Local Government Reorganisation
Angela Rayner Excerpts(2 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on local government reorganisation. This Government are committed to delivering good growth across the country and power in every postcode, with places able to set their own ambitions and integrate services to meet people’s needs. Achieving that requires a fundamental rewiring of the state, giving power held by Westminster and Whitehall back to the people and the places where they live and work. As we set out in the Cabinet statement on rewiring the state, effective and sustainable local government is the vital foundation of our devolution ambitions.
As we are now determined more than ever to devolve power closer to the people we represent, it is only right that I, as the new Secretary of State, ensure that everything we do is working towards that plan to change Britain. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. I think we have had this before, Mr Mayhew. I want to hear this statement; it affects my constituency and others. The last thing I need is you meddling.
Angela Rayner
The Prime Minister told the House last week that he was
“prepared to look at local government reorganisation”,—[Official Report, 1 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 65.]
and he asked me, as his Communities Secretary, to do that. Throughout this process, the Government have listened to representations from Members of this House, councils and the public, and I want to be clear on how critical this is to me, given their importance to our democracy and the services they provide for local people. However, there will always be a wide range of divergent views, which means that achieving perfect consensus will never be possible.
I understand that feelings run high and people naturally have strong views in different directions. In that context, and in the light of legal advice, I want to satisfy myself first that the right process is in place, that it is robust and, of course, that it complies with the law. Secondly, I want to fully test whether our proposals for local government reorganisation meet the priorities of the new Administration and the new Prime Minister, and any additional considerations.
With those two considerations in mind, I have decided to withdraw the decisions made in March this year for Essex, Hampshire, Norfolk and Suffolk and, where relevant, their neighbouring unitary authorities. The Government’s legal representatives have notified the court of this step.
I have also decided to conduct a full review of the local government reorganisation programme, including the decisions that were announced in July this year for a further 14 areas, and the two areas where decisions have not yet been taken, and ask that reorganisation activity be paused. These 14 areas are Derbyshire, Devon, East Sussex, Gloucestershire, Hertfordshire, Kent, Lancashire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Nottinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire and, where relevant, their neighbouring unitaries.
I do not take this lightly. I recognise the huge amount of work that has already gone into progressing reorganisation in each of these areas, and I am very grateful for it. I know that many Members of the House and many council leaders will have lots of questions about what this means for them and their communities, and I will try to address those questions as best I can today.
First, we are working across Government on rewiring the state following the Cabinet statement. We recognise that effective and sustainable local government is fundamental to our ambitions for a devolved country that works better for and with communities, and we will consider this issue as part of our wider approach.
Secondly, as an immediate step, I have asked the Minister for Local Government, Devolution and Regional Growth to undertake a rapid review of the current local government reorganisation programme, including the position of the four areas where we have withdrawn and the further 14 areas that we are reviewing and pausing, alongside the two remaining areas. The new councils for East Surrey and West Surrey will be unaffected because they are already established in law, have had their first elections and are on track to go live in April 2027.
Thirdly, I want to be clear about what this means for elections scheduled for next May. Elections will go ahead in May 2027 on existing council boundaries. Finally, my Department will provide support to council leaders, officers and Members representing impacted areas, and the Minister for Local Government has written to leaders and copied in Members of this House.
I want to ensure that all those who represent these areas feel fully included in considering their future, and I will update the House at the earliest opportunity. My ministerial team and civil servants from the Department are ready to discuss and work with those representatives. My team will proactively reach out to discuss the local implications in detail. My Department remains committed to working in partnership with local government, both in this immediate period and in the longer term. I commend this statement to the House.
Mr Speaker
Order. Can I just say that it is refreshing to hear an announcement first in this Chamber, rather than on TV? I call the shadow Minister.
David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)
I welcome the Secretary of State back to the Dispatch Box, and I thank her for early sight of her statement. I am not sure that this was the triumphant return to the subject of devolution that she had in mind, because our councillors and the communities that they represent are looking aghast at yet another shambolic U-turn from this Government. Ministers have repeatedly given assurances to this House from that Dispatch Box that have not been honoured, and it speaks volumes for the Government’s sense of priority that, this far into this Administration, only Surrey has proceeded with its reorganisation—despite all those assurances.
The Secretary of State has already told the House that she is not satisfied that the process that was followed by her predecessor was lawful. Can she tell the House from the Dispatch Box why she is not satisfied that it was lawful, and will she place all the non-privileged documentation and correspondence relating to this debacle in the public domain and in the Library?
Given that the Government have agreed to pay the legal costs of councils that have challenged them on this matter, can the Secretary of State tell us what assessment has she made of the legal costs that will be borne by taxpayers as a consequence of this U-turn? Given that the Government have been banking on millions of pounds in savings—we have challenged them on those savings repeatedly across the Dispatch Boxes—to mitigate costs, which include the massive rise in national insurance that has driven many councils to the verge of bankruptcy, what assessment have Treasury colleagues made, and what advice have they given to the Secretary of State about how they will need to mitigate this further delay in any of those savings being achieved, should they ever materialise?
The Secretary of State has told the House from the Dispatch Box that elections will go ahead. We have all heard that promise made at the Dispatch Box before; indeed, in some cases it has been reversed literally the following day. Given the promises made and that all our political parties have selected candidates who have been campaigning for mayoral elections and new unitary authorities that the Government promised were coming into being, with elections to take place next May, will she give a categorical assurance that those new authorities will be in place, or promise the House clearly that they will not be? Will she tell us what is the timetable—if there is one at all—for bringing those new mayoral combined authorities into existence, particularly given the store by which the Government have set those as their path for devolution?
Finally, I appreciate that the Secretary of State has returned to the role after others have been stewarding it, but will she apologise to all those councillors, all those local government officials, all those political candidates and activists and all those businesses who have engaged in good faith with the Government’s process? All of them have been shamefully let down by this betrayal of local democracy.
Angela Rayner
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his place and thank him for his constructive comments. It is disappointing that I have had to come to the House to make this statement. I recognise the work that local authorities, Members of the House and others have put into getting us to this point, but when I took over the role recently and the Prime Minister asked me to look again at the reform, and upon receiving legal advice, I wanted to satisfy myself as the Secretary of State that the process was robust and legally sound. That is why I have made this decision today, but I understand why hon. Members will be disappointed.
I was asked about legal costs. Those will be determined in the usual way. Local government reform is often contested in the courts. It is right and part of our democratic system that important issues can be challenged. The Government engage legal advisers to defend decisions whenever challenges are brought; that does bring costs.
The hon. Gentleman asked me about savings. The Government have made savings in the past through local government reorganisation, but for me it has got to be about not savings but the outcomes for people in their local area. That is what has driven reorganisation from my point of view.
In terms of the new mayoral authorities and what will happen, I am really clear that it has to be done correctly and right. As Secretary of State, I have to believe, in good conscience, that I have dotted every i and crossed every t. That is why I have made the decision I have today.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
This has been a long process for Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, where we have ducked and dived as best we can with the announcements that have come over the last two years. The thing that we really care about is devolution, because where the line is drawn on councils is important, but the real powers unleashed by devolution would make a real difference to my constituents. Can the Secretary of State give some indication of the impact on the timetable for moving towards mayoral combined authorities for places like Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent, where currently the opportunity does not meet our aspiration?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is right to raise the opportunities of devolution. The Prime Minister is really clear that the Government’s ambition is to ensure that every area in England has, or is in the process of establishing, a strategic authority by the end of 2027, with strategic authorities in place everywhere by the end of 2028. The process that I have put in place today is about making sure that we have a rapid review and make the right and correct decisions on reorganisation.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for giving me advance sight of her statement. I have almost lost track of the number of times I have stood in this Chamber and warned the Government about problems with their local government reorganisation plans—yet here I am again. It appears that the Government have finally listened, but they have done so too late and the damage has already been done. Thousands of residents have been denied their right to vote over the course of this process, because of plans that many of us in this Chamber warned were on a very uncertain legal footing. Councils have poured enormous amounts of time, effort and money into proposals they were repeatedly assured were legally sound, only to discover that they are now being abandoned. The abortive costs are likely to be substantial. Worse still, a number of authorities were relying on reorganisation as part of a strategy to address serious financial concerns. Those councils are now being left in limbo.
In my own area of Surrey, councils were forced down a reorganisation route that now appears to be effectively abandoned by the Government and questionable on a legal basis. Will the Secretary of State commit to meeting Surrey MPs and the new authority leaders to discuss how our county can avoid the risks and uncertainty that the Government say have prompted this decision elsewhere? The Government need to acknowledge the significant democratic harm caused by this episode and take responsibility for it, including by issuing an apology, so will the Secretary of State set out clearly what happens next for communities and local authorities left in limbo by today’s announcement? Will she also publish the legal advice so that Parliament and the affected communities can understand what went wrong with the original process?
Angela Rayner
I have set out already that I want to be able to review these decisions to ensure myself that they are the right ones, and I think that is the correct course of action. Respecting the court process means that the way to do this is to withdraw and consider afresh. It is a long-standing principle that the Government do not publish or comment on legal advice. The review will consider implications for the timetable, as the hon. Lady mentioned. Local elections scheduled to take place to existing councils in May 2027 will go ahead unless we are in a position to hold elections to new unitary councils at that point. The review does not include reorganisation of Surrey, where councillors have been elected and new councils go live from 1 April.
Ashley Dalton (West Lancashire) (Lab)
There is a real appetite for change in my constituency. We are not scared of it; we are eager for it. Only today, we have seen the former Reform Lancashire county councillor for Skelmersdale East defecting to the Labour party because he knows that Labour will deliver for Skem. Can the Secretary of State assure me that the Government will meet the ambition of my constituents, and keep pushing for change and a better system for Lancashire?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. I commend the local representatives in Lancashire for their work. I have been really clear that I have paused to have a review of those places in order to make sure that I am confident, as the Secretary of State, that I have dotted every i, crossed every t and worked with local people to ensure that we give them the best possible local government reform and devolution package.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for looking again at Lincolnshire. I made the point to her predecessor that the proposal for a Greater Lincolnshire authority was, in the eyes of many people, just a gerrymander. Will she look again at it and stop dividing West Lindsey and North Kesteven in half? I represent the Gainsborough South-West ward—the most deprived ward in the entire country. I am on the Pride in Place board. What was the point of dividing Gainsborough and leaving it out on a limb from the rest of the county? Will the right hon. Lady look at our viewpoint in a positive way?
Angela Rayner
I thank the Father of the House. I can feel his frustration, but I also acknowledge the plug he gave for the Pride in Place funding, which is making a real difference to some of the most deprived areas. I reassure him that this review of the decision is about me making sure that it is the right one. It is about giving me the time to listen to what hon. Members and leaders are saying, so that I can ensure that I have got the correct advice. As Secretary of State, I take that responsibility very seriously and I will make sure that it is done as quickly as possible.
Linsey Farnsworth (Amber Valley) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement today. I support local government reorganisation and the two-unitary option for Derbyshire, but Chris Emmas-Williams—the leader of Amber Valley borough council—and myself have repeatedly made representations against the decision to split Amber Valley in two. My constituents do not want it, and I have concerns about the capacity to deliver that divide while maintaining the high standards of service that my constituents deserve. Will my right hon. Friend commit to meeting me to discuss this further?
Angela Rayner
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work that she is doing to represent her Amber Valley constituents. As I have said, there is a pause while we review the programme. I am sure that the Local Government Minister will arrange a meeting with her and local leaders to ensure that we have a full understanding of Amber Valley’s challenges and opportunities, so that we can take this forward.
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for her announcement, which, however she dresses it up, is in fact a decision about common sense and listening. I put it to her that, in Essex, most of the district councils, the county council and most MPs want to stay with two-tier local government. Is that an option? Will she acknowledge that and listen?
Angela Rayner
I am glad that the hon. Member said “common sense and listening”, because I am trying to listen, use my common sense and be pragmatic. As I said when I embarked on local government reform, it has to be about services for local people. On the two-tiered approach to local authorities, we have always been clear about ensuring that the split is absolutely right, so that we get the scale and so things like education and other services can be delivered. That is why we always said that we would consider those proposals and how best to deliver unitary councils in this Parliament.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
As the Secretary of State and her Ministers can attest, throughout the reorganisation process I have been fighting to protect my city’s proud identity and its important, but often neglected, position in Hampshire. I am sorry for all the confusion and politicking that residents have had to face—it is simply not good enough. As she reviews local reorganisation in Portsmouth, will she reassure my residents that any decision will maintain Portsmouth’s strong identity, and will she confirm that today’s announcements will not delay the Government’s plan for devolution and putting power closer to the people we represent?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend has been an absolute champion for the people of Portsmouth since being elected to Parliament, and I do not think any of us will try to take that identity away from the people of Portsmouth—I am sure that she will be pushing that. She is absolutely right to talk about devolution; we need to grasp the nettle on local government reform so that we can put areas in a strong place for devolution. We will be working with her in the coming weeks to ensure that that happens.
Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)
The current proposals for Devon were the brainchild of Exeter and Plymouth and were endorsed by the Conservative leader of Torbay council, and they resulted in a rural rump for Devon. Will the Secretary of State assure us that the rural rump of Devon will not rear its ugly head again?
Angela Rayner
Like I said, I have paused that decision today, and we will be reviewing it. I am sure that the Local Government Minister will be happy to meet with Devon Members to discuss the challenges that they face.
Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)
This decision, to put it mildly, is frustrating for everyone in Lancashire who has been involved in the process, and I feel for councillors, council workers and all the service users for having to deal with that frustration. What are the legal reasons, so I can go back to my constituents and explain them? Having listened to this statement, I have nothing I can take back to constituents to explain why this happened, when the next step will be, or whether the boundaries that were just announced in July are going to change. Give us something to go back to people with, please.
Angela Rayner
I considered the legal advice provided as part of the judicial review process, and the decision to withdraw the decision reflected updated legal clarity. It is a long-standing principle that the Government do not publish or comment on legal advice. I have been clear that I want to be able to review these decisions to ensure, as the new Secretary of State, that they are the right ones. We will consider the programme in the round in the light of the Government’s priorities, as set out in “Rewiring the State”, and Ministers will meet with Members of this House and will set out decisions at our earliest opportunity.
Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her statement, but I have to confess to being a bit more confused now than I was when I walked into the room. When it comes to Hampshire, is this a pause or a cancellation? When will we know whether this titanic waste of council taxpayers’ money will re-emerge? The Government’s top-down reorganisation plans have cost councils across Hampshire so much time and money, at a point when finances are already stretched to breaking point. Has she calculated the cost? Will local authorities be reimbursed for the time and money already spent? When will we know what is in the plan?
Angela Rayner
Again, I said that we would work at pace, but I want to be able to review these decisions to ensure that they are the right ones, respecting the court process. That means the way to do this is to withdraw and consider afresh. On the costs so far, I recognise that a lot of work has gone into the financial commitments that have been made. I say to the hon. Member that this work is not wasted, and the Government have committed to providing transitional funding.
Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
There have been lots of different views about reorganisation in my constituency, but one thing everybody is fully agreed on is that Kent county council is a failing organisation. It is too big to be effective, and it consistently lets down residents right across the county. It is critical that we get this right because it is residents who live with the results. While the pause is under way, how can we ensure that momentum is not lost in improving local services and ensuring that Kent and its different communities start to receive decent services? For instance, in my case, I am disappointed that we have lost the Thames Estuary growth board. How can we ensure that we will get the structures and powers we need to succeed and thrive?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to recognise the work that has been done already. We want to work at pace to review the programme, and we will report back to Parliament at the earliest opportunity. Hopefully, the work that has been under way is already paying dividends for those areas. I do understand the frustration, but I ask Members who have worked well in bringing these proposals forward to bear with me as I review this and take us forward at pace.
Sir James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)
On 26 March, I said that people will ask whether these reforms are an act of gross gerrymandering and political opportunism, or gross incompetence and stupidity. I think today we recognise that it is both. The right hon. Lady has only just returned to the Dispatch Box, so it cannot really be her fault, so who has screwed up? Who is it that has wasted the time, effort and money of people in Essex and other parts of the country? She has the opportunity now to tell us where, how and why this went wrong, and I encourage her to do so.
Angela Rayner
Again, I have made it clear that I want to be able to review the decisions. I have made it clear that legal advice was provided to me as part of the JR process, and I have made the decision to withdraw because of where we are up to and to review the decision. I want to also say that a great number of dedicated and professional public servants have worked on this in both central and local government, and I want to thank them on the record. But I want to be sure, as Secretary of State, that I am making the correct decision with all the information available.
Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)
Most Gloucester residents are not interested in the detail of who is running what services. What is important to them is: will their services improve, will we feel the benefits of devolution, and will we reverse the years of cuts under the previous Government? Can the Secretary of State confirm that taking time to get this decision right will achieve those three aims?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely, and I commend my hon. Friend for the work he has been undertaking as well. After 14 years of the Conservatives, who took money out of local government and, in fact, boasted about taking money out of the most deprived areas, I was clear that I would work to rebuild the foundations and resilience of local government. Local government reorganisation for me is about ensuring that local areas feel the benefits and also can take forward devolution. I want to ensure that I get that right as Secretary of State, and that is why I have made the decision today.
Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)
I want to impress upon the Secretary of State the anger that my local councillors, across all parties, are feeling at yet another pause, because pauses create more uncertainty for local authorities, when they should be planning for the future so that our residents get better services in the long term. Does the Secretary of State believe that a single resident in West Sussex is better off because of the reforms that were announced two years ago?
Angela Rayner
If we get this right, it can unlock benefits through local government reform, and whether in education, transport, local services, or social care, I absolutely believe it can unlock such reform. I am a big champion of local government. I am a creature of it; I spent a long time there, and represented members who work in local authorities, so I want to get this right. The hon. Member is correct to pull me up on this and say that people are frustrated. I understand that, but I want to ensure, in good conscience, that I have all the information available on working with local areas to get this right.
Michael Payne (Gedling) (Lab)
Back in July I called in this place for a review of the decision about Nottingham and Nottinghamshire, so I hugely welcome the Secretary of State’s announcement of the pause and review. The Secretary of State is a long-standing friend of mine, and whatever noise she receives today, she should know that listening and pausing is a sign of strength, not of weakness. Will she assure me that during the review, the views of local residents in Gedling and of local councillors, and indeed my views as the Member of Parliament, will be properly heard, taken seriously, and genuinely reflected on, whatever decision is ultimately made?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely, and I commend my hon. Friend for his years of service to local government. I had the privilege and honour to be reappointed as Secretary of State, and my No. 1 priority is to get it right for hon. Members, including those from different political parties who have invested so much into local government because they believe that it will unlock potential and support for their constituents. I want to ensure that I have taken the time to get this right, and that is why I have made the decision.
Neil O’Brien (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston) (Con)
In the Government’s own consultation on whether to expand Leicester, nine out of 10 people said no. Tens of thousands of people signed petitions against it, yet until Ministers hit this legal snag they tried to press on anyway. When I wrote to them, Ministers said that they would not publish any of the advice or guidance they had been given ahead of making this decision, leaving local people wondering what they had to hide. Will the Secretary of State at least answer this? Why do Ministers sat here in London believe that they know better than local people in Leicestershire what local people in Leicestershire want?
Angela Rayner
I say gently to the hon. Member that what we are trying to achieve is working with local members to get better outcomes for local people. That is why I have made a decision to pause and review this. I am happy for him to meet the Minister who will be taking this forward, and ensure that his views, and those of his local members, are fully engaged and part of this process. I believe as a principle that local government reform can unlock great potential for local areas. I remain committed to that, but I am going to do it properly and right.
