Social Housing Local Connection Test Exemptions

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Thursday 19th June 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

In his conference speech on 24 September 2024, the Prime Minister set out this Government’s commitment to supporting the most vulnerable to access social housing.

To support the delivery of that commitment, I have today laid regulations to exempt certain victims of domestic abuse and young care leavers from any local connection tests for social housing applied by local councils in England in order to facilitate their access to social housing.

Victims of domestic abuse and young care leavers often have to leave their local area for their own safety or to receive suitable support and therefore struggle to meet local connection tests in places where they would best be able build a safe and stable life. We know that most councils use the flexibilities available to them to exempt care leavers and victims of domestic abuse from local connection tests, but we must ensure that these exemptions are consistently applied.

The regulations laid today will ensure that this potential barrier will be removed and that they will no longer need to meet a local connection test for social housing. The regulations will come into force on 10 July.

Statutory guidance will be updated to reflect these changes. This includes specific guidance on improving access to social housing for victims of domestic abuse to ensure that victims can rebuild their lives away from abuse and harm. Statutory guidance will also be updated to ensure that councils are giving appropriate priority for care leavers who wish to stay in the area where they were placed.

These regulations follow those made in December, which exempted all former members of the regular armed forces from any local connection test for social housing, regardless of when they last served.

The Government are committed to supporting vulnerable groups and veterans to access social housing more generally by increasing the supply of social and affordable homes to better meet demand. Over the past 11 months, we have taken decisive steps to prioritise investment in social and affordable housing. At the spending review, the Government confirmed £39 billion for a successor to the affordable homes programme over 10 years of starts from 2026-27 to 2035-36—the biggest boost to social and affordable housing investment in a generation.

[HCWS721]

Oral Answers to Questions

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Wednesday 18th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Deputy Prime Minister (Angela Rayner)]

I have been asked to reply, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has been attending the G7 summit in Canada. In an era of global instability, we are working with our partners to urge de-escalation in the middle east, to put pressure on Russia to agree to a ceasefire, and to deliver security renewal for the British people.

The Air India plane crash last week was devastating. Our thoughts and condolences are with everyone affected by this awful incident, and we are working closely with the Indian authorities to support those in need.

Nine years ago, we lost our beloved friend and colleague Jo Cox, who was a beacon of positivity and courage. Her legacy lives on. I must take this opportunity to also remember Sir David Amess, who is much missed by the whole House.

This Sunday marks Windrush Day. We celebrate the extraordinary contribution of the Windrush generation and their descendants to our country.

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Adrian Ramsay]

Given the strong consensus across this House on the importance of de-escalation of the deeply worrying conflict between Israel and Iran, does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that this House’s actions must match its words? Will she therefore give a commitment that before any further military support is given to the Israeli Government, whether it be the deployment of RAF jets or armed forces, her Government will first give MPs in this House a free vote on the matter?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The situation in the middle east is fast-moving and deeply concerning, and there is clear potential for a significant and rapid worsening of the situation. In every step we take, we will always be guided by the safety of British nationals and the UK national interest. That is why we have deployed jets to the region, so that contingency support is in place for our armed forces personnel, and it is why we are asking British nationals to register their presence. We will keep all advice under review.

[Olivia Bailey (Reading West and Mid Berkshire) (Lab)]

Q2.   Too many of my constituents are stuck in unsuitable housing, and after 14 years of inaction from the Conservatives, local families are being split up because there are not enough affordable homes. I welcome this Government’s plans to turbocharge the delivery of social and affordable housing, including through the new national housing bank. I ask the Deputy Prime Minister to confirm that this Government will finally give my constituents the security that they deserve.

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right to talk about the 14 years of failure by the Conservatives. Labour is turning the tide on the housing crisis, and I am proud to announce today our commitment to establishing a new publicly owned national housing bank, backed by £16 billion of new finance. This includes £2.5 billion in low-interest loans for social housing, to help achieve the biggest uplift to social and affordable housing in a generation.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Home Secretary.

[Chris Philp (Croydon South) (Con)]

I associate myself with the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks about the tragic air crash in India, and of course about our dear colleagues Jo Cox and Sir David Amess. I also join her in calling for de-escalation between Israel and Iran, while noting that everything possible must be done to stop Iran getting a nuclear weapon.

Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition and I met survivors of the rape gang scandal and their family members. Fiona, Teresa, Lucia and Marlon told us how authorities deliberately covered up the systematic rape of young girls, and some boys, by gangs of predominantly Pakistani-heritage men. They covered it up because they cared more about so-called community relations than protecting vulnerable girls. That is disgusting.

The survivors told us that they will only have confidence in an inquiry if it is independently led, has full statutory powers, and covers all 50 towns affected, including Bradford. They will also only have confidence in it if those who covered this up are prosecuted, foreign perpetrators are all deported, survivors are closely involved, and it is set up before the summer recess. Can the Deputy Prime Minister give the survivors and their families those assurances?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

First, I thank the shadow Home Secretary for his tone, and for putting the survivors and victims at the heart of his question. It is absolutely right that we all look at what has happened over the last couple of decades, and at the countless reports that we have had, and look to implement them. He is right to talk about the confidence that people must have in the independent inquiry. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary spoke about that earlier this week in relation to Baroness Casey’s report, which we will take forward at speed. The inquiry will be independent, and it will have statutory powers. We will also implement the Jay report, which he will have known about, as the Minister in charge at the time. We will get on with taking action. I hope Conservative Members will adopt his tone, so that we can make sure that the whole House puts victims first, and that we all work together to get to the bottom of this.

[Chris Philp]

It is vital that scandals like this are never again covered up because of the racial background of perpetrators. Baroness Casey’s report said, to use her words, that people who downplay the ethnic dimension are letting victims down, so I have to raise the matter of the language that the Prime Minister used in January, when I am afraid to say he smeared campaigners as jumping on a “far-right bandwagon” simply for calling for the very inquiry that he has now been forced to set up. Standing up for rape victims is not far-right. Will the Deputy Prime Minister apologise for what the Prime Minister said?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The Prime Minister did not just raise issues; he has acted on them. He brought the first prosecutions against grooming gangs, and called for action to address ethnicity issues in 2012. The right hon. Member will know that the data that the previous Government collected was inaccurate and not complete. Baroness Casey recognised this, and it is the subject of one of the recommendations that we will take forward. The Prime Minister made those comments specifically about Tory Ministers who sat for years in Government and did absolutely nothing about this scandal.

[Chris Philp]

Smearing campaigners who stand up for rape victims as being “far-right” is completely unacceptable, and the Prime Minister should never have said that. I commend his predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), for the grooming gangs taskforce that he set up, which led to 550 arrests in its first year. Baroness Casey’s report also said that a significant number of rape gang perpetrators were non-UK nationals or asylum seekers, many of whom entered the country illegally. We also know that most illegal immigrants crossing the channel are young men, contrary to what the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said last week. Does the Deputy Prime Minister now accept that the small boats crisis is one of public safety, as well as a border crisis?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

This is a very serious issue, and more needs to be done. Let me update the House. Working with our allies, we have carried out a series of major arrests to tackle the smuggling gangs behind this vile trade. In the past month, a ringleader who has smuggled almost 4,000 migrants has been jailed for 25 years. We can go further thanks to the law-enforcement agreements we have struck with Germany, Italy, Serbia and the Balkan states. That is in stark contrast to the right hon. Gentleman, who was the man at the heart of the Home Office when immigration soared, we lost control of our borders, and we spent £700 million of taxpayers’ money on persuading just four volunteers to be removed to Rwanda. I take no lectures from him.

[Chris Philp]

If she wants to find out who has lost control of our borders, I suggest that she looks to her immediate right, because ever since the Home Secretary scrapped the Rwanda deterrent before it even started, illegal immigration across the channel has gone up by 30%. So far, 2025 has been the worst year in history for illegal immigrants crossing the channel. That is on her watch; that is down to her Government.

The Prime Minister is planning crisis talks with President Macron, and is finally admitting that the situation is, in his words, “deteriorating”. The Government’s laughable plan to smash the gangs lies in tatters. Will the Deputy Prime Minister at last accept that we need a removals deterrent, so that every single illegal immigrant who arrives on these shores is immediately removed? Will she commit to that—yes or no?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

If the Conservatives want to argue that the 40,000 arrivals since July ’24 are down to the scrapping of the Rwanda scheme, they need to explain why there were more than 43,000 arrivals in the same period starting in July ’22, when the Rwanda agreement was in place. It is absolute rubbish. They lost control of our borders; we are getting control of our borders. The right hon. Gentleman needs to apologise.

[Chris Philp]

I do not see how the Deputy Prime Minister has the brass neck to claim that she has the situation under control when the numbers crossing the channel this year are the highest in history. She asked about the Rwanda deterrent. She was obviously not listening to what I said earlier. The Rwanda scheme never started; indeed, illegal immigrants in Calais—[Interruption.]

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Philp]

The Rwanda scheme never started. Illegal immigrants in Calais said before the election how much they wanted the Prime Minister to get elected because he would help them to get here. When Australia started a similar scheme about 10 years ago, it worked within a few months.

As a consequence of the Government losing control, they now accommodate in asylum hotels and flats growing numbers of illegal immigrants, many of whom crossed the channel. The Home Office’s suppliers are actively offering above-market deals to landlords to get hold of their properties for use by illegal immigrants. In the meantime, hard-pressed young people here are unable to rent or buy. Why do this Government prioritise housing for illegal immigrants above housing for our young people?

[Angela Rayner]

Again, I gently say to the right hon. Member that, under his Government’s watch, immigration increased fourfold, until it reached almost a million in a single year. They also created the backlog—400 hotels, which we reduced to just over 200 in our first 12 months in government. One million pounds a day “spiffed” up the wall because they were so incompetent. We are building the homes that they failed to deliver over 14 consecutive years of failure. They should apologise while we get on with the job of rebuilding Britain.

[Chris Philp]

Goodness me, the Deputy Prime Minister has a cheek. Housing starts in quarter four last year went down—her mission to rebuild Britain is not going very well. She talks about asylum hotels, but she obviously has not looked at the most recent numbers. The number of people in asylum hotels was higher in March this year than it was at the time of the election. And she gave no answer about the priority being given to illegal immigrants over people already living here.

A Zimbabwean paedophile due for deportation was recently allowed to stay in the UK because a court found that he might face “some hostility” back in Zimbabwe, which apparently breached his article 3 rights. What about the rights of children here to be protected from this dangerous paedophile? Who is looking out for their rights? Not the Government. There are thousands of such cases involving foreign criminals. There is a solution: we need to scrap the Human Rights Act for immigration matters so that this sovereign Parliament decides on the law that our courts apply. But the Deputy Prime Minister’s party voted against that. I have a simple question: why do the Government side with foreign criminals and not the British public?

[Angela Rayner]

The Conservatives had 14 years of failure on these issues. We have deported 4,500 foreign national offenders since we came to office, which is more than they did over the same period. I will take no lectures from the Johnny-come-lately who could not do anything when he was in office.

[Anneliese Midgley (Knowsley) (Lab)]

Q3. Last Saturday marked eight years since Grenfell—eight years fighting for justice. The Hillsborough families, including Margaret Aspinall from Huyton, have campaigned for 36 years—for decades—for the Hillsborough law. Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell me whether this Labour Government will bring forward the Hillsborough law without delay? Will they honour the promises made to victims of state cover-ups, and will they finally deliver justice for the 97?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question, for the work that she has done with campaigners such as Margaret in their fight for justice, and for mentioning Grenfell, the eighth anniversary of which was not so long ago. We remain fully committed to bringing in a Hillsborough law. The state has failed victims and their families too many times in the past, which is precisely why our focus is now on getting the legislation right. I can assure her that measures will be brought forward as soon as we are confident that they will deliver the justice that victims deserve, and we want to do this at pace.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats.

[Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)]

On behalf of my party, may I associate myself with the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks about the Air India crash? In a week that we remember the murder of Jo Cox and David Amess, our party’s thoughts are with their friends and families and all those in this House who lost their beloved friends. We also remember those who died in the Grenfell tragedy.

In 2003, we Liberal Democrats were incredibly proud to lead the campaign against the Iraq war—a war in which the UK blindly followed the US in a move that was not backed by the United Nations. In light of reports that President Trump is seriously considering joining the war between Israel and Iran, launching a US strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, can the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that if President Trump does take such action, today’s Labour Government will not blindly follow the US into war again?

[Angela Rayner]

The one thing I will say is that we agree with President Trump that Iran must never have nuclear weapons. But we have been consistent in urging Iran to engage with the diplomatic process and work with the United States and we continue to support that diplomatic approach.

[Daisy Cooper]

I am grateful to the Deputy Prime Minister. We support those efforts.

Today, the Government are set to unveil their plans to cut personal independence payments and carer’s allowance, a prospect that one of my constituents described as “terrifying”. Liberal Democrat analysis of the Government’s own data suggests that 1.3 million disabled people are at risk of losing some support. Can the Deputy Prime Minister honestly say, hand on heart, that that is the change that 1 million disabled people and their carers were promised?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

Labour is the party of work and the party of fairness and social justice. We have announced a plan to get Britain working again, and we are clear on the principles—I want to be clear on that—that those who want to work should be able to work and those who can never work should be protected.

The current system, which we have inherited, does not support those who need that support and does not allow people opportunities for employment. I have personal experience of it. I know what the hon. Lady is saying, and I know how some people are fearful of the changes, but this Labour Government have put their values into place and will ensure that people are supported into work where they can work, and those who cannot will be supported. We are the party of the welfare state—we set it up after the second world war—and believe it should be there for people who need it, but we should also help people into work.

[Sarah Champion (Rotherham) (Lab)]

Q5.  Mr Deputy Speaker, I welcome the—[Interruption.] I apologise, Mr Speaker—there are too many deputies in the place today. I welcome the Government’s announcement on grooming gangs. I am sorry for stumbling; I have been floored by the point scoring going on around them—on all sides. I wonder whether the Deputy Prime Minister is aware that the victims and survivors of grooming gangs are being denied compensation by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority on bizarre technicalities, as are all children who have been victims of online abuse. For me, that is a grave injustice. The authority thinks it is better than a judge and jury. I wonder what the Deputy Prime Minister plans to do. Personally, I think it should be abolished.

