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. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

   Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill

   It is a pleasure to close what has been a genuinely fascinating debate. I give thanks to hon. and right hon. Members from all parts of the House for their thoughtful contributions, in addition to their support for this worthwhile and historic piece of legislation. As we heard earlier from the Minister of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), this important Bill will facilitate the removal of an outdated 19th-century restriction. We have spent a lot of time today talking about history, and who does not enjoy a little conversation about history? I certainly do, and I know the Minister of State would agree. It is enjoyable to be involved in preparing for a debate where someone uses a phrase like “not since the reformation”. It reminds us of the scale and scope of what we do in this place, but we are here to talk about where we are in 2026. This Bill ensures that any Prime Minister, regardless of their religious beliefs, can advise the sovereign on Church appointments. We have heard in this debate a number of views and contributions from Members across the House. I welcome support for this Bill from across the House, including from the official Opposition and the Liberal Democrats. Religious freedom and tolerance of faith before the law are crucial principles that we must uphold. In response to why we are bringing forward this legislation at this time, when there are undoubtedly more important issues, I simply say two things: one, the Government are handling this in a pragmatic way, tackling minor constitutional issues as and when they arise. This is an obvious problem with an obvious solution. The legislation is pragmatic, quick and will not detain the House long, despite the enjoyable history lesson that we have had today. Secondly, I am a strong believer that we can walk and chew gum at the same time, and our ambition is a matter of public record: to rewire the state and to deliver the largest re-industrialisation of our nations and regions in at least a generation and the biggest redistribution of power our country has ever seen. In response to the specific issues raised by the Members of the official Opposition, let me say that this is a narrowly focused Bill without knock-on consequences. The temporary arrangement in respect of the Lord Chancellor will be brought to an end once this Bill has been passed, and there are no wider constitutional changes. I am happy to give a firm commitment in that regard. This is not a wider constitutional change, and the existing arrangements between the Crown, the Government and the established Church will remain. My hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling) talked about the wider role of religion in public life. It was an interesting contribution, but this is a tightly focused Bill which deals with this issue and this issue alone. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) also entertained the House, although I should say that I do not express a preference for any particular religion in No. 10, and I say that as a lapsed Methodist, if one can even be such a thing. I am very happy to have a Catholic Prime Minister, although once a Methodist always a Methodist—much like “once a Whip, always a Whip”. The Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), entertained us with a historical tour de force. I am afraid I do not have any historical forebears such as his to call upon, so I will simply say that it is right and proper that the senior adviser to the sovereign, the Prime Minister, should be able to advise the sovereign. The hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) talked about political input. That is not what we are talking about today, so in a sense we may differ on that point, but it was nonetheless a thoughtful contribution. The debate has indicated that there is clear support for this legislation on both sides of the House. When I speak to my constituents, whether at Gateshead’s Jewish Kehilla or at Cardinal Hume Catholic School, I want the students there to know that they can play a full role in democratic life, where their faith is no barrier, and I know that that view is shared across the House. I look forward to hearing further from hon. Members during the remaining stages due to follow shortly, and I commend the Bill to the House. Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time; to stand committed to a Committee of the whole House (Order, this day).

   Hansard source
2. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

   Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill

   I hope that I will not detain the Committee for long in dealing with the two clauses. Clause 1 is the only operative clause of the Bill. Its purpose is to remove the restrictions that prevent a person who professes either the Roman Catholic or Jewish faiths from advising the sovereign on Church appointments. It also removes parallel restrictions that prevent a person of those faiths from making Church appointments, when they have a right to do so by virtue of their office. Some office holders appointed by the sovereign, such as the Lord Chancellor, have the right to nominate someone directly to a benefice—for example, the right to nominate the local vicar of a parish. The sovereign has no involvement in those appointments. The clause achieves that by repealing sections 17 and 18 of the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 and the Jews Relief Act 1858 in their entirety. It also contains some consequential repeals of Church legislation that cross-referred to some of these provisions. Finally, the clause provides that once it comes into force, no person can be convicted under the provisions in section 18 of the 1829 Act or section 4 of the 1858 Act. Clause 2 sets out the extent, commencement and short title of the Bill. The Bill extends to the whole United Kingdom, and applies UK-wide. It will come into force on Royal Assent, which will ensure that the Prime Minister can assume his constitutional duty to advise the sovereign on Church appointments without delay. It is clear that the Bill commands broad consensus, and I am grateful to colleagues for their approach to it. I look forward very much to the rest of today’s debate, and to seeing the Bill on the statute book soon.

   Hansard source
3. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Myer

   University Hospital of North Tees

   This is a Teesside-wide issue, and it is felt by communities across the region. All of us, as MPs representing the Tees Valley, believe that there needs to be a long-term future for this hospital. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald) is also supporting the trust’s strategic outline case for the future of the hospital. We need to see a future here. However, there are also other hospitals within the trust’s area that are sitting and rotting. I see one in my constituency in East Cleveland. It is controlled by NHS Property Services and there are huge parts of that building that are sitting empty, which could have more services in. I urge the Minister to meet with us collectively to talk about the future for hospitals across the Tees region.

   Hansard source
4. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Myer

   University Hospital of North Tees

   There is not yet much clarity on where some of that funding will go in terms of setting up those mental health services, particularly in Redcar and Cleveland. If we have a hospital with a wing that is sitting empty, it seems to me a no-brainer that that wing could be a site for some of those services, but obviously I would like to have a conversation with the Department to understand whether there are any such plans, and if there are not, whether we can get some confirmation on that.

