport. They tell me that there are proposals to merge section 1 and section 2 certificates for the licensing of shotguns and rifles, but they are very different. Will the Leader of the House arrange for the Minister responsible to have a look at this issue and perhaps report back to the House?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly will arrange for Ministers to look at this issue and report back to the hon. Gentleman and, indeed, to the House. Having previously had some responsibility in Government for the issues that he raises, my view is that one does not have to be a shooter to value shooting as a sport, and to value the clubs in our local communities.

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

Nobody should go to work, never to return home. On Tuesday 13 January 2026, Kenny Campbell Smart went to work at Corby steelworks and never returned home. Now that I have said his name, it will be written down and recorded in Hansard, and his name will live on forever. Today we are joined in the Gallery by Kenny’s wife Sally and his son Kian, who are determined that no other family should go through what they have been through. In the light of this, does the Leader of the House agree with them that we should do all we can to keep people safe at work, and that health and safety is not red tape, bureaucracy or a barrier to growth, but what keeps people safe at work? In the name of Kenny, his community, his workplace and his family, we should strengthen our laws so that this never happens again.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sure the whole House will join me in extending our heartfelt condolences to Sally, Kian and all Kenny’s friends and family. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that health and safety in the workplace is not an inconvenience. Good health and safety practices save lives, and I will ensure that the relevant Minister writes to him to set out what further action the Government intend to take.

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

Nurses are at the heart of our wonderful NHS. I am delighted that two nurses from NHS Borders recently gained national recognition from the Royal College of Nursing Scotland: intensive therapy unit clinical nurse educator Karen Bacon was highly commended in the “learning in practice” award category, and Michelle Brownlee, a healthcare support worker in the ITU, was a runner-up in the nursing support worker of the year award. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Karen and Michelle, and pass on all our thanks to our hard-working nursing staff in the NHS?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I will indeed join the hon. Gentleman in congratulating Karen and Michelle on their exceptional achievements. He is absolutely right to celebrate the work of all our wonderful NHS nurses, and I am sure the whole House will join me in giving thanks for all the hard work that they do.

[Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)]

I am sorry to say that I have not been able to feel the same enthusiasm as the Prime Minister in recent days, and we are at odds over a big issue—Arsenal’s premier league victory. However, I join the majority of people in this country in wanting the champions league final, which Arsenal are participating in, to be a success for English football, so it is very upsetting to see that the game will not be free to air on TV. It is a moment for the nation to come together, get behind a great English football team and have a victory in Europe. Will the Leader of the House do what he can to ensure that the game is free to air for the nation to enjoy?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: such matches should be available for people to watch for free. I will raise his concerns with the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport to see if anything can be done.

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

Along with the stealthy silence of knives and the deadly danger of guns, crossbows, in the wrong hands, cost lives. As the Leader of the House will know, they cost the lives of Louise Hunt and her sister Hannah, who were murdered by such a weapon. I am delighted that the Government announced in March that they are going to ban the sale of new crossbows and license existing ones. That responded to calls that I and Members from across the House made following that awful event, but we have heard little more. All we have heard is that the Government will consult on the detailed arrangements. However, there is no detail on the timetable and nothing about means or method. Will the Leader of the House update the House, or will the appropriate Minister do so by means of a statement, so that we can be sure that there will be no hesitation, no obfuscation and no prevarication? Any of those things would cost still more lives.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that there will be no hesitation or prevarication, because the Government are committed to this. However, I gently say to him—again, having had some experience myself—that we can discuss these matters and all get to pretty much the same conclusion, but implementing that conclusion is often more difficult than many people think. We should not offer something that ultimately does not work. We need to make sure that such a measure has the effect that right hon. and hon. Members desire, so there is often a delay. However, I will draw his remarks to the attention of the relevant Minister, and see if we can get the update he seeks.

[Gill German (Clwyd North) (Lab)]

I recently had the pleasure of visiting the Denbigh youth shed, led by the inspirational Scott Jenkinson. Youth Shedz is youth-led, with young people in leadership roles shaping their own activities, ranging from upcycling old guitars to creating comfort packs for children going into care. The Government have recently published the youth justice White Paper, in which early intervention and improving consistency are clear priorities. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on support for community-led youth organisations that are engaging with our young people, so that Ministers can outline how initiatives such as Youth Shedz can access sustainable funding and can be expanded across the country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to champion the great work of Youth Shedz and similar community organisations. Their work is vital to support young people in our communities. As she rightly points out, the youth justice White Paper sets out how we can make the justice system fairer and more consistent. I will draw her remarks to the attention of the relevant Minister, and see if we can find time for such a debate.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

Would the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Jenny Rayner MBE? She has managed to raise an amazing £2 million for a new wellbeing centre locally to support young people with mental health issues and get them the support they need before a crisis is reached. We in Reigate, Redhill, Banstead and our villages are so proud of what she has achieved in raising this money and supporting our young people, so would he join me in congratulating her?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely join the hon. Member in congratulating her constituent. Last week was Mental Health Awareness Week, and it is vital that we continue to raise awareness of the signs and symptoms of depression and other mental health issues in young adults. The exemplary work of people in our local communities underlines how important that is to keeping young people well.

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

Angela and Terry, a couple from my constituency, were the proud owners of Otis, a little three-legged shih tzu dog. Angela, who is in her 80s, was walking Otis a few weeks ago when two rottweilers got loose and savaged Otis terribly. Angela took him to the vets and paid thousands of pounds, but, sadly, Otis died. It is very brave of Angela and Terry to speak out, and the community are up in arms. Please can we have a debate to talk about the owners of dangerous dogs, as it is the owners who are often the problem here, and about who pays when one dog attacks another?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for her important question. This is an upsetting case, and I know other responsible pet owners will be concerned about attacks in their communities. There are powers under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 to protect the public, and we have reconvened the responsible dog ownership taskforce to explore further measures. When those measures become clearer, I am sure the House will want to debate them.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

Would the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Walton and Hersham football club in my constituency? They have secured promotion to the national league south for the first time in their history—an extraordinary fourth promotion in just six seasons. At a time of concern about young people’s mental health and online harms, which I know the House will debate in future, can he provide time for a debate about supporting grassroots football clubs and sports clubs? They are a diversion away from online harms and for better mental health, as Walton and Hersham show so well.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly congratulate Walton and Hersham football club because, like other clubs across our communities, they do such important work. Such clubs are at the heart of local communities and I think they should be commended, particularly where they offer diversion activities for young people. What the hon. Member says about the importance of sport in local communities is exactly what the Government are trying to do.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

Last weekend’s march saw vile racist thugs, national figures, openly fanning the flames of hatred against British Muslim communities, saying things like, “It’s time for many Muslims to leave this country” and “This is a war—we need to get ready to fight.” There were many more vulgar and dangerous statements that I am unable to repeat in this House. The incitement of hatred and violence against British Muslims in the heart of our capital should worry us all. Will the Leader of the House allow sufficient time for a proper debate to address the dangerously rising levels of Islamophobia, protections for British Muslim communities, and the consequences for those responsible?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely condemn any disorder and inappropriate language, whoever it comes from and whoever it is directed against. We do not want to see last weekend’s scenes repeated. The Government are absolutely determined to bear down on this. We are providing additional resources to protect places of worship, including mosques. New legislation in the Crime and Policing Act 2026 will address large repeated protests, as well as protests outside places of worship. My hon. Friend has been around long enough to know that if he seeks an Adjournment debate on these matters, he will be among many others who will also want to raise these concerns.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

In his business statement, the Leader of the House rightly referred to fly-tipping waste criminals. Will he allow for a debate in Government time to consider a different sort of waste perpetrated on our constituents, which is that arising from so-called energy-from-waste plants, otherwise known waste incinerators, which are more polluting than burning coal and for which the UK is already overprovisioned. We have too many of these things, they are not wanted and it is time for a moratorium. Can we have a debate on that?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I will give the right hon. Gentleman a commitment that I will raise the issue with the relevant Ministers and see if we can find some time to debate these matters, should time allow.

[Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)]

My constituents continue to face delays in accessing driving tests post covid. The Government’s important consultation covers tackling bot activity, bulk and speculative bookings, and improving access to genuine test slots. A driving instructor in Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney has expressed his concerns about potential booking restrictions for driving instructors and issues around examiner recruitment. Will a Transport Minister please update the House and confirm that those issues will be considered in the round?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

We have doubled the number of trainers for examiners, and provided 120,000 additional tests between June last year and January this year. We have also tightened up the rules on who can book and reschedule tests to avoid exploitation by online bots and re-selling, but I will draw my hon. Friend’s remarks to the attention of a Transport Minister. He can either seek a meeting with the Minister or we will get an update for the House.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

May I take this opportunity to congratulate both the SNP in Scotland on an historic fifth landslide election and Plaid Cymru on its historic win in the Welsh Senedd elections? That brings together the north of Ireland, Wales and Scotland as being represented by Governments who believe not only believe in the people, but in unlocking the nations’ potential by being independent nations in the future. The north of Ireland has a legal mandate to hold a referendum on its future. However, Scotland does not share that legal mandate. That is a glaring omission from the Scotland Act 1998, so can we have a debate on the constitutional crisis the UK now finds itself in, where Scotland has spoken with the highest ever majority for independence parties but is denied the democratic route—[Interruption] I’m sorry, but I think we are in a democratic Chamber here—to express the will of the people of Scotland?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government have no plans to change the current position. If the hon. Gentleman is seeking a constitutional crisis, it will not be of our causing —it will be of the SNP’s.

[Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)]

On 26 February I raised with the Leader of the House my fears that the unreliability of the postal service might affect constituents in Glasgow West who wish to vote by post in the Scottish Parliament elections. Since then, I have been advised of a situation where a proxy vote application was received some days after the deadline, although the envelope was very clearly postmarked several days before the deadline. Will my right hon. Friend assist me in arranging a meeting with the appropriate Minister to discuss a simple amendment to the Representation of the People Bill that would grant returning officers limited discretion in such cases?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As my hon. Friend will have heard, the Representation of the People Bill contains measures to increase the resilience of the proxy and postal voting systems. That is also a constant theme of the defending democracy taskforce. If my hon. Friend seeks a meeting with the relevant Minster, I am happy to arrange one.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

May I begin by sending my commiserations to the family and friends of Scottish rugby legend Scott Hastings, who died recently aged only 61? Scott was an inspirational figure, both on and off the pitch.

I am sure the Leader of the House shares my concern about the outbreak of Ebola that is affecting both the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. Hundreds of people have already died. Can we have an oral statement when the House returns to hear what the UK is doing to prevent the spread of the outbreak? The UK played a pivotal role in stopping the previous serious outbreak, in Sierra Leone, and must have much to offer by way of expertise in relation to this one.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join the right hon. Gentleman in his remarks about Scott Hastings. Rugby is not my sport, but I recognise very much the contribution that Scott Hastings made. We send our condolences to his friends and family.

The right hon. Gentleman raises an important matter on the outbreak of Ebola, which the UK Government take very seriously indeed. Through the NHS, we have safe procedures in place in any such case of it coming to the UK, and specialist centres where people can be looked after. He asks what we are doing to help other countries. The Government are reacting quickly; the Foreign Secretary has announced a further £20 million to help contain the Ebola outbreak.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

The levels of congestion on Wigginton Road are unacceptable. Residents’ air quality is affected, people are late for their hospital appointments and our whole city is snarled up because the hospital does not have a sufficient transport plan. Will the Leader of the House impress on the Secretaries of State for Health and Transport the need for hospital transport plans, and can we have a debate in Government time on hospital-induced congestion?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to be concerned about traffic and congestion in her constituency. Responsibility for managing traffic on local roads, including those near hospitals, rests with local authorities. However, she is right that it is about not just local authorities but ensuring that everyone who has a role to play actually plays that role. I will raise the matter with the relevant Secretaries of State, as she asks.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

The national cancer plan has many ambitious and urgently needed targets, but they will only be delivered when the Government properly invest in the NHS workforce. Healthcare professionals and charities want clarity on when the Government will commit to this. Can the Leader of the House urge his colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to update the House on when the workforce plan will be launched?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Member raises an important point. The Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that we have the workforce in place to deliver the changes in the NHS that are necessary in cancer and other areas. We are delivering record investment, and waiting lists are down by over 400,000—I think that is the biggest drop for some time. I will raise his specific concerns about when the plan will be launched with Ministers, and get a response for him.

[Emma Lewell (South Shields) (Lab)]

For years now, I have been trying to help a constituent who has been the subject of repeated identity fraud via their NHS records. Meetings with Ministers have been cancelled or refused, and questions and letters to the Home Office, Ministry of Justice and Department of Health and Social Care always result in the same response: it is not their responsibility and there is nothing they can do. This is impacting on my constituent’s daily life in so many ways. Will my right hon. Friend please use his good offices to help?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sorry to hear of the experience of my hon. Friend’s constituent; if she lets me have the details, I will raise it with the relevant Departments and see if we can get the answers that she seeks.

[Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)]

I want to raise a case of gift card fraud. My constituent Nigel Bannister was recently given a gift card as a birthday present, but, by the time he came to redeem it, the money had gone. This is a rising trend, where people are taking a photograph of the cards and stealing the PIN details, and claiming them before someone else can. The cards are obviously publicly available in supermarkets. I ask for a debate in Government time on this rising trend, which caused £18.5 million of losses in 2023-34.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise this concerning matter. I will take it up with the relevant Departments to see what level of awareness there is and what they intend to do about it. Should she seek an Adjournment debate, she could also hear directly from a Minister.

[Michael Wheeler (Worsley and Eccles) (Lab)]

A recently elected Reform councillor in my constituency believes that the best way to regenerate Eccles, which he described as a problem area, is to turn it into the UK’s Dubai. It might surprise him to learn that the council has already brought the town centre into public hands and, during the consultation, not one single resident raised the prospect of “Dubeccles”. Our communities need regeneration led by genuine involvement of local people, like that being in delivered in Brookhouse and Peel Green through Pride in Place. Will the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time to ensure that local people lead in the regeneration of their towns?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a great champion for regeneration in his area. His commitment stands in stark contrast to the approach of the Reform councillor he refers to. As my hon. Friend and the whole House will know, the Government are already taking action to regenerate our high streets, with £5.8 billion of Pride in Place funding to deliver for places like Eccles. I will think about whether we can find some time to debate the success of that programme.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

In February, I asked the Minister for Care about access to dentists in rural areas. He said from the Dispatch Box that he would write to me with the numbers of how many more dental treatments have been provided in my constituency and integrated care board area. I was concerned when the Minister replied that Somerset ICB delivered 5,559 fewer NHS dental treatments in the seven months to October 2025 compared with the same period before the election—that is 4% fewer dental treatments in Somerset under Labour. Will the Minister give a statement to explain why dental services in Somerset are getting worse under this Government?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am not sure the hon. Gentleman should necessarily draw that conclusion; as he will be aware, the Government are committed to improving access, but, as he will also know, it takes time to turn around the system that we inherited. He is right that if he gets information from Ministers, he should also get an update on the progress that we are making. I will ensure that he gets that from the relevant Minister.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to Councillor Angela Loughran, who has sadly passed away. She first represented the Manor ward in ’97, and worked tirelessly for her residents for nearly 30 years. A previous teacher, she was a true public servant, and she will be greatly missed by her friends, family and the wider Stafford community.

In a recent survey of more than 500 residents, 61% cited the return of an indoor market in Stafford as their top priority. I am campaigning with residents for that: a lively, all-day destination that draws in people from across the town and beyond, and will create local jobs. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate on the contribution of indoor markets to local economies in towns like Stafford?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to Councillor Angela Loughran. Local figures like her truly embody the spirit of the community they serve. I also recognise the importance of the issue that my hon. Friend raises for the people of Stafford. I encourage her to apply for a Westminster Hall debate on the impact that indoor markets can have on local economies, as I am sure there will be others who share her enthusiasm and support for such markets.

[Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)]

A student on a night out is stabbed multiple times with a 21 cm knife. He is lying in a pool of his own blood, literally drowning in his blood. The police come to the scene, but instead of doing everything they can to save his life, they handcuff and arrest the lad because there is an accusation of racial abuse. This is a scandal. Will the Home Secretary come to House and say what she is doing to investigate the way that the police conducted this matter, and can we have a debate on two-tier policing, which is doing so much to undermine respect for the police and the rule of law in this country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The right hon. Gentleman raises an important and distressing matter. I assume that the police investigation is ongoing. There are ways in which the actions of the police, if they were as he describes, can be investigated. I am not going to comment on that and interfere, but I can tell him that the Home Secretary takes absolutely seriously not just the issue of knife crime but the protection of citizens, whoever they happen to be.

[Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)]

Last weekend, West Lothian Danceworld, founded and led by Hazel Saunders Dunn, celebrated its 40th birthday with shows at the prestigious Usher Hall in Edinburgh. Over the years, Danceworld has given thousands of young people the chance to showcase their talent, refine their dance skills, build confidence and forge lifelong friendships. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating West Lothian Danceworld, and in wishing all the students and teachers every success for the next 40 years?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely join my hon. Friend in congratulating West Lothian Danceworld on its remarkable 40th anniversary. As she points out, dance is a brilliant way to support young people and build their confidence. I praise not just the students but the teachers for their commitment, and I wish them every success in the future.

[Peter Fortune (Bromley and Biggin Hill) (Con)]

While there has been talk of the shenanigans of some minor football teams, it would be remiss of me not to mention the mighty Bromley FC, the only English football league club that is blessed with a Conservative MP and that has been crowned the champion of league two—probably as a direct result.

