partytracker.uk — a sourced record of what Britain's political parties say and do, party by party, with every entry linked to a primary source

12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Diana Johnson

   Prostate Cancer Screening

   I recognise the hon. Gentleman’s experience as a GP. My understanding is that a man who requests a PSA test from a GP will have that test if he is given the information and the choice is there, but I will write to the hon. Gentleman if that is not correct. It has to be an informed choice, with the man knowing the risks and the harms but also the potential benefits. Ultimately, everyone in this Chamber wants the same thing: we want fewer men to die from prostate cancer, cancers that need treatment to be found earlier, and every man to receive the care that is right for him; but we must achieve that while protecting men from unnecessary diagnosis and from receiving treatments that can have lifelong consequences for a cancer that might never have caused harm. The question is not whether we want to prevent more deaths from prostate cancer—of course we do. The question is how we can do so safely, effectively and fairly, using the best available evidence while continuing to build the evidence where it is not yet strong enough. As I have said, as that evidence develops, we must be prepared to act. I thank the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk for raising this important issue, and all Members who have contributed to this thoughtful and powerful debate.

   Hansard source
2. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Claire Hazelgrove

   Performance of Royal Mail

   I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests regarding the CWU. On that precise point, does the hon. Gentleman agree that this really is not the fault of our dedicated postal workers? In fact, it is a real loss across the country, and certainly in my constituency, to see many dedicated and long-serving postal workers stepping away from roles that they have held for decades because of the uncertainty and the workload that they face.

   Hansard source
3. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Ward

   Topical Questions

   October marks the first anniversary since the appalling arson attack on a mosque in Peacehaven in my constituency. I will forever be grateful to the Home Secretary and the Policing Minister for coming to Peacehaven in the immediate aftermath and standing with me and the local community. I am also grateful to the Home Office for the extra security measures it has given to my community. A year on, what more does the Home Secretary think we can do to stop this kind of appalling hate crime and rebuild community cohesion so that something like that never happens again?

   Hansard source
4. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

   Rough Sleeping and Good Growth Funds

   I thank the Minister for her statement. As someone who worked for a homeless charity, the wonderful Streets2Homes in my constituency of Harlow, this statement and this Government’s ongoing commitment to tackling rough sleeping are hugely important to me. The Minister has recognised the importance of the charity and voluntary sector to tackling rough sleeping in some of the answers she has given so far. That is not just Streets2Homes, but organisations such as Open Road, which helps to tackle alcohol addiction in Harlow. Often the funding for the VCS is sporadic, not long term and postcode dependent. What will the Minister do to ensure that brilliant charities such as Streets2Homes and Open Road get the long-term support and funding they need to tackle rough sleeping and the causes of rough sleeping?

   Hansard source
5. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

   Performance of Royal Mail

   My hon. Friend will appreciate that my constituency is some way from North Somerset. He will also appreciate that as a new town, Harlow has an intricate system of numbering houses on our estates, which means that having a regular postie who covers an estate on a regular basis is really important. Does he agree that when we lose posties in the way he describes, we also lose their experience of getting around an estate effectively, which adds to the increased challenges facing the postal service?

   Hansard source
6. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

   Performance of Royal Mail

   My hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge and Bellshill (Frank McNally) also mentioned the inconsistency when it comes to Royal Mail staff contracts, and Royal Mail staff in my Harlow constituency are very concerned. Will my hon. Friend touch on what needs to change?

   Hansard source
7. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Murray

   EU Pact on Migration and Asylum

   Illegal immigration is by definition a cross-border phenomenon, which is why we are required to work with our friends and partners across borders. The Home Secretary has already talked about the 50,000-person reduction from France; we increasingly hear reports that for those in the camps in northern Calais, smugglers are hard to find. That is a far cry from the situation under the previous Government, who could not even decide if France was a friend or a foe. Does the Home Secretary agree that it is by working with our allies on international challenges that we can address the problems of illegal immigration, which is what the public are asking for?

