Regeneration in Reddish

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Navendu Mishra]

In meetings with the hon. Lady I have pushed the Government for more funding for Stockport, and I just mentioned that the Government should go beyond what the 7.5% increase will deliver. I agree that more deprived and lower-income areas across Stockport and Greater Manchester deserve more attention; we cannot have a one-size-fits-all approach. As a politician, I will make political points, but I hope she sees that my voting record and my record in Hansard show that I do what is best for Stockport.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Navendu Mishra]

I am happy to take an intervention from Northern Ireland.

[Jim Shannon]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate; he is absolutely right to press for his constituents. Does he agree that whether we are talking about an urban, industrial town like Reddish or a rural community, for instance my Strangford constituency, the foundational rules of successful regeneration remain exactly the same? Regeneration requires targeted central Government support, modernised infrastructure and revitalised high streets, so that people can live, work and thrive in their home towns. The hon. Gentleman is pressing for that. I support him, and wish him well.

[Navendu Mishra]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. It is extremely important to invest in our high streets and have thriving high streets with independent local businesses, as well as thriving district centres. We are lucky that Reddish has a wide range of fantastic independent local businesses, as I will mention later.

As I said, I call on the Liberal Democrat-run Stockport council to take investment in Reddish seriously, and nowhere is the need for fair investment clearer than in Reddish. Stockport council must not continue to overlook its needs when allocating funding. Reddish faces many issues, including serious health inequalities. In Reddish the average male life expectancy is 78 and the average female life expectancy is 83. That is lower than other parts of my constituency, where the average male life expectancy is 81 and the average female life expectancy is 84.

Residents have consistently raised concerns with me about ageing infrastructure, a lack of high-quality public facilities and the lack of investment in the area. The people of Reddish deserve good-quality public amenities and facilities, and better infrastructure in key green spaces like Reddish Vale and North Reddish park. Under the previous Government, many residents felt forgotten, while more affluent areas of Stockport benefited from sustained investment. Sadly, this is continuing under our Liberal Democrat-controlled local authority. It is purely a political choice, just as austerity was. Can I remind the House that the Liberal Democrats were in coalition with the Conservatives for five long years, delivering truly regressive policies such as austerity, the bedroom tax and much more?

A Reddish resident told me recently:

“It feels like Reddish is a cash cow, the residents pay lots in and get absolutely nothing in return.”

Across my constituency, there has been a string of failures by Stockport council. Grand Central swimming pool, which has provided this country with sporting champions, is in need of investment, with the future of its 50-metre capacity uncertain. Many roads across my constituency are in an unacceptable state, with potholes and ineffective repairs. Stockport Central library has been closed since September 2025, with no timetable or indication of when it will be reopened by the council. The bridge near Harrison’s weir in Reddish Vale is still out of action almost 18 months after it was severely damaged by flooding, with Stockport council producing no timeline for its repair. Charges in council-owned carparks, including at Broadstone Road in Reddish where charges were recently introduced, are hitting residents and small businesses hard.

Turning to Reddish Baths, the site includes the disused baths building, the former community centre and fire station, and Reddish library. The 1908 buildings—library, fire station, baths and mortuary—are thought to be the only configuration of their type in the UK. They were a gift to the people of Reddish on joining the county borough of Stockport and are considered by some to be a symbol of the esteem—or the lack thereof—in which Reddish is held by Stockport council. Reddish Baths closed in 2005 and has stood vacant ever since. For generations, the swimming baths brought the community together, allowed young people the opportunity to learn a vital skill and served as a much-loved facility. Despite that, Stockport council currently has no firm plans to reopen or reinvest in this historic building. I want to pay tribute to Reddish North councillors Rachel Wise and David Wilson, who work tirelessly for the wider community and have done lots of work with me on this issue.

I recently ran a community survey in Reddish, asking residents to share their views on the future of Reddish Baths. Almost 1,000 residents responded, offering crucial insights into the community’s opinion: 86% of respondents placed swimming or fitness facilities in their top three preferred future uses for the site; 50% selected youth activities and services; 43% chose a community café or meeting space. The strongest guiding principles were promoting health and wellbeing, preserving historic architecture and expanding youth and family services. Some 65% of respondents want a plan that brings together the library, baths and community centre into a single, multi-use community and cultural hub. The most frequent expressed hope was clear: reopening the baths.

Many respondents referenced childhood memories, the loss of local pools and frustration at seeing a valued building left unused. There is also a strong desire for a shared community asset that serves all ages. However, residents also raised concerns that future plans could be too expensive for local people, exclusionary for low-income households, older residents or young people, run in a way that limits genuine community access or harmful to the site’s heritage. Some residents also expressed distrust of Stockport council due to previous delays and failed plans. I contacted the chief executive and the leader of the council to reopen engagement on the future of the bath site. I am grateful to the chief executive for visiting the baths with me a few months back. Across five facilities in Stockport borough, the public supply is 2,648 square metres of water. To meet the recommended supply of 12 square metres per thousand of the population, Stockport would need another 990 square metres, meaning that there is currently a clear water provision deficit.

Not only has Reddish lost its baths; we also have serious issues as Grand Central swimming pool in our town centre. Sport England has been less than helpful with my inquiries, which is highly disappointing because it receives a huge amount of funding from British taxpayers. Nationally, swimming outcomes are worsening looking at the 2024-25 statistics, only 73% of year 7 pupils can swim 25 metres competently, and just 67% of children aged five to 16 can swim 25 metres unaided. That is 30,000, or 3.5%, fewer children than in 2017-18.

Turning to libraries, only 19% of children and young people in the north-west read daily in their free time. That is the second lowest percentage in England. Alongside this, research from the University of Liverpool suggests that 1.2 million residents in Greater Manchester could be digitally excluded, with around 450,000 residents being non-users of digital technology. Reddish library was the first to have been purpose built in Stockport. It is also the home to the longest continuous library provision in the borough. Reddish library needs investment in its equipment, staffing and opening hours. The building itself is crumbling with a leaky roof. The library is a vital community asset, supporting people of all ages to learn crucial literacy skills and providing support for members of the community who are digitally excluded with free wi-fi provision, computers and help with digital skills. Many people also rely on our library as a warm space.

I am concerned that the urgent works identified for the library have still not been undertaken, despite the importance of this facility to the local community. I have been lucky enough to hold surgeries at the library, and I remember during my last surgery a few months back that there were lots of buckets out in Reddish library catching the water that was leaking from the roof. It is absolutely unacceptable. It is also deeply concerning that scaffolding has now remained in place at Reddish library for over three years at a cost of over £26,000 to the taxpayer. When including VAT, that cost rises to over £30,000 paid by the people of Stockport.

