What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.
Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology
Labour Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
The hon. Member makes a really important point. We have seen through door knocking in my constituency that people are now less willing to take a postal vote, which could have real implications for our democratic process going forward. How does this situation get resolved? I want to make it clear that this issue does not land at the feet of our postal workers.
The hon. Lady makes a really important point. Royal Mail used to be characterised by a really low turnover of staff, but that is changing rapidly, and the culture of the workplace is changing with it. Following on from that point, I visited sorting offices in my constituency last year and talked through the issues that the postal workers faced. They work in incredibly hard conditions, but that is being made even worse, because senior management cannot get a grip. It is the so-called leaders at the top who are failing and leaving staff lower down to get the blame and angst from angry customers.
I completely agree. If we listened to the staff on the ground, a lot of these problems could have been foreseen.
I have nothing to add to that. My hon. Friend has made a fantastic point, and I completely agree. Ofcom also needs to take responsibility. Years of fines and damning verdicts have done nothing to resolve poor levels of service. Royal Mail has been given a free pass. Ofcom has allowed the company to relax its targets, yet it still missed both reduced targets in the first quarter of 2026-27. In any other line of work, that would not be acceptable, so why are the Government not acting? I implore the Minister: let us just get this done. The Government have to step in and take meaningful action either through giving Ofcom stronger powers that actually bite or through other means. Royal Mail is an iconic service known across the world, but its legacy is being completely trashed by the management at the top. Let me end with two examples of how Royal Mail’s failures have impacted on lives in my constituency. Kate, who lives in Cheadle village, wrote to me: “I missed an important medical appointment in mid-March as the letter never arrived. I had to rearrange the appointment, creating a delay of over a month to commence my treatment, this also complicated my travel plans and insurance. My GP surgery had to waste time chasing this up and then the GP had to re-refer me…the expensive scanner plus clinical and admin staff are not being used efficiently. This costs us all.” Laura wrote to me and said that she had been diagnosed with cancer for a second time. She received an important hospital appointment letter the day after the appointment. Letters from her oncologist for treatment frequently arrive late, which adds to her stress during an unbelievably difficult time for her and her family. It is clear in Laura’s case just how crucial the universal postal service is to people’s lives; it is absolutely fundamental. I hope that Royal Mail management is listening to this debate and begins to appreciate just how important it is that they get this job done properly. Just in case, I will be personally delivering the complaints that I have received from my constituents directly to Royal Mail headquarters—after all, with a postal service this bad, I might as well deliver them myself.
I thank the 335 people in my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough who signed this petition. My hon. Friend mentioned earlier that the Government seemingly have no plans at this point to change things, and there is the conversation around whether the Road Traffic Act 1988 is the mechanism to achieve change. Does he agree that the message that we can send today from this House is that, even if it is not legally required, the right, moral thing to do is for people to notify the police and to try to find the owner? That is a message that we can all send from here today.
Will the hon. Member give way on that point?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for being very generous with his time. Earlier today, I opened the new Friends of Harrogate Hospital garden at the hospital. I spoke with the chief executive, who made the point that Royal Mail has told them that NHS appointments are meant to be prioritised, but the reality that we are all experiencing clearly shows that that is not the case. Does he agree that Royal Mail needs to pull its finger out, so that lives are not lost as a result of its negligence?
I had the joy of spending time with the Kendal and South Lakes prostate cancer support group just a few weeks ago. Like the hon. Gentleman and me, its members are massively in favour of increased screening and making sure there is default screening for men over 50. Does the hon. Gentleman also think the Government need to be aware that if we test more people earlier and identify cancers earlier, more people can be treated? Does he believe the Government have done enough work, both north of the border and in the UK Parliament, to ensure that we have sufficient capacity for surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy so that we can treat the people who are diagnosed?
The point my hon. Friend makes about passports and other valuable documents is a good one. I attended a meeting in the Polden Hills, where the posties are brilliant but the post is absolutely rubbish, arriving every three weeks or longer. The thing that really shocked me was that Royal Mail is advertising for more posties but applicants do not even need to provide a CV. These people would be expected to deliver documents of prime importance—very often personal things like bank cards. It seems pretty shocking that Royal Mail has decided it does not need to have somebody’s CV before employing them. Does she agree that is really poor practice?