   Hansard source
5. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Myer

   Community Policing: Government Support

   The Minister knows what I am going to say. Two years ago, I was here warning about the systematic underfunding of Cleveland police, and I have done so continually over the last couple of years. I am grateful to the Prime Minister for the time he made last week to discuss these matters, I am grateful to the Minister for taking the time on many occasions to discuss them, and I am grateful for the mutual aid that we have seen in our region since the tragic deaths of PC Tom Clough and PC Matthew Blades this summer. The fact is that Cleveland police is one of the most overstretched forces in the country. Since 2010, it has been the hardest hit force in England in terms of cuts to police numbers, and Cleveland has one of the highest recorded crime rates in England and Wales. The chief constable, Victoria Fuller, has estimated that the force needs another 500 officers just to get to the national average. However, as Lauren Somerville, chair of the Police Federation in Cleveland, said when I met her earlier this week, Cleveland is a good force and its officers are proud of their work. The new police performance system gave the force in Cleveland its highest rating of level 1 and the force in Cleveland has also been recognised as one of the most improved forces in England and Wales. The problem is not the hard-working, brave officers of Cleveland police; the fundamental problem is the police funding formula, which does not adequately reflect the scale of crime, deprivation and demand in Cleveland. I urge the Government to overhaul that formula at pace and to inject an emergency in-year funding increase so that we can tackle the challenges we have in our region.

   Hansard source
6. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

   Support for Veterans

   12. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support veterans who served in Operation Banner.

   Hansard source
7. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

   Support for Veterans

   Veterans in my constituency were let down by the previous Government’s legacy Act, which offered nothing but false promises. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give to Operation Banner veterans in North Durham that they will not be subject to unnecessary repeat investigations and that the operational context of their deployment will be taken into account?

   Hansard source
8. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

   Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

   With permission, I will make a statement on Sir David Bell’s review into antisemitism in schools and colleges in England. First, let me just apologise for some of the reporting in the media. The full report and Government response were laid in the House this morning and were not given to the media first. I have ordered a leak inquiry into this matter. Today, Sir David has published this seminal review, exposing the shocking scale of antisemitism in British society and how that is reflected across education. Almost three in five Jewish young people and half of Jewish teachers have experienced or witnessed antisemitism. That cannot continue. Let me place on record my sincere thanks to Sir David for his excellent report and to the reference group for their support. Make no mistake, this is a report for every teacher, every staff member, every education leader and every student listening today. All children and teachers should be able to go to school or college free from fear, but there is a wider responsibility for education as a whole to teach our young people British values of tolerance, acceptance and respect for one another. Collectively, we have a duty to educate this generation and the next on what antisemitism is, on why it is wrong, and on what happens when it takes hold in society. Whether or not there are Jewish staff and students in your school or college, this report is for you. This generational challenge belongs to us all. We all know that antisemitism is an ancient evil. Today it remains as pernicious as ever, but its modern mutation is in many ways more prominent and more prevalent. Perhaps most concerning of all, that is especially true among young people. Old tropes have found new life in the modern world. The fallacy that Jewish networks control the global economy and other such delusions once confined to the fringes have found a new home on social media. Antisemitism is now normalised and amplified in echo chambers online, reaching directly into children’s bedrooms. I thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport for her leadership and commitment in tackling this issue, and I am grateful for her collaboration. As Sir David’s report also identifies, the conflict in the middle east has significantly fanned the flames of division here at home. Misunderstanding, ignorance and deliberate misrepresentation can quickly lead to antisemitism—at times casual, at others more serious, and all too often unreported and unchallenged. As a House and a Government, we must be clear: blaming British Jews for the actions of the Israeli Government is antisemitism; assuming British Jews have a particular political standpoint because they are Jewish is antisemitism; and targeting British Jews out of concern for Palestine is antisemitism. When such views and behaviours are expressed in any school or college, whether or not they are aimed directly at a Jewish person, they are antisemitic, and we have a duty to challenge them. Sitting at the centre of our communities, schools and colleges have a leadership role in fostering tolerance, compassion and respect for difference. Let me be clear: teachers should not bring their own political views into the classroom. That is a fundamental of education. However, this principle should not lead to a shying away from difficult debates. In fact, as Sir David’s report clearly recommends, schools and colleges should be the place for important discussions, but school leaders often fear reprisals, protests or accusations of political bias, so they avoid discussing and addressing important topics. I want to empower our teachers and school and college leaders to tackle these issues head on. Our young people have to learn how to navigate contentious debates thoughtfully and respectfully, and to understand that antisemitism and other forms of racism are wrong. That is a job for education, but we all have a responsibility to set the tone, here in this House and in the media too—robust debate and challenge matched with respect, tolerance and disagreeing amicably. A new approach is needed. Antisemitism is unique in both historical context and its reach today. It demands a unique response. That is why this Government accept all 27 recommendations from Sir David’s review. I thank everyone who contributed their views and experiences, but above all, I want to recognise the Jewish community directly for their bravery in engaging with the review. I do not take lightly the personal cost they have paid in recounting their deeply hurtful experiences. They have not only my thanks but my word that their voices will be heard. Change will come. I turn to the report’s recommendations. First, definition matters. Combating antisemitism starts with identifying it. I agree with Sir David that the use of a common and consistent definition will improve understanding and confidence. I will therefore write to all schools and colleges to set out my expectation that they adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism. As Sir David recommends, we will strengthen the safeguarding guidance to make it clear that antisemitism is a distinct risk and therefore requires a distinct safeguarding response. I also accept the recommendation that all education settings should record antisemitic incidents as a specific category. Sir David also says that school and college leaders, as well as head and teacher unions, need more support to identify and challenge antisemitism. We will develop and roll out high-quality training, good practice guidance and practical resources, as well as dedicated support for leaders managing complex and serious incidents involving antisemitism and other forms of racism, including support for escalation when it is needed. We will also give schools and colleges clear and specific support when it comes to how and when controversial and sensitive issues should be discussed. We will update and strengthen Holocaust education, so that this generation and the next can better understand the horrors of the Holocaust, how it came about, and why that should matter to us today. I can confirm that such education will continue to be compulsory in the national curriculum. However, as Sir David has recommended, while it is right that every child should know about the Holocaust, that should not be the only thing that they know about Jewish people and their history. We will ensure, through the curriculum, that the contribution, culture and history of Jewish people in Britain are well understood and appreciated. Judaism is a diverse, modern and generous faith tradition, and the curriculum should reflect that as well. However, this is not just about what happens in the classroom. One of the most shocking findings of Sir David’s review was that following the Heaton Park synagogue terrorist attack, educational visits to the Manchester Jewish Museum in my constituency fell by half, just when those visits were needed most. We will boost opportunities for engagement with Jewish cultural experiences. The testimonies of Jewish teachers and leaders in Jewish schools about how much of their time was spent on safety and not teaching were particularly concerning. We cannot build ever higher walls around our Jewish institutions, but we will continue to work with the Community Security Trust and the Home Office to ensure that children and staff can be safe, happy and supported. Sir David looked closely at the issue of political symbols displayed by staff and students. He found it not to be a widespread issue, and therefore concluded that extending existing legal duties on schools would be disproportionate. I accept his recommendation, but as Education Secretary, I should make it clear that I would not expect to see teachers coming to school or college wearing or displaying any political material. There are further important recommendations for leaders of schools and colleges, and for teachers, staff, parents and unions, among others. I will ensure that we work to do what needs to be done and to maintain momentum. I have set up an implementation group, which will get to work immediately, and I have asked Sir David to conduct a one-year review of the implementation of his recommendations. Although universities are not in the scope of the review, I want to make it clear to the House that the rise in antisemitism on our campuses is completely unacceptable. I wrote to all vice-chancellors earlier this month about the steps that they need to take to combat antisemitism, and I will continue to act wherever I can. This is an incredibly important moment for education and for our country. It falls to our generation to educate the next on what can happen to a society when antisemitism is allowed to take hold, and why we all have a duty to root it out. I commend this statement to the House.

