National Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Wednesday 28th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for securing the debate, which will be so important to people in my constituency.

I have spoken at length about large-scale developments being proposed with insufficient infrastructure and with new homes sitting empty, and I hope the Minister can pass back to the Secretary of State the message that I am still waiting for the meeting she promised me in the Chamber. However, today I want to focus on schedule 1 in the scheme of delegation.

I accept that the vast majority of planning applications are rightly determined by professional officers, but when applications are controversial, when communities have legitimate concerns or when residents simply need confidence that their voices have been heard, planning committees play a vital role. They are there not to frustrate development, but to improve it. They bring together the three important sides of professional advice, local knowledge and public scrutiny, allowing elected representatives to listen to applicants, officers and residents and identify solutions to make development more acceptable to everyone. They are often the best of democracy, and they can be the closest that many of our constituents get to influencing the places where they live.

Recent examples from my area, shared by Lib Dem councillors today, demonstrate that value. One application, which councillors considered today, was refused based on height, density and design, but they were able to debate how the proposal could better fit with the character of the area. In a case last month, members considered the impact on neighbours of three bungalows being squeezed on to a plot for one, and discussed the conditions that might make a future application more acceptable. Both applications were rejected today, and members expect them to come back—but better. That ability to shape development, rather than just approve or reject it, is a crucial part of the process.

Supporters of the changes argue that community engagement should take place through local plans. I understand that, but local plans and planning committees serve different purposes and work to different timelines. As explained by my hon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green), local plans are often out of date, and when they are rewritten they create a bird’s eye view of a community; they do not see inside the window of a neighbour’s poorly placed extension.

Local plans can allocate land, but they cannot say whether a particular design respects the character of a street, or whether a historic feature, such as the wall in my ward built by Italian prisoners of war, should be retained. That is something that only local councillors and local residents know. With the funding slashed for neighbourhood plans, which the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) and I discussed when we were on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill Committee, communities do not even have the opportunity to create new neighbourhood plans to get that much closer position.

I will give another example that was shared with me today. A recommendation for an HMO in Poole was going to be approved. Had there not been local concern, it would not have gone to committee, where a mistake was discovered. The planning officer thought that nine additional properties were going to be created and therefore that housing capacity would be affected, when in fact an HMO does not create nine additional properties. If the case had not gone to a planning committee, that mistake would not have been able to be fixed, because the decision would have been published too late and the community would not have had its say. These people are not blockers; they are trying to make their communities better. While they recognise that a planning officer makes recommendations based on law and policy, they contextualise cases.

Another issue that has not been covered is that many planning applications are now determined from afar. Since covid, we have had planning officers working from Northern Ireland and seeing the sites only on Google Maps. The councillors are the ones who can tell us the context of whether a site is overhanging another, not somebody who has been shipped in on a contract from afar. The Government frequently speak about devolution and empowering communities, but devolution should mean trusting local people and their elected representatives, not reducing their involvement in decisions that affect the places where they live.

One Dorset resident today put it to me far better than I could:

“If a community is going to feel that it’s been completely shafted by a decision, there should at least be a meaningful opportunity to secure measures that address its concerns and help rebuild trust in the process.”

That is ultimately what planning committees provide: trust, transparency and democratic legitimacy. By removing that layer of local decision making, we may make some decisions faster, but we risk weakening public confidence in the planning system itself.

Civil Service Pensions

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Monday 26th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sally Jameson]

I agree with my hon. Friend: Capita has been abysmal, as I have said a few times now. It is for that reason that my predecessors in the role held back nearly £10 million in contractual payments to Capita—a move that I supported. Capita, on a voluntary basis, is now receiving 10% less on its monthly payments because it recognises that its service is wholly inadequate. All other options remain on the table. I will monitor the outcome of the new rectification plan on a fortnightly basis and return to this House if it is not good enough.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Pat’s father died in September last year. It took eight phone calls between October and May to be told that everything was in place. It then took another three months to be told that the claim was accepted and literally awaiting dispatch. We are now four months further on. Does the Minister think that it is acceptable for it to take four months to put a stamp on a letter and send it?

[Sally Jameson]

No, it is not acceptable, and if the hon. Member flags that case with me, I will ensure that it is chased. I will not make excuses for Capita’s poor performance; it is accountable for its performance, and frankly it should be ashamed.

Rejoining the EU

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Monday 12th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mrs Barker, and to respond on behalf of His Majesty’s official Opposition. I warmly congratulate the petitioner and the people who added their names to the e-petition. In our parliamentary democracy, petitioning the Crown and Parliament is a cherished right, whether campaigning to save a beloved community hospital, to crack down on illegal fly-tipping or, as in this case, to casually ask the House of Commons to overturn the largest democratic vote in British history on a Monday afternoon. It is entirely right that those arguments are heard and debated in Parliament.