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. When the announcement about Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland came forward in July, I wanted reassurance from the then Secretary of State about barriers to growth, which for Leicestershire are not having a mayor and being without a devolution settlement. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give in the light of this announcement that my constituents in North West Leicestershire will no longer feel the delay caused by not having a devolution settlement?
Angela Rayner
I have been clear that the Government’s ambition is to ensure that every area in England has, or is in the process of establishing, a strategic authority by the end of 2027, with strategic authorities in place everywhere by the end of 2028. I agree with my hon. Friend that achieving good growth requires a fundamental rewiring of the way our country works, and I want to work with her and her local leaders to ensure that they reach their full potential.
Steve Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)
Less than two months ago, the right hon. Lady’s predecessor rushed to the House on the last day before recess, to say how essential these measures were, and Conservative Members warned that it was gerrymandering. It is not that the Secretary of State has listened; she has been told by her lawyers that it is gerrymandering. The warning signs were there two months ago when plans for Cambridgeshire were paused. When again announcing a pause for Cambridgeshire, will she tell my constituents how long the pause will be, and how much it will cost?
Angela Rayner
Again, I have said that I want to do the review at pace and I will be working on that. I want to place on the record that there is no suggestion of wrongdoing by my right hon. Friend the Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed) or my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Alison McGovern). They are quite correct that we must review the processes and learn lessons, and I am pleased that we will today announce the new permanent secretary in my Department, who has an impeccable track record in public service, including local government. I will ensure that we continue at pace to ensure that we get the best local government reform for the right hon. Gentleman’s area.
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
In North Warwickshire and Bedworth, our councils, businesses and voluntary organisations were all preparing for new unitary councils. They will be disappointed with the news, but we must get reorganisation right. Will the Secretary of State assure the councils struggling to recruit and retain high quality officers, the businesses wanting to invest and the voluntary organisations preparing to restructure, that the pause will not be an undue delay and that the towns and villages in my constituency will not be left behind without the investment that devolution will bring?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. My hon. Friend is right to highlight the challenges but also the opportunities that can be unlocked as part of this process. I appreciate the specific work that has been done that needs to be paused, but councils can continue with cross-cutting things like data sharing. My officials will be in touch to ensure that we are giving the right support to her local area, so that we can get back on track and ensure that we deliver for her constituents.
Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)
Earlier in the year, the Secretary of State’s predecessor’s decision to cancel elections for 5 million people was overturned on the eve of its going to the courts, amid allegations of gerrymandering. Now, her predecessor’s decision to reorganise local councils has been overturned on the eve of its going to the courts, amid allegations of gerrymandering. What is going wrong in the Secretary of State’s Department? How is she going to reassure people that this Government take decisions fairly and in accordance with the law, and actually respect local democracy?
Angela Rayner
Let me be really clear: this has not been overturned. As Secretary of State, I have made the decision to withdraw so that I can have a look and clear sight of what is going on, and review those decisions. I have done that in good conscience because I want to ensure that we get this absolutely right.
I dispute the gerrymandering allegation—I do not believe that that is the case. I am really clear that local government reform can unlock potential in the right hon. Gentleman’s area and in areas across England, and that is what I want to do with local people. I understand that we will not get consensus and it is probably going to be a highly litigated area, but I want to work hard to get this right as quickly as possible, so that we can deliver for his constituents.
Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State back to her position. I have been an advocate of local government reorganisation, but my thoughts today are with the local government officers and councillors who have been working so hard for so long, including in some instances people who have been employed specifically to manage the transition. Will my right hon. Friend give them some reassurance? What they need, above all else, is certainty, so can she tell the House that for Hertfordshire, where she has promised a full review, she will come forward as soon as possible with clarity about the timeline and what comes next?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. I agree with my hon. Friend about the amount of work that has gone in from local officers and council representatives as part of the process; I recognise that a lot of work has gone into the financial commitments as well. I say to the House that this work is not wasted. We are reviewing at pace so that I can come to the House at the earliest opportunity, and the Government have committed to providing transitional funding. I urge my hon. Friend and his local leaders to contact my Department.
Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
In Worcestershire, what has happened has thrown everything into disarray. Now that we are asking people to stand as district councillors next May, will the Secretary of State clarify whether that will be for a four-year term?
Angela Rayner
What I have said is that the elections next year will be on the old boundaries. We will continue at pace with local government reorganisation, working with areas to ensure that we get it right. I urge the hon. Lady and her local leaders to make contact with my Department and Ministers so we can take that forward.
Sarah Smith (Hyndburn) (Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. Before the summer, I raised the concerns of my constituents in Hyndburn about the proposals for a Pennine-Lancs authority, which could become the most deprived in the country. As Ministers undertake the review, will they look at that issue very closely and consider the perspectives of my constituents?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise those issues. We want to ensure that we get this right and work with local leaders; I am sure that she will have the opportunity to speak with Ministers and my officials as we look at the review.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
North Norfolk has more than 2,000 people waiting for housing, a coastline that we are trying to prevent falling into the North sea and endless challenges from being an underfunded rural authority. Now it has been made to waste £600,000 on a local government reorganisation programme that the Secretary of State demanded and has now gone back on. One question will be about the future of devolution for Norfolk, but what people in North Norfolk will be thinking first is, “We want our money back.” Will she give it to us?
Angela Rayner
I would push back a little on that, because I do not think that money has been wasted. I have said that I want a review, and I have put a pause in place to carry out that review and ensure that I get it absolutely right as the Secretary of State. I do not think that money is wasted. I have been really clear that the Government have committed to providing transitional funding. I want to continue to work with the hon. Gentleman’s local leaders so that we can get local government reform on track, but I want to be confident that I am making the correct decisions for his local area and with his local area, delivering what it wants.
Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. A pause in the review is clearly the right step, but my constituents—particularly those in East Saltdean, Peacehaven and Telscombe—will want to know what comes next. Will she answer two specific questions? First, will the review that she has announced look again at the precise boundaries announced in May, as well as the legal process that got to them? Secondly, how will my constituents have a chance to shape that decision? Will it be through MPs? Will there be another consultation? How can they feed in so that we can get this right and make LGR the success that we both know it can be?
Angela Rayner
The review will look at those issues; I will then be able to give a more detailed response to how that happens with Ministers. I want to ensure that local Members feel that this review takes into account the issues and concerns that people raise and that it is done in a prompt and inclusive way, so that we can make the right decisions for my hon. Friend’s local area.
David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)
Building 1.5 million new homes and doing LGR at the same time was clearly bonkers. From freedom of information requests that I have submitted, I know that local councils in my area have already spent more than £1 million trying to do LGR. That much-needed money could have been spent on special educational needs and disabilities and other critical things in my county. Before any more money is wasted, will the Secretary of State be very explicit about what is happening in Devon? Will elections be happening next May? Can she give an indication of when a decision will be reached?
Angela Rayner
I have said that we will look at the review happening as speedily as possible. The Government have committed £63 million for transition costs to support councils, including £900,000 per unitary. Again, I do not think this money is wasted. Certainly, from my perspective as the Secretary of State and from the perspective of the Prime Minister, local government reform is about delivering for people in their local area with better services. I want to work with the hon. Gentleman and his local leaders to ensure that that happens.
Jack Abbott (Ipswich) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. I know it was incredibly difficult to make, but I also know how disappointed and concerned local residents, businesses, organisations and councils will be—they have put a huge amount of work into this area, not least in the six months since the original decision was made.
However, this issue is not just about looking to the past; it is about looking forward to the future. That is why so many people, including me, are championing Greater Ipswich or Ipswich and South Suffolk, alongside an East Suffolk council and a West Suffolk council. Just when we were on the verge of thinking that a new future was possible, this statement has changed everything. Will the Secretary of State offer some reassurance to all my local residents, businesses, organisations and councils that we are not going to go right back to the drawing board?
Angela Rayner
I recognise the amount of work that local leaders, my hon. Friend and others have put into this matter. Effective and sustainable local government is key to our ambitions on devolution, and as part of that we are looking at the overall programme timings, but we are not moving back from local government reform—I absolutely believe in that. As the Secretary of State, I am ensuring that I review those decisions and take them forward in a way that satisfies me that I have delivered what is expected of me in my obligations to this House. I would rather come to this House and say, “I have had to put in a delay to satisfy myself of that,” than make in haste and regret at leisure.
Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)
Having consistently raised concerns about the proposed east Lancashire authority, which would group together some of the most deprived communities in the country, I welcome the Secretary of State’s decision today to pause these plans. Will she assure me that this review will look at deprivation and economic stability and that it will deliver for Blackburn and the surrounding areas? Will she meet me and other Lancashire MPs before any new proposals are made?
Angela Rayner
I assure the hon. Member that the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton, is in his place and will be meeting Lancashire Members. We want to make sure that we unlock the potential of that area. The Prime Minister talks about growth in every postcode, which includes making sure that devolution and local government reorganisation deliver for everybody across the whole of Lancashire. That is what we want to do through this review, and it is at the forefront of my mind.
Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)
I have to say that I am really disappointed by this decision. Councils have spent months working on proposals; resources and precious time have been spent—or, I would say, wasted—on them. Growth is meant to be a priority for this Government, and Oxfordshire is a high growth delivery area, yet we have no devolution, no local government reorganisation and no timescale for either. Will the Secretary of State or one of her Ministers meet me and my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) to discuss the shortcomings in this high-value growth area?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely; the Minister and I will happily meet my hon. Friend as part of this programme. The new Prime Minister has made absolutely clear that we want growth in every postcode; in order for the UK—and England in particular—to raise its growth agenda, every area needs to feel that. The Chancellor made a statement earlier today about how he sees that as a priority and about devolution being part of that programme. We will be in touch with my hon. Friend to support his area.
Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
I am delighted by the reprieve—the New Forest was to be split, and part of it swallowed by Southampton. Will the Secretary of State accept my representation that we want the integrity of the New Forest to remain, and the last thing we want is for it all to be swallowed by Southampton?
Angela Rayner
I am glad to have pleased the right hon. Member; I do not think I have ever done that before. Of course, I am happy to work with him going forward, and you never know—I might even visit the New Forest, without the split.
Mr Paul Foster (South Ribble) (Lab)
Back to Lancashire: the residents of Lancashire—in particular the residents of the two authorities that I represent, Chorley and South Ribble—are rightly really disappointed with this new Secretary of State. However, can she reiterate and commit that local government reorganisation in Lancashire is still a commitment of this Government—that this is a pause, that she will be reporting back, and that we will hopefully go to the four unitary model?
Angela Rayner
I am absolutely committed to making sure that areas such as Chorley and Lancashire more widely get local government reform, and that we take that forward. This is a pause. I have not taken that decision lightly, but I want to review the decisions and make sure, for my peace of mind as Secretary of State, that I have got this absolutely right; that I have taken on board the legal advice given to me recently; and that I can go to the Prime Minister, who tasked me last week with reviewing these decisions, and say that I have reviewed them and we are making the right decisions. I accept that I will not get the consent of everybody around the House, but I want to make sure that I have at least heard everybody’s views.
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
At the Government’s request, councillors and council officers have put a huge amount of time into preparing for these proposals—time that could have been put into improving council services. If there is going to be another extended period of instability, that will further worsen that situation. Does the Secretary of State accept that local government funding is extremely stretched, especially for councils that run services such as SEND and social care, and that councils very little money for anything else? Does she agree that if local government reorganisation is to go ahead and devolution is to be meaningful, it needs to put money into the hands of local people, and there needs to be proper funding for local government?
Angela Rayner
This Government have recognised that, after 14 years of failure by the Conservatives, local government had faced the brunt of austerity, and we put in additional funding. We also recognise that the most important thing about local government reorganisation is delivering better services for local people. The Prime Minister has recognised that in terms of devolution. We recognise the investment that has gone in—that is why we put transitional funding in place to support councils—and I want to work to get this policy right, because I absolutely believe that it will be the best thing for the hon. Member’s constituents.
Kevin McKenna (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Lab)
I very much welcome what the Secretary of State has said from the Dispatch Box today for two reasons. First, there is no question but that the two-tier system is very bad for people in Sittingbourne and Sheppey and across Kent, so I welcome her commitment to press ahead with local government reorganisation. Secondly, at the same time, the geographies announced by her predecessor just before the summer recess were terrible for the people of Sittingbourne and Sheppey. How can local councillors, local residents, businesses, other organisations locally and I feed into this review, which I am grateful will be happening?
Angela Rayner
My Department will be reaching out to local authorities and the areas affected to make sure that we are taking into account all the information that we have at hand. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton, is willing to meet representatives of the local area to ensure that we get this right. I do not want this review to go on for a considerable time; I want to do it rapidly, but I want to be reassured that the decisions we are making are the right ones.
Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
The Labour leader of City of Lincoln council has put forward suggestions that votes should be weighted on the basis of deprivation, leading to proposed wards with an electorate of 2,100 electors per councillor and others with 4,700 electors per councillor. Does the Secretary of State agree that all our votes should be created equal?
Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab)
Devolution and local government reorganisation are different things. To be honest, they should probably be considered separately, but they have become so interlinked and intertwined in this debate that it is impossible to do so. If we are to have a stronger devolution settlement, it is right to spend more time getting it right. Does the Secretary of State agree that any new structures that emerge should be based on economic growth and dynamism, rather than having to be built on existing districts? Those building blocks were established in a very different economic era.
Angela Rayner
I agree with my hon. Friend. In our past lives, we worked in local government and on local government policy for some time. We have to take time to get this policy right, and he is right to make the distinction between local government reform and devolution, but the two can intertwine to help us on our way. This review does not impact on the timetable for devolution. Unitary local government can help with smoothing the functions of strategic authorities, but that is not a prerequisite.
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
Devon is one of 14 areas where local government reorganisation is being reviewed and paused, and I am grateful to the Secretary of State for having listened to Liberal Democrats in Devon and perhaps also to her legal advisers. When the rapid review takes place, will the Secretary of State please consider the greater costs associated with delivering in the countryside, such as rural Devon?
Angela Rayner
One of the challenges that rural areas face is transport. One of the reasons that the Prime Minister has been so eager to make sure that devolution happens is that those who are closest to what is going on in their local area know what challenges are being faced and how we can unlock some of the potential, and Devon can take the positives from that. We want to work with Devon to make sure that people in Devon get the right local devolution and local government reform for them. That is why I paused the decision.
Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)
My constituents, and people in Kent generally, cannot wait any longer to see an improvement in their roads, bus services, social care and SEND provision. They were let down by decades of Tory administration, and are now being let down by Reform. Can the Secretary of State reassure them that this pause will not create more uncertainty, and will not lead to any further decline in public services?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is right to mention what happened under the Conservatives. This Labour Government recognised what local government had been through, and took steps to build back resilience and deal with funding pressures. For me, local government reform is about ensuring that people receive the right services at the right level and that we can deliver the best for their local areas, and that, hopefully, is what we will be able to do. I still believe in and am committed to local government reform; I just want to make sure that we get this right.
Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)
Since the Secretary of State first announced these plans, when she last held this role, the Labour Government have played fast and loose with our local democracy, cancelling elections and creating chaos and uncertainty in our councils as they struggle to deliver key frontline services. As she goes to work on this review, will she publish, alongside the legal advice that she has received, the financial costs that councils in Essex have faced as a result of this massive U-turn? Has she assessed the adverse impact on local services caused by the time and resources spent on these changes?
Angela Rayner
Again, Madam Deputy Speaker, let me gently say that this is not a U-turn. This is me, as Secretary of State, reviewing the position and ensuring that we get this right. I still believe that local government reform in the right hon. Lady’s area in particular can deliver for her constituents, and I want them to engage with us. We have provided transitional funding to give support, and her local authorities and those in her local areas can get in touch with my Department to discuss it.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
May I warmly welcome the Secretary of State back to her place? I especially welcome this statement, as will many people back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme who only wanted to be listened to.
Back in July, in the strongest terms, I asked the Secretary of State’s predecessor to pause and think again. Today the Secretary of State has done that, and I am grateful. I hope that she will also listen to the many representations that I have made to her Department. May I go one step further, however, and ask her to focus on establishing the new mayoral authorities, which will provide the comprehensive cross-party, cross-community support that we need when it comes to changes of this scale?
Angela Rayner
The Prime Minister has been clear about what he wants to see in terms of our devolution agenda, and we will be taking that forward. As I have said, this will be a rapid review. I want to make sure that that is done and that the decisions are the right decisions, but we are moving forward with devolution, and we will be engaging with those in my hon. Friend’s area so that they can unlock their full potential.
Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)
My constituents never asked for local government reorganisation. They do not support local government reorganisation, which they see as leading to decisions being taken by a more remote, more expensive and less accountable authority. Will the Secretary of State confirm that maintaining the status quo is at least an option as a part of her review, and will she also say whether the intention is still to go ahead with the mayoral election in Essex in 2028?
Angela Rayner
Let me gently say to the right hon. Member that, as I have already said, I think that local government reform can unlock potential for areas, but we want to do this with areas, and, indeed, to look into how we can deliver for his area and improve services for his local constituents.. There are opportunities, but sometimes there is duplication, so I welcome that discussion. As for taking forward the devolution agenda, I do not envisage that being interrupted by this process.
Alex Baker (Aldershot) (Lab)
It is never too late to make sure that a decision is the right one, but I am pleased to hear the Secretary of State recognise the challenge that this pause presents to local councils such as my district council, Rushmoor borough council, which has worked so hard to deliver local government reorganisation in our community. However, it also has an impact on businesses, schools and community organisations across Aldershot and Farnborough, which have spent months committing time and energy to preparing for this reorganisation on the basis of the Government’s decision. Does the Secretary of State recognise how frustrating it is for them to have that certainty pulled away, and has the Department considered the cost and disruption that this decision will cause beyond local councils themselves?
Angela Rayner
I thank my hon. Friend and members of her local community for engaging in local government reform. I reiterate from the Dispatch Box my commitment to that, but we need to make sure that we get it right. The example that I can give, especially to the young people in her area, is that if they feel that they do not have all the information, it is okay to say so and to take that forward in the correct way. That is the right and correct way forward. We are committed to providing transitional funding, and I urge my hon. Friend and her local leaders to be in touch with my Department so that we can take a look at this issue.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
As we heard a short while ago from the Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), Lincolnshire county council welcomes the review, but in the north of the county, where the two unitaries are, I and my two constituency neighbours, who are Labour colleagues, favour the status quo, as do council leaders. May I urge the Secretary of State to take an early decision to continue the status quo in respect of the two unitaries?
Angela Rayner
I want to give clarity to the hon. Gentleman and his local leaders, and I will review the situation at pace to make sure that we are able to do so.
Naushabah Khan (Gillingham and Rainham) (Lab)
My constituents in Gillingham and Rainham want local government that works for them and delivers the services that they need. Could the Secretary of State provide some reassurance that while the review is taking place she will continue to look at local government funding and finances, and particularly at how councils such as mine—Medway council, which is in a non-mayoral area— are able to access investment and growth opportunities in the way that other devolved authorities are able to do?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. As the Prime Minister set out, it is really important that every area and every postcode feels the benefits of growth and that we can unlock potential through devolution. Local government reform is part of that process but not the only bit. I believe that we will put areas in a strong position through devolution, and that we will be able to deliver better services for her local area and start to repair some of the damage that was done by the cuts to local government under the previous Government.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
Will the Secretary of State confirm that the mayoral election in Cumbria will go ahead as planned and that the planned combined authority will be introduced without further hindrance, disruption or uncertainty? Will she also take this opportunity to review the other mistake that this Government have made on devolution in the last couple of years: the errors when it comes to what is referred to, wrongly, as “fairer funding”? Westmorland and Furness is the most rural unitary authority in England, and for that crime it has borne the penalty of a 31% cut in its funding from the Government, meaning that devolution no longer looks like devolution of power and instead looks more like a delegation of cuts for the people of Cumbria.