At one of my surgeries recently, I met Lorraine and Satvir, who are both Vodafone franchise holders and employ a lot of people in the area. They signed a contract in good faith relating to fluctuation of commission rates, so when Vodafone cut that commission rate by 50%, they were left out of pocket, and they feel that they were treated badly. Can we have a debate to discuss franchising regulations?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman seeks an Adjournment debate on the subject, because if that is happening in his constituency, it might be happening elsewhere. If so, I am sure that there will be other colleagues who want to hear directly from a Minister on what the Government intend to do about it.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the remarkable work of the Susan Vickers Foundation? Its care-experienced team is changing the lives of care-experienced families, including by providing free rail travel and cinema access, thanks to partnership with London Northwestern Railway, West Midlands Railway and Cineworld. Will he also commend Rethink Mental Illness and all the community groups involved at the Hub at Wolverhampton station, as they mark their first year helping thousands across our city?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend in recognising the work of the Susan Vickers Foundation, Rethink Mental Illness and everyone involved in the Hub at Wolverhampton station. Last week was Mental Health Awareness Week, and this year’s theme was action. Charities and community organisations play a huge role in supporting those struggling with mental illness, and I thank everyone involved for their commitment and service.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

Earlier this month, I was delighted to at last receive a response from the Department for Work and Pensions to a letter I wrote on 25 November last year, raising a constituent’s case. That is more than a five-month delay; the original acknowledgment said that it aimed to respond within 15 days. Such a delay is unacceptable, and this is by no means an isolated case; I have had multi-month delays in several other cases. What are the Government doing to improve departmental complaint processing times, so that constituents and MPs get a response within a reasonable timeframe?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady will know that I am keen for Departments to respond in time and fully to MPs, because that is part of their job. Of course, some Departments will find it more difficult to respond, not just because of the complexity of the issues involved, but because of the number of letters and parliamentary questions that they get. However, I will draw her remarks to the attention of not just that Department but other Departments. We constantly remind them of the need to maintain a standard.

[Lillian Jones (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab)]

According to a CBI report published in 2025, the contribution of the wood panel industry to the UK economy was £1.1 billion gross value added. Given that significant contribution, will my right hon. Friend make time for a debate on how the Government’s industrial strategy will support the UK timber and wood sector, including through measures to strengthen domestic supply chains, increase the use of sustainable British timber in construction, and support rural jobs and net zero ambitions?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise those matters on behalf of her constituents, and others in rural areas. I will raise them with the relevant Minister and get an update on how the Government intend to make progress on this matter.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

Yesterday, the Climate Change Committee laid out in stark terms the risks that we face as a country if we do not tackle the impact of climate change; one of those was drought. That is especially pertinent in Mid Sussex and across the south-east, which is extremely water scarce. South East Water is already warning about its ability to meet the demands of a growing population. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on how the Government intend to reconcile their housing targets with the region’s finite water resources?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As the hon. Lady will know, the Government intend to bring forward a water Bill in this Session. She will be able to raise her concerns directly as that legislation makes progress.

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

Kent Fire and Rescue Service will shortly launch a consultation on its modernisation as a result of a shortfall in funding. As a former public sector worker, I recognise the importance of reforming our emergency services to ensure that they remain effective and efficient. It is equally vital that services respond to the evolving risks faced by local communities, particularly in rural areas. Will the Leader of the House find time for a debate on the importance of fire and rescue services, their funding, and the steps needed to protect provision in rural communities?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend raises an important matter. I place on record our thanks to firefighters and fire service staff for all the work they do. He will know that the Government are committed to working with the fire sector to ensure that the funding system remains fair and responsive, but I will ensure that the relevant Minister hears his concerns.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

Woking’s only brewery, Thurstons, is sadly closing down. The owner, John Mintram, said:

“It’s all getting too expensive…People are feeling the squeeze—you can’t sell £8 or £9 pints.”

Will the Government please apologise to the owners and customers of Thurstons for what they have done to the hospitality sector, and agree to a debate on ensuring that they properly support the brewing and pub sector in the future?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I do not accept the premise of the hon. Gentleman’s question. The Government have done, and continue to do, a great deal to support the sector, but the hospitality sector knows, and he will know, that the best way to help the sector is to get the economy growing, so that people have money in their pockets, and can spend it in the sector. The first priority of the Government is to tackle the cost of living crisis and get the economy growing.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

Hoarding disorder is a distinct mental health condition, although it is often confused with obsessive compulsive disorder. Hoarding disorder causes individuals to fill their home with items that they feel unable to discard, even when it causes danger and a risk of physical injury. It is believed that up to 3 million adults in the UK suffer from this chronic and progressive condition. Does the Leader of the House agree that it is time to have a national hoarding strategy offering a consistent, comprehensive approach to care, and prioritising early intervention and clear pathways for specialist mental health support?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to raise this matter; the impact of hoarding can be severe. There are no plans for a specific hoarding strategy, but the Government have announced plans for a new mental health strategy, which will seek to provide the right support to people with a mental health condition. The call for evidence is live now, and I encourage him and others across the House to contribute.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

My young constituent Alex is paralysed after a dreadful road accident a couple of months ago. He wants to return to Loughborough University for his third-year studies as soon as possible. He has been told by the wheelchair services team that he has to have a 27 kg wheelchair to start with, before he can get a different one, as “that’s what everyone gets”, even though he will never have the strength to operate it, as it is too heavy. The staff know this, Alex knows this and his parents know it, but there seems to be no way to stop the madness and waste, and to get a wheelchair that meets his needs. Will the Leader of the House please ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to review the NHS wheelchair policy, so that patients have appropriate equipment from the outset, rather than time and money being wasted and patients and their families being caused such unnecessary distress?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sorry to hear of Alex’s experience, because the Government want individuals to get the support that they need, not just generalised support. I hope that the people who make these decisions listen to what the hon. Lady has said, but I will also draw the matter to the attention of the relevant Minister and get the hon. Lady an update on what the Government are prepared to do on this.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

Recently, I attended an incredibly informative special educational needs and disability roundtable organised by PEGiS—the Parent Engagement Group in Stoke-on-Trent. As we know in this place, we make our best policy when we listen to people with real, lived experienced, so will the Leader of the House please join me in recognising the incredible work of Michelle and the PEGiS team, who have worked tirelessly for many years to ensure that the voices of families are heard?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend in recognising the incredible work of Michelle and the Parent Engagement Group in Stoke for their work to make sure that the voices of families are heard. The Government are absolutely committed to making sure that the SEND system works for every child, and our education for all Bill, announced in the King’s Speech, will make sure that every child is able to thrive.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Hon. Members will remember the harrowing images of three-year-old Alan Kurdi, who was found lying dead on a beach in Turkey after drowning when the boat that he and his family were on sunk. A Reform candidate at the 7 May elections, in describing that situation, blamed it on his parents’ “greed”. That candidate was very close to winning. Today, East Sussex Conservatives have done a deal that has allowed Reform to take control of East Sussex county council, despite Eastbourne voting against that. Will the Leader of the House grant an urgent debate on how we can ensure that towns like Eastbourne are governed by those they actually voted for?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am appalled to hear of the comments of the Reform candidate. As for Reform coming together with the local Conservative group to run the council, I just advise both of them: be careful who you get into bed with.

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

There has been some talk about football. I think we should all be celebrating the glorious victory of Raith Rovers in the Challenge cup.

Results from a survey of Burntisland residents that I conducted suggest that 87% of people experience difficulties using Burntisland station, due to the lack of step-free access. For railway users across my constituency, including those in Cowdenbeath and Kinghorn, who face similar barriers, that is unacceptable. It makes life harder for those with mobility issues, luggage, buggies and bikes. Does the Leader of the House agree that Network Rail should prioritise accessibility upgrades at those stations, and will he make time for a debate on railway accessibility?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government are absolutely committed to improving the accessibility of the railway, including through the Access for All programme, and I am sure that Network Rail will have heard my hon. Friend’s comments. The Railways Bill makes it a legal requirement that the interests of passengers, including those with accessibility needs, are at the heart of decision making on the railway. I am sure that my hon. Friend will want to make her voice heard during proceedings on that Bill.

[Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)]

During a recent visit to DHL in my constituency, I heard yet again about the growing financial burden of the Merseyflow bridge tolls on those travelling to work. DHL wants to expand its operation in Runcorn and double its workforce, but it is struggling to attract people. The bridge tolls have become a costly barrier to employment and economic growth. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate on the economic impact of the bridge tolls in communities such as Runcorn and Helsby?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government are absolutely clear that we want to see the economy grow and companies grow, and nothing should get in the way of that. I will draw the hon. Member’s remarks to the attention of the relevant Transport Minister, but she might also want to seek an Adjournment debate, in which she can hear directly from the Minister.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. In Birmingham Northfield and across the country, there are many reports of inappropriate houses in multiple occupation that prove actually to be poor-quality supported exempt accommodation. At its best, SEA can provide a valuable service, but at its worst it can be a byword for neglect, antisocial behaviour, exploitation and serious organised crime. Please can parliamentary time be found to discuss the need to bring forward proper regulation and end the unacceptable blight on the lives of many of our constituents?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising again a matter that has been raised with me on a number of occasions. Local authorities have planning powers to limit the proliferation of HMOs, but we keep regulations under review. I will consider his request for time for a debate, but I will also ensure that the relevant Minister hears his comments and gives him an update urgently.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

That concludes business questions. I have a list of Members who were unsuccessful in catching my eye today, but may I ask Members to reflect on the length of their questions? With such long questions, it is really difficult to get everybody in.

Government’s 2026 Legislative Programme

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 14th May 2026 Written Statements

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

Following the state opening of Parliament, it is normal practice for the Leader of the House of Commons to list the Bills to be introduced for the convenience of the House.

Other measures will be laid before the House in the usual way. The programme will also include Finance Bills to implement budget policy decisions and estimates for public services.

Civil Aviation Bill

Clean Water Bill

Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill

Competition Reform Bill

Digital Access to Services Bill

Education for All Bill

Electricity Generator Levy Bill

Energy Independence Bill

Enhancing Financial Services Bill

European Partnership Bill

Highways (Financing) Bill

Immigration and Asylum Bill

National Security Bill

Health Bill

Nuclear Regulation Bill

Overnight Visitor Levy Bill

Police Reform Bill

Regulating for Growth Bill

Remediation Bill

Removal of Peerages Bill

Small Business Protections (Late Payments) Bill

Social Housing Bill

Sovereign Grant Bill

Sporting Events Bill

Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill

Tackling State Threats Bill

Bills that will be published in draft this Session include:

Draft Taxi and Private Hire Vehicle Bill

Draft Ticket Tout Ban Bill

Draft Conversion Practices Bill

The following Bills will be carried over from the first Session:

Armed Forces Bill

Courts and Tribunals Bill

Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill

Northern Ireland Troubles Bill

High Speed Rail (Crewe-Manchester) Bill / Northern Powerhouse Rail

Public Office (Accountability) Bill

Railways Bill

Representation of the People Bill

[HCWS1558]

Business of the House

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 14th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Top of the morning to you, too. I call the Leader of the House.

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 18 May will include:

Monday 18 May—Continuation of the debate on the King’s Speech, on backing business to create economic growth.

Tuesday 19 May—Continuation of the debate on the King’s Speech, on energy security.

Wednesday 20 May—Conclusion of the debate on the King’s Speech, on defence readiness.

Thursday 21 May—Second Reading of the Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill.

The House will rise for the Whitsun recess at the conclusion of business on Thursday 21 May and return on Monday 1 June.

The provisional business for the week commencing 1 June will include:

Monday 1 June—Second Reading of the Health Bill.

Tuesday 2 June—Committee of the whole House on the Armed Forces Bill.

[Jesse Norman]

I thank the Leader of the House very much for announcing the business, and I welcome all colleagues back to the House. I am sure that the whole House will wish to join me in congratulating His Majesty the King not only on the Gracious Speech yesterday, but on his glorious triumph in the United States of America, in particular reminding our American cousins of the joy not of monarchy, which they know well enough from recent experience and over the years, but of a genuinely constitutional monarchy.

The House will know of my obsession with building NMITE—the New Model Institute for Technology & Engineering—our new university in Hereford. I hope that colleagues across the House will join me in celebrating its second graduation ceremony last Saturday. Its flagship degree was recently accredited for chartered certification by the prestigious Institution of Engineering and Technology, making its graduates, in that sense, holders of degrees equal to those to be found at Oxbridge or Russell group universities. Its latest crop of graduates have gone on to companies including Airbus, Hitachi Energy and GKN, and there is huge interest from applicants in its new bachelor’s and master’s degrees in autonomous robotics and drone technologies, which start in September. If Members will excuse the pun, as an engineering institution, NMITE is really starting to motor. I strongly encourage any Members who might be interested and wish to know more to drop me a line, because this route to local economic growth is of great potential significance.

It is fair to say that we have known quieter weeks than the couple since we last convened. What have we discovered during that period? A previously undisclosed gift of £5 million from a foreign cryptocurrency donor to the leader of Reform UK is now being investigated by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. We are reassured that it is entirely unrelated to that hon. Member’s recent interest in investing in Bitcoin.

The leader of the Green party, Zack Polanski, has admitted that he failed to pay council tax, was not in fact a spokesman for the Red Cross and was never a full member of the National Council for Hypnotherapy, which I am sure will come as a great relief to women across the country. He must be an acute embarrassment to my neighbour, the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns), and we thank her for her resilience. All that news will come as a surprise to precisely no one.

Lest we forget, nearly 100 Labour Members of Parliament, including four Ministers, have gone public with their opposition to the Prime Minister remaining in office. Three Cabinet Ministers have called on him to set a public timetable for his departure. Few Labour MPs, if any, believe that the Prime Minister will lead them into the next election.

Mr Speaker, you will be aware, I am sure, of the famous lines:

“The boy stood on the burning deck

Whence all but he had fled”.

It may be that the Leader of the House is the last person to occupy the position of standing on the burning deck when all but he has fled. Others are fleeing, and it is astonishing that Buckingham Palace had reportedly been forced to ask whether the King’s Speech was, in fact, really going ahead. Even now, I notice the slight sparsity of Members—actually, on all sides of the House—in this earlier sitting, and the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is widely reported to be preparing a bid for the leadership of the Labour party. King Lear asks in his bewilderment:

“Who is it that can tell me who I am?”

So it is with the Prime Minister. He does not know and nor, it seems, does anyone around him.

Amid all this Westminster madness, it falls to me to insert a nugget of something that actually affects every Member of this House in their constituencies—a matter of great local importance. The House will know that the Construction Industry Training Board is meant to be the guardian of construction skills in this country, funded by a statutory levy on the industry. Yet employer confidence is rapidly being eroded by the CITB’s recent behaviour. An Ofsted “requires improvement” judgment, the Farmer review’s call for a “fundamental reset”, poor communications with levy payers, a rarely updated website and a slow, cumbersome booking system all point in the same direction. At the same time, firms report duplication, delay and poor value for money.

For some courses—forklift training, for example—the CITB route can cost more than twice as much as the non-CITB route, take considerably longer and yet lead to precisely the same qualification. Many of the courses are not optional. Small construction firms must keep up with industry standards and legal health and safety requirements. They need a system that is fast, clear and good value, not one that makes compliance harder, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises that are so crucial to our economy. Meanwhile, the levy is a tax in all but name that must be paid regardless of the services offered.

The CITB has expenditures of nearly £300 million, but gives less than half of that away in grants, while its wage bill and headcount steadily rise. Will the Leader of the House ask the relevant Ministers to write to me explaining how they intend to restore employer confidence in the CITB, particularly among small construction companies, improve course access and value for money, and reform an organisation that appears to be losing its way?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his remarks—well, for some of his remarks. On a serious matter, I am sure that the whole House will join me in sending our condolences to the families of the three young women who died yesterday in the tragic incident in Brighton. Following the local elections, which took place last week, I wish to put on record my thanks to councillors for their service to their communities, irrespective of parties or of whether they are not party-aligned, and particularly to those who were not re-elected.

The King’s Speech opened our new parliamentary Session. Members will have heard your words, Mr Speaker, about how we should conduct ourselves. I fully support those remarks and thank you for setting them out to the House. This Session will be about economic growth, building infrastructure, improving public services and strengthening our national security. I have published a written ministerial statement this morning, which lists the Bills that we have announced, and Members will have an opportunity to debate the King’s Speech over the coming days. This is a serious, long-term plan, bringing about change and putting the country back in the service of working people.

Curiously, and in contrast, the Opposition brought forward an alternative King’s Speech, which, like most of the country, I had failed to notice until the Leader of the Opposition referred to it yesterday. I have a copy here, if anyone needs any night-time reading to put them to sleep. I read it with interest. The shadow Leader of the House is a distinguished author—I have read some of his works—who writes with genuine interest, clear thinking and even wit sometimes. All that demonstrates is that he had absolutely nothing to do with this alternative King’s Speech. The alternative King’s Speech is no more than a description of the long-term ills of our country, which merely serves to remind us that the previous Government had 12 legislative programmes and 14 long years to test these ideas, and they failed, so we will take no lectures from them.

I draw the House’s attention to the report published by the Modernisation Committee this morning. The report recommends a new pilot to allow Members to participate virtually in Select Committee meetings in limited circumstances. That is part of the Committee’s ongoing work to ensure that the House’s procedures remain effective, accessible and resilient. A motion will be brought forward in due course to allow the House to consider those proposals, which I hope will be supported.

Let me turn to the other remarks of the shadow Leader of the House. I certainly congratulate NMITE in his Hereford constituency. I have said this before, but I will say it again: the success of that organisation is due not least to the right hon. Gentleman’s commitment and leadership on this matter, and we should congratulate him on that.

I absolutely agree with the shadow Leader of the House on the matter of the donation to the leader of Reform. These are serious allegations. I welcome the fact that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is looking into this, and I also welcome the independent Rycroft review into foreign financial interference in our democracy.

As for the other comments that the shadow Leader of the House makes about the current political situation, I encourage him to stop doomscrolling. The Prime Minister and the Government are getting on with the job of governing, and this King’s Speech is spreading opportunity and building a fairer Britain. On the CITB levy, this is a serious issue, and I will raise the matter with the relevant Minister and get them to write to him.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

On Monday I attended the Bradford City football club fire disaster memorial service. We remembered the 56 football fans who died in the tragic stadium fire 41 years ago. Young players from the club attended alongside fans who had survived and families of those who died. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to the club for keeping alive the memory of those who suffered, and will he find time to celebrate the role that football plays in bringing communities together?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to Bradford City for keeping the memory of the 1985 disaster alive. Some of us remember that day and will never forget. I extend my heartfelt condolences to the friends and families of those who lost their lives on that tragic day. As she rightly points out, football and sports more widely bring communities together and can be a force for good. I hope we will see that in the coming months, not least when the world cup kicks off.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for today, Wendy Chamberlain.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

May I start by associating myself with the remarks of the Leader of the House in relation to Brighton and the elections? It is not easy to stand for elected office, particularly if you are not successful, and it does take a toll, so I thank him for those remarks.