   Hansard source
8. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Murray

   Work-based Immigration

   As someone who served on the Home Affairs Committee for two years, I pay tribute to the Chair and the other members, who I can see around the Chamber. I am a partisan person, and I enjoy a partisan political fight, but in a Select Committee one works with people from other parties to get into the weeds of complex and difficult issues. I found that to be a rewarding experience that brings a lot to democracy, so I pay tribute to the members of the Committee. The statement and report are important, because although immigration is one of the most divisive political issues, the report shows us that the public are nothing like as polarised as we would think. I attended the deliberation in Renfrewshire with the Committee, and on immigration the public are willing to engage with the trade-offs and find common ground between different positions. There is rarely someone who is 100% pro-migration or 100% anti-migration; they are much more open to persuasion. Does the Chair of the Committee agree that the report shows economic migration is a tool of economic policy, but that we struggle to talk about it because it is occluded by discussions on the small boats? Does she agree that the public are willing to engage with complexity and the trade-offs involved, and that they are far more thoughtful and engaged than social media and the press would have us think?

   Hansard source
9. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Kane

   Prostate Cancer Screening

   I want to talk about what happens after a diagnosis. A relative of mine was diagnosed with prostate cancer, and he was offered treatment through NHS Scotland. However, there was another option, focal therapy, which was not mentioned to him. He subsequently discovered that he was eligible for that treatment, but it was not available through his local health board; it was only available to him privately. The way in which he discovered the therapy was rather unusual: he was watching “Clarkson’s Farm”. He was struck by how quickly Jeremy Clarkson appeared to have received treatment after sharing his cancer diagnosis on the programme and, given what my relative knew about both treatment and tractor suspension, how quickly he was back driving in his fields. My relative had expected that treatment would mean weeks or months of recovery, but what he saw on television prompted him to investigate, and that is how he discovered focal therapy. He eventually had the procedure and is now cancer-free, but it raises some difficult questions. First, why was he not told about the option in the first place? As a Scottish MP, I recognise that health is devolved, but we are still part of one United Kingdom. If one part of a country is at the vanguard of new medical technology, surely we have an obligation to learn from it and share that knowledge. Whatever political or administrative boundaries we operate within, patients deserve access to information about all clinically appropriate treatment options. I am not arguing that focal therapy is suitable for every man with prostate cancer—of course, it is not. However, the availability of treatment in one part of the country should not determine whether a patient in another part even knows whether it exists, let alone whether they can access it. Surely we cannot be relying on someone watching “Clarkson’s Farm” to push for information on what their treatment options might be. I ask the Minister: what more can be done to ensure that patients across all four nations of the United Kingdom are informed about clinically appropriate treatments, including those available beyond their own health board and national NHS system? Screening would give more men information quicker to start to make informed decisions with their doctors. However they find their way to the doctor to take a PSA test, if they are fortunate enough to find out early that they have cancer, we owe them all the information they need to make informed choices about what happens next.

   Hansard source
10. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Kane

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    In attempting to find the owner, microchipping is incredibly important. Compulsory microchipping of cats is already in place in England but remains voluntary in Scotland. Does the hon. Member agree that Scotland should catch up so that more families can be reunited with a missing cat, or at the very least be spared the uncertainty of never knowing what happened to a much-loved pet?

    Hansard source
11. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Kane

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    As my hon. Friend’s parliamentary colleague, I agree with everything that was said. The Government’s concern that a driver may not always know that they have struck a cat is a reason why the issue might be problematic. However, does my hon. Friend agree that there is a clear distinction between an unnoticed collision and knowingly driving away from an injured animal? Why should difficulty in preventing the first stop us from placing a duty of drivers to stop safely and seek help in the second?

    Hansard source
12. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Kane

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Last week I asked my constituents to tell me about their experiences of Royal Mail, and I was struck by how often people praised their own postie while expressing real frustration with the service. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that Royal Mail’s leadership must take responsibility for giving postal workers the support they need and customers a service they can rely on?