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is a long-standing advocate for child protection, and I pay tribute to her campaigning on these issues. We share her determination to do what is right for the victims and the survivors. We recognise that no sum of money can ever fully compensate for the horrors they have experienced. We are committed to funding efforts to tackle child sexual abuse in the future and support survivors to rebuild their lives—that is why we will make it easier for victims to make personal injury claims through the civil courts by removing the three-year time limit—and we are redoubling funding for therapeutic support services.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

This Refugee Week is an opportunity for the House to show solidarity with those fleeing war, persecution and oppression. Compassion and welcome are core British values, but for decades the Home Office has been undermining those values, as my new report “No Way Home” shows, by treating migration as a crime rather than making it work for our communities and for newcomers. Will the Deputy Prime Minister read the report and consider its recommendation to remove migration from the responsibilities of the failing Home Office?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I will commit to reading the hon. Lady’s report, because it is important that we take all information on these issues. We inherited an asylum system under exceptional strain, which costs up to £9 million a day. We will end the use of hotels through suitable self-sufficient accommodation for asylum seekers, minimising the impact on local communities, and we will protect and support asylum seekers while demonstrating value for taxpayers.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

Q8.   On 1 July, Warwickshire county council will permanently remove one of Nuneaton’s two fire engines. Its decision, based on dubious data that does not account for local factors such as high deprivation, does not accurately represent the current risk to residents. The cuts will put lives in Nuneaton in danger. Will the Deputy Prime Minister please look into this matter to confirm that there has been sufficient scrutiny and a thorough risk analysis to ensure safety for the good residents of Nuneaton?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important issue, and I know that the fire Minister—the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North and Kimberley (Alex Norris)—will be happy to discuss it further. I am committed to ensuring that fire and rescue services across the country have the resources they need to keep communities safe. The deployment of fire engines, though, is decided locally, so this really is a question for Warwickshire county council, which is now led by Reform. The hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) should have a word with his county councillors in Nuneaton and get them to explain why Reform is cutting fire services.

[Pete Wishart (Perth and Kinross-shire) (SNP)]

Q4.   I remember when the Deputy Prime Minister was a fierce critic of austerity and a proud champion for the disabled, but today her Government are introducing their £5 billion disability cuts Bill that will push another 250,000 people into poverty. Does she agree that everyone has the right to oppose such devastating cuts? Is it the Prime Minister’s intention to remove the Whip from any Labour MP who does the right thing and votes against these disability cuts?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The hon. Member talks about austerity, but I gently say to him that we have given the biggest amount of increase to Scotland—[Interruption.] I have covered this point in an earlier question. We are absolutely committed to ending child poverty. We have already introduced free school meals, we are already supporting families and we have given a living wage rise to millions of workers that need it. We are getting on with the job of rebuilding Britain. The hon. Member has had decades of failure in Scotland, and it deserves better.

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Q10. Derbyshire’s Derwent valley is the home of the industrial revolution and it is also now a UNESCO world heritage site. That community showed a Victorian sense of purpose that delivered improvements to people’s everyday lives. Can my right hon. Friend set out how the Government’s £39 billion investment in housing will instil that same drive while maintaining the unique character of the east midlands’ only UNESCO world heritage site?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I know my hon. Friend is a champion for regeneration across his constituency, and he is working hard to get homes built in his patch for his constituents. Our plan for change will deliver the biggest boost for investment in social and affordable housing in a generation, and for the first time in recent memory, we will give providers in his constituency a decade of certainty over the capital funding to build ambitious housing projects that honour Derbyshire’s history.

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

Q6. The Home Secretary says that we should judge her success in smashing the gangs by whether the number of channel crossings falls, but under this Government the numbers are up by more than 30%. By which date should we judge the Home Secretary, and if she fails, will she be fired?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The Conservatives continually vote against the measures that we are taking to smash the gangs. We are getting on with the job, working internationally to disrupt the abhorrent work of these smugglers and gangs, while the hon. Member harps on from the sidelines. He should apologise for their record in government, which was abysmal.

[Kirith Entwistle (Bolton North East) (Lab)]

Q11. Since becoming an MP, I have received thousands of pieces of casework from constituents who are stuck on social housing waiting lists. I recently had an email from a woman with severe mobility issues who is effectively trapped in her front room while she waits and waits for suitable social housing. Even when a home becomes available, she will be forced to compete with other residents because there simply are not enough affordable options. What will the recent new funding announced by the Government mean for my constituent and others like her who have already waited too long for a decent home?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting that case. It is not an isolated case; we inherited a really dire situation and there are far too many people that do not have a safe and secure home that meets their needs. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor has announced record funding of almost double the level provided by the previous Government, who ended up handing back the cash for social and affordable homes. Labour’s plan for change is renewing our country and investing in Britain’s future.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

Q7. The Government quite rightly give full and unequivocal support to Israel in its bid to end the scourge of Iran’s nuclear weapons programme forever. Will they also work with our allies to try and convince the Israeli Government that it is not in the long-term security interests of Israel to carry on with this policy of illegal settlements in the west bank, which is simply leading to radicalisation and desperation throughout the region? Have not the overwhelming majority of Palestinian people the right to yearn for peace and security in their own homeland, as the Jews yearned for their homeland for 2,000 years?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I thank the Father of the House for his important question. Settler violence and expansion in the west bank is appalling and completely unacceptable. Alongside our allies, we have sanctioned individuals responsible for inciting this extremist action, but a two-state solution is the only way to bring the peace that the Israelis and the Palestinians deserve. That is only achievable if the hostages are released, aid is surged into Gaza and the ceasefire is restored. We will do everything we can to make that happen.

[Chris Kane (Stirling and Strathallan) (Lab)]

Q12.   In Scotland, over 10,000 children are stuck in temporary accommodation, including many in my constituency. Too many families face soaring rents, long waiting lists and dwindling options. It is just one of so many policy failings—we are all losing count and losing patience—as public confidence in the SNP’s ability to govern collapses. What advice does the Deputy Prime Minister have for the SNP Government as they continue to preside over a chronic failure to invest in the social and affordable housing that Scotland desperately needs?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend is right. Homelessness levels are far too high, which have a devastating impact on those affected. Under the SNP, 10,000 children in Scotland—a record high—shamefully have no fixed home to call their own. Our decisions have given Scotland a record settlement—the largest since devolution. We saw in Hamilton how Scots are fed up with the SNP’s excuses. The SNP has been in power for nearly two decades and has nowhere left to hide from its failure.

[Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)]

Q9.   Diolch, Mr Llefarydd. Welsh farmers are taking hit after hit, from Tory trade deals to Labour taxes. Now, on top of that, bluetongue restrictions affecting Wales and England will hamper cross-border trade. Over 550 farms on the border and key livestock markets rely on summer trading. Once-in-a-year opportunities like the Royal Welsh Show are crucial, and the disruption will be devastating. Will the Deputy Prime Minister commit to working with the Welsh Government on a scheme to compensate the losses?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I gently say to the hon. Member that you do not deliver for Wales by voting against an extra £1.6 billion for public services like Plaid did in the Senedd. We will ensure that we support Wales and Welsh farmers and will continue to do that as a UK Government.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

Q13. In the spending review last week, the Government backed Peterborough with support for our new pool and a sports quarter in the city. That commitment has the power to turn years of campaigning into a reality, but that is not all: the Government have also recently approved the business case for our new station and have given us new police. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that this is just the start and that places like Peterborough that were forgotten for too long by the Conservatives are now at the top of this Labour Government’s agenda?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. I am flanked by the two ladies—the Chancellor and the Home Secretary—who have ensured that those things happen. The Chancellor has guaranteed funding to accelerate projects like Peterborough’s new sports quarter, which will include a new Olympic-sized swimming pool. I can also confirm today that, subject to the business case approval, we will provide nearly £48 million of funding for a new city centre quarter and a refurbished eastern station building.

[Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)]

Q14. A small family business in my constituency was recently burgled by a prolific offender serving an eight-month suspended sentence. The man was caught, arrested, charged and appeared in court, where he was given another eight-month suspended sentence and was released. The business was offered £200 in compensation. Does the Deputy Prime Minister think that that is justice served, or is this Government now soft on crime and soft on the causes of crime?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

First of all, I am sorry to hear about that. Hard-working businesspeople who spend a lot of their time building up a business should expect the full force of the law to protect their property and their interests. Also, while I have the opportunity, can I congratulate the hon. Member on running Hamble Valley’s very first pub competition this year? I hope that I will get an invite. He is absolutely right that we have to have increased police numbers and ensure that they are responsive to people’s concerns. We are doing that; his Government let people down.

[Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)]

Saturday marked eight years since 72 people lost their lives in the Grenfell tower fire—eight years without justice. But, finally, there is the prospect of some systemic change following the public inquiry. I welcome the Government’s commitment to barring all the cited companies from accessing public contracts and their full support to the police investigation to deliver real accountability. Can the Deputy Prime Minister also reassure our community that, alongside the Hillsborough law, the Government will consider some independent oversight so that victims from the Post Office to Hillsborough to Grenfell know that inquiry recommendations will actually lead to real change?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The Grenfell fire was a national tragedy, and we must never forget the 72 lives that were lost. It was a honour to pay my respects on the eighth anniversary at the weekend. We remain fully committed to introducing the Hillsborough law, including a legal duty of candour for public services and criminal sanctions for those who refuse to comply. I know my hon. Friend speaks with passion and authority on the matter and, having spoken to the Grenfell community, I know that they really want to see this happen as quickly as possible. We are exploring reforms to ensure that we can get to the truth more quickly and deliver the meaningful change that these victims deserve.

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

Bishop Challoner school has been helping to educate Bromley pupils for nearly 75 years, but it will close its doors in July due to Labour’s decision to impose VAT on independent schools. Given the Deputy Prime Minister’s well-publicised views on independent schools, does she welcome this closure or would she like to apologise to the parents, pupils and staff?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

As I have said for a long time, taxpayers in this country should not be subsidising tax breaks for private schools. I welcome all schools that give children a great education, but I am also determined to ensure we have qualified teachers in every classroom, for every child, which is something the hon. Gentleman’s Government failed to do.

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

As a trained physics teacher and a former engineering lecturer, may I ask the Deputy Prime Minister what this Government are doing to help people improve their maths skills after they have left school? I came across an awful case the other day: a 61-year-old man who believed he had counted up £7 billion of Government spending, when there was really only £27 million. What can we do for people like the leader of Reform UK, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), who evidently cannot add up? [Hon. Members: “More!”]

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend highlights an important fact: Reform’s sums simply do not add up. He will be pleased to know that we are investing £136 million in skills bootcamps, and I will be sure to send the details to the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage).

Oral Answers to Questions

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Monday 9th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)]

1. What steps her Department is taking to help prevent new unitary authorities from requiring exceptional financial support.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

Local government reorganisation will lead to better outcomes for residents and save a significant amount of money that can be reinvested in public services and improve accountability. It is for councils to develop robust, financially sustainable proposals that are in the best interests of their whole area.

[Gregory Stafford]

The rushed local government reorganisation means that Waverley borough in my area will be forced to join other authorities that are debt-ridden, such as Woking. What will the Secretary of State do to ensure that residents in my area do not pay a financial price for the woes of other authorities?

[Angela Rayner]

As set out in the invitation letters, and as with previous restructures, there is no proposal for council debt to be addressed centrally or written off as part of reorganisation, but the Government accept that Woking and Thurrock councils hold significant unsupported debt that cannot be managed locally in its entirety. We have committed to providing an initial amount of debt repayment support for these councils in 2026-27 ahead of the reorganisation. This is unprecedented Government support.

[Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)]

I have been contacted by constituents who are concerned by media comments over the last week that suggest that the Planning and Infrastructure Bill may render sites of special scientific interest protections meaningless. Will the Secretary of State clarify the Bill’s position on this and outline what protections there will be for SSSIs like Lodge hill in my constituency with its important nightingale population?

[Angela Rayner]

I am sure that those on the Conservative Benches have an interest in areas of natural beauty as well, and I am sure that the Minister for Housing and Planning will address this point when we discuss the Planning and Infrastructure Bill later today. We take natural beauty and history seriously, and we think that the Bill will be able to do nature recovery and enable us to build the houses that we desperately need.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I remind Members to look at the question on the Order Paper and make sure that their supplementary question is related to it.

--- Later in debate ---

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

In 2010, just 12% of homes had an EPC C rating or above, so those homes were too cold and had bills that were too high. It was 60% by 2024 when we left power. Will the Minister share with the House the ambition and give us a number for the percentage of homes that we should expect to have that basic EPC C rating by the end of this term, which I hope will be the only one the Minister has, so he should make a difference while he can? [Laughter.]

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

That’s a bit harsh.

[Matthew Pennycook]

The right hon. Gentleman is certainly not charitable. As I made clear, I recognise the December 2021 uplift in energy efficiency standards means that most new builds that come through achieve an EPC rating of A or B. Off the top of my head, though I stand to be corrected, I think about 84% of new homes meet those standards. But as I said, we have announced that we want to introduce future standards this autumn, which will drive even more ambitious energy efficiency and carbon emission requirements for new homes.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)]

10. What steps she is taking to build more social and affordable homes.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

In our first eight months in office, we have announced £800 million in new funding for the affordable homes programme and £2 billion as a down payment on future investment. The previous Government handed back precious cash for social and affordable homes. This Government will get those homes built. The Chancellor will set out details of new investment at the spending review.

[Rebecca Long Bailey]

I very much welcome the Secretary of State’s commitment to social and affordable housing. I know that she will be concerned by the new analysis by the National Housing Federation, which finds that local authorities in England with the most severe shortage of social housing now have waiting lists exceeding 100 years for a family-sized social home. With nearly 6,000 people on the waiting list in Salford alone, will she outline what support she will give local authorities and the social housing sector to deliver desperately needed social homes?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have a housing crisis in this country, and it is felt particularly acutely by those who need social and council housing. That is why we have been absolutely clear that we want to deliver the biggest increase to social and affordable housing in a generation. We have already outlined a number of measures, including allowing councils to retain 100% of right-to-buy receipts and making long-term funding settlements for rents. We have set out the investment that we have put into the sector, but we will say more at the spending review.

[Baggy Shanker]

Having access to a safe and secure home is a basic human need, but the Tories absolutely ignored this when they cut Government funding by £4.8 billion in just five years, and Derby has suffered the consequences. Last year, waiting lists for social housing in our city reached record highs. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to lift people stuck on these waiting lists out of limbo and into good social housing?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is a great champion for Derby and many Members across this House can understand the acute pressures he mentions. The fact is we have not been building enough homes, and we certainly have not been building enough social homes. Therefore, we have already set out some steps, as I mentioned briefly earlier, around the right to buy receipts, and we are consulting on new long-term rent settlements to give providers confidence to build, and we will be investing billions of pounds into social housing. I cannot pre-empt the spending review this week but the Chancellor will set out more then.

[Alberto Costa (South Leicestershire) (Con)]

When a developer pledges to build 40% minimum of affordable housing and obtains outline planning permission on the basis of that pledge, and then, less than 20 months later, seeks to reduce the 40% to 0%, is that acceptable?

[Angela Rayner]

I am not going to stray into individual cases, but what I will say is that since gaining office this Government have confirmed the changes to the national planning policy framework, in particular around section 106, to ensure that when developers seek planning permission and pledge that they are going to do something, they are kept to those pledges.

[James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Reform)]

My constituency is seeing approximately 60,000 new homes being built across the Basildon and Thurrock areas. Basildon hospital is consistently running at 98% capacity, and a school I visited today, which I was very proud to see in such a good state, has roughly 1,100 pupil applications for 300 available spaces each year. Along with housing, my constituents are deeply concerned about the level of infrastructure being developed and the state of the existing infrastructure. What reassurances can Ministers give them about those concerns?