I also thank the Leader of the House for providing us with the first set of business for the new Session, but I have to note that at the beginning of the previous Session the new Government made a virtue of the fact that they would be putting an end to the incessant chaos of the Conservatives, yet we find ourselves again with a Prime Minister who appears to have lost all authority. We all know that changing Prime Minister over and over again is deeply damaging for our economy and our place on the world stage. I heard us described in recent days as, “Italy without the cuisine.”

When we look at the content of the King’s Speech, we see the reason why this Prime Minister has run out of road, despite having such a large majority: there is no real change offered by this Government’s policy agenda, just a tinkering around the edges. There is an EU reset Bill that offers no reset and no attempt to boost growth by moving beyond the Government’s red lines. There are no measures to boost national security by introducing a programme of defence bonds, and there is nothing to fix the crisis in social care that plagues so many of our constituents.

Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate in Government time on how to stop this continued chaos of successive Conservative and Labour Governments? Perhaps some of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet colleagues might want to come along and make contributions. After last week’s results, one of the solutions that should be discussed in that debate is the need to move to a system of proportional representation for general elections, as well as for local government elections in England. That need has never been greater. We Liberal Democrats will always support calls for making every vote count, and that is despite results in Richmond upon Thames and some of the Scottish constituencies—including my own, I have to say—that would make Kim Jong Un blush. Will the Leader of the House speak to the Prime Minister and try to persuade him that if he wants to leave some form of legacy that he can be proud of, he should make time for a Bill on fair votes?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The King’s Speech made it clear, as has the Prime Minister, that the long-term national interest does require a closer relationship with our European allies—now more so than ever—because there are huge opportunities to strengthen our security and cut the cost of living. We have made progress with closer co-operation on agriculture, electricity, emissions trading and more, but I have to say that the previous Government’s Brexit deal did deep damage to the economy. We will not be joining the customs union or the single market and we will not be returning to freedom of movement, but legislation will be coming forward to reset the relationship with Europe, because the Prime Minister and the Government are very clear on the need for closer partnership.

On proportional representation, our party’s position is very clear. I note that the Liberal Democrats have an opportunity to table an amendment to the Address in reply to King’s Speech on this, if they so wish, and if they do so, I think they will get an answer they do not want to hear.

[Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)]

I recently held an event in High Green to listen to local people’s priorities for the area, because they have felt overlooked for far too long. Two of the areas in High Green have a bottom 3% and 7% score of deprivation in England. I want to change that so that High Green can receive £20 million of funding from the Government’s Pride in Place programme. I am ambitious for High Green, the home of the Arctic Monkeys, and I know that this investment will fulfil the potential of the talent and community spirit in that place. Will the Leader of the House advise me how I can work with Ministers to secure Pride in Place funding for High Green to breathe new life into our community and ensure that everyone locally can stay near but go far.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for her communities, and I once again pay tribute to her for that. We are committed to regenerating communities through our waste action plan and by investing in libraries, cultural venues and youth services, ensuring that communities across the country get the investment they need. She draws particular attention to Pride in Place, which is not just about investing in local neighbourhoods; it is also about putting people in charge of decisions about their local communities, and the things that they care about and that affect their lives. She makes a strong case for further funding, and I will ensure that the Secretary of State hears that.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

First, I thank the Leader of the House for his unfailing courtesy at the Dispatch Box, and for the meticulous manner in which he refers Members’ concerns to the appropriate Ministers. Whoever emerges as the leader of the Labour party, I very much hope that he will remain in his post.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I would just say that a good old stager knows how to take advantage, but questions should cover one area, not two at the same time.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sincerely grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his comments. I do think it is important that we uphold standards wherever we can. As for his reference to not wishing the ultimate job on me, I suspect he has been talking to my wife in that regard, and I can assure him that it is clearly not going to happen, because apart from anything else there is no vacancy.

On the issues the right hon. Gentleman raises, I think we made a good start on animal welfare in the first Session, and there will be further Sessions in which we can bring forward such measures. Depending on the progress made in this second Session, there is also the possibility that other legislation will be brought forward. I am not promising him anything, but there is some flexibility there. There are also other routes that Members can take, not least private Members’ Bills, to address some of the important matters he raises.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

On Sunday, there were scenes of wild celebration among the Dale fans at Wembley, as our beloved club staged a fabulous comeback and won the play-off final to return to the English football league. There were also fantastic civic celebrations at Rochdale town hall, where Jimmy McNulty and his lads could see for themselves just how proud we all were of the team’s heroics, grit and togetherness. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the Dale on a fabulous season, and on proving that our club, like our town, never, ever gives up?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and I certainly will join him in congratulating Jim McNulty and the Dale team on their successful season. Our local football teams give us pride in local communities. That is why, in the last Session, we delivered the Football Governance Act 2025, which gives fans a greater say in how their beloved clubs are run. I am sure that if my hon. Friend wants to raise this matter, perhaps in a Westminster Hall debate, it would be an opportunity for colleagues from across the House to celebrate the importance of local football in our communities.

[Sir Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con)]

Next week, can the Leader of the House produce a Government statement in response to the Hallett review on covid-19 vaccines? Lady Hallett recommended major reform of the vaccine damage payment scheme. The Government said that they were considering the matter, but it is now more than five years since thousands of people suffered severe loss, or in some cases bereavement, as a result of covid-19 vaccines. Justice must be done sooner rather than later.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman raises an important matter, as ever. I do not know the answer to the question that he asks about progress on this matter, but I will raise it with the Department and get an answer from the Minister for him on where we are with this issue.

[Carolyn Harris (Neath and Swansea East) (Lab)]

The Welsh, known for our singing, are united in concern for Swansea’s global superstar Bonnie Tyler, who has been hospitalised in Portugal due to ill health. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Bonnie a safe and speedy recovery? As the song that she first recorded in ’88 says, she is simply the best.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am saddened to hear of Bonnie Tyler’s situation. She is an inspirational voice for a generation. I send our best wishes to her family and her fans. I join my hon. Friend in wishing Bonnie Tyler the very best and a speedy recovery.

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

Women trying to flee domestic abuse are sometimes coerced into staying by their partner’s threatening to harm their pet, especially their dog or cat. May I pay tribute to organisations such as the Dogs Trust, which runs a dog fostering service for women while they find a new permanent home, so that they do not have to give up their pet permanently, and Trinity Winchester, which has opened new rooms for women fleeing domestic abuse, and lets them bring their pets with them? This is really needed; it breaks down another barrier that prevents women from fleeing domestic abuse.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman raises a very important matter, and I pay tribute to the Dogs Trust and Trinity Winchester for their fantastic work. He is right to point out that there should be absolutely no barrier in the way of anyone fleeing domestic abuse, whether it be worry about a pet or anything else. The Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that victims in those circumstances get the support that they need, and that nothing stands in the way of their accessing that support.

[Michelle Scrogham (Barrow and Furness) (Lab)]

Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Shed One Distillery in my hometown of Ulverston on being selected as a finalist in VisitEngland’s awards for excellence? Does he agree with me that Barrow and Furness, the most beautiful constituency in the country, has much to offer visitors of all ages, and will he visit, to sample the award-winning gin and meet some fantastic tourism businesses?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I absolutely join my hon. Friend in congratulating Shed One Distillery and all the nominees for this year’s VisitEngland awards. She may have some competition for the most beautiful constituency, but I thank her for highlighting the vital contribution that tourism makes to our national economy. I too am happy and lucky to have a constituency that is a popular tourist destination, and I would be delighted to take up her offer of a visit, should my diary allow.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

Last Sunday, along with the hon. Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn), I attended the annual service for lost fishermen at Grimsby minster, organised by the Fishermen’s Mission. The timing was unfortunate because the EFL scheduled Grimsby Town’s play-off game for the same afternoon, and despite being only 10 minutes late to the game, I missed two goals—but that is by the way. Would the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the Fishermen’s Mission on the work that it does? Although it is over 30 years since the deep-sea fishing industry in Grimsby went into decline, there are still many families affected by the loss of brave fishermen who went out in all weathers.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join the hon. Gentleman in thanking the Fishermen’s Mission for the work that it does, not least in North Shields, where it is led by the Rev. Peter Dade in an exemplary way, as I know it is in the hon. Gentleman’s area. The lost fishermen’s service is an important part of the annual diary for fishing communities. It is an important reminder of the tragedies that have too often taken place in those communities, and of the price that is paid for bringing fish back to our country.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

At one of my recent surgeries, I met a constituent diagnosed with premature ovarian insufficiency, also known as early or premature menopause. This required her to take fertility preservation treatment and to go off work with stress. Her employers failed to provide reasonable adjustments, and she has now lost a lucrative job that she loved, and is having to spend large sums of money to pursue a sex discrimination claim. Does the Leader of the House agree that the Equality Act 2010 must better reflect sex-based conditions to provide clarity for those tackling sex and disability discrimination, and will he make Government time available for a debate on this important issue?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sorry to hear of the case that my hon. Friend raises. The Government are committed to helping working people balance their jobs with their personal lives, including by managing their health conditions. I will ensure that the relevant Minister is made aware of this concerning case, but my hon. Friend may also want to take an opportunity to make those points during the debate on the King’s Speech, as this is an important part of ensuring that people can fully contribute to the economy, and to the economic growth that the country is looking for.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

It is clear that the tired old first-past-the-post voting system is utterly unfit for purpose. This winner-takes-all system means that a party can secure a huge majority of seats on a minority of votes, which poses a major democratic risk. It is long past time we had proportional representation is this country, so that every vote is represented equally and seats match votes. Will the Government finally take the opportunity to legislate for proportional representation in the Representation of the People Bill, which is set to return to this House, so we can have a fair voting system in which every voter’s voice is heard and given equal weight?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

This is the second time this morning that proportional representation has been raised, and it is a good illustration of how, when the Lib Dems and Greens agree on an issue, they are invariably wrong. It will be possible for the hon. Lady’s party to raise and vote on the issue during the debate on the King’s Speech, and as she points out, there are Bills being considered that will allow her to raise the matter as well. However, I fear that when the House gives its verdict, it will not be the result that she is looking for.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

I know that you will join me in wishing Bolton Wanderers all the very best in the second leg of the play-off semi-final at Bradford tonight, Mr Speaker.

Solicitor Andrew Milne has been arrested by South Yorkshire police after allegations of fraud and blackmail from leaseholders up and down the country. In Horwich in my constituency, Milne bought freeholds on the cheap and threatened to take my constituents to court if they did not pay him thousands of pounds. After repeated engagement with me and my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Hallam (Olivia Blake), the Solicitors Regulation Authority has now imposed interim conditions on Milne’s licence after a separate stalking conviction. Regrettably, my constituents were never given the opportunity to buy their own freeholds before they were purchased by Milne. Will the Leader of the House make Government time available for a debate on the merits of extending first refusal rights to homeowners?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

This is a case that my hon. Friend has raised with me before, and I pay tribute to him for the way that he has championed the rights of his constituents. As he will have heard in the King’s Speech yesterday, we are taking action in this area, and I encourage him to speak in debates as the relevant legislation passes through the House. I understand that, as he says, assurances have been received from the Solicitors Regulation Authority on this case, and that an investigation has been opened. I once again pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his sterling efforts on this.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

I begin by commending Craig Hoy on his election as MSP for Dumfriesshire, and on ensuring that the blue wall of Scottish Conservative and Unionist seats in the south of Scotland remains intact. Ahead of those elections, the leader of the SNP, John Swinney, asserted that if the SNP gained a majority in the Scottish Parliament, there should be another independence referendum, despite there being no constitutional or factual basis for that. Of course, the SNP fell well short of a majority; indeed, the majority of Scots who voted did so for parties that oppose independence. Will the Leader of the House convey to the Prime Minister—whoever that is—that he should make it absolutely clear to John Swinney that last week’s elections provide no basis for a section 30 order or another independence referendum?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that the Government do not support the SNP’s position, and I join in what he says. As we set out yesterday, the King’s Speech is for the whole of the United Kingdom; it is about bringing prosperity to every part of our country, because the reality is that we are stronger together.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

I am a very proud Scouser, and very proud that in 2015, the city was designated a UNESCO city of music for our musical legacy. Indeed, I have lots of grassroots music venues in my constituency. However, the Music Venue Trust has said that many of these organisations have been denied business rates relief because of local authorities’ inconsistent interpretation of the guidance. Will the Leader of the House find Government time for a debate on ensuring that grassroots music venues are correctly recognised in the valuation methodology, and protected in the business rates system?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As my hon. Friend says, Liverpool has been home to some of the most influential artists of the modern age, and we want to see that proud tradition live on. She is a strong advocate for the city she loves. Every pub and live music venue is receiving 15% off its business rates, and local authorities should be applying the guidance fairly. My hon. Friend may wish to raise these matters in the King’s Speech debate on Monday, when we discuss backing business to create economic growth, because the issues that she raises are important drivers of growth in our cities.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

Two of my constituents have received letters addressed to multiple individuals unknown to them who appear to have used their address to obtain Disclosure and Barring Service checks. If false addresses are being used to obtain DBS certificates, that raises serious concerns about the robustness of the system. The DBS has confirmed to me that it does not routinely monitor the volume of basic DBS applications linked to individual addresses. Can we have a statement from the relevant Minister on the steps that are being taken to address this obvious weakness?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Member raises some very concerning matters. If she gives me the details of this case, I will ensure that it is raised with the relevant Minister, and that she gets the answers that she seeks.

[Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)]

I hope you will join me, Mr Speaker, in wishing Wealdstone football club good luck in their FA trophy final at Wembley on Sunday.

The early access programme gives the NHS access to life-changing and innovative drugs for free. I recently met Sarcoma UK, which told me of the difference that these drugs make to many patients. However, as a result of a recent decision by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to charge VAT on these drugs, which are provided for free, the BioIndustry Association has withdrawn from the programme, and other pharmaceutical companies are considering following BIA’s approach. This is very worrying to many patients who already have access to drugs, and to others who would like access to innovative drugs in future. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate about improving access to innovative new medicines on the NHS, and on the importance of removing barriers such as this one?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend raises an important point. We are committed to improving health outcomes across the UK, and to ensuring that the UK remains an outstanding place to start a company, scale and invest. We are actively discussing the matter that he raises with the industry, and I will make sure that he receives an update from the relevant Minister.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

Madison Chilcott is a student midwife from Bridgwater. She pays fees of £9,500 a year, and must complete a minimum of 2,300 unpaid clinical hours. She works 12-hour shifts at nights and weekends, while her protected learning time is routinely overridden to fill staffing gaps. Despite that, she and many student midwives face graduating into unemployment. This is happening during a national midwife shortage. Can we have a debate in Government time on the graduate guarantee made by the Health Secretary in August 2025, which induced many midwives to start training with what appears to have been a false guarantee of employment?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman raises important matters. The Health Secretary is absolutely committed to making sure that the healthcare professionals that the NHS needs, going forward, are in place. I will raise the case that he mentions with the relevant Minister, and will ensure that he gets an update, or a meeting, if he would like one.

[Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)]

Meur ras, Mr Speaker. As the Government work to unlock economic growth and strengthen social cohesion across the country, it is crucial that residents in every part of the UK feel that they are getting a fair share. I am concerned that support for estuary crossings may be allocated differently from support for the Tamar crossings in my South East Cornwall constituency, despite the importance of the Tamar crossings for local economies, healthcare access and nationally significant industries, such as defence. Will the Leader of the House work with me to secure a meeting with the relevant Minister to address my concerns?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend has been an assiduous campaigner on this matter, having raised this issue in previous business questions. I know how important it is for her constituents, so I will raise it with the relevant Minister and see if a meeting can be arranged.

[Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)]

On Thursday, the Welsh dragon roared. Before I go on to say who roared on Sunday, I want to thank Eluned Morgan, the previous First Minister of Wales, for her 30 years of unstinting public service to the people of Wales.

On Sunday, the Drovers roared. Llandovery RFC won the Super Rygbi Cymru cup for the third time. Our small rural Carmarthenshire town has produced phenomenal rugby players for Wales. They have won the Welsh premiership twice, the Welsh cup three times, and the national sevens championship five times in a row. The captain of Sunday’s match, Lee Rees, was playing his 402nd match for Llandovery over an 18-season term, which is a phenomenal achievement. Coaches Euros Evans and Gareth Potter have been at the helm for 13 or 14 years—

[Ann Davies]

Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Llandovery rugby club on its success?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady reaffirms the importance of local sports—particularly, in her part of the world, rugby—to communities. I congratulate her on managing to mention just about everybody in her local community in one question. Well done to the team.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

I was born and raised in Wednesfield by parents and grandparents who came 10,000 miles from Fiji to make Wolverhampton their home. Today, British Fijians serve in our British armed forces, in the NHS, across public services and business, and, of course, on rugby pitches across the UK. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising Girmit Day, which commemorates the arrival of the first indentured Indian labourers in Fiji in 1879, in honour of communities like the British Fijians, who quietly and proudly help to drive this nation every day?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to celebrate the rich heritage of the British Fijian community. I join her in recognising Girmit Day, which serves as a powerful reminder of the valuable contribution that British Fijians make to our communities.