    Hansard source
13. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Curtis

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Like many others, I will start by paying tribute to our fantastic posties, particularly the one who delivers my mail to Richmond House—constantly reminding me, through letters from constituents, just how dreadful the service that they are experiencing from Royal Mail has become. I will not spend too long listing the many examples of atrocious service that Royal Mail has been delivering in my constituency, but let me give one example. A letter dated 7 July arrived on 4 August, five days after the recipient was supposed to have had an operation. Just in case that was not bad enough, Royal Mail also messed up on follow-up letters from the NHS about cancer checks. We have heard that Royal Mail is planning to get this service fixed by Christmas. I should like to know which Christmas, because in August one of my constituents managed to receive a very, very late Christmas card. I am not sure that we have got last Christmas fixed, let alone Christmas this year. No one is going to argue that this is acceptable but, like many Members, I find it particularly frustrating that every couple of months or so I go to the delivery office and we have that conversation in which the people running it tell me that, yes, they have been facing challenges, but don’t worry, they are on track now. I go back two months later and it is just like groundhog day: we have exactly the same conversation. I am told, “Yes, there were problems when we last told you that we would fix them, but don’t worry, they are being fixed now.” We have heard all the statistics showing that Royal Mail is completely failing to meet the targets that it has set, although those targets have been lowered. We have also heard that prices have been rising at the same time. I think people appreciate the challenges that Royal Mail is facing—there has been a dramatic drop in the number of letters, from the 20 billion that we saw years ago to just 6.5 billion today—but there is something fundamentally wrong with the idea that every time Royal Mail fails to meet the standards required of it, our response should be to lower those standards until they become achievable. When investors bought shares in Royal Mail, they knew that they were buying into a business with certain regulatory obligations attached. Those obligations were part of the deal. While circumstances change and regulations sometimes need to catch up with them, we cannot have a system in which shareholders get to enjoy the potential rewards of private ownership while the public are expected to accept an ever-diminishing service. Even if this is a difficult problem to solve, solving it should start with an acknowledgment that the decision by the Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition to privatise Royal Mail was a mistake. The argument for privatisation is normally that the discipline of the market will drive improvements in efficiency and service. If a company does a bad job, customers can go somewhere else, and the threat of losing those customers gives the business an incentive to improve. But, as should have been obvious at the time, that mechanism does not work with Royal Mail. If my constituents do not receive their hospital appointment letters, they cannot just decide to have them delivered by somebody else. They do not get to choose which postal network the NHS uses to reach them. We have lost the accountability that comes with public ownership, without securing the competitive pressure that is supposed to make private ownership work. There is a much bigger problem with the way in which we regulate many of these privatised monopolies. In the short time that I have left, let me build on the argument advanced by my right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol North West (Darren Jones) about the options for renationalisation, which is certainly something that I believe we should look into. However, this challenge goes way beyond Royal Mail. We now have a problem across our economy with unaccountable, regulated monopolies that simply do not work. If you speak to Ofcom—I may be the only person here who has some sympathy with Ofcom’s position—it will tell you that Royal Mail, like so many other regulated monopolies, such as the water companies, is in financial distress. We cannot use fines as a way to stop those companies being in financial distress, but we still need to produce an incentive for them to improve their behaviour. I urge the Government to consider more innovative ways than just using the fines and the regulatory model to incentivise better behaviour. For example, they should be looking at using—

    Hansard source
14. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I beg to move, That this House is concerned about the performance of Royal Mail; and urges the Government to work with Royal Mail to improve its performance levels. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for selecting the debate and the more than 100 hon. Members from across the House who put their names to the application. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), who applied for the debate alongside me. May I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a member of the executive of the trade union group of Labour MPs? Today’s debate is not an attack on our posties, the men and women trying to deliver a quality service with their hands tied behind their backs; it is about holding Royal Mail and Ofcom to account until the service that my constituents receive is the one they pay for. I called for the debate because in Redditch and the villages, the post—or the lack of it—is now one of the most common reasons that people write to me as their Member of Parliament. My constituency is a mix of urban, suburban and rural, from Batchley and Church Hill in the town itself to Inkberrow, Feckenham and Wychbold in the villages. The difference between postcodes can be stark. Let me begin with the ordinary complaints from my casework, with the Radio Times arriving a week late, first-class birthday cards taking five days to cross Redditch, and Christmas cards arriving on 23 January. One Feckenham family always receives birthday cards due on 12 January five days late; it would be funny if it was not so sad. Some receive no post for days and then one bundle tied with the obligatory rubber band. One received nothing between 3 and 20 January. Another in Wychbold gets deliveries once every 12 days.

    Hansard source
15. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I completely agree with the hon. Member. I will get to the impact on businesses later in my speech. A letter from my own office sent on 11 June arrived on 25 August. Bills arrive overdue while people struggle to reach complaint lines or their local sorting office. The consequences can be far more serious: one constituent received a hospital letter on 6 October about an appointment on 17 September.

    Hansard source
16. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I completely agree. Another resident of mine, whose husband has cancer, has had to wait anxiously for medical correspondence about a diagnosis.