   Hansard source
9. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

   Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

   I thank the right hon. Lady for what she has said, for discussing these issues with me yesterday, and for her contribution to the review; I know that she spent time speaking to Sir David, which he really valued. As she has said and as I have said, this is an issue that we should address collectively, with one voice and as one House. I think we all agree that we do not want to hear any testimonies such as those to which she has just referred, although she was right to do so. I will pick up on a couple of the right hon. Lady’s points. Enforcement and data collection and measurement will all be absolutely critical to ensuring both implementation and, more importantly, change. In a year’s time, I hope I am able to come back to the House and say that the situation has improved. That is why we are updating the teacher standards, and why we are including in the safeguarding framework the obligation to have regard to antisemitism. She will know that safeguarding is a key issue that Ofsted looks into and inspects. We are updating and boosting the requirement to report, because when things are reported, action can follow. If we need to go further, we will, but today we have set out, in response to Sir David’s review, a number of ways in which these things will be measured and enforced. Sir David looked into the issue of trade unions in his review, and he was clear in his report. I asked him to do the review, and I fully take what he found in that. He is clear that he does not believe that any education union is inherently antisemitic, and he is also clear that the education unions should have robust policies and processes in place to tackle these issues, and to ensure that members are sufficiently trained. I have discussed these matters with the education unions, and I know that they are keen to put things right. In the spirit of coming together on this issue, I gently say to the right hon. Lady that the fear of reprisal, and of media or political attention, when it comes to being politically impartial—we have heard this testimony time and again—has led to many school leaders and teachers fearing to tackle these issues head-on. They do not want to go into debates on the subject when they hear some of the age-old tropes in the classroom, for fear of reprisals, or of not being supported. Sir David’s review is very clear that schools and colleges absolutely should be places where issues can be debated, challenged, discussed and brought to life. We have to get the balance right. If anything, I would say that things have moved too far in the other direction. The fears about not being politically impartial is hampering our teachers and school leaders, preventing them from doing what they need to do. I am glad that the right hon. Lady mentioned the Green party; I see the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) in her seat. We Labour Members are absolutely clear that the motion passed by the Green party is wrong—it is antisemitic. The Green party leadership has a much deeper responsibility here, because it has such reach with young people. The motion is being repeated in campuses, councils and colleges, and that is causing widespread fear. It has resulted in ever increasing antisemitism since the report was published. I ask the Green party to consider these issues very carefully.

   Hansard source
10. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank my hon. Friend for her leadership, and for the work that she continues to do as Chair of the Education Committee. I know of the incident involving her constituent, which we have discussed a couple of times, and I was as horrified as she was to hear of it. I hope that the students and schools involved in that incident are listening today and understand that they should have gone further. They can still go further in challenging what happened to her young constituent, and take action. My hon. Friend is absolutely right: we must support teachers and school and college leaders in developing capacity, skills and confidence, so that they feel supported in challenging these behaviours and creating an environment where this can be discussed. It is absolutely critical that students understand that certain ideas are wrong, and what it means when they are expressed. As she knows, we are in the middle of updating the curriculum. A new citizenship curriculum is coming on stream in primary and secondary schools, and we will ensure this issue is included. We will also update teacher training, as well as doing all the other things that I have announced today, that were in the report.