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

Further to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), I met two trainee midwives in a surgery just last week in my Norfolk constituency. They are training at the Norfolk and Norwich university hospital, where 250 student midwives are going after just 50 places. What has happened to the graduate guarantee?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

This question has, as the hon. Gentleman points out, been raised previously, so I make him the same offer: we will get an update from the relevant Minister, or if we organise a meeting, he is free to come along.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

Pride in Place investment can help to provide the kind of community infrastructure that lets neighbourhoods thrive, but South Shore, in my Blackpool South constituency, which is home to the highest concentration of deprivation in the country, is not currently getting that support, despite its real potential to become a vibrant and thriving place once again. Will the Leader of the House join my call for a Pride in Place funding programme in South Shore, and will he make time for a debate on how community infrastructure supports regeneration and how we can ensure that places like South Shore are never left behind?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a wonderful champion for his constituency, and I once again commend him for that. We are giving constituents the investment and powers they need to deliver the change they want to see in their communities, not least through Pride in Place. He makes a strong case for further funding, and I will ensure that the Secretary of State hears his remarks.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

May I say what a pleasure it is to have the Leader of the House back in his place again? I look forward to his contributions, and thank him for all the responses that he coaxes out of the Ministers who respond to me. Will the Leader of the House ask the Foreign Secretary to make a statement on China’s law on the promotion of ethnic unity and progress, which is due to come into force in July, and its implications for freedom of religion or belief, cultural identity, and the rights of ethnic and religious minorities in China? China continues to punitively and aggressively persecute Christians, Falun Gong, Muslims and others.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his remarks. There has been a bit of a theme this morning about my being in my place; I am slightly worried that hon. Members have heard something that I have not—you never know. As ever, he raises a serious matter. The Government stand firm on human rights, including the repression of people in Xinjiang and Tibet and the wider erosion of rights and freedoms across China. We continue to monitor developments, and urge China to respect its obligations under international and national laws. We will not hesitate to hold China to account for human rights violations. I will ensure that the Foreign Secretary hears his concerns.

[Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)]

I recently visited Glasgow airport in my constituency to witness the first direct transatlantic flight by United Airlines between Glasgow and New York. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating United Airlines and Glasgow airport on this significant new development, and does he agree that a debate on global connectivity might be a suitable subject for the new Session of Parliament?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I do indeed join my hon. Friend in congratulating Glasgow International and United Airlines on their success in securing this important route. Transport links like that are vital to local economies and critical to driving growth, which is why we are bringing forward measures in the civil aviation Bill, and I hope that my hon. Friend will contribute to that legislative process.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

Incredibly, it is now over two years since the Patient Safety Commissioner published her report on mesh, yet the Government appear to have made no meaningful progress in implementing its recommendations. The absence of action is unacceptable. This issue continues to affect many of my constituents—women like Natasha, and Andy, a man who suffered not only significant harm but substantial costs having to pay for surgery to stop excruciating pain and to attempt to remedy the damage caused to him. We are in the absurd position where MPs are resorting to ask not only when a redress scheme will be established, but when the Government will set out a timetable for producing a timetable. Please could the Leader of the House ask someone in Government—anyone—to confirm when mesh victims will receive compensation?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady raises an important matter. It has been raised over quite some time in this House, and she is right to raise it again because it is important that people are not left in pain and in the situation that she describes. I will get her an update from the relevant Minister to see what progress is being made and what further progress is planned.

[Mr Connor Rand (Altrincham and Sale West) (Lab)]

Last week, the BBC revealed a terrifying lack of regulation in the growing infant sleep industry, where literally anyone can call themselves a maternity nurse or a sleep consultant and give vulnerable parents advice that puts babies at risk. Locally, that led to the tragic death of a four-month-old baby who was put into an unsafe sleeping position on the guidance of a so-called maternity nurse who had no medical qualifications. Can we have a debate in Government time on what we can do to regulate the infant sleep industry so every child and parent is protected?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this highly disturbing case, and may I first express our condolences to the family? This case has illustrated just how important trusted advice on safe sleeping is, and we would encourage parents to access support, not least through Best Start family hubs. We are also changing the law so that anyone describing themselves as a nurse without the relevant qualifications and registration will be committing a criminal offence.

[Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)]

I am sure we all share the objectives of the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000, but they are having the effect of denying access to public service vehicles for any child who buys a place on a council school bus. Can we have a debate in Government time on the implementation of those regulations and the support that local authorities need, so that children in my constituency and across Somerset are not being denied places on buses that have not yet met the accessibility regulations?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman is right to raise this matter, which is important to many of his constituents. I do not know the detail of the issue he raises, but I will get him a meeting with the relevant Minister if he wishes, so that he can raise those matters directly.

[Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)]

Recently, I was contacted by a leading manufacturer based in my constituency, Trojan Plastics, which highlighted the findings of the Made in Group’s industrial strategy survey report 2026. It found that one in four manufacturers described their energy costs over the past 12 months as “survival threatening”. While I congratulate the Government on their excellent work on delivering clean power, may we have a statement on their plans to improve energy costs for businesses?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend’s advocacy for businesses in his constituency is commendable, and I pay tribute to him. We are currently reviewing the eligibility for the British industry supercharger and the energy intensive industries compensation scheme. I encourage him to raise these matters during the King’s Speech debate on Monday, which is around backing business to create economic growth.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

Given that it is marathon season, will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the new endurance event in my constituency: the 39-week Creswell roadworks? Before the scheme started, many of my constituents were deeply concerned about safety, disruption and delays, and they were right to be. This week was the first week, and constituents have reported children being late for school in exam season, public transport issues, vehicles driving the wrong way down a one-way street, and confusion after changes to the route were decided but not communicated to anyone. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on how roadworks are planned and communicated, so that disruption is minimised, the cost to businesses is considered, and communities such as mine are not left to bear the burden once again?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a strong campaigner for her constituency, and she has raised similar concerns on behalf of her constituents with me before. She is right to say that her constituents deserve better, which is why we are clamping down on roadworks that overrun and doubling fines. This is a matter not just of ensuring that people can get to school, but it is also about disruption to business. I therefore encourage her to raise such matters during Monday’s debate on backing businesses to create economic growth.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

The fantastic Flowers Band from my Gloucester constituency recently won the prestigious European brass band championships. It was their first time at the tournament, and they are the first English band to win it since 2015. I will not name all the members of the band this morning, but I got to go to their open rehearsal, where I saw their fantastic hard work, dedication and unbelievable talent. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating them on their success, and the success of all young musicians in Gloucester?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly congratulate the Flowers Band, not least because they are the first English winners for a decade. Brass bands are so important to our local communities. They are part of our heritage, and an important way of providing access for young people to come through, learn an instrument, and take part. I congratulate the Flowers Band, and wish them success in the future.

[Gerald Jones (Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare) (Lab)]

Illegal offroad bikes cause regular and unnecessary nuisance to residents across Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare, and other parts of the country. South Wales police are constantly trying to deal with residents’ concerns, but the situation persists and is widespread. The Crime and Policing Act 2026 will provide the police with additional tools, but can we have a debate or statement to outline what further steps the Government can take to help tackle this issue, which is causing such nuisance to my constituents and others across the country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to raise that concerning matter. As he says, the Crime and Policing Act will give the police greater powers to clamp down on antisocial behaviour involving vehicles such as e-bikes. I am sure that this would make a popular topic for a Westminster Hall debate should he apply for one, because many Members across the House will have similar concerns.

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

This week marked the 22nd anniversary of the devastating Stockline ICL Plastics factory explosion in Woodside in my constituency, in which nine people tragically lost their lives. Given continuing concerns about corporate accountability, may we have a debate in Government time to assess how effective the offences of corporate manslaughter and corporate homicide have been since they were introduced, and whether the legislation is delivering justice for families affected by workplace deaths?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in remembering those killed and injured in the factory explosion at the ICL Plastics factory in 2004. Through the Crime and Policing Act 2026 we clarified and extended powers to ensure that corporate bodies are held liable for criminal offences committed by their senior managers. It is important that we continue to draw lessons from that avoidable tragedy, and my hon. Friend may wish to raise those concerns directly with Ministers during Justice questions next week.

Select Committee Statements

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

I beg to move,

That Standing Order No. 22D (Select committee statements) be amended in paragraph (3), by leaving out “5 sitting days” and inserting “10 sitting days”.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Motion 18—Backbench Business Committee—

That, from the start of the next Session, the following changes be made to Public Business Standing Orders:

(1) Standing Order No. 122D (Election of Chair of Backbench Business Committee) shall be amended by:

(i) leaving out sub-paragraphs (1)(a) and (1)(b) and inserting:

(a) The election of the chair of the Backbench Business Committee shall take place at the start of the Parliament on the day of the ballots for election of select committee chairs under Standing Order No. 122B (Election of select committee chairs).

(b) Nominations of candidates shall be in writing and shall be received by the Clerk of the House by 5.00 pm on the day before the ballot, and the Speaker shall have power to vary these timings.

(ii) leaving out sub-paragraph (1)(g) and inserting:

(g) Arrangements for the election shall follow those set out in paragraphs (9) to (14) of Standing Order No. 122B (Election of select committee chairs) as if those paragraphs applied to chairs elected under this order.

(2) Standing Order No. 152J (Backbench Business Committee) shall be amended:

(i) by adding after paragraph (2):

( ) Unless the House otherwise orders, each Member nominated to the committee shall continue to be a member of it for the remainder of the Parliament.

(ii) by leaving out in paragraph (3) “remainder of the Session” and inserting “remainder of the Parliament”.

Motion 19—Consequential amendments arising from the Backbench Business Committee motion—

(1) Standing Order No. 14 (Arrangement of public business) shall be amended by leaving out in paragraph (6) “paragraph (9) of Standing Order No. 152J” and inserting “paragraph (10) of Standing Order No. 152J”; and

(2) Standing Order No. 54 (Consideration of estimates) shall be amended by leaving out in paragraph (1) “paragraph (9) of Standing Order No. 152J” and inserting “paragraph (10) of Standing Order No. 152J”.

Motion 20—Backbench Business Committee: Election of Chair and nomination of members in the 2026-27 Session—

That at the beginning of the next Session:

(i) the election of the chair of the Backbench Business Committee shall take place on a day and at times to be determined by the Speaker, in accordance with paragraphs (1)(b) to (1)(g) of Standing Order No. 122D, and such a day may be fewer than 10 days after the State Opening of Parliament; and

(ii) the Committee of Selection shall table a motion relating to the membership of the Backbench Business Committee after the election of the chair has taken place.

Motion 21—Select Committee chair elections—

That this House notes the Procedure Committee’s Fifth Report of Session 2024–26 (HC 535), and endorses paragraphs 109-111 and 114-115 of that Report and the following Rules for Select Committee Chair elections:

Select committee chairs are central figures in carrying out the House’s scrutiny function and are vitally important roles in our parliamentary democracy, with significant responsibilities and weight both within and outside the House. Members of Parliament and the public have the right to expect that the elections for these posts will be conducted fairly and in a way that safeguards and enhances the reputation of the House.

Members seeking to stand in elections held under Standing Order No. 122B (Election of select committee chairs) or No. 122D (Election of Chair of Backbench Business Committee) should follow the requirements set down in these Rules. To demonstrate their commitment to the Rules, they should signify that they have read and will abide by these Rules as part of their supporting statement when submitting their nomination form. Members engaging in campaigning activity before officially submitting their nomination should equally ensure that they act within these Rules.

By standing for election as a candidate for a select committee chair position, all candidates agree to the following restrictions on their campaigning activities:

1. The production and distribution of any printed campaign material, other than the booklet of candidate statements produced by the House Administration, is prohibited.

2. The use of mass electronic communications, such as mass emails, calendar invitations or messages, or unsolicited addition to groups on any messaging platform, for campaigning purposes, is prohibited.

3. Respect for colleagues’ protected time for constituency activities and private life is paramount. Any campaign activity outside the working week (Monday to Friday) and reasonable business hours (8am to 8pm) is prohibited, including any campaign activity when the House is in recess.

4. Campaigning activities in the immediate vicinity of the polling place on the day of the election are prohibited.

Candidates and prospective candidates can expect the electorate to take a dim view of any breach of the provisions of these Rules and of the damage done to the reputation of the House by any such breach.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I have brought forward a number of motions today to facilitate implementation of recent recommendations of the Backbench Business Committee and the Procedure Committee. I thank both Committees for their recent reports on these matters, and I will briefly speak about the motions. Members should note that the explanatory notes are also available in the Vote Office.

First, I will deal with Select Committee statements. Currently, a Select Committee statement must be made within five sitting days of publication of the report or announcement of the inquiry. The Backbench Business Committee recommended in its 15th anniversary report that Select Committee statements under Standing Order No. 22D should instead be allowed to take place 10 sitting days after publication of the report or announcement of an inquiry. Select Committee statements have increased in popularity in recent years, and the Government agreed with the Committee in its recommendation. The motion therefore asks the House to amend the Standing Order to enact that change.

Let me now turn to the motions relating to the operation of the Backbench Business Committee. Both that Committee, in its 15th anniversary report, and the Procedure Committee, in its report on elections in the House of Commons, proposed that the members and Chair of the Backbench Business Committee should be elected in line with those of all other elected Select Committees, namely for the whole Parliament rather than for each Session. While the Backbench Business Committee does have unique powers in scheduling business on the Floor of the House, the Government recognise that its operation is well established, and that its reappointment at the beginning of each Session can cause delays in the scheduling of Backbench Business. The Government have therefore accepted that recommendation, and the relevant motions contain proposals to make the change ahead of the next Session, with a few consequential changes.

The Government propose, as far as is possible, alignment of nomination periods and ballot timings for the Backbench Business Committee with those of other Select Committee Chairs. No other arrangements relating to the election of the Backbench Business Committee Chair—for example, signature requirements for candidates or parties eligible to stand for the position—have been amended. However, as the current Chair and members have been appointed only on a sessional basis, the Committee is still required to be re-elected at the beginning of the next Session to allow the Chair and members to be appointed for the remainder of this Parliament. As ever, the Government will endeavour to ensure that the Committee can be re-established in good time in the new parliamentary Session. A further motion has been tabled that sets out the arrangements for the election of the Chair and the appointment of Committee members at the beginning of the next Session to ensure clarity in the arrangements for setting up the Committee in the transition Session.

The final motion relates to the election of Select Committee Chairs, and follows the recent report from the Procedure Committee. Its inquiry recommended that rules be adopted for Select Committee Chair elections to limit campaigning activity and the time during which campaigning can take place. Paragraphs 109 to 111 and 114 to 115 of the Committee’s report explain how the rules should be adhered to. The Government accept the Committee’s recommendation, and the motion asks the House to endorse the rules.

I thank the Backbench Business Committee and the Procedure Committee for their consideration of these matters and look forward to continuing to work with them across a number of areas, both as Leader of the House of Commons and as Chair of the Modernisation Committee. I hope that Members will support the motions, and I commend them to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank all Members for their contribution to today’s debate. I thank the shadow Minister for her kind words; I agree that the changes are eminently sensible.

The Chair of the Procedure Committee does a fantastic job. We work closely with her Committee and the Modernisation Committee. I thank her and all Procedure Committee members for their important work. I welcome the changes to campaigning. I think that Members will be relieved to know that, once we are into the campaigning season, there will be limits to what campaigning can be done. I thank the Procedure Committee Chair for that; it is eminently sensible.

The Chair of the Backbench Business Committee asked why different rules applied to his Committee, and suggested that it might have been because of the awkward squad on his side of the House. I could not possibly comment on that, but I remember those days. Given the good job that he does, things now are less awkward and more respected. I said to him that I would bring forward these motions, and I have. As for his final remarks, it is better late than never, I suppose.

I thank the hon. Gentleman and his Committee for their important work; again, it works closely with the Modernisation Committee. We will take forward a piece of work on how we spend our time in this Chamber. We can learn lessons from people such as the hon. Gentleman and the experience that he brings.

To finish, I want to clear that in the changes that we make, including to Backbench Business Committee time and petitions, I want to be seen as a champion of the rights of Back Benchers. It is really important that they should have the opportunity to have their voices heard. Long may that continue. I hope that Members will support the motions today, and I commend them to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Backbench Business Committee

Ordered,

That, from the start of the next Session, the following changes be made to Public Business Standing Orders:

(1) Standing Order No. 122D (Election of Chair of Backbench Business Committee) shall be amended by:

(i) leaving out sub-paragraphs (1)(a) and (1)(b) and inserting:

(a) The election of the chair of the Backbench Business Committee shall take place at the start of the Parliament on the day of the ballots for election of select committee chairs under Standing Order No. 122B (Election of select committee chairs).

(b) Nominations of candidates shall be in writing and shall be received by the Clerk of the House by 5.00 pm on the day before the ballot, and the Speaker shall have power to vary these timings.

(ii) leaving out sub-paragraph (1)(g) and inserting:

(g) Arrangements for the election shall follow those set out in paragraphs (9) to (14) of Standing Order No. 122B (Election of select committee chairs) as if those paragraphs applied to chairs elected under this order.

(2) Standing Order No. 152J (Backbench Business Committee) shall be amended:

(i) by adding after paragraph (2):

( ) Unless the House otherwise orders, each Member nominated to the committee shall continue to be a member of it for the remainder of the Parliament.

(ii) by leaving out in paragraph (3) “remainder of the Session” and inserting “remainder of the Parliament”.—(Gen Kitchen.)

Consequential Amendments arising from the Backbench Business Committee Motion

Ordered,

(1) Standing Order No. 14 (Arrangement of public business) shall be amended by leaving out in paragraph (6) “paragraph (9) of Standing Order No. 152J” and inserting “paragraph (10) of Standing Order No. 152J”; and

(2) Standing Order No. 54 (Consideration of estimates) shall be amended by leaving out in paragraph (1) “paragraph (9) of Standing Order No. 152J” and inserting “paragraph (10) of Standing Order No. 152J”.—(Sir Alan Campbell.)

Backbench Business Committee: Election of Chair and Nomination of Members in the 2026-27 Session

Ordered,

That at the beginning of the next Session:

(i) the election of the chair of the Backbench Business Committee shall take place on a day and at times to be determined by the Speaker, in accordance with paragraphs (1)(b) to (1)(g) of Standing Order No. 122D, and such a day may be fewer than 10 days after the State Opening of Parliament; and

(ii) the Committee of Selection shall table a motion relating to the membership of the Backbench Business Committee after the election of the chair has taken place.—(Sir Alan Campbell.)

Select Committee Chair Elections

Ordered,

That this House notes the Procedure Committee’s Fifth Report of Session 2024–26 (HC 535), and endorses paragraphs 109-111 and 114-115 of that Report and the following Rules for Select Committee Chair elections:

Select committee chairs are central figures in carrying out the House’s scrutiny function and are vitally important roles in our parliamentary democracy, with significant responsibilities and weight both within and outside the House. Members of Parliament and the public have the right to expect that the elections for these posts will be conducted fairly and in a way that safeguards and enhances the reputation of the House.