I have been contacted by constituents whose complaints Capita has closed without resolution and whose pension quotes have disappeared. I heard the Minister say that old cases will not be allowed to sit in backlogs without progress, but my constituent, who served 43 years in the Department for Work and Pensions, alleges that this is an example of Capita manipulating closure figures. Will the Minister say how the Government are monitoring Capita to ensure that complaints are closed only once they have been resolved and that quotes do not disappear?
I thank the hon. Lady for her statement and for leading our inquiry. There are around 40 applicants for every apprenticeship and engineering place in Scotland. The UK Government have offered funding for two defence technical excellence colleges, and the Scottish Government have agreed to match that funding. Does she agree that both Governments should continue to work together so that Scotland gets as many apprenticeships as possible?
A constituent of mine from Somerton applied for retirement nearly a year ago, but has had to withdraw her application twice because she has not received her pension quotation, and she obviously cannot afford to retire with no income. My caseworkers have been attending the fortnightly casework meetings regularly, but there has been no resolution of this issue and many others like it. If neither Capita or the Cabinet Office can resolve my constituent’s problem, will the Minister intervene personally and tell my constituent when she will finally be paid?
The Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s commitment. We want to see an end to rough sleeping, but we have heard such pledges before. The last Conservative Government promised to halve rough sleeping by 2022 and end it by 2027, then brought that forward to 2024, but they achieved neither, leaving 8.5 million people in England with unmet housing needs. This attempt must do better—a catchy pre-Budget headline needs a plan behind it. Somerset council has identified 142 bed spaces, but given that it will not know its share of the money until Wednesday, that will leave only around eight weeks for the council to deliver the spaces before Christmas. Rough sleeping is not just an urban problem: in Somerset, 80 people were found rough sleeping on a single night at the last count. In Glastonbury, 131 vans and caravans are being lived in at the roadside by people who have been priced out of a home by rents that they simply cannot afford. They do not show up in the rough sleeping count, but they are homeless in all but name. The County Councils Network warns that more than 23,000 children in rural England are growing up in temporary accommodation. None of this will be fixed without more social homes, so the Liberal Democrats would build 150,000 of them a year. I have three questions for the Minister: is eight weeks a realistic timeframe for councils to deliver? Will the funding reach rural areas, not just our cities? And will it be backed by long-term investment in social housing, or will people be forced back on to the streets come January?
I spoke the other day to a postie who covers a large delivery round in Glastonbury and Somerton. He told me that the posties’ handheld device monitors their every move, alerting managers if they are stuck in traffic, if they are waiting for an elderly resident to come to the door, if they are too slow and even if they are using the toilet. Royal Mail has admitted to using the tracking data in conduct cases. Does my hon. Friend agree that posties should be trusted, not monitored by machines, and that we should recognise them as key workers?
The hon. Member has just described a village in my constituency called Kentisbeare. Royal Mail threatened to sack or rather move the postie to a different walk, and the village petitioned to maintain the postie on the same walk. Does she recognise that these postal workers do fantastic work and are crucial in communities for maintaining people’s wellbeing?