    Hansard source
11. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank the hon. Lady for her powerful contribution. She is absolutely right to suggest that antisemitism has got worse, not better, since David Bell began his review a few months ago. We have all seen and heard of the horrors that have been reported, but many unreported incidents are happening across the country, and education settings reflect that. As I said earlier, there is a particularly shocking rise in antisemitic views among our young people, and such views are distinct from other forms of racism that are sometimes expressed by different generations. That is why this needs to be tackled as a generational issue for all of us, and for every single school and college, not just those that represent Jewish communities. She is right in what she says about those attending Jewish schools and colleges, and I hear the same testimonies as she does about having to hide one’s faith and hide one’s identity. We are taking forward a plan of action with the British Transport police, so that buses and other forms of travel to and from school can be made safer. There will be funding attached to what I have outlined. I will ensure that schools and colleges have the funding they need to do the jobs we need them to do. However, I think this is really about leadership at the moment, and ensuring that schools do feel that they can address these issues and are confident that they will be supported. There are often counter-protests and reprisals when action is taken, which is why I want every school and college leader to know that I will back them. I will back them on having debates in their schools, and I will back them in any action they need to take.

    Hansard source
12. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend’s words. Zionism is not racism, which is why the motion passed by the Green party is so wholly wrong and is antisemitic, and I want people to hear that loudly and clearly. The IHRA definition of antisemitism is clear that denying Jewish people the right to self-determination is antisemitic, which is why it is really important that schools adopt it. I thank him for that contribution.

    Hansard source
13. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank the hon. Member for that question, and he is absolutely right about the scale and the urgency. How this exists everywhere in every part of society is absolutely shocking and something we must all really take hold of. That is why I have fully ensured that I, as Education Secretary, am the one leading on this in my Department. We have had cross-Government meetings and action taskforces on antisemitism across a range of issues, and he will be aware that a number of other reviews are happening of other aspects of public services. There are really important recommendations in this report, and we accept them all and will implement them all, but this is bigger than one report or one set of recommendations and their implementation. We must have a big national conversation about what contemporary antisemitism looks like, where it is appearing and why it is appearing, and we must be calling it out and explaining to the next generation what goes wrong in a country and a society when we fail to do that. That is a job for every single one of us, not just me.

    Hansard source
14. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    First, I thank my hon. Friend for all the work he has done on these issues over many years and for the role he is currently playing on the board of the IHRA. I am glad that he welcomes the updating and enhancing of Holocaust education, and we will be working with the Holocaust Educational Trust. Its chief executive sits on the implementation taskforce, and I know she will be doughty in ensuring that we do that very well. He is absolutely right that the IHRA definition is a working definition. It is a practical guide, but it comes to life only when it is taught, when it is implemented and when people use it as an everyday tool to navigate the issues they may be facing in their school or college.

    Hansard source
15. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    As ever, I thank the right hon. Gentleman for all the work he has done on this issue over many years. I must say that I find it hard to believe that he has done so for over 40 years; it cannot possibly be so long. He makes a really important point, and I will certainly look at those sections. His history of the Education Acts is better than mine, but I will look at including those sections as an annexe because he is absolutely right. When people go into teaching and become school and college leaders, they absolutely know they have to leave their own political views at the door and they want to educate the next generation on all these issues. We have to regain the confidence in schools and classrooms to have debate, to disagree amicably and respectfully, and to hear each other’s opinions in a balanced way. That is what I want all our schools to feel able to do. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for amending that Bill. I know he will continue to amend Bills in times to come. I will look at those annexes and include them in my letter.

    Hansard source
16. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank my hon. Friend for that contribution and for agreeing with the findings of the report. Absolutely, Sir David has recommended the safeguarding as an explicit duty and we have accepted that completely. Making safeguarding a statutory issue is a way we can ensure that it is reported, measured and understood, and that there is then explicit training on it for teachers and staff. All the resources, materials and training to implement the report will be available for our schools and colleges within the year.

    Hansard source
17. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank the hon. Lady for another testimony from students who feel they have to hide their faith. Indeed, we heard many accounts in the review of teachers doing the same in their schools and colleges. That is why we are accepting all the recommendations, we want to put this issue centre stage, and we are having this important debate and showing cross-party resolve to see schools and colleges take action. But we also want society as a whole debating, discussing and understanding the difference between maybe some of their political views and what then can quickly become antisemitism.

    Hansard source
18. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank my hon. Friend for that question, and for all the work she is doing in her community with Joe Burchell and others. There are, obviously, big questions for all our public services. This is something that every single one of my colleagues around the Cabinet table takes incredibly seriously. I will certainly pass on to my counterpart her suggestion for faith officers in the police.

    Hansard source
19. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    As ever, the right hon. Gentleman makes a profound point and he is absolutely right to do so. I remember his review from 2004. It was important then and he is right that every generation needs to learn, relearn and keep on learning to ensure the next generation are taught the horrors of antisemitism. With every generation that passes, the horrors of the Holocaust get further and further away in the rear-view mirror. That is why we need to update that learning. We need to ensure that Holocaust education remains on the national curriculum, but that it is updated for the modern era. His words are really powerful. I am sure like many colleagues in this House, I went on the Auschwitz visit with the Holocaust Educational Trust a few years ago with school students from Manchester. The profound learning from visiting Auschwitz is that many, many, many good people turned a blind eye to what they knew was happening, which is how the murder of so many Jews, on an industrial scale, was allowed to take place. Many good people turned a blind eye. We are not going to be that generation of good people, I can reassure him of that.

    Hansard source
20. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank my hon. Friend for what sounds like incredibly important inter-faith work in Birmingham. She is absolutely right: modern, contemporary forms of antisemitism—the conspiracy theories she talked about—which are now, I am afraid, rife online, appear in gaming and on other social media. They are, therefore, in children’s bedrooms, living rooms and other rooms where their screens are. That is why we need to ensure that every school in Birmingham and across the country is well-trained and well-versed, and is adopting the recommendations we are setting out.

    Hansard source
21. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank the hon. Lady for sharing her family history. It is really important that we do keep sharing those stories as well, and I thank her for being a governor of what I am sure is an excellent school in Hazel Grove, as there are many excellent schools in Hazel Grove. She raises a good point about governors, and I will take that on board and ensure that training and other resources are available to governors as well. What we are talking about is new funding, as well as new resources for training, suggested classroom resources and so on. That will be available, and I hope schools will feel fully supported in taking this forward.