Members seeking to stand in elections held under Standing Order No. 122B (Election of select committee chairs) or No. 122D (Election of Chair of Backbench Business Committee) should follow the requirements set down in these Rules. To demonstrate their commitment to the Rules, they should signify that they have read and will abide by these Rules as part of their supporting statement when submitting their nomination form. Members engaging in campaigning activity before officially submitting their nomination should equally ensure that they act within these Rules.

By standing for election as a candidate for a select committee chair position, all candidates agree to the following restrictions on their campaigning activities:

1. The production and distribution of any printed campaign material, other than the booklet of candidate statements produced by the House Administration, is prohibited.

2. The use of mass electronic communications, such as mass emails, calendar invitations or messages, or unsolicited addition to groups on any messaging platform, for campaigning purposes, is prohibited.

3. Respect for colleagues’ protected time for constituency activities and private life is paramount. Any campaign activity outside the working week (Monday to Friday) and reasonable business hours (8am to 8pm) is prohibited, including any campaign activity when the House is in recess.

4. Campaigning activities in the immediate vicinity of the polling place on the day of the election are prohibited.

Candidates and prospective candidates can expect the electorate to take a dim view of any breach of the provisions of these Rules and of the damage done to the reputation of the House by any such breach.—(Sir Alan Campbell.)

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

The House will now suspend pending the arrival of Lords messages. I will cause the Division bells to ring five minutes before the sitting resumes.

Business of the House

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 23rd April 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

The business for the week commencing 27 April will include:

Monday 27 April—If necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, followed by consideration of a Lords message on the Pension Schemes Bill, followed by consideration of a carry-over motion relating to the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, followed by consideration of a carry-over motion relating to the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the Crime and Policing Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.

Tuesday 28 April—If necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the Pension Schemes Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of a Lords message on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords messages.

Wednesday 29 April—If necessary, consideration of Lords messages.

Thursday 30 April—If necessary, consideration of Lords messages.

The House will be prorogued when Royal Assent to all Acts has been signified.

[John Lamont]

May I start by congratulating the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) on the birth of his daughter, baby Lyla? I am sure the whole House will join me in wishing him and his family well.

Last weekend, I met the friends and family of Jamie Tweedie as they walked the St Cuthbert’s Way from Melrose to Holy Island, raising over £25,000 for the Scottish Brain Tumour Research Centre of Excellence. Jamie was a local farmer in the Borders who tragically lost his life to a brain tumour just under a year ago. I know their efforts will help advance treatments for that devastating disease.

We are all watching the development of peace talks between the US and Iran. For the good of our economy and in the interests of bringing energy bills down for households and businesses, we all hope to see a swift end to the conflict.

Turning to domestic politics, after weeks of chaos, this may be the lowest point yet for this Government—a Prime Minister putting his own interests above the national interest. He has already had four chiefs of staff, five directors of communications, three Cabinet Secretaries and four principal private secretaries. Does the Leader of the House agree that perhaps the problem lies with the Prime Minister himself? On Tuesday, the Foreign Affairs Committee heard extraordinary evidence from Olly Robbins, the former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office. He described a dismissive attitude in Downing Street towards vetting, and “constant pressure” to appoint Peter Mandelson to the most senior diplomatic role. He also told MPs that he was asked to give the Prime Minister’s then director of communications a senior diplomatic post—without informing the Foreign Secretary, it would seem. The Foreign Office is not a redeployment pool for failed political advisers.

Can the Leader of the House tell us whether it was appropriate for No. 10 to apply such pressure over Mandelson’s vetting, or does he accept that due process was not followed? Does he believe the Prime Minister inadvertently misled the House? Does the Leader of the House accept that the Prime Minister continues to make statements that are hard to reconcile with reality? Can the Leader of the House explain why Olly Robbins was sacked? Was it right and fair to sack him?

The Prime Minister has never looked weaker. The Prime Minister is so weak that he has brought forward the moment of Prorogation to avoid another bruising Prime Minister’s questions. He has already lost the confidence of the entire country. When will Labour MPs finally stand up for their constituents and join us in removing this dreadful Prime Minister?

While the Prime Minister is consumed by internal chaos, the issues that matter to our constituents are being ignored. Energy bills are soaring, particularly for those in rural communities who rely on heating oil, people are struggling to find work, and decisions on funding our national defence are being delayed, despite global threats. At the same time, Government Back Benchers and Cabinet members brief against each other, plotting over the Prime Minister’s future. As this parliamentary Session draws to a close, I doubt it will be remembered fondly by those on the Government Benches.

In two weeks’ time, voters will go to the polls in important elections across England and in parliamentary elections in Scotland and Wales. In Scotland, Labour’s campaign has descended into confusion, illustrated by the remarkable sight of the Prime Minister visiting the nuclear base at Faslane, while avoiding any contact with his own party leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar. It seemed that the Prime Minister needed the protection of the nuclear deterrent from his own Scottish Labour colleagues. This Government have found it easier to locate secret Russian submarines in the north Atlantic than to find the Scottish Labour leader in the south side of Glasgow.

Across Scotland, voters are clear: they are tired of an SNP Government distracted from delivery and focused on independence. But people are not powerless. The peach-coloured regional ballot paper gives voters the opportunity to prevent another SNP majority, as they did in 2016 and 2021. The results of another SNP majority in Scotland would be similar to those of the current Labour majority in this House: more broken promises, more chaos and more division. Does the Leader of the House agree that whether at Westminster or at Holyrood, Governments deserve to be judged harshly if they do not stick to their promises and they inflict chaos on our country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join the hon. Gentleman in welcoming the birth of Lyla, and I wish her and her parents all the very best indeed.

I wish everybody a happy St George’s day today. During this week, we have celebrated the centenary of the birth of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and it has been announced that a trust will be established in honour of the life of the late Queen. The trust will focus on restoring shared spaces in communities, reflecting the late Queen’s commitment to public service, inspired by the belief that everyone is our neighbour—a lesson that we should all seek to live by.

Last week, the Government made clear their commitment to tackling antisemitic attacks. Following the incident this week, I restate our position that attacks on British Jews are an attack on all of us. We will do whatever it takes to stop those who seek to intimidate our Jewish communities.

We are approaching the end of the Session, which, at its conclusion, will have seen the delivery of more than 50 Government Bills. We will continue to build on that in the next Session.

A statement was made to the House to provide an update on Capita and civil service pensions. I know that Members across the House will have welcomed that update. I assure hon. Members that the issues that they raise with me in this forum are heard by the Government and, where we can, the Government act.

Before I turn to the remarks made by the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont), may I wish everyone taking part in the London marathon this Sunday, including all the Members of the House who are participating, the very best of luck?

I join the hon. Gentleman in saying how saddened we are to learn about the death of Jamie Tweedie, which came far too soon. His friends and family are ensuring that we remember him and that he is not forgotten, and his untimely death leaves a legacy of which they should be proud.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned the peace talks. I join him in hoping that they are successful. We want the ceasefire to continue. We want to ensure that the strait of Hormuz is open; otherwise, as he points out, it will prolong the expected economic damage, not just to our economy but to others. I want to put it on the record that what has unfolded in that part of the world demonstrates that the Prime Minister’s judgment on not joining the war in the first place was absolutely correct. He has spent his time making diplomatic efforts, working with others, to ensure that the strait of Hormuz is open at the earliest opportunity.

Let me turn to the hon. Gentleman’s remarks on domestic politics. He is perfectly entitled to make his case, but let me remind the House that the Prime Minister came here at the earliest opportunity on Monday and faced questions on Peter Mandelson for two and a half hours. That was followed by an emergency debate for three hours on Tuesday in which Members had an opportunity to make their case and ask their questions. Yesterday, the Prime Minister faced Prime Minister’s questions for about 45 minutes, in which he was questioned extensively on the issue. The Foreign Affairs Committee is doing its job in holding decision makers to account. There have been numerous opportunities—including at Cabinet Office questions, which has just finished—for other questions to be put. I and the Government cannot be held responsible for the fact that the Leader of the Opposition has been so hopeless during these events that she cannot hold the Government to account effectively. [Interruption.]

Let me just mention the question of Prorogation, because the hon. Gentleman has clearly been reading too many newspapers. I have just read out to the House that the business next week—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Mr Stafford, please, you are getting very carried away. Enjoy yourself on the Front Bench, but it is not the place to be thrown out from.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I have just read out the business, which includes, if necessary, Wednesday and Thursday, when we will be dealing with Lords amendments. The hon. Gentleman asked about PMQs; if the House is still sitting, PMQs will take place. I would imagine, too, that business questions will take place if we are still sitting on Thursday. Nothing in what I read out suggests anything that is not usual.

The hon. Gentleman talked about the record of this Government and went on to talk about what is happening in Scotland. Let me disagree with him about the way in which this Government will be judged. The borrowing figures show that we are borrowing less than at any time in the past four years, unemployment has come down, inflation and interest rates were falling, and waiting lists are coming down, too. I accept that we are facing the turmoil of the fallout from the situation in the middle east, but when such events happen, as a result of the action that we have taken in the last two years, this country is much better placed to see out those challenges than we were under the previous Government.

Finally, I agree with the hon. Gentleman in what he said about the situation north of the border, at least as it pertains to the SNP. Voters suggest that they are tiring of the SNP Government; after two decades in government, it is time for change. The SNP Government have had the biggest settlement since devolution, and they are failing across the board on public services. I expect that voters will want to take the opportunity to make their position clear. Let me finally disagree with the hon. Gentleman, because the way to do that is to vote Labour.

[Gareth Thomas (Harrow West) (Lab/Co-op)]

In Harrow, getting a free car parking space is often critical to whether someone can access vital public services, and it is crucial for local businesses, too. My right hon. Friend will therefore understand my constituents’ frustration that Conservative-run Harrow council has axed free weekend and evening parking in North Harrow, Harrow town centre and Wealdstone. With Harrow Labour determined to reverse that, may we have a debate on the guidance that Ministers might offer councils on the importance of listening to residents’ and businesses’ concerns about access to free parking?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly share my hon. Friend’s frustration on those matters. We have heard on many occasions in these sessions how much they are of interest to our constituents. It is disappointing to say the least that charges may prevent people from accessing services. My hon. Friend put on record today his concern on behalf of his constituents. If he wants to amplify that, I would encourage him to apply for an Adjournment debate. I hope that when the time comes his residents are given the opportunity to show their frustration at the ballot box.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

I am here subbing for my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean), who, as has already been mentioned, welcomed his new daughter late last Thursday. I am very pleased to tell the House that mum Gemma and baby Lyla are both doing very well indeed.

Yesterday, the Public Accounts Committee published a report that raises serious concerns about the resilience of the new hospital programme. This project has already been riddled with delays and spiralling costs, and it now faces further risk from a volatile global economy. The Office for National Statistics inflation figures, which were also released yesterday, add to the concerns, as they confirm what many feared: “Trumpflation” is having an effect on our economy. UK prices rose by 3.3% in the 12 months to March, driven largely by the biggest increase in fuel costs for over three years—a direct consequence of Trump’s reckless war in Iran and the effective closure of the strait of Hormuz.

Capital infrastructure projects, such as the new hospital programme, are acutely vulnerable to exactly that kind of supply disruption and inflationary pressure. In my area, Stepping Hill hospital already faces a £130 million repair backlog, crumbling buildings, flooded corridors and years of broken promises. Will the Government make time for a debate on the impact of global economic instability on UK investment and public infrastructure, and on their plan to ensure that patients, including those depending on hospitals such as Stepping Hill, are not left waiting even longer for the facilities they need?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Let me repeat my best wishes to Gemma and Lyla.

The previous Government’s ambition to deliver 40 new hospitals by 2030 was not achievable; neither was it funded properly. We have conducted a review of the programme and, alongside the record £13.6 billion of capital investment in the NHS last year, we have put the new hospital programme on a sustainable footing and a more realistic timetable. We are keeping delivery on track, responding to changes in healthcare needs, and working closely with the relevant NHS trusts to accelerate progress wherever possible, but the hon. Lady is right to remind us of the potential economic fallout from the volatile international situation.

The Chancellor updated the House earlier this week on the Government’s response to events in the middle east, because the war in Iran will come at a cost. However, the Government have had the right economic plan to keep costs down and, at the same time, to invest in public services, and we will continue to do so. I except that as the situation unfolds, the Chancellor will want to keep the House updated.

[Cat Eccles (Stourbridge) (Lab)]

Following the Environment Act 2021, all councils in England were required to introduce food waste collections and improved kerbside recycling by April this year. Despite the long lead time, Tory-run Dudley council waited till the 11th hour, leaving it ill prepared for the changes and without the vehicles needed to complete the collections. That has left waste uncollected and cardboard strewn over the streets, and crews have been working hard around the clock to catch up. Residents have played their part and complied with the new rules. Does the Leader of the House agree that Dudley council must meet its obligations to residents, and provide accountability and answers for its failures on basics such as waste collection?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a champion for both her constituents and the wider community, and I thank her for consistently raising the issues that matter most to them. This is not the first time that the failures of Conservative-run Dudley council have been brought to my attention. I thank the residents and crews who are stepping up, but I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that Tory-run Dudley council needs to clean up its act.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I begin by paying tribute to the late Brian Jones, who died overnight, aged 89, at Northwick Park hospital. Brian was either president or chairman of the Harrow East Conservative Association for 25 years, and he was also my election agent for three general elections. He was a distinguished civil servant who worked on international trade matters before he retired, and he was the district scout commissioner in Harrow. He will be sorely missed, and we obviously express our sadness to his relatives and friends.

I suspect that these will be the last business questions before Prorogation. As is usual at the end of a Session, I shall write to the Leader of the House, on behalf of the Backbench Business Committee, with a list of debates that are still on our waiting list. We have debates for the Chamber until the Christmas recess; for Tuesday mornings in Westminster Hall until the November recess; and for Thursdays in Westminster Hall until the conference recess. If the Leader of the House wants to have any general debates before the Committee is reconstituted following state opening, there is a long list of them. I thank him for laying the Standing Orders, but when will they be considered by the House? I pay tribute to the members of the Backbench Business Committee, the Clerks and the other support services, who have done such a brilliant job assisting us in formulating the debates that we have had.

There have been recent attacks on Jewish communities across north London. The recent arrests of individuals that have taken place are welcome, but Jewish people will be thinking twice about whether they should go to synagogue this weekend and whether they will be safe. It is imperative that the Government not only take measures to reassure Jewish people in this country, but take prompt action. The individuals perpetrating these evil attacks are controlled by Iranians; it is often Iranian diplomats or other third parties who are directing these operations. We must put a stop to what is going on in radicalising our young people and using them as stooges for the Iranian regime. Will the Leader of the House encourage the Security Minister to take prompt action to round up the individuals instructing these evil people so that Jewish people can feel safe once again in this country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee for his work and the work of his Committee. I also thank him in anticipation of receiving his letter about the topics that are still around to be debated. As he points out, although it may take some time to get the Committee running again, there may well be an opportunity for general debates, and I thank him for that.

Let me say something about Brian Jones. He was in a different party to me, but that does not matter, because people like him are important not just in their communities, but for the working of local politics. We need to appreciate that, and I join the hon. Gentleman and all Members in sending our condolences to Brian’s friends and family.

The hon. Gentleman mentions the Backbench Business Committee motions, and he is right that we have tabled them. He seeks to draw me on when they will be dealt with, so let me use a parliamentary term: shortly. In this case I really mean “shortly”, so he can work out whatever that means.

I join the hon. Gentleman in his remarks about antisemitism, because the House shares the view that all religious hatred is abhorrent and has no place in our society. We are shocked by the recent attacks and, as I said in my opening remarks, we stand with the Jewish community. We thank counter-terror officers for their work, and we are working with the Community Security Trust to keep the community safe.

The hon. Gentleman has drawn our attention previously to the question of whether legislation is robust enough. We are bringing forward new legislation in the Crime and Policing Bill, but should we need to go further, I will draw his remarks to the attention of the Security Minister.

[Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)]

Mr Speaker, you and I agree that all women and girls should be safe on this estate, whether they are MPs, staff or visitors. We have been working together to ensure that we become the first White Ribbon-accredited Parliament in the world. What progress is being made to ensure that that accreditation is in place for this House by the next International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, so that we can all celebrate that this is a safe place for every woman and girl who chooses to work or visit here?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend has been an assiduous supporter of the White Ribbon accreditation process and has been working on it from the very beginning. I can reconfirm for her that we are committed to making the UK Parliament the first to have White Ribbon accreditation. The House of Commons Commission has established the necessary leads to start accreditation, and an action plan has been drafted and is on track to be launched in the near future.

[Mr Speaker]

Since I was brought into that question, I just want to add that the Leader of the House is absolutely correct. We are almost there, and almost ready to bring it forward.

[Sir Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con)]

With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I want to raise three points with the Leader of the House about the operation of the Humble Address agreed by the House on 4 February. I make clear that I do so on behalf of the Intelligence and Security Committee. First, I invite the Leader of the House to confirm that under the terms of the Humble Address, no one within Government has the right to withhold, deny or not disclose the existence of any document within the scope of the Humble Address.

Secondly, as the Leader of the House knows, the exemptions set out in the Humble Address that relate to the Intelligence and Security Committee are about redactions that need to be made to protect either national security or international relations. Beyond that, the Government produced a document to go along with the first disclosure of material on 11 March, which set out a number of grounds on which the Government would also seek to redact information. If you will permit me, Mr Speaker, I will quote what they are. The document mentions

“Individuals’ email addresses and phone numbers; the identities of junior civil servants; personal data of third parties where this is not in scope of the motion; and legal professional privilege.”

It also makes reference to a

“small amount of Peter Mandelson’s personal data”,

and then says that

“It may also be necessary for the government to make further redactions in future publications based on other public interest principles, including commercially sensitive information.”

I invite the Leader of the House to confirm that if the Government intend to do so, they need to come to this House to explain what those grounds for redaction will be, because—as I hope he will agree—they are not covered by the terms of the Humble Address as it stands. It is important that the House has the chance to validate the Government’s view that further redactions would be appropriate.