    Hansard source
17. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Could I make a little progress? I am conscious that many hon. Members wish to speak, but I need to get through some of my speech. A council letter about a husband in a nursing home took from 14 November until 3 March to arrive. His family had six months to appeal and almost four months had already passed. A Department for Work and Pensions letter dated 5 January required a response by the 14th, but it arrived on the 20th. My constituent’s benefits were withheld. She had done nothing wrong; her letter was late. Benefits withheld, appointments missed and appeal deadlines lost—all because the post failed. If my office cannot trust Royal Mail to deliver a letter, how can I assure constituents that their hospital correspondence will arrive in time? One more thing struck me with this casework. Almost every constituent says that their parcels arrive on time; it is the letters that do not. Is that a coincidence, or is that what happens when a company chases the parcels market and treats letters as an afterthought while holding a monopoly on them?

    Hansard source
18. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I will give way to the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) as she asked first.

    Hansard source
19. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    The hon. Lady is completely correct, and I will touch on that issue.

    Hansard source
20. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I agree. The Government’s response to the Business and Trade Committee makes the point well: a lack of capacity that forces a company to prioritise some items over others is no justification for failing to deliver the expected service. Royal Mail must deliver 90% of its first-class letters the next working day. It is managing 85%. Against the target of completing 99.9% of delivery routes each day, it is completing just 70%. Those targets have been missed for five years running, while the price of a first-class stamp has risen by 137% to £1.80 and the price of a first-class medium parcel, where Royal Mail competes, has fallen by half. Where there is competition, prices fall; where there is monopoly, prices rise and services continue to fall. What has the regulator done, really? Since 2015, Ofcom has investigated Royal Mail seven times and fined it four times. Last year, Ofcom lowered the very targets Royal Mail was missing and cut second-class delivery days, saving the company up to £425 million—“rewarding failure”, as Citizens Advice put it. More fines will not fix this, yet Ofcom has never come to this House seeking the powers it needs to hold Royal Mail to account. A regulator that can punish failure but cannot compel improvement must answer a fundamental question: what is it for? If Ofcom cannot do its job, a new regulator, with real teeth, must be considered.

    Hansard source
21. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    That is a cheeky question, and I might get back to it. In May, the Business and Trade Committee called the service unacceptable and called Ofcom’s regulation into question. It demanded a road map to improvement. We are still waiting. Meanwhile, last Christmas, 16 million people experienced delayed letters, 5.7 million missed a vital letter and 19 million received bundled deliveries. Behind every statistic is someone let down by a service they have paid for and have every right to expect. Royal Mail points to £500 million of investment and a promise to meet targets by April 2027. I welcome the investment, but a voluntary plan and relaxed targets are no substitute for accountability. No future promise can undo a missed hospital appointment or restore the time lost fighting for a loved one. That is why I joined my hon. Friends the Members for Lichfield and for Corby and East Northamptonshire (Lee Barron) in writing to Royal Mail’s chief executive, Alistair Cochrane, asking him to meet affected MPs in Parliament. Our constituents deserve more than a briefing from a distance. However, we must also confront uncomfortable questions. When Royal Mail was privatised, we were promised flexibility, investment and competition. Instead, the taxpayer lost hundreds of millions of pounds through an undervalued sale, and performance levels fell. If privatisation was supposed to secure Royal Mail’s future, why are we now facing these challenges, and what needs to change to put the service back on a sustainable footing?

    Hansard source
22. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Yes. We are not going there; they should be coming here. I understand that the world has changed. Letter volumes have fallen from around 20 billion at their peak to 5.6 billion, while Royal Mail must serve 4 million more addresses. The economics of the universal service do not shrink with the volumes. A postie still walks the same streets for 10 letters as they do for one. Around 1,000 delivery offices are changing how they operate in a compressed period. The answer cannot be another round of job cuts, which put more pressure on the very service we want improved. Other European countries subsidise their postal services. We must be prepared to have an open debate about whether further Government support is needed to protect the universal service and whether a new operational model is required

    Hansard source
23. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I agree. That is incredibly frustrating and impacts so many different areas. I am going to make some progress and finish. Recognising the need for change does not mean accepting the unacceptable. Before I turn to what must change, let me deal with the tired old narrative that we must pick a side between consumers and workers—the customer who wants their post and the postie who wants decent pay. That is a false choice, and the evidence contradicts it. Citizens Advice, the statutory champion of postal consumers, and the Communication Workers Union, the voice of postal workers, have reached almost the same conclusions from opposite ends. Both want a regulator that protects the universal service, the same rules for competitors and an end to bogus self-employment. A fairly paid, properly employed postie is how a customer gets their letter.