Angela Rayner
I recognise what local government has been through after 14 years of the Conservatives—in fact, I think the hon. Gentleman’s party was involved at the time. In trying to recognise the challenges that areas face, I believe that what I am saying today about local government reorganisation does not impact on the timetable for devolution. I believe that that will go ahead, and unitary local government can help with the smooth functioning of strategic authorities.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
In Chesterfield, there will be unmitigated despair at the statement we have heard today from my right hon. Friend. For the authorities for which she is doing a review—the 14 that thought they had got their decision in July—could she clarify the basis of that review? Is she still attempting to achieve what we were attempting to achieve previously in terms of the size of authorities, or is she relooking at the basis of what reorganisation should achieve? We were told in February, when the 2026 elections had been cancelled and then the cancellation was cancelled, that this reorganisation would definitely not happen in 2027. What has actually gone wrong? There is a real lack of confidence that what we are being told one day is the same thing that we will be told the next.
Angela Rayner
I appreciate my hon. Friend’s frustration, but I have considered the legal advice provided as part of the judicial review process. The Prime Minister asked me to review this process, and I took the decision that I needed more time. I really appreciate how that has left people, and their frustration. This is not the end of local government reform. We remain committed to unitary councils, and the review will consider proposals for how best to deliver unitary councils in this Parliament, and to ensure alignment with the priorities of the new Administration.
Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)
Communities like mine in Eastleigh are being denied funding opportunities because they do not yet have an elected mayor. With the timeline for local government reorganisation and elections now thrown into doubt, will the Secretary of State ensure that funding opportunities are offered to all local authorities, whether or not they have an elected mayor?
Angela Rayner
Devolution can unlock funding and potential, but an area does not necessarily need to have a mayor. I think the Prime Minister outlined that in his statement, when he took questions for over three hours; the hon. Member should look back at that. This is about making sure that devolution can be unlocked for areas at the pace they wish. As I said in my statement, I do not believe that this pause will have an impact on people’s ability to continue with the devolution agenda.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
I understand the limits on what my right hon. Friend can say today, but it seems that there have been real failures in the official process. The situation in many of our constituencies is being put on hold. She is taking accountability, even though she is not actually responsible for this. Will she assure me that she will investigate any failures of process that have occurred, and that have led to this situation, so that we can learn the lessons, and so that this does not happen again?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is right that we have to review the process and learn lessons. As I said to the right hon. Member for North East Cambridgeshire (Steve Barclay), we are announcing our new permanent secretary, who I am sure will be listening to this debate and will want to take this forward. I want to place on record my thanks to the dedicated, professional public servants from both central and local government who have worked on this, and to my predecessor. I want to reassure the House that I have taken this action, as Secretary of State, to ensure that I have all the facts, so that I can make the decision.
Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)
I have to confess to the Secretary of State that I am even more confused now than my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage) was 40 minutes ago. Could the Secretary of State just be clear with my residents that the combined authority elections due next May are off, and the borough council elections are on, but the combined authority elections might be on if she gets her skates on and the borough council elections might be off? If the combined authority elections are off, when will they be on, and is the mayoral election in 2028 on or off? If it is off, what is going to happen to police governance?
Angela Rayner
I have said that the review is on and the elections are on, and I am ready to get on with it. I am sure that the right hon. Member will work with me to make sure we get it sorted—and it is on.
Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)
One of the policy goals of LGR is to encourage economically important cities like Exeter to better play their role in generating jobs, growth, housing and better place-based services. In our case, devolution does not work if Exeter is not in the strategic authority, as it is one of the two big economic drivers of the region. Can the Secretary of State confirm that this remains the case, and that after the rapid review, should it have a positive outcome, we can move forward with both LGR and devolution in Devon quickly?
Angela Rayner
I reassure my hon. Friend that I have said that this review should be rapid, and that we should get on as quickly as possible with engagement, but also that the timetable for devolution should not be affected. We need to make sure that we make the right decisions on local government reform, but we want to take forward devolution at pace.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
It is apparent to absolutely everyone that this local government reform is now a shambolic, incompetent mess. I just want to put on record how much time, as well as money, has been spent by councillors and council officials right across Norfolk, where this has been a massive, monumental distraction, not for months, but for years. The independent Local Government Association says:
“There is no excuse for the Government’s mishandling of this process.”
Does the Secretary of State agree?
Angela Rayner
No. What I have said is that I have reviewed the decisions. I have said on record that people across Norfolk, and representatives from across the whole conurbation, have put in a great amount of work. I want to respect that work, as the new Secretary of State, and make sure that I am listening, that I have reviewed the decisions, and that I am making the correct ones. I do not believe that is a waste of the time and resources that have been put in. I believe that local government reform is an opportunity for Norfolk. I will work with local leaders at pace to give them certainty. I wanted to ensure, out of respect for their work, that I take that work into consideration, as Secretary of State.
Andy MacNae (Rossendale and Darwen) (Lab)
I echo the comments of Lancashire colleagues, particularly on the opportunity to review the boundary decisions, but I also think that all those councillors and officers in Lancashire who worked so hard on reorganisation and made so much progress deserve an apology.
More fundamentally, every day and every week that goes past, Lancashire falls further behind our neighbours in Manchester and Liverpool, simply through lack of an effective structure and the capacity and capability to deliver our growth potential. I was pleased to hear the Secretary of State’s recommitment to growth in every postcode. Will she meet me, along with Lancashire colleagues, to agree how we can properly resource Lancashire’s growth potential? We cannot wait; we need to do it now. We need to properly resource it, and we need to deliver on our potential through this period of uncertainty.
Angela Rayner
Again, I say to my hon. Friend that I recognise the work that has gone in. That work is not wasted. The pause will be about working with local areas at pace to get this right, but it does not mean that we cannot take advantage of unlocking growth in every postcode. The Ministers here will be happy to work with my hon. Friend and other hon. Members from his area to ensure that we get the right devolution, and a package that works for them.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
I am going to try a different tack, rather than commenting on the hokey-cokey of this process. The more serious point is that local government reorganisation was always a significant risk to the voluntary and community sector. Many funders are reluctant to fund organisations with annual incomes exceeding £1 million, leaving those organisations reliant on commissioned contracts from local government, NHS bodies and other public sector departments. The proposed transition to unitary authorities was already disrupting funding streams; today’s announcement creates further disruption. Can the Secretary of State reassure those important community organisations that they will have the funding, and give them certainty about the direction of travel, so that they have the confidence to start and continue providing services for my community?
Angela Rayner
Again, I want to reassure the hon. Member that this is about getting the process right. I want him and those local organisations to get in contact with my officials, so that we can be sure that we are doing everything possible to support the process. I have said that unitary local government can help with the smooth functioning of strategic authorities. I also recognise that the Government are committed to providing transition funding, so please go ahead and get in touch with my Department.
Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her statement. It will be met with some disappointment and frustration locally, not least because many businesses, community groups, charities, councillors and council officers have put an enormous amount of effort into the proposal for a north Hampshire authority. I believe it is still the right course to set up a north Hampshire. Can she reassure those people that their effort has not been in vain, and that she will provide certainty and take a decision on the new proposals as soon as possible?
Angela Rayner
I absolutely provide that reassurance. I needed that time. With the advice that I received during the judicial review process, and with the Prime Minister asking me to look at this again, it was only right that I did so, in a timely way. As I have reiterated, I am absolutely clear that I want to take this forward. Local government reform is a priority, and I want to undertake it at pace, as do Members across the House, including my hon. Friend and his local leaders.
Nigel Huddleston (Droitwich and Evesham) (Con)
There is a video circulating online that claims the three most difficult things to say in life are “I’m sorry,” “I love you” and “Worcestershire”. It is fascinating to see that the right hon. Lady struggles with at least two of those three things. I am glad that she has abandoned, or at least paused, her decision to destroy the well run, low-tax, Conservative-controlled Wychavon district council, but is she aware of the chaos and cost that she has caused to councils in Worcestershire and across the country? She is giving very strong vibes that she does not know what she is doing. Is that because she does not know what she is doing?
Angela Rayner
I am sorry, but I am not sure that I love the hon. Gentleman, but I love something—and Worcestershire. I apologise. I do know what I am doing. I know that this has been a disappointment for some areas. I do not make this statement to the House lightly, but I am doing this, in all sincerity, to get it right. I hope that hon. Members from across Worcestershire and every other area where we are looking at local government reorganisation appreciate that. Even if I cannot say “I love you”, hopefully the hon. Gentleman will be able to say that he loves me at the end of this process.
Jacob Collier (Burton and Uttoxeter) (Lab)
First, I thank the councillors and council officers from East Staffordshire borough council and Staffordshire county council for the hard work that they have put into the process. The rapid review is essential to give residents and council workers the certainty that they need. As my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) said, it should be seen as being apart from mayoral devolution, which is the real prize for our communities; it will bring power out of this place and into Staffordshire. Will the Secretary of State commit to a meeting in No. 10 North with Stoke and Staffordshire MPs, so that we can talk about getting that deal in place?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is right that devolution can happen at pace, and that it will unlock potential. I am sure that the Minister will be happy to meet him and my colleagues from No. 10 North to ensure that we unlock the potential of his area.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
I absolutely share the shock and anger of councillors and council officers at the announcement. At the heart of this are councillors who are working so hard to deliver frontline services, whether that is education, housing or social care. It is they who are battling this change. I am still uncertain about what will happen in May, so will the Secretary of State please reassure the people of Hertfordshire, and say what they will be voting for in May? Will councils be reimbursed for the money and time spent, so that the money can go to the services that are desperately needed?
Angela Rayner
I gently say to the hon. Member that while I appreciate she uses language like “shock and anger”, it was important to me, as Secretary of State, to make the right decision, so I came to this House and spoke to hon. Members to ensure that I do that. I still believe that local government reform will unlock potential for the hon. Member’s area. I want to ensure that I am doing this with local people’s consent; I know that we cannot get everyone’s consent, but I absolutely believe that we can design services that will improve her area. We have committed to providing transition funding. Hopefully, through local government reform, we can transform some of the thorny issues that have been around for a long time, like adult social care, as the Prime Minister said, and build resilience at a local level.
Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)
The Prime Minister and the Cabinet Office set out their plans last week to rewire the state, and effective local government remains fundamental to that. Will the Secretary of State double down on her commitment to listening—as she did so well with us in Cornwall—to Members of this House, local councils and members of the public in this process?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. Last week, I said clearly that I recognised the work of those in local government, and how difficult this has been for our local government colleagues, given the changes that have happened in our communities and the demands and pressures put on local government. I absolutely believe that local government is critical to ensuring that we get the devolution agenda right, and that we must build back resilience at a local level, so that councils can carry on delivering excellent services to their residents.
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
Local government reform in Essex has been a farce from the outset, because the people never wanted it. The council tax payers themselves never had any desire for this process. I welcome the fact that Labour’s five gerrymandered unitary authorities are clearly now stone dead, but I want to give the Secretary of State some honest advice: drop it and walk away—including the mayoralty. We have got by in Essex for 1,000 years without a mayor, and the last thing we want in our county is another Sadiq Khan. Just get rid.
Angela Rayner
I will not drop it, because I believe that the people of Essex and people all over England deserve good local services. Where there is something that I believe will improve local services and is worth exploring with local leaders, whether in Essex or elsewhere, I am up for that challenge. I am not ready to drop it. I think we can work together to improve local services, and I would be happy to meet the right hon. Gentleman, or any of his local leaders, to progress that.
Michelle Welsh (Sherwood Forest) (Lab)
I welcome the review, which gives us a real opportunity to get local government reorganisation right for my constituents. I hope that they will now be heard. Infrastructure in my constituency is creaking at the seams due to years of neglect by the previous Government. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss the real concerns in my constituency about planning, local infrastructure and local government reorganisation, as well as an exciting opportunity to create a local country park?
Angela Rayner
Well, Madam Deputy Speaker, Sherwood Forest and a local country park—I am really up for that. When I was in the Lake district over the bank holiday weekend, though, I managed to fall halfway down a mountain—that is why my legs are not used to bouncing up and down at the moment, because my knees are not so good—so I am hoping that the park will be a bit flatter and that the gradient will be a little better for me. My hon. Friend asks if we can meet, and I am sure that the relevant Minister will be happy to meet her to discuss how we can progress, ensuring that her area, including Sherwood Forest, benefits from devolution and local government.
James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)
Large numbers of my constituents took part in the Government’s consultation on proposed boundaries for the East Sussex unitary authority in good faith. They were appalled by Brighton and Hove city council’s attempted land grab in our area, and together, we resisted it. Can the Secretary of State be crystal clear for my constituents on whether she intends to reopen the discussion over East Sussex’s local government boundaries as part of this review?
Angela Rayner
Again, at the moment I can give the hon. Member an assurance that I am looking at the areas, and that I will look to ensure that all the consultation, information and advice is correct and that we are making robust decisions. I want to ensure that I do that. I am happy for him to be in contact with the relevant Minister or myself to ensure that we hear what he is saying about that process, but I have heard him today.
Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)
I appreciate that the Secretary of State is new in post, so the issues that she has outlined today are not necessarily of her making, but I must tell her that this is extremely frustrating for people in Derbyshire, and that service delivery and business confidence will be undermined while this pause goes ahead. I am at a loss as to how it has proceeded so far without it being totally legally watertight. I would appreciate any assurances the Secretary of State can give me that it will not be torpedoed in the courts again. Crucially, we are going to be asking people to stand for the existing local authorities in Derbyshire next May—people of all parties; civic-minded, community-spirited people. How long will they serve for? I think we owe it to them to tell them how long their term will be, because they will be making professional and family sacrifices. If she could offer me that information, it would be very helpful.
Angela Rayner
Again, I do recognise the frustration that my hon. Friend has expressed at parts of this process. I want to ensure that we take this forward and that it is robust, and that is why I have come to this House to say that I want to review the decisions on the basis of the legal advice provided as part of the JR process. I want to ensure that the rationale for those that go forward, including the 14 other areas, is absolutely watertight. I ask my hon. Friend to meet the Ministers as part of this process and we can iron out some of those concerns.
Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)
When the Secretary of State embarked on local government reorganisation for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, her Department accepted the principle that the Isle of Wight council should remain a stand-alone unitary authority. Now that she is reviewing local government reorganisation, will she reconfirm that the Isle of Wight council will remain a stand-alone unitary authority and that it is not, and will not be, at risk of merging with a part of the mainland?
Angela Rayner
I think it is fair to say that there is a very strong argument and rationale for it. I will make sure that the review happens speedily and that we can give those reassurances as part of the process after the review.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
I have repeatedly argued with colleagues that LGR is extremely complex but extremely important. It therefore did not need to be a term-one priority for this Government, and I remain of that view, because for me our councils should be building council houses, tackling homelessness, strengthening trade standards and regenerating high streets, not focusing on administrative structures. Assuming that LGR still goes ahead in some form—I advise the Secretary of State to think deeply about that—will she please explain how the views of Rushcliffe and Nottinghamshire residents, many of whom felt ignored through the last process, will be fully considered in this new approach?
Angela Rayner
Again, we will ensure within the review that people are engaged in the process. I say to my hon. Friend that local government reform is challenging and complex, but the aim for me is to deliver better services for local people. That means building the homes that we desperately need and renewing our high streets, which this Government are taking forward. We can deliver better services, we can reorganise and we can do better. I believe that working with local leaders is the way forward to deliver for the people of this country. I am committed to local government reform, and I want to make sure that we get it right. That is why I have made the decision to have the review.
Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)
I am the only MP in the House who represents constituents in both East Sussex and West Sussex and three district councils, including Lewes, which was previously potentially going to be split previously, along with West Sussex. The confusion around devolution and LGR in West Sussex is a terrible mess, because we have different speeds and approaches and an unclear mayoral timetable. The Secretary of State will acknowledge that the two previous East Sussex and Wessex Sussex leaders spent huge amounts of time on this process and brought positive energy to it. The right hon. Lady rightly talks about outcomes, but what can she tell my constituents about how their services, including education, social care, roads, and infrastructure, will be delivered in the future?
Angela Rayner
I pay tribute to the hon. Lady’s local leaders and the work that they are doing in local government. I recognise the challenges that they face, and I have outlined what has happened to local government over the decade and a half that her Government were in power. I have tried to build up that resilience for local leaders. Previous Ministers chose to take more time to consider the proposals—she referenced two of the places involved—and we will consider these alongside the wider review of the programme.
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
When I am out on the doorsteps in Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove, residents tell me that too often they feel distant from decisions that affect their lives. I want residents to feel that decision making is being brought closer to home and that locally we are taking better decisions about improving our buses and houses and giving young people the skills that match their potential. Can the Secretary of State please confirm that devolved powers are still coming to Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire and that they are coming at speed, because we cannot be left behind?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. Devolution is at the heart of our plans to rewire the state. I am making this statement today exactly to ensure that that happens.
Alison Griffiths (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
We are 26 months in, and the Secretary of State has already admitted that the real cost that the Government have not assessed are the costs of the lost programmes, projects and services that have not been delivered in West Sussex and Arun because the bandwidth, headspace and resources have been devoted to LGR. Can she tell me, first, what has been the financial cost—nationally, in West Sussex and in Arun—of this so far failed experiment with LGR? Secondly, how many months can the district councillors elected in 2027 expect to serve?
Angela Rayner
Again, I do not see local government reorganisation as a wasted endeavour. I have been really clear about the reason for the pause: to get the decision right. We have committed to providing transitional funding. Where local government reform has happened in the past, we have seen that there have been savings, but my motivation is to work with local authorities to improve their services. Local authorities recognise that we could do that. I am absolutely committed to continuing that, and we will work at pace to deliver for the hon. Member’s area.
Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)
I welcome my right hon. Friend back to her role and thank her for her statement. I am sorry that the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) is no longer in his place, because I wanted to assure him that, far from being swallowed up, his constituents would have had a warm welcome and excellent local public services as part of Southampton.
I understand the difficult decision that the Secretary of State has had to make, but I must express disappointment that after all the hard work across councils and across parties, the five unitaries for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight will not be going ahead. Will she confirm that, after her rapid review, Southampton and the surrounding councils will still have the opportunity to reorganise if they so wish, or is this the last we will hear of LGR?
Angela Rayner
I absolutely want to reassure hon. Members that this is not the end of local government reorganisation, because I am absolutely committed to it. I commend my hon. Friend for his work, and his local partners and others across the House who recognise what local government reorganisation could do for their area. I want to work at pace to put us on a firm footing, so that I as Secretary of State am clear-eyed about the decision I am making and that we can go ahead, with their consent or not.
Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)
From the LGR options that were on the table for Devon, the Government opted for a Labour-led proposal to create three urban growth areas, with all the rural bits that were left behind dumped together into one huge, unworkable authority that divided communities, had no economic hub and had little chance of being sustainable. I therefore welcome the Secretary of State’s announcement that she will review the decision, although it is not clear how the review will happen, who will do it or how long it will take. Will she commit to meeting all Opposition Members who represent rural Devon so that we can discuss the best proposal for the for the biggest number of people across Devon? The one we had was going to leave rural Devon behind, and we want to ensure that does not happen again.