My third point is about redactions on grounds other than national security or international relations. As the Leader of the House knows, the Committee I am part of is going through documents now to confirm that the redactions the Government propose to make are appropriate on the grounds of national security or international relations, but no one is doing the same work in relation to redactions that the Government seek to make for other reasons. Should they not be, and should there not be an opportunity for someone in this House to look at the unredacted versions of those documents, to confirm that the redactions the Government are seeking to make are appropriate?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

First, I place on record our gratitude to the Intelligence and Security Committee for its time and its consideration of the large number of documents that it is reviewing. Further documents have been gathered, and the Government are working at pace to ensure that the ISC has all the relevant documentation as soon as possible. On Tuesday 21 April, the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister committed to the House that

“we will release that further material shortly, subject to the processes ongoing with the Metropolitan police”—

which I know the right hon. and learned Gentleman understands—

“and the Intelligence and Security Committee, and we will continue to keep Members updated as we make progress.”—[Official Report, 21 April 2026; Vol. 784, c. 235.]

The Prime Minister has been very clear that he expects us to make progress as quickly as possible, but as the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, there are literally mountains of documents to wade through.

As for what the ISC was asked to do, I do not believe that that has fundamentally changed. My view, which I have expressed in one of these sessions, is that the Government would be wise to get as much information as possible out as quickly as possible, and to do as little redaction as possible. However, if I have understood him correctly, the right hon. and learned Gentleman raises an interesting question about what the Government have subsequently said about what they might or might not do. I want to go away and think about that, because from what he has said—and I trust him absolutely on these matters—it does seem somewhat at odds. Were the Government to change those terms, I would expect them to come to this House and do so.

[Jim McMahon (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton) (Lab/Co-op)]

Happy St George’s day to you, Mr Speaker, and to the House, and what better day is there to reflect that the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill will soon receive Royal Assent? With it come enhanced powers to safeguard community assets, including automatic protection for sporting grounds. This important Co-operative party campaign reflects the real community of Britain, with decent people pulling together, protecting what is important to them. Does the Leader of the House agree that now we are soon to have these widened protections, we also need widened ownership and to bring forward a new community ownership fund?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for his work on these matters, including as a Minister and shadow Minister. He brings valuable insight. I cannot give him a commitment on the fund, but I believe that we need to go further on these issues. As the Government have made clear, communities should, wherever possible, be put in the driving seat in terms of not only their resources and the decisions they have to make, but the assets at their disposal.

[David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)]

St George’s day is certainly a day to celebrate patriotism. This morning, The Daily Telegraph reported that the Attorney General, when he was in private practice, voluntarily gave advice on the pursuit of British soldiers over alleged war crimes—allegations that turned out to be bogus. The article says that he realised those claims could be bogus early on in the process. That brings into question his impartiality in advising the Government on matters of human rights law as they apply to soldiers. He should therefore recuse himself from giving advice on those matters generally, but especially on the Northern Ireland legislation, which as it stands will victimise more British soldiers. Can we have a debate on Government legal advice and the shameful misuse of human rights law in pursuit of our soldiers?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As I said in announcing the business, there may be an opportunity before the end of this Session to return to the question of the legacy Bill. There will certainly be an opportunity as soon as we come back to return to it. The right hon. Gentleman may wish to make those remarks during those debates. Knowing the Attorney General as I do, I am sure that he approaches these questions in an absolutely correct way. Should a situation arise where he feels that he should recuse himself, I have absolute faith that he would make the right judgment.

[Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome the Government’s tabling of the carry-over motion for the Hillsborough law. A lot of people who were extremely worried about what was happening will be relieved today. However, that motion must be matched with urgency. Ministers must end the delays and deliver the law in full, as promised, without carve-outs for the intelligence and security services. That will achieve the cultural change that the country desperately needs, as we have seen this week. Will my right hon. Friend remind some in government that negative media briefings against key figures in the campaign risk undermining confidence in the process and should cease? Following the Prime Minister’s commitment at PMQs last week, will my right hon. Friend ensure that I am directly informed and included in all meetings and briefings moving forward as the parliamentary lead for the Hillsborough law campaign?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend not just for his questions, but for his record on this matter. I know that he has a personal interest as someone who was at Hillsborough on that terrible day. As he says, we have tabled the carry-over motion, and I am pleased that he welcomes it. Briefings against anyone are never welcome, wherever they come from. I hope that those who might have briefed hear his words. In terms of keeping him updated, I will certainly draw his remarks to the attention of the relevant Minister.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I had the opportunity to test out my hand-eye co-ordination recently by joining Chichester Centurions hockey club. We have a thriving hockey community in Chichester, and Chichester hockey club has more than 650 members. They are at risk, however, of losing their pitch provision because the pitches are coming to end of life and are being replaced with 3G pitches, which are far more favourable to football—hockey cannot be played on them. Will the Leader of the House please talk to the Sport Minister, the hon. Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), and ask what she can do, because the picture in my area is happening nationally? Will he please ask her to meet me, so that she can tell me what she will do to protect hockey?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I will draw the hon. Lady’s remarks and concerns to the attention of the appropriate Minister, and see if we can arrange the meeting she requests.

[Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)]

As Members will know, this week Parliament welcomed Prestur, the wonderful Icelandic horse showcasing the value of animal-assisted and community-based support for neurodivergent people. May I personally thank you for that, Mr Speaker? I am sure you agree that we have never seen so many fat smiles on MPs’ faces as we did with Prestur. The event had a serious purpose, which was to highlight the strength of neurodiversity and the difference that inclusive, non-clinical environments make to wellbeing, emotional regulation and connection. Does my right hon. Friend agree that such support helps embed neuro-inclusion in our communities? As we shift from hospital to community care, how can we best champion such initiatives so that all people can thrive?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a champion on this matter for her constituents and, indeed, more widely. I thank her for her work as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. I do agree with her, but more importantly, the Government more widely agree with her that such community-based support is vital, and in raising this matter in the House today, she has highlighted the case even more.

[Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)]

Phoenix shops are a blight on many of our high streets, including in my constituency of Solihull West and Shirley. Councillor Karen Grinsell, the leader of Solihull metropolitan borough council, recently brought forward a motion to have greater statutory powers to close down these stores. Will the Leader of the House provide Government time to debate this issue so that we can close these stores for good?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

As I have said, there may well be such an opportunity after the King’s Speech, when the Government will have more time for general debates, and I will certainly consider the hon. Gentleman’s request.

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

Last month, I was thrilled to see Scarborough rugby union football club crowned regional 2 north-east champions—the highest level in the club’s history. The club does brilliant work in the Scarborough community, with various teams for women and for rugby players of all levels. Will the Leader of the House join me in celebrating Scarborough RUFC’s historic victory and its vital contribution to Scarborough?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend in congratulating Scarborough RUFC on its success. Not only that club, but rugby clubs across our country are so important in local sports. Very often, they are at the heart of our local communities because, moving beyond the sport they play, they get involved in all sorts of other things, and I thank rugby clubs for everything they do.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

First, I am grateful to the Leader of the House for bringing my previous concerns about the management of visa cases in the Home Office to the Department’s attention. However, at the moment I have a very acute issue with immediate support needs. A constituent of mine is in the USA, where his baby was born through surrogacy. Unfortunately, the baby has been very unwell, and he has not yet been able to complete the formalities for a British passport, although they do hold a US one. My constituent’s ESTA—electronic system for travel authorisation—is running out, and he desperately wants to get back to Scotland with his baby, who needs further medical care. In the absence of any remaining Home Office questions, will the Leader of the House advise me who could urgently offer some support to bring this case to a conclusion?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

If the hon. Lady lets me have the details of that case immediately after this session, I will see what we can do. While I am on my feet, let me wish her well for her run on Sunday.

[Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)]

Changes to Northumberland county council’s council tax support scheme have left some low-income residents in my constituency facing unaffordable increases, some of nearly £100 per month. Those impacted are the most vulnerable in our communities. Can the Leader of the House imagine what it is like, when they are already struggling to survive through the cost of living crisis, to be lumped with paying an extra £100 per month? That is pressure, Mr Speaker. Can we have a debate on the impact that local authorities can have, both positively and negatively, on the financial wellbeing of our constituents and their constituents?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to that decision by Northumberland county council. It cannot be right, even after 14 years of under-investment by successive Tory Administrations, that less well-off households in his area are being asked to pay more. This Government are taking action so we can keep costs down for everyone and provide support for those who need it more. But the lesson that people need to learn, unfortunately by experience, in areas such as his is this: do not vote for a Tory or a Reform council.

[Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)]

Last July, my constituent Caroline decided to take out her civil service pension after 37 years working in the tax office in Shipley. Nine months later and she has still not received a single penny of the tens of thousands of pounds she is entitled to, despite many emails, messages and phone calls. Caroline is at her wits’ end, as are many of my constituents in similar scenarios. Capita initially promised to return to normalcy in February 2026, but the goalposts have been moved to June. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate in Government time on Capita’s mismanagement of the civil service pension scheme?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman raises an issue that has been raised many times during these sessions. As I mentioned earlier in my remarks, one effect of that was that a Minister did come to the House to give a statement on Capita. I am sure that they will continue to do so. If this situation continues, as we return after the King’s Speech, he is certainly making a good case for us to find time to have a debate on this issue.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

In September, Uber intends to roll out driverless taxis on UK roads, after the Government gave permission to companies to put driverless vehicles on our roads. This is causing concern among Uber drivers, who feel they are not being consulted by their employers about the impact it might have on their future employment. My right hon. Friend will recall P&O Ferries sacking its staff without notice and taking on foreign agency staff. There is very little difference with what Uber seems to be doing with its staff over the roll-out of driverless vehicles. May we have a statement from the Department for Transport? We do not want the Government featherbedding the sacking of existing staff in the way that P&O Ferries treated its staff in 2022.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

We certainly do not. I understand my hon. Friend’s concerns and the concerns of Uber drivers. Of course, we would want to see companies consult with their employees and hopefully give them reassurance going forward, but I will take up his concerns directly with Ministers to ensure that we are doing everything we can to get ahead of this particular game.

[Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)]

The Iranian war has caused a huge spike in fuel prices for all drivers, but this is especially true for businesses in Caerfyrddin and rural Wales. Ammanford construction business TRJ has been deeply affected, along with haulage companies such as Tony Powell Transport, which has seen costs increase by £7,000 a week. Transport costs for all Caerfyrddin businesses will inevitably result in higher prices, including for food and essentials, for all our constituents. I appreciate that the 5p cut in fuel duty will continue until October, but can the Leader of the House ask the Chancellor to help businesses by using the additional taxation received through the increased fuel price by further cutting fuel duty?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Lady is right to draw attention to the concerns about the possible economic fallout from the current situation in the middle east. As she points out, we are already taking action. We had already extended the 5p cut in fuel duty until September. We are also working at pace with our International Energy Agency partners on a co-ordinated release of oil stocks to the market, with the UK contributing 13.5 million barrels. The Chancellor and the Energy Secretary have met the petrol retail industry to make clear that drivers must get a fair deal, whether they are haulage drivers or domestic drivers. We need to make sure that competition is kept open and that the competition watchdog is vigilant on price gouging.

As the Chancellor and the Prime Minister have both said, we are keeping the situation under review. We are also keeping under review the cost of red diesel, which I know will be more important in some areas, in particular rural areas, than it might be in others. We have also taken action on heating oil, which again is probably more of a prevalent concern in areas like hers than it is in some urban areas.

To respond to what the hon. Lady said about the money that the Chancellor is meant to be getting in through taxation as a result of rising fuel prices. That is false economics; it does not exist. It may be that the receipts are coming in through one door, but they are going out through another because costs to Government rise, too. We should not try to—I know she is not trying to—kid people that somehow this is a benefit to the Chancellor. The Chancellor does not want this to happen and it is not as straightforward as the hon. Lady has said.

[Liz Twist (Blaydon and Consett) (Lab)]

I recently had the chance to speak to air cadets at 1509 (Blaydon) Squadron, my local air training corps, where I received a good grilling on the job of an MP and on a wide range of issues affecting the cadets. They told me how they are learning practical and social skills, as well as being provided with training and outdoor pursuits by the RAF. Can we have a debate in Government time on how we can continue to build on the work of our cadet services to benefit our young people?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to champion the good work of the cadets and the impact on young people. We are committed to the joint Department for Education and Ministry of Defence cadet expansion programme, complementing our national youth strategy. I encourage my hon. Friend to perhaps apply for an Adjournment debate to hear directly from Ministers about not only the work we are undertaking to support the cadets, but what plans there are for the future.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

For far too long, mobile phone connectivity across Bromsgrove and the villages, Worcestershire and, frankly, the rest of the country has been woeful. I find it shocking that humanity can send a rocket to loop around the moon and back, and yet we cannot get reliable mobile phone signal. This morning, I read in The Times and The Telegraph that Vodafone, Three, O2 and EE are considering rationing mobile phone connectivity in the light of surging energy costs. Will the Leader of the House allow for a debate in Government time on the adequacy of mobile phone connectivity—not just in rural areas, but across the whole country?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

We are all frustrated when there is no connectivity, particularly when travelling, but there is a wider and more important point here, which is the economic cost, particularly in rural areas but also across the country. I am not aware of what those providers are saying, but I will draw the hon. Gentleman’s remarks and concerns to the attention of the relevant Ministers to ensure that they are sighted of this, as I am sure they are. I will get him an update on these matters.

[Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)]

I wish you a splendid St George’s day, Mr Speaker.

My constituent Milly Mulcahy is a wheelchair user who is entirely reliant on a lift maintained by Lancashire county council to enter and leave her home. Since being installed six years ago, this lift has broken down constantly; every time it breaks down, Milly is trapped in her own home. It was completely broken for two months over Christmas, with the county council failing to respond to multiple requests. Engineers have confirmed that the lift will never work reliably and simply needs replacing, but the county council has refused to engage in a long-term solution. This flies in the face of common sense—thousands of pounds have been spent on engineer call-outs with nothing to show for it. Will the Leader of the House agree with me on calling on the Reform leadership at Lancashire county council to stop dodging the issue, do the job properly and give Milly the freedom she deserves?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend raises a very disturbing story, and I wish Milly well. We have heard time and again in these sessions that when Reform is in local government, it overpromises and underdelivers. I strongly encourage Lancashire county council to listen to my hon. Friend’s contribution and to do the right thing by Milly and people across his community and put this right.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Many across the House will have watched “Dirty Business” last month and been shocked not only by the behaviour of the water companies, but by the deliberate deregulation and defunding of the agencies that are there to protect our environment. When Storm Chandra devastated homes in my constituency, particularly those in Sturminster Marshall, the Environment Agency door drops did not arrive until after the flooding had entered my constituents’ homes.

One of the causes of flooding is lack of maintenance of ditches by riparian owners. Even when the agency is able to raise it with owners, it has insufficient funding to take enforcement action, relying instead on neighbourly good will. As our climate changes and we have more frequent and severe flooding, will the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time on the remit and capacity of the Environment Agency to keep us all safe?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The previous Government should never have allowed the water sector to get into this state, with record levels of sewage spills and ageing infrastructure, and this Government are determined to put it right both through legislation and by encouraging and resourcing the Environment Agency. I will give consideration to what the hon. Member says about this matter, and she may wish to draw it directly to the attention of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

I understand the concerns about the Environment Agency when such things happen, but a lot of Environment Agency staff are doing a really good and really tough job, day in and day out, and we should send them our support.

[Carolyn Harris (Neath and Swansea East) (Lab)]

In May 2025, the all-party parliamentary group on beauty and wellbeing, which I chair, launched an inquiry into ultraviolet safety in the UK. Over nine months, we have taken evidence from the industry, academics, clinicians and those with lived experience to understand the dangers of overexposure and what more can be done to improve protection and reduce risks. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking all those who contributed and encouraging Ministers, brands and retailers to read our report very carefully when it is launched next month and to consider our very sensible recommendations?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in thanking all those who contributed to the inquiry, and I thank the members of the APPG for all their work on this vital issue. I join my hon. Friend in inviting all those in the sector to read the report when it is published, and I will draw her remarks directly to the attention of Ministers.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

Yesterday I held a meeting with representatives from Hydrogen UK, a number of whose members have projects planned for my constituency. They expressed concern about the delay in the publication of the Government’s hydrogen strategy. The delay is costing these companies many thousands of pounds and may lead to them withdrawing investments, which would obviously be damaging for the local economy and the ambitions of the Government’s growth agenda. Will the Leader of the House arrange for an early statement from a Minister to announce the strategy to let us get moving with these projects?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise this matter on behalf of businesses in his constituency, and I understand their uncertainty. We are absolutely committed to building a thriving hydrogen sector in the UK through our strategy, as he points out, but I will draw his concerns to the attention of Ministers. If we have the strategy and the energy, we need to get on with it.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

We are tired of lazy stereotypes and assumptions in Slough, which is why we are tackling them head-on with our application to be the 2028 UK town of culture. I am sure the Leader of the House will agree that as a cultural, digital and economic powerhouse, with a young, diverse and talented population, Slough would be the ideal candidate. Does he also agree that, with projects already planned to improve skills, community cohesion and civic pride, the impact of winning this award would be transformational for our town?

[Mr Speaker]

It is up against Chorley, no less.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this to the House, and he is absolutely right. Programmes like the UK town of culture have often been transformative experiences, with the impacts on people and places extending well beyond the title year. I hope to see the same transformation in the winning town.

I have to be diplomatic in wishing all the communities, including Chorley and Slough, well in their quest to be the town of culture. Even if they are not the outright winner, taking part in the process and being a runner-up is a considerable achievement, and it is often a boost to local people.

Before I sit down, Mr Speaker, I also want to mention that North Shields has a very strong case.

[Mr Speaker]

On that basis, I am dead gutted.

[Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)]

After years of Conservative failures to do so, Liberal Democrat councils across Harpenden and Berkhamsted are working hard to secure a local plan for housing. However, the Government’s work on top-down planning, which gives Dacorum an increase of about 40% in housing numbers and St Albans an increase of almost 90%, and the Government’s grey belt proposals are literally giving developers a field day in Harpenden and Berkhamsted—including in Tring, where we see proposed increases of about 40% across the village. Now that the Government are seeing the impact of that policy, will the Leader of the House help us to secure a debate on grey belt—and a visit from the Minister to see those green belt areas, which are supposedly grey belt, right on the Chilterns national landscape?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government are clear that we wish to see brownfield sites prioritised wherever possible, but the reality is that we have ambitious targets for housing because the failure of the previous Government to build sufficient housing has left us with a housing crisis. It is true that local voices should be heard in this process, but it is also true that we need to get on and build some more houses. I will draw the hon. Lady’s question to the attention of the Housing Minister, who is doing his very best in that regard. This issue is raised very often, so, should she wish to seek an Adjournment or Westminster Hall debate, I am sure other Members would want to come along and take part.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

On Monday of this week the former MP for Clydebank and Milngavie, Tony Worthington, sadly passed away. He was the MP for my home town of Clydebank from 1987 until 2005. Over 18 years in this House, he championed many causes, not least the campaign to secure compensation for victims of asbestos-related illness and their families after the collapse of Chester Street Insurance Holdings. He was victorious in that fight. He will be remembered fondly by my constituents, and he remains an inspiration to me. Will the Leader of the House to join me in commemorating Tony Worthington and offering our condolences to his wife Angela, his son Robert, his daughter Jennifer and his three grandchildren?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend and all those in this House in remembering the life and achievements of Tony Worthington. I knew Tony briefly, and I was certainly aware of the extraordinary campaigning he undertook and his success, not least on asbestos. It is not every MP who at the end of their career can claim success in the way that Tony Worthington could. I share the House’s sympathy and send our condolences to Tony’s family at this time. We remember his life, which was a life well lived.

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

I wish you and the whole House a very happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. Following the launch of the local media action plan, will the Leader of the House join me in celebrating local newspapers in my constituency such as the Bridlington Echo, the Bridlington Free Press, the Driffield & Wolds Weekly and the Holderness & Hornsea Gazette, and local radio stations including Bridlington Gold Radio, Great Driffield Radio and This is the Coast? Can we have a debate in Government time on the funding for local radio and for local newspapers, to ensure that that £12 million effectively reaches those brilliant independent outlets, so that they can innovate and attract high-quality journalism?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The Government are certainly keen to see local newspapers and local radio continue, because they are so important to the lives of our communities. I will draw the hon. Gentleman’s remarks to the attention of the relevant Minister; if he wants to hear from the Minister directly about what more we can do with the fund, then he might seek an Adjournment debate.

[Justin Madders (Ellesmere Port and Bromborough) (Lab)]

When the Central England Co-operative announced that it was purchasing the Marquis pub in Great Sutton and the Saffron restaurant in Ellesmere Port, we were delighted that those old buildings were going to be brought back into use as convenience stores. However, five years on since those announcements, I am afraid that both buildings have been left to rot. That is not a good look for our community. We want the Co-op to get on and build the new stores that it has promised. It is vital for our community that we see that investment, to build on our £20 million of Pride in Place funding, but we are at a roadblock, and we cannot get an answer on where things need to go. Could we please have a debate on what other levers we can use to encourage this investment, which we absolutely want to see?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to raise these matters. They must be of deep concern to his constituents, who had their hopes built up but nothing has happened. I hope the Co-op has heard what he has said today, because the answer lies largely in its hands. He is right to point out that we are taking action to help high streets, not least through Pride in Place. Should he seek a meeting with Ministers to see if there are any other levers to pull, as he puts it, I will arrange that.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

Some of the most shocking stories that I heard during the general election campaign on doorsteps throughout North Cornwall were of people pulling out their own teeth because they could not afford the high cost of private dental care. This week, all parties at Cornwall council unanimously passed a Lib Dem motion to tackle the urgent dentistry crisis we face by focusing on prevention, outreach services and workforce shortages. The Lib Dem sponsors, Councillors Rosie Moore and David Garrigan, emphasised urgent action over more talk. If Cornwall council can come together cross-party and act with such urgency, why can’t the Government? Will the Leader of the House please commit to a debate in Government time on fixing the NHS dentistry crisis in rural and coastal communities, like mine in Cornwall?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

The direct answer to the hon. Gentleman is that the Government are seeking to address these matters at pace. We are coming together to ensure, for example, that dental hubs are rolled out where people can see them and the effect can be felt. We have already rolled out 700,000 more urgent dental appointments. We are reforming the dental contract, which is perhaps easy to say and more difficult to do. We have also announced the first sustained expansion of dental training since 2007. Having said that, I hope that in the hon. Gentleman’s local area, by coming together, there is an opportunity to improve access to dentistry. It has been left in a shocking state, but the Government are fully committed to doing something about it.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Rural fly-tipping is a persistent problem across the villages in the South Bedfordshire part of my constituency, including Billington, Eaton Bray and Kensworth. I welcome the Government’s waste crime action plan and the additional £45 million for the environment agency to tackle fly-tippers and the criminal networks behind them. May we have a debate in Government time on the particular impact of fly-tipping in rural villages?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

Our new waste crime action plan sets out a zero-tolerance approach in order to prevent waste crime, pursue the criminals responsible and accelerate clean-up, and I think it has been widely welcomed. Should my hon. Friend seek an Adjournment debate on the scourge of fly-tipping in rural areas, I am sure it would be well attended. If she is not successful, I will certainly see if we can find time in Government time to give her the debate that she asks for.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

My casework team routinely wait between three and six months—sometimes longer—for substantive replies from the Department for Work and Pensions on cases. I am also aware of colleagues experiencing similar delays. Will the Leader of the House advise on the most effective means by which Members can hold the Government to account for these persistent failings?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I understand the frustration that Members sometimes have when they do not receive full replies or the substantive replies that they seek. If the hon. Lady gives me details of that particular case, I will certainly follow them up. She may also know that the Procedure Committee is undertaking an inquiry into parliamentary questions. The situation is a bit more complicated than it seems, because the number of PQs has gone through the roof and there are all sorts of questions as to why that should be the case. Also, although Members are given the opportunity to ask questions and hold Departments to account, there is a question as to whether the rules that we work to and live by are the right ones for the current situation.

[David Baines (St Helens North) (Lab)]

Happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. Alan Clark and a team of volunteers from the CAMRA award-winning pub Haydock Reading Rooms recently completed the West Highland Way, raising thousands of pounds for Clatterbridge hospital and for Ryan Lawrenson, who at just 21 was recently diagnosed with osteosarcoma. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Ryan and his family the very best? Does he also agree that Alan and the team’s voluntary work and community effort show the best of Haydock and the best of England?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I want to reciprocate by wishing my hon. Friend a happy St George’s day. He highlights some of the incredible efforts by Alan Clark and other volunteers from his constituency. As I have said many times before, local volunteers are the golden thread that runs through our constituencies, so I will of course join him in wishing Ryan and his family well, and in thanking the team.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Twenty-four-year-old Eastbournian Chanté Lloyd-Buckingham was tragically found dead in her supported accommodation in the town in 2024, amid grave concerns about the quality of the care that she was—or, indeed, was not—receiving. Scandalously, many private supported accommodation providers are not CQC regulated, so many of them take our money but do not take responsibility. Given that Chanté’s parents, Emma and Karl, secured 70,000 signatures on their e-petition to regulate supported accommodation but did not quite make the 100,000 for a debate, will the Leader of the House consider granting a debate on this issue to honour the memory of Chanté?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am saddened to hear of the tragic case and will certainly give the hon. Gentleman’s request some consideration. I suspect that a cross-departmental approach needs to be taken here, so if he wishes to give me further details, I will draw his concerns to the attention of Ministers; it is important that they see how these things actually play out in local constituencies and how they affect individuals.

[Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)]

The British Standards Institution has supported safety, industrial harmony and best practice in the workplace for 125 years this year. I have seen at first hand the extensive work that it has done in creating the new inclusive personal protective equipment standards, with special mention to Anne Hayes, Sara, Nele and Robbie. Will the Leader of the House support a debate in Government time on these vital standards and join me in wishing the BSI a very happy 125th birthday?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the BSI on 125 years of tireless work. There was a Westminster Hall debate on this very matter recently. I encourage all workplaces and employers to align their work practices with the Government’s suicide prevention strategy, and to consider drawing on BSI standards to help embed suicide prevention in working practices.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

I am proud today to celebrate Warwickshire day with colleagues from across this House, and I thank the Speaker’s Office for arranging an event this morning. It was a real honour to raise the Warwickshire flag on the flagpole here in Parliament.

The Believe in Bedworth board manages the £20 million Pride in Place investment from the Government, and we are holding a St George’s day celebration this Saturday. There will be free activities for children, as well as food vendors and stalls. It will be a great day out for everyone, and I am really looking forward to it. Can I ask the Leader of the House if the Government will make time for a debate on the importance of community events like this for cohesion in our areas and to celebrate days like St George’s day and Warwickshire day?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I join my hon. Friend in recognising Warwickshire day. As I have said previously, community volunteers and events like the one she describes are at the heart of making our local communities the fantastic places they are. This sounds like a great way to celebrate St George’s day. Should she seek a Westminster Hall debate on the issues she raises, then I hope she is successful. If not, then I will give consideration to her request for a debate in Government time.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

One of my constituents was diagnosed with breast cancer and subsequently received universal credit and incapacity benefit, but the DWP then stopped these payments due to some confusion over a critical illness cover policy. The facts around it were incorrect. Despite her best efforts and despite my team’s recent best efforts, we have been unable to get a hearing from a DWP caseworker for a mandatory reconsideration claim. That was over six months ago. In the meantime, she has now discovered that her cancer is terminal. Please can we have a debate in Government time on DWP delays and their impact on the critically ill?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I am sorry to hear about the case that my hon. Friend raises. It must be a very difficult time for his constituent and her family. I am sure that I speak for the whole House when I extend my deepest sympathies and best wishes to her. If my hon. Friend would like to give me the details after Question Time, I will ensure that he gets a response from the relevant Minister.

[Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)]

Further to the concerns raised by the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers), will the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero make a statement on the delayed hydrogen strategy refresh? Projects in my constituency, including the Lhyfe Wallsend development, are ready to move forward but face growing uncertainty. Given the importance of hydrogen for jobs and energy security, and in supporting UK industry, will the Government provide clarity on when the strategy will be published and how it will support investment in the north-east and other regions?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is a true champion of businesses not just in her constituency and along the river that we share, but across our region. I pay tribute to her for that work, for which she is widely respected. As I have said, we are committed to building a thriving hydrogen sector in the UK, but we have not been able to move as quickly as possible. We want to renew the hydrogen strategy and see it at work, but we must also give industry the clarity it needs. I hope that work will be completed as soon as possible. Should she wish to make her case to a Minister, I will make the case for a meeting with her and the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers).

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

May I wish you a happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker?

Reform-run Lancashire county council, which borders my Bolton West constituency, has threatened residents with care home closures, put gritting depots on the chopping block and attempted to withhold money given by this Labour Government to support local nurseries. With vital local elections on Thursday 7 May, does the Leader of the House agree that my constituents will look askance at the chaos over the border in Reform-run Lancashire, listen to their neighbours and conclude that once voters have had a taste of Reform in power, they do not go back for seconds?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the performance—or, should I say, the lack of performance —of Reform councils. We have heard time and again in business questions that when Reform is in local government, it over-promises and under-delivers. There is a real political choice in the coming local elections. He makes a strong case for learning from the example of what it is like to live under a Reform council, and for the benefits of voting Labour.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

The 14 to 18-year-olds who study at university technical colleges are three or four times more likely than the national average to secure an apprenticeship. The UTC in Derby is oversubscribed—it got 450 applications for just 100 places —and demand outstrips the number of places in other UTCs too. Many of our industries are concerned about skills shortages, so might we have a debate on how to expand UTC provision, or enable UTCs to team up with other schools, so that more young people can benefit from the skills that UTCs teach and from those strong routes into apprenticeships?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend raises an important matter. We recently announced 19 new technical excellence colleges in England, on top of the 10 confirmed for the construction sector last year. We are expanding the youth guarantee to create further opportunities for young people. However, as she points out, we need to go further and we are committed to doing so. I encourage her to apply for a Westminster Hall debate to explore how we can expand the opportunity to study at university technical colleges. That is, as she points out, so important for our young people and local communities.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

Friday 8 May is a significant day: the country will celebrate the 100th birthday of our national treasure, Sir David Attenborough. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] He is an icon of broadcasting, a steadfast champion of the natural world, and an educator who has brought science and all corners of our world into the homes of millions of people. His contribution to our national life is without equal. He remains the only individual to have received BAFTA awards across black and white, colour, high definition, 3D and 4K broadcasting, and one of the very few people to have been knighted twice. On the off-chance that these are the last business questions before Sir David’s birthday, will the Leader of the House join me in wishing him a very happy birthday, and will he support a debate in Government time on the immense contribution that Sir David has made to our nation and on the merits of establishing a permanent public monument to honour it?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that matter. As I said previously, Sir David Attenborough has been instrumental in teaching generations about the importance of the natural world. I am sure that the whole House will join me in celebrating the monumental occasion of Sir David’s 100th birthday, and let us give some thought across the House to how best we can mark that.

[Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)]

In South East Cornwall we are rightly very proud of Cornwall Air Ambulance, which, along with more than 20 air ambulance charities across the UK, carries out vital lifesaving work, responding to over 130 missions daily and attending some of the most serious incidents, from road traffic collisions to cardiac arrests and major trauma. Cornwall Air Ambulance has raised concerns with me about emergency planning, particularly around fuel resilience and rising costs. Will the Leader of the House support me in securing a meeting with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that Cornwall Air Ambulance and other air ambulance charities are fully included in national emergency and prioritisation planning, so that they can continue to deliver critical care without disruption?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the important work of the Cornwall Air Ambulance charity and wholeheartedly join her in commending the vital work of the volunteers who keep these essential services in the sky. I will certainly take up her concerns with my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary to seek the meeting that she wants, but because it may not simply be a matter for the Department of Health and Social Care, let us give some consideration to how else we can resolve this matter at a ministerial level.

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

A very happy St George’s day to you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Erewash Voluntary Action underpins dozens of community groups in Erewash, providing governance, safeguarding and volunteer support. Councils for voluntary service like EVA need infrastructure investment to provide support to frontline groups and volunteers. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating EVA on securing more than £400,000 in funding from the National Lottery Community Fund and consider finding time for us to debate the importance of locally rooted voluntary sector infrastructure organisations like the fantastic Erewash Voluntary Action?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to champion the work of the brilliant community groups in his constituency, and I join him in congratulating Erewash Voluntary Action on securing its funding and continuing to support community engagement. There has been a theme this morning, and indeed in other sessions, about the importance of community volunteers, so I will certainly give some thought to his suggestion that we should find a way of discussing these matters further.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

I recently walked around Ball Green with Sharon Rospendowski, a local champion who helps to keep the fabric of her community together. Residents in Ball Green and places like Norton share a common concern: they have lost vital services over the years, including Sure Start centres, youth clubs, post offices and local policing—services that kept our communities secure and connected. Despite that, it is people like Sharon who step forward to fight for their communities. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on restoring neighbourhood services and outline how this Government will ensure that places like Norton and Ball Green get the investment they deserve, so that they can rebuild?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise that matter. As I have said many times, these organisations are the golden thread that runs through our communities. Our social cohesion plan sets out our commitment to bring communities together and restore pride in them, and I encourage him to apply for an Adjournment debate so that he can make his case in more detail.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

Happy Warwickshire day, and happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. This week also marks an event that is incredibly important to me: Allergy Awareness Week. On Monday I was proud to launch the national allergy strategy with more than 150 clinicians, researchers, patients, families and charities. With more than 21 million people in the UK suffering from allergic diseases, does my right hon. Friend agree that time should be given in this House to debate allergy care, the strategy and how we can improve outcomes for those who suffer?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend and everyone who worked to develop the national allergy strategy. Over the coming months the Government will thoroughly review all of the strategy’s recommendations, and carefully consider the feasibility and viability of their implementation. I encourage my hon. Friend to apply for a Westminster Hall debate so that those matters can be discussed in more detail.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

St George’s day is an appropriate time to ask my right hon. Friend about progress in the implementation of the veterans covenant across the public sector. Thanet has a significant number of veterans who, despite the commitment to the ambitions of the covenant by the Government, still struggle to access public services in a way that meets their needs. This is of course a cross-departmental matter, so I ask him to raise the issue with colleagues across Government to see if and when we could have a progress report.

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend is right to raise veterans’ issues and I thank her for doing so. As she knows, Op Valour is our UK-wide veterans’ support system, providing £50 million in funding to better connect charities and local and national services. I will ensure that she gets a response from the Minister for Veterans and People and the update on the issues that she seeks.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

For over two years, residents on the edge of Carlisle, in Rockcliffe, Harker and Cargo, have been waging an excellent campaign against the building of a gasification plant—a campaign for which they have my full support. Cumberland council rightly refused the application, but the applicant, who has much deeper pockets than local residents, is taking the issue to appeal. My community is not the only one fighting incinerator plans, so will the Leader of the House arrange for a ministerial statement on the Government’s current position on the building of new incinerators?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this matter to the House. The Government have set up new rules so that waste incinerators will receive planning approval only if they meet strict new local environmental conditions. I know that this is a matter of concern not only to my hon. Friend’s constituents but to others, and I will draw it to the attention of Ministers.

[Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)]

My constituent Kevin has to travel between Redditch, Gloucester and Cheltenham for chemotherapy and operations following a diagnosis of oesophageal cancer. He has been told that he does not qualify for hospital transport as he is not in a wheelchair or using oxygen, but in reality Kevin is in no fit state to drive himself to appointments over an hour away from his home. Can I ask the Leader of the House for a debate in Government time to discuss how integrated care boards and the Department of Health and Social Care can work together to ensure that non-emergency patient transport services take a holistic approach to granting transport for deeply unwell patients to get them to their critical appointments?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

My hon. Friend raises a serious matter. The Government recognise that the cost of travel should not be a barrier to treatment, and the non-emergency patient transport scheme guidance is determined by ICBs and their partners, including local ambulance trusts. I will make sure that the relevant Minister is aware of this case and see what action may be taken.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Type 1 diabetes with disordered eating, or T1DE for short, is a lethal combination of two conditions, but pilot sites set up to trial bespoke NHS services that bring specialists from both fields together have closed down due to funding coming to an end, including two earlier this month. The all-party parliamentary group on diabetes wrote to the DHSC about that in February but has not received a reply. Will the Leader of the House chase a response and ask the public health Minister to make a statement on the matter so that we can debate support for that vulnerable group of patients?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this incredibly important matter. NHS England previously extended the initial two-year funding term and is providing data to ICBs to support decisions about treatment and care, but I will of course reach out to the relevant Minister to ensure that those responses are issued as a matter of priority.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

May I ask the Leader of the House to welcome the new owners of Harlow Town football club to their role after a period of uncertainty, when the club went into administration. As I know he is a fan of football teams that play in red and white, will he join me in wishing Harlow Town football club, often known as the non-league Man City, a successful season next year?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly join my hon. Friend in welcoming the new owners of Harlow Town. I am sure that is welcome news to supporters, because local football clubs are of such importance to our local communities, and I wish them all the best for the new season. May I also wish my hon. Friend all the best for Sunday, when he will be running the London marathon, raising funds for a local hospice?

With the House’s indulgence, Madam Deputy Speaker, may I correct the record? In answer to the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire), I said that we have already rolled out 700,000 emergency dental appointments. What I should have said is that we have started rolling out 700,000 emergency dental appointments. The work began this month. I want to ensure that when I misspeak, I put the record right at the earliest opportunity.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I thank the Leader of the House for that.

Modernisation Committee Report: Access to the House of Commons

Alan Campbell Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Leader of the House of Commons (Sir Alan Campbell)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the First Report of the Modernisation Committee, Access to the House of Commons and its Procedures, HC 755, and the House Administration response, HC 1726.

It is a pleasure to open this debate today, both in my capacity as Leader of the House of Commons and as Chair of the Modernisation Committee. I begin by extending the Committee’s thanks to all those who provided evidence. The Committee heard directly from Members of this House and the other place, as well as from members of staff, experts and academics. I thank former and current Committee members for their work on this inquiry. In particular, I thank my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell).

The Modernisation Committee embarked on this inquiry following a consultation that it held in autumn 2024, when it heard the views of hundreds of members of the parliamentary community about what it should prioritise. The resounding call was to consider the accessibility of the House—both physical accessibility of the parliamentary estate, and the accessibility of procedures and conventions in the Chamber, including the information that the House provides to the public about our work.

We all recognise that the Palace of Westminster is an iconic building and part of a UNESCO world heritage site, but that comes with challenges for accessibility. The Committee received sobering evidence about the negative impact that these challenges can have on Members, staff and visitors. They include inaccessible doors, toilets, lifts, lighting and signage, which impact on the daily lives of people trying to use the estate. The Committee has been encouraged by the House Administration’s efforts to address some of these issues, including before the inquiry concluded, but the tasks before it remain substantial.

To assist the House Administration, the Committee recommended that an external accessibility advisory group be established, so that the Administration can call upon its expertise when needed. I am pleased that the House of Commons Commission is undertaking work to set up that group. A key issue that the Committee identified was the lack of progress on issues raised in accessibility audits of the estate. The Committee therefore recommended that the House Administration publish a summary of progress against accessibility audit recommendations, and I am pleased that the House Administration’s progress will now be a regular feature of business plans and tracked throughout the year.

An overarching challenge for the House Administration is the culture around accessibility. The Committee concluded that although the aspiration of the Administration is to provide accessible services, there is a lack of central responsibility or clear lines of accountability to deliver it. The Committee believes that this must be addressed by introducing better training and practical guidance for staff, specific to their area of responsibility.

The Committee also recommended that the House Administration revise its strategic priorities to make it explicit, as part of the value of being inclusive, that accessibility is a priority for the organisation, alongside security and safety. I am pleased that the next three-year strategy for the House Administration includes an explicit commitment to improve accessibility.

I turn now to the House of Commons procedures and processes. Many of the procedures and processes that govern our proceedings have been in place for a long time, for very good reason. We are grateful to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and to Mr Speaker and the other Deputy Speakers, for the care that you take in assisting Members who have access needs. To ensure that this support is clearly advertised to all Members, the Committee recommended that references to the routes available to MPs who require reasonable adjustments be made in the guidance for Members. The report also explored issues relating to seating in the Chamber and to Divisions, and made a series of recommendations. Work is currently under way to consider how deferred Divisions might be made more accessible, and the potential introduction of a reasonable adjustment card scheme for MPs who require certain seats for access reasons.

The final section of the report focused on communication. Ensuring that we communicate in an accessible way is key to ensuring that our constituents can stay informed about what happens here. That includes thinking about how we improve accessibility for visitors in the Public Gallery, and leading by example in ensuring that the documents we produce are accessible to the largest possible number of people. I know that the Administration Committee and the House Administration are considering what more can be done in these areas.

The Modernisation Committee received the House Administration’s response to our report, published on 19 March, which assured us that it would make progress on our recommendations. Today I look forward to hearing from Members across the House on their experiences. The Committee will draw on these when we hear about further progress from the House’s senior leadership team later this year.

Accessibility should never be an afterthought. It is a core part of what we do, and I commend this motion to the House.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I thank all Members for their contributions to today’s debate. I hope to take a little bit of time responding to them, because although this has been a relatively short debate, it has been a very useful one.

Let me first comment on the shadow Leader of the House’s speech. I thank him for his remarks and the way that he made them. It is abundantly evident from the time that we have worked together that he cares deeply about this place, as do I, as he knows. We are, to some extent, adversaries in a system that is adversarial; but at heart, we share a deep respect and love for this place, not least because, as he knows, we are both passing through. It was here before we got here, and it will be here after we leave.

That means that we work well on the Committee. What has struck me, in the relatively short time that I chaired the Committee, is that it works in a cross-party way; in fact, it works in a non-party way. Given the varied experience and the varied party labels of people around the room, it is amazing how often we actually understand the problem, analyse it and get to the right conclusion. That is not as rare in this place as people think; indeed, it is why it works very well indeed.

I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman’s concern that dumbing down can be a problem if we are not careful. This is not about dumbing down; it is about making this place more accessible, but also about how we do things. Where I do not agree with him, as he knows, is on restoration and renewal; on that, we are on different sides. However, as has been pointed out, today’s short debate is about now. It is about how we conduct ourselves now and for the foreseeable future, because even if the House takes a particular view on R and R and moves forward, it will still be quite a long time before some of the issues come to fruition. I believe that accessibility must be at the core of what we are doing now, but it must also be at the core of what happens after a decision is made on R and R.

Let me turn to the excellent speech by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis). I commend him on the excellent work that he does on his all-party groups, which I know comes from his deep personal interest in these matters, his experience and his commitment. The personal experience of these issues that he brings to this debate is important; it is abundantly clear that instead of observing these things from a distance and seeing them in our own way, we should learn from a position of experience. I very much value his contribution to modernisation. He is a strong advocate; if he has a strong view, he will voice it, and I absolutely commend him for that.

The issues with booking that my hon. Friend spoke about are not acceptable. I give him a commitment that we will look into that and see what more can be done. The story of what happened at that recent event illustrates the problem, and shows how important this investigation and report are. However—I will return to this point in my closing remarks—this is a work in progress. The report is a step along the way, not the end point.

Like other Members, my hon. Friend paid tribute to the work of our hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball). As I know from personal experience, on matters of policy and everything else, she is a very strong advocate. I value her contribution and her knowledge on these matters very much indeed.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford raised the issue of changing places and toilet facilities and, interestingly, pointed to the National Portrait Gallery. I have found out that, as Leader of the House, I am a trustee of the National Portrait Gallery— I have more than found it out; I have actually participated in the trustee role, to some extent. The next time I visit, I will once again remind them that there is a portrait of a former Member for Tynemouth—Dame Irene Ward, who was also the longest-serving woman MP—in the gallery, and I recently surpassed the length of time that she served in that seat. I am just letting them know that there is a certain logical conclusion that follows, but so far, they have not taken the hint—although I will not be wearing the hat that she is wearing in her photograph. [Interruption.] Well, it will be very popular.

Let me turn to the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain), the Lib Dem spokesperson, who drew on her experience of this period of the Session, when there is ping-pong and Lords amendments. It is a difficult course that we have to navigate. I do not want to stress this too much, but I have been around quite a long time, and I can assure hon. Members that every time we get to Lords amendments, I have to go to the Clerks and ask whether I am right in what I think. I am not going to say that every time I navigate this, I get a different answer, but it is notoriously difficult. However, she is right; there are things that we should be able to do to inform Members of where we have got to.

I agree with the hon. Lady’s remarks about thinking about how and why we do things, because it is really important—other Members also picked this up—that the way we conduct our affairs in this place evolves, although we should also be careful about how that happens. We need to be—if hon. Members do not mind me saying so on this occasion—conservative with a small c. There should be a good reason before we change things. I fear that she might be correct, in that some of the changes will not be quick, but that does not mean— I know that she accepts this—that we should not get on with them. We do get on with them; we knock down the barriers and, where we can, quicken things up.

The hon. Lady has mentioned on a number of occasions that she is running the London marathon. I commend her for that, and for her hard sell on sponsorship. I would encourage people to run it; most of us, not least me, will not be doing that, but she is, and that is great. She talked about how the Modernisation Committee works. It is right that we share a space with other Committees, but they bring an expertise to what we do. I think that works quite well, because we can and do work effectively with other Committees.

The hon. Lady is absolutely right about the impact of covid, which had a massive effect on the way that this place works. We have spent a great deal of time trying to get back some of the things that were lost during covid—and they were lost. It was not just the way that this place conducts its votes that changed; it was, for example, the way that speeches were made. When most people, apart from the Whips, vacated this place and we moved to virtual speeches, I for one expected that nobody would want to speak. In fact, everybody wanted to speak, because they were speaking from their kitchen and making a three-minute speech. As a result, and with all due respect to new Members, there are now far more people trying to get in on debates, and far more time limits. It is now quite unusual to listen to a speech like this, that lasts more than three minutes. There were lasting effects from that time. However, there are lessons here, not just on this issue, but on other things we do. I would say to the hon. Lady that we are not going back to what we regarded as normal. We need to move forward and make things better.

I also endorse what the hon. Lady said about the great job that the education team does, particularly with younger children, and the daunting experience of trying to explain to them how this place works. I had that experience when children from Marine Park first school came down recently. Before I spoke to them, they had been in St James’s Park, having their packed lunch. I expected the first question to be, “Have you ever met the King?”, or “How much do you get paid?,” but it was, “Have you ever had your sandwich stolen by a duck?”, which brought politics down to a different level. I had not, actually, but unfortunately the child had, and she clearly remembered it.

Turning to my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince), I agree with his appreciation of the work of the previous Member for Harlow. We did not agree along political lines, but I learned a great deal from him; he was an excellent Member of Parliament.

I also agree with my hon. Friend about accessibility for all. It is not just about making this place accessible but making politics accessible. It is also not just about the people who are here now, who often had a greater struggle than some of us to get here, but the people in future who might want to get here but think that there are literally physical barriers in their way. Everybody has the right to get here, or at least to aspire to—it is up to the electorate to decide whether they are coming or not.

My hon. Friend also made an interesting point about Portcullis House. To some of us, Portcullis House is very new, yet it was the very place that was identified as being inaccessible. This is a battle that will continue over a long period of time. I echo the point that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) made that procedure is important, and the history of this place is important. It is quite interesting what happens when new Members turn up—I know because I was one once. We think that things are going to change rapidly and that the House is going to change, but when we settle in a bit we realise why we do what we do. That is why we need to proceed at speed with some of these changes, but—if it is not the opposite—we also need to proceed with a degree of caution.

Turning to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice), I look forward to his contribution when the debate on R and R comes around. I think he thought that that is what this debate was going to be about. I cannot tell him when it will be, but there will be a debate. To some extent it has already been postponed, but that has been done for the right reason. He and I are on opposite sides on this, but I want Members to have absorbed the report. It is a big, far-reaching and powerful report, and I want Members to have the time for it to sink in.

I am very conscious that the situation is going to be brought into greater focus in the difficult international and economic situation we are living through. Considerations about how we spend taxpayers’ money will come into greater focus, so it is absolutely right that the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office are looking at this. It is right that we get reports from them and are able to see in a more authoritative way—it is their job to do this—whether the proposals on the table are ones that we want to back or change. I can say to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness and the House two things: first, there will be a debate, and, secondly, Members in this place and in the Lords will make the decision on this. It will not be a decision taken behind closed doors.

[Jesse Norman]

The Leader of the House may not have been in his place, but I suggested that it might be possible to have two debates—a digestive debate and then a debate with a decision. Even if one of those is a Backbench debate, would that be something that he would support?

[Sir Alan Campbell]

I certainly support people having their say and being informed by debates. I will give it some thought; I am not rejecting it out of hand. But there will be a moment and there will be a motion, and then we will have to decide. As I say, I will be on a different side because, going back to what I have said about this remarkable place, this is an iconic building. It is part of a UNESCO world heritage site. Despite how legalistic the terms are, it is not owned by the Government but by the nation.

People will look at the numbers, and the numbers are eye-watering—I give them that—and the timescale is eye-watering too, but we will not save any money by delaying the vote to decide to either get on with it or not. Time and again when people were asked, they said that they want to see this place survive. It is the crucible of their politics. They want to be able to access it safely, and currently it is not safe in many ways. We are going to have to address this, but I give the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness and the House my word that we will have a vote at some point in time.

Let me turn to the contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme. I do remember the event that he talked about. I am sorry that we were not able to find a way through that situation. He raised the different aspects of why he felt that he was in that situation, and I do think that we need to go away and reflect on that. The proxy system is evolving, but we should take away examples and see whether we need to make some changes.

This is not an excuse for what happened, but it was a set of unusual circumstances in the sense that it was not just a private Member’s Bill but a hotly contested private Member’s Bill. People felt personally committed to it, and I remember a huge number of emails about. There was also an expectation that people would be here. Therefore, the thing that we can do—to decide not to be here and not to vote—was not really an option for many people. When it came to trying to get someone to pair or finding some other way, I could not find a way through it at that time.

Briefly, I want to say that this is not just about changing a system—for example, proxy voting, which I would be open to looking at, and I think the Modernisation Committee would be too. I am a great advocate of the usual channels. I am a great advocate of the bit that people think is very suspicious and that makes them wonder why on earth we have such a system. Actually, it makes this place work. It is the oil that makes the engine of this place work. There are things that can be done through the usual channels that are never seen but that make life better for people—for MPs.

I will not go into the realm of the divisive politics that we have just lived through, but I will say that it is not just about covid. Covid is one part of it, but I have lived through recent times where politics has been more divisive. Therefore, it has been more difficult to get Opposition parties to accept the Government position, and the Government are finding it difficult to accept the perspective of the Opposition parties. I have to say, if this place is going to work better, we have to do it better. That is not to say that we have to resurrect the usual channels as it always was, but we have to find ways of better working, and that includes—I am not ashamed to say this—the personal relationships that make the usual channels work. That is certainly my approach, and it will continue to be so as long as I have the opportunity to contribute.

My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) was right to say that there was a huge turnover at the general election. In fact, it was said to me that 80% of Members now have less than seven years’ experience. Even when there was a massive change in 1997 and, indeed, 2010, it was not on that scale. The effect is that we have lost some of the institutional memory of this place, and that, as far as I am concerned, is a deficit.

On the other hand, we have a great number of new MPs with varied backgrounds, with all sorts of experiences, and also with varied needs. That is good, because we need to keep moving through that generational change. There is always a bit of a price to pay, but there is always an advantage to getting there as well. It is important that we take that into account. There are solutions to many of the issues that have been raised, but as I say, this report is not the end of the story. We will continue to work on this.

I understand the points that have been made about lots of votes, the time it takes and how exhausting it can be—and that is not to trivialise the experience of people who have additional needs. But going back to what I just said about the usual channels, I cannot remember a time when we had as many votes. When it comes to the responsibility of this place and the relationship between us and the other place, yes, they have every right to send lots back, and we have every right to kick it back too, but at some point they have to start giving something and the Government have to start giving something too. It is how Parliament works. It is how democracy works.

We do not have to have as many votes in this place as we do. They do not have as many votes down the corridor as we do here on a day-to-day basis. We do not have to have a vote at the end of Second Reading. Even if Members do not agree with a Bill, they do not have to vote against it on Second Reading. They can vote it down on Third Reading. The point of listening and making a speech against a Bill on Second Reading is that it will go to Committee, where changes can be made. If hon. Members do not like it, they can have a go on Report, and if they still do not like it they can vote it down on Third Reading. We spend a great deal of time on Divisions when we pretty well know what the results will be in most of them. [Interruption.] I am wandering a bit now, I can see that, but these are all issues where there are different solutions from those that might appear obvious. However, I will take that away and think about it.

My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich also made an important point about gender. Long may she continue to do so, because that is very important indeed.

We clearly have a long way to go on modernisation. We have seen some encouraging progress, and the report is part of that. We will continue to monitor all sorts of issues, including accessibility. I look forward to working in a collegiate way with colleagues to make progress and to make this an even greater place to work and for visitors to visit. I thank the House authorities for their ongoing work and commend the motion to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the First Report of the Modernisation Committee, Access to the House of Commons and its Procedures, HC 755, and the House Administration response, HC 1726.

[Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. On Tuesday evening, in the midst of a succession of votes, the technology supporting the world’s oldest continuous Parliament failed. I thank the Clerks and support staff for their speedy response and the quick transition to the old paper system, and the Whips for the effective communication. The Microsoft technology that runs our electronic voting system did not communicate effectively and displayed the message, “Cannot connect to essential module” or something similar. Despite successive reboots and the window of doom, that was all we could get out of it.

Madam Deputy Speaker, can we expect a report on the reasons for the failure, whether Microsoft provided speedy and appropriate support, how resilient the technology is and whether other providers are available? The failure was time consuming for Members, but more importantly it reduced confidence in the democratic process.