Budget Resolutions

Rachel Taylor Excerpts

Thursday 27th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sir Mel Stride]

We will come on to why that is the case momentarily.

What has happened to borrowing? One might have thought that the Government would have learned the lesson that ever-increasing borrowing always leads to disaster, but no: there is £11 billion of additional borrowing on average in every year of the forecast. What has that done to living standards? Real household disposable income—the economists’ measure of economic wellbeing —is down in every year of the forecast compared to the forecast in the spring.

The OBR says—the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury will like this one—that real income growth across this forecast will be well below the average of the last decade. So this Government should not point a finger at the last one when it comes to living standards.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

[Sir Mel Stride]

I will in a moment. It is there in black and white in the OBR’s report. The reason for that forecast is £26 billion of additional taxation in 2029-30, and, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury will know, an additional £12 billion of tax take that will occur because of fiscal drag. Those higher inflationary numbers in the forecast are dragging ever more people into paying ever more tax.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Mel Stride]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The income tax threshold freeze—which has been extended for three years, even though the Government briefed that it would probably just be two—means 780,000 more people paying tax for the first time, because the personal allowance will be frozen for longer, and 920,000 people going into the higher rate tax bracket. In fact, by 2029-30, around one in four workers in this country will be in the higher rate tax bracket.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has said that the measure is a clear breach of the Labour party manifesto. The Chancellor herself accepted in the autumn Budget last year, when she said that she would not come forward with the measure, that it would hurt working people. She repeated that yesterday. It is very clear that this is a breach of the Labour party manifesto.

When it comes to young people, we hear that there will be a freeze to the student loan payment thresholds. Young people are already disproportionately impacted by the changes to national insurance, particularly the reduction in the threshold that means that lower-income earners, which include younger people, will be disproportionately impacted by those tax changes.

The Employment Rights Bill, which is coming down the line, will make it far riskier to take younger people—[Interruption.] Government Members should be careful what they wish for. The Labour party speaks a lot about those who are not in employment, education or training, of which there are about 940,000; that Bill will do nothing to improve their life chances. It will make things worse. It will make it more risky to take those people on and employ them.

[Rachel Taylor]

rose—

[Sir Mel Stride]

The hon. Lady has been very patient, so I give way to her.

[Rachel Taylor]

As the right hon. Gentleman seems to care so much about those who are not in education, employment or training, why did he allow 88,000 young people to become NEETs, and is he proud that when he left office, almost 1 million young people were not in any form of employment, education or training? Is this not the worst kind of hypocrisy?

[Sir Mel Stride]

I congratulate the hon. Lady on reading accurately from the Whips’ circular. The Opposition stand by our record—[Interruption.] Absolutely. When we were in government, we were a job-creating machine: there were 4 million more jobs under us than had been there before. When we left on the day of the general election, we had a near-record high level of employment and a near-record low level of unemployment. Unemployment is now at a five-year high—[Interruption.] The Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury shakes his head, but it happens to be true. One of the results of the Budget for young people is that there will continue to be a lost generation of workers.

What about those who want to save, do the right thing and provide for their future in retirement? Should we not be encouraging that? What has the Budget delivered on that front? Salary sacrifice has been savaged, the savings tax has been put up, and the cash ISA has been cut. We are punishing savers. We will see the reverberating effects of those measures for many generations and many years to come.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds West and Pudsey (Rachel Reeves) for delivering a Budget with fairness and action to tackle the cost of living at its core, and one that will make work pay. Having sat through this debate for about eight hours, it is interesting to observe that Members on the Labour Benches are giving a voice to those vulnerable children living in poverty, while those on the Conservative Benches are simply standing up for those who own mansions. That is the difference.

I am pleased to see that around 1,990 children in my constituency of North Warwickshire and Bedworth and nearly half a million children across the country have been lifted out of poverty, and that the degrading rape clause has been removed from child benefit. That will be the biggest change a Government have ever made to child poverty in a Parliament and it is the right thing to do for children. I know that everyone in my area will be pleased to see the £150 off their energy bills too. That is the difference our Labour Government are making to the cost of living for ordinary families.

In a coalfield community such as mine, we carry immense pride in our heritage. Standing up for former mineworkers in North Warwickshire and Bedworth is personal to me. My grandad Bill was a miner at Birch Coppice, and I grew up understanding the dignity, sacrifice and solidarity that defined that way of life. That is why I am delighted that the Government have taken the long-awaited decision to return the British Coal staff superannuation scheme surplus to its members. The last Government allowed that injustice to continue for far too long. I have campaigned tirelessly for that measure, alongside my colleagues who represent coalfield communities and have lobbied hard for the Government to do right by BCSSS members. I am immensely proud that this Government have listened to the voices of my constituents who were impacted by that unfairness.