    Hansard source
22. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    I thank my hon. Friend for that, and once again put on record my thanks to Sir David Bell and his team for the way in which they conducted themselves, not just for the outcome of their review. My hon. Friend is absolutely right: positive engagement, cultural experiences and cultural exchange are absolutely critical to our fostering an environment of acceptance, tolerance, respect and understanding. It sounds like the exhibition at the Bournemouth gallery is one such event, and we will be supporting with extra funding schools to take part in more of these cultural experiences.

    Hansard source
23. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    That is an excellent question and it raises a very good point. The hon. Gentleman talks about being a father. As a mother, I too have had to have these conversations at home and it is important that we do. That was in part why I wanted to be absolutely explicit and clear—as we all need to be—in my opening statement about how antisemitism is revealing itself in modern times. But the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: this is hard; it is not easy for anybody. I have great faith in our teaching workforce. We have some of the best teachers in the world in our schools, but we will be working with experts and the teaching profession to design a lot of the resources and the guidance and advice that we need. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that in addition to what I am announcing today we are on the cusp of our big curriculum review, and at the heart of that review will be media and digital literacy and equipping our young people with the ability to discern dis and misinformation and to ask the right questions and to understand where information is coming from and therefore what it might mean.

    Hansard source
24. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Powell

    Antisemitism in Schools and Colleges

    Well, that must have been some politically impartial class, and I thank my hon. Friend for allowing us to end this statement on that note, sending a very important signal to the country, and to our teaching workforce as well, that this is something we stand together on, shoulder to shoulder, resolutely as one Parliament, as one country, as one Government. It might be helpful if I remind colleagues of one thing that was exposed in Sir David Bell’s review: in a survey of secondary school teachers who teach about the Holocaust, 40% reported encountering antisemitism coming into those classes among their students. This really is an issue that we all have to take forward, and I thank every single colleague here today for their contributions.

    Hansard source
25. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lola McEvoy

    E-scooters and E-bikes: Regulation

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for bringing this important debate to Westminster Hall. On 16 May 2025, just before 1 pm, 86-year-old Gloria Stephenson was walking her daughter’s dog using a zebra crossing when she was hit by an 18-year-old riding a Sur-Ron e-bike. Gloria died at the scene. My constituent Julie Francis lost her mother that day. She has a petition for more police funding and has been a vocal campaigner for more action to get these bikes off the road. In September, I brought her to Parliament to meet the Policing Minister. Julie’s ask of us all is simple: “Don’t let my mother’s death be in vain.” The rise of e-bikes and e-scooters in Darlington is a major problem. It is obvious from the cross-section of representation in the Chamber that we are not alone. The balaclava-wearing men tearing through our town and deliberately intimidating everyone else, on and off the road, are a visible degradation of our collective social contract. They are literally running amuck, Minister, and my constituents and I have had enough. “Ban them” is the most tempered call from residents, and the most appropriate for a parliamentary debate; many have suggested other measures, which I will not go into now. But the truth is that they are banned; it is already illegal to ride these dirt bikes, motocross bikes and e-scooters on our roads. Durham police are doing a great job of seizing and crushing them—I attended a scrapyard recently and crushed 70 of them with the police—but aside from that, they do not have the powers alone to tackle the problem. One reason why this issue has become so prolific is that it requires a multi-Department approach. Will the Minister review the dirt bike licensing regime, because it is clearly ineffective? In the north-east, we have 34 licensed Sur-Ron bikes; I saw more than that crushed two weeks ago. Will he consider mirroring the gun licensing regulation to enforce stricter requirements for legitimate UK purchases, increasing the penalty for driving dirt bikes without a licence, and banning the sale of e-scooters entirely in our high-street retailers? Will he bring together a cross-Department taskforce to regulate the import of these dangerous kits and, ultimately, get these illegal bikes off our streets?

    Hansard source
26. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lola McEvoy

    E-scooters and E-bikes: Regulation

    Having had 14 years in power to do something about this issue, the Conservative party might be expected to support the next stage of our policing regulations, as set out in the King’s Speech. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it would be great if the upcoming policing Bill contained provisions on the regulation of off-road bikes?

    Hansard source
27. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lizzi Collinge

    Jackdaw Gasfield

    As a member of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, I have looked in detail at both Jackdaw and Rosebank. It is important that we in this House do not confuse the two. My main concern has always been the impact on carbon emissions of any gas taken from Jackdaw. Will the Minister tell me what impact Jackdaw gas will have on emissions? Will he reassure me that this decision will not have an impact on the speed or scale of the low-carbon energy transition?

    Hansard source
28. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lillian Jones

    Jackdaw Gasfield

    I welcome the Minister’s statement on approving Jackdaw. Particularly during the current global instability, it is going to help strengthen our energy security, and protect skills and jobs. More importantly, it will start supplying British households and businesses by the end of the month. Does he agree that if we are serious about energy security, decarbonisation and the faster roll-out of electrification, the SNP must rethink its ideological opposition to nuclear energy? It is a vital part of the energy mix to deliver reliable, low-carbon power for Scotland.

    Hansard source
29. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lewis Atkinson

    Engagements

    Q14.  Waits for NHS mental health care are far too long. Our constituents are 200 times more likely to wait 18 months for help with a mental health condition than for a physical health condition. A key reason is that, for a long time, there have been clear standards set for physical health access that we are all familiar with—four hours for A&E, and 18 weeks for physical health—but such standards have not been set by successive Governments for mental health. Our manifesto promised to reform the NHS to give the same focus and attention to mental health as to physical health. Will the Prime Minister ensure that the forthcoming mental health strategy delivers on that and sets clear standards, to reduce mental health waits for people of all ages?