    Hansard source
24. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I am sorry; I have to make some progress. When workers are squeezed, consumers pay the price—and squeezed they are. I do not blame the posties. I have spoken to a postal worker with 36 years of service, who told me that morale is at an all-time low. Staff are told to complete half a delivery one day and scramble to catch up the next. Overtime is restricted, yet posties work extra hours unpaid just to keep the show on the road. Royal Mail runs a two-tier workforce: new starters on £13.68 an hour against £15.50 for long-standing colleagues. Is it any wonder that the company cannot recruit or retain? All the while, parcel competitors undercut Royal Mail with bogus self-employment—paying nothing in employer national insurance, while Royal Mail pays £650 million a year—and cherry-pick the profitable addresses while passing difficult ones back to the national network to which they never contribute. That matters for Redditch’s small businesses, too. They rely on the post for invoices, cheques and supplies. For them, a late letter is not an inconvenience; it is a cash flow problem. I have four clear asks of the Minister. First, I ask her to strengthen regulation: to ask Ofcom what powers it needs to hold Royal Mail to account, to tie above-inflation stamp prices to meeting service targets and to require transparent reporting of efficiencies to Parliament. If Ofcom cannot regulate effectively, we must question whether it remains fit for purpose. Secondly, I ask her to level the playing field: to tackle bogus self-employment through the employment status reforms, to extend minimum service and consumer protection standards to competitors, and to examine the case for a levy on operators that profit from the universal postal network. Thirdly, I ask the Minister to protect the workforce: to address pay inequalities, to work constructively with the CWU on the new delivery model and to build workloads a human being can actually complete. Finally, I ask her to convene an emergency national summit, bringing together the Government, Ofcom, Royal Mail and the unions to agree a sustainable future for this vital service. We must acknowledge that the postal market has changed, and have an honest conversation about service standards and funding, but change cannot be an excuse for declining standards or intolerable pressures on our workforce. This House has not always got it right when making historic decisions about Royal Mail’s ownership, but we must learn from those mistakes. What matters now is that we act decisively to secure Royal Mail’s future, protect its workforce and safeguard the communities that depend on this vital national service.

    Hansard source
25. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Bloore

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I have already had the best part of 20 minutes, so I probably will not be long. I thank the Minister for her comprehensive response. I also thank the many right hon. and hon. Members from all parties for taking part in today’s Backbench Business debate. I have learned things about the service that I did not think I would ever learn, whether that is the infidelity of a former Prime Minister—I do not know if I am letting the cat out of the bag here—or the Jane Austen quotes that we have heard. My right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol North West (Darren Jones) talked about the direction of travel and what is likely to happen if we do not take action. Despite the light-hearted and more serious stories that we have shared today, we are in a position where we could lose universal services if we in this House do not take action. While I may not have set out the same plan as my right hon. Friend in his speech, I really do think we have to understand that we are at a point of no return if we do not take strong and positive action. Our constituents will not forgive us if that universal service disappears, and it will cost us a lot more to try to rebuild it in the future. Once again, I thank everyone for taking part today. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House is concerned about the performance of Royal Mail; and urges the Government to work with Royal Mail to improve its performance levels.

    Hansard source
26. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Catherine Fookes

    Civil Service Pensions

    Communications with Capita did get better for a time, but I am afraid they have dropped off a bit now. Let me share with the House the sad case of a constituent who came to us in May 2026. She had spent two hours on the phone to Capita; she could not get through, and she had two pensions unpaid. She had retired from the Department for Work and Pensions with breast cancer. In June, she was contacted by another scheme member—a completely different person—who said that on two occasions, she had been sent my constituent’s details, both the annual benefit statement and some other details about the scheme, which was an appalling breach of GDPR. Can the Minister please help me to resolve that case, as it is still outstanding, and will she consider compensation for those who have waited for more than two years, and from whom I have many emails in my inbox?

    Hansard source
27. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Catherine Atkinson

    Rough Sleeping and Good Growth Funds

    I welcome today’s additional £432 million to tackle rough sleeping. With reoffending accounting for 80% of offending in England and Wales, securing stable accommodation on release from prison is absolutely central to reducing reoffending and making our communities safer, yet last year around 1,000 people a month left prison homeless. Will the Minister work with the MOJ to use this investment to go beyond the target of halving homelessness among prison leavers? As we seek to accelerate progress on preventing homelessness, I am concerned that the Ministry intends to replace quarterly accommodation figures with annual reporting, so will the Minister press for quarterly publication to continue to be tracked?