[Angela Rayner]

Coming back to the point that we do need housing, including social and council housing, we have been clear in the changes that we have been making, including in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, to ensure that that infrastructure is there, because that is one of the barriers leading to people rejecting some proposals because the transport connectivity and the facilities are not available. Therefore this Government are committed to ensuring we get the right type of development that supports local need and also, importantly, has the infrastructure alongside it.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)]

The Deputy Prime Minister has repeatedly stuck to her commitment that 1.5 million homes, including social homes, will be built over the lifetime of this Parliament despite everybody knowing that she will not achieve it. And today, the latest people to say she will not are Savills, who have forecast that the true number she will build over this Parliament is just 840,000, and that means fewer social homes too. Now that she has emerged from the dark rooms of the Treasury to capitulate to the Chancellor, will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that more social homes and 1.5 million new homes will be built by the end of this Parliament: yes or no?

[Angela Rayner]

The Opposition cannot have it both ways: one way they are saying we are failing to build the homes; and the other way they are saying we are concreting over the green belt. We said that planning reforms alone will not deliver our ambitions, which is why we have committed to delivering the biggest increase in social and affordable house building in a generation. And I say to the hon. Member, as I have said to many people in my life, underestimate me at your peril.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrats spokesperson.

[Angela Rayner]

I am disgusted to hear about what happened to that young person and her baby—that is absolutely terrible. The number of people, particularly children, who are in temporary accommodation at the moment is shocking, which is why this Government are committed to the biggest wave of social and affordable housing in a generation. We have not put a particular number on that, not least because we do not have the spending review results—they are coming later this week—but we are clear that we want that number to ramp up and we need that proportion to meet the target of 1.5 million new homes, so I ask the hon. Member to wait just a little bit longer.

[Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)]

12. What progress her Department has made on providing adequate funding for local authorities as part of the fair funding review.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

As the Planning and Infrastructure Bill enters its remaining stages in the Commons, I thank my hon. Friend the Housing Minister and Members across the House for their continued work on this important piece of legislation that will get Britain building again.

This weekend marks the eighth anniversary of the Grenfell tower fire. I know that I speak for all Members of this House when I say that the 72 men, women and children who lost their lives at Grenfell will never be forgotten. We have accepted the inquiry’s findings, and will take action on all 58 recommendations to build a more robust and trusted regulatory system that will deliver safe, quality homes for everyone.

[Alice Macdonald]

Many of my constituents are concerned that too often new estates go up without the necessary infrastructure, whether that is schools, GP surgeries or even playgrounds. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is vital to address that issue, and can she elaborate on how we will do so after too many years of inaction?

[Angela Rayner]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. The Government are committed to strengthening the system of developer contributions to ensure that new developments provide the necessary infrastructure that communities expect. We will set out further details in due course. Earlier I mentioned the changes to the national planning policy framework that were announced in December, and we will also support the increased provision and modernisation of various types of public infrastructure.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

As the Secretary of State has said, Saturday marks the eighth anniversary of the Grenfell tragedy. As she knows, I can confirm to her that I will work constructively with her and her colleagues to deliver remediation, building safety and the best outcomes for local communities. The previous Government committed over £5 billion for remediation; will the Secretary of State confirm that the spending review will continue to provide such financial support? Will she also confirm that she will meet the previous Government’s pledge to co-fund with the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea the renovation of the Lancaster West estate, and that the £85 million from central Government needed and promised to finish the works will be provided?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank the shadow Secretary of State for the constructive way in which he has approached this issue. We all remember what happened at Grenfell and the work that the previous Government did, and we are continuing that work, as outlined in phase 2 of the recommendations. The buildings Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North and Kimberley (Alex Norris) has been meeting—as I have—members of the community, RBKC and others to make sure we continue on that journey. I hesitate to say, though, that the previous Government made a lot of promises that are challenging. We will always put safety first, and we are working to ensure that we deliver on that.

[Kevin Hollinrake]

I know that the Secretary of State has had some difficult negotiations this weekend with her colleague the Chancellor. The spending review is critical for the funding of the affordable homes budget. In the past, the Secretary of State has praised the Chancellor’s generosity, as she puts it, not least for providing the extra £2 billion for the affordable homes budget, but will she admit today that that budget is decreasing from previous levels under our Government? Will she say—even if it is after the spending review—exactly how many affordable and social homes she expects to deliver during this Parliament?

[Angela Rayner]

The shadow Secretary of State has been called a bit later than the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes), for whom I outlined the reasons we have not put an exact figure on that and confirmed that we will build the biggest increase in affordable and social housing in a generation. I say gently to the shadow Secretary of State that we are delivering for working people by banning no-fault evictions and introducing groundbreaking protections for renters, which the Conservatives promised but did not deliver. We are introducing major planning reforms to build 1.5 million homes; they promised 1.6 million homes, but could not get anywhere. We are also delivering the largest ever single package of devolution measures, pushing power out of Westminster. We are delivering where the Conservatives failed.

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

T2. We are very good at growing things in South Norfolk, including food, businesses and thriving communities. However, if we want our young people to share in that success, we need to plant a new town in my constituency. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we will achieve that?

--- Later in debate ---

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

T6. I am confident that the Secretary of State loves the pub as much as you and I do, Mr Speaker, but the jobs tax and the slashing of business rate relief have delivered a hammer blow to pubs such as the Barrel in Walkington, owned by Thwaites, and to hospitality businesses such as the Beverley Arms hotel. Has the Secretary of State made representations to the Chancellor ahead of Wednesday to ensure that more landlords are not forced to call last orders?

[Angela Rayner]

I might like a pint; and wouldn’t he like to know?

[Emma Foody (Cramlington and Killingworth) (Lab/Co-op)]

People have lived in Earsdon View in my constituency for more than 15 years, but the estate remains unadopted due to an ongoing issue between the landowner, Northumberland Estates, and the developer, Bellway, involving the securing of sewer adoption. I continue to press all parties to resolve the problem, but how can we ensure that people are not left in this situation for decades, often paying management fees on top of council tax, and that developers deliver?

Oral Answers to Questions

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Monday 7th April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

6. What recent progress she has made on the new towns programme.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

Our vision for the next generation of new towns is setting the stage for a house building revolution in the years to come. These will be well-connected, attractive places with all the infrastructure and services needed to sustain thriving communities, including public transport, GP surgeries and schools.

[Peter Swallow]

Bracknell was designated a new town 76 years ago in the aftermath of world war two, and it has been a huge success, in part because of the way it was designed, with leisure facilities, access to nature and transport links built into the town’s DNA. As the Government look to build the next generation of new towns, will my right hon. Friend commit to learning from the new towns that went before?

[Angela Rayner]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. There is a lot to admire from the past, including in new towns such as Bracknell. We are learning the lessons from the past for our next generation of new towns, to ensure that they are well connected, well designed, sustainable and attractive places, where people want to live, and it is important that they have the infrastructure, amenities and services that they need to thrive.

[Ben Goldsborough]

The housing crisis is an issue in not just our city centres but our rural communities. A new town would be excellent for our area of South Norfolk. It would help tackle our local housing crisis and ensure that we could deliver affordable housing for local people, where they need it.

[Angela Rayner]

I agree with my hon. Friend that the housing crisis is a challenge across the whole of England. The independent new towns taskforce is reviewing submissions to the call for evidence as it continues its work on recommending locations for new towns. The responses to the call for evidence will support the taskforce’s work of developing its recommendations, and the responses demonstrate significant enthusiasm across the country.

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

Our local paper, The Echo, revealed last week that Labour-led Southend council and Lib Dem-led Rochford council are planning to build a new town of up to 10,000 houses on the border between the two. I understand that if this is done under the new towns fund, those numbers would be in addition to Rochford’s housing target, rather than making up part of the target. We would be talking about building nearly 20,000 properties by 2043, which is totally unsustainable, given that our infrastructure is creaking as it is. Can the Secretary of State confirm whether those new-town houses on the Rochford side would go towards our meeting the target or be in addition to it?

[Angela Rayner]

We have not selected the positions for the new towns; the new towns taskforce is still working on those. We have been clear that what the new towns will deliver will be over and above the targets for housing produced through the standard methods, but this is not one of those new towns, because we have not chosen them yet.

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

In the new town of Sherford, which is already being built in my constituency, there will be up to 5,500 new homes built over the coming years. However, there are challenges around FirstPort, the delayed delivery of a supermarket and other vital local amenities, and delays and escalating costs relating to the delivery of a new GP surgery. Also, National Grid pylons are being moved to make way for further new homes, at enormous cost to the taxpayer. What conversations is the Secretary of State having with key providers of national infrastructure, including the NHS and National Grid, to ensure that such obstacles are removed, so that these homes can be built?

[Angela Rayner]

We are bringing forward the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, as the hon. Member knows, and we have set mandatory targets. Unlike the previous Government, we believe that infrastructure has to come through this process, and we are working across Government to ensure that. We are already pushing further on section 106 notices in our work with developers. We are telling them that we want the houses, need the infrastructure, and want them to do this properly.

[Cameron Thomas (Tewkesbury) (LD)]

2. What steps she is taking to ensure that new homes are sustainable.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

Our country is in the midst of a housing crisis, decades in the making. As our plan for change set out, the Government are committed to the biggest increase in social and affordable housing in a generation. We have already taken decisive action to increase the supply of new homes, with bold reforms to the planning system and the launch of the new homes accelerator programme, which will unblock thousands of homes stuck in the planning system. In the spring statement, we announced a £2 billion down payment to deliver up to 18,000 new social and affordable homes, and we are investing £600 million in training for new construction jobs.

[Katie Lam]

Demand for housing is greatest in London, which is where the economy most needs new homes. Building in London means less pressure on commuting infrastructure and house prices in places like rural Kent, but the housing targets for London have been cut. The Government justify that by saying that London has

“the biggest proposed percentage increase against delivery”.—[Official Report, 12 December 2024; Vol. 758, c. 1067.]

Why is the right hon. Lady rewarding the London Mayor’s failure to build Britain’s most needed houses with lower targets?

[Angela Rayner]

We are asking London to deliver record levels of house building. Our revised standard method sets the housing need for London at nearly 88,000 homes per year. The previous Government artificially boosted targets for London using an extra 35% urban uplift. That resulted in a target of nearly 100,000 homes—a third of the previous national target—which could not be justified. The London Mayor has started building more new council homes than at any time since the 1970s. He is getting on with building homes while the Tories have failed and are the blockers.

[Andrew Cooper]

With around 1.3 million people on housing registers in England, it is vital that we achieve a step change in the supply of housing, particularly social housing, over this Parliament; however, in my constituency and across the north-west, housing associations are managing many ageing, low-quality homes that require ongoing investment and maintenance. Homes for the North warns that many of these properties will become uninhabitable and unsuitable for social housing over the next decade. What consideration has my right hon. Friend given to targeting the renewal of social housing, such as through pooling funding with money for decarbonisation, so that registered social landlords can use the money flexibly to combine retrofit, demolition and new build? That would drive regeneration and reduce carbon emissions.

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the absolute mess that the previous Government left our housing stock in. We will ensure the biggest increase in social house building in a generation, and provide safe, warm and decent homes, by introducing minimum energy efficiency standards and reviewing the decent homes standard. Recent funding includes £1.29 billion for the warm homes social housing fund, £800 million in top-ups to the current affordable homes programme, and a £2 billion down payment on the future programme, which will be used for regeneration projects that will result in a net increase in the number of homes.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

The housing numbers for London were cut by 20% by the Government, but again and again we find in Hansard the Secretary of State asserting that 1.5 million homes will be built during this Parliament in England. Why did the Chancellor tell us a few days ago that only 1.3 million will be built across the whole of the UK, and will the Secretary of State please confirm that the 1.5 million target has gone?

[Angela Rayner]

The Minister for Housing and Planning answered this question just a moment ago. Perhaps my Mancunian accent will help: the OBR scored the national planning policy framework changes that we have already made. That is where that figure came from. Our other plans, including the new homes accelerator programme, the money that we have invested since then, and the changes in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, mean that the number will increase, and we will meet our 1.5 million homes target. I do not think that I can put it much clearer than that.

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

There is a real housing crisis in Hackney, where we spend £54 million a year on temporary accommodation. I visit families, most of them working families, in tragically overcrowded accommodation. We need this social housing as quickly as possible, and I know my right hon. Friend is putting her shoulder to the wheel. Will she visit Hackney to see the work that the council has been doing to build properly affordable social rented council housing? The council could do so much more with more Government support.

[Angela Rayner]

We have over 160,000 children in temporary accommodation, as I have said at the Dispatch Box a couple of times, and it is a scandal that we are in this situation. That is why the Government are making these changes. We make no apology for changing the mandatory housing targets to get Britain building again, because we need those homes and those kids deserve better. We also need to cut the number of children living in temporary accommodation, including B&Bs. We are determined to do that.

[Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)]

4. What steps her Department is taking to work with local councils to prevent homelessness.

--- Later in debate ---

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

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, which states that I am a trade union member.

Let me update the House on the waste dispute in Birmingham. Our priority is tackling the misery and disruption caused to residents. The Government have consistently urged the council and Unite to sit down and resolve the dispute; it is welcome that they met yesterday and that further talks are taking place today, but we continue to press all parties to negotiate that urgently needed resolution.

It is essential to protect public health by tackling the backlog of waste, and my Department is in close contact with the council. This weekend I met the council leader and the managing director, and we are providing ongoing support to address the public health emergency. Collections took place over the weekend, and will continue this week to clear the backlog and protect public health. The Government continue to support Birmingham’s recovery.

[David Davis]

Needless to say, everyone wishes the Secretary of State well with that.

In March, the Chancellor said:

“The regulatory system has become burdensome to the point of choking off innovation, investment and growth. We will free businesses from that stranglehold”.

In my constituency, the Finnish company Metsä Tissue wants to invest hundreds of millions to build a state-of-the-art tissue manufacturing plant. The investment will provide 400 direct jobs, thousands of other jobs and £30 million a year for the local economy, but although the site is a freeport, the investment is hampered by monumental costs of £113 million to make it ready, although the same process on an equivalent site in Sweden will cost £4.5 million. What are the Government doing to correct this problem?

[Angela Rayner]

We have been doing a lot to try to ensure that, under this Government, taxpayers get value for money from the fair and reasonable amounts that we can invest to make land ready for development. As the right hon. Member said, we have the freeports—some of them a legacy from the previous Government—but we want to see infrastructure built, which is why we are bringing forward the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. We have committed ourselves to 150 new major infrastructure projects, so hopefully we will kick-start the economy in a way that his Government was unable to.

[Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)]

T2. I was delighted recently to see civic and business leaders in Southampton join the Labour council in launching their Renaissance Vision, setting out an ambitious agenda for regeneration and house building in the city. What steps will the Government take in the upcoming spending review to support and enable house building visions such as this?

--- Later in debate ---

[Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

The effects of the Birmingham bin strike have been declared a major incident, they are a national embarrassment, and with 21° temperatures forecast for later this week, they will become a public health emergency. While Labour Members in Birmingham are busy campaigning for an airport in Pakistan, the Secretary of State is unwilling to visit the city or take on Unite. Is that because of the tens of millions of pounds that her party receives from Unite, or, indeed, because of the £10,000 that she received for her own election campaign?

[Angela Rayner]

I thought the shadow Secretary of State was better than that, but heigh-ho.

This is a local dispute, and it is right that the negotiations are led locally. We have made it clear that both parties should get round the table, and I am pleased that that happened on Sunday and talks continue today. Birmingham city council did declare a major incident last week; we expect the rubbish to be cleared, we expect the parties to get round the negotiating table, and we expect this to be sorted out.