    Hansard source
30. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lee Pitcher

    Mineworkers’ Pension Schemes: Nottinghamshire

    I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. I had one of those dreaded calls this week from a family member to say that a resident of mine had passed away without getting justice. These people gave blood, sweat and tears for our country. Is it not time that they got justice?

    Hansard source
31. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Kate Dearden

    Royal Mail: Performance

    Good afternoon, Ms Lewell; it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I congratulate the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) on securing this debate about the performance of Royal Mail. She clearly outlined the issues in her constituency. She has heard directly from constituents about the inadequate service, and I thank her for bringing that to the Chamber, as I thank other colleagues for doing the same. This is not the first debate on Royal Mail in the House, but it is my first debate as the Minister responsible, and it is a pleasure to respond to it. I take this part of my brief extremely seriously, and I hear the challenges we are working through loud and clear. Royal Mail should be a cornerstone of our national infrastructure, serving every address in the UK under its universal service obligation. As we have heard, people and businesses continue to rely on its services every single day, and posties are such valued members of the communities they serve. Royal Mail is an independent business, and the Government are not involved in its day-to-day operations or resolving specific service issues, but patience with its performance is wearing thin. Colleagues will have heard that loud and clear from the Prime Minister at the Dispatch Box earlier this afternoon. Customers have every right to expect better. Royal Mail must do more to restore confidence in its service. That is why I was frank in my meeting with the chief executive of Royal Mail last month, and will continue to be so for as long as necessary. We are clear that the service has been unacceptable for too long and that the pace of improvement must increase quickly. Although letter volumes have fallen from 20 billion items per year in the mid-2000s to 6.5 billion in 2025, the number of addresses served by the universal postal service has continued to grow, and we should reflect on that.

    Hansard source
32. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Kate Dearden

    Royal Mail: Performance

    I thank my hon. Friend for raising those important points. I will shortly turn to the work we are doing with Ofcom and the engagement I have had with it so far. Postal services remain absolutely essential, delivering everything from medical letters to financial information and birthday and greeting cards from loved ones—as well as, soon, Christmas cards. At the same time, the rapid increase from e-commerce over recent years has transformed the postal sector. Parcel volumes for 2025-26 reached 1.44 billion—a 7% increase from ’24-25. I am conscious that, with Christmas coming up soon, Royal Mail will be entering its busiest period of the year, as we have heard from colleagues. It is vital that it delivers a reliable service for its customers. Royal Mail is an independent business, so responsibility for managing delivery operations, workforce deployment and local performance rests with its management, and it is best placed to investigate localised problems. However, I am all too aware that customers across the country continue to be let down by Royal Mail’s poor service. Many hon. Members receive correspondence from constituents highlighting their concerns and frustrations about Royal Mail’s performance, and colleagues have raised them today, as I have, too.

    Hansard source
33. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Kate Dearden

    Royal Mail: Performance

    I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for his intervention. I will very shortly turn in more detail to my engagement with Royal Mail, and the expectations that I have put to it for how it should engage with us in this House with appropriate detail and information. The consequences of delays can be especially significant when correspondence is important and time-sensitive, such as correspondence regarding hospital appointments, bills, legal documents, benefit correspondence or letters containing driving licences. I share the frustrations and concerns of hon. Members and their constituents. That is exactly why Royal Mail must do more to deliver a reliable service. Before I reflect on my engagements with the chief executive and my correspondence with hon. Members in this Chamber and outside, I will turn to Ofcom. As the independent regulator for postal services, Ofcom is responsible for setting and enforcing Royal Mail’s service standards. I met Ofcom yesterday to share the feedback I received from hon. Members across the House ahead of this debate—I will also reflect on today’s contributions—and to discuss the wider postal sector. Ofcom has fined Royal Mail £37 million over three years for not meeting quality-of-service targets. Ofcom assured me and the Government that it continues to monitor Royal Mail service data closely and will take further regulatory action, where needed, to hold the company to account. Ofcom is also investigating Royal Mail’s performance against quality-of-service targets in the last financial year. I know that several hon. Members, some of them in the Chamber, met Ofcom on Wednesday 14 October to raise their frustrations about the continued poor service from Royal Mail. Ofcom has shared the key themes from that discussion with me and my officials. I thank colleagues for taking the time last week. I have no doubt that Ofcom will have heard and understood the strength of feeling about the service that our constituents have experienced. I will turn briefly to costs, particularly the cost of stamps, which lots of colleagues have mentioned. Last week, Ofcom launched a consultation on extending the current second-class letter price cap until 2028. Of course, every pound counts when people are still struggling with the cost of living crisis, yet they are not getting a reliable postal service. I hope that will be a key consideration, but I recognise that it is for Royal Mail, as an independent business, to set the price of stamps. Ofcom and I discussed that yesterday. The regulator sponsorship charter, which the Government published in July, reaffirms our role in setting regulators’ strategic direction and holding them to account. We will continue to work closely with Ofcom on its approach to regulation and the outcomes it delivers for customers. We would pragmatically consider any future requests for additional powers where they are needed to support improved outcomes for customers and our constituents. We will actively hold Ofcom and other regulators to account, as appropriate.

    Hansard source
34. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Kate Dearden

    Royal Mail: Performance

    I will provide an update on our next steps, and our engagement with the unions and Royal Mail, very shortly. All hon. Members present agree that Royal Mail needs to step up and improve its performance. Colleagues reflected on the improvement plan published by Royal Mail to address the primary cause of service issues. It has committed to invest £500 million to increase its frontline resourcing and the availability of working hours for part-time employees. I reflect on the point about suitable sorting offices, using modern technology. We have secured legally binding commitments from the new owners for sufficient investment to ensure that the USO can be delivered.