I thank the Minister for her statement. I, too, am on the Public Accounts Committee, and as the hon. Member for North Cotswolds (Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown) mentioned, we have done our best to get reasonable responses from Capita. My constituent Jane has been failed time and again by Capita; there has been a five-year delay to her pension payments, poor communication, an unexplained suspension of her pension, and now an outrageous demand that she repay £8,000 because of Capita’s mistake, not hers. Will the Minister condemn that treatment and reassure my constituent that the Government will ensure that she is treated fairly following those serious errors? Will they ensure that Capita, as a contractor acting on behalf of the state, is properly held to account for its failures? That has not happened so far.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for so eloquently introducing this debate and for revealing himself as a lifelong cat lover. One of the things I like about this Chamber is what we learn about our colleagues here. I have to say, if I had participated in a guessing game about some of the cat-loving Members we would hear from today, I probably would not have done very well—perhaps somebody could create one of those internet guessing games about MPs and whether they lean dog or cat. That would certainly be more savoury than some of the web applications there have been about Members of Parliament—I shall certainly not say any more about that. I thank CatsMatter for all its hard work over many years to advance protections for cats, and the 189,192 signatories to this e-petition, including 334 of my constituents in Didcot and Wantage. I have never had a cat of my own, but I absolutely love them. I want to illustrate the very strong bonds that can be formed between humans and cats by talking about three of the cats that I have formed a strong bond with over my lifetime. The first was called Henry. He lived primarily in another house in our cul-de-sac, but he liked to visit a number of people in the area, including us. He was a ginger and white cat. He was very friendly and intelligent, and he really enjoyed human company. He was an enormous source of companionship and comfort to me during some quite lonely and difficult times as a child and as a teenager growing up. Where I lived a few years ago, the landlord’s cat, Puzzle, would come and visit quite often. She was quite old—I think she was 17 when she died—but you would never know it: she was full of energy and very chatty. When my doors were open in summer, she would enter and announce herself by miaowing very volubly. She was incredibly friendly. I wish that anybody who thinks that cats are aloof or unfriendly could have met Puzzle. There was a little shop in the complex where I was renting, and when somebody would enter the courtyard she would run over, wanting to say hello to the people who were there—even children, and cats are not always the biggest fans of children. If I went too long before stroking her, she would start crawling up my leg, demanding more strokes; I was always very happy to give them, but occasionally the working day had to take priority. I learned of her death—not from being hit by a car, thankfully, but by natural causes—the same week that Putin invaded Ukraine, and it definitely added to the feelings of sadness. The final example is my friend Freddie’s cat, Mr Whiskers. He grew up as a stray cat roaming the mean streets of Haywards Heath for much of his life until he was adopted. He became an indoor cat because he got feline immunodeficiency virus as a result of being a stray. However, he had to be given up for adoption because his owner acquired a girlfriend who had a cat allergy—a rather controversial decision. I am not sure I would have chosen a significant other over Mr Whiskers, but that is one for another time. Mr Whiskers is called that because he has very distinctive whiskers. He is a black and white cat and is very friendly and chatty. We have heard some very powerful accounts, both from Members and from their constituents, of the strong bond that they have formed with cats. I have a constituent called Jenny who lives in Moulsford. She and her family had a cat called Mowgli, who was sadly hit by a car four years ago. The car did not stop and Mowgli was later found by a resident who was jogging through the village and recognised that the cat belonged to Jenny. He was only one year old, and Jenny’s daughters were devastated when they found out what had happened. That perfectly illustrates what many Members have said during this debate: cats are intelligent, are members of our family and have their own characters, and we can be absolutely devastated when we lose them, particularly in a manner as brutal as being hit by a car. That is why the Liberal Democrats are sympathetic to the petition’s ask that we extend the legal requirement to report road traffic collisions involving animals to include cats. It is not right that when a cat is hit by a vehicle, there is no legal requirement for the driver to report the incident to the police. As a result of such accidents, injured cats can be left at the roadside without prompt veterinary treatment, causing unnecessary suffering. We believe that it is important to improve welfare and quality of life for household pets, while also ensuring that all animals are treated equally in legislation. We believe that, like us, animals can experience suffering, pain and fear. Experts in the field of neuroscience are confident that mammals, birds and many other creatures possess consciousness. If we accept animal sentience, then animal cruelty or accidents must be considered unacceptable. It is crucial that we change the law to better protect animals from harm. As some Members have said, cats are also working animals. It is not just dogs who do that; the role of cats in pest control has been established for millennia and continues to be important to this day. I know that there has been debate about getting cats here in Parliament. That has been declined as a suggestion because people are worried that they could get stuck in nooks and crannies —although I think that perhaps we have underestimated their ingenuity for getting themselves out of trouble as well as into it. However, certainly those of us who have occasionally seen a mouse scurrying in the Tea Room or the Pugin Room would welcome cats here in Parliament. They would also be very good for our morale, and maybe we need to start a campaign for that as well. The Liberal Democrats have already had success in improving pet welfare in this Parliament, with my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) passing the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025, which aims to protect animal welfare by restricting the importation and non-commercial movement of dogs, cats and ferrets. I want to say a little about what the hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) said regarding an alternative approach advocated by Cats Protection. It is interesting that there is not necessarily unanimity among organisations that care passionately about cats that amending the Road Traffic Act is necessarily the sole solution to this challenge. As the hon. Lady said, the concern is that an amendment to include cats in the Road Traffic Act could force drivers to report collisions, but could also lead to various unintended consequences, for example, the imposition of criminal and civil liability on the owners of cats involved in collisions. I am sure that we would all agree that we would rather not open up another front of legal warfare—there are already so many as it is. Bringing cats into a framework designed for dogs and livestock could risk creating new legal responsibilities around containment, control and liability. Cats Protection advocates an even bigger push on microchipping. It led the call, along with others, to campaign for compulsory microchipping. That was introduced in 2024 in England, and Cats Protection calls for it across the rest of the UK, as the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) said, along with an important duty on owners to keep their details up to date so that the chipping system can work. It also advocates for scanning. Highways agencies in England and Scotland already collect, scan and notify owners about cat road victims, and the charity has published a scanning guide for local authorities. Finally, there is more that we can do not just within legislation but beyond it, as good citizens. A driver who hits a cat should take them to a vet for emergency treatment, where they can also be scanned for a microchip. That is the quickest way to identify the owner. Those are some options for the Minister to consider in tackling the problem. I look forward to hearing his comments.