I am so disappointed that Stockport council made a combined application for four libraries across Stockport borough under the libraries improvement fund, rather than prioritising areas such as Reddish, where the need is most urgent. Reddish north has a digital exclusion risk index score of 4.37 out of 10. That is much higher than other parts of my constituency, where the scores are between 1 and 2.

The local authority, Stockport council, could have made a decision to submit a one-off individual application for Reddish library. However, Reddish was simply one of many bundled into one joint application, despite needing thousands of pounds to stabilise the roof in addition to the other issues that I mentioned. The council did not inform me of this application. Had they done so, I would have been more than happy to lobby the Government and the Minister on behalf of the council. However, communication with elected officials, whether councillors or MPs, seems to be really poor from Stockport council. I recognise and welcome the investment secured from this Labour Government for nearby Bramall Hall, in my neighbouring constituency of Cheadle, including £1 million this year in addition to the £1.6 million previously awarded. Many of my constituents feel strongly that Reddish has once again been overlooked.

To be clear, I welcome investment in all parts of Stockport, not just in my constituency. However, the Liberal Democrats should be honest and upfront about overlooking some parts of our borough and prioritising other areas. I am a proud trade union member and I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I thank Unison members working in Stockport libraries and across Stockport council for all the work that they do and the vital services they provide to the people of Stockport. It has been noted that Reddish has fewer home library service users than other parts of Stockport borough with similar demographics. That is attributed, among other factors, to the extraordinary knowledge, diligence and care demonstrated by Nicki and Belinda, Reddish’s long-serving librarians.

As we mark the National Year of Reading, I also want to recognise the outstanding work of organisations such as Read Easy Stockport, whose volunteers help adults improve their literacy and confidence. Facilities such as Reddish library play an essential role in supporting that work, but they need a roof that does not leak to do so.

I want to challenge the narrative being pushed by the Liberal Democrat council leadership in the local press. We are told that this Labour Government, who are trying to address the effects of the coalition years of austerity and cuts, have made a political decision on funding in respect of Stockport. Let me be clear: blaming this Government, who have been in power for less than two years, has become a convenient excuse for years of neglect in Reddish under the Liberal Democrats. The real question the people of Reddish and myself as the local MP ask is: why do some communities always seem to be at the back of the queue? Residents in areas such as Reddish can see the difference for themselves. They can see nearby areas getting investment attention, yet their infrastructure and public realm is left to deteriorate even further. If council leaders are prepared to speak loudly and publicly about funding shortfalls, they should also be prepared to explain their own choices. How have local resources been allocated? Which communities benefited the most, and why do some areas such as Reddish repeatedly feel overlooked and, frankly, invisible?

One cannot claim to stand for fairness while presiding over unequal outcomes; one cannot demand accountability from the Government while avoiding accountability for one’s actions—the “one” being the Liberal Democrat leadership at Stockport council. The leadership at Stockport council should stop looking for someone else to blame and explain to the good people of Reddish why their neighbourhood has been left behind.

High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for setting the scene so well. The reason so many hon. Members are present is because the future of our high streets is of great concern to everyone, myself in particular.

Each high street is different and should reflect the unique character and personality of each community. High street restoration requires shared visions, creative thinkers and strategic planning. I always bring a Northern Ireland perspective, and the high street in Newtownards is important to me because it is in our major town. High streets should be home to places that provide important functional services, alongside cultural, community and leisure functions. Regeneration should be community-led, ensuring that local voices are heard and that our high streets reflect the genuine needs of our communities, fostering a sense of belonging in our town centres.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is up to each local authority in Northern Ireland to bring forward a marketing, tourism and economic plan for each high street to get under the bonnet and start fixing this problem, which has been around for so long?

[Jim Shannon]

I certainly do, and I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention.

To ensure that regeneration is lasting, work must continue to be done by all councils across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to prevent unlawful shopfronts and enforce planning permission breaches. The number of enforcement actions carried out increased by nearly 25% in 2025, compared with 2022. However, significant disparities remain between local authorities, with evidence indicating that some councils are considerably more proactive than others in monitoring such activity.

In Strangford, £1 million has been provided for the Supporting Thriving High Streets programme to create safer and more attractive streetscapes, boost footfall and attract new businesses. These transformations do not happen overnight, and a significant amount of planning and work has already been done to begin the project. All four UK nations record year-on-year declines in footfall. Shopfronts lie deserted, a visual reminder of the economic pressures. Regular health checks should be carried out to assess the effectiveness of these efforts. That would ensure that investment is not only delivered effectively but protected over time, creating resilient, responsive high streets.

I look to the Minister to ensure that UK-wide funding is available to support high streets, to ensure that banks have a high street presence and to re-engage people with the joy of shopping local and sowing into their local economy. That can be achieved, and together we must achieve it.

High Streets

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mr Campbell]

I agree, and in a few moments I will talk about some of the positive developments, but they are chinks of light, not the answer. I believe that we need to look at this issue much more radically.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. Anchor institutions on our high streets, such as banks and post offices, are disappearing. Across the United Kingdom, 7,000 banks have disappeared, including 11 in my constituency, and post offices have disappeared in my constituency too. According to a YouGov poll, 76% of Britons say that access to a physical bank branch in their local area is important to them. Does my hon. Friend agree that that issue is contributing to the decline of high streets and that steps must be taken to ensure that high street regeneration policy reflects the importance of maintaining anchor institutions to sustain economic stability?

[Mr Campbell]

I agree that that is contributing significantly to the downturn.

Elections: First Past the Post

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney).

I will shed some light from a constituency that operates PR for local government and Northern Ireland Assembly elections. The hon. Lady—I spoke to her already—and I will have slightly different opinions on this matter, but I respect her greatly. Indeed, I respect all my colleagues on the Opposition Benches—[Interruption.] And on the Government Benches, by the way—sorry, but I corrected myself quickly. We may have differences of opinion, but there are many more things that we agree on.

I will put forward the point of view from Northern Ireland. I say gently and respectfully to the House that the DUP and, indeed, the people of Northern Ireland speak on this matter with a unique form of authority. We are not better than anybody else; it is just that we have done this for a great number of years. We do not just look at alternative voting systems in theory or on academic balance sheets. Through the single transferable vote, we live it, operate within it and contest it in every single local government mandate and Northern Ireland Assembly election. STV is the law of the land.

First, I want to look at the undisputed champion of stability—forgive me, those close to me who may not agree with this—the first-past-the-post system used for our UK general elections. First past the post delivers what the British public value above almost all else in Governments: clarity, accountability and a direct, inseverable link between a Member of Parliament and their constituents. When the voters of Strangford sent me here, they knew exactly who was responsible for standing up for local schools, roads, hospitals and many other issues—farming, fishing and immigration. There is no hiding behind a party list. There is no passing the buck to three or four regional members. The buck stops with the constituency MP.

For the record, whenever I have been elected as an MP—that has been five times—I have always said in my election speech that I thank everybody who voted for me and those who did not vote for me, because I am still their MP and I will work for everybody to the fullest of my ability. I fought seven council elections and five Assembly elections, including for the Forum for Political Dialogue. This is my 41st year as an elected representative; it has been a long time. I started with hair and now I have none, so maybe that is the reason—I do not know.

First past the post provides a clear outcome. It allows the electorate to decisively choose a Government or throw one out. I believe that it prevents the sort of backroom political horse-trading we see perpetuated across Europe, where coalitions are cobbled together weeks after an election has finished, rendering the manifestos that parties fought on and the public voted for completely meaningless. I point Members towards the Republic of Ireland, where partnership or coalition Governments are cobbled together each and every time. In doing so, parties have to water down what they set out to the electorate in their manifestos.

Let us contrast first past the post with our experience back home in Northern Ireland. We use PR via STV for councils and the Assembly. Although STV was introduced as a tool to ensure cross-community representation in a deeply divided society, let us be honest about its practical realities. First, it is complex. Sometimes it is confusing. Every election shows that many people, no matter how many times they are told how the PR system works, still spoil their votes by marking six or seven Xs, or by writing one, two, three, four, five and six in different columns. Someone might put ones, twos or even threes for everybody; the PR system is confusing for them.

STV also fundamentally dilutes the democratic mandate. Counting goes on for days. Fractional transfers of votes decide who wins the final seats. Candidates with a minuscule share of first-preference votes can end up being elected on the 10th or 11th count, not because they were anybody’s first choice but because they were the least disliked one. A candidate someone disliked the most could still be elected, even though they did not want them to be.

I am very conscious of time. First past the post has preserved the integrity of this Parliament for centuries. It ensures that Governments are robust and that the Union remains anchored by a strong, understandable and decisive democratic process. We must never trade a system of proven stability and direct accountability for one of permanent compromise, fractured local representation and endless coalition haggling. I strongly urge the House to reject this proposal—although, of course, we will not vote on it—and to maintain the strength of first past the post, the best system there is. Let us continue with it.

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

Thank you, Mr Shannon—nearly bang on time.

Stoma: Public Toilet Provision

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 18th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered public toilet provision for people with stoma.

Thank you for standing in, Mr Dowd. It is much appreciated by us all. It is always good to have you in the Chair, no matter what, but today is a special occasion. This is not what I would call a particularly fashionable debate, but it is one that affects many people and it needs to be aired in Westminster Hall so we have the opportunity to put forward a case.

Throughout my life, I have had occasion to engage with people who have stomas. I never quite understood what they were, other than that there was something wrong with their bowel system and a stoma as a method to give them a normal life, if that is the right way to put it. In some cases, the stoma was there for only a short time because the person recuperated. Sometimes their body needed a bit of rest, and perhaps that was one way of doing it.

I am pleased to have secured this debate, and I am grateful to the colleagues who have come along to participate. I also place on the record my thanks to Colostomy UK for its support in preparing for the debate and, more importantly, for the work it does every day to support people living with stomas across the United Kingdom. I recently had the opportunity to meet representatives from Colostomy UK to learn more about the challenges it faces, and the challenges faced by patients living with stomas. The discussions highlighted an issue that many of us rarely think about, but it affects thousands of people every single day. This debate is not just about public toilets for those with stomas. At its heart, it is about dignity, independence and inclusion. Those are the three themes that I wish to put on the record.

I apologise for not saying at the beginning that it is lovely to see the Minister in her place. I understand that this is her first debate, and I wish her well in her new role. We will not be hard on her—that is not in my nature—but we will collectively put forward a case, and she will respond in a positive way to encourage us on what we are asking for. I have four asks for her to look at.

For most of us, access to a toilet is something we take completely for granted. We leave home to go to work, visit friends, attend events, go shopping and go travelling without giving it so much as a second thought, because there will always be a toilet. That reminds me of a story. When I was in the armed forces parliamentary scheme, John Spellar, who used to be a Member, told me that he had two pieces of advice when we went on a course—he always gave good advice. He said, “If you see a toilet, go, and if you see food, eat.” Those were the two things he told me to do whenever I went anywhere, and I have always remembered his words of wisdom. The fact of the matter is that I did not have a stoma, so I could go to the toilet anywhere, but it becomes a great problem for those who have a stoma.

We assume that if we need a toilet, one will be available, but the many people living with a stoma do not have that certainty. That is the key theme of this debate. For the benefit of those following, a stoma is a surgically created opening in the abdomen that allows waste to leave the body into an external pouch. People may require a stoma following bowel cancer, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, diverticulitis, trauma or other serious health conditions. I have had a couple of friends over the years with Crohn’s disease and one with colitis. For a short period of their life they had a stoma, which helped them to heal and eventually they were able to do without it.

For many people, a stoma is lifesaving surgery that allows them to have a comparatively normal life. It enables them to regain their health, maintain their independence and continue living active and fulfilling lives. Having a stoma should not mean they cannot do that; it just means they have to deal with the toilet issue.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate and raising awareness of this issue. Anyone who was at Prime Minister’s questions last week will have seen me talk about living with ulcerative colitis. I am grateful that the Prime Minister has arranged for the Minister to meet me to talk about the issues that people with inflammatory bowel disease face. If the hon. Gentleman or anyone else is interested in trying to join that meeting, should the Minister allow it, I would be more than happy to include them in that conversation.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Gentleman, and I will take advantage of that opportunity if it comes.

More than 200,000 people across the United Kingdom live with a stoma. For some, it may be a short-term issue, their body may heal and they will recover—that is to be welcomed. However, there is a lot of anxiety for those who have to live with a stoma even for a short time. Many find that something as simple as leaving home can require careful planning and considerable anxiety. One of the strongest messages I took away from my discussions with Colostomy UK is that many people living with a stoma plan their life around toilet access. It is a fact of life, and if they are going to a restaurant or a shopping centre, or if they are going on a journey, they have to make sure there is toilet provision.

[Tom Gordon]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for being so generous with his time. He listed restaurants, businesses and other places where one might find a toilet. In recent years, we have seen the hollowing out of local government and the loss of publicly accessible toilets provided by town councils, unitary authorities or whatever it might be. Does he agree that when local authorities look either to close or to charge for those facilities, they need to consider the impact on people with stomas and other IBD conditions?

[Jim Shannon]

The very poor provision of toilets is an issue I will address shortly. Fortunately, we have been proactive in my constituency, which may be something that others wish to follow.

The availability of a suitable toilet can determine whether a person feels confident enough to attend a family gathering. When all the family is there and the kids are running about, they wonder, “Is the toilet handy?” or “Are there two toilets, if somebody is in one, because I need to make sure I get there fairly quickly?” It determines whether they can enjoy a day out, travel for work, visit a town centre or simply spend time with friends. It is not a situation any of us would wish to see.

Evidence gathered by Colostomy UK highlights the significant scale of the issue. Its Stoma Aware survey found that 62% of people living with a stoma avoid activities that many of us take for granted because suitable toilet facilities are not available. One in four had been challenged for using an accessible toilet, despite having a genuine need to do so. Most concerningly, 4% said they left home only for emergencies. Those figures are striking. It seems that they are almost a captive in their own house.

The figures tell us that this is not an issue of convenience, but of social participation, confidence and, for many people, isolation—isolation is the key issue. In this House, we spend a great deal of time discussing loneliness and social isolation, to which the Government rightly respond positively by trying to make the situation better. We talk about encouraging people to remain active in their communities and ensuring that those living with long-term health conditions are not left behind, yet, as the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) said, inadequate toilet provision can be a significant barrier to those ambitions, affecting the way a person plans their day, their journey or their outing.

If someone cannot be confident that they will find a suitable toilet when they need to, they may begin to avoid situations that others take for granted. They may stop attending social events, going to family occasions, travelling or visiting friends and family, or they may avoid shopping centres, cultural events or community activities. “If I go there and am caught short, where do I go? Is there provision? How far can I travel?” It is not that they lack the desire to participate, but that they are concerned about the predicament they might find themselves in because they lack confidence that the facilities they need will be available.

People living with stomas can also experience complications that require immediate access to a toilet, such as leakage, pancaking or ballooning. Those can happen without warning and often require urgent attention. I remember when one of my friends was caught short unexpectedly and went to the toilet. The problem was that his stoma had overflowed. Apart from the embarrassment, the people around him did not quite understand what was going on. For my friend, especially, it was incredibly worrying. Such situations can happen without warning and often require urgent attention, so when they occur, having access to a suitable toilet is not a luxury but essential—“We must get there right now.”

I have heard some of the comments made by people who responded to the Colostomy UK survey. One respondent said:

“I plan every journey around toilets. Sometimes I cancel plans because I can’t face the stress”.

That is the stress of not knowing whether a location has a toilet, whether they will have access to it or whether there will be a problem.

Another respondent said:

“I once had a woman yell at me for using the accessible toilet because I looked fine”,

and she could not understand what was going on. The respondent did not go out again for weeks because of the fear of having to deal with somebody else who might shout at her, maybe saying worse things.

Those comments are a reminder that many conditions are invisible. People should not have to justify their need to use an accessible toilet, nor should they be challenged at any time when doing so. The impact extends far beyond physical inconvenience; it affects confidence, wellbeing and quality of life.

It strikes me that the solutions to this issue are neither complicated nor expensive, so I have some thoughts to put to the Minister on how to move forward. We are not talking about major infrastructure projects or significant new financial burdens. In many cases, we are talking about practical measures that can make a substantial difference to people’s lives. The challenge is not a lack of solutions, but ensuring that those solutions are consistently available and embedded in policy and practice.

That brings me to the two key issues I wish to raise with the Minister. The first concerns public toilet provision. Across the United Kingdom, public toilets have disappeared from town centres and public spaces. Communities that once had facilities on which people could rely have seen those facilities close, often without any indication that they will be replaced. That issue is well known. The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough referred to it in his intervention, and it will be commented on by others.

[Tom Gordon]

I commend the hon. Gentleman on being one of the most generous Members I have encountered. On the provision of public toilets, the issue is not only the toilet closures, but the lack of maintenance and spending to make them a toilet that someone wants to use. Does he agree that we need to make sure that, where we have those facilities, they are up to the standard that anyone, let alone someone with one of these conditions, should expect?

[Jim Shannon]

That is, again, an incredibly powerful intervention from the hon. Gentleman, who is very focused on the issue. The toilet should be of the right level of cleanliness, and with the relevant attendance, so that it can be used by everyone.

The wider decline has been highlighted by the Royal Society for Public Health, which has warned of the emergence of public toilet deserts in the UK. Recent research found that there is now one public toilet for every 15,500 people in England and that public toilet provision has fallen by 14% since 2016. That is incredibly worrying, and highlights the importance of this debate. It is also why my requests to the Minister will be fairly specific.

For many people, the lack of provision may simply be frustrating; for somebody living with a stoma, it can be life-limiting. It can influence where they go, how long they stay and whether they feel able to leave home at all. Public toilets are not simply a convenience for many people: they are essential infrastructure and an essential part of everyday life. The Royal Society for Public Health has warned that, for some people, access to a public toilet can be the difference between whether they leave the house or not. That is the reality that Colostomy UK hears from people living with stomas.

I do not set aside the financial pressures facing local authorities, and I appreciate that there are difficult decisions to be made, but I hope the Minister agrees that nobody should be excluded from public life because they cannot access a suitable toilet when they need one. I therefore hope the Government will consider how local authorities can be supported to ensure that people living with stomas and other long-term health conditions are not disadvantaged by a lack of public toilet provision. I also hope the Minister will consider whether the current discretionary approach to public toilet provision is sufficient for those who rely on these facilities to participate in everyday life.

The second issue I wish to raise is separate but equally important. The first issue is whether people can find a toilet at all; the second is whether, when they do find one, it is suitable for their needs. That is key. Even where accessible toilets exist, they do not always meet the needs of people living with stomas. A toilet may be accessible from a mobility perspective, but may still lack the practical features needed by somebody managing a stoma, as the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough outlined in his three key interventions.

As I mentioned earlier, I am fortunate to be the hon. Member for Strangford, but I also represent the largest part of the Ards and North Down borough council area. What the council has done, which I have supported over the years, is so important and is perhaps a blueprint for other councils to follow. It has worked with Colostomy UK on a strategy and a process to upgrade all accessible toilets in council-owned facilities and make them become stoma-friendly. In doing so, it became the first council in Northern Ireland to make all accessible toilets within its facilities stoma-friendly, demonstrating real leadership on this issue. Ards and North Down borough council—the council I served on for some 26 years—has led the way, and I hope others will take forward its policy.

The improvements include practical additions such as shelves, mirrors, hooks and appropriate disposal facilities. As the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough referred to in his intervention, that is one way forward. Those may sound like small changes, but they make a significant difference to people managing a stoma. I commend the council for recognising the needs of people living with stomas and for taking practical action to improve accessibility across its estate.

The fact that the first council in Northern Ireland has already implemented changes demonstrates that they are achievable and can be delivered within existing public sector budgets. The council delivered those special features in the toilet facilities it has in my constituency. That is particularly encouraging, because it demonstrates that the solutions being proposed are practical and achievable and can be delivered. The council recognised the need, worked with people who understand the issue and implemented changes to make public facilities more accessible. The question we should ask ourselves is this: if we recognise that these features are necessary, why should their provision depend on the goodwill of individual councils, businesses and organisations? Should they not become the standard that people can expect?

As things stand, provision is inconsistent. Some facilities include those features, while others do not. As a result, people living with stomas cannot be certain that an accessible toilet will meet their needs. That is why Colostomy UK is calling for stoma-friendly features to be incorporated in part M of the building regulations and in future accessibility standards. These are constructive policies, put forward so that people with stoma bags are able to have a better quality of life.

The success of Changing Places toilets shows what can be achieved when the Government identify a genuine accessibility need and respond positively. The features required to make a toilet stoma-friendly are modest, yet they can have a profound impact on people’s daily lives. I therefore believe that there is a strong case for examining whether stoma-friendly features should become a standard requirement for accessible toilets in any new developments.

The Minister has already seen them, but before I conclude I have four specific questions for her. First, will she agree to meet Colostomy UK to hear directly from people living with stomas and discuss their issues further? I understand and appreciate that she has only just taken over, but if she could make the time, we would appreciate the opportunity to act on this issue.

Secondly, on public toilet provision, will the Minister engage with her ministerial colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to explore how local authorities can be supported to maintain adequate public toilet provision for people with stomas and other long-term health conditions? There are many pertinent long-term conditions, which the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough referred to in one of his interventions.

Thirdly, on building standards, will the Minister ask officials to examine whether part M of the building regulations could and should be updated so that stoma-friendly features become standard for accessible toilets in new developments? Fourthly, will she work with Colostomy UK and other stakeholders to ensure that people living with stomas are able to participate fully in work, education, travel, culture, community life and, indeed, normal life?

Let us be quite clear: this is not a party political issue. In the debates that I bring forward, I try to never make it about that, because it is not; it is about the people. It is a practical issue, an accessibility issue and, above all, a human issue. No one should feel excluded from society because they cannot access a suitable toilet when they need one.

I look forward to hearing other Members’ contributions, and I thank the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough for his interventions. I look forward to the contributions of the shadow spokespeople, the hon. Members for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) and for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson), and I really do wish the Minister well in her role. Today we have the opportunity to work collectively to do better for our people.

--- Later in debate ---

[Vikki Slade]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I worked for Diverse Abilities, which looks after disabled children and adults in Dorset. The number of times that we could not ensure that the children in our care had suitable facilities was really frightening. I spoke at the Backbench Business Committee earlier this week, where the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis), put in a pitch for a debate on a new strategy for Changing Places toilets. That is hugely important, and I would absolutely support it.

[Jim Shannon]

Let me read out an example. I do not know this young lady, but you know her incredibly well, Mr Dowd. She is a young constituent called Jessica, who has had a stoma since she was four years old and has campaigned for 16 years. She fundraises to provide special teddy bears with their own stoma bags to children preparing for surgery. They are called Buttony bears. She works with Colostomy UK’s “Step Up for Stomas” campaign to promote an active and positive lifestyle. You are right to say that she is a heroine, Mr Dowd; she is a very brave young girl. She has her own Facebook page to raise awareness. We now know her story because you have shared it. We think of her, too.

--- Later in debate ---

[Nesil Caliskan]

That is exactly the point that I am making. I thank the hon. Lady for highlighting that very good example of what local leadership can deliver in the community. It is important that we empower local authorities and leaders to think outside the box, champion this issue and speak up on tricky topics. That gives me the opportunity once again to pay tribute to hon. Members for taking part in this debate. By talking about and giving attention to a difficult subject, we are able to shift views and encourage our public sector to provide facilities that meet the needs of our communities.

[Jim Shannon]

The role of councils is incredibly important. The Government’s 10-year health plan sets out a shift from hospital to community, from sickness to prevention and from analogue to digital. For stoma care, moving from analogue to digital could mean remote monitoring for high-risk people living with a stoma, app-based ordering of stoma appliances, reducing prescription errors and delays, and digital self-management for diet, hydration and troubleshooting. Those are all critical issues for the health service to consider when moving from analogue to digital. I ask the Minister, whether or not it is in the notes I gave her, to look at that point as well. I also ask that she meets Colostomy UK with all Members present. That organisation has much more knowledge than me, and we look forward to that opportunity.

[Nesil Caliskan]

Absolutely. I am very happy to meet any campaigning organisation to discuss this important issue. I note that other hon. Members have also made that request. If charities would like to contact me, I will happily meet them to talk about how we can better support the needs of all our communities.

On the important point the hon. Gentleman makes about the NHS plan and healthcare support, he is absolutely right. It is all the more reason why we need a joined-up approach to what local authorities and NHS local boards are doing. I take the opportunity to highlight health and wellbeing boards across the country, which will play a really important role in making sure that, as one part of the local authority is delivering something, it is making the most of what it is doing so that it meets the objectives of a different part. In the case we are talking about, health is a really obvious example.

To return to my general point about local authorities thinking outside the box and doing things differently, one area we should encourage them to consider is how they conduct procurement. There are many examples across the country where public toilets in parks and open spaces have fallen into disrepair. Some local authorities are addressing that through procurement processes by stipulating, for example, that the owner of a new café must look after the toilets in that space. Those are good ideas that should be encouraged and will ultimately make it easier for our communities to access facilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon]

I thank everyone for their participation, and those in the Gallery who gave us information to use in the debate. The hon. Member for Fylde (Mr Snowden) brought a focus to this issue in a way that I would have been too hesitant to do. I am too much of a traditionalist, too much of a conservative and maybe a wee bit careful, but I thank him for that. We need a bit of humour sometimes; he gave us that, and I thank him for it. I was fearful of what the next name he would come up with was going to be. I was sitting here thinking, “Don’t say that!” but that is by the by.

Toilet provision must be clean. The psychological adjustment is something that we need to focus on as well. I just know how I feel and think, and if I had such a condition, I know how much worse it would be to try to deal with it. We must also focus on the knock-on effect on the NHS. The Minister has grasped that issue. The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) always makes very perceptive interventions. He is no longer present, but in his absence, I thank him for his interventions on toilet provision and living with a stoma bag.

The hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) has great knowledge of this matter. She has been active on this subject for some time, especially since she was elected but even before that when she was on the council. It would cost a small amount to address this issue, but it would have a big return. It is a bit like a credit union; if we invest a wee bit, we will get a lot more out of it. Toilet access has a big impact, as it protects people’s dignity. Some 40% of toilets in the UK have disappeared. They are a public necessity, and surely England could do better. Public toilets must be a part of modern society.

The shadow spokesperson, the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson), also brought knowledge to this debate. He referred to the 200 to 250 people in his constituency who have had a stoma in the last year. He also referred to the “Boys Need Bins” campaign, which others have referred to, and which those in the Gallery have made us very much aware of.

The disability is invisible—we need to remember that. I know about stomas only because of friends and constituents. Under the previous Government’s Changing Places policy, the number of toilets has risen, which is good news, but there is a lot more to do. I think the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire referred to that as well. He also asked for a meeting with Colostomy UK—I think we can help each other on that.

I congratulate the Minister on her debut in Westminster Hall. I wish her well in the role that she has chosen—or that someone else has chosen for her. [Laughter.] It does not matter; it is a role that she is capable of. On behalf of our constituents, I was very pleased with her response to us as individuals and collectively as well. She referred to the 13,000 each year who have the stoma operation. Independence for people with such a disability is important for them to live a normal life and not be conscious of all the things that can happen. The standard of public toilets needs to be up to a certain level. The hon. Member for Fylde explained things about going to the toilet that I had not thought of or even conceived of, but he explained it very well. Only then do we realise how important it is to have a certain standard of toilet.

Local authorities were also referred to. The Minister gave us some assurance, which I am very pleased about, in relation to the 10-year plan and how the scheme will change from analogue to digital. It is important that we look at ways of doing things better.

Again, I thank you, Mr Dowd. We do not often say this, but we should thank our Hansard staff who come along and decipher our words, or my accent or my Ulster-Scots-isms or whatever it may be. I thank them and the civil servants who come along and dutifully listen to all the things we have to say, take notes and never show emotion. That is the standard of a good civil servant.

Question put and agreed to. 

Resolved, 

That this House has considered public toilet provision for people with stoma.

Legacy of Jo Cox

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 11th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Alison McGovern]

I thank the hon. Lady for her words, which are spot on.

Ten years ago next week, I was in Portcullis House next door when I received a message from the now Chancellor of the Exchequer telling me that our friend Jo Cox, the then Member for Batley and Spen, had been murdered in her constituency. It remains the worst moment of my life in politics. That someone so courageous and strong, someone small in stature but enormous in spirit, should be killed like that is as horrific today as it was in that moment. At the time of her killing, her loved ones and friends decided that it was she who should be talked about, not the person who killed her. Her life, her work, her beliefs are important; helping her murderer achieve any notoriety is not. Today, we meet to put her legacy on the record again.

Jo was a parliamentarian for just a year, yet her life before becoming an MP had been so adventurous and full, and she had already seriously influenced politics. There is therefore much about her whole life to talk about.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the Minister for leading the debate. I recall well the Friday morning in my constituency office when the news broke. I immediately penned a letter because at that stage, Jo was still with us, although injured. I had hardly finished the letter when, unfortunately, the sad news came through that she had passed away. To her sister, the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater), and to all her family, I will say that we very much think of them and our prayers are with them as well. We always remember, as the Minister said.

I cannot be here for the whole debate, as I am leading another debate in Westminster Hall, so I want to put these words on record. I admired Jo for her courage and for her advocacy of her constituents. No one doubted her determination, and when she spoke we were always moved by what she had to say. Today, 10 years later, we still remember her with fondness.

[Alison McGovern]

On behalf of us all in this House who have ever received the kindness of a letter from the hon. Gentleman, I say to him that he embodies the “more in common” spirit and we are so grateful to him for doing so. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

Whether someone is inspired, as we all are, by Jo’s work in international development—travelling around the world to stand up for women in the most dangerous environments—the impressive physical challenges she undertook, or the manner in which she included people, whatever their background or beliefs, this is the story of a woman whose life may have been cut short, but whose contribution will be remembered and will continue always. Members from across the House will share their own stories today, and I encourage them all to do so with joy.

For my part, I will never forget sitting on the Opposition Benches during a turbulent time in Labour politics, when Jo showed leadership on the horrors in Syria while far too many others equivocated or looked the other way. I will never forget her sense of humour and fun, or her unrelenting hope that there was always something we could do.

Much has been achieved in Jo’s name and in that spirit in 10 years. From the Jo Cox Women in Leadership graduates to the thousands of people who have been along to a Great Get Together, her impact on the people of this country has never weakened.

Local Government Reform

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O’Brien) for securing this debate.

Obviously, the Minister is not responsible for local government reorganisation in Northern Ireland, but I want to caution against the approach that has been put forward today, because the shortfalls of what we have done in Northern Ireland will undoubtedly be replicated here on the mainland.

It is nice to see the Minister in her place. She will know some of the things I have said in the past, including in my questions to her in the Chamber. We have done a local government review and reorganisation in Northern Ireland and it did not quite work out, so perhaps a cautionary approach should be taken, learning from the promises that were made and ultimately not delivered for us in Northern Ireland.

I note the optimistic projections before us. The House was told that this grand restructuring will streamline services and save an estimated £2.9 billion over five years. That is to be welcomed, if those words turn into reality. I wish I could say it is the reality of what happened in Northern Ireland, but it is not because the promises were not realised at all. From our distinct experience in Northern Ireland, I must therefore issue a strong note of caution to the Government.

We had reform of all councils in Northern Ireland, reducing their number from 26 to 11. Massive savings were promised due to less duplication, with no need to have so many middle staff because one departmental head could look after two sections, and no need to have buildings in all the council areas. Lots of savings were promised, and unfortunately they were not realised.

I served on a council for some 26 years from 1985 right through to 2010, so there is a very special place in my heart for local government. I know at first hand the real and tangible benefit of local councils making local decisions for the people who live there. Indeed, some of the best days I had were on the council. I love bread-and-butter issues, and councillors get their hands dirty with that sort of stuff.

I know that any Member who has served at local council level will agree that the general public having access to their council must be protected at every single level. Unfortunately, I suspect that will not happen with these reforms. We know the importance of that level of representation and advocacy. I look back with fondness on my 26 years of apprenticeship. For a short period of three months, I served as a councillor, a Member of the Legislative Assembly and an MP at the same time. I gave an undertaking to resign from the other two places to take up my position here, and I did.

The systematic removal of face-to-face access for people in our towns and villages caused by aggressive centralisation can never be acceptable. We have seen this movie before. It is like a less funny “Groundhog Day”. It happened to us in Northern Ireland, and it is going to happen here again—except when we wake up this time, it will not be so much fun.

Northern Ireland is now a decade on from our own major reform of local authorities, which reduced the number of councils from 26 to 11. The promises made then mirror the promises made today. A 2024 Department for Communities report concluded that it is still too early to determine if those reforms have been cost-effective. Crucially, the report also revealed that the new, larger councils are actually spending more than their 26 predecessors combined—wow. The promises were never realised. Indeed, they went the other way. As has already been said, bigger does not automatically mean cheaper. Centralisation does not inherently guarantee efficiency.

The Minister is an honourable lady who does her best for us all in this Chamber. Looking to Northern Ireland, has she and her Department fully taken into account the findings of that DFC report and the deep financial uncertainties that it highlighted? What iron-clad guarantees can she offer to ensure that we are not promising billions in theoretical savings, when the reality might mean taking more hard-earned cash from the pockets of local taxpayers and ratepayers? That is what this means, as that is who pays for it all at the end of the day.

We must not allow structural change to become an expensive, box-ticking exercise that leaves hard-working families picking up the tab at a particularly difficult time.

[Jess Brown-Fuller]

The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point about local government finances. My constituency currently sits in two different district councils. The Government’s proposals would mean that my residents in Pagham and Bersted will end up in a coastal authority that will be bankrupt on day one; the rest of my constituents will be in an authority that should be on a sound financial footing. What will happen to my residents in Pagham and Bersted? Their council tax bills will go up overnight to manage the debt that is currently held in Adur and Worthing, when their current council is on a sound financial footing. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is an unacceptable position for my residents to be put in, when they did not ask for this?

[Jim Shannon]

That intervention sums up my comments, and it provides further evidence. When Ards borough council, on which I served for 26 years, was partnered with North Down council, we took on North Down’s debt, while we had been prudent—very Ulster Scottish—and had made sure that our moneys were well managed. That is not a bad reflection on North Down council, but it illustrates the issue. The hon. Lady has illustrated it incredibly well with her comments.

I am all for making efficiencies, but throwing areas together that have little in common, as the hon. Lady just said, and removing the face-to-face contact points, centralising to an inaccessible hub and doing all of that with no savings to show over 10 years must be a warning to all. Sometimes financial projections do not meet the reality. We must all be aware of the myriad difficulties presented. I gave the example of Ards borough council and the changes in Northern Ireland. It did not work for us. Will it work here?

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Coastal Communities: Government Support

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 1st June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Neil Duncan-Jordan]

My hon. Friend is right. There are some areas of Poole where no one lives; they are all holiday lets, second homes and so on.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

First, I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing this issue forward. He is a very assiduous MP on behalf of his constituents and he should be congratulated on his contribution. I am also an MP for a rural coastal area, and there are other issues as well as social housing, including isolation, which many suffer from. Isolation means more expensive shops and more expensive petrol, less frequent transport, social housing scarcity and a lack of digital connectivity. Does he agree that there is a clear need for the Government to understand that greater support is required, not in terms of per head accountancy, but taking into account rural isolation difficulties, and that more investment is the first step to achieve that?

[Neil Duncan-Jordan]

I always welcome contributions from the hon. Member, and I often find myself agreeing with him, as I do on this occasion.

The expensive apartments that have sprung up in my constituency and others are unsuitable for young families in the area or are out of the reach of many local people. While I support the Renters’ Rights Act 2026, we must also go further and look at rent controls to ensure fair play.

That brings me to the health challenges that coastal communities face, and the excellent report from the chief medical officer published in 2021, in which he recognised that coastal communities have some of the worst health outcomes in England, with low life expectancy and high rates of many major diseases. While coastal communities are not all the same, many share similar characteristics, which should help in developing some common policy responses. Fishing or port communities such as mine have particular challenges, and a national strategy informed by those common experiences will help reduce health inequalities in those areas. For example, many coastal communities were created around a single industry that has since moved on, meaning that work can often be scarce or seasonal.

New Developments: Unadopted Roads and Public Amenities

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 13th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Member on bringing this debate forward. What he is explaining happens round my way regularly. It is a scandal when hard-working people put all their life savings into a new-build home and then find that the estate’s roads are not even completed. The Department for Infrastructure back home is unwilling to take over the work, so the only way forward is through maintenance fees, and they rise every year. Does the hon. Member agree that the Government and the Minister, who is always very responsive to our requests, should bring forward clear guidance, for all the regions of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, that maintenance fees must be kept to the bare minimum?

[Alistair Strathern]

Absolutely. The situation that the hon. Member highlights is far too common across every part of the United Kingdom. It is really important that the Government drive forward an ambitious solution that tackles all the issues that he has set out.

Homeowners on average pay £350 in maintenance fees. That is a significant sum of money, on top of their council tax bill, and fees often run to much more than that. I have had correspondence from residents who have been paying close to £1,000 in fees. That is exacerbated by the fact that the relationship with the management companies is often structured in a way that inflates the costs that have to be paid. We have heard examples of constituents having to pay up to £200 simply to have a lightbulb fixed on a street lamp, and some estates have been subdivided to the point where the biggest part of their bill each year is simply for having the accounts audited of a management company to which they do not want to be on the hook. They are being hit in the wallet, week in, week out, by fees that simply cannot be justified by the quality of the service that they are receiving. That is making them poorer not just in their wallet, but in their pride of place. This lack of accountability is not just inflating costs but leading to very poor service.

--- Later in debate ---

[Matthew Pennycook]

I would refer the hon. Gentleman in the first instance to that CMA house building report, which says very clearly that a twin-track approach is needed. We need common adoptable standards. Only at the point that we have common standards can we force local authorities to adopt. I understand, as I know many hon. Members do, the dilemma that local authorities can face when they have substandard amenities and are asked to adopt them and incur all the costs of bringing them up to the necessary standard, as well as the cost of their ongoing maintenance.

[Jim Shannon]

The Minister probably know what my question is going to be before I have even asked it: will he share his ideas and his conclusions on the way forward with the relevant Minister back home? If the Minister has a way of doing it better, we need to know it as well.

[Matthew Pennycook]

I will happily direct my counterpart in Northern Ireland to the Government’s response when we publish it in due course, having analysed those two consultations.

Where private arrangements exist, they must be transparent and properly regulated. If residents are expected to pay for services, they must be able to see and scrutinise what they are paying for and to access effective routes to redress. We must, of course, ensure that any reforms taken forward work in practise across different types of development and support effective long-term stewardship. But we also have to avoid unintended consequences—for example, implementing measures that would reduce overall housing delivery or that simply shift costs in ways that do not ultimately benefit homeowners.

Alongside the consultations I have referenced, we are bringing forward measures to help those on existing unadopted housing estates, including the removal of draconian enforcement practices that can cause real anxiety for homeowners. Through the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, which was published in draft in January and is obviously mentioned in substantive terms in the King’s Speech today, we intend to repeal sections 121 and 122 of the Law of Property Act 1925— a 100-year-old law—in order to bring arrears collection into the modern era.

The Bill also strengthens safeguards around enforcement, including requiring notice before enforcement action can commence. We are acting to ensure that enforcement mechanisms are fair and proportionate, and that people are not faced with undue threats or escalating penalties in relation to their home. In addition, we are sponsoring a Law Commission project to consider longer-term legal frameworks so that residents could be given greater control over the management of their estates. I really do think—alongside the consumer protections that are the short-term answer to some of those unfair charges being levelled, and looking at how, in the long term, we end the prevalence of these arrangements—that control is the vital third leg of that stool, giving residents in such situations control. I know that is what the private Member’s Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin seeks to address.

We are also considering what further steps we can take to strengthen the regulation of property agents because the quality and conduct of the managing agent can make a profound difference to residents’ experience, particularly in respect of communication, responsiveness and the handling of disputes.

This issue also engages the responsibilities of other Departments, including the Department for Transport and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Residents do not experience these matters in departmental silos. A road that is not adopted affects safety and accessibility; poorly managed drainage affects flood risk and local environmental quality; and under-maintained public spaces affect community wellbeing and pride in place.

Concerning roads specifically, alongside our consultation, the Department for Transport has commissioned independent research by Ipsos UK into the barriers to road adoption. This will help to ensure that we have a clearer evidence base about what is preventing adoption in practice, whether it be issues of technical standards, inspection and certification processes, funding and commuted sums, long-term liability, or the interaction between planning consents and highways agreements.

That work will help inform my Department’s thinking about next steps, including how we can support local highways authorities and ensure that the system encourages timely adoption where that is the appropriate outcome. In parallel, a Future Homes Hub project is under way that is helping my Department to engage with industry, local government and others on quality, standards and delivery. Ensuring that new estates come with well-designed, durable and maintainable infrastructure is an integral part of building the high-quality places that communities expect.

Before I conclude, I want to briefly mention transparency. It is important to recognise that this debate is not one only about one type of amenity; it is about the whole public realm on new estates—as has been mentioned, the play areas, open spaces, water features, attenuation ponds, sustainable drainage, street lighting, verges, footpaths and the smaller pieces of infrastructure that, taken together, determine whether a development feels like a coherent community. When those amenities are not properly completed, or when their long-term upkeep is not clearly and fairly arranged, residents can feel that the place they were promised has not been delivered. That is why transparency at the point of sale matters so much.

People are making the biggest financial commitment of their lives in most cases. They should be able to understand in plain terms what is intended to be adopted, what will remain private, what services will be provided, how charges will be set, what protections exist if standards slip and what happens if the original developer is no longer on the scene. Certainty and predictability are not luxuries—they are essential.

We know some that private management arrangements can work well, particularly where there is a clear resident-focused governance model and robust oversight, but where such arrangements are used, it is vital that residents are not left exposed to opaque fees, poor service or enforcement measures that feel disproportionate. That is precisely why our reform programme spans both the prevention of poor outcomes, by reducing the creation of problematic unadopted estates, and the strengthening of protections and accountability where those arrangements remain.

In conclusion, the Government recognise the strength of feeling on this issue, and the very real impact that current practice is having on homeowners. We are acting through the two consultations that concluded in March, the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill, the implementation of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024, our sponsorship of the Law Commission’s project, which I just mentioned, and our ongoing efforts to strengthen the regulation of property agents. I look forward to continuing to engage with my hon. Friend and other hon. Members from across the House as this work progresses, so that we can deliver a system that is clearer for consumers, fairer in practice, and better at ensuring that the places we build come with the adopted, well maintained amenities that residents rightly expect.

Question put and agreed to.

Fire and Rescue Services: Funding

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Matt Vickers]

I am sure that the hon. Lady would also recognise that the situation is getting worse, not better. Across the country, despite the fact that we are paying record levels of tax, our fire services are under pressure. We might want to talk about the history of it, but I want to talk about what will happen in my community in the coming months, as the Government make hay with this horrendous settlement that could see the number of firefighters in my community reduced. That is why I am here today.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Just three weeks ago, there was a massive fire at Corries farm outside Newtownards. The response of fire service personnel was absolutely excellent, but the issue was access to water pressure, which there is always less of in rural communities. One solution is to have a water tanker in each district, but that means capital expenditure. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that a new look is needed at the response to fires in rural areas?

[Matt Vickers]

The hon. Gentleman is entirely right. Ensuring that we have the right capabilities and resources to respond in rural communities often requires technology and capital investment. It is important to put that into the mix as we see what the funding settlement will look like.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon]

I should have made this point earlier; I do not think it has been mentioned. Back home in Northern Ireland, we have an issue with gorse fires in the mountains. We had two massive fires just last weekend. Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that with the summer and what we hope will be hot weather comes the threat of gorse fires and the loss of peatland and farmland? Should that not be motivating the Minister and the Government to respond positively?

[Matt Vickers]

Certainly there are the pressures of the summer and the consequences for rural communities. Fire authorities across the country are also having to make incredibly tough decisions about what they resource and the people they can employ. It is a pressure point that is moving at a hell of a pace and we need a quick response to the challenge.

I hope the Minister will be able to provide answers and reassurance on some of the points that people have raised. What are the Government planning to do to properly support Cleveland and Durham fire brigades and deal with their significant financial shortfalls? How will the Minister and the Government fix the fair funding formula to ensure that communities such as mine in Stockton and those across Teesside are treated fairly?

If we fail to fund our fire services properly, we put lives at risk. Firefighters in our communities have raised the alarm repeatedly and their concerns cannot be ignored. The service responsible for protecting us is being asked to do too much with too little. I urge the Minister to carefully consider the points that have been raised, and to work with colleagues to deliver a financial settlement that is fair, forward looking and reflective of the unique challenges faced by Cleveland and Durham fire brigades. I urge her to listen to firefighters, fire chiefs and local residents in communities who are deeply concerned, to invest in our fire services and to keep us all safe.