    Hansard source
35. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Kate Dearden

    Royal Mail: Performance

    Before I address the hon. Gentleman’s point, and reflecting on his remarks about visiting his local sorting offices and what he is hearing from posties themselves, I put on record that Royal Mail has informed me that it has invested more than £470 million since 2021 in automation and in delivery and infrastructure updates. Of course, when it comes to pay and conditions, we work closely with the trade unions represented in Royal Mail, and we will consider the wider support we can provide to create a sustainable future for Royal Mail. Supporting our posties is absolutely essential. I also take this opportunity to reflect on my recent meeting with the chief executive of Royal Mail, at which I specifically raised the issue of engagement with colleagues. I urged Royal Mail to be much more proactive with MPs, and much more detailed in its assessments of what is happening at constituency level, and to take seriously every complaint raised directly with it by colleagues, whether the complaint is about performance, service, staffing levels, sickness or absences. It is important that Members across the House have relevant information to hand. When Members, myself included, receive numerous complaints from constituents, it is important that they have the appropriate and relevant information to make that assessment. I reassure Members that I always reiterate that point when I meet Royal Mail.

    Hansard source
36. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Kate Dearden

    Royal Mail: Performance

    Hopefully, the hon. Member has reflected on my remarks about my engagement with Ofcom, particularly on its recent consultation on stamps, the cost of living crisis, service and targets. I have heard his remarks and will take them forward in my conversations, particularly around Royal Mail’s service, which has to improve, and improve very quickly, as the Prime Minister reiterated today. I thank the hon. Member for putting his reflections on the record. On USO reform, Royal Mail is currently implementing a new delivery model, as we all know and have discussed today. That new delivery model was approved by the CWU and its membership, and it is being implemented across the network. Colleagues have reflected on different feedback from their constituents, posties and local management. Royal Mail’s performance against its quality-of-service targets has been improving, so it is important that any final issues between the company and its workforce in rolling out the new approach are resolved urgently. Today, I reaffirm the commitment given by the Secretary of State yesterday that we are meeting the CWU and Royal Mail the week after next to press for progress. We will update colleagues on that meeting. I also want to reflect on what colleagues have said about our important, absolutely essential postal workers, who are a central part of every city, town and village we represent. Indeed, they are integral to their communities’ future success. Posties work tirelessly every single day for constituents and customers, and Royal Mail must ensure that they remain at the heart of a business that delivers in line with all our expectations. I put on record my appreciation for our postal workers and posties across the country. My grandad was a very proud postie. He loved his community and he loved his job, because it is about much more than delivering letters and parcels. Posties are part of the communities they serve. They know their rounds and their customers. Often, they are one of the familiar faces that people see every day; sometimes, they are the only familiar face that people see. I therefore take the time to express my appreciation. It is in everyone’s interest to get round the table to resolve the issues we have discussed today, including the need for an improvement in the quality of service—we must make sure that happens quickly. Indeed, that is my commitment to all colleagues in Westminster Hall today. Before I conclude, I will talk about parcels and the need to address the imbalances in the postal sector, which is an important part of the next steps, and update colleagues on the work we are doing in the Department in this space. We are improving the working conditions, standards and rights of workers across the economy, including in the delivery sector, which is really important to me. Last week, we published a consultation on proposals for targeted reforms of the employment status framework for employment rights. We recognise that self-employment arrangements can provide flexibility for some people, but we are also aware of the concern that the current employment status framework can leave vulnerable workers without core and basic employment protections and rights. Our consultation hopes to address those issues, particularly around bogus self-employment, which colleagues have reflected on today, taking into account the impact on key sectors of the economy, including the postal services industry. Yesterday, colleagues and I attended an interesting roundtable on work and employment in UK parcel delivery, held with the University of Sheffield Management School, where we talked about exactly these issues. Its research is important and will feed directly into our work in this space. Across the sector, Ofcom has reacted to growing concern about delivery performance by reminding operators of their obligations, and it has engaged with all major parcel companies to ensure their compliance with the regulatory framework. Although this debate focuses on the performance of Royal Mail, it is important to recognise that reliable delivery matters across the postal and parcel delivery market. That is particularly the case for our vulnerable constituents, as service failures can have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable consumers, including disabled people who might often struggle to leave their homes. Ofcom has introduced targeted protections that require operators to have appropriate policies in place for the fair treatment of disabled customers, alongside strengthened guidance on complaints handling. Lots of colleagues mentioned that today, and I will continue to press Ofcom and Royal Mail where I need to. The way we communicate might be changing, but post remains an essential service for people and businesses across the United Kingdom. The Government believe that the performance of Royal Mail has been unacceptable: I have made that clear, as has the Prime Minister. The Secretary of State also made it clear in his response, published yesterday, to the Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee’s report. We will continue to press Royal Mail and its management to improve the quality of its service. Customers rightly expect and deserve a reliable postal service, and colleagues from all parties expect their constituents to have it, too. Royal Mail absolutely must deliver it, and deliver it soon. Again, I pay tribute to and thank our incredible posties across the country who work tirelessly to deliver for our constituents and support their communities. Royal Mail is a national institution that is a key part of our identity, and we all want it to succeed. We are passionate about the universal postal service on which we all rely. I hope colleagues hear my passion about ensuring that we get people round the table so that we can deliver a better service for our constituents, through the wider postal sector and Royal Mail. I thank colleagues for their reflections and contributions, and I thank the hon. Member for Lagan Valley for securing this debate.