T8. A business with which a constituent liaises missed out on work as a result of senior officials in the Ghanaian Government being denied business visas, which is believed to be due to their salaries being too low. That work then went to another country. Will the Minister meet me and my constituent to discuss the requirements for business visas and how a more sensible policy could help UK businesses be more competitive?
The Metropolitan Police Commissioner is clear that, despite recent welcome funding increases from the Government to the capital city grant, to be able to police protests and events in London he has two pretty invidious choices on his hands: he either has to take police officers out of constituencies like mine—and the Policing Minister’s—to police those protests and events, or he has to cut back on just-in-case police officers, so there is a huge risk if an event flairs up. Which does the Policing Minister think is the better option?
The PEEL—police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy—review into Surrey police recently found that my local force requires improvement on a range of matters, including how it investigates crime, how it responds to serious crime and the leadership itself. What steps is the Home Secretary taking to ensure that Surrey police improves and that we tackle crime in Woking?
Several of my constituents are in financial hardship as a result of Capita’s failings. This appalling company has even sent out financial statements and letters with figures deliberately obscured so that former civil servants do not know what they are entitled to. MPs across the House have clearly lost confidence in Capita, so will the Minister agree for the Cabinet Office itself to set up a hotline for MPs to raise cases and hold regular surgeries so that we can ensure that our former civil servant constituents get the money that they are entitled to?
The Prime Minister has said that wider society, especially the faith and voluntary sectors, will need to play their part in ending rough sleeping, but voluntary groups such as Woking’s homeless shelter, the York Road Project, are already overstretched and underfunded. How will the Minister ensure that the voluntary sector is supported and funded to end rough sleeping both this year and in future years in the long term?
2. What assessment she has made of the potential merits of the UK joining the EU pact on migration and asylum.
The Prime Minister has said that he wants access to the Eurodac database. How does the Government propose to negotiate that without breaching their EU red lines?
Stuart is 83. He lives in a care home in my constituency, which his pension pays for, but that pension stopped for four months over the summer, and even after my constituency office intervened he has had less than a quarter of those arrears paid back. Anna, another of my constituents, is in her 80s. She has just come out of hospital, and she is owed a staggering 17 years’ worth of widow’s pension. In July, Capita told me that the payment would be made within two weeks. In August, it said that it had no notes on file from that July meeting. In September, it told me that payment would be made within 10 days. On the 15th of this month, it said that it was still awaiting human authorisation. Last Friday, I was told that four members of Capita’s staff were working directly full time on her case. Would the Minister like to join me this Friday at 11 o’clock for my next weekly Capita casework call to try to ensure that Anna finally gets some of those 17 years’ worth of pension payments?
I thank the right hon. Lady and her Committee for the report. She will be aware that many agricultural sectors rely heavily on migrant labour, and that the Home Office is telling us that we need to upskill our own workforce to take the place of those workers. I draw to her attention the situation concerning foreign sheepshearers, who come to this country for a short period of time—three to four months every year. They come here, they shear the largest flocks—we reckon they do an excess of a million sheep in that short period of time—and then they move on and shear in other parts of the world. They take a number of our local shearers with them, which is a great opportunity for young people from farming communities. Nobody is going to train to the level that those people need to operate for work that is only going to last three or four months of the year. Can I encourage the right hon. Lady to bring some pressure to bear on the Home Office to take a more realistic view on the position of sheepshearers?