Angela Rayner
I want to reassure the hon. Member that we do not want to leave rural Devon behind, either. As the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon), has just had to nip out for another meeting, I will volunteer him for the commitment to meet those Members. It is of serious concern for me to ensure that people are heard in the process. That is why I decided to have the review.
Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)
I know that the pause will be frustrating for people in Adur and Worthing who want to see the back of West Sussex county council and have power and money brought closer to them, but I do accept that it is important to take the time to get this right. Will the Secretary of State assure me that the review will not diminish the Government’s plans to devolve power closer to my constituents?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely. We are committed to devolution and to devolving power. The Prime Minister has made it really clear that that is one of his priorities. We want to ensure that we do this right, with local people, so that the power is there and we give areas the resources and support they need to flourish.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
Local councils across South Cambridgeshire spent time and money in good faith preparing for local government reorganisation according to the Government’s criteria and timelines. Businesses in one of the fastest growing areas of the country welcome the prospect of certainty with a final decision, yet further delay leaves them all in limbo. Does the Secretary of State agree that chaos is not good for local democracy and not good for investment? Will she meet me and local council leaders to understand the implications of this decision for Cambridgeshire?
Angela Rayner
I totally recognise that Cambridgeshire has a huge amount of potential, and we will absolutely ensure that a meeting is set up with myself or the Minister. I gently say that I understand the implications of me coming to the House today, as Secretary of State, and reviewing these decisions. I have said that I want to do it at pace, but I have also made it really clear that I felt that I needed to put that review in place so that I could satisfy myself that we are doing it correct. These are some really big reforms, as the hon. Lady is aware. I want to make sure we get it right so that her area can reach its full potential, and I am sure it will.
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)
When the right hon. Lady came to the House last year to announce her consultation, I called it a mess. Fast forward 18 months: there is now chaos in the outcome and decisions. Make no mistake, the reason we are here now is the threat of the courts. My concern comes because in Leicestershire, we had three applications go forward and the Government chose their own fourth application. Will the Secretary of State ensure that her review involves not just the process but the boundaries as well, because the biggest contention in Leicestershire is the massive land grab coming from the city, and nine out of 10 people in her own consultation said that this was not acceptable?
Angela Rayner
I reassure the Member that I am going to review those issues and make sure that I am confident in the decision that is made, including within the boundaries, to ensure that any decisions that are made are the right ones. I will update him, and work with him and other Members to ensure they have that clarity. We might not agree, but I will make sure that I have listened and that I at least know where I am going and make the decision confidently.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
I was not in favour of the decision announced by the right hon. Lady’s predecessor before the summer break for a single unitary Gloucestershire. I would have preferred something more Cheltenham-centric. However, that decision seems to reflect the political consensus across the parties in Gloucestershire, so I have to ask the Secretary of State: is she in the business of overturning the political consensus across party locally in Gloucestershire? If not, will she just let us get on with it so that the councils can get on with doing the things that my residents want, including ensuring that there are no unwanted cuts to fire services because of cuts from Westminster to our budgets, that the town centre in Cheltenham is fixed up and that we get a tip reopened for Cheltenham? Those are the things my residents want. They are not so bothered about boundaries, even if they are concerned about Cheltenham losing its historic voice.
Angela Rayner
This is not about overturning or overpowering local decisions. This is about me reviewing these decisions and making sure that there is a robust system that says, “This is where we want to go”, and taking that forward. I hope to do that within a matter of weeks—not too long a process—and to get it right. That is fundamentally the first and foremost point: I want to get it right for the hon. Gentleman’s constituents so that they can get on and get the things that they absolutely want and desire.
Mr Peter Bedford (Mid Leicestershire) (Con)
Given that the right hon. Lady emphasised listening to local people, empowering local communities and making decisions with their consent, does she agree that local communities such as those in Leicestershire should have local referendums before decisions are imposed upon them, such as being dragged into an enlarged Leicester city council area?
Angela Rayner
I have to say that I am not a big fan of referendums, if I am really honest. That is my personal opinion, but I am open to having discussions about how we can make sure that the hon. Member’s local residents feel like they are engaged and see the benefits of local government reform. That is my ultimate aim as part of this process, and I look forward to working with him on that endeavour.
Charlotte Cane (Ely and East Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests: I am a district councillor on East Cambs district council. The residents of Ely and East Cambridgeshire will be relieved that they are not going to have the wrong unitary imposed on them, but they will be worried about the chaos and uncertainty that we have heard about, and about what happens next and when. What is the remit of the review? How is it going to be run to ensure that local people get their voices heard? And what is the real timetable? “As quickly as possible” and “at pace” are all great, but what is the actual timetable? Also, the Secretary of State appeared to say that May’s elections would be held on the existing district council boundaries unless the unitaries were in place by then. What did she mean by that?
Angela Rayner
I have asked the Minister for local government, devolution and regional growth to undertake a rapid review of the local government reorganisation programme. That is a review regarding the decisions that were announced in March and July, and the two remaining areas of West Sussex, and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. I have said that the review will cover 18 decisions already taken and the two areas where decisions have not yet been made. I want the programme to be reviewed at pace and will report back to Parliament at the earliest opportunity.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
This process has been a complete shambles from start to finish and has failed to have Worcestershire’s best interests at its heart. Will the Secretary of State confirm to the House whether this is actually being paused or whether, in reality, the can is being kicked down the road, under the veil of the process being delayed, rather than the Government admitting embarrassment? If it has been paused, and she is going to revisit the decision, will the evidence base be revisited, and will there be a new consultation with stakeholders, including residents? If so, will the Secretary of State meet me, as the Member of Parliament for Bromsgrove, before she takes a decision? I think she said earlier that the Government had allocated £63 million to support councils across the country in this process. How much of that £63 million has been spent so far?
Angela Rayner
This is a pause. It is a review—I have made that absolutely crystal clear—for me to consider the legal advice that was provided as part of the JR process, as well as for me to be able to do what the Prime Minister asked us last week, which was to look at the local government reform programme. That is what I am doing. I did talk about the £63 million. That money is earmarked. If those areas have financial concerns regarding the money they have spent on local government reorganisation, they can contact my Department.
Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)
This sudden U-turn is greatly disappointing for my constituency, after so much work by council officials, residents, councillors and other partners, and after so much money wasted on LGR costs. Given that the two-unitary model in Warwickshire—South Warwickshire and North Warwickshire—was championed by my constituents, the majority of local council leaders and the majority of Warwickshire MPs, will the Secretary of State reassure us all regarding the timescale for this review? Above all, will she reassure us that the decision will respect the democratic input of the people of Warwickshire who contributed to the previous LGR process?
Angela Rayner
Absolutely, I reassure the hon. Member that this is about me reviewing the decisions and making sure they are absolutely correct. I want to do that. I recognise the work that has gone in from her local area and those representatives, and I pay tribute to the work that they are doing. I have indicated that I want the review to take weeks rather than months. I do not want to kick the can down the road; I just want to ensure that the decisions that we made are robust and take us forward in the spirit of co-operation with local areas.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
When I led a debate in Westminster Hall last week on the impact of local government reorganisation in Cambridgeshire, I could not possibly have anticipated that it would have been powerful enough to stop it dead in its tracks. I welcome the pause to tranche 3, but I want to get a bit of clarity for the councillors in my constituency. The plan is going to be reviewed. If it comes back, will we potentially see local elections in May 2028 for a new shadow unitary? With that in mind, will the Secretary of State meet me and Huntingdonshire district council to discuss some of the topics that are still outstanding and the reason why Cambridgeshire and Peterborough was delayed in the first instance?
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Member for his comments; I believe that he enjoyed the Westminster Hall debate with the Local Government Minister. I am sure that the Minister would like to continue that conversation to ensure that we get the best deal over the line. I do not want to pre-empt the review, but I want to ensure that we have heard from the hon. Member and his local representatives about the challenges. I am sure that the Minister will set a meeting up in his diary as soon as possible, so that we expedite the process.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
My constituents in Esher and Walton, in Surrey, are left wondering whether they have been thrown under the bus by a Government who failed to be secure in the legal advice and the costs from the very beginning. This is incompetent. Will the Government release the legal advice? What are the legal implications for Surrey? What extra support will she give Surrey regarding the cost implications, given the gross underestimation of how much LGR would cost and the significant debt that Conservative Surrey has amassed in the two years that this has been going on under the unfair funding formula?
Angela Rayner
I say again that the review does not include the reorganisation of Surrey. Councillors have been elected and new councils go live from 1 April.
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
You wait a while and two Surrey questions come along at once! One of the potential unintended consequences of today’s announcement is to leave Surrey in the slightly discomfiting position of being in an experimental cohort with a sample size of one—the one county being reorganised under this legislation. We all know why: it is because the Conservative-run Surrey county council begged the Government to put it on this rollercoaster with no known destination and, as it turns out today, with legally slightly shonky rails. Do the legal concerns that the Secretary of State has expressed today also relate to Surrey? If Surrey is affected by those legal concerns, what faith should my residents have that this experiment is not going to come fully off the rails before 1 April 2027?
Angela Rayner
I gently say that, for me, this is not an experiment; it is about working with local areas to deliver local services and improve on them. The review does not include the reorganisation of Surrey. As I said, councillors have been elected already, and the new councils go live on 1 April 2027. I hope that Surrey, with the two new unitary councils, will be able to deliver across the area on vital services, like adult social care, transport and those good services that people want to see across their area, and I will work with them to deliver that.
James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind)
I thank the Secretary of State for sharing—I have fluffed it now. Forgive me, I have had a two-hour wait, and I have completely lost my train of thought.
Over the last two years, the people of Essex have faced a dizzying array of changes, from council elections—off and on—to over-subscribed hospitals and 30,000 new homes to be built, many of which will be on greenfield land. The question is: how can we trust this Government to deliver on anything when they say one thing and do the other?
Angela Rayner
I appreciate the hon. Member’s frustration, but—[Interruption.]
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Order. The hon. Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (James McMurdock) may wish, out of courtesy to this House and certainly to the Secretary of State—and to his constituents and my constituents—to stay in his seat to listen to the response by the Secretary of State.
Angela Rayner
The right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) raised these issues before, and I do appreciate the frustration in Essex. In response to the right hon. Member, who was here a while ago and raised these issues, I made it really clear that local government reorganisation is about delivering—
Angela Rayner
I know you’re still here! I made it really clear that local government reorganisation is delivering for people across Essex. I understand the pressures on local services. Essex does have a need for more housing and more infrastructure, and a need for local government reform. This Government are there to work with the local people of Essex to deliver that.
Oral Answers to Questions
Angela Rayner Excerpts(2 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
Angela Rayner
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am delighted to have been appointed Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and it is great to be back answering questions from this Dispatch Box—in fact, I like it so much that I thought we would do a statement straight afterwards as well. I pay tribute to my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed), and his team for their hard work.
Our new national planning policy framework strengthens support for green spaces by requiring local plans to set standards for green infrastructure and increase support for new and improved community facilities and public service infrastructure.
Josh Newbury
I warmly welcome the Secretary of State and her team to their places. It is fantastic to see my right hon. Friend back at the heart of Government.
This summer’s relentless wildfires have brought home to us in Cannock Chase the vital importance of green spaces and woodlands. However, I have heard from residents of new estates such as Norton Hall Meadow in Norton Canes that their woodlands have been badly neglected by private management companies. Will the Secretary of State ensure that, as we build new homes across the country, the planning system ensures that green spaces are available to all and maintained properly for decades to come?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is right to raise the subject of private management companies; I recognise the situation he is describing and how unacceptable it is. It is clear that the current system is not delivering for ordinary people, and the Government are committed to reducing the prevalence of private estate management arrangements and ending the injustice of fleecehold. We consulted on the proposals—I think that was in March—to increase the adoption of amenities and new estates, and we will respond in due course. It is the wild west at the moment, and the Minister for Housing and Planning, my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook), is undertaking important work to tackle it.
Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)
The Secretary of State has doubled housing targets for Maldon district, causing it to fall behind on its five-year supply; that is putting green spaces at risk in villages such as Tollesbury. These villages are building more homes but, importantly, this is affecting their ability to plan their strategic infrastructure and community growth. Will the Secretary of State meet me and my right hon. Friend the Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) to discuss the targets and the impact that they are having on the community and on green spaces?
Angela Rayner
I thank the right hon. Member for her question. We have set out our targets within the national planning policy framework and local plans, and I encourage authorities to make sure that their local plans are up to date. Natural England’s standard on accessible green space stipulates that everyone should have access to good quality green and blue spaces close to home for health and wellbeing and contact with nature. Hopefully, the right hon. Member will be able to see that we are putting things in place to ensure that we have the housing and the green spaces people want.
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
I welcome the right hon. Lady to her place alongside her team. Guildford borough council’s latest green-belt assessment found that 92% of its green belt now meets the Government’s grey belt definition, and its assessed housing need has been doubled by the Government from 562 to 1,168 homes a year. That has left many of my residents worried about the loss of green spaces, about unsustainable development without appropriate infrastructure and about the loss of the distinctive historic character of their villages.
What assessment has the Secretary of State made of the potential impact of planning policy on green-belt land in my constituency, which falls within the Guildford borough area? Can she outline what steps her Government will take to protect green spaces for communities by ensuring that developers are directed towards genuine brownfield sites first, rather than development being concentrated on land around Guildford that was previously protected by the green belt?
Angela Rayner
What we have been doing is making sure we are strengthening and clarifying the rules around the release of grey belt, but brownfield has to be first. We are also strengthening policy provisions to support local authorities in planning for green space at a strategic level, to ensure that green space is available and that we have the housing and infrastructure people need, but brownfield has to be used first. I encourage the hon. Lady to work with her local authority to look at its local plans.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
We are building the homes this country needs through our £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, the £16 billion in the National Housing Bank and the most ambitious planning reforms in a generation. The Greater Manchester combined authority and its fantastic new mayor has received £258 million from the national housing delivery fund and Ministers have intervened to ensure that Stockport’s local plan is consulted on, so that we can provide the homes that Stockport needs.
Navendu Mishra
I congratulate my good friend the Secretary of State and the Ministers on their appointments. As a fellow Stopfordian, she knows Stockport well. In Stockport, nearly 10,000 households are on the waiting list for housing, and Stockport council has spent more than £2 million on temporary hotel accommodation for people who have nowhere else to go. Stockport also has one of the highest levels of residential tower blocks in Great Manchester. Many residents are living in ageing high-rise homes, including those in Lancashire Hill in my constituency, and they are raising serious concerns with me about the condition of their housing and their flats. Will the Secretary of State set out how her Department will support councils not only to build new social homes in our communities, but to invest in and protect existing housing stock, so that everyone has a safe, decent home to go to?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is a great advocate for his constituency, which includes the town of my birth. I have fond memories of Lanky Hill as a child—it was where my nan lived. We announced initial allocations of the social and affordable homes programme that will support the delivery of tens of thousands of new council and social homes. We are supporting councils to invest in existing homes, with a 10-year rent settlement alongside the warm homes funding.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
I have asked the Minister for Local Government, Devolution and Regional Growth, my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) to undertake a rapid review of the local government reorganisation programme. I have withdrawn the decisions made in March this year for four areas: Essex, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock; Hampshire, the Isle of Wight, Portsmouth and Southampton; Norfolk; and Suffolk. The review will look at the programme as a whole, including the decision that was taken for Devon, Plymouth and Torbay.
Martin Wrigley
I congratulate the Secretary of State on her return to her place in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. I welcome her team, too. I thank her for her upcoming statement and the review that she has just started, which address my question and that of my colleague, my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), about the Devon local government reorganisation, which had been described as bonkers. Next time around, will the Government include the local MPs in the process? Will the local councils be refunded the costs incurred this time around?
Angela Rayner
I hope that local MPs and councils will be engaged. I have made a commitment, which I will go into further in the statement after this Question Time. It is about making sure that we make the right choices for local areas. Where costs have been incurred, there will be conversations with my Department, which was allocated money to support local government reorganisation. We are still committed to local government reorganisation, but with people.
Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
Last Thursday marked the two-year anniversary of the publication of the Grenfell Tower inquiry phase 2 report. We remain committed to ensuring that the Grenfell tragedy is not forgotten and never happens again, and we will continue to work closely with the community and the building industry as we deliver lasting change.
Olly Glover
Some constituents are facing exorbitant service charges for retirement properties inherited from a family member that are proving impossible to sell. One of my constituents is paying £770 a month in service charges for an empty one-bedroom flat, after inheriting the home from their late mother. What steps will the Government take to regulate the sector and stop these companies ripping people off?
Angela Rayner
I have great sympathy with what the hon. Member says, and the Housing Minister has just indicated that he would be happy to meet him. That is something that we want to tackle. We have been very clear on service charges and fleecehold, and we will make sure that we bring forward legislation that protects people from unfair charges.
Building Homes and Renewing Communities
Angela Rayner Excerpts(6 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
The Prime Minister has this week set out our plan to bring back hope, after a decade of decline. Today I want to update the House on the first steps that my Department is taking to rise to these new challenges.
We know that the sense of decline that people feel runs deep. The causes are not straightforward, and it did not happen overnight, but the most visible sign of it—a constant reminder of political and economic failure—is the state of our high streets: shuttered-up shops reminding us of what once was, and organised crime too often out there, visible, in the open. Decades of deregulation and austerity for local government and the recent cost of living crisis all share the blame. Every part of Government has a role to play in getting our high streets booming again, so in response we are rebuilding the local state, giving councils new powers over their high streets and putting them back in control of their town and city centres.
Local leaders know their high streets best and are best placed to bring them back to life, so in the months ahead we will support councils to block new bookies, vape shops and so-called casinos, and we will double the length of closure orders from six to 12 months, so that police have longer to investigate dodgy shops. We will improve high street shopfronts by setting clearer expectations for their design and appearance. That is alongside our Pride in Place programme, which is giving local communities £6 billion to improve their areas.
Everyone who has walked down their high street will have spotted another glaring signal of state failure: people sleeping rough. In 2026, in the world’s fifth richest economy, everyone should have a roof over their head. That is who we are as a country. This is a kind, caring nation where people take pride in looking out for each other, and that is why we will end rough sleeping in our country. When I visited Changing Lives in Newcastle over the summer, I met the incredible Sabrina Cohen-Hatton. Today Sabrina is chief fire officer for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, but as a teenager she experienced homelessness. Sabrina is an absolute inspiration and shows that if people are given the right support that they need, they can transform their lives.
By Christmas this year, everyone sleeping rough will be offered a route off the streets. We have set aside £442 million for a new rough sleeping programme to meet that milestone, while investing in accommodation and support to end it for good. That takes our total investment in homelessness and rough sleeping services to more than £4 billion over the next three years. We know that the reasons people sleep rough are complex. For example, eight out of 10 rough sleepers have a mental health vulnerability. Our plans are more than just accommodation; it is a whole-system approach that will also include access to health, substance or employment support. Women who are homeless are not always visibly sleeping rough, so we are specifically asking services to meet women where they are, to ensure that they get the support they need.
Rough sleeping is just the worst symptom of an underlying crisis that we are determined to tackle. For too long, Britain has not built the homes that we need. We are getting Britain building, with council housing at the centre of our plans. The failure to build council homes to replace those that were sold off is one of the major causes of the housing crisis that we inherited at the last election. Last month I met families in Kidbrooke who told me that when they moved into their new social homes, it took so much stress away. One resident told me that they had come from a place with mould on the walls and mice on the floor, and that finding out that they were moving into a new home was like winning the lottery.