Earlier this year, I held an event for BCSSS members in my constituency. Ray Sweet, Andy Callow, Don Jennings and others shared with me the years they spent working in and around our mines. I am delighted to be able to tell them that they will finally receive the full pension they worked so hard for. I also met a woman who joined the National Coal Board at 16. She worked for years from 5.30 am to late in the day to ensure mineworkers got paid on time and at the end of their shift. Women like her, who supported the mining industry behind the scenes, have often gone unrecognised and underappreciated. I hope they now feel the recognition they have long been owed and the nation’s gratitude for their work to keep our lights on and our homes warm. I know that for many this comes too late, and I remember them too.

I thank the Chancellor for abolishing the bingo tax. I visited Palace Bingo in Bedworth last week and met the owners, Pete, Donna and Paul, who took over the family business. It was great to see the investment they have made; there are new toilet facilities there has been a total renovation. They provide safe entertainment for hundreds of people every day of the week in Bedworth, and I know how much people in my constituency enjoy a good night out at the bingo, as do I. It is right that they are exempted from bingo tax, and that online gambling pays the price for the harm it causes.

Finally, I have listened carefully to farmers in my constituency. They know that I have passed on their concerns to the Treasury, so I am pleased to hear the Treasury’s small concessions.

I want to reassure the residents of North Warwickshire and Bedworth that this Government are on their side. For all my constituents, I am feeling positive. There is work to be done, but this Budget will continue to bring the change that we promised at the general election. The damage left by 14 years of austerity is finally being undone. This Labour Budget is putting money in the pockets of those who need it most, delivering healthcare for everyone, providing opportunities for young people, unlocking growth, delivering new homes, reducing energy bills, reducing business rates for hospitality and retail, putting more money in people’s pockets to spend in local businesses, giving us pride in our towns and powering our future. That is the difference a Labour Government can make.

Statutory Maternity and Paternity Pay

Rachel Taylor Excerpts

Monday 27th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jacob Collier]

My hon. Friend is a great champion for his constituents. Many of the issues that he notes will come out in the debate today. He is right to say that the Government have begun the first ever full review of parental leave and pay, which is a serious and welcome step.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for leading this debate. Many of my constituents, including Helen, Lauren, Laura and Kayleigh, have written to me, and Helen asked me to raise this point in particular. When she went on maternity leave, she needed support from her partner. One in four women has a caesarean birth, and the physical recovery can often take six weeks, yet their partner must return to work after only two weeks’ paternity pay. That is why we need the wide-ranging review. It is heartbreaking for mothers and fathers, who are left in a difficult position, with mothers sometimes unable even to lift and carry their young child.

[Jacob Collier]

I know that that is the experience of many parents, and I am sure that the Government will look at it as part of the review that they are undertaking.

Under the current arrangements, a mother or primary adopter can receive maternity pay for up to 39 weeks. For the first six weeks, that pay is 90% of average weekly earnings. For the following 33 weeks, it falls to a flat statutory rate, or 90% of earnings—whichever is lower. Statutory paternity pay lasts for two weeks at the same flat rate.

Welfare Reform

Rachel Taylor Excerpts

Monday 30th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Liz Kendall]

I understand why disability organisations are making the points they are. That is their job; our job is different. Our job is to take the right decisions—ones that we believe are fair—to make sure we have a system that works for the people who need support, but that is also sustainable for the future. That is not easy—that is a statement of the obvious—but I believe we have a fair package. It is a package that protects existing claimants because they have come to rely on that support, as is often the case in the social security system. It begins to tackle the perverse incentive that encourages people to define themselves as incapable of work just to be able to afford to live, and it puts in place employment support to help the hundreds of thousands of disabled people and people with long-term conditions who want to work. That is the right way forward, and I hope that my hon. Friend and his constituents will get involved in the Timms review to ensure future changes make this vital benefit fit for the future.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

Last week, I spoke to one of my constituents, Mike, a disabled person who speaks on behalf of many disabled constituents across Warwickshire. He is really pleased that he will have the right to try work, and he is also really pleased that disabled people will be treated with dignity and will be part of the co-production of the new proposals. However, he is still fearful that these changes may mean losses and difficult situations for disabled people like him. Can the Secretary of State reassure Mike that one of her Ministers will meet him to discuss these changes? In particular, how will we look at fluctuating conditions such as ME and MS, which my partner suffers from, so that such people do not lose out and so that we make the changes positive for every disabled person up and down the country?