Businesses, constituents and pets in Tunbridge Wells suffer from destructive and often cruel catapult attacks. It is a problem that many of us across this House have seen in our inboxes. Kent police and Tunbridge Wells borough council are working together to manage the problem, including looking at public space protection orders. Can I ask the Secretary of State whether she has considered restrictions or a ban at a national level in order to strengthen the hand of local police forces and local authorities such as mine in Tunbridge Wells?
Like many right hon. and hon. Members, I have constituents who have not had their pensions paid. In the worst case, a constituent has waited for 11 months without a pension. My question is twofold. First, what compensation will the Minister force Crapita—sorry, Capita—to pay those constituents who have missed out? Secondly, there are tax implications for the sequencing of payments, so payments can fall in different tax years, among other things. Will that all be squared away with His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, so that our constituents do not overpay tax?
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and we are indeed flattered to see the Prime Minister discussing improved relations with the EU as a way to solve issues in the asylum system, but when the Government say that they will negotiate access to various agreements, including Eurodac, without dropping their red lines, they are engaging in Brexit delusion of the type we saw under the Conservatives. If we want useful co-operation on asylum and a good deal for taxpayers—because it will cost less if we are in the pact—we will have to join the EU migration and asylum pact, and that means dropping the Government’s red lines, doesn’t it?
We await more on the agreement with France, and perhaps with Belgium and many other countries. It might just be simpler to have an agreement with the entire EU. It grieves me to say this, but internal difficulties have arisen within the Labour party over migration. Cabinet members seem to be struggling to defend the Home Secretary’s position, and Government Back Benchers have a wide range of opinions. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has called for an “honest discussion” about EU freedom of movement. Will the Home Secretary back down and get behind the Prime Minister, who is open to freedom of movement, or will she stay loyal to her Back-Bench allies in the blue Labour faction, who are so hostile to it?
I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 750612 relating to placing a requirement on drivers to report collisions with cats. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers—I suspect they might need to change the nameplate. The petition was started by CatsMatter, a group co-funded by Mandy Hobbis and Tiya Ivy, who are here today. I am standing in today for my hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), who had the privilege of meeting Mandy ahead of today’s debate and learned that both of them had lost cats on the roads. Anyone who has waited up for a pet that never came home will understand why the campaign has kept going since 2017. I should declare an interest. I have always lived with cats and have lost several to being run over. Just a few weeks ago, a family member lost their cat, Comet, who was hit by a car in a residential cul-de-sac and just left there. As with every loss of a cat, they were devastated. My daughter Emily has a beautiful white fluffy cat that rules the Wrigley household. He is called Ignatius D Flufflesworth—not that he comes when called by that name, of course. He was, however, very fond of joining in with my Zoom calls during the pandemic and pretending he was in a James Bond movie. I know how much he means to her, and the idea of losing him to a car accident without knowing what happened does not bear thinking about.
I agree. Cats are not just companions; they are members of the family, so, yes, collisions should be reported. Clearly, we are not alone. By the time the petition closed on 17 June, it had gathered 189,192 signatures, many of which were in my own Newton Abbot constituency.
Yes, absolutely. It is the not knowing that is really awful. I will come on to that. I am told that this is the largest cat welfare petition that has ever come to Parliament. That is a great many people and they deserve to have their concerns properly heard today. So where does the law stand?
From my experience, I suspect that the right hon. Member’s third option is probably correct. On people’s confusion about where to report a collision with a cat, section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 says that a driver who hits certain animals must stop and, if necessary, report it to the police. Those animals are horses, cattle, asses, mules, sheep, pigs, goats and dogs. Cats are not on the list.
I tend to agree, and we will come to working animals shortly. Cats are not on the list. Neither, I might add, are llamas or alpacas, which gives a fair idea of how old the list is. It has come down to us, almost untouched, from the Road Traffic Act 1930. The usual explanation—my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) must have read my speech in advance—is that these are working animals with an economic value to their owners, whereas cats were seen as pets. Rule 286 of the highway code does advise drivers to report any collision with an animal and, where possible, to find the owner of a cat. However, that is only guidance, and a driver who hits a cat can carry on driving without breaking any law.
Yes, I agree—it should. In their response to the petition, the Government noted they have “no current plans” to change the law due to the fact that cats are small and often out at dawn and dusk, so a driver may genuinely not know that they have hit one. They argued that, alongside research into how councils identify cats found on the road, compulsory microchipping offers a better way forward.