[Kevin Hollinrake]

The right hon. Lady still has not explained why she has not visited the city to look at this issue at first hand.

The right hon. Lady’s manifesto sets out the issue of preserving the green belt. In this very House, she said that she would transform grey-belt land such as wasteland or old car parks, but also that she would protect the green belt. In its report accompanying the spring statement last week, the Office for Budget Responsibility stated that most of the additional homes delivered—up to 500,000, according to her—will be built on the green belt. Is it not the case that she has conned the public with her grey-belt policy, and that she has unintentionally misled this House?

[Angela Rayner]

I thought the hon. Member was going to do better, but he did not. The Minister for Local Government was in Birmingham on Thursday, and I am always happy to visit Birmingham. It is a great city and has always been a fantastic place, and I have probably been there more times than the hon. Member has. Under the Tories, the number of homes approved on green-belt land increased nearly tenfold since 2009, so I will not take any lectures. We have said that we will develop on brownfield sites first, and we are taking action to make sure that we deliver the homes and infrastructure that people need. He could learn a lot from me.

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

T3. At the end of January, 14,000 people were still on Northumberland county council’s social housing waiting list, yet hundreds of properties right across the county, including in rural Allendale, remain empty. Given the number of people on the housing list and in desperate need of accommodation, it is a disgrace that the Conservative administration has left them empty for so long. Does the Minister agree that a Labour council, backed by a Labour Government, will do much more to get people off the housing list and into homes?

Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Angela Rayner Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 24th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

It is time to get Britain building again. It is what working people expect of this Government and it is what we will deliver. Our Planning and Infrastructure Bill is critical to achieving economic growth, higher living standards and a more secure future for our country. This is our plan for change in action: action to build 1.5 million homes in this Parliament and a fast track of 150 major infrastructure projects—more than were decided over the 14 years of the previous Government. The Bill is also key to making Britain a clean energy superpower, bringing down bills for working people and securing our energy supply in a more uncertain world.

Make no mistake: the Bill will transform the lives of working people and Britain’s prospects for years to come. It is hugely ambitious, and rightly so. Everywhere I go, I hear the same frustrations: “We just can’t build anything any more,” and, “We desperately need more homes and more development.” For too long, the answer has always been no, which has choked growth, leaving working people worse off and leaving Britain behind, with trains that do not work, roads that are clogged and not enough homes being built.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I gently say to the Secretary of State that none of my constituents is saying, “In Shropshire, we don’t need any more homes. We don’t want any more homes.” They just want to be consulted. They want the homes in the right place, at the right scale, with the right architecture and in the right numbers. They want their voices listened to through a local plan—not ignored, as the current Government are doing.

[Angela Rayner]

I gently say to the right hon. Member that it is this Government who have brought forward mandatory local plans, and it was his Government who did not. For too long we have left home ownership to collapse, with homelessness soaring and over 160,000 children in temporary accommodation. This is a country that simply is not working.

The time it takes to secure planning permission for major projects has almost doubled in the last decade, and it now takes more than four years. It is slower and more costly to build big infrastructure in England than in France and Italy. No new reservoir has been built for over 30 years. There are countless other examples, such as the critical new road improvement scheme for Norwich, which would create jobs and speed up journeys yet was held up for two years by unsuccessful legal challenges. We have the ridiculous situation where 139 desperately needed houses were delayed in Bingley because of a row over the speed of balls at the neighbouring cricket club.

The result of such delays has been fewer homes built, higher energy bills, and lower productivity and growth. For 14 years, the country has been crying out for a Government with the will to change that. Successive Tory Prime Ministers promised that change, but when the bold action was demanded they were too afraid to stand up to their Back Benchers.

[Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)]

Can the Secretary of State outline what powers in the Bill she will use to take on developers and make sure that they build based on the planning permissions they already have?

[Angela Rayner]

The hon. Member will know as a member of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee that we have already made changes through the national planning policy framework, and we have our new homes accelerator programme, which is already providing thousands of homes. The Bill is about building on those powers to ensure that we get Britain building. It was his Government who did not build the houses and the infrastructure that we desperately need and who were too timid to face down the vested interests. This Labour Government are on the side of the builders, not the blockers, and we are saying, “No more.”

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

There is nobody who does not welcome the 1.5 million houses target, and it is important that we see those homes. Part of infrastructure is electric vehicle charging systems. Many people I ask about electric cars say that they are not getting one because there are not enough charging points. Clause 43 indicates that there will be more EV charge points. Is that something the Secretary of State will share with the relevant Minister in Northern Ireland? I also understand that some of the standard accessibility requirements do not meet the standards. Can she confirm that that will be changed?

[Angela Rayner]

The Bill will streamline the approval of street works needed for the installation of EV charge points, removing the need for licensing where works are able to be authorised by permits, because we recognise that people need that critical infrastructure as part of these reforms.

We have taken more action in eight months than the Opposition managed in 14 years of government. We have reversed the damaging changes made by the Tories to the national planning policy framework and have brought green belt into the 21st century. We have ended the de facto ban on new onshore wind, and we are supporting local authorities with an additional 300 planning officers. Just this month, we set out reforms to put growth at the heart of the statutory consultee system.

Many would have said, “Stop there and allow the reforms to bed in,” but Britain cannot afford to wait. We have been held back for too long by Governments without the will to drive change. This landmark Planning and Infrastructure Bill goes even further and faster.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on championing the expansion of affordable and social housing in particular. I ask her to take account of another excluded group: Gypsies and Travellers. They have been systematically discriminated against by the Conservatives over 14 years. There is no assessment of needs or statutory duty to provide sites any longer, and they are not in the strategic planning provisions. Can we rectify that in the Bill so that we have a level playing field for everybody who is in need of housing?

[Angela Rayner]

We are working with local authorities, and the Bill includes provision for strategic authorities so that we can look at where we have sites and ensure that people are accommodated. It is for local authorities to be able to do that.

The Bill starts with a quicker and more certain system for big ticket infrastructure projects. It will slice through the bureaucracy and speed up transport projects. It will overhaul how Government decisions on major infrastructure projects can be challenged, so that meritless cases will have one, rather than three, attempts at a legal challenge, stopping cases from being dragged endlessly and needlessly through the courts.

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

Somewhere knocking around in the system is a Government press release that says that the National Grid Sea Link project is being obstructed by too many objections. The reason that it is being objected to is that the National Grid wants to build a 90-foot-high converter station the size of five football pitches on the Minster marshes in Kent. We must have the right to object to that kind of project.

[Angela Rayner]

I gently say to the right hon. Gentleman that there is not a loss of the right to object. In fact, we are strengthening and clarifying those processes as part of the Bill. I will say it again: there will be a quicker and more certain system for big ticket infrastructure projects. The Bill will slice through bureaucracy and speed up transport projects. What it will not do is allow meritless cases to have three attempts at a legal challenge. It will stop cases from being dragged endlessly and needlessly through the courts. It will begin to strip away the unnecessary consultation requirements that do nothing to improve applications and do not meaningfully engage communities, but slow down the delivery of infrastructure that will benefit communities in the future. It will create greater flexibility so that projects can go through a more appropriate and faster planning route.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

The Secretary of State will understand that when a number of nationally strategic infrastructure projects are in one area, that has a huge impact. In my constituency we are looking at a strategic rail interchange, a major solar plant and the East West Rail project. Will she reassure my constituents that their voices will be heard under the Bill? Will she reassure us that when these issues go to the Planning Inspectorate and to the Secretary of State, the cumulative effect of national projects that are not present in local plans will be considered before decisions are taken?

[Angela Rayner]

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we will consult on the draft we have put forward. We want better and quality engagement as part of the Bill. Our changes will ensure that everyone works together early on, and that we have proportionate and faster decisions. We will make sure that the Government’s infrastructure policies are updated at least every five years, but the measures in the Bill are not the limit of our ambitions.

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)]

The Secretary of State is outlining the process by which essential infrastructure needs to be built, but she will forgive me for coming back to Heathrow expansion. I would be extremely grateful if she could set out for us—perhaps not today, but later or in writing—the exact process for considering the expansion of Heathrow under the new legislation. In addition, could she explain why those who will be affected by compulsory purchase will now be removed as consultees at the pre-application stage?

[Angela Rayner]

I will not get into the details of any particular planning process, but I will say that the Bill is about better and quality engagement. Of course, statutory consultees will continue to be engaged, but what we do not want is major infrastructure projects continually being blocked for years and years. People have been speaking about some of these projects for decades, and we still do not have the connectivity that we desperately need.

We are open to strengthening the Bill, and we will give serious consideration to proposals that further our objectives. We will continue to engage with colleagues across the House, as well as with business and communities, on what might be done about existing requirements that are not working as they should. We are clear that where once the answer was always no, to get Britain building, to drive growth and to deliver opportunity, the answer must now be yes.

The Bill is also geared towards another crucial pledge: building the new homes that we need. We will boost house building in England by streamlining planning decisions.

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

I warmly welcome the steps being taken to streamline the system and get more homes built. That, of course, includes social and affordable housing. Does the Secretary of State agree that that would go some way to helping the 160,000 children who are stuck in temporary accommodation?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing the debate back to why we are all here and why we are in this mess in the first place. Over Christmas, when we all got to see our family and friends, I was thinking about the 160,000 children in temporary accommodation. During the general election campaign, one thing I was clear on was that we have to move forward to build the homes that people desperately need—behind every single one of those statistics is a family or an opportunity that is not being realised—and one of this Government’s missions is to strengthen that.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

If the Government are going to build 1.5 million homes over the course of this Parliament, and we are nine months into the first year of this Parliament, by my calculation they should have built 225,000 by now. Will the Secretary of State confirm how many homes have been built?

[Angela Rayner]

The hon. Gentleman has just given us an example of the mess the previous Government left us in. House building was going backwards, and they were nowhere near the figures they promised. That is why, within the first few months of us getting into power, we changed the national planning policy framework. We have been consulting, we have been working with industry, we have had a new homes accelerator—thousands more have been put into the system—and £2 billion for the affordable homes programme has been announced today.

We will boost house building in England by streamlining planning decisions, introducing a national scheme of delegation that sets out which types of application should be determined by officers and which by planning committees. Local democratic oversight is crucial to ensuring good development, but the right decisions must be taken at the right level to get Britain building.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Deputy Prime Minister is giving an excellent speech about the importance of building homes. She mentioned the importance of getting young people out of temporary accommodation, which I wholly support. Does she agree that it is not just about temporary accommodation but about families who are suffering from overcrowding, families in unsuitable accommodation and families at risk of homelessness, with the anxiety that brings? My inbox is full of that from residents in Harlow.

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Not only have the Government inherited a really dire house building situation—we will turn the tide and build 1.5 million homes—but we have seen homelessness levels rise. The previous Government promised to end section 21 no-fault evictions but did not; we are going to do it. We will also bring in Awaab’s law, which will protect people in the rented sector. There is so much wrong with our housing system. The Government are starting to turn the tide on that. This Bill is one crucial step in the overall picture of what we are doing to improve circumstances for people, whether they want to buy a home, whether they are in a home or whether they are in privately rented accommodation.

I turn back to the planning committees. We will bring in new controls over the size of planning committees, increasing the pace and quality of decision making while maintaining robust debate. We are introducing mandatory training for planning committee members to improve their expertise while allowing councils to set their own planning fees to cover their costs, with a promise that that money will be reinvested in the system to help speed it up.

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (North Cotswolds) (Con)]

I welcome much of what the Bill will do. It will speeding up the planning system, which as a chartered surveyor who has practised in planning is I know desperately needed if we are to get more houses built. However, the one area of the Bill that I have concerns about is what she has just come on to. If local people feel completely overridden by their planning system, they will feel very hard done by. If we are to override local people, we might just as well have a nationally directed planning system rather than a local planning system. Will she think carefully about that balance?

[Angela Rayner]

I recognise the hon. Gentleman’s expertise in this area, and he is absolutely right to say that there has to be a balance; that is why the Bill sets out that controversial schemes will still go to full planning committees. I am sure he would recognise that there are other areas where local planners could do some of that work. If we set out the rules clearly, we can make the process better, so that where there is more need for that engagement—with the mandatory training for those on planning committees—we will get a better result. I hope the hon. Member will continue to engage with us in that vein.

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

I welcome the £2 billion in extra money for social homes being announced today and the 150 new nationally significant infrastructure projects for which the Bill will pave the way. We are the party of the builders, not the blockers, so more importantly we need more builders. That is why the £600 million announced for a new army of 60,000 more brickies, electricians and engineers is very welcome. Can I suggest that Rochdale’s Hopwood Hall college, which has a brilliant record in training construction workers, is included in this project?

[Angela Rayner]

As my hon. Friend says, 10 colleges of excellence were announced as part of the £600 million funding and 60,000 new apprenticeships. By giving our young people opportunities, this is part of making work pay. It will be fantastic, and I hope my hon. Friend will be engaged in that process. My colleagues in Government will have heard what he said. As a fellow Greater Manchester MP, I feel that Greater Manchester definitely should be part of that process.

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

To pick up on the tone of the comments made about blockers, I knock on many doors in my constituency and find the narrative about nimbys blocking housing and people not wanting homes built in their constituency to be untrue. People recognise the need for additional homes for themselves, their children and the growing population, but what they worry about is infrastructure. This Bill does not include mandatory infrastructure targets, and that is why residents are so sceptical. Given their inability to get GP appointments at the moment, with additional homes and additional demand they will struggle even more. How can we reassure them that those needs will be met in the future?

[Angela Rayner]

Let me be clear: I do not call people of this country the blockers. I do not see that when I am out and about; I never saw it during the general election campaign. People want this development. The hon. Member makes an important point about infrastructure; people often say that the infrastructure is not there. This Bill streamlines infrastructure. I think it goes some way towards doing the work. It is not everything; we have to do a lot of other things, like we have done with section 106, for example. Under the previous Government, we often did not get the benefit of that, because people wriggled out of their obligations. I appreciate the tone of the hon. Member’s remarks. This Government are going to make sure that we build the houses that people want, where they want them, with consultation and with the critical infrastructure that they need.

At the same time, we will unlock land for housing and infrastructure by reforming the compulsory purchase process, ensuring that important projects that deliver public benefits—such as many more social and affordable homes—are given the green light, and that compensation paid to landowners is not excessive.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

I warmly welcome the changes to hope value in order to build more affordable homes, but will the Secretary of State clarify whether that will also apply to wider projects for community benefit such as playing fields? Udney Park in Teddington in my constituency has lain derelict for over a decade as successive owners have wanted to develop it but cannot do so. There is a huge demand for community playing fields and the community wants to be able to access that land. Will she assure me that the hope value changes will apply much more broadly than just to affordable housing?

[Angela Rayner]

I hope that the hon. Member continues to engage, because we want to make sure that we can go as wide as we possibly can so that we get the land that is needed and we can build the houses that we desperately need. We are also doing work within the devolution Bill, which will be coming forward, around compulsory purchase on other assets of public value that are not for building on. That touches on the point that the hon. Member has raised.