    Hansard source
28. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Cat Eccles

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I declare my interest as a loyal servant to Penny and Hugo. I pay tribute to the CatsMatter team for creating this petition, the largest ever cat-related petition to come to Parliament, and to my constituent Mandy Hobbis, who co-founded the charity. I have supported them and this campaign since becoming an MP, and have twice joined them to hand in petitions at No. 10, so it is fantastic to finally debate this issue. This is not simply about road traffic law; it is about whether the law reflects the place that cats hold in our society. As I said in a Westminster Hall debate earlier this year on the animal welfare strategy, there are significant inconsistencies in the protections given to cats and dogs under the law. Cats are cherished members in millions of households, yet under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 a driver who collides with a dog must report the incident, while the driver who collides with a cat does not have to. The origins of that legislation are almost 100 years old. Society, animal ownership and our understanding of animal welfare have changed enormously since then, so the question before Parliament is not why cats were excluded in the past, but whether their continued exclusion can be justified today. As campaigners point out, compulsory microchipping has strengthened the case for reform, but a microchip alone cannot save a cat’s life. Importantly, the UK is increasingly becoming an outlier internationally. Jurisdictions including Hong Kong, Switzerland, Gibraltar and Jersey already require drivers to report collisions involving cats, demonstrating that such measures are practical and enforceable, and that it is neither radical nor unworkable. For many families, the most distressing outcome is not knowing what has happened to a beloved pet. The RSPCA has highlighted the heartbreak faced by owners who never discover what happens to their cat, while CatsMatter has emphasised the importance of prompt action and clearer routes to assistance for injured animals. I recognise that organisations such as Cats Protection have raised concerns about unintended consequences if cats were simply inserted into the existing framework. Those concerns deserve careful consideration, but they should not be a reason for inaction. Instead, the Government should work with animal welfare organisations and develop a proportionate solution that improves reporting and owner notification, while preserving cats’ right to roam. I would like to put several questions to the Minister. Does he accept that the current distinction between cats and dogs is increasingly difficult to justify, given the place cats occupy in millions of British households? What assessment has he made of the reporting requirements for cats in jurisdictions such as Switzerland, Gibraltar, Jersey and Hong Kong? Can any lessons can be learned in England and the UK more widely? Will the Government review whether the current arrangements for microchipping are sufficient to ensure that injured or deceased cats are identified and their owners informed? If the Government do not support bringing cats into the scope of section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, what alternative measures will they consider to improve reporting? Finally, will the Minister commit to meeting the campaigners, more welfare organisations and interested MPs to discuss possible legislative or even non-legislative solutions to this issue? The priority is preventing cats from being left to suffer unnecessarily on our roads. I urge the Government to engage constructively and set out a clear pathway for addressing this anomaly in the law.

    Hansard source
29. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Brian Leishman

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    It is a pleasure to have you in the Chair this evening, Mr Vickers, and I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for introducing this e-petition debate. My family love cats, none more so than Tishy, who was our tabby cat and lived with us until the ripe old age of 20. Some years have passed, but we still miss her very much. I thank the Cats Whiskers, a charity based in Clackmannanshire that does so much for the welfare of cats and kittens across my constituency. It has just celebrated its eighth anniversary. The fantastic work it does includes running a trap, neuter and return programme; providing temporary fostering; helping pet-owners with food, litter and practical support; rescuing, rehabilitating and rehoming abandoned, neglected and vulnerable cats; and supporting Police Scotland, local authorities, vets and other charities in animal welfare cases. I share the frustration and dismay of the people from the Cats Whiskers at the fact that cats are not included in section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. We think it is abominable that if a cat is hit by a vehicle, the driver can just drive away and leave the animal behind injured and in pain or lying dead on the road, and that that is considered acceptable by the law. It is surely a question of basic compassion and decency to change this law. I would not dare to speak for any other right hon. or hon. Member, but I imagine that whatever one’s worldview and politics may be, one decides to run as a candidate to come to this place to positively change the country, if not the world. I appreciate that there may be limitations, barriers or impediments to achieving that level of change as a parliamentarian, but surely making this law fairer for the benefit of people who have a cat as a beloved member of their family and changing it so that drivers must stop and report if they have hit a cat can gain universal, cross-Bench approval. The change is most certainly achievable.