Yes, that is a very good way forward. The campaigners have answered the Government’s points with some care. On the working animals argument, CatsMatter has done its own sums. Using a University of Bristol study and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs farm figures, it reckons that there could be around 60,000 working farm cats in England, against roughly 65,000 working sheepdogs. It is open that those are estimates, but I represent a great many farms, and I can tell Members that farm cats in Devon work as hard as farm dogs and earn their keep. The campaigners also make a broader point, and I have some sympathy with it: many people now think of their cats as one of the family—Ignatius is certainly part of ours. When they see that dogs are covered and cats are not, they feel that the law simply does not value their animal in the same way. Other countries have updated their laws to include cats, including Italy and Hong Kong. CatsMatter argues that even if a new duty of stopping for cats was rarely enforced, it would tell drivers what decent behaviour on the road looks like. The question is whether the reasons for leaving cats out of section 170 still hold up in 2026. Cats Protection, the UK’s leading cat welfare charity, wants exactly the same outcome as the petitioners. Nobody wants an injured cat to be left to suffer, or an owner to be left forever wondering. However, the charity has real concerns about using this particular piece of law.
I agree with my hon. Friend that that is the right, moral thing to do and we need to encourage drivers to do it. The animals in section 170 are ones whose owners are expected to keep them under control or fenced in, and the law has long accepted that cats roam. Cats Protection worries that bringing cats into a framework created for dogs and livestock could open up questions about an owner’s liability if a roaming cat causes an accident. It might also nudge people towards keeping their cats indoors—speaking as Ignatius’s feeder and door-opener, I am not sure he would take kindly to that. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals supports the aim of the petition and says it would not stand in the way of a change in the law. Its concern is a practical one. A duty to report to the police would not in itself get an injured cat to a vet, or ensure that that a dead one is scanned for a chip. Police forces are stretched, and ringing 101 will not bring help to the roadside. The sense of unfairness that the petitioners feel is real, and I understand it. It has been fascinating to open the debate on this petition, because the fact of the matter is that everyone involved—on both sides of the petition—is united around one thing: they all care deeply about cats; they just disagree about whether changing section 170 is the right answer. What they also agree on is what should happen if a cat is hit. If the cat is alive, it needs to see a vet as quickly as possible. Alive or dead, it should be scanned for a microchip, so that its owner can be found and told. That brings me on to what drivers actually face. Picture someone on a dark road who has just hit a cat. They are shaken and they do not know whether to ring the police, the council, a vet, a charity or highways, because responsibility is split across all of them. I would like to hear from the Minister what the Government will do to give that driver a clear answer. That may or may not mean amending the Road Traffic Act 1988. Whatever the mechanism, cats should not be left to suffer at the roadside, and their owners should not spend years wondering what happened to them. I thank Mandy and Tiya and everyone at CatsMatter for their work, and I look forward to hearing from colleagues and the Minister’s reply.
I thank Mandy Hobbis, Tiya Ivy, CatsMatter and the nearly 200,000 people who signed the petition, which has enabled us to have this debate. I also thank Members from across the House for their contributions. Some significant themes have emerged from the debate, including cats being part of the family; people not knowing what has happened to their lost cat adding to the trauma of the situation; people loving their cats; and too many cats being hit by cars. I particularly noted the statistic that every day in every constituency two cats are hit by cars. That is just too many for nothing to happen. Two members of this robust institution have not been mentioned today—I am surprised they were not referred to, although I loved hearing about Clem Cattlee, Mo Meowlam and the other cats around the place—and they are Larry in No. 10 and Mr Speaker’s cat Attlee. They might, like me, be slightly disappointed by the Minister’s response to the debate. I have great sympathy for all those Members from across the House who talked about the issues with their own animals and those of their constituents. When I was elected, I promised to stand up for cats, and I am pleased to be able to do so—
From coastal Devon to rural Warwickshire, we have the same issues. My constituents are not receiving letters on time. They are missing NHS appointments—really important appointments—documents are getting lost, and letters informing people of fines to be paid are arriving too late. We know that our postal workers are doing their best, and are working very hard in very difficult conditions. Does my hon. Friend agree that both Ofcom and Royal Mail need a radical overhaul?