We are also strengthening development corporations to make it easier to deliver the housing projects we need. Those corporations delivered previous generations of new towns. This Labour Government are building on our post-war legacy by giving them enhanced powers to help deliver our next generation of new towns. These will be communities built with local people in mind, with the affordable housing, GP surgeries, schools and public transport that working people expect and need.

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

The Deputy Prime Minister and I have a mutual passion: she too is a great fan of His Majesty’s work on the built environment and ensuring the high quality of design. One concern that a lot of people have is seeing the quality of design eroded, so that we see the same design in Kent as we do in Staffordshire. Would she look at what could be done to enhance design codes, because it feels like they have been eroded not enhanced?

[Angela Rayner]

The right hon. Gentleman reminds me of our time sparring at the Dispatch Box, but I am glad that I am on the Government side now. [Interruption.] I beg to differ.

The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about design, and we are covering that in our new towns. He is right that His Majesty is also passionate about this; I think everybody is to be honest—nobody wants to live in an ugly home. Design is important, and it is different in different places: Yorkshire is different from Manchester, which is different from Devon. Ensuring that design is part of the process is crucial, but it must not prevent us from going forward. That is why we have clarified some of the issues around “beautiful” in the NPPF that were holding things up. I want to reassure Members across the House that we expect safe homes, beautiful homes and homes fit for the future in terms of renewables and energy efficiency.

To meet our net zero ambitions and drive growth, the Bill will speed up approvals for clean energy projects. Some projects currently face waits of over 10 years—another legacy of Tory failure. With a first ready, first connected system replacing the flawed first come, first served approach, and with £200 billion of investment unlocking growth through “Clean Power by 2030”, our reforms will protect households from the rollercoaster of foreign fossil fuel markets and usher in a new era of energy independence, in which despots like Putin can no longer have their boot on the nation’s throat.

Britain’s electricity grid needs a 21st century overhaul to connect the right power in the right places, which is why our plans for vital energy projects needed for clean power, including wind and solar projects, will be prioritised for grid connections, with those living within 500 metres of new pylons getting up to £250 a year off their electricity bills. We recognise the service of these communities in hosting the infrastructure that will lower everyone’s energy bills.

[Bradley Thomas]

The Deputy Prime Minister makes an important point about the access to energy that all our communities require. Particularly prominent in all our minds, at a time when we recognise that food security is national security, is the displacement of high-quality agricultural land and, in effect, energy becoming a new cash crop. Will she assure the House that we are not at risk of falling into that trap and that we will not displace high-quality agricultural land for energy?

[Angela Rayner]

I can assure the hon. Member—I gave him two chances; I must like him—that we will protect high-quality agricultural land. Farmers have used land in various ways throughout the decades and generations, and we will protect our high-quality agricultural land.

Finally, I want to turn to the measures in the Bill on development and nature recovery. We have some incredibly important habits and species in this country, and the Government could not have been clearer in our manifesto that we are committed to improving outcomes for nature.

[Olivia Bailey (Reading West and Mid Berkshire) (Lab)]

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on a fantastic speech and a great piece of legislation that will turbocharge our plans to restore nature at scale and build the homes that we need. Will she say a little more about how the Bill could help us to restore our precious chalk streams, such as the River Pang in my constituency?

[Angela Rayner]

The Bill is about how we can do nature recovery and protect nature. We think that it is a win-win. Under the previous Government, all sorts of problems held us up, and we tried to work with the then Government but they would not work with us. That is why they are now on the Opposition Benches and we are on the Government Benches, building.

I am sure that all Members across the House share the goal of improving outcomes for nature, but I am also confident that no one here thinks that the system is working well. Any set of rules that results in a £100 million bat tunnel is an outrage. I know that Opposition Members agree, but they were determined to take a clumsy approach to fixing nutrient neutrality that risked ripping up environmental protections and would not have worked.

Thanks to a collaborative effort with organisations across the development and environmental sectors, our Bill sets out a better way. That is a win-win for development and for nature. The Bill establishes a nature restoration fund that will allow developers to make a simple payment to discharge their environmental obligations, and to crack on with the building of the homes and infrastructure projects that we desperately need. Natural England will use that money to take the action needed not just to avoid further decline in our natural world, but to bring about improvement.

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

It is reassuring to hear that the right hon. Lady is so passionate about restoring nature. How, then, can she explain the fact that planning permission, which the local council had refused, has been granted for a battery energy storage system on the green belt in Walsall?

[Angela Rayner]

I will not comment on individual projects, but we have been clear about nature recovery and protecting our natural spaces, as set out in the Bill. That is how we will put talk of newts and nutrient neutrality behind us and get Britain building, while stopping the pointless pitting of nature against development.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

The problems caused by the previous Government’s failure to tackle nutrient neutrality mean that north Cumbria faces significant house building issues. I strongly welcome the Bill’s provisions on the nature restoration fund. Will the Department work with the local authority to develop mitigation schemes that will get house building going in north Cumbria in the interim?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that long-standing issue. The Government are already engaging with the local authority in her area. She is absolutely right: for too long the previous Government were not listening. In the other place, and when I was in opposition, we tried to work with them on these issues and they refused.

The Bill is our reform to mark a new era for Britain. We are turning the page on the years of defeatism and decline in which this country of extraordinary talent and capability was held back by a system that was hobbled at every turn. With these landmark reforms, we are not just putting more money into the pockets of working people and strengthening communities; we are taking a major step forward to secure our country’s future for the long term. We are getting Britain building again, getting growth going and paving the way for national renewal. This is real delivery and real change to transform the lives of millions of people for years to come. I commend the Bill to the House.

Point of Order

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Tuesday 11th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I thank the hon. Member for his point of order. I am sure that his comments have been heard by those on the Treasury Bench.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I assure the House that no one has had a preview? The Planning and Infrastructure Bill is coming to the House. Of course, we regularly consult stakeholders, but no one has had a preview before the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I thank the Secretary of State for that point of clarification.

Bills Presented

Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57

Secretary Angela Rayner, supported by the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Ed Miliband, Secretary Heidi Alexander, Secretary Steve Reed, Secretary Jo Stevens and Secretary Ian Murray, presented a Bill to make provision about infrastructure; to make provision about town and country planning; to make provision for a scheme, administered by Natural England, for a nature restoration levy payable by developers; to make provision about development corporations; to make provision about the compulsory purchase of land; to make provision about environmental outcomes reports; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed (Bill 196) with explanatory notes (Bill 196—EN).

Sentencing Council (Powers of Secretary of State) Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Robert Jenrick, supported by Mrs Kemi Badenoch, Rebecca Harris, Dr Kieran Mullan and Helen Grant, presented a Bill to provide that the Sentencing Council may not issue sentencing guidelines without the consent of the Secretary of State; to give the Secretary of State the power to amend sentencing guidelines prepared by the Sentencing Council before they are issued; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 14 March, and to be printed (Bill 197).

Oral Answers to Questions

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Monday 3rd March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

12. What steps she plans to take to ensure that new housing developments have adequate access to primary health services.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

Through the revised national planning policy framework, this Government have strengthened the existing system of developer contributions to ensure that new developments provide the necessary infrastructure that communities expect and deserve, including health services. We will robustly hold developers to account for delivering on their obligations, and we will support local planning authorities to do so.

[Chris Coghlan]

Westvale Park in my constituency is a new housing development of 1,500 homes. Its residents have been waiting seven years for a GP surgery, and the existing GPs cannot expand their capacity. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how we can ensure that Westvale Park gets the GP surgery it has been promised, as well as the other associated infrastructure and primary healthcare services for new developments across my constituency?

[Angela Rayner]

I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman, which is why this Government have said that infrastructure must come as part of our 1.5 million homes. The Housing Minister will be happy to meet him.

[Ben Maguire]

Cornish house prices far exceed local wages, and in areas such as Rock and St Minver, 40% of houses are second homes. Meanwhile, more than 3,000 homes are set to be built in towns such as Bodmin by 2030, but the only GP surgery building is currently running at 150% capacity, despite a new building having been promised for years. Will the Secretary of State please ensure that national planning guidance mandates that primary care and education infrastructure is put in place before developments are started, preventing developers from later breaking their promises?

[Angela Rayner]

Again, I sympathise with the hon. Gentleman. As I have said, this Government are absolutely committed to ensuring that we get that infrastructure and that development is a truly plan-led system. The policy framework is meant to do that, and we intend to consult on future policy changes—including a set of national policies for decision making—this spring.

[Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)]

Last week, the Government produced new guidance about building on green-belt sites, particularly the golden rules about having sufficient infrastructure in place for health, education and transport. At the request of the Planning Inspectorate, Sheffield now has to provide sites in the green belt to hit its housing targets. Will the Secretary of State make arrangements for the Housing Minister to meet the leader of the council and local MPs to discuss how those arrangements can be delivered, and liaise with her colleagues in other Departments to ensure that: the resources are available to enable that to happen?

[Angela Rayner]

I can do better than that: the Housing Minister is going on Thursday.

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

When new housing was built in Mickleover under the last Government, residents were promised time and again that they would get a new GP surgery, but it never happened. What can this Government do to ensure that when new homes are built, residents have the GP access they need?

[Angela Rayner]

Again, I totally sympathise—I think this is why people have resisted some of these planning applications a lot of the time. That is why our Government are absolutely committed to ensuring, through the revised national planning policy framework, that infrastructure, including GP surgeries, is available when new housing is built.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)]

We know that through the section 106 agreement progress, the planning system is very good at levying funds for new NHS facilities, but NHS Property Services has not always been effective at building those facilities out on time. What assurance can the Secretary of State give the House that across Government there will be an appropriate focus on ensuring that NHS Property Services delivers the facilities that planning has secured?

[Angela Rayner]

The shadow Minister is absolutely right—it was his Government who did not do enough in this area. We have said that we will strengthen section 106 planning obligations, and we have also set up a unit within my Department to ensure that we hold developers to account and work across Government to ensure that infrastructure is built.

[Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)]

2. Whether the number of houses recommended by the new towns taskforce will be in addition to the housing targets set in the national policy planning framework.

--- Later in debate ---

[Satvir Kaur (Southampton Test) (Lab)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

In a written ministerial statement on 21 November, the Government committed to taking steps to bring the feudal leasehold system to an end and to reinvigorate commonhold to make it the default tenure for new flats. Today marks the first step in the transition, with the publication of the “Commonhold White Paper”, which sets out the Government’s proposal for how a reformed commonhold model will operate, based on the recommendations of the Law Commission.

[Satvir Kaur]

The last Government’s disastrous changes to permitted development rights saw over 100,000 office and retail units converted into unsafe and unsuitable homes. In Southampton, they have left people living with office wires still hanging from the ceiling. Some have no windows, and others’ homes are no bigger than a car parking space. I welcome the Government’s excellent progress on renters’ and leaseholders’ rights, but will my right hon. Friend go further and confirm when permitted development rights will be reviewed, tighter regulations imposed and, where necessary, unsafe conversions banned?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise that issue. We acknowledge that there has been criticism of some homes delivered through permitted development rights—particularly those that enabled commercial buildings such as offices and shops to change use to residential—and the Government are committed to keeping development rights under review.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

Help to Buy helped 350,000 young first-time buyers and the stamp duty discount helped 640,000 first-time buyers get on the housing ladder with discounts of up to £11,000. Both are now scrapped. Is the Secretary of State pulling up the housing ladder behind her?

[Angela Rayner]

It is staggering that the shadow Secretary of State says that, given that so many people now cannot get housing because his Government failed to meet their housing targets. We will have a mortgage guarantee scheme and we will build 1.5 million homes so that young people and other people can get the houses that they deserve.

[Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

I will try again. The Government’s manifesto promised to preserve the green belt. Then grey belt came along, which was supposed to be a few garage forecourts. Now it turns out that grey belt will mean 640 square miles of green belt—the size of Surrey—are to be built on. Is this simply another broken promise?

[Angela Rayner]

I will also try again. Under the Tories, the number of homes approved on greenfield land increased nearly tenfold since 2009. Labour will be strategic in grey belt release, and we will have a brownfield-first policy.

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

T2. Many families in my constituency live in new housing estates where the developers have made their profits, sailed off into the sunset, and left the roads and services in an unacceptable state and unadopted. What steps might the Government be able to take to push local authorities like Northumberland county council into action to accept their responsibilities and adopt those estates?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)]

On 8 February, the Court—a grade II listed landmark in Chorleywood in my constituency—burned down in mysterious circumstances. I met the three local councillors—Councillors Cooper, Hearn and Reed—on Friday to discuss the matter. I am not asking the Secretary of State to comment on this specific case, but will she confirm that where listed buildings are destroyed without permission, there should be a presumption that they are rebuilt brick by brick to how they were before the destruction?

[Angela Rayner]

I am sorry to hear about that particular case, and I am happy to meet the hon. Member to get the details; absolutely, listed buildings are an important part of our landscape.

[Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)]

T8. At nearly every single one of my advice surgeries, leaseholders in Stratford and Bow have told me appalling stories of disrepair, high service charges and no accountability from management agents, after years of broken promises of reform by the Conservative Government. I am pleased about today’s announcement on leasehold reform for new builds, but will the Minister assure my constituents about what concrete action will be taken for existing leaseholders?

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I rise to gently follow up on a critical request for urgent help that I made in November. In September 2023, Kirklees council temporarily closed Dewsbury sports centre for safety reasons due to reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete. The centre remained closed until 5 November 2024 when the council unilaterally decided to permanently close the centre without investigation. I raised the issue with the Secretary of State for DCMS and have written to the Prime Minister and the Chancellor for assistance. Will the Deputy Prime Minister facilitate an update for me on the issue?

[Angela Rayner]

The hon. Member makes an important point around safety and RAAC in our public buildings. We are absolutely committed to do all we can, despite the legacy given to us by the previous Government. I will ensure that he gets a meeting with the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North and Kimberley (Alex Norris).

Islamophobia: Definition Working Group

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Monday 3rd March 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

The Government have established a working group to provide a definition of anti-Muslim hatred/Islamophobia, chaired by the right hon. Dominic Grieve KC.

The group will advise the Government on how to best understand, quantify and define prejudice, discrimination and hate crimes against Muslims. Details of the group’s terms of reference and membership will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Incidents of anti-Muslim hate crime are at a record high in England and Wales, and the group’s work will support wider efforts to tackle religiously motivated hate crime, delivering on the Government’s plan for change mission for safer streets.

Alongside drawing on their own expertise, members will engage widely to ensure the definition accounts for the variety of backgrounds and experiences of Muslim communities across the United Kingdom.

The group’s proposed definition will be non-statutory and will seek to provide the Government and other relevant bodies with an understanding of unacceptable treatment and prejudice against Muslim communities.

The group’s proposed definition must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression—which includes the right to criticise, express dislike of, or insult religions and or the beliefs and practices of adherents. This work will support these important freedoms, ensuring that they are preserved.

The Government will continue to work with communities and other partners to heal the divisions of recent years and renew our country together. The working group announced today is an important step in that mission.