    Hansard source
37. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    E-scooters and E-bikes: Regulation

    It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for securing the debate, and the many Members who made contributions. Although this was billed as a transport debate, a number of other Departments clearly have some influence and interest in the matter, not least the Home Office. A lot of the debate has been about the impact of the reckless and illegal use of e-scooters and e-bikes—ranging from nuisance and antisocial behaviour to downright criminality—in all our constituencies. We heard a number of tragic stories about the serious harm that misuse can cause, including life-changing injuries and, indeed, fatalities, so I want to start by reassuring Members that I and the Government understand the importance of the issues raised. It is correct to say, as a number of Members did, that e-bikes and e-scooters have a role to play in our communities—they provide another transport option and have the potential to improve individuals’ health and reduce emissions—but, as we have heard clearly today, an inconsistent approach to regulation and sales over years has left loopholes that at best confuse people and at worst leave this area open to criminal abuse. As my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns) said, the illegal activity is undermining the positive story we want to talk about in respect of the use of these vehicles.

    Hansard source
38. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    E-scooters and E-bikes: Regulation

    As my hon. Friend will hear in the rest of my speech, we will be going further in a number of areas. I absolutely recognise his concerns.

    Hansard source
39. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    E-scooters and E-bikes: Regulation

    This will be the last intervention; we have a lot to fit in.

    Hansard source
40. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    E-scooters and E-bikes: Regulation

    There is an awful lot we need to be looking at in terms of the retail element, which I will come to shortly. We have heard contributions from my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds); from my hon. Friends the Members for Darlington (Lola McEvoy), for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh), for Bermondsey and Old Southwark (Neil Coyle), for Carlisle, for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker), for Ealing Southall (Deirdre Costigan), for Reading Central (Matt Rodda), for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law), for Rushcliffe (James Naish), for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards), for Tamworth (Sarah Edwards), for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss) and for Shipley (Anna Dixon); and from the hon. Members for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking), for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde), for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor), for Yeovil (Adam Dance), for Witney (Charlie Maynard), for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell). This is clearly a nationwide issue that Members throughout the House are particularly interested in. I will not be able to address every single comment, but I will pick out a few that I can address now. We will respond in writing—either me or the relevant Minister—to issues that we are not able to pick up. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden has campaigned on this issue for a long time. She mentioned e-bike fires, which I am well aware of as I was the Minister responsible for the Product Regulation and Metrology Act 2025. I have met Sofia Duarte’s mother and I absolutely agree that it is important that we introduce regulations. I will address that in due course. My hon. Friend the Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark probably shared a little too much information about his body shape, but he asked an important question about the national licensing framework. I can confirm that the consultation on that will begin imminently. My hon. Friend the Member for Darlington mentioned the tragic circumstances of her constituent Gloria. I absolutely hear what her daughter Julie has said, and reassure her that we will act on that. My hon. Friend mentioned a review of the dirt bike licensing regime; I will come back to her on that in writing. She was right, as were my hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife and the hon. Member for Witney, along with several others, about the responsibility of retailers. It is not good enough to put in small print that these vehicles are for use only on private land. That is not the action of a responsible retailer. Let me be clear: we expect retailers to clean up their act, and if they are not able to do that, more levers are available for us to deal with that. It might help if I briefly set out the current legislative framework. The Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycles Regulations 1983 set out the parameters for what is legal and what is not. The power of the electric motor on a legal e-bike cannot exceed 250 watts, and the maximum assisted speed cannot exceed 15.5 mph. Anything faster or more powerful is an electric motorbike and should therefore be approved and registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, taxed and insured. In addition, the rider must wear a safety helmet and hold a driving licence. A vehicle that is too fast or too powerful and not properly registered as an electric motorbike is illegal for use on public roads. We absolutely need to restate that. The hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell mentioned concerns that the police do not have enough powers. I think it is fair to say, as a number of Members recognised, that the Government have made it easier for the police to act thanks to measures in the Crime and Policing Act 2026—I am afraid the shadow Minister forgot to mention that his party voted against it on Third Reading. The police can now seize vehicles without first having to issue a warrant. As my hon. Friend the Member for Reading Central said, police forces use a range of different tactics; we are keen to learn from experiences up and down the country. I am pleased to report that there is a lot of cracking down in different forces, tackling the issue from London to Liverpool. Merseyside police’s Operation Gears seized 500 illegal electric motorbikes and e-scooters in 2025. Only last week, the local constabulary in my Ellesmere Port constituency seized around 13 illegal vehicles, supported by one of my local councillors, Katie Kendrick. The issue really matters to people, because we all see it on the streets. If people are wearing balaclavas on bikes, it is criminality hiding in plain sight. It is equivalent to the dodgy vape shop. It is important that we support the police to use the powers they have, and look at whether more powers are needed to deal with the issue. Of course, that is only one side of the problem. As we have discussed, it is far too easy to get hold of these vehicles, which means we must look at doing more at the point of sale. This is about not just the bikes but the e-bike conversion kits which, as we have heard, have the potential to pose real harm to cyclists and others. E-bike batteries can be dangerous if they are not properly installed, and they must be properly regulated to keep people safe. As Members will be aware, over the summer the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade consulted on a range of updates to the product safety framework, including clear duties for online marketplaces to take due care to identify, prevent and remove from their sites unsafe products such as unsafe or non-compliant batteries and their use in e-bikes and conversion kits. That consultation has now closed. BIST officials are considering the responses as part of drafting the Government’s response. As the Minister who introduced the enabling legislation, I am keener than most to ensure that we make the best use of it. I remind the shadow Minister yet again that his party voted against that particular set of laws. Let me turn briefly to e-scooters. The hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell told us about the tragic death of Jacob Calland, and my sympathies are with his family; I understand that they met my predecessor, and I am keen to continue that dialogue. As Members have pointed out, private e-scooters are illegal for use on public roads. They can be legally used only through the Government’s trials, which have been extended to May 2028. The trial system was implemented back in 2020 but has never been placed on a statutory footing. We are making a firm commitment that we will legislate to define e-scooters in law, which will provide the certainty that we currently do not have. People will know what is legal and what is not, and what can be enforced against.

    Hansard source