[Liz Kendall]

We want to work with MPs, disabled people, their organisations and other experts, as part of co-producing the Timms review. The point about fluctuating health conditions is really important and something we have to crack for the future, because so many people have those conditions. They may be able to work one day and not another, or to work three days at home but not five days. We must make it fit for the future, because the reality is that we are living longer, more of us have disabilities and more of us have two, three or more long-term conditions. The welfare state in its broadest sense—the NHS, as well as the benefits system—and the world of work have to wake up to that. As we live longer, we will have to work for longer, but we have to make that practical and decent.

Winter Fuel Payment

Rachel Taylor Excerpts

Monday 9th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Torsten Bell]

The right hon. Member is right to highlight that we need to provide support for older people, and for all households, with their energy bills right through the year, which is what this Government have been doing. We have not been waiting. As I said, the warm homes discount is being extended to almost 3 million extra households, we are rolling out the improvements to the insulation programmes that I have just mentioned, and the household support fund has been extended for future years. That is exactly what we need to do, while at the same time improving our energy security and our energy generation to make sure that, in future, we do not see the disaster of the last five years, when global wholesale gas prices sent electricity and gas prices here in the UK through the roof.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for his statement, which will be warmly welcomed by constituents, particularly pensioners who were just above the threshold and who lost out last winter. Does he agree that measures such as rolling out free breakfast clubs—I visited one this morning at Goodyers End primary school—are making a real difference by tackling poverty and that that is what this Government are doing across the board in all age groups?

[Torsten Bell]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. We need to make sure that we are seeing child poverty fall and seeing extra help for families through free school meals, as well as through the breakfast clubs that she mentions. We also need to see more progress on pensioner poverty. That is why today we are saying that the threshold will be well above the incomes of pensioners who are in poverty. We do not want to see that poverty in the years ahead, which is exactly why we have made this change today.

British Sign Language Week

Rachel Taylor Excerpts

Thursday 20th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I thank the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this important debate during Sign Language Week. Her dedication in advocating for British Sign Language is commendable, and her tireless campaigning is a sign that the 2024 intake of parliamentarians is one of the best.

I am really sorry that I do not have any sign language. My mother lost much of her hearing as a teenager and lived to the age of 93, using aids for as long as I can remember. If she had been able to learn BSL, I am sure her life would have been much easier.

My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I share the belief of the hon. Member for Thurrock that all deaf and hearing-impaired individuals have the right to participate in society fully and independently. That is not a theoretical right: it is a basic human right that too often remains unrealised.

[Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) for securing this debate. When I worked at the Royal National Institute for Deaf People 25 years ago, I learned how important BSL is as a means of communication for deaf people.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (in the Chair)]

Order. Interventions must be short.

[Rachel Taylor]

BSL is a rich and important part of the cultural identity of the deaf community. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is essential that deaf people and their parents have access to BSL based not on whether they can pay for the courses but on need? That would enrich the language and cultural identity of the deaf community.

[Clive Jones]

I agree 100% with everything the hon. Lady said.

The Liberal Democrats have a long history of pushing for British Sign Language to be given legal status. We have worked for change since one our councillors, David Buxton, became the first deaf sign language politician in the UK to be elected as a borough councillor. He co-founded the Liberal Democrat Disability Association, and has extensive experience of campaigning and doing incredible work across the UK in advocating for the deaf community.

In 2022, David fought hard for the British Sign Language Act, which officially recognised BSL as a language in England, Wales and Scotland. That was a significant victory, but we must acknowledge that it was only one step on a much longer journey. Recognition is essential, but it is not enough: we need respect for BSL alongside tangible pathways to a world where deaf people can achieve their full potential.

We are concerned about the previous Conservative Government’s legacy of cuts to British Sign Language interpretation services for deaf people accessing health services. Funding for the BSL health access app was withdrawn, and it is deeply unjust that BSL users currently have to ask for reasonable adjustments through the Equality Act 2010 if they want to access information and services. Furthermore, the adjustments provided are usually written notes, rather than the provision of a BSL interpreter.

We are committed to seeing more deaf BSL users elected to public and political office, and a good step towards that aim is wider access to services in BSL. Extensive research suggests the best time to learn a second language is from the age of six to puberty. The opportunity for access to language experience is crucial, especially for deaf children’s language, emotional and cognitive development. That is why the Department for Education should commission a feasibility study into the introduction of BSL lessons in primary schools, which would embed the teaching of basic BSL from an early age, and offer expert findings to devolved Education Departments to share best practice across the United Kingdom.

Furthermore, we support the rapid introduction of GCSE-equivalent qualifications in BSL in England, which would provide a clear formal pathway for students to gain fluency in British Sign Language. It is deeply concerning that, despite the Government’s commitment to rolling out the qualification by the start of the 2025 academic year, the implementation of BSL in the national curriculum continues to be delayed.