[HCWS487]

Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Phase 2 Report

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Wednesday 26th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

This Government accept that the final report of the Grenfell Tower inquiry must be the catalyst for long-lasting systemic change. All Members of the House, past and present, will have shared my anger over its shocking findings. The inquiry chair, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, and his dedicated team uncovered damning evidence of political, corporate and individual failings going back decades. These led to the loss of 72 innocent lives, 18 of them children, on that terrible night in June 2017. It was a deadly betrayal and a national tragedy that must never happen again. I repeat today what the Prime Minister said in September to the bereaved families, the survivors and those in the immediate Grenfell community, some of whom are with us today in the Gallery: on behalf of the Government, the British state and those responsible, I am very sorry.

The inquiry report made 58 recommendations, of which 37 were directed at the Government. The Government accept the findings of the report and will take forward all the recommendations. Our response published today addresses each in turn and goes further, to set out our wider reforms of social housing and the construction sector. As we make these vital changes, we will publish quarterly reports on progress and update Parliament annually. The Government are open to scrutiny and will remain accountable for their actions.

We will prioritise residents and protect their interests, make sure that industry builds safe homes, and provide clearer accountability and enforcement. To have anyone anywhere living in an unsafe home is one person too many. That will be our guiding principle, and it must be that of anyone who wants to build or care for our homes. That will be an important part of the legacy of Grenfell.

For nearly eight years, despite their pain, the bereaved, survivors and members of the community have campaigned with determination, not wanting anyone to suffer as they have. It is fair to say that the building system we have today is not the same as the one that was justly criticised in the report—the one we had leading up to the tragic events of 2017. But it is also clear that there is still much more to do, so I can announce that we will create a single construction regulator and a chief construction adviser. We will set out our detailed plans later this year.

I am accepting the recommendations to professionalise fire engineers and assessors, to licence principal contractors and to review the role of building control. Where standards are clear and industry has clarity and certainty on how individuals and firms must behave, it encourages investor confidence. This will improve the safety of residents, and support the construction industry and our mission to deliver economic growth.

We have pledged to build 1.5 million homes over the Parliament to tackle our country’s acute housing crisis, as part of our plan for change to improve the lives of people across the country. It is vital that these future homes, as well as existing homes, are safe and of high quality, and I welcome how some parts of the industry have stepped up to lead the necessary change in culture and approach.

But lest we forget, Sir Martin found that just about every institution and organisation charged with keeping the tower safe and protecting those who called it home failed. His most devastating conclusion was that every single death was avoidable. The inquiry uncovered serial incompetence and negligence, complacency and inaction, and blatant dishonesty and greed. The organisations that failed included the Government and regulators; the Department I now lead, which failed to act on known risks and ignored, delayed or disregarded matters affecting the safety of life; and the manufacturing companies, including Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex, whose products were used to refurbish the tower. The report found that they acted with systemic dishonesty as they mis-sold and marketed them. Their disgraceful mercenary behaviour put profit before people and exploited the regulatory regime to evade accountability, with fatal consequences. To my disgust and their shame, some have shown little remorse and have refused even to help fix the building safety crisis that they did so much to create.

Companies must be held to account for their role in Grenfell. The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office is announcing today that she will use new powers under the Procurement Act 2023 to investigate Arconic, Kingspan, Saint-Gobain as the owner of Celotex at the time and other organisations. I expect swift, decisive action and will ensure that progress is reported.

But we must do more to make sure that the right rules are in place. To this day, critical gaps persist in how construction products are regulated. Only with rigorous reform will we transform the culture that allowed the tragedy to happen. To achieve that, we are also publishing today a construction products reform Green Paper. It will help us to cut out the rot in the sector and allow competence to take root. Safety will come first and a culture of responsibility will prevail. We will celebrate those who lead the way, and those who fall short will suffer the consequences. In the future, rogue companies will be held to account. Our Green Paper sets out our ideas for prison time for executives who break the rules and unlimited fines where safety is put at risk. We will do whatever it takes.

Across the sector, there is appetite for change. That change is overdue, and we will lead it. I pay tribute to the enduring resilience and resolve of the bereaved families, the survivors and the members of the immediate community. Their campaigning has seen new legislation passed, which members of this Government supported, that has made our public realm more secure. Everyone is safer thanks to the Building Safety Act 2022, which set new standards for the construction of residential buildings in England. The Act introduced the Building Safety Regulator and provisions for high-risk buildings. All people living in flats now know that the entrance doors, external walls and structure of their homes are in scope of fire risk assessments thanks to the Fire Safety Act 2021. There are new duties for owners and managers of buildings and blocks of flats. The Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 ensures that landlords are held to account.

I have challenged the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to demonstrate how it has changed by becoming an exemplar landlord and local authority. I will be keeping a close eye on its progress, and we will listen to its tenants to assess whether it has succeeded.

We are pushing ahead with the remediation acceleration plan to fix all buildings around the country that still have dangerous cladding, and where building owners fall short, we will act. We are introducing regulations to improve the fire safety and evacuation of disabled and vulnerable residents in high-rise and higher-risk residential buildings. As of 1 April, ministerial responsibilities for fire functions will move from the Home Office to my Department, in line with the inquiry’s recommendation that we bring responsibility for fire safety into a single Department.

People and their safety are front and centre of our inquiry response, but there remains a stark and terrible reality: the bereaved, the survivors and members of the Grenfell community are still waiting for the justice they need and deserve. Justice must be done. The ongoing Metropolitan police investigation is among the biggest it has ever undertaken, and the Met has the Government’s full support. In September, the Prime Minister rightly said that this tragedy poses questions about what social justice means in Britain today, and whether the voices of working-class people, those with disabilities and those of colour are ignored and dismissed. I am here to say that we will not be that country. We will be a country where decent housing, security, safety and peace of mind are shared by all and are not just the privilege of a few.

The lessons of the inquiry should not have taken a tragedy to unearth. We will honour the memory of those who lost their lives by bringing about meaningful change in their name—change that will make life better for everyone. We are under no illusions about the scale of the task at hand. The responsibility to deliver lasting change is the privilege of leadership. That will not be done by Government alone, but we will put our voice and power in the service of the cause that the Grenfell community has continued to fight for nearly eight long years. Together we will bring about the transformational change that the people of this country deserve. It is with that admiration for the spirit of the Grenfell community and the determination to honour it that I commend the statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

May I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for advance sight of her statement and the Government’s response to the phase 2 report?

I echo the Deputy Prime Minister’s sentiments, which are shared across the House. The tragedy of Grenfell, which claimed 72 innocent lives—54 adults and 18 children—will always remain a scar on our national conscience. I thank Sir Martin Moore-Bick and his team for their work. I join the Deputy Prime Minister in offering my deepest apologies to the bereaved, the survivors and the Grenfell community for the failures that led to that horrific night in June 2017—we all remember where we were that night. I also thank them for their constant and constructive campaigning.

The inquiry’s findings—decades of systemic failure, dishonesty and negligence—are a damning indictment of successive Governments, regulators and industry. The Government’s response, with its acceptance of all 58 recommendations, is a step forward, and I welcome the commitment to action. The creation of a single construction regulator, the appointment of a chief construction adviser and the consolidation of fire safety functions under one Department are long overdue reforms. So too is the focus on professionalising fire engineers and reforming the construction products sector, which the inquiry exposed as riddled with systemic dishonesty from firms such as Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex.

The Green Paper on construction products reform is a promising start, but it must deliver real accountability. Unlimited fines and prison sentences for rogue executives and, where appropriate, Government officials, cannot remain mere rhetoric. Ambition must be matched by urgency and scrutiny. Nearly eight years have passed since Grenfell, yet thousands still live in buildings with unsafe cladding and other fire safety defects. Although I welcome the fact that the Deputy Prime Minister has accepted the majority of the recommendations, why has she not accepted the inquiry’s recommendation for a single regulator to oversee the testing and certification of construction products, leaving that instead with conformity assessment bodies? I remind her that the Building Research Establishment, which is itself a conformity assessment body, was strongly criticised for its conflicts of interest.

The remediation acceleration plan is welcome, but its targets of assessing all buildings by July 2025 and completing works by 2027 relies heavily on developers stepping up voluntarily. What actions will the Deputy Prime Minister take if they do not comply? Will she work to deliver solutions for non-qualifying leaseholders and those at risk as a consequence of other fire safety defects? This House needs concrete assurances that no resident will be left behind. I question the phased approach to implementation stretching beyond 2028. Justice delayed is justice denied. The Grenfell community has waited long enough for change. Why must they potentially wait another parliamentary term for full delivery?

What discussions has the Leader of the House had with parliamentary colleagues on the establishment of a public inquiries Joint Committee to monitor the implementation of public inquiry recommendations? What is the timetable for the new publicly available record on all public inquiry recommendations since 2024? On social housing, the extension of Awaab’s law and new standards are positive, but the Government must go further to address the inquiry’s wider lesson. Residents’ voices were ignored. Tenant empowerment must be more than a panel or a campaign; it needs legal teeth to ensure landlords act on concerns swiftly.

Justice demands accountability. The Metropolitan police investigation has our full support, but the pace must quicken. Those who profited from cutting comers or were criminally negligent must face consequences—not just fines but criminal charges where evidence allows. Grenfell must be a watershed—a legacy of safety, transparency and respect for every resident. I make our clear commitment to work with the Deputy Prime Minister and the Government, on a cross-party basis, to meet that promise.

[Angela Rayner]

I thank the shadow Secretary of State for his comments and the way in which he makes them. I hope genuinely that we can work together to continue this piece of work. I recognised in my statement the work of the previous Government, through the Building Safety Act and other measures, and we will continue to work in that vein.

I hope that the shadow Secretary of State recognises some of the work that we are already doing. We have brought forward a significant amount of legislation on social tenancy, on empowering tenants through the Renters’ Rights Bill, on protecting leaseholders, and on our remediation acceleration plan. The Government will deliver those legislative changes as soon as parliamentary time allows. The legislation commitments are detailed in the plan. That includes creating certainty on buildings that need remediation and on who is responsible for remediating them; making obligations for assessing and completing regulation remediation clearer, with severe consequences for non-compliance; and giving residents greater control in situations of acute harm where landlords have neglected their responsibilities.

The shadow Secretary of State asks about a single construction regulator. We accepted that recommendation in principle, but the single regulator will deliver the functions recommended by the inquiry, with two exceptions to avoid conflicts of interest: setting the rules for construction products and policing its own compliance. We will consult on the design of the regulator in the autumn.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee.

[Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)]

Today is yet another long, exhausting day for the loved ones of the victims of Grenfell, who are still having to fight for justice nearly eight years on. I welcome the Secretary of State’s response and look forward to the Select Committee’s scrutiny of the Green Paper and the proposals for the single construction regulator.

If we are honest, however, what the Secretary of State has outlined will not tackle the root cause of the systematic ignorance of tenants’ concerns—that toxic stigma at the heart of our social housing sector. What steps is she taking to ensure that tenants have a voice in the social housing sector and are shown respect when they raise concerns for their families?

We must never forget that 41% of the victims of Grenfell were disabled. That figure underlines the collective failure of the system to protect those in need. The Government’s commitment to residential evacuation plans for disabled people in high-rise buildings is a welcome step forward, but I would be grateful if the Secretary of State clarified how the Government intend to make residential personal emergency evacuation plans—PEEPs—enforceable if the responsible person fails to identify the vulnerable resident. I am also pleased that funding has been allocated for that in the social sector, but in reality disabled people live in all types of housing. Will she commit to ensuring that disabled people in the private rented sector have the same access to evacuation plans as those in the social sector?

None of the families present in the Public Gallery should have to be here. The tragedy in 2017 happened in the holy month of Ramadan, and as we approach Ramadan this week—a time that should be dedicated to reflection, healing and togetherness—too many families are still fighting for justice. No family member present should have to spend their time demanding accountability when they should be focused on recovering from their trauma. I pay tribute to them for their tireless efforts, and pledge to continue to be a voice for them in their fight for justice without any more delay.

[Angela Rayner]

I know that my hon. Friend, as Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, is committed to the rights of social housing tenants. As she outlined, the social housing system has not been fit for purpose, and those failings contributed to the Grenfell tragedy. We are driving up standards in social housing through stronger regulation and enforcement measures, strengthening tenants’ voices and improving access to redress. Those reforms will ensure that landlords are held accountable for the quality of the homes and services that they provide.

At the heart of the new regulatory regime is the requirement for all landlords to treat tenants with fairness and respect. Social landlords are required to understand and provide information and support that recognises the diverse needs of their tenants, including those arising from protected characteristics and language barriers. The Government will lay regulations as soon as possible this year on the social housing provider funding made available for residential PEEPs. We will direct the regulator to set standards on the competency and conduct of staff to ensure that tenants are treated with respect.

At a national level, we have extended the social housing residents panel to help ensure that tenants’ voices and experiences inform policy development. We will keep a new regulatory system under review. We will evaluate its effectiveness by 2028 to ensure that it is delivering the improvements we need. We will set out further measures to strengthen residents’ voices in the long-term housing strategy later this year.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

Liberal Democrats stand firmly with the many bereaved family members, as well as the immediate community, friends and neighbours, as they mourn the 72 people, including children, who tragically lost their lives in 2017. Any steps regarding changes to the building will be a deeply personal matter for that community, and I know that the Secretary of State will approach any decisions about the future of the building with due respect for the local community, survivors and victims. We therefore welcome the Government’s decision to work with the Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission to design a memorial, and we urge the Government to approach the discussion with respect and sympathy for those who suffered, as I am sure the Secretary of State will do.

As we approach eight years since the Grenfell fire, Liberal Democrats are concerned that there are still thousands of people in the UK living in buildings with dangerous cladding. The Grenfell inquiry provided a detailed look at the facts leading up to the night of 14 June 2017, including looking at the underlying causes of the fire, where mistakes were made, the condition of the tower and the responses of the public and the emergency services. On the recommendations to the architectural profession, I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests—I am a member of the Royal Institute of British Architects.

There are lessons to be learned by ever authority in the land. We recognise that the previous Government provided funding to start the process of dealing with cladding, which is slowly being allocated, but it is now time to accelerate that vital work to make all buildings safe. We are concerned that too many developers and building owners are passing the cost of remediation work on to tenants and leaseholders, which puts many at serious financial risk.

Liberal Democrats endorse all 57 recommendations of the Grenfell inquiry phase 2 report by Sir Martin Moore-Bick, including the creation of legally enforceable orders to remediate premises so they are safe, on pain of criminal sanction. However, we need to take further steps to guard against commercial interests overriding safety, as they did in both the testing of materials and the enforcement of building regulations. We would like to see more done to ensure that commerciality will not, shockingly and disgracefully, override interests of safety ever again.

It is time to invest in our housing stock so that the cladding is dealt with. It is time for justice for the victims and for all those living in unsafe housing. Lib Dems stand ready to work across parties to do achieve that.

[Angela Rayner]

I thank the hon. Member for his commitment and support in taking forward the recommendations that came from the inquiry. I thank him for his comments about ensuring that we take decisions about the future of Grenfell in the most sensitive of ways. I absolutely agree with him, and I am committed to taking the next steps respectfully and carefully with the community. I continue to support the independent Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission as the community choose a design team to work with them on designing a memorial.

I agree that it is a priority for us to work at pace because the work is urgent. We are working as quickly as we possibly can. Some of the inquiry recommendations are wide-reaching and some will require further work, including public consultation, before they can be delivered. However, where we can work quickly, such as with the machinery of Government change—moving responsibility for fire to my Department—we are committed to doing that.