Last week I announced the first wave of our allocations for the social and affordable homes programme. That is more than 70,000 homes, nearly two-thirds of which will be for social rent. We also announced new support for councils to rebuild their capacity, including a further £46 million over three years, and an expansion of the Pathways to Planning programme. This follows our new national planning policy framework, which will unlock thousands of homes around train stations, and our announcement of new housing and planning powers for mayors, who can now call in planning applications for strategic sites, and grant up-front permission to build for the benefit of local people. We are also giving them greater say over how national housing funding is spent in their areas, with Homes England investment now focused on their priorities.
Solving the housing crisis is not just a moral cause, it is an economic necessity. Every shovel in the ground means new investment, new jobs and growth in every postcode. We must also put power in every postcode. The legacies of political choices in the 1980s and the decades since, the centralisation of political power, privatisation of economic wealth, and de-industrialisation all contributed to the loss of control that so many people feel today. The future of our country relies on us building a new economic and political settlement that serves those we represent.
That starts with the largest ever transfer of power and funding out to every region of England. For the first time, mayors will receive a share of income tax revenues, meaning that they can invest in what matters most locally. They will also be given new powers to bring rail and bus services under local control, run 16-to-19 funding and employment support, and back local industries and businesses to create new jobs. Where power is devolved, resources will be devolved too. That will end the begging-bowl culture of the past and pave the way for a new era of devolution. In the months ahead we will make sure that every area benefits, by supporting areas without a mayor to establish new strategic authorities.
Finally, I want to take a moment to thank all of those involved in the response to the wildfires this summer, including the firefighters, who showed immense bravery battling the flames. I saw the horrendous damage in Stourbridge at first hand, and the level of emotional turmoil was devastating. I will never forget meeting a woman on Quarry Park Road whose neighbour was widowed less than a year ago; she had lost her home and all her possessions too. During the fires we made emergency funding available, and this autumn the Prime Minister will chair a wildfire summit to discuss what more we can do to improve our resilience. The wildfires and extreme heat show the threat that we face from the climate crisis. We must treat this as an emergency in itself.
The steps we are taking are only the start. In the months ahead, we will take through the Representation of the People Bill, giving 16 and 17-year-olds the vote and protecting our elections from foreign interference; we will speed up building safety remediation and end the feudal leasehold system; and we will work with local leaders as we fix the foundations of local government. The Prime Minister has promised a new political and economic model and, together, we are shaping it.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her statement. It is a pleasure to see her again so soon. I join her in thanking those involved in the response to this summer’s wildfires, and applauding their remarkable courage.
The Secretary of State is right to note that for far too many people across the country the sense of decline runs deep. In far too many places, organised criminals have taken over the high street, and in far too many cases, a place to sleep is something that people cannot take for granted. The stories I have been told by constituents who have experienced rough sleeping or unsafe housing remain some of the most challenging and profound I have heard since coming to this place.
Although the Secretary of State talks about a new political and economic model, I am afraid that what we have heard today is a recipe for more of the same. While her focus on the scourge of organised crime on the high street is welcome, I am concerned that she addresses a symptom of the problem but not the underlying cause. While many bookies, vape shops and high street casinos are clearly legitimate, their cash intensiveness and lower overhead costs make them particularly attractive as fronts for money laundering. However, if those businesses are closed, criminals will simply find other types of high street businesses through which to launder money. What conversations is the Secretary of State having with her Home Office colleagues on dealing with organised crime?
The right hon. Lady talks about the devolution of power and resources to local people, but what she really means is more politicians being given the power to increase the size of the state and raise taxes, but never to let people keep more of their own money or to interfere less in their lives. Will she confirm whether any tax raising powers devolved to mayors will be accompanied by powers to reduce tax—and if not, why not?
Similarly, while the right hon. Lady is right to recognise the vital importance of addressing the housing affordability crisis, the answer cannot be spending ever more taxpayers’ money. Instead, the state must stop making it so difficult and so expensive to get new houses built in the places where people want to live. A greater supply of homes in those places will mean lower costs for everybody, particularly those who are renting and those looking to get on the housing ladder. In London, where our housing crisis is most acute, Labour has been in power for over a decade. Under Sadiq Khan, housing starts fell to their lowest level ever in 2024-25. Construction began on just 4,000 homes across our capital. Can the Secretary of State explain why Labour’s London mayor has failed to get to grips with this problem? Will the changes she proposes actually solve the housing crisis in the capital? If not, it is a little difficult to understand why she is introducing them.
Finally, on homelessness and rough sleeping, we share the Government’s ambition to end rough sleeping, but it is impossible to ignore the fact that the new Prime Minister promised to do exactly that in his 2017 manifesto for the Greater Manchester mayoralty. His pledge was to end rough sleeping within three years. In fact, rough sleeping in Greater Manchester has increased every year since 2021, including in 2024-25 when the Labour party was also in power nationally. Can the Secretary of State therefore explain why the Prime Minister failed to solve rough sleeping in Greater Manchester, bearing in mind that it increased when both the local authority and the national Government were run by the Labour party? Can she explain why anybody should believe that he will be able to do so nationally?
Angela Rayner
I welcome the hon. Member to her place, and I look forward to facing her across the Dispatch Box in the months to come. She comes with a good, strong track record: I believe her grandparents met while they were delivering leaflets for the Labour party—so that’s a good start! I welcome her tone, in particular her agreement on supporting those who helped us over the summer with the wildfires. I look forward to working with her constructively, especially as we move towards the summit in the autumn; I will keep her informed.
Some of the challenges we face are of long standing. It would be remiss of me not to gently remind the Conservatives that their austerity measures hollowed out our local services and that the decline in our high streets started on their watch, but the hon. Lady is absolutely right to highlight the challenges our high streets face—that is why we have a strategy. We have made announcements to make sure that we tackle organised crime, giving the police more powers and more funding, with a £30 million boost to police and Trading Standards activity as well as strengthened closure orders and a new high streets organised crime unit. We are tackling the issues that the Conservative party failed to tackle.
The Prime Minister has been really clear about ensuring that we work with local leaders and that they are able to do the things that will help them in their local communities, so they can really start to tackle some of the issues. On tax-raising powers and the reduction of tax—again, that is an ongoing dialogue. The hon. Lady will have seen the statement from the whole of Cabinet and the work we are doing through the National Economic Council to work with mayors and local leaders so we can take those issues forward.
I was bemused by the hon. Lady saying that the state has made it hard to build. The Conservatives missed every single housing target they set, and they scrapped targets completely after pressure from their own Back Benchers. We have brought in new powers and updated the national planning policy framework. We are giving more powers to mayors, we have brought in mandatory housing targets and mandatory housing plans, and we are working with local areas to deliver the housing we need. We have been very up front about that, but we have also been really clear that infrastructure, wildlife and nature have to be taken into account. I will not take lectures from those in the party opposite, when they created a housing crisis where millions of families were locked out of home ownership.
Specifically on London, the city has built significant amounts of council housing, but the hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise the challenges that London faces. When we look at the number of children in temporary accommodation, it is clear that London has an acute need. We recognise that and have provided support through the allocation of money through the social and affordable housing programme. We also recognise the success that the Mayor of London has had in ramping up housing supply where it is needed.
Finally, let me turn to what happened in Greater Manchester under our new Prime Minister. The numbers actually fell originally—as a Greater Manchester MP, I saw that—but because there was not a national programme, the numbers then went up as more people came to Greater Manchester. We want to roll out a programme, working with local leaders and mayors, so we can offer that support. I hope the hon. Member will work with us, because I remember that this used to be a target for the Conservatives: they wanted to end rough sleeping, but then they scrapped the target. I hope they can work with us on this renewed effort, in the spirit of how the Prime Minister wants to work, to ensure that we can roll out a programme nationally where everyone who is rough sleeping has an option of safety and an option to come in.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for very timely and welcome statement. Let me point to a good development in Grimsby—a really good example of town centre housebuilding that is working with local housing associations. The partnership is between Keepmoat and Ongo northern Lincolnshire housing association, and it will provide a mix of private accommodation and social housing. She will find in her mailbox a letter from the leader of the Labour group, Emma Clough, who has written to her to raise the issue of town centre houses, and in particular empty homes in town centres, to ask whether the Government will be looking to put in place additional measures to support local authorities to tackle the scourge of empty homes, which number nearly 2,000 across Grimsby.
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend has been a great champion for Grimsby for a very long time—I think we both originally came here together in 2015—and I congratulate her on her work. She is absolutely right to praise the housing associations coming together to build the homes that people desperately need. I will look at that letter, which she is absolutely right to highlight. I will bring forward proposals on how we are working with councils to deal with the empty homes situation.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)
I congratulate the right hon. Lady on her appointment. I look forward to our exchanges, and to working with her and her team.
There are millions fewer council houses than there used to be, yet the need for social housing has only increased, not least given the scourge of poor-quality temporary accommodation for too many children. The Shared Health Foundation has found that in the last six years, temporary accommodation has been noted by the coroner as a contributory factor in the deaths of 104 children.
In Taunton and Wellington and elsewhere, all that people see are unprecedented plans for private housing that many will not be able to afford. Councils have been instructed by Whitehall to consent to homes for 180,000 people in Somerset over the next 15 years—a 25% increase in the pace of growth, never seen in the county’s history. What we need instead is a truly ambitious programme of council and social housing—not the Government’s reannouncement that 60% of its 300,000 programme will be social housing and not the 18,000 per year, but the Lib Dem policy of 150,000 social homes a year.
I recognise that the statement confirms around 46,000 social homes over 10 years, with further tranches to come, but will the Housing Secretary and the new Prime Minister, who has said a lot about social housing, raise the target from 18,000 a year or not? Will the Government raise their £3.9 billion funding to our proposed £6 billion? If they will not do that, will they write off some of the councils’ housing revenue account debt so that councils such as Somerset can build the 600 council houses that they would build if they could?
Angela Rayner
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise this issue, which is one that the Prime Minister feels incredibly passionate about. He has committed to delivering the biggest council house building programme since the post-war boom ended in the early 1980s, and although I recognise the challenges, I also want to celebrate the fact that last year, councils built the most council houses since records began in 1991. However, we want to see that ramp up with the money we are investing to help councils, as I outlined earlier.
We have already taken measures, as Members can see from the legislation that is going through at the moment—it has been through the other place—to tighten up the right to buy and make sure that councils keep full receipts. We are supporting that programme, and we should recognise the significance of the £10 billion of investment that was announced last month. This is about making sure that we get that money out the door so that we can build those homes, and the planning reforms we have introduced are about making sure that people have a say about those homes, but also about having clarity, so that the homes and the infrastructure around them are built.
The hon. Gentleman is right to mention the number of children in temporary accommodation. I still think it is absolutely awful that those children are in those circumstances, and that is why we want to tackle social housing in particular.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
Our councils are the front door to our democracy, and after years of damage, too many people have lost faith in what lies behind it. Does the Secretary of State agree that rebuilding strong, trusted local government must be central to rebuilding trust in politics? On the issue of high streets, will she meet me to discuss how existing tools such as high-street rental auctions can be made simpler and easier for councils to use, so that communities such as Hartlepool can bring empty shops back into use?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the role of local government. I came from a local government background, and then represented local government workers across the board for many years as a Unison rep, so I am slightly biased about what local government does. We should think about what has happened to local government—the pressures that are on our local councils at the moment, and have been on them since 2010, and how they have had to evolve with those pressures and challenges. I absolutely commend local councils and their representatives for the work they are doing. That is why this Government have given more funding to councils and have freed up some of the itty-bitty pots, to try to make it easier for councils to do the work they want to do.
Turning to auctions, we have also been making sure that we can support councils in implementing the plan that we want to put in place for our high streets, so that more powers are in place and we can safeguard community assets. The high-street rental auction powers will also bring closed-down pubs and properties back into use.
Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con)
I welcome the Secretary of State back to the Front Bench; the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee looks forward to scrutinising her in due course. As she will be aware, South West Hertfordshire has beautiful green-belt land, and she will have seen press reports about unauthorised clearance of sites over the last bank holiday weekend. While some of these clearances may be legal and lawful, my constituents consistently have concerns about the lack of information, and worry that when bulldozers and tree-clearing equipment turns up on a Saturday morning, council officers are not available until the following Tuesday, after the bank holiday weekend. What more can the Secretary of State and her Department do to make sure that my residents do not have that fear?
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Member for raising this issue, which Ministers and myself were discussing only yesterday. I will make sure that he gets an update on that. It is deeply concerning that over the bank holiday weekend, some try to do things that they know are not okay and are completely unacceptable. We are cracking down on illegal Traveller sites, and it is important that we do. Our new planning rules explicitly tackle any potential environmental damage and transport impacts, making it harder for people to get retrospective permission. However, I will contact the hon. Member about that specific case, because I know it has caused great concern to people in his area.
Alan Strickland (Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor) (Lab)
I strongly welcome the investment in social housing. What more can the Department do to make sure that the necessary social infrastructure comes with those new homes—the school places, doctors and dentists that we have struggled to secure in my constituency to support new homes, and that we need around the country?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight this issue, which I was acutely aware of, because I do not like it when this debate becomes about people who are opposed to new homes versus those who are not; actually, most of the time, people are concerned about the infrastructure that comes with those new homes. The reforms we have made through the national planning policy framework and the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 put provisions in place to make sure that when those homes are built, there is local input into the planning process, but also, critically, that the infrastructure is there, so that local people can see that those homes enhance their area. That will alleviate some of the genuine concerns that people raise.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
Does the Secretary of State accept that there is an intimate link between local government reform and the successful carrying-out of major house building programmes? One of the reasons I warmly welcome her return to office is the failure of her predecessor, the right hon. Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed), either to confirm or deny on 16 July the report in The Times on 18 June that senior civil servants and lawyers in three separate Departments had been overruled when they advised him not to make local government reorganisation decisions merely at the behest of Labour-led councils. Will the Secretary of State undertake to look at this issue again, particularly in the light of the number of boundary changes involved, and given that her colleague, the hon. Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon)—now mercifully back in action—had originally promised that boundary changes would be rare exceptions, and that particularly strong reasons would have to be put forward in justification?
Angela Rayner
Without straying too much into that area, I will just say to the right hon. Member that my principle with local government reform is that it is about the best services for the people in a local area. That is the only way that we get buy-in from people to deliver that, including through our local representatives—local councillors, many of whom are doing a fantastic job of addressing the challenges that local government faces. To me, local government reform is about making sure that areas can deliver on things like transport, education and health in a way that is best for those people. I will look into the issues that the right hon. Member has raised.
Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)
It is really great to hear from the Secretary of State today. Members across this Chamber will know about the harm that damp and mould does to children and their families. It is absolutely right that we have brought in Awaab’s law, for which there was real cross-party support, but what are we doing to monitor its impact? How should housing associations and social landlords be regulated to make sure that they are enacting Awaab’s law and are on top of the timelines in it?
Angela Rayner
I thank my hon. Friend for her question, as well as for the visit we made together, on which we met that wonderful young mother who had been to hell and back. What was a dream of home ownership turned into hell. Her experience is one that many people up and down the country have also experienced, and that visit is still very much at the forefront of my mind as we take things forward. Of course, Awaab and his family were from Greater Manchester—it was a tragic case of a young person losing their life because of the conditions they lived in. We are absolutely clear that we have to take Awaab’s law forward; we have carried out a process of test and learn as part of that, and phase 2 is now being implemented to make sure we are continually, robustly proving that those laws are in place and will deliver what we expect them to.
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for saying that closure orders will be extended to combat dodgy shops on our high streets. In my constituency, the police have fought a running battle against shops with secret compartments selling counterfeit cigarettes. However, having talked to my local trading standards office in Devon, it is clear to me that those offices do not have nearly enough personnel to investigate suspicious businesses. Will the Secretary of State’s Department make sure that the funding given to local councils to do this is ringfenced for the purpose of recruiting more trading standards officers?
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Member for raising this important issue. I can appreciate that it has been acute in North Devon, but it is coming up across the whole of England. That is why we are strengthening the orders, and I thank him for acknowledging that. We have, as I mentioned, invested £30 million to boost police and trading standards activity, with thousands of businesses expected to face raids, closures and cash seizures. I hope he will be in touch with his local police and trading standards office to see how they are implementing this in his North Devon constituency.
Ms Abena Oppong-Asare (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and in particular for outlining what her Government are doing on wildfires. As Minister, I oversaw the emergency alerts and the creation of the risk vulnerability tool. What work are the Government doing to strengthen the resilience plan, so that we can be better prepared for the future? Will she share with us the lessons learned from the emergency alert issued on 14 August?
Angela Rayner
I congratulate my hon. Friend on the work she has been doing. We are making almost £1.95 billion available to stand-alone fire and rescue authorities in England through the local government finance settlement. That can be used for training and preparation, and prevention based on local risks. We are making wildfire advice more visible, including through social media, during high-risk periods. We have the “Fire Kills” campaign, and the education platform led by the National Fire Chiefs Council. I have mentioned the wildfire summit, which will consider how we can go further.
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
An estimated 1.4 million consented homes in England remain unbuilt. Why will the Secretary of State not concentrate on getting those homes built before demanding that councils surrender more green-belt and greenfield land? Otherwise, developers just cherry-pick the most profitable sites, instead of building the homes for which they have already been given permission.
Angela Rayner
My simple answer is that we are doing that. It is why we strengthened the national planning policy framework. As I have said, this is not just about one lever; a number of factors need to be considered. We have been doing that, and that includes having mandatory housing targets and plans for local areas. We are strengthening, we are pushing, and we are making sure that we fix the mess that the previous Government left us.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
It was a pleasure to join my right hon. Friend at Greenwich council’s development of 435 council properties in my constituency for the launch of the social and affordable housing programme. Some 70,000 homes are planned, and that is welcome and overdue. However, my constituency and ones like it have a lot of sports grounds, and as we push for more land, the temptation is for owners of those grounds to lock the gates, in the hope that they will make a windfall from developing those sites. Will my right hon. Friend reassure my constituents that that will not be allowed under the programme to build the housing that we need?
Angela Rayner
It was a great pleasure to visit the site with my hon. Friend. I outlined in my opening statement something that touched me, which is how people spoke about getting a home and the conditions they had before. They literally said it was like winning the lottery—it was life-changing. As I outlined to the shadow Secretary of State earlier, I think about those children affected, especially those impacted by the acute housing crisis that London faces. I congratulate the Mayor of London and London councils working to deal with that. We announced the funding grant to help London with the particular problem it has had. My hon. Friend is right to raise the subject of protection of spaces. That is what we have done through strengthening the national planning policy framework. The Housing Minister would be happy to chat more with my hon. Friend about that—I am sure they already do, as they are neighbours—but it is important that we continue that work, too.
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
The Secretary State mentioned mandatory housing targets. Under Labour’s targets, in south Essex—from Grays across to Shoeburyness—we are expected to accommodate more than 100,000 houses. That is 7% of the Government’s entire 1.5 million target in one half of one county alone. That is despite the fact that our medical infrastructure, our sewage capacity and in particular our roads—the A13 and the A127 are maxed out as it is—simply cannot cope, even now. [Interruption.] Labour Members can chunter all they want. Why is Labour so determined to cover south Essex in concrete and gridlock our roads, purely for ideological reasons?
Angela Rayner
We can look at it another way: I am confident that the right hon. Member and local councillors can work in partnership with us to recognise the acute housing need within his local area and to deliver, with well-connected local transport, the homes that are so desperately needed. His Government failed to deliver them, and I am sure his inbox is full of people who need those homes. We will work with his local leaders to deliver the homes and infrastructure that people in his constituency desperately need.
Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)
Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss the St Andrews estate in Bedford, where local residents and children walking to Great Ouse primary academy are being put at risk by dangerous driving and parking on estate roads that require traffic safety measures, but have remained unadopted for around eight years. What action will she take to address the wider problems of developers and local authorities passing responsibilities between themselves, leaving estate residents waiting years for roads to be completed and adopted?
Angela Rayner
I am sure that the residents of St Andrews estate are frustrated, but I commend the work of my hon. Friend in highlighting this issue. It is not acceptable for roads to be left unadopted for years and for people to be left in those circumstances. I am happy to arrange a meeting with the relevant Minister to look at how we can support him in his endeavour to deal with this matter.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Communities such as Wimborne, Merley and Bearwood have doubled in size in the past few years, with no extra roads—[Interruption.] It is not funny. The people there have no extra roads, no water treatment plants, no new GPs, and the remaining areas of green belt specifically designated to separate them have disappeared. Their communities are being forced to build thousands more—it is 7,000 a year in Dorset, similar to Essex—but they are not selling. These houses are lying empty, which means that the community infrastructure is not being built, and we have empty homes everywhere. The local population cannot afford them. The social housing providers do not want them, because they are built under old standards. We run the risk of them being filled with holidaymakers. We need a review of this huge housing target, so that it is based on need in the local community, with a requirement for the infrastructure to come first. Can the Secretary of State please help?
Angela Rayner
I can honestly feel the hon. Member’s frustration. One of the issues that I picked up when I first became Secretary of State, as I outlined earlier, is that it is not about opposition to new housing, but frustration because of the infrastructure not being there, the form of the houses built and how local people cannot afford them. I have complete sympathy with what the hon. Member is saying. That is why we have been making changes to the national planning policy framework and to how we do building consents, so that we can get these houses built where they are accessible to local people and where developments are contributing to the wider local community, including with services. I am happy to speak to her about the specifics. If there are empty houses that local people cannot get and the infrastructure is not there, I can fully appreciate why people would be frustrated.
Deirdre Costigan (Ealing Southall) (Lab)
The Secretary of State is right to say that the reasons people sleep rough are complex, and Ealing Southall is almost unique in that many of our rough sleepers do not have the right to stay or work in the country, so the council cannot legally help them off the streets. Will she meet me to find ways of making it easier for this group of rough sleepers to reconnect with family abroad and return home with dignity?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this issue: we have to do more to make sure that people who have exercised all their appeals and want to return home can do so. I will work with my colleagues in the Home Office to look at how we can tackle that issue, alongside the package that we are putting in place over the winter.
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
Silsden in my constituency is being inundated by a huge number of housing developments. In the last few years, we have had seven different housing developers all building houses, with no focus whatsoever on improving infrastructure or services. It is getting to the stage that Silsden cannot cope. It gets worse than that, because the section 106 money that is collected, which Bradford council negotiated with the housing developer under the last Labour administration, is not being spent on mitigating the negative implications of the housing developments, and the council has no local plan in place. We are seeing a lot of speculative development coming down the line, and it is simply not good enough. I have to say to the Secretary of State that this was all overseen by the last Labour administration at Bradford council.
What in today’s announcement from the Secretary of State will deliver something positive for my constituents, and something that addresses the key issue of infrastructure and service improvement when house building does happen?
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Member for raising this issue. We have strengthened the role of infrastructure within the national planning policy framework. The announcement is about making sure that local areas can deliver on local plans, and I have been very clear on that as the Secretary of State. I can hear his frustration about section 106 money, and there are legitimate reasons why it is sometimes delayed, but it is an area that I have focused on since returning to this post. I have focused on that with the Housing Minister, and I am due to be in touch again with local authorities to ensure that the money is going out the door and that right-to-buy receipts, which we have strengthened for councils, are going out the door in order to create the homes and infrastructure that local areas desperately need.
Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)
The Secretary of State knows my constituency well, and she knows that I have been campaigning for several years to regenerate Wythenshawe civic centre. Thanks to this Government, we are about to cut the turf on building 2,000 new homes within the decade, and phase one starts with building 800 social homes in the next few weeks. Is the Secretary of State prepared to don her best Doc Martens, pop out of No. 10 North and cut the ceremonial piece of turf?
Angela Rayner
That’s a tough question! My hon. Friend knows full well that my mum’s side of the family are from Wythenshawe, so I know the civic centre very well. I used to spend many a weekend at Woodhouse Park social club—unfortunately no longer there—but I can see the civic pride across the whole of Wythenshawe. I am not the most famous person whose family are from Wythenshawe—we all know a famous footballer who has done incredible work in that area—but never mind. I congratulate my hon. Friend on the work that he is doing. Those 2,000 homes are desperately needed in the local area. I have fond memories of growing up around there, and I would be absolutely honoured to come back.
Mr Louie French (Old Bexley and Sidcup) (Con)
The Secretary of State failed to recommit to the 1.5 million new homes pledge in Labour’s manifesto. She also failed to mention the almost £5 billion that was provided to the Mayor of London by the previous Conservative Government and the fact that this Labour Government have been forced to cut the mayor’s housing target, given his poor record of delivery here in London. One way that the Secretary of State can help improve London’s family housing crisis is by giving local councils more powers to stop bad HMOs. They are destroying family housing in communities across the capital, particularly in outer London. Will she commit to that today?
Angela Rayner
I disagree with the hon. Member on what is happening in London. Half of all council homes built in 2024-25 were in London, showing what can be achieved through devolution and the London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, who has been doing a fantastic job. That is why I have confidence that the social and affordable housing programme will give more investment to London so that it can deal with the acute situation it faces.
On HMOs, I will take no lectures from the Conservatives, who left us in a very difficult situation. The issue is under review, and we are working with local authorities and mayors to make sure that planning circumstances do not create situations that cause tensions through HMOs.
Nesil Caliskan (Barking) (Lab)
I warmly welcome the Secretary of State to her place. Local GPs in my constituency serve 20% more patients than the national average, and it is particularly bad at Barking Riverside, where there is new development. Unlike Conservative Members, I strongly support new homes being built, because my constituents feel the pain of the housing crisis. However, the fact that we do not have enough GPs, schools and other crucial infrastructure means that they are being let down. May I press the Secretary of State to give us further assurances that as this Government deliver the homes that this country and my constituency need, GPs are also delivered?
Angela Rayner
There is a theme developing here, and I think it comes from years of not having enough infrastructure. People are rightly concerned about that. I mentioned earlier that there is a lot of opposition to our planning reforms and the mandatory housing targets that we have set as a Government. I hear it loud and clear, and I want my hon. Friend’s constituents, my constituents and everyone else’s constituents to know that I am acutely aware that the infrastructure that people desperately need must come alongside the housing. I do not think they are nimbys; they raise genuine concerns, and I have heard them loud and clear. That is why we have strengthened the national planning policy framework, particularly on GPs.
I am sure that my colleagues in Health have heard my hon. Friend, but I will make sure that there is a nod to what is happening in her area. I want to reassure the House that I am acutely aware that if we are going to ramp up house building, which we absolutely must do—our constituents expect it—that has to be done in a way that ensures that local people are involved in the process and that the infrastructure is there too.
Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)
The south Warwickshire local plan requires more than 27,000 new homes to be allocated to Stratford-on-Avon district under the standard method, and my constituents support the delivery of truly affordable homes and social rent. However, these homes are not going to be affordable for local people, and housing growth continues to outpace investment in transport, schools, GPs, and drainage and sewage infrastructure. Will the Secretary of State review the mandatory targets to ensure that local housing need rather than a centralised formula determines housing allocations in rural areas? Can she also guarantee that the infrastructure will keep pace with development instead of lagging years behind, if it is delivered at all?
Angela Rayner
The local target is based on housing stock and affordability. I appreciate the hon. Lady’s comments on affordable housing, and I take her back to what the Prime Minister has said about needing more social housing—I am sure that she appreciates that this is an issue. We will make sure that we lean towards that and build the houses that people need so that local people can get access to the homes that are built in their area, and the infrastructure is an important part of that.
The hon. Lady mentions water drainage and water supply. We have not built a reservoir for decades, and this Government are now taking action to make sure that we build reservoirs and the critical infrastructure that we need to deliver for the housing that we need.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
I am delighted to see my right hon. Friend back in her role, and I am really pleased that the Government have committed to fast-track developments close to transport hubs. It is a fantastic opportunity to build housing around Shipley station, which is close to the recently refurbished Shipley market. High-quality and affordable housing would help increase footfall and bring regeneration to the high street. Will the Secretary of State join me and the West Yorkshire Mayor, Tracy Brabin, on a visit to Shipley to see the opportunity for herself, and will she help to accelerate house building in Shipley?
Angela Rayner
I often visit the West Yorkshire Mayor and her geographical area, and Shipley is a great place. It is a really good drive from my house in Manchester to Shipley—I would recommend it to anyone. I always jump at the chance to go to the area, and I congratulate the West Yorkshire Mayor, my hon. Friend and her local leaders on the work that they are doing to deliver the homes that people desperately need.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
How does the Secretary of State square what she said in the statement about wanting to
“put power in every postcode”
with the reality of what her Government are doing to Buckinghamshire? They have increased our housing target by 43%—while letting London off some of its target—but if we had power locally, we would categorically not choose to build. They have also been telling Buckinghamshire council that if it turns down too many planning applications and actually supports the residents of Buckinghamshire, it will have its planning powers taken away. That is not putting power into every postcode; that is central diktat, isn’t it?
Angela Rayner
I disagree with how the hon. Member has framed that question. Housing targets are based on housing stock and affordability, and local plans are mandatory—which his party removed—so we are actually strengthening this, and being more strategic and clear about where houses and the infrastructure that people need should go. I urge him to engage in that process, look at the key changes to the national planning policy framework and use them to benefit his constituents.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
Over the conference recess, my team and I are taking over a shop in Bournemouth town centre and filling it with a range of community and cultural uses that showcase our amazing local organisations. Meanwhile spaces have a range of benefits for our high streets. They give small businesses and charities a chance, fill persistently empty shops and create better collaboration between councils, landlords and tenants. However, they often require councils to use the powers at their disposal, particularly on rates relief and the bit of capital investment for persistently neglected units. I really welcome the measures announced over the summer to improve high streets, but can the Secretary of State tell me how meanwhile spaces fit into the Government’s high streets strategy?
Angela Rayner
I think this is really important, and I congratulate my hon. Friend on the work that Bournemouth is doing, which sounds absolutely fantastic. These are exactly the sorts of projects we want, as opposed to vape shops, betting shops and other elements. This is about what do we do with that space, and the measures that we have outlined—on the community right to buy, high street rental auctions, giving local places practical powers and cutting business rates, as we announced over the summer—are about making sure that local areas can use that space. We are bringing forward a high streets strategy, and I hope she will engage with my Department about what she can contribute, because she has clearly demonstrated that she can do so in her local area.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
As the Secretary of State will be aware, we are still awaiting a local government reorganisation decision in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. To that extent, as I laid out in my Westminster Hall debate on Monday, I very much back a Huntingdonshire unitary authority, because of the opportunities for growth it will afford the region, including the delivery of the Ministry of Defence’s Project Fairfax, which I had the opportunity to discuss with her Housing Minister earlier this year. Before she makes her final decision, could I invite her to speak to Huntingdonshire district council to clarify any of the decisions about which her predecessor required clarification before he could make a decision? Will she also assure my constituents that the area involved in any such decision will be coterminous with the current district authority boundaries, so that we do not lose any more time in disaggregating functions, because we have already lost two months ahead of the elections next May?
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Member for raising this important issue for his area. As he outlined, my colleagues the Housing Minister responded to him earlier this week, and I know he said there would be an outcome by the end of October. The hon. Member has done his job well in representing his constituents by raising the issue with me as the Secretary of State today, and I have noted it.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
I really welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment this week to work on Cornish devolution, but the Housing Minister—and he did not make up the rules—has told me that the population of Cornwall is too small to be granted a strategic place partnership, despite the fact that our population is greater than that of Iceland, Malta and Barbados. Our lack of social housing is one of the greatest blockers to regeneration in Cornwall, so we are very keen to take up a strategic place partnership. Is there a chance that I could get a meeting with the Housing Minister or somebody from MHCLG to discuss our desire to have a strategic place partnership?
Angela Rayner
They may be small in number but they are definitely mighty—that is my observation about my hon. Friend and his Cornish colleagues. I will absolutely get the Housing Minister to meet him to see what more we could do. I know that my hon. Friend and his colleagues have raised concerns about the devolution agenda and how to ensure there is devolution for Cornwall and that it fits with them. I will make sure he gets a meeting with the relevant Minister.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
The Government appear to be very inconsistent in their approach to local government reorganisation. Worcestershire is being split into two, Gloucestershire is being kept whole and the boundary of Leicester city council is expanding outwards into the surrounding areas. Can the Secretary of State rule out further expansion of Birmingham city council into the surrounding areas, including Worcestershire?
Angela Rayner
In response to an earlier question on local government reorganisation, I said that my principle is that it should benefit the people and the services of the local area. I do not want to comment on specific local areas at the moment—I need to look at that—but the principle should be to ensure that this is not done to people and that local leaders are part of the process. This is about making sure that services deliver for the people in their local area.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State back to her place. I agree with her comment that the situation we are facing on high streets is not something we have created recently, but has been inherited after years of austerity. Particularly in Stafford, we welcome many of the high street initiatives taking place such as on vape shops and—this is a bit of a throwback one—the high street rental auctions, which are great. Could I have a meeting with her, because my local authority is really keen to pursue this, but with LGR going through and some stretched personnel situations with LGR and previously with austerity, it is finding the administration of this a little overwhelming? It would be great if we could get this in Stafford, perhaps with a little bit more support for such councils.
Angela Rayner
I commend my hon. Friend for her work in representing those in Stafford, and I appreciate that there is a lot going on at the moment. I really want her to be involved in the high streets strategy that we are bringing forward, and I will make sure that my Department is in contact with her so that she is fully engaged, and her local area can play a full role in shaping the future and is heavily involved in the process.
Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)
The Secretary of State is quite right to highlight the link between mental health illness and street homelessness. Sadly, over the 30 years I have served the people of Torbay, I have seen it quadruple, and it feels to me that street homeless people are just the tip of the iceberg in relation to the homelessness we see in our communities. Will she give me some assurance that in a community such mine in Torbay, where social rented housing is at only 7% compared with the national average of 18%, will be targeted with additional support for additional affordable and social rented housing?
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising this issue. He is a champion in knowing and recognising the challenges that his local area faces. We announced £442 million of support for tackling rough sleeping this winter, and that is based on a formula that recognises the challenges that local areas face. I will get my Department to contact him so that he can understand the effect of that, and he can shape what comes forward in his area. He is absolutely right to recognise that the programme has to have settled accommodation as well as intensive wraparound support to help people leave rough sleeping behind. We have to learn the lessons of what happened in Greater Manchester and how it was able to achieve great outcomes for people. As I mentioned in my statement, when I have met people whose lives have been transformed by it, I can understand why the Prime Minister says he wants us to make sure this happens nationally.
Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab/Co-op)
One of the most inspiring housing projects I have ever seen is Coin Street, a housing and worker co-operative a few moments’ walk from this House on the banks of the thriving Thames in London. It does not just build houses; it builds homes and communities and gives pride back to working people in the heart of London. The same spirit of pride runs through the Pride in Place funding that Peterborough has received and the ambitions of this Government with devolution. Can my right hon. Friend put on record her support for the co-operative and mutual ideals as part of our devolution agenda, and as part of our mission to rebuild communities in our country?
Angela Rayner
I thank my hon. Friend for recognising some of the fantastic work being done by the co-operative movement. Is our Prime Minister the first ever Labour and Co-operative Prime Minister? I do not want to mislead the House, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I think he might be—he is definitely a Labour and Co-operative Prime Minister and I think he is the first. Coin Street is the type of development that can happen when homes are built with a sense of community. Our Pride in Place work is about rejuvenating our local areas. In Tameside, in my local area, I have seen people going through difficult times. There have been some difficult times for our nation and our country recently, whether because of the covid pandemic, the austerity years or what has been happening locally, but people have come together. Pride in Place has allowed us to look not just at how we can stop the flow of some of the challenges, but at how we can work together as a community to tackle them together, and I am incredibly proud of that work.
Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)
May I welcome the Government’s decisive action over the summer to tackle wildfires, particularly by placing a temporary ban on disposable barbecues? Last year a huge wildfire caused massive damage to the North York moors near Whitby. The farming community played a vital role in supporting firefighters, but they are still out of pocket over a year later, having suffered significant losses. Will my right hon. Friend look at introducing grant schemes to help those affected by wildfires, similar to the ones available for major flooding events?
Angela Rayner
I am sorry to hear about the situation in the North York moors and the circumstances surrounding the funding package. We are working closely with fire and rescue services to ensure that support is targeted at those facing the greatest operational pressures, and we will set out further details in due course. The current focus is about ensuring that the support reaches the areas that need it most urgently, but I will take back what my hon. Friend says. As I said, the Prime Minister is looking forward to the wildfire summit this autumn, so hopefully we can make progress there.
Antonia Bance (Tipton and Wednesbury) (Lab)
Isn’t it great to see our right hon. Friend back in her place? It was also great to see the first allocations of the social and affordable housing programme last month, and we desperately need our share in Tipton, Wednesbury and Coseley, including at the Friar Park development of 650 new homes. Will she support the campaign that I have been running with our West Midlands Mayor to get Sandwell council and Homes England to help local people, who have been stuck on waiting lists for years, by raising the proportion of social housing in the Friar Park development to 50%?
Angela Rayner
I would not want be on the wrong side of a campaign led by my formidable hon. Friend. She is a formidable campaigner, so I reckon she has got all power to her elbow. Having the West Midlands Mayor on side makes me confident that their campaign will come through. She is right to raise not only the social and affordable homes programme and the announcement of the £10 billion in funding, but the work that we are doing on mayoral planning and housing devolution. That will give more power to their elbow and I am confident that they will win through.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
I welcome the £39 billion of investment in the social and affordable homes programme that this Government are making, but my right hon. Friend will know that for every social home we build, when a social housing provider disposes of another home, not only are we losing a valuable home that could support residents in Bracknell Forest and across the country, but we also need to replace that home. That is why I am calling on the Government to go further than currently envisaged in the Social Housing Bill to clamp down on disposals. Will she continue to look at that with the Housing Minister, so that we can do everything we can to protect the social homes we already have as well as building more?
Angela Rayner
May I put on record my thanks to Ministers, including the Housing Minister, who during my time of absence have seen the Social Housing Bill go through this place and the other place? Measures have been strengthened significantly and we will start to see, for the first time, that more council housing is being built than being lost. That is welcome—it has not happened for a long time. I am sure that the Housing Minister has heard everything my hon. Friend raised, but I know that is his intention and it is definitely mine.
Representation of the People Bill
Angela Rayner ExcerptsWednesday 2nd September 2026
(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Representation of the People Bill 2024-26 View all Representation of the People Bill 2024-26 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Consideration of Bill Amendments as at 2 September 2026 - large print - (2 Sep 2026)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
The Bill strengthens our elections and takes a stand against hostile actors at home and abroad who seek to threaten them. It extends the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds and automates voter registration. It protects candidates and officers, and introduces new, tougher rules around political donations.