Listening to the contributions today from the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish National party and, indeed, some on the Government Benches, one might easily get the impression that rejoining the European Union is treated a bit like renewing an expired gym membership: we simply pop back down to reception, set up the direct debit and immediately pick up where we left off. Some hon. Members genuinely appear to believe that our European neighbours have spent the past decade sitting by the phone in the Berlaymont, tearfully gazing at an empty chair, desperate for the United Kingdom to saunter back in and instantly reclaim our rebate, opt-outs and front row seat at the summit table. I must gently break it to those hon. Members: Brussels does not accept refunds.

I may have disagreed with almost everything that the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy) said, but she was right that the process of rejoining the European Union would not be simple, short or straightforward. We have to be brutally honest about what applying to rejoin under article 49 actually involves in the cold light of day. The petitioners do not merely ask for warm words or polite co-operation; they ask this Parliament to formally trigger accession negotiations. That does not mean stepping into a time machine back to 2015; it means starting the accession process as a brand-new candidate country alongside countries such as Albania and North Macedonia. The European Commission has made the house rules for new joiners crystal clear. Under chapter 17 of the accession acquis, there is no bespoke menu where we can pick the bits we like and leave the rest.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I am listening to the shadow Minister’s speech with incredulity and watching the faces of the wonderful people in the Gallery who have come but are not able to speak. I wonder whether he has actually had those discussions. I think we are the only country to have ever left, and there have been significant comments from Ursula von der Leyen and others that we are not going to be treated exactly the same. Unless the shadow Minister has actually had those meetings, it would be very unwise to say that is fact.

[Mike Wood]

Yes I have, as a member of the Parliamentary Partnership Assembly and as someone who spent seven very happy years working in the European Parliament and still has many friends who work there and in the institutions. There is no question of there being a speed line route back to full membership reserved for the United Kingdom; we would have to go through the full accession process. Joining means a binding treaty obligation to scrap pound sterling and adopt the euro, and to abolish our national border controls and join the Schengen area.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mark Ferguson]

I think it is clear to anyone who has listened to the debate over the last couple of hours that there is no lack of debate in this place or, in fact, anywhere else, on this important matter. That is why we are rightly looking at options for the future relationship to strengthen the country’s prosperity and security.

[Vikki Slade]

rose—

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

rose—

[Mark Ferguson]

This is my final sentence: Europe is our neighbourhood—

[Vikki Slade]

The Minister has 40-odd minutes.

[Mark Ferguson]

I do, but I only have one sentence left, so I will give way.

[Vikki Slade]

I am very grateful to the Minister for giving way. This struck me earlier when the Prime Minister talked about the importance of the British public being the boss throughout this. The Minister has been clear about all the available options, but if the British public are to have their say, which presumably would require a general election, referendum or something similar, is there not a risk that we end up pushing all of this into the long grass again when we know that the longer it takes, the worse the situation becomes? Is there any opportunity for short-term changes that can move this closer?

[Mark Ferguson]

The hon. Lady invites me to speculate; I think that the Prime Minister was quite clear this afternoon.

I will finish by referring to something that the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton), said, which is that Europe is our neighbourhood. As he said, geography matters: the EU is our closest partner and largest market—there are only 21 miles between France and England, and we share land borders as well. A stronger, deeper relationship is in Britain’s best interests.

International Update

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Monday 12th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I would say that we do want to uphold the highest standards of security in our voting system, but the Bill before the House does that, as well as allowing more people the ability to vote.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Today was a very sad day for my residents in Mid Dorset and North Poole, with the very last sailing of the Barfleur from Poole to her twin town of Cherbourg in France after 34 years of continuous trade, and this is blamed on Brexit red tape, food export restrictions and travel limitations on people who can travel only for 90 in 180 days. Will the Prime Minister please ask his officials to do all they can to keep open the window of opportunity to keep this going, and make sure that the issue of UK ports and their role is included in the UK-EU summit?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Lady raises a really important point, and the Minister for Europe has just said that he is willing to meet her to discuss it, because it is a real shame, given that level of history. But again, that is why we are trying to negotiate a better arrangement. We will do exactly as she says, and look at how what we are trying to achieve could benefit British ports.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Thursday 10th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I hope that the hon. Member heard my earlier response about how seriously we take the issuing of the alert, and how we take considerable effort to look carefully at how it has worked and whether it can be improved in future. I say to her that every emergency alert is carefully co-ordinated with the responding public bodies and agencies, and each request is evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure that it is necessary for public safety.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I am sorry to return to Capita, but I may have a solution. My constituent John is retiring partly due to ill health and his salary is now at half level—he is really struggling. He explained to me that under the current system a retirement date must be selected four months in advance, and if the delay goes one day past that, rather than amending the figures, the system has to start all over again. My suggestion is that we make a slight tweak so that we save Capita a lot of work and our residents a lot of heartache. Will the Minister comment on that and pick up my constituent’s case?

[Sally Jameson]

I thank the hon. Member for bringing that idea to this House. I will be happy to put that to Capita when I next meet it, and if she wants to write to me with her case, I will happily ensure that it is escalated.

Rewiring the State

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Louise Haigh]

As the hon. Lady knows, the Prime Minister said yesterday that we will be hosting a National Economic Council with the First Ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in order to discuss devolution at length, and the decisions around devolution that she has described will be made from there.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I align myself with the comments about firefighters and suggest that the right hon. Lady might need a bigger room for the summit, as there is so much interest in it.

I seek some clarity on business rates. She mentioned that devolution might lead to business rates retention, but it is the structure of business rates that is causing the decline of our high streets and the decimation of our hospitality sector. Giving local authorities such as Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council and Dorset council the right to cut them will simply move the problem from the business to the statutory services of the councils. Could she clarify this and expand a little on her intentions?

[Louise Haigh]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for allowing me to be clear about this issue. The Prime Minister made clear his intention around business rates very early in his premiership, including on cutting business rates for pubs and hospitality and businesses that really benefit our high streets. Where we are proposing devolution is for business rates retention, encouraging areas to grow their economy and then enjoy a share of that. They will not have any difference in altering the level of business rates, but they will be incentivised and be able to keep a share of them.

Direction of Government

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Tuesday 1st September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Every one of my generation went on a school trip to Jodrell Bank, and there is no way that we can see its demise—it will not happen under my Government. I know that changes have been made in relation to research funding, but Jodrell Bank is a heritage asset for the country as well as a research asset. I will indeed set up the meeting that my hon. Friend requires. There must be a way to save Jodrell Bank, and I give her a commitment today at this Dispatch Box: we will find it.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

We have had the hottest summer on record, and we have had an exceptionally high number of tragic deaths in the rivers and seas around the country. At the same time, so many children are no longer able to learn to swim; over 200 public and school swimming pools have closed since 2020. Will the Prime Minister look at how we can better fund leisure centres and swimming pools to make sure that every child knows how to save themselves and to float—with the advice from the Royal Life Saving Society? Will he ensure that we do not have such a terrible summer again?

[The Prime Minister]

There have been too many tragic deaths this summer, and the best way to prevent that is to do exactly what the hon. Member said. Swimming should be an entitlement for young people on the curriculum, and I look forward to seeing how we can deliver that, working with her.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Since the Supreme Court judgment—and even more so since the code of practice was published—my constituents who identify as trans are contacting me daily. One has told me that he feels entirely pushed out of public life, and has had to leave his job due to customer harassment. He says that finding a new job is nigh on impossible. Does the Minister perceive that to be an intended or unintended consequence of the draft guidance, and will the Government please give Parliament the opportunity to vote on it?

[Olivia Bailey]

I have said how greatly I recognise the significant anxiety that is felt by some in the trans community at the moment. The Supreme Court was extremely clear that trans people’s rights and protections against discrimination and harassment are protected in law, and the Government will defend and extend trans people’s rights. The draft code of practice is before the House for scrutiny, and Members can apply for additional debates on the subject if they wish.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Liz Kendall]

The right hon. Gentleman is always helpful—well, not always, but on this occasion he has been very helpful. The cliff-edge argument has been made to me personally by the NSPCC, the Molly Rose Foundation, the Internet Watch Foundation and others, and it is one that we should take seriously. I have spoken to schools in my constituency about how best to handle it if we were to go ahead with the ban. There is a really important point about young people’s education and awareness, because life is online now and we have to prepare children for the future. That is at the heart of the issues we are debating in the consultation.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

I recently visited Lytchett Minster school and Queen Elizabeth’s school, and I held a session asking the young people about their views. Overwhelmingly, the children in sixth form supported a ban and the children in the younger part of the school did not. How will the Government tailor the questions for younger children and older children, so that we get a true understanding of the problem?

[Liz Kendall]

I would love it if the hon. Lady sent me a report or a note on that, because alongside the consultation, which is specifically designed for children and young people, many of us in this House are talking to schools. I say to everybody: do send in those views, and I promise I will read them all.

Oral Answers to Questions

Vikki Slade Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this absolutely shocking case and for talking to me last night about the details. My thoughts are with the victim, who had a right to be safe and who was failed in the most appalling way. Travelodge must take serious action to ensure such an appalling incident can never happen again. I am concerned at reports that the company has not met Members of Parliament; it should do so. I should add that the Safeguarding Minister wants to meet the company as well, and it should do that too.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Q13. Two weeks ago it was confirmed that no extra time would be provided in the other place to allow the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill to complete its course. If the will of this democratically elected House is blocked, it will be a travesty for democracy and, more importantly, a tragedy for all those who are relying on the legislation and have waited so long, not least my own dad. Will the Prime Minister act now to prevent the dismissal of the views of 76% of the public, especially as other parts of our country have approved legislation, and so secure a real legacy of social policy in this Parliament?

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that issue. I know there are strong views, and I acknowledge her personal connection, which shows how serious the issues are. It is a matter of conscience. It is for Parliament to decide the passage of the legislation and any changes. Scrutiny is a matter for the other place. We have a responsibility to make sure any legislation is workable, effective and enforceable.