I hope the hon. Gentleman heard my words on the acceleration of remediation and our action plan. As I hope was reflected in my response, I agree entirely with his comments about commerciality not taking precedent or having any control over safety. Safety must come first and this Government are committed to that.

[Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)]

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for her statement today and the Prime Minister for his statement on 4 September, which made it clear that the lessons from Grenfell are central to this Government’s missions. Today is another painful step towards truth, justice and change for the bereaved families of the 72 people who lost their lives at Grenfell, the survivors and the community in my constituency of Kensington and Bayswater, many of whom have joined us today. I pay tribute again to their strength and resilience.

The fight for justice, now nearly eight years long, will continue after today, and every day, until we have criminal prosecutions and true accountability for those responsible, including those companies referenced in the inquiry report. I know the Government have looked seriously at the inquiry recommendations, and I welcome the commitment to meaningful change across all of them, but too often recommendations from public inquiries fail to be implemented. Indeed, if the lessons from previous fires had been learned, including at Lakanal House in 2009, then lives would have been saved—this was avoidable. Will the Deputy Prime Minister assure me that the Government will consider a strong oversight mechanism to ensure accountability for implementing what has been set out today, so that it lasts beyond any one Government and leads to real change?

Will she also provide further detail on how she plans to ensure accountability for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, given their culpability before, during and after the fire? The council’s culture desperately needs to change and there needs to be an improvement in the quality of services in our community today.

[Angela Rayner]

I thank and pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the way he has constructively challenged and worked with us on behalf of his constituents. I know this report has great personal significance for his constituents, and I pay tribute to his dedicated work as an advocate in calling for truth, justice and change for the Grenfell community.

I agree that robust oversight of the Government’s implementation of the response is essential for this, and for all public inquiries. The system needs to be improved and we are taking forward the inquiry’s recommendations on oversight. We will create a publicly accessible record on gov.uk of recommendations made by public inquiries since 2024, and we will consider making that a legal requirement as part of a wider review of the inquiry’s framework.

On the Grenfell inquiry recommendations, my Department will publish quarterly progress updates on gov.uk until they have all been delivered. We will report annually to Parliament to enable Members to scrutinise our progress and hold us to account.

On my hon. Friend’s comments about the council, the council failed in some of its most fundamental duties to keep residents safe, to listen to their concerns and to respond effectively when disaster struck. The council was right to apologise, but it is clear that more must be done. I have welcomed the council’s commitment to improvement and culture change, and I have set my challenge to the leader of the council to ensure that those improvements are a reality felt by the council’s residents. I will continue to engage and keep an eye on that progress.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. All our thoughts are with the victims and their families. I know the Secretary of State will keep us up to date about the permanent memorial. However, the big failure that she has not spoken about was the testing regime for the products that were put on Grenfell, and on buildings up and down the country. Firms deliberately cheated the testing regime system, so products were signed off as safe. Will she undertake to overhaul safety mechanisms and the testing regime for products, so that buildings, both the ones we have already and those built in the future, will be safe for the residents who live in them?

[Angela Rayner]

I agree with what the hon. Gentleman says. The Government are committed to a system-wide reform of the construction product regime, ensuring that we address the significant gaps that the Grenfell inquiry and the independent review of the construction product testing regime have exposed. The construction products Green Paper that we have published today is a significant step forward towards a construction products regime that has public safety at its heart. I hope we can continue to work across Government and across the House to ensure that we have a system that is fit for purpose for the future.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State go a little further than she did in her reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell)? It is good that she will have a publicly accessible record of recommendations. Will she commit to what the charity Inquest and many others have asked for, which is a national oversight mechanism—a body that collates, analyses and follows up on the recommendations of inquiries and inquests? Otherwise, there is a real danger that these recommendations and others will gather dust on the shelf.

[Angela Rayner]

I heard directly from members of the Grenfell community their call for the Government to introduce a national oversight mechanism. We recognise that this goes wider than Grenfell and that it is an important issue for other communities and families, such as those affected by covid-19 and the blood scandal. We are considering that in the year ahead as part of measures to strengthen public inquiries, and the Government will listen to the views of the affected families as part of that consideration.

[Julia Lopez (Hornchurch and Upminster) (Con)]

The Grenfell fire was an appalling tragedy, but it also threw a blanket of uncertainty over countless residents in many of our constituencies who are trapped in cladded properties. When I hear the Deputy Prime Minister talk about a new regulatory regime and change, I confess I feel very nervous that any changes to the regulatory regime will throw further uncertainty over those who are still trapped in their homes. Can she assure the House that any move she makes will not create further uncertainty about the standards to which buildings need to be remediated? I also highlight the case of my constituents in Harold Wood, who had their buildings assessed by a fire risk assessor who was subsequently struck off. Those people, who thought they were going to be released from that terrible stasis, are now back to not knowing where they stand, so will she please look into those concerns?

[Angela Rayner]

I hope that what we are announcing today will bring clarity to the system. One of the things that came out of the phase 2 report was about the system being disjointed. Bringing clarity will hopefully ensure that people understand what they are meant to do—what their legal obligations are—and that we expect them to do it; if they do not do it, there will be serious consequences.

I also point to the remediation acceleration plan. I completely understand that many people are still in buildings that are unsafe, which is unacceptable. That is why this Government are taking action. On the Harold Wood case, I am happy for the hon. Lady to meet the Building Safety Minister about that.

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her important statement. The people of Grenfell were treated badly because of who they were, what they looked like and how much they earned. We say that 72 people were killed in Grenfell, but the police are holding ashes for which they have no name. Nobody should have to go through this; the families should never have to go through this. This should never happen again. Does she agree that, as well as the chief executive officers of the companies, all the people in the council who treated the residents badly and did not listen to them, because of what they looked like, must be held accountable? Everybody needs to be held accountable.

[Angela Rayner]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. At the heart of the new regulatory regime is the requirement that all landlords treat their tenants with fairness and respect, and take action so that the services they provide have fair and equitable outcomes. Social landlords are required to understand and provide information and support that recognise the diverse needs of their tenants, including those arising from protected characteristics. That has not been so in the past, and, if I am honest, it does not feel like it is the case today when I speak to residents of the community. That is why I have pushed the council in that particular area and why this Government are bringing forward legislation that says we respect people. Whether they are social tenants or private tenants, they deserve a safe and secure home and to be treated with dignity and respect.

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister’s statement, and the moves towards centralised regulation and improved safety generally. Does the report not serve as a single act of shame for this country? As she just said, it reveals that the safety and quality of social housing has been considered to matter less, because the people who live in social housing have been considered to matter less. Should that point of view, which has been in place since the decline in building standards in the 1960s, not be a matter of deep national repentance?

As the Deputy Prime Minister seeks to tackle that, has she spoken to or is she continuing to speak to her right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer? There is a cost to making sure that we build to a high standard, as we did immediately after the war, while also expanding the number of social rented homes, particularly in parts of the country where build costs are more expensive, such as London and the Lake district.

[Angela Rayner]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for the way in which he articulated that point. I am still dismayed to this day by archaic attitudes towards people in social tenancy. I was a social tenant for a very long time and grew up in a council house. The issue is the way that these people were treated, especially after this report. I ask anyone who works in social housing to read the report—or at least the executive findings, if they do not want to go through the chapters that I went through. Sir Martin outlines the horrifying way that people were treated. That is a shame for our country, and we must do better. Hopefully, the legislation we are bringing forward will bring about a cultural change.

I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that social housing should be of high quality, safe, affordable and warm, and this Government will continue to ensure that. Safety will not be compromised in our building 1.5 million homes; nor will building 1.5 million homes compromise our ability to bring up to standard homes that are not up to standard. We have all seen the reports, and we have all seen on television programmes that show people still living in damp, mouldy properties. That has to end.

[Ben Coleman (Chelsea and Fulham) (Lab)]

I also welcome the statement by the Deputy Prime Minister. The people in my constituency of Chelsea and Fulham stand shoulder to shoulder with the people who lived in Grenfell Tower, who have suffered hugely. The pain is still felt throughout the whole community. I am delighted to hear my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) highlighting again the culpability of the local council and the contractors. I know from my own experience that there is much for the council to do to improve its respect for, and the way it deals with, people living in social housing.

I pick up on the point made powerfully by my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi) about disabled people, 15 of whom died in Grenfell Tower because they had no personal emergency evacuation plan. I, like her, welcome the Deputy Prime Minister’s commitment to introducing regulation to improve the fire safety and evacuation of disabled and vulnerable people, but when will we see the details? Will those regulations apply to all disabled residents, wherever they live? What legal weight will they have? Can we be absolutely sure that everything is being done to ensure that disabled people have the evacuation plans that they need in order to escape in the event of a terrible fire, such as that at Grenfell?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Since taking office, we have ensured that all the outstanding phase 1 recommendations were fully considered and responded to. The Government announced on 2 September 2024 that a residential PEEP policy would be taken forward, and we also committed funding for it. The Government will lay regulations as soon as possible, and social housing providers funding will be made available this year.

This policy aims to improve the fire safety and evacuation of disabled and vulnerable residents in high-rise and higher-rise residential buildings in England by providing residents who have disabilities and impairments with a person-centred risk assessment that identifies appropriate equipment and adjustments. It aims to aid their fire safety and evacuation by ensuring that there is a residential PEEP statement that records what vulnerable residents should do in the event of a fire, and records information for fire and rescue services, in case they need to undertake evacuation. We will continue to keep that under review.

[Sir Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

I refer the House to my declaration of voluntary interests. I commend the Deputy Prime Minister for the sensitivity with which she is approaching the issue, both with families and in the House today. As she knows, mediation efforts with residents of Grenfell are being led by Lord Neuberger and others. I genuinely believe that mediation is of massive value in this situation. I realise that much of this is in the legal sphere, but can she and the Government commit in any way to supporting those mediation efforts?

[Angela Rayner]

It is absolutely right that we look at all options, and I am happy for the right hon. Gentleman to take that matter up with the safety Minister as well. We want to continue to support the community, who have been through so much. I visited the site and met the headteacher of the school; children who were not even born when the tragedy happened are still suffering the effects of the trauma today. We are committed to supporting the community, the bereaved and the survivors for as long as it takes.

[Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)]

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for her response to the report on the Grenfell tragedy. Flats in a large leasehold block in my constituency were given a B2 EWS1 certificate by Adam Kiziak of Tri Fire Ltd. He and Tri Fire are now being investigated for potential malpractice by the Institution of Fire Engineers. One of my constituents, a leaseholder in that block, told me that they do not know whether their certificates are valid, or whether their problems can be remediated through the building safety fund. They do not even know whether their block still has a safety issue, and that is quite apart from the fact that those needing to move cannot sell because mortgage lenders will not lend. How and when can leaseholders such as my constituents get the assurances they need, including the assurance that no more fire inspectors will be allowed to get away with what Adam Kiziak did?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank my hon. Friend for that very important question, and I am sorry about the situation that her constituents find themselves in. I understand that the relevant professional body is investigating that case, and it would be wrong of me to comment on the specifics, but we are working to encourage mortgage lenders to act proportionately, in order to provide support to leaseholders and buyers in buildings with EWS1 certificates that mortgage lenders are not accepting. Where a building is in a remediation scheme or the leaseholder is protected by the Building Safety Act 2022, we expect the 10 lenders that have signed the industry cladding statement to honour that statement and not require the EWS1. If my hon. Friend wants to speak to the safety Minister about that case, I am sure he would be happy to meet her.

[Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)]

I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister’s statement. I particularly welcome the Government’s acceptance of the recommendation on professionalising and regulating fire engineers and assessors, not least because five years ago, in the Committee on the Fire Safety Act 2021, I tabled new clause 2, which would have created a public register of fire risk assessors. Had my new clause been accepted, we might have been able to avoid the developing scandal of the issuance of potentially fraudulent EWS1 certificates by Tri Fire, which could have a devastating impact on thousands of leaseholders, including some in my constituency. In the light of those concerns, which have been raised both in the media and in the Chamber today by Members from all sides of the House, can I urge the Deputy Prime Minister to convene a meeting for all MPs whose constituents are affected, and does she agree that it is time that the police investigated those reports?

[Angela Rayner]

Let me expand my invitation: I am sure that the safety Minister would be happy to meet the hon. Lady. We will legislate to make it a mandatory requirement that fire risk assessors are competent to perform their critical role, and are certified against approved standards by a certification body accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service. The Government are supporting an industry-led British standard for fire risk assessors; that standard is currently being drafted, and once it is completed, that will create a single, clear definition of competence against which certification and qualification should be mapped.

[Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)]

Our thoughts today are obviously with the Grenfell survivors, and the family and friends of those who died. I thank my right hon. Friend for her comprehensive response to the inquiry report. I think I agree with everything she said, but I seek one point of clarification, and there is one area in which I will push her to go a little further, if I may.

First, as my right hon. Friend said, it is really important that we respect and value social housing tenants and treat them equally. Will she give social housing tenants access to the building safety fund on equal terms with private leaseholders? Secondly, the testing of products by construction manufacturers has been a disgrace for many years. They have gone from one testing house to another until they have found one that passes their products. Those products could come on the market, having had several failures and one pass. Will my right hon. Friend pick up a cross-party recommendation made by the Select Committee in the last Parliament—the recommendation that the results of every test done on a construction product be made public, whether the result was failure or a pass, so that we can all see the real strength of products, and whether they are fit for purpose, before they are put on buildings?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments, and I am certainly happy to look at that recommendation. We accepted in full all the recommendations that the phase 2 report came out with; that is an important baseline, but I am happy to look at what more we can do.

Turning to social housing, we will set out plans in the autumn Budget to give councils and housing associations the rent stability that they need in order to borrow and invest in new and existing homes, while also ensuring appropriate protections for existing and future housing tenants. We will bring forward details of future Government investment in the forthcoming spending review, and we will keep that issue under review.

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

Leaseholders listening to the Deputy Prime Minister’s very comprehensive statement will have heard her mention the role of developers in remediation for blocks covered in inadequate and dangerous cladding. Can she explain in more detail what happens when developers have defaulted in some way and are no longer in existence, and freeholders then seek to visit the costs of remediation on the innocent leaseholders? I think the legislation covers those situations to some extent, but it would be helpful if the Deputy Prime Minister provided more detail.

[Angela Rayner]

Those freeholders will get access to the cladding remediation scheme. We are really clear that building owners must fix their buildings—there is no doubt about that—and there are already legal powers to force landlords to act. We will make them do so quicker and give them a harder bite, but we also recognise that in some situations, that will not happen. That is why the cladding remediation scheme is available.

[Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State is right to say that progress has been made on building safety, but that we need to go much further. As she knows, fire and rescue services have already made huge improvements in this area, through both new equipment and improved processes, but we must roll out stronger national standards across the fire and rescue sector. What progress is being made on establishing a national college of fire and rescue?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The recommendations of Sir Martin’s phase 2 report were very clear, and we are taking them forward. We intend to launch a consultation this summer on the college of fire and rescue, including its proposed functions and structures. Delivering a college will require careful planning and investment, as well as legislation to ensure that it has the necessary legal foundations. We are also considering funding models as part of the spending review.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

I welcome everything that the Deputy Prime Minister and other right hon. and hon. Members have said, but there is a fatal flaw that has still not been raised. Speaking as someone with 30 years’ experience in the real estate sector, I urge the Deputy Prime Minister and her officials to focus on the single staircase. The 2009 Lakanal House report recommended that fire suppression systems—sprinkler systems—be installed retrospectively in buildings above six storeys. That is the best way to save lives, and I think we need to look at that recommendation again for existing buildings. Future buildings above six storeys can still be designed with a single staircase until 2028; I urge the Deputy Prime Minister to say that that is too long.

[Angela Rayner]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his contribution to this debate, and for his expertise in this area. The approved document B is now subject to continuous review by the Building Safety Regulator, which has already taken steps regarding this matter, and a wider review of building safety regulations will be undertaken. We will consider what action is needed on all resulting recommendations.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State and her team for their work on the Government’s response to the inquiry. Having spent my life in the construction sector, I can tell the House that fixing construction products is incredibly challenging. I really welcome the Green Paper published today, because we have to get that right.

I have two questions for the Secretary of State. First, could she confirm that the new regulator and adviser will work with Government and industry bodies, including the Construction Leadership Council? It is co-chaired by the Minister for Industry and Mark Reynolds of Mace, and has already done some brilliant work on building safety. Secondly, could she set out a bit more clearly what teeth the new regulator will have to tackle dodgy developers and cowboy builders, big and small?

[Angela Rayner]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and yes, those bodies will work together. That is what we want to see. We have granted funding and support to the Building Safety Regulator and the Health and Safety Executive to improve the support that is offered, and we will continue to do that. The bodies will have teeth. We will be looking at what further legislation we may need, but we expect action to be taken where there are issues and where things have been highlighted. When action is not taken, we expect there to be consequences.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for her commitment to the inquiry’s recommendations and her commitment to systemic change. Picking up the thread from two Government Members on an oversight mechanism for state-related deaths, I was shocked to discover that it is nobody’s job to track recommendations from prevention of future deaths reports and make sure they are enacted. Those have relevance for victims of huge tragedies such as this, but just as much for individual tragedies, such as that of one of my constituents. I have a private Member’s Bill on that proposal. Will the Deputy Prime Minister meet me to talk about this idea in detail and how it can be enacted?

[Angela Rayner]

The hon. Member is absolutely right to raise the oversight mechanism. I think I have addressed some of that and the wider issues, not just in terms of this inquiry, but all the inquiries that we have had. There have been far too many inquiries into tragedies, in the sense that these scandals and tragedies should not happening in the first place. We are committed to looking at oversight mechanisms, and I have detailed the oversight mechanisms I expect from my Department and the recommendations from Grenfell. I am happy for her to share that information with my Department, and I will take those considerations into account.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

My thoughts today are with the survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster and the 72 families who are still mourning the loss of a loved one. I pay tribute to their immense dignity, as they continue to fight for justice.

I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister’s clear commitment to implement all of Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s recommendations. I have constituents living in blocks with fire safety issues. Those are often not cladding-related issues, but issues identified as part of the wider scandal in the construction industry uncovered by fire safety inspections post-Grenfell. In some cases there have been terrifying fires in these blocks, leaving residents feeling unsafe and leaseholders trapped in unsellable flats, as building owners and construction firms argue over who is responsible for the fire safety defects and fail to resolve the issues. Can the Deputy Prime Minister therefore say, as she moves forward to implement Sir Martin’s recommendations, when she would expect my constituents to have a clear plan, with a timescale attached to it, for the remediation work needed in unsafe buildings? Where is the accountability in the meantime?

[Angela Rayner]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that, nearly eight years on from the tragedy of Grenfell, it is completely unacceptable that people are still living in unsafe buildings. I respect and pay tribute to what previous Governments have done. That legislation has enabled authorities to take action, and we have been supporting them in making sure that action is taken. Our remediation acceleration plan will also outline how we can ensure that those responsible for remediating buildings, whether that relates to fire safety or any other defects, are held accountable, so that we can take those actions and get that remediation done as quickly as possible. I do not want it to take another eight years before people are living in safe and secure homes. I expect to do it as quickly as possible, and action is already being taken.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for what she said today and how she said it. I hope that the families of the survivors of Grenfell Tower have heard what she had to say and find some reassurance in the acceptance of all the recommendations. I have residents in my constituency who are trapped in just the latest chapter of the fire safety scandal. These residents have EWS1 forms similarly signed off by the now notorious fire safety engineer Adam Kiziak. They find themselves unable to sell their properties or remortgage. Even more fundamentally, they do not know whether they are living in a dangerous building. Neighbouring buildings, built at exactly the same time and that have been signed off or had their EWS1 forms produced by a different fire safety engineer, have already been stripped of their cladding.

I am incredibly grateful to hear that the Government have accepted recommendations 15 and 16 and that they are looking at a professionalisation of the fire safety industry, greater regulation and a commitment to greater recruitment. We know that those are some of the issues that have underpinned the EWS1 scandal. I urge the Deputy Prime Minister and her team to think about emergency measures. It cannot be right that we just overlook the EWS1 forms that people already have, because people do not know whether they are living in safe buildings. We have to fundamentally and rapidly reassess the safety of those buildings to allow them to be sellable or remediated again.

[Angela Rayner]

I refer back to what I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes): I absolutely accept that people should be in safe and secure homes. The Government remediation funds have a robust audit process in place to assess the quality of fire risk assessments of external walls. The audit process ensures that assessments carried out for buildings in our remediation funding programmes meet the appropriate standards. Where those standards are not met, we will take action to ensure that is addressed.

[Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab)]

The report from the Grenfell Tower inquiry is utterly scathing about the role of central Government and their obsession with deregulation. The drive to scrap so-called red tape was a key failing, which led to such a terrible incident and the avoidable loss of life. Will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm to the House that that approach has been ditched in relation to policies concerning fire safety, building safety and the construction sector?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight that just about every system failed, as I outlined in my statement. Everybody needs to understand what led to what happened on that night in Grenfell. Action has been taken, and the regulatory system is not the same as the one in place back in 2017. There have been a number of Acts of Parliament, which have meant that there is more instruction and more legal requirements for building safety. We will continue to update that, and we have legislation going through at the moment in Parliament to hopefully deal with social landlords and give renters more protection, too. We know there is much more for us to do, and I hope that we will continue to work across the House to put safety at the heart of everything we do. The legacy of Grenfell should be that we take notice and do not just say warm words at this Dispatch Box, but take the action needed to protect people.

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

First, may I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for bringing the report forward and the Government for accepting all its recommendations? I echo the points from around the Chamber that our thoughts today are with the survivors and the families of the victims. As is often said, justice delayed is justice denied. Will the Deputy Prime Minister please give a timeline for when the companies mentioned—Arconic, Kingspan and Saint-Gobain or Celotex—and the testing firms, which covered up these failed results, will face justice for their dishonesty and mis-selling, which so tragically contributed to the deaths of 72 innocent residents?

[Angela Rayner]

I echo what the hon. Gentleman says about where all our thoughts and sentiments are today in the Chamber. I spoke about justice being delayed, and it is awful that people still have not got justice and are fearful that they will never receive justice. The police have said that this will take time. This is one of the largest and most legally complex investigations ever conducted by the Metropolitan police, with more than 180 officers and staff dedicated to it. We will continue to support them in their important work. The police have recently confirmed that they have everything they need to do that work, and we will continue to support their efforts. I spoke in my statement about procurement and making sure that we can do something on construction products. My hon. Friend the Building Safety Minister is taking that forward.

[John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)]

In my constituency, tenants in social housing are regularly treated as second-class citizens, and it is a shame and a stain on our society that that is so. Many of my constituents are desperately worried about cladding remediation following the terror of Grenfell. The Scottish Government received about £97 million from the UK Government for remediation, but it was confirmed later last year that virtually none of it had been spent for that purpose.

This year I sent the Scottish Minister responsible a detailed set of questions about progress. I asked how many high-rise buildings—buildings at least 18 metres in height—with aluminium composite cladding had been identified, how many of them had been identified as requiring remediation, and how many had been remediated. My questions continued, but not one of them was answered with data or numbers. These are people’s homes, the homes of mums and dads and children. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that the Scottish Government must get a grip on this topic, and will she undertake to provide such advice and assistance as her Department is able to supply?

[Angela Rayner]

As my hon. Friend has said, this is a devolved matter, but I am happy to work with the Scottish Government. I hope that they have looked at what we are doing in respect of the remediation acceleration plan, and also at the reforms that are under way to drive up standards in social housing through stronger regulation and enforcement measures, strengthening tenants’ voices and improving their access to redress. My hon. Friend is right to raise these issues, and I hope that the Scottish Government are following in our footsteps and will continue to learn from the legacy of Grenfell so that people in both Scotland and England can feel safe.

[Siân Berry (Brighton Pavilion) (Green)]

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for, in particular, her comments about the way in which residents were treated. There have been strong recommendations for a review of the Civil Contingencies Act 2004. My former role involved listening to and trying to support the many local community organisations that were dealing with the enormous gaps in the humanitarian response that had been left by the local authority; the problems continued for weeks. Can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us when we will hear about the timing and the format of that review of the Act?

[Angela Rayner]

We have looked at the Civil Contingencies Act and also at the category 1 training, and we have said that we accept what has been said and will take action. We will work with local partners in scoping progress for local authorities in regard to the training, and we are working with all other Departments to ensure that we can do that as quickly as possible. I commend the hon. Lady for her comments about social housing tenants. Having listened to what has been said by Members on both sides of the House in support of their constituents, I hope that those outside the House have been listening as well.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and for her continued commitment to securing justice for the victims of this terrible tragedy. I had the opportunity to meet some of the victims’ families, and I commend their bravery. Let me also pay tribute to my constituent Rod Wainwright, who was one of the first responders on that dreadful morning. Does the Secretary of State agree that we need to do more to support those in our emergency services—such as Rod and his colleagues, who were also victims of this terrible tragedy—and that we should join my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) in hoping and praying that we never have to see an event like this again?

--- Later in debate ---

[Angela Rayner]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and I too pay tribute to Rod and his colleagues. Not long after my appointment as Secretary of State, there was another fire in the borough of Barking and Dagenham. The same first responders went out again, and the trauma and the fact that they put themselves in harm’s way without question or fear are a testament to the work that they do. We owe them a debt of gratitude, and we also owe them the ongoing support that the Government continue to provide.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for her statement, and for the update on phase 2. I think we are all encouraged by her commitment to ensure that those responsible are held accountable under the law of the land, and also to ensure that safety is improved.

Last December, the Government embarked on plans to ban the firms involved in the Grenfell fire from public procurement. That is a welcome step, but what further steps can be taken to make all firms involved in building works liable for ensuring that all materials and other products are fit for purpose? Lessons must be learnt for the future from this awful tragedy.

May I also ask the Deputy Prime Minister to share the conclusions of the report with all regional administrations, especially the Northern Ireland Assembly, so that safety can be improved throughout this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and we all gain?

[Angela Rayner]

My hon. Friend the building safety Minister was in Northern Ireland yesterday. I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that we should all work together to improve safety. We must ensure that the Building Safety Regulator, and what we have put in train, produce the results that we need. Hopefully this will be a clearer path, clarifying what people’s legal obligations are and making it plain that if they do not do what they will be expected to do, there will be absolute enforcement of the rules.

Grenfell Tower

Angela Rayner Excerpts

Wednesday 12th February 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)]

I want to provide the House with an update on the Government’s work with the Grenfell community and on my decision about the future of Grenfell Tower.

Supporting the community

Learning the lessons from the Grenfell tragedy and ensuring lasting change are key priorities for the Government. In his statement to this House in September, the Prime Minister (Keir Starmer) committed to supporting the community now and always, and to building a legacy of change in their name.

I am committed to supporting bereaved families, survivors and immediate community, and working to ensure that we never see a repeat of the tragedy. Since my appointment, I have valued hearing directly from the community about the issues that matter to them.

Grenfell Tower

I am responsible for Grenfell Tower and for making a decision about its future. I understand that this is a deeply personal matter for those affected, and I am keeping their voice firmly at the heart of this decision making.

I would like to update the House that over the last week I have met bereaved families and survivors, and residents in the immediate community to explain my decision that Grenfell Tower will be carefully taken down.

Listening to the community

I have reached this decision after listening carefully to the community, and I am grateful to everyone who has shared their personal stories and views, especially bereaved and survivors.

In November last year, I explained to families that I would listen to their views and make sure their voices were heard, as well as consider expert information before making a decision on the future of the tower in February.

From November I offered bereaved and survivors the opportunity to meet in-person in North Kensington and Whitehall, or online, at different times and individually when families felt more comfortable with this. I have also spent time with representative groups, residents’ associations, schools and faith leaders. I am grateful to everyone who shared their view—whether directly with me, with the Minister or officials—and especially to the bereaved and survivors.

The tower was the home of the 72 innocent people who lost their lives, and of survivors whose lives were forever changed. It is clear from conversations it remains a sacred site. It is also clear that there is not a consensus about what should happen to it.

For some, Grenfell Tower is a symbol of all that they lost. The presence of the tower helps to ensure the tragedy is never forgotten and can act as a reminder of the need for justice and accountability. Being able to see the tower every day helps some people continue to feel close to those they lost. For others it is a painful reminder of what happened and is having a daily impact on some members of the community. Some have suggested that some floors of the tower should be retained for the memorial, others have said that this would be too painful.

Expert advice

I also considered independent expert advice. Engineering advice says that the tower is significantly damaged. It remains stable because of the measures put in place to protect it but even with installation of additional props, the condition of the building will continue to worsen over time. Engineers also advise it is not practicable to retain many of the floors of the building in place as part of a memorial that must last in perpetuity.

Taking the engineering advice into account I have concluded that it would not be fair to keep some floors of the building that are significant to some families, while not being able to do so for others and knowing that, for some, this would be upsetting.

How the tower will be taken down

The Government are committed to taking the next steps respectfully and carefully. There will be continued support for, and engagement with, the community throughout the process.

In the coming months, the Government will confirm the specialist contractor that will develop a detailed plan for taking the tower down. The work will be led by technical experts with specific health and safety responsibilities and will include a methodology that includes environmental, health and safety measures and a detailed programme of work. The views the community have shared already will inform the plans. The Department will continue to work with them, for example on arrangements to pay their respects.

There will be no changes to the tower before the eighth anniversary. It will likely take around two years to sensitively take down the tower through a process of careful, progressive deconstruction that happens behind the wrapping.

We continue to support the independent Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission as the community choose a design team to work with them on designing a memorial.

I will ensure that parts of the tower or materials from the site can be carefully removed and returned for inclusion as part of the memorial, if the community wishes.

The Department has regularly consulted the Metropolitan Police, HM Coroner and the Grenfell Tower inquiry to ensure decisions about the site do not interfere with their important work in pursuit of justice and accountability. The Police and HM Coroner have again recently confirmed they have everything they need.

Continued commitment for the community

My commitment to the community continues. I will ensure bereaved families, survivors and residents continue to have opportunities to speak with me and the Building Safety Minister on issues that matter to them most.

[HCWS440]