The legislation reflects the commitments made in our strategy for modern and secure elections, which I published as Secretary of State in July 2025. It also now delivers much of the Rycroft review on foreign interference. It meets our manifesto commitments and sets the foundations for a new model of politics that is both stronger and fairer.
I reassure the House and hon. Members that during the Bill’s passage we have committed to returning to various issues in the other place. I look forward to a strengthened Bill returning.
I will briefly pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), my right hon. Friend the Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed) and the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith, who have carried the Bill through the House, as well as my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali), who delivered much of the policy that led to the Bill.
I also thank those hon. Members form across the House who have contributed to debates on the Bill. In particular, I thank the Opposition and those who took part in the Bill Committee. It would be remiss of me not to pay a special tribute to the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes). As he said in Committee, the Bill is “groundbreaking” legislation, and I most certainly agree. Finally, I thank my team in the private office, all the officials at the elections directorate in my Department, and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, who have worked so hard to produce the Bill before us today.
The Bill will leave our politics stronger and fairer, and all those who have contributed to its drafting and passage should take huge pride in having done so. The measures are the next step in the evolution of our democracy, strengthening our institutions and processes to ensure that they work for the people they serve. I commend the Bill to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Commonhold and Leasehold Reform
Angela Rayner Excerpts(7 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Matthew Pennycook
I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesman for those questions. He often mentions Lloyd George, and I share his passion for Lloyd George’s radicalism on property law and other measures. I will address the specific points that he raised. During the passage of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, I was clear that my instinctive preference when it comes to ground rents was for a peppercorn cap, fully eliminating ground rents. The changes that we are making ensure that, after 40 years, that change occurs.
Having considered all the analysis and advice available to me as a Minister, including the evidence gathered in response to the previous Administration’s 2023 consultation, I believe that we have set out the right policy. It is clear that an immediate peppercorn cap would carry significant risks, including some that might impact on leaseholders. The Government also recognise that there is a significant difference between regulating the creation of new leases, and intervening to affect existing contracts and investments.
On the functioning of the cap itself, I want to make clear that it is a maximum cash cap. If someone’s lease is below £250 and does not include escalating clauses, their ground rent will not rise to £250. If someone’s ground rent is over £250, at the point that the measures are brought into force they will see an immediate reduction. That will benefit millions of leaseholders across the country. It is a huge cost-of-living intervention, and I hope the House can get behind it as the most just and proportionate way of addressing unregulated and unaffordable ground rent terms.
The hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) will know that we ran a consultation last year on how we can standardise service charges and increase their transparency to ensure that leaseholders can better challenge the reasonableness of service charges at tribunal. However, we do not intend to bring forward a cap, not least because doing so could harm leaseholders, particularly those in enfranchised buildings, who may need to raise sums beyond the cap to carry out essential maintenance works on their buildings.
Angela Rayner (Ashton-under-Lyne) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for this extremely welcome statement. I know how much work he has put into this. We know, however, that vested interests have repeatedly resorted to lawfare to block such measures, and may do so again; we have already seen the scaremongering begin, with outrageous claims that these changes will impact on lifesaving building safety work. Can my hon. Friend reassure me that the Government will not waver in the face of such threats, but stand firm and ensure that the will of this Parliament prevails? I take exception to objections from those on the Opposition Benches, who did nothing on rent caps in their time in Parliament.
Matthew Pennycook
I thank my right hon. Friend for her kind words. She was an incredible champion of the reform agenda for this legislation when she served as Secretary of State. She raises the matter of vested interests. I hope that the House—and you, Mr Speaker—will take from the Government’s robust defence to the legal challenge brought against the 2024 Act by a group of claimants who are owners of freehold and other arising interests of dwellings that we will robustly defend the legislation. The High Court, incidentally, comprehensively dismissed that challenge, allowing us in due course to take forward the relevant provisions. I simply say to my right hon. Friend—who embodies this herself, so she is well aware—that taking on vested interests that are opposed to change that will bring about improvements in the lives of working people is what Labour Governments do.
English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill
Angela Rayner ExcerptsTuesday 2nd September 2025
(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 View all English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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.
This Government were elected on a manifesto to deliver change—real change for working people; change that people can see and feel around them. That means more money in their pockets, decent jobs, new homes, good transport links, thriving high streets and opportunities for young people. But after 14 years of a Tory Government unwilling to take the tough choices to make life better for working people, it is no wonder that people have lost hope that real change is possible. And we have a plan to change that—a plan to give people with skin in the game real control over their lives and the power to have a real stake in their place and share in our country’s success.
Our landmark English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill will deliver this and more. It will help us to build a modern state based on a fairer, stronger partnership between Government and local people, with the aim of renewing people’s faith that the state can work for them. That faith has been sorely tested in recent years. After more than a decade of broken promises from those on the Conservative Benches, people associate Whitehall with failure and decline. The communities that once built Britain have seen good jobs disappearing, secure homes crumbling and once-strong communities divided. Things that our parents and grandparents once relied on—that I relied on as a young mum—have fallen by the wayside. It is my mission to rebuild those foundations of a good life for all communities in all parts of our country.
I worked on the frontline of local government and I saw how it changes people’s lives. I know that I will not achieve our goals unless we fundamentally change the way that our country is run. That means handing power back to where it belongs—to local people with skin in the game—so that they can make decisions on what really matters to their communities. This Bill will drive the biggest transfer of power in a generation out of Whitehall to our regions and communities and end the begging bowl, micro-managing culture. It will make devolution the default setting by: giving mayors new powers over planning, housing and regeneration to get Britain building as part of our plan for change; rebuilding local government, so that it can once again deliver good local services that people can rely on; and empowering local communities to have a bigger say in shaping their local area.
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
In the right hon. Lady’s attempts to drive forward this carthorse of devolution, will she tell us where the accountability and scrutiny will come from and where the voice of local people will really be heard?
Angela Rayner
I am really disappointed, because I thought that the previous Government were the ones to turbocharge devolution, and we are moving on that agenda. We actually do believe that devolution is a good thing and that these measures will enable mayors and local areas to be empowered more to drive that growth that we desperately need in all parts of the country.
This Bill is long overdue. England is one of the most centralised developed countries in the world. Too often, the system works against rather than with local people. Too many decisions affecting too many are made by too few. That, combined with short-term, sticking-plaster politics, has left the country in a doom loop of worsening regional divides.
Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)
Madam Deputy Speaker, you many wonder why a Scot would make an intervention at this point in the debate. May I advise the right hon. Lady to look north, to Scotland, to see how this should not be done? The Scottish Government have centralised powers, taking them right away from communities such as mine. That is how we should not do it. This is a cautionary tale.
Angela Rayner
I thank the hon. Member for his guidance. I always look north—contrary to what other people believe. I am very proud of the north. I gently say to him that the challenge at the moment lies with the Government of Scotland. Hopefully, we can reverse things and have a Government who truly believe in putting the power in local people’s hands.
We only have to look at the difference being made by our mayors to see that there is a better way. From building tens of thousands of new social homes with Mayor Rotheram in Liverpool, to fighting child poverty with Mayor McGuinness in the north-east, to making people’s commutes quicker and cheaper with Mayor Burnham in my own Greater Manchester, and to creating London’s summer of al fresco dining and world-leading culture with Mayor Khan—
Mr James Frith (Bury North) (Lab)
Will my right hon. Friend give way on that point?
Mr Frith
We are very proud of the work of our Greater Manchester Mayor, Andy Burnham. On the issue of driving change, I would like to raise a point about drivers. Half of private hire taxis in Greater Manchester are licensed outside the area. That undermines local enforcement and accountability as well as local drivers who do the right thing. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Bill is a chance to fix that, protect passengers, raise and maintain standards, and back the best in trade?
Angela Rayner
As another Greater Manchester MP, my hon. Friend will know that Mayor Burnham has been trying to address taxi licensing for some years. I think, Madam Deputy Speaker, you were here for the previous statement, which I listened to intently, in which the Minister made it clear that there is a commitment to introduce that legislation as quickly as possible. We need to make sure that that vehicle is there, and sitting next to me is the Leader of the House, whose job it is to make sure that happens.
We have also increased opportunities and given young people a voice in decisions in the east midlands with Mayor Ward. We are driving forward a new mass transit network for West Yorkshire with Mayor Brabin, supporting women and girls into activity and sport with Mayor Skaith in North Yorkshire, and, not to forget, working to secure the future of Doncaster Sheffield airport with Mayor Coppard in South Yorkshire. We are also securing the extension of the Birmingham tramline with Mayor Parker.
Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)
For many years under the Tories, the west midlands was at the bottom of the league table for regional transport investment, but Mayor Richard Parker has secured £2.4 billion of investment to extend the metro. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the powers in the Bill will make it easier for combined authorities to deliver these kinds of projects in the future, including, I hope, further extensions of the metro to south Birmingham?
Angela Rayner
I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention and again give full credit to Mayor Richard Parker, who has been working tirelessly with the Labour Government to invest in the future of Birmingham. I also thank my hon. Friend for his campaigning, pressing the case that his constituents are better off for such an investment, which will bring new jobs and better transport links. This Bill is just the start of that.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
On jobs, in Sadiq Khan’s first two terms as London Mayor, he has seen the creation of more than 330,000 jobs by the Greater London Authority. These are high-quality, well-paid jobs that bring huge opportunity to Londoners from all walks of life. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is the testament to growth that devolution can deliver, which will be further boosted by this Bill?
Angela Rayner
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. This is about unlocking growth in all parts of the country. I hope that most hon. Members can see that people with skin in the game are working across the board to make sure that that potential is reached. I am talking not just about London—although London is incredibly important to that—but about all regions across our country.
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
First, I thank Mayor Tracy Brabin for her investment in mass transit across West Yorkshire, including a new bus station in my town of Dewsbury. I am grateful for those investments, but how will this Bill stop a council from making the decision to distribute funding unequally across its borough? How would it stop a council from, for instance, making a decision to shut down a sports centre that is used by people of all ages on the pretence of there being reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete and then not taking steps to investigate or having a plan to reopen?
Angela Rayner
I welcome the hon. Member’s comments on the mass transit network for West Yorkshire, which I am sure will bring added benefits to his constituents. To his other point, obviously elected officials in local councils make decisions, and I would gently say to him that councils have faced significant pressures since the austerity measures of 2010, which I am sure he is aware of. I was in local government at the time, and I remember being a union rep and seeing the devastation.
We are trying to restore and empower local government, instead of this situation where they have to make incredibly difficult decisions that are harmful to their constituents. It is about being able to grow our economy and have a bigger slice of the cake. We are already investing more into local government so that we can deliver the services that people want. Within this Bill is the community assets element, which may be able to help communities in relation to high streets and to sports facilities, which can be utilised as an asset that they value in their local area.
We are also improving local transport for people in the west of England with Mayor Godwin. Our brilliant, ambitious mayors are making a difference every day for their regions. Working with them, we have already achieved so much after just a year in office. We are on track to achieve devolution across almost 80% of the country, covering 44 million people. We have created integrated funding settlements for Greater Manchester and the west midlands, giving their mayors the tools and freedoms to make decisions to get growth going, with Liverpool city region, London, the north-east, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire set to benefit from the same freedoms next year.
Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)
We are in London, the greatest city in the world—some would say anyway—and we have all just come back from holiday, have we not? Our Mayor Sadiq Khan has ambitious plans for an overnight accommodation levy that would put us on a par with Paris and New York and would harness our growth. Those funds could help regenerate the tourism sector and improve the visitor experience. I wonder whether the Secretary of State would be open to using this devolution Bill to give mayors everywhere the power to make decisions about those kind of things.
Angela Rayner
I can hear much provocation from the Conservative Benches, but any new tax is, of course, a matter for the Chancellor at the Budget, and it must balance the potential revenue and benefits against the impact on taxpayers and the economy.
Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) (Lab)
I really welcome the Bill’s efforts to strengthen communities and local democracy. However, I am worried that not enough is being done to protect private renters. In Lambeth, nearly a third of residents are renters. Rents are rising faster than wages, and the average renter is paying 72% more than the national average, which is leaving many families struggling and in poverty. The Renters’ Rights Bill was definitely a step in the right direction, but it fell short on rent hikes. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this Bill is an opportunity to give metro mayors the power to bring in rent controls and protect renters in their cities?
Angela Rayner
The Renters’ Rights Bill does contain measures that mean that renters can challenge unfair rent hikes. The previous Government said many times that they would do something about section 21 no-fault evictions but they did not. Our Renters’ Rights Bill will ensure that we end those evictions, which are causing so much harm to my hon. Friend’s constituents and many around the country.
Our devolution revolution is well under way, with others queueing up to join it. This what we committed to in our manifesto, and we are delivering it through this Bill. Crucially, the Bill will make devolution the default for how the Government do business, with new strategic authorities having powers to pilot and request new functions and Government having a duty to respond to certain requests. It will mean that we can deliver devolution further and faster.
Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)
On devolving the ability to run pilots, and following up on the point made by the hon. Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy), Bristol city council—including Labour councillors—voted cross-party to have the power to pilot rent controls. Recent figures show that typical private renters in my constituency spend 45% of their income on rent. That is not sustainable. This Bill could offer the opportunity for that pilot—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
Order. Interventions have become far too long. There are many Members in the Chamber who wish to contribute, which the Secretary of State might think about before she takes more interventions.
Angela Rayner
I will pay attention to that, Madam Deputy Speaker.
The hon. Lady is right that there is a challenge in housing at the moment, which is also contributing to the rental situation for people. That is why we have a big ambition to build more houses. The Bill gives us more powers for strategic planning so that we can get on with building the homes that people need. The Renters’ Rights Bill does start to make progress toward making housing fairer for renters—something that the previous Government promised but failed to deliver.
I will now make progress, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)
Before the Secretary of State makes progress, will she give way? [Laughter.]
Angela Rayner
The strategic authorities will be created as a new category of authority in law. They will make it easier for local leaders to work together over larger areas to drive through big pro-growth projects such as integrated transport networks and housing. These will operate at three levels—foundation, mayoral and established mayoral—and the particular powers and responsibilities that each of them will have are to be defined by the Bill.
Working alongside parliamentarians and local councillors, mayors drive forward the delivery of people’s priorities—driving growth, unlocking infrastructure and powering a national renewal from the ground up. That is why the Bill will give mayors wide-ranging new powers in areas such as transport, planning and economic development.
Angela Rayner
I will make progress.
We will create new planning powers to raise the mayoral community infrastructure levy, which has generated over £1 billion since 2012 in London and, alongside investment and leadership from Mayor Khan, has helped to fund the Elizabeth line. With the expansion of their remit, the Bill will allow mayors who choose to raise a precept to spend it on the full range of functions, ensuring that local taxes are spent on local priorities.
I am sure that the shadow Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly), will welcome this change given that it was the Conservatives who first introduced the mayoral precept nearly a decade ago and that Mayor Boris Johnson used a business rates supplement to help pay for Crossrail. I hope the shadow Secretary of State will wholeheartedly support the new powers in the Bill, which will mean that mayors can intervene in major strategic planning applications to unlock housing—as long as that housing is nowhere near his constituency, of course.
We will also introduce powers to license shared cycle schemes so that they work for everyone and so that bikes are not lying across pavements. The Bill will see more mayors take on police and crime commissioner functions and become responsible for fire and rescue functions, allowing them to take a joined-up approach to improving public safety.
Mr Bayo Alaba (Southend East and Rochford) (Lab)
Will the Secretary of State give way?
Mr Alaba
In Southend East and Rochford we are a proud coastal community, but we have been left behind when it comes to connectivity, educational outcomes and investment in skills. Does the Secretary of State agree that through this Bill we have a chance to deliver the long-term meaningful change that my constituents deserve?
Angela Rayner
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. This is about all areas being able to join up and create inclusive growth for their areas, and that is broader than at local authority level. By combining those efforts we can unlock the potential, and his constituents will feel the benefit of that as we take this forward.
The new powers also mean new duties, including to produce a local growth plan demonstrating how mayors plan to unlock growth through planning and house building. There will also be a duty to co-operate with local government pension scheme managers so that mayors can attract investment into their local areas, unlocking jobs and opportunities. Mayors across the country will also be able to appoint commissioners to support them as their responsibilities grow, just like in London. The Bill also strengthens the ability of mayors to work with the public sector, convening local partners so that they can lead with a helicopter view of public services across their region.
We are backing the ambition and untapped potential of local areas with a more ambitious role for the mayors representing them. That must be underpinned by elections that command public confidence. Because of changes made by the last Government, mayors can be elected on just a fraction of the vote, despite serving millions of people and managing multimillion-pound budgets. We can do better than that. The Bill will therefore revert to a supplementary vote system for electing mayors and police and crime commissioners after the May 2026 elections to provide greater accountability and a strong, personal mandate for mayors. In addition, the Bill will bar mayors from also sitting as MPs, ensuring that local places benefit fully from having dedicated local champions.
Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame) (LD)
If the Deputy Prime Minister feels that elections for mayoral authorities should have a supplementary vote as that gives them sufficient authority, why does she not feel the same for Members of this House?
Angela Rayner
Millions of people are represented by mayors, who have huge powers over big regions. We want mayors to have strong personal mandates for the communities they serve rather than being elected on a fraction of the vote. It is right that first-past-the-post remains in place for general elections to maintain the constituency link.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
Will the right hon. Lady give way?
Sir Julian Lewis
I am truly grateful. This is, I hope, a non-party political point. The White Paper in advance of the Bill mentioned rightly that there had been consultations on strengthening the standards and conduct framework for local authorities, which relates to a campaign many of us have been involved in to try to protect local council clerks against bullying. We were pleased to be called into that consultation. There is, however, nothing about that in the Bill. Does the right hon. Lady plan to bring it forward in separate legislation?
Angela Rayner
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising that important issue. We intend to bring forward legislation. Our response to the local government standards consultation sets out our plans for whole-system reform, including empowering local authorities to suspend councillors who are guilty of serious misconduct for up to six months, with the option to withhold allowances and institute premises and facilities bans. We are committed to ensuring that misconduct is dealt with swiftly and fairly across the country at local and regional mayoral levels. We do want to take action on the issue.
Let me be clear that stronger mayors and strategic authorities will not replace councils, nor the crucial work of the House. MPs on both sides of the House will continue to be vocal champions for their areas, and we expect mayors to engage in regular and constructive dialogue with MPs, working together in the best interests of their constituents. Alongside the freedom for mayors to focus on local priorities, my Department is continuing to explore a local Public Accounts Committee-style model to improve the system of accountability and scrutiny of local spending.
The Government expect mayors to use their new powers to deliver real change, not retain the status quo. This is not about grandstanding or making a political point; it is about using the levers of growth to unlock infrastructure and drive investment. The role of local authorities in delivering vital local services and improving local neighbourhoods is essential, and it will continue. We also expect to see strategic authorities working hand in glove with their constituent councils to deliver for their residents.
The Bill will help rebuild local government for the communities who depend on it day in, day out. As a fit, legal and decent foundation of devolution, the Bill will establish the Local Audit Office to help fix the broken, fragmented local audit system. We will also reform local authority governance, requiring councils with a committee system to move to a leader and cabinet model and putting a stop to new local authority mayor roles being created. That change will streamline decision making across all councils and make it easier for people to understand how their council is run. It will also give the Government the tools to deliver local government reorganisation, resulting in better outcomes for residents and significant savings that can be reinvested in public services and improving accountability.
