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

Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Douglas McAllister

   Jagtar Singh Johal

   I agree entirely with my hon. Friend, who makes a powerful point about the ongoing position of my constituent Jagtar Singh Johal. I thank my hon. Friend not only for his intervention, but for his continued support for me and my constituent, Jagtar. He has been unfailing in his commitment, on behalf of Glasgow South West, to demonstrating the ongoing support across the west of Scotland and the nation for securing Jagtar Singh’s safe return home. In opposition, my party rightly called for Jagtar’s release on the basis that he was arbitrarily detained. It is my hope that through effective diplomacy, we will be able to deliver that outcome. Above all, this case has deeply affected Jagtar’s family in Dumbarton, who have spent nearly a decade fighting for justice and searching for answers.

   Hansard source
2. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Douglas McAllister

   Jagtar Singh Johal

   I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. I place on record my thanks to her and, as she validly says, the British Sikh community across the United Kingdom, Sikh Federation UK and the all-party parliamentary group on British Sikhs. Without that collective support, we would not have secured what we have today, which is his release on bail, but the fight continues. Jagtar, of course, is from my West Dunbartonshire constituency. His ordeal is a matter of huge concern to many of my constituents, who have urged me to continue pressing Jagtar’s case in this place. I am grateful for the continued efforts of campaigners in my constituency and beyond to keep me updated on developments. Although I have never spoken to Jagtar, I hope one day to meet him as a free man, shake his hand and have that long-awaited conversation. Jagtar travelled to India in 2017, shortly after his wedding. What should have been one of the happiest periods of his life turned into nine years of unimaginable suffering. While shopping with his wife in Punjab on his honeymoon, he was abducted from the street by hooded men who were later identified as police officers. He was held incommunicado for 10 days. During that period, he was subjected to electric shocks, sleep deprivation, stress positions and threats against his life. It is now known that a forced confession was extracted from Jagtar through torture. Following that, he was sent to prison, where he remained arbitrarily detained for almost nine years. The highly political accusations against Jagtar are not supported by any material evidence—no bank records, no email trail, no CCTV or anything of that kind. In fact, the case against him is based on that forced confession, obtained under days of torture. These deeply concerning events are not simply claims made by campaigners or family members. They have repeatedly been the subject of international concern and scrutiny. In May 2022, the United Nations working group on arbitrary detention concluded that Jagtar was being detained arbitrarily and called for his release. In April this year, 10 UN special rapporteurs and independent experts issