National Planning Policy Framework

John Hayes Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Westminster Hall

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

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the impact of changes to the National Planning Policy Framework.

I am pleased to see you in the Chair, Sir Desmond. I am grateful for the time to introduce this debate on the impact of the changes to the national planning policy framework. I called for this debate following a decision affecting the village of Yatton in the north of the Wells and Mendip Hills constituency, with 190 homes set to be built on a site known as Rectory Farm, Yatton Batch. Yatton Batch is in flood zone 3a, which is the highest level of risk, according to the Environment Agency. The consequences of this decision affect not just the people of Yatton, as I believe it sets a precedent for every other community living with flood risk across this country.

I will give the Minister some context to the geography of my constituency, which matters enormously. Wells and Mendip Hills falls roughly in two parts. One part comprises the limestone Mendip hills and the rest, the majority of the constituency, is wetlands and coastal plains: the Somerset levels and the North Somerset levels. Fifty-one per cent of my constituency is less than 20 metres above sea level.

I will send the Minister a map, on which he will see that the Somerset levels are a man-made landscape. The monks, led by the Abbot of Glastonbury, drained the land hundreds of years ago by digging what locally we call “rhynes”, which is why the map shows the waterways as straight lines in my part of the world. It does not take a PhD in geography to work out that low-lying coastal wetlands are prone to flooding. It has taken centuries of careful management and regular maintenance of the local waterways to keep this land habitable at all.

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

On the subject of keeping land habitable, the hon. Lady will be familiar with the fact that the Lincolnshire fens, and particularly South Holland and The Deepings, are entirely flat, without even the undulation equivalent to the Mendip hills. Our land is drained, and much of it is reclaimed from the sea, yet there are perpetual attempts to put critical infrastructure on it, including solar, pylons and suchlike. That is incompatible, and those things cannot be reconciled. I entirely endorse what the hon. Lady says about the character of the land, its propensity to flood and what we should do with it.

[Tessa Munt]

I take the right hon. Gentleman’s point. I will suggest to the Minister that, if he wishes to pursue a policy of building on land that will almost certainly flood, we need to put those buildings on stilts. That is not impossible, and there is certainly one very beautiful house on the levels that sits on stilts.

Yatton, the village subject to the decision, sits within the North Somerset levels, barely 2 km from the Bristol channel. On Friday 12 June, the High Court handed down its judgment permitting the development of 190 homes in this flood-prone area, on a site that failed the flood risk sequential test. The judgment follows the NPPF exactly, as the judge had to, and prioritised building homes over protection from flooding. It imperils not only the new homes—I should explain that the judge said that homeowners threatened by flooding had sufficient time to vacate their houses before the floodwater reached them—but the homes and businesses in and around the Yatton site. The impact of flooding does not disappear just because people can get away safely. This is about property as well as people. The damage to wellbeing and mental health takes its toll on those affected, as does the damage to property, which can take months and sometimes years to remedy and replace.

I would not want the Minister to think that this is a case of nimbyism and anti-development sentiment by those in rural areas. My Lib Dem colleagues and I agree with the Government’s desire to meet the huge need for housing across the country. There are 12,800 people on the Homefinder list in Somerset, which covers 66% of my patch, and a similar proportion on the North Somerset list.

I am chair of the all-party parliamentary group on flooding and flooded communities. Many of our discussions centre on the Flood Re scheme, which was a great initiative that meant insurers could cover flooding claims and the premiums for home insurance in high flood risk areas were not astronomical. The scheme comes to an end in 2039, and the Government have been very clear that it will not be extended. As set out in legislation, homes built after 2009 are not covered by the scheme. As we get closer to that 2039 date, more and more homes built in high flood risk areas are not covered by the scheme and so risk becoming uninsurable and consequently unmortgageable. The consequences for developers and those who have already bought the homes will be awful. And the Yatton decision compounds the problems with the NPPF in allowing the need for home building to override common sense.

To press the point, it is very likely that residents of new homes built on floodplains, such as those in Yatton, will face flooding damage in the coming years. Not only will they not be able to make an insurance claim, but any new buyers will likely struggle to access a mortgage. Residents may well end up trapped, unable to sell a home that might cost them thousands of pounds in repairs every winter. The Minister knows the weather experts say that what we are experiencing now is the most stable weather that we are ever going to see.

I mentioned that the current neighbours would also be affected due to the simple fact that the floodwater must go somewhere. If developers choose to build up the land on which they wish to develop, the floodwater may well not hit those homes precisely, but will cause the existing homes and businesses in the area to be flooded more greatly. I have a lovely set of photographs of the land I am speaking about, which I will send to the Minister, showing exactly how it floods every year.

High Streets

John Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir John Hayes (in the Chair)]

I will call Gregory Campbell to move the motion; I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they can make a speech only with the prior permission of the Member in charge and of the Minister. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the future of high streets.

When I was considering a title for this debate, I toyed with “High streets: a future?” or “High streets: is there a future?”, but I settled on something more neutral. We had a debate on a similar topic this morning in which many of us took part, such is the concern in almost every town and city across the United Kingdom.

It is not the case that there is absolute and total dereliction in 100% of town and city centres. Some towns and cities are getting by, but they are the exception, not the rule. Many high streets, unfortunately, have a poor look. In some town centres that I know of, there are shops that have been empty for so long that people have received small grants to paint them as if they were occupied. There is a door front, a window, curtains and some flowers painted to make a passer-by who does not look too closely think that it is an occupied dwelling, when in fact it is an empty shop and has been so for a number of years.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Campbell]

Yes, I agree. Edge-of-town and out-of-town retailers have the advantage in one sense, while the huge multinational online retailers have the advantage in another sense—and they have both put our high streets at a major disadvantage.

I move on to some of the positive contributions that have been made. In Northern Ireland, our own Department for Communities has a Shaping Sustainable Places programme under my colleague Gordon Lyons, the Minister for Communities. That draws together a range of Departments to try to revitalise town centres and co-ordinate more closely on how that can best be sustainably delivered for the future.

Here in Westminster, along with colleagues, I have been pressing the Government for the past 12 to 18 months to complete the future towns fund, as they now have. As a result, Londonderry and Coleraine—one is entirely in my constituency and the other is partially in it—will get £2 million per year over the next 10 years. That is progress and something of a start, but it must become part of a co-ordinated approach that includes other Departments and some of the local councils that have been mentioned, to radically reassess where we take town councils in the future.

I hope the Minister will agree that discussions are needed between devolved Ministers and their Departments on whether an agreement can be reached about a pilot scheme in the English regions, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, to see how to transform town and city centre landscapes—not just over the next year or two, but the next decade or two. If the decline continues, it might not be me back here in 10 years’ time—I probably will not be, or anywhere else for that matter—but someone will be, saying, “When are we going to do something to transform and revitalise our town and city centres?” We need a radical overhaul. I hope the Minister responds positively so that various Government Departments and devolved institutions can co-ordinate to deliver the tangible change that people want.

[Sir John Hayes (in the Chair)]

I must point out that this is our second debate on this subject on the same day, in the same place and with the same Minister, whom I invite to respond. You will say something like what you said earlier, I guess.

High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts

John Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Bradley Thomas]

I will make a tad of progress, if I can.

The Office for National Statistics has reported that in 2025 there were 530,000 shoplifting offences, an increase of 20% on the previous year. That is the highest figure on record, and it does not take into account crimes that are not reported because there is a general malaise or a suspicion that they will not be investigated. I read a similar stat from public authorities that only 50% of shopkeepers report crime, while a staggering 55% of reported cases are closed without a suspect ever having been identified. That is despite retailers having spent £300 million on measures such as security, CCTV and facial recognition to mitigate the effects of shoplifting.

It is believed that up to one half of vape shops and a large proportion of American candy stores have ties to organised crime. The scale of the problem is unquestionable; we all recognise it. Over the past 12 months, 3,600 shops have had illegal goods seized, and it is estimated by the National Crime Agency that £1 billion of criminal cash is laundered through high street retail. The scale of the problem is undeniable, which brings me to the question of what we can do about it.

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

rose—

[Bradley Thomas]

I am genuinely interested in hearing what fellow Members have to say, so before I continue I will give way to my right hon. Friend.

[Sir John Hayes]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing this debate to Westminster Hall and for his interest in what I am about to say. The Government took powers under the Tobacco and Vapes Act 2026 to license these kinds of premises, but there is real uncertainty—I have had correspondence with the previous Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley (Yvette Cooper)—about the Government’s application of the new powers. I am sure that my hon. Friend will join me in calling for the Government to get their act together and clamp down on these shops.

[Bradley Thomas]

My right hon. Friend is absolutely correct. Much greater focus on tackling these issues is needed from all arms of the state, national and local, including arm’s length bodies, law enforcement and investigation. For far too long, a fragmented approach has allowed the problem to grow: it has swelled, not declined, in recent years.

The reason this matters is that society has to get the basics right. I am a big believer in the idea that the fundamentals in society slip when we do not collectively enforce the basics. That often starts with pride. As we have seen our high streets hollowed out, we have seen a decline in civic pride across the country. In all our areas, the councils do some things very well, but it is unquestionable that investment in the public realm has declined over the past decade. There are lots of reasons for that, and hon. Members may speak about some of them, but we have to get back to enforcing the basics. I am passionate about the importance of good design, including design codes and good-quality signage and a good-quality aesthetic in the public realm. A lot flows from the degradation that we have seen in recent years.

--- Later in debate ---

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

It is a pleasure to serve under you, Ms Vaz, and to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas), who introduced the debate and said much of what I would have said in his place.

Let me set out the context for a moment or two. We must make a decision about the character of places. People’s sense of place nurtures and nourishes their sense of worth. When we see diminished places, people are diminished alongside them. We have to understand that the decline of high streets is about much more than retail habits; it is about how we comprise community. Community matters because it allows us to deal with the inevitable vicissitudes of human experience. The real issue is what Government can do to nourish and support those communities.

I have some requests for the Minister. The first is to change planning law to limit out-of-town and edge-of-town development. When the life and the livelihoods are sucked out of the centre of places, that inevitably drives people to the extremities of settlements rather than drawing them into the heart of them; consequently, the hearts of our communities are being ripped out.

Secondly, the Government need to crack down on the illegal shops that now pervade much of our kingdom, including South Holland and The Deepings, and to reinforce the powers of local councils to close such shops when they are trading illegally, as many certainly are.

Thirdly, we can re-dignify our town centres. In my time representing my constituency, much of the footprint of government has been removed. Let us reopen closed magistrates courts and local tax offices. Let us see the footprint of government informing and dignifying so much of our country. Things like that, where the Government can take proactive steps to change the character of areas, would make a huge difference to regenerating communities and giving health again to high streets.

--- Later in debate ---

[Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I welcome the new Minister to her place; I know that she has a background in these issues, and I look forward to working with her in the weeks, months or years ahead. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this debate. He is a great champion for his community. This issue is close to his heart, and given his previous career in local government he is very knowledgeable about it.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. My hon. Friend mentioned a range of topics, which shows how much he is involved in his constituency and community, ranging from flaws in the banking hub criteria to the aesthetics of our high streets. I know that that comes from his time as leader of a local authority. I am also his Whip; after this morning, he can be guaranteed a good mention in dispatches later.

We have heard some entertaining and knowledgeable speeches from my colleagues. My hon. Friends the Members for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune), for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson), for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth) and for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) and my right hon. Friends the Members for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) and for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) have shown their in-depth knowledge of the challenges in their constituencies.

Traditionally, high streets have been seen as indicators of the health of our economy, with the British Retail Consortium calculating that retail generates nearly £500 billion in annual sales and nearly 3 million jobs. According to the Office for National Statistics, around 4.4 million people work in businesses located on British high streets, which represents roughly 14% of all employment in the UK.

The contribution of the sector to the UK economy is vital to any Government seeking economic growth, especially regionally driven growth, which I have reason to believe the incoming Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), is enthusiastic about. This growth will be much better able to sustain communities and help them thrive. It will empower local people, business owners and decision makers to improve the areas they know and love better than any centrally planned project ever could.

As I have said in previous debates, however, the high street is more than a place where cash, services and goods change hands. It is at the heart of our communities—a place where people can come together to catch up over a coffee or a beer, have a natter in the nail bar or have a quiet read in the local bookshop. The value of our high streets cannot be quantified by simple sums of money, or by the business rates or council tax that they generate for the Treasury and local government. They are so much more than that.

As has been outlined this morning, however, there is a sad story of decline on our high streets. Many factors explain that, and colleagues from across the House have touched on many of those, including the rise of online shopping, cost of living pressures, economic stagnation, high taxes on businesses, planning issues, poor local transport links and stretched public services. There are many causes of the problem, and many people lose out from dying high streets.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is the impact on young people. Retail has always been one of the UK’s great entry-level employers. It has given generations of young people their first job, taught customer services skills, teamwork and responsibility, and provided a pathway into management and business ownership. As Members will be aware following the publication of Alan Milburn’s report, youth unemployment stands at a staggering 16.2%—an increase of almost two percentage points on last year; at the same time, youth employment has fallen. More than 3 million 16 to 24-year-olds across the country are unemployed and economically inactive.

We should ask ourselves a simple question: how many of those young people have been pushed out of work, or denied work in the first place, by the continuing decline of our high streets? Increases to the minimum wage, the surging cost of employer national insurance contributions and council tax hikes are just a few of the burdens heaped on to businesses, which have been pushed to the wire. In 2024 alone, more than 13,000 high street stores closed, and over the last two years the retail sector has lost almost 250,000 jobs. Every shop that closes represents not just another empty unit but another lost opportunity for someone hoping to take their first step into employment. If we genuinely care about tackling economic inactivity, we cannot ignore what is happening in our town centres and high streets.

The picture is no better for Britain’s pubs. At this point, I had better declare an interest: I like being in pubs quite a lot. Changes to employer national insurance contributions have added around £7,200 a year to the wage bill of the average pub, which employs eight people. Layer on top of that business rate reforms, which were presented as a lifeline but for many businesses have proved to be anything but, and it becomes easy to understand why so many publicans are questioning whether they can continue. The consequences are stark: across Britain, two pubs close every day.

At the 2024 autumn Budget, the Chancellor promised to “permanently lower” business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses, telling Parliament that this would help to level the playing field for our high streets. That ambition was welcome, but when the detail emerged many businesses concluded that the reforms would do the opposite. Rather than providing certainty, the changes have raised serious concerns that many larger retailers and hospitality businesses—the so-called anchor tenants that attract shoppers to our town centres—could face significantly higher costs. Those businesses generate footfall for everyone else. When a department store, a supermarket, a major retailer or a large hospitality venue closes, it is not just the business itself that suffers; small independent retailers, cafés and local shops lose passing trade.

[Sir John Hayes]

The Government need to know when to step back and when to step forward. They need to step back by reducing the costs that my hon. Friend has set out, and they need to step forward by restricting where businesses can be located. The Government should be obliging businesses to reinvest in the high street.

[Paul Holmes]

I agree entirely with my right hon. Friend. That is something that this Labour Government have never got to grips with.

Businesses already operating on tight margins face £40 billion of tax rises, including substantial increases in national insurance contributions, which will place further strain on them. I am delighted that colleagues on the Opposition Benches mentioned the Leader of the Opposition’s pledge to abolish business rates for most high street businesses.

Alongside the economic challenges facing our high streets, we must also confront an uncomfortable truth, which many Members have mentioned: our constituents are increasingly concerned that some high street premises are being used not as genuine businesses but as vehicles for tax evasion, money laundering and organised crime. Those concerns are frequently raised in relation to certain cash-intensive businesses, including some barber shops, nail salons, mini-marts and vape shops. The overwhelming majority of those businesses are of course honest, hard-working enterprises that serve their communities and deserve our support, but the ones that are not undermine legitimate traders, distort competition and damage public confidence in our town centres.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes), for his warm words welcoming me to my place. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this important debate, and I thank all Members for their passionate contributions, reflecting their commitment to their local high streets and to the people they represent.

High streets are integral to our communities. They are where people work, shop and spend time together. At their best, they are vibrant and welcoming places, supporting local communities and building pride in place. However, as Members have articulated, too many high streets face real challenges, from changing consumer habits to vacant units and declining footfall. In some areas, those challenges are compounded by the rise of businesses used as fronts for criminal activity. The Government are determined to address both sides of the challenge: to support regeneration and renewal, while tackling the unlawful activity that undermines all our high streets.

Thriving high streets do not just happen by accident. They require investment over a long period, planning, and a clear vision for the future—backed, crucially, by local leaders with powers to protect their towns and high streets. I understand that well; having served as a council leader, I know how passionate debates about high streets can become. Later this year, the Government will publish a cross-Government high street strategy, because saving our high streets needs a cross-Government approach. The strategy will be backed by £300 million to support the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors— I was pleased to meet with representatives of the hospitality sector last week—and to help them to reimagine the role of the high street in modern Britain.

[Sir John Hayes]

To do that, we must reimagine the role of Government. The Government need to stop their preoccupation with driving people online. How wonderful it would be if the Government suddenly said, “You can no longer do this online. You must do it face to face.” Those personal interactions, with all their civilities and courtesies, make up the tapestry of civilised life.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I do not disagree with the right hon. Member. We have seen the impact of online retail, and I think it would be misleading to say that we are about to see its disappearance. Instead, we have an obligation to think about what our high streets might look like in the future. Local communities want to be able to shape their high streets. The partnership between a local authority, businesses and residents can shape future high streets, not least through the commitment to densification—an important point made by a number of Members today.

--- Later in debate ---

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank the hon. Member for that important point. I recognise how passionate people are about that. The NPPF does set out some of that, but the truth is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Having been a council leader, I know how challenging that can be. It is important that the public realm is shaped by local people. The best examples are where there is co-production and co-operation between local partners, residents and businesses.

[Sir John Hayes]

Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder. As Keats said, beauty is truth, truth beauty. That truth is about recognising that the aesthetic of a place informs people’s association with it. All my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) is asking is for design codes to have statutory force and not simply be guidance, which is not enough.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I acknowledge that call, and I believe the NPPF goes some way towards doing it. I understand there may be gaps; Government will always be willing to look at that and work with the Local Government Association, for example, which supplies some of that guidance. Whether a statutory response is appropriate is yet to be debated. I am confident that the NPPF provides what is necessary. I do accept the point that the public realm is a key part of regenerating our high streets and town centres.

On the points about organised crime and illegal activity, I assure hon. Members that the Government recognise that we will not see high street regeneration or thriving town centres without tackling that head-on. Regardless of how many functions we devolve and high streets we regenerate, they simply will not thrive if illegal businesses are left to take hold. I recognise the concerns raised by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley, that too many high street premises are being used as fronts for organised crime, facilitating money laundering, tax evasion, illegal working and the sale of illicit goods.

Although opinions may differ on what looks nice in relation to design codes, nobody wants to see illegal activity on our high streets and in our town centres. The Government have announced £30 million of investment over three years to target those businesses and crack down on the corrupt networks operating on our high streets. A sum of £20 million to strengthen national co-ordination and local enforcement will make a difference, which we are seeing already, with hundreds of so-called businesses conducting illegal activity targeted, visits to thousands of premises, hundreds of arrests and the seizure of millions of criminal proceeds.

We are strengthening the role of trading standards, which has been left for too long without the required resources, with £6 million to boost its capacity in priority areas. I recognise trading standards is still under pressure, and local government representatives frequently raise the subject with me. Alongside enforcement, we are strengthening powers to act quickly and effectively. I hear too often that local authorities want to take power but feel restricted. We are extending and reviewing closure powers, including consulting on increasing the maximum duration of closure orders to 12 months.

Water Supply and Housing Targets: West Kent

John Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir John Hayes (in the Chair)]

Tom Tugendhat will move the motion and the Minister will respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge and the Minister. I have had notice that one Member will intervene, which is fine. Unfortunately there will not be an opportunity, Tom, to wind up. That is the custom in these short debates.

[Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered water supply and housing targets in west Kent.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John—not for the first time or, I certainly hope, the last. What is less pleasurable is having no water coming out of your taps. Sadly, that could be the reality for more than 13,000 new homes in Tonbridge and Malling if the Government get their way. Planning decisions in the community are, I think we would all agree, best left to local councillors. After all, it is right that those elected at the most local level have responsibility for shaping the place they live in and represent. However, this Government’s planning policies are taking us away from that principle.

Since the general election, we have seen mandatory housing targets reintroduced and increased enormously. They are up by 34% in Tonbridge and Malling and by 63% in Sevenoaks district. Then, of course, there is the grey-belt policy. I have been getting used to Green party and Labour MPs going through the voting Lobbies and making things easier for development to merge towns and villages and create one single, homogeneous, blended whole and for development on previously protected grey-belt land. However, water seems not to have been considered. There are many aspects of water locally that I could focus on, including the excellent work done in Edenbridge on water quality by NEDRA—the New Edenbridge District Residents’ Association—but in the interests of time, I will focus my comments today on water supply only.

This is now a very salient issue for those of us in west Kent. Although Tunbridge Wells has been the worst affected, towns and villages such as Tonbridge, Edenbridge and across the north downs have lost water supply this winter and last winter. Why is that? It is because there is not enough water in the system to supply houses in our area. I am aware that the Water Industry Act 1991 in effect places a legal requirement on water suppliers to ensure that running water appears when the tap is turned on. Although South East Water is not very good at doing that right now, we also need to focus on the future. That means asking fundamental questions. Where is the water—now and in the future? Do housing targets accurately reflect the water infrastructure in west Kent?

I will focus on two authorities in the area that I represent: Tonbridge and Malling borough council and Sevenoaks district council. I emphasise to the Minister that they are two of the very best run councils in the whole country and have been for a number of years. We are very lucky to have brilliant people at both councils, and both are trying to do the right thing for future development and adopt a local plan. In both cases, however, that has been delayed from 2024 because of the Government changing planning policy. It is not the fault of either council that they do not have an adopted local plan; that is because of tinkering and meddling by the Government and, historically, the Planning Inspectorate.

Temporary Accommodation: Out of Area Placements

John Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 20th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir John Hayes (in the Chair)]

I will call Josh Babarinde to move the motion, and then call the Minister to respond. Other Members may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge. There will not be an opportunity to wind up, sadly, as it is only a half-hour debate.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD) [R]]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered out of area placements in temporary accommodation.

Thank you so much, Sir John; it is great to serve under your chairship. I have deliberately avoided the green suit that I know is not your favourite from my wardrobe, so I hope that you will afford me good grace in this debate. [Laughter.]

[Sir John Hayes (in the Chair)]

It is a private joke, don’t worry!

[Josh Babarinde]

I am grateful for the opportunity to spotlight the challenges faced by people experiencing homelessness who are placed by their local authorities into temporary accommodation outside their local authority areas.

In many cases, out of area placements are both necessary and an appropriate means to safeguard vulnerable individuals. A clear example is survivors of domestic abuse, who may be forced to relocate to ensure their own safety. But too often, for placing authorities, “out of area” becomes shorthand for “out of sight and out of mind”. A scandal has unfolded across our country, in which homeless people are dumped from one place to another without the proper assistance that they need to address the causes of their homelessness, or other support that could help to get them back on their feet.

Local Government Finance

John Hayes Excerpts

Wednesday 5th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jim McMahon]

The Deputy Prime Minister and I, like many others in this House, have local government in our blood—we are proud public servants. We know what a difference the sector makes every day to millions of people across this country, and how much stronger local government, working in genuine partnership with central Government, can achieve to change lives. I thank the millions of dedicated public servants who work in and for the sector for all their efforts to deliver more than 800 services that local people rely on.

We know it has been a difficult few years, but this statement is an important step towards rebuilding the foundations of local government, ready to meet the scale of the challenge ahead so that we can rebuild our country together as part of our plan for change. That is why I take the responsibility of leading the Government’s work to rebuild the sector with the seriousness and urgency that is, quite frankly, long overdue.

Today, I will set out funding for local authorities in England for the coming year through the final local government finance settlement. Before I do, I want to say that the Government are grateful to all those who contributed to the consultation on the provisional settlement, which attracted 227 responses, including more than 45 from Members of this House.

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

I am extremely grateful to the Minister for giving way, and I appreciate much of what he has already said on the difficulties and challenges local government faces, and the Government’s recognition of that. Part of the consultation feedback he will have had is on the local authorities that have to fund drainage, such as South Holland, in my constituency, and many others. There is a real problem here, because drainage is not adequately funded through the system; it does require an extra grant, in my judgment, to those local authorities. Will he look at this issue, and will he meet me and others to discuss it further, should that be helpful?

[Jim McMahon]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question, and assure him that it is an issue we are acutely aware of. The disproportionate burden that drainage places on small district councils is quite a challenge. We met representatives from a number of district councils to talk about the internal drainage board levy system, and, as an interim measure—in the end, I think we do need a more fundamental review of how it is paid for—we have increased the levy grant by £2 million to £5 million, so we are beginning to get there. However, I agree with the right hon. Gentleman entirely: we do need a long-term solution to that. He has my commitment that we will find a way through that as we begin the wider reforms later on.

As the Chancellor said last week, this plan will be achieved first and foremost through growth, which will be driven by empowered local leaders working in partnership with local communities and local businesses; those who have skin in the game are now on the playing field, not confined to the terraces as spectators. This new approach has to start with strong and empowered local government, because whether we are talking about raising living standards, delivering 1.5 million new homes and vital infrastructure, getting our NHS and social care system back on its feet or creating good jobs and strong communities, it all comes back to local councils delivering for local communities.

Indeed, we cannot deliver on the national renewal that working people deserve without grassroots government leading the charge, which means resetting our relationship with local leaders and rebuilding the foundations from scratch. It means ditching the slogans and gimmicks in favour of a determination to get the basics right, delivering decent local services that people can begin to rely on once more.

After 14 years of neglect and decline, that will be easier said than done, and, because of the scale of the challenge, it will take more than six months to fix. But be clear: we have changed course. The work has begun with determination and with pace. Councils of all political stripes are feeling the strain, and it will be a long, hard road to get them back to full fitness. This final settlement marks an important milestone on that journey, as we finally turn the page on chaos, austerity and 14 long years of managed decline.

In that spirit, the settlement addresses the financial crisis facing councils head on, moving away from bidding wars for wasteful competitive funding pots and towards core, stable multi-year financial settlements.

Building Homes

John Hayes Excerpts

Thursday 12th December 2024 Commons Chamber

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

The hon. Gentleman is a thoughtful and diligent Minister who shares my disdain for the identikit, soulless, ubiquitous housing estates that have been built during his lifetime and mine. I welcome the NPPF’s commitment to design codes that provide

“a local framework for creating beautiful and distinctive places”.

Will he write to every local authority to make it clear that design is a key planning determinant, and is absolutely salient? Will he also write to the Planning Inspectorate to ensure that, when local authorities turn down an application on the basis of poor design, the inspectorate will back them up?

[Matthew Pennycook]

Well-designed places remain at the heart of planning policy; as the right hon. Gentleman will know, an entire chapter of the NPPF remains devoted to well-designed places. The changes we are making to the presumption today will ensure that when it comes to national policy on design, those expectations need to hold in the balance of decisions that the Planning Inspectorate makes. There is much more we can do outside of policy. In the new year, my Department will bring forward updates to the national design guide and national model design code. As part of those changes, we will make clear our expectations about what local authorities can do to improve the quality of design.

Building Homes

John Hayes Excerpts

Tuesday 30th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Angela Rayner]

I welcome my hon. Friend to her place. It will be a challenge, but we are desperate to try to meet that challenge as quickly as we can. That is why we are moving at pace with the consultation exercise we have put forward today, which we will do as quickly as we can, so that we can have the affordable and social housing, the green spaces and the infrastructure that people desperately need.

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

I welcome you to the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I welcome the Secretary of State to her new role. I appreciate that she will not have time today to wax lyrical about her vision of aesthetics or to expand at length on the relationship between truth and beauty. Nevertheless, given the welcome reference in her announcement to proportionality and to the link between the existing built environment and the scale of development, will she also take into account the character and style of development? She may know that I have served on the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission and in the Office for Place. Will she agree to meet the Office for Place to discuss beauty? She will know that the wealthy can always live in beautiful places and in beautiful homes, but people from council houses—from where she and I originate—deserve their chance to know, to sense and to see beauty.

[Angela Rayner]

I absolutely agree with everything the right hon. Gentleman says. The Minister of State, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook), will shortly meet all the stakeholders, and I think he has a meeting in the coming days with those the right hon. Gentleman just mentioned. I would love to work with him to make sure that we build the houses that people deserve. Whether it is social, affordable or any other housing, it should be beautiful and should have character and style, and we are determined to make that happen.

Easter and Christian Culture

John Hayes Excerpts

Thursday 21st March 2024 Westminster Hall

[Nick Fletcher]

My hon. Friend said in 30 seconds what has taken me 18 minutes to say, so I thank him for his contribution. He is completely right.

As I was saying, I am sure there must be a way the Department can do much more to promote faith and family and our Christian heritage, values and way of life; encourage the country’s people to look out for each other instead of focusing inwards; embrace a culture of forgiveness and love for all our neighbours; and lead the nation to speak proudly of its past. The formidable Douglas Murray once urged people to have “an attitude of gratitude”. A nation that knows the boundaries of right and wrong sets them in stone so that we all know where we are and that no means no, not maybe, especially when speaking to and guiding our young. That is a nation where opportunity is available to all for the better of all. I want a nation’s people that believes what CS Lewis once stated:

“Aim at Heaven and you will get Earth ‘thrown in’: aim at Earth and you will get neither.”

Can we not do all that while letting those who have called our shores home enjoy their culture, too? I think we can and we should.

If our Christian culture with its faith and families shines like the beacon of hope that it should, the ideologies and desires that are often negative will be starved of oxygen and will fall away one by one. The new people we welcome will see our culture and maybe even want to be a part of it, too.

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

I endorse my hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) in congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Don Valley (Nick Fletcher) on securing this debate. He is articulating the fact that the most corrosive force in our country now is nihilism and the moral relativism associated with it. We hear people speaking not of truth, but of their truth, as though truth could be negotiated. But truth cannot be negotiated; it is an absolute, and is embodied in the message of Christianity.

Draft Higher-Risk Buildings (Keeping and Provision of Information etc.) (England) Regulations 2023

John Hayes Excerpts

Wednesday 13th December 2023 General Committees

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

I have a simple question that this excellent Minister will be able to address, but before he does, may I say that he has done a very good job on this issue, as was acknowledged by the Opposition? That needs to be put on record. He is an excellent Minister; I have had personal dealings with him on other subjects, and I know that he always responds to colleagues with diligence and alacrity. More than that, he listens, and acts when he has listened, so I thank him very much.

I have a technical question; I do not want him to think I am a soft touch, given what I have just said about him. Interestingly, schedule 1 sets out clearly responsibilities in respect of resident engagement, and schedule 2 sets out in considerably more detail information that needs to be provided. I want to be clear about new or potential residents. When they are offered a place in a block, how much are they told ahead of the game? My slight concern is that people will not necessarily know what they need to. Imagine that they are coming from a way away, and are not familiar with the location or building. What are the mechanisms by which people can know what to expect, and what they are taking on? I am sure that the Minister will have thought about, and will not have any trouble answering my question, particularly given what I said about him earlier.