At all levels, we are backing local people to drive growth and greater opportunities for all, because, from top to bottom, the best decisions for communities are made by those who know their area best. That is why the Bill will also give local communities across the country much-needed new powers, like a bigger say in shaping their place through effective neighbourhood governance, with councils required to make sure that this is happening, as well as the tools to transform their high streets and neighbourhoods through a new community right to buy—to save much-loved community assets, like pubs and shops, from being lost and to protect sports grounds, which are at the heart of so many communities and a source of great local pride. The Bill will also support our high streets by banning the unfair practice of upwards-only rent reviews, preventing the blight of vacant shop fronts, because it is only when every community succeeds that our country succeeds.
The Bill and our reforms herald a new era for Britain: a new way of governing that puts politics back in the service of working people. Where previous Governments promised and failed the British people, this Government are keeping faith.
I note the Conservatives’ reasoned amendment. I must say that after they left the country with the worst housing crisis in a generation, I am dismayed that they would oppose a Bill that will unlock housing and planning on a vast scale. This Bill will empower local communities to take back control of their high streets by ending the Tory policy of upward-only rent reviews, and it will end the begging-bowl culture of the last Government.
While the Tories made empty promises to level up the country, this Labour Government are getting on with the job. Within days of taking office, Secretaries of State were passing down newly-won powers for the sake of our towns, cities and villages, with the Prime Minister leading the way. It has not always been easy, but real change takes hard work. We are rewiring Britain and, with it, growth and opportunity. This is how the British people will take back control, and how we will unite our country in times when we have never needed it more. I commend the Bill to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Oral Answers to Questions
Angela Rayner Excerpts(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
May I start by sending my thoughts and prayers to everyone involved in yesterday’s incident at Southend airport?
We remain committed to giving leaseholders greater rights, powers and protections in respect of their homes, and bringing the feudal leasehold system to an end. We have made significant progress, implementing the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 and, this month, launching a consultation to strengthen leaseholder protections when it comes to charges and services. We are delivering, but we will go further; we will publish a draft leasehold and commonhold Bill later this year. This week, the High Court will hear challenges to some of the enfranchisement reforms in the 2024 Act; we will defend those challenges robustly, and will await the Court’s judgment.
Andrew Pakes
I have been contacted by more than 300 residents in Peterborough about problems relating to FirstPort’s leasehold and management service charges. They face unfair charges, a lack of transparency, bad communication and poor services. Residents in, for example, Hammonds Drive and Manor Drive are fed up with getting a second-class service. What is my right hon. Friend doing to help residents in places like Peterborough get the peace of mind and justice that they so deserve?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this issue. Many Members from across the House have found that too many leaseholders suffer as a result of poor-quality services from managing agents. We are consulting on proposals to strengthen the regulation of managing agents, including a proposal to make minimum professional qualifications mandatory.
Kevin Bonavia
My constituent Ed, a leaseholder in Monument Court, Stevenage, has been trapped for years in an unsellable flat after the building failed its EWS1 assessment because Higgins Homes had not followed its own architectural plans. He has faced uncapped and unregulated service charges and utility billing, and the threat of disconnection, while seeing the saleable value of his property decrease by more than £70,000. Will the Secretary of State consider introducing a statutory route through which people like Ed can pursue legal action against a developer without bearing the full cost burden?
Angela Rayner
I am very sorry to hear about Ed’s situation. The Building Safety Act 2022 protects qualifying leaseholders from uncapped costs relating to non-cladding remediation. When remediation is not progressing, leaseholders can apply to the tribunal for remediation orders, which can compel relevant landlords to fix relevant defects in their buildings, as well as for remediation contribution orders, which require developers to pay towards the costs of the remediation.
Sam Carling
At Fletton Quays in my constituency, managed by Gateway Properties, leasehold residents are reporting that service charges have increased by as much as 150% in the last two years. Flats are under warranty and faults should be fixed by Western Homes, which built the property, but instead are being fixed by Gateway, which has increased the service charge and, I understand, has even been sending separate bills on top. I know that the Government have been keen to address issues relating to high service charges and the need for financial transparency for leaseholders; can the Secretary of State provide an update on that work?
Angela Rayner
Unjustified service charges are wholly unacceptable, and I strongly recommend that the homeowners obtain legal advice. The Leasehold Advisory Service, for instance, gives free legal advice to leaseholders. Developers are typically responsible for rectifying defects within the first two years of the warranty period; even if no warranty claim is made, developers are still liable, and should not pass charges on to leaseholders. Unreasonable service charges may be challenged at the first-tier tribunal.
Peter Swallow
Through the Government’s landmark Renters’ Rights Bill, we are doing much to address the inequities of the rental sector for constituents in Bracknell and across the country—for instance, we are extending the right to request a pet. Now the Government are turning our attention to reforming leasehold. My right hon. Friend will know that many leaseholders are also blocked from having a pet by a clause in their head lease. What can we do to deal with that?
Angela Rayner
I know that my hon. Friend has already spoken to the Minister for Housing and Planning about this issue, and that those discussions will continue. As you well know, Mr Speaker, pets bring joy, happiness and comfort to their owners, while also supporting their mental and physical wellbeing. We have strengthened the rights of private tenants to keep pets in the Renters’ Rights Bill, and we will of course keep the position of leaseholders with pets under review.
Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)
Leasehold residents of Marlborough House in Maidenhead found that their developer had entered liquidation, leaving £250,000 in section 106 payments outstanding, as well as massive defects in the development. Leaseholders fear that the authorities will ask them for the section 106 money, and that the costs of finishing the development will fall on their shoulders. Given that some developers have poor track records, with dozens of companies going into liquidation, how can we strengthen leasehold legislation to ensure that future leaseholders do not have the same problems as those in Marlborough House?
Angela Rayner
It is frustrating when we hear of situations like this, which is why it is our intention to publish the draft leasehold and commonhold reform Bill in the second half of this year. I hope the hon. Member will contribute his views on it, so that we can build on the proposals that the previous Government brought forward. They needed extra work, as I mentioned in my opening answer, but hopefully we can start to deal with this issue, so that leaseholders get the protection that they deserve.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
At a recent surgery, a constituent brought to me the leasehold problems that she is experiencing with her housing association. Despite paying a considerable amount in service charges, leaseholders have been whacked with a £7,000 bill for improvements to the property’s roof, with the expectation that they will pay within 30 days of completion. There was limited consultation, and leaseholders had no choice in who carried out the works. What does the Secretary of State advise my constituent to do?
Angela Rayner
Again, the consultation exercise that we are undertaking is about how we deal with such matters. I hope the hon. Member will work with us during the consultation period, so that we can bring forward the draft legislation and get this matter right. We hear these stories time and again, and we need to fix this problem and protect leaseholders.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State for her answers. The issues with the leasehold system, and the need for legal protection for everyone, have been set out in debates in Westminster Hall and this Chamber, and I very much welcome the Government’s commitment to changes. The leasehold system here is slightly different from that in Northern Ireland, but the legal protections need to be the same. I have a very simple question for the Secretary of State: will she have discussions with the relevant Minister in Northern Ireland to ensure that what happens here can happen for us in Northern Ireland, and that we will be given the same protection?
Angela Rayner
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We do work with the devolved nations, not just to show them what we are doing, but to learn from them. We have seen that the housing situation is not an England-only situation; the issues affect the whole of the UK, and we all need to learn from each other. Hopefully, the reforms that we are bringing through will be informed by the devolved nations, but we will also have some learnings for them. We need to work together in lockstep to protect people, wherever they are in the United Kingdom.
Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
We announced a record £39 billion investment into the new social and affordable homes programme at the spending review, which will create around 300,000 new homes over 10 years. Earlier this month, we published a five step plan that sets out how we will deliver the biggest increase in social housing in a generation to transform the safety and quality of social housing. My priority as Deputy Prime Minister is to get more social rent homes built, and that is what this Labour Government are delivering.
John Slinger
Planning authorities such as Rugby borough council are working hard to ensure that new housing developments contain as much affordable and social housing as possible. They work in partnership with housing developers, Government bodies such as Homes England, and others to that end, though it is not always an easy process and it often takes far too long. Will my right hon. Friend outline how the Planning and Infrastructure Bill will enhance their work, so that we can build as many high-quality affordable and social homes as possible and ensure that more people, particularly young people, get the homes they deserve?
Angela Rayner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the Planning and Infrastructure Bill will unlock a new scale of housing and infrastructure delivery across all tenures to help build 1.5 million homes in this Parliament. We are also taking action in the Bill to improve local decision making by modernising planning committees and ensuring that planning departments are well resourced by allowing local planning authorities to set their own planning fees.
Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
Will the Deputy Prime Minister please explain why her Government will not set a target for the provision of social housing? While I welcome the investment in the social and affordable homes programme that she set out, the reality is that it will meet only 10% of the total number of new homes anticipated and only 10% of the current demand for social housing. If she believes that setting national targets like the 1.5 million homes target is important to drive change, why will she not set a target for social housing?
Angela Rayner
The Government have not set an affordable housing target to date, but we continue to keep the matter under review. Accurately trying to forecast long-term delivery is inherently challenging, but we believe that our new social and affordable homes programme could deliver around 300,000 social and affordable homes over its lifetime, with around 180,000 for social rent. The measures we have taken, alongside the commitment for rent so that there is this long-term programme, will hopefully help with the supply, and I have made it categorically clear to the sector that we want more social rent housing.
David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)
There has been a 66% reduction in new affordable housing starts in London under Mayor Khan, and I note that Hillingdon Labour vigorously opposes the Conservative council’s plans for a new affordable housing site at Otterfield Road in Yiewsley. Will the Secretary of State condemn the failings of these Labour politicians on housing, and will she acknowledge that whether someone is a homeless person, a rough sleeper or an aspirational first-time buyer, this Government are failing those in housing need?
Angela Rayner
I find that absolutely astonishing when the Conservatives failed to meet their housing targets year after year. The Mayor of London has welcomed the money through the affordable homes programme. There is the amount of money we have given, and we are permitted to increase rents by CPI plus 1%. We are consulting on rent conversion, when the Conservatives prevented social landlords from being able to raise the money to provide the social housing that we desperately need. We are making the changes to get social housing where they failed miserably.
Gideon Amos (Taunton and Wellington) (LD)
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
I was pleased that the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill had its First Reading last Thursday. That landmark Bill will bring a radical reset to local government, deliver on our manifesto commitment to decentralise power, ignite regional growth with streamlined powers for mayors, and speed up new homes and infrastructure. It will empower communities to take back control of their beloved pubs and shops, helping local leaders to deliver a decade of national renewal, as promised in the plan for change.
Sarah Olney
I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues welcome the provisions in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which recognise that first past the post is an unrepresentative electoral system. That is a welcome first step—although we would prefer alternative voting for mayoral elections—but if the Government admit that first past the post is not suitable for mayoral elections, why do they maintain that it is suitable for general elections?
Angela Rayner
Let me cover that point. Mayors serve many millions of people and manage multimillion-pound budgets, yet can be elected by just a fraction of the vote under the previous Government’s changes—despite the fact that the supplementary vote system had worked effectively for over a decade. Given that the large populations that mayors and police and crime commissioners represent far exceed those represented by parliamentarians, we think that this is the right approach.
Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)
The chair of the working group on anti-Muslin hatred/Islamophobia, Dominic Grieve, who was appointed by the Secretary of State, has previously stated a preference for a definition of Islamophobia that would shut down talk of religion in cases like the grooming gangs scandal. All other members of that committee—again, appointed by the Secretary of State—are adherents of the Muslim faith. Does the Secretary of State not share our concerns that their report and recommendations will be seen as predetermined and biased?
Angela Rayner
No, I do not. There is no blasphemy law in this country because the previous Labour Government got rid of it, whereas the Conservative party had kept it on the statute book for years. We will always protect free speech, including the right to criticise religions. That kind of incendiary language is beneath the shadow Secretary of State.
Kevin Hollinrake
Incendiary language? I was merely stating the facts; that is the reality. The right hon. Lady is right in one regard: freedom of speech is on the line. The current position is that the report will be for Government eyes only, and that the decision on a definition will be taken in private. Will she at least commit to making the full report publicly available so that it can be scrutinised in the House and elsewhere before a decision is taken?
Angela Rayner
As set out in the terms of reference, the independent working group will submit its findings to Ministers. We will then consider its recommendations and set out the next steps. I urge Members to let the independent group get on with its work. If the shadow Secretary of State has views, he should feed them in as part of the call for evidence.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)
Angela Rayner
I am incredibly proud that the Government are introducing life-changing measures that will make a real difference when people are at their most vulnerable. I personally thank my hon. Friend for courageously telling her own story, and I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh) for her incredible and tenacious campaigning. Their work will change the lives of so many. We want to bring the benefits of these vital measures to people as soon as possible. We will be consulting on them in the coming months, prior to commencement.
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
Angela Rayner
We have the terms of reference, and we have the consultation that is going on at the moment. I am not going to provide a running commentary on the work of the independent group. The Government have a non-engagement policy with the MCB, and that position has not changed.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
City of York council is the lowest funded unitary authority, but under the fair funding review we do not fare any better. Can the Minister extend the consultation guidelines? These are complex issues. Will he meet our council to look at the impact of the review?
Housing Safety: “Awaab’s Law” and Electrical Checks
Angela Rayner Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Angela Rayner)
The Government are clear that homes must, above all, be safe. Safety is non-negotiable, and landlords must take urgent action to respond to issues when they arise. We want housing providers to put the people who live in their homes at the heart of their mission, approaching their relationships with tenants with care and professionalism so that mutual trust and respect is established. While many landlords do deliver effectively for their tenants, we know this is not always the case, and in some circumstances tenants have felt completely let down. As such, establishing clear standards and requirements of social landlords, and timelines to meet those requirements, will eliminate uncertainty for both tenants and landlords helping to ensure all tenants can live in the safe homes they deserve.
To this end, the Government are today introducing two important pieces of safety legislation. “Awaab’s law”, laid in Parliament today, will put in place clear protections for tenants by making sure dangerous damp and mould and emergency hazards are addressed quickly. New electrical safety regulations, also laid in Parliament today, will ensure electrical safety checks are carried out at least every five years in the social rented sector. We also want the courts to be prepared for these changes, and we are committed to working with the Ministry of Justice on tackling claim farms to aid the justice system.
On 21 December 2020, two-year-old Awaab Ishak died as a result of a severe respiratory condition due to prolonged exposure to mould in his home. I pay heartfelt tribute to the resolute campaign that Awaab’s parents have led in their son’s name. Awaab’s tragic death was entirely preventable and has brought to light the acute need for reform within the sector, to make sure that such a tragedy never happens again.
Awaab’s law is a crucial piece of legislation that will empower residents to hold registered providers of social housing to account by law if they fail to act on hazards in social homes and make them safe within set timescales. This law will ensure that the relationship between landlord and tenant is strengthened, that social landlords take tenants’ concerns seriously, treat all residents with empathy and dignity and that tenants feel respected and heard.
The first phase of Awaab’s law will come into effect in October this year, covering damp and mould and all types of emergency hazards. Social landlords will have to respond to emergency hazards within 24 hours and there will be no excuse for delays. We are clear that protections must be in place to ensure we never see a repeat of this tragic case. Two further phases, which will extend the law to additional and then remaining hazards, will come into effect in 2026 and 2027 with corresponding regulation to be laid in due course.
I am determined to ensure this policy works effectively, creating a positive impact for all tenants and leaving a lasting legacy. As such, Government will take a “test and learn” approach to implementing the policy. Over the coming months, we will closely monitor and evaluate the impact Awaab’s law is having; the effectiveness of the processes put in place to implement it and, will clarify or adapt our approach to deliver the best outcomes if we need to.
The requirements set by Awaab’s law are as follows:
If a social landlord becomes aware of a matter or circumstance in a social home that may be a hazard within scope, they must investigate within 10 working days to ascertain if there is such a hazard.
The social landlord must produce a written summary of the findings of the investigation (in most cases) and provide this to residents within three working days of the investigation concluding.
If the investigation finds that a hazard presents a significant risk of harm to the health or safety of a resident, the social landlord must, in most circumstances, within five working days of the investigation concluding, make the property safe (using temporary measures if necessary) and begin any further required works. The social landlord must satisfactorily complete repair works within a reasonable time period.
In an emergency situation, the social landlord must investigate and action any emergency repairs as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, within 24 hours.
If the property cannot be made safe within the specified timescales for Awaab’s law, then the social landlord must offer to arrange for the residents to stay in suitable alternative accommodation, at the social landlord’s expense, until required repairs are completed.
Social landlords should begin preparing for phase 1 of Awaab’s law now and be thinking about steps needed to get ready for phases 2 and 3. Tenant safety must remain paramount and landlords must continue to ensure that duties to keep homes fit for human habitation and free of category 1 hazards and to remedy disrepair continue to be met as Awaab’s law is phased in.
I am immensely grateful to all those across the sector who have engaged— through the public consultation, via membership organisations or otherwise—to help make Awaab’s law as robust as possible. Many of you will see your feedback reflected in the final policy. It is my profound hope Awaab’s law provokes a cultural shift in the way social homes are managed by landlords and experienced by tenants, and that all social landlords will place the safety of residents as their priority.
Under Awaab’s law, where landlords do not meet their obligations by failing to comply with the new strict timelines for remedying hazards, tenants will be able to challenge them. They can seek to have poor housing conditions put right through their landlord’s complaints process, the Housing Ombudsman, and through the courts by bringing a housing disrepair claim. To ensure that the system of redress remains fair, that vulnerable tenants are not exploited and that both tenants and landlords are not unfairly targeted by unscrupulous claims farming activity—the Minister for Housing and Planning and the Minister for Courts and Legal Services are today also announcing their intention to launch a call for evidence this year. Through this we will gather evidence on claims management company referrals to solicitors on a no win no fee basis to seek views on current practices and consider how to reduce unscrupulous “claims farming” activity in housing disrepair cases.
We will continue to protect consumers’ interests by sharing insight on poor practices with the SRA and FCA to inform their work in regulating inappropriate behaviours and practices in the sector.
Our Make Things Right campaign already informs tenants how they can use social housing complaints procedures and access the Housing Ombudsman Service. To ensure tenants continue to know their rights and are fully informed about the introduction of Awaab’s law, later this year the Make Things Right campaign will also include information on the new requirements, and we will publish guidance for tenants on Awaab’s law, when it comes into force in October 2025.
Alongside Awaab’s law the Government are driving transformational and lasting change in the safety and quality of social housing by improving electrical safety so that tenants can feel safe in their homes.
We know that poor electrical safety can have devastating effects and can cost lives. The Grenfell Tower fire, which claimed the lives of 72 men, women and children, was started by an electrical fault in a fridge-freezer. It is vital that we act to keep social housing residents safe from electrical harm.
In 2022, the previous Government carried out a consultation inviting views on proposals to introduce mandatory checks on electrical installations at least every five years; ensure parity between the rented sectors in respect of safety standards; and requiring mandatory portable appliance testing on all electrical appliances provided by social landlords.
This Government are now acting to bring this crucial safety measure into force and to protect social housing residents from harm. That is why we are laying regulations in Parliament today that will require social landlords to carry out:
Checks on electrical installations for social housing at least every five years; and
In-service inspection and testing of electrical equipment (ISIT) on all electrical appliances they provide as part of a tenancy (sometimes known as “PAT testing”).
The statutory instruments and consultation responses for both policies will be published on gov.uk and copies will be deposited in the Library of both Houses.
[HCWS739]
Social Housing Local Connection Test Exemptions
Angela Rayner Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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)
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.
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.]
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)
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.
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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).