    Hansard source
30. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Brian Leishman

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his kind words at the start. I appreciate them; sometimes I would like it if some of my own parliamentary colleagues thought the same as he does, but that is a different matter. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman: this is achievable and it should be done.

    Hansard source
31. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Brian Leishman

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    I thank my hon. Friend, and I understand that there is a differentiation. This debate is well-subscribed and I do not want to take up too much more time. I will finish with a request from the good people at the Cats Whiskers that they have asked to be put to the Minister: “We want the Government to legislate to require drivers to stop, check and report any road collisions with cats if they’re injured on the road, and hold drivers accountable if they fail to stop and report a collision involving a cat on the basis they left a cat to unnecessarily suffer. We believe asking drivers to be made responsible for seeking help for an injured cat is a perfectly reasonable & simple ask.” As their MP for Alloa and Grangemouth, I wholeheartedly agree.

    Hansard source
32. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ben Goldsborough

    Foreign National Offenders: Deportation

    Nearly 6,000 foreign national offenders were returned in the last year—12% more than in the year before. Clause 20 of the Immigration and Asylum Bill strengthens the measures on circumstances in which it is in the public interest to deport foreign criminals, particularly where their offending is more serious. Will my hon. Friend explain how these changes will build on the progress that has been made, and further strengthen public security?

    Hansard source
33. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Baggy Shanker

    Topical Questions

    Earlier this month I met reps from East Midlands airport who were telling me about the abuse that their staff face. Some 42% of cabin crew nationwide have experienced physical assault. Does the Minister agree that, as in retail, no airport worker should face abuse just for doing their job?

    Hansard source
34. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Foreign National Offenders: Deportation

    Anyone coming to the United Kingdom knows that doing so is a privilege, not a right. Any foreign national who breaks our laws is not welcome. All foreign national offenders who receive a prison sentence or suspended sentence are now eligible for deportation. Since this Government came to power, we have removed over 11,700 foreign national offenders; that is up 41% on the two years before then. We are determined to ensure that more foreign criminals are removed from our shores.

    Hansard source
35. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Foreign National Offenders: Deportation

    I appreciate the hon. Lady raising this case, and look forward to her supporting our Immigration and Asylum Bill, which is going through Parliament. We are determined to build on the progress we have made, and which I have just outlined. Our asylum Bill will fix the broken appeals system and close the human rights loopholes, so that they cannot be exploited. From early next year, we will be able to remove offenders immediately after sentencing, allowing us to scale up deportations even further. We will be relentless in ensuring that all who break our laws are removed.

    Hansard source
36. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Foreign National Offenders: Deportation

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We remain firmly committed to the ECHR and the protections it gives us all, including the prohibition on torture, a right to life and protections from the state. However, we are determined, through this legislation, to protect its principles from over-interpretation, both domestically and internationally, and to ensure we have an immigration and asylum system that has the consent of the British people.

    Hansard source
37. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Foreign National Offenders: Deportation

    It is sad to see the Conservative party so spooked by the far right that they are trashing some of the finest work of their greatest Prime Minister, Winston Churchill. When he said, “Never again,” and led the way in building a European convention on human rights, he knew the protection it gave everyone from tyrants, despots, torture and death. This Government will defend Churchill’s legacy—even if the Conservatives will not—by reforming both the ECHR, internationally, through co-operation with our European neighbours, and its domestic application through the forthcoming Bill, to ensure that its protections and principles are fit for the modern world.

    Hansard source
38. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Topical Questions

    I would be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues. Home Office officials continue to engage with Scottish Borders council and other local partners on asylum accommodation. We value and recognise the importance of working with those local authorities, taking account of local circumstances when considering accommodation requirements.

    Hansard source
39. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Topical Questions

    The Wethersfield centre, which was opened under the right hon. Gentleman’s Government, has operated for years with robust security arrangements to maintain the safety and security of both residents and the wider community. The chief constable has said that the centre is not having a negative impact on crime. This Government are proud to put fairness at the heart of our approach by moving to alternative accommodation, including former military sites, which reduce the burden on communities because they are self-contained, with 24/7 security and CCTV.

    Hansard source
40. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Turley

    Topical Questions

    I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising those cases. I would be happy to meet him to discuss it further and will look into it.

    Hansard source