There is a real risk that further delays in implementing BSL qualifications will deprive the next generation of BSL users of the access and opportunities they rightly deserve. Without this opportunity, deaf children may grow up without the proper foundation to navigate the world fully and confidently. That would be simply unacceptable. Will the Minister commit today that the BSL GCSE will not go the way of the Welsh equivalent by eventually being scrapped? Will he also give more specific details as to when Ofqual’s proposed consultation on assessment arrangements and its technical consultation will be launched?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)]

I am delighted to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. We have had a wide-ranging and thoughtful debate. I warmly congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) on securing it during British Sign Language Week and on the initiative of establishing the all-party parliamentary group.

It is not very well known that the Deputy Prime Minister is BSL qualified to level 2. She has this morning posted on social media a signing message in support of British Sign Language Week. She sets out in the message the Government’s commitment and her own commitment to championing BSL and to tackling the barriers that face people in Britain with hearing impairments.

[Rachel Taylor]

Does the Minister agree that there is still a long way to go to make BSL accessible for everyone who needs it and that it is important that deaf people not only are included in the conversations, but lead them? Does he share my delight in seeing BSL interpreters here today in Westminster Hall, which sends a message to deaf people that they are welcome here?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

I am very glad to do so; I completely agree with my hon. Friend.

This week gives us a chance to celebrate British Sign Language and Irish Sign Language. As we have heard, 151,000 people use BSL; 87,000 have it as their first language, and it is the UK’s fourth most widely used indigenous language. That is a very large group of people, with a great deal to contribute to our economy and our society.

It is right to take this week as an opportunity to highlight, as my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock said, the rich culture around BSL, of which many people are unaware. I was intrigued that American Sign Language is completely different from BSL; I think that arises from its origins not long after American independence when—I suppose understandably—Americans wanted more to do with the French than the British. That has shaped American Sign Language today.

We have heard about the 2022 Act, and I echo the tributes to our former colleague Rosie Cooper and to Chloe Smith, the then Minister. The Act is driving improved accessibility of Government communications and in this Government we are going to implement it in full. My hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock very reasonably asked why the BSL version of Tuesday’s Green Paper has not yet appeared. I can only apologise for that. The 12-week consultation clock will not start until all the accessible versions are published in early April, with a BSL version among them, so that BSL users will have a full 12 weeks to respond.

The BSL Act requires the Government to publish a British Sign Language report setting out each Department’s steps to promote and facilitate the use of BSL in public communications. The first, as the hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies) reminded us, was published in July 2023. The second was a bit delayed by the general election and appeared in December. I echo the commitment that she set out to annual publication in those first five years. As my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock said, BSL activity has more than doubled across Government since that first report, but there is still a long way to go, and I have noticed impatience in some quarters about the speed of progress.

The new Lead Ministers for Disability will have an important role here. We discussed the BSL Act and its reporting framework at our first meeting in December, and we did so again in our second meeting last week. We will keep progress under review, and of course I will have the opportunity to discuss there a number of the issues raised in this debate. We will also publish a BSL plan for each Government Department with the third BSL report, which we will be publishing in the summer.

In line with the commitment in our election manifesto, I work closely with disabled people and representative organisations to put their views and voices at the heart of all we do. Since July, I have met a wide range of deaf people’s organisations, along with other disability organisations. We have heard about the independent BSL Advisory Board, set up in the wake of the Act; it is co-chaired by Craig Crowley, chief executive of Action Deafness, who has done a fantastic job. The board has 15 members, mainly BSL users and all with lived and/or professional experience of the barriers facing deaf people.

I have been very impressed with the board’s work, drawing on the experience of its members and their knowledge of those barriers to develop priorities and a focus for its work, including setting up sub-groups on specific issues. For example, the health and social care sub-group is compiling recommendations based on deaf people’s experiences in the health service—we have heard about a number of those in this debate. I have also spoke to SignHealth, which has made the point to me that BSL users often struggle even to make a GP appointment and to communicate basic health information with the NHS. The report of that sub-group, with its recommendations, will appear later on this year.

Over the last year, the board has also discussed deaf access to sport with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. It presented at the British Deaf Association conference in Manchester, the theme of which was BSL in the early years, and I am grateful to the board co-chairs and other members for their commitment to improving the lives of deaf people and collaborating in order to do so.

I attended the education summit that the BSL Advisory Board organised at the Frank Barnes School for Deaf Children at King’s Cross last year. There were powerful contributions from senior leaders on the barriers that deaf children and their families face in education. That school is really interesting; it has a bilingual model of education and shares a playground with a hearing school, encouraging interaction between deaf and hearing children, contributing to the inclusion of everybody.

We want to enhance the status of BSL, and I agree with the points made in this debate that the GCSE will benefit BSL users generally, as well as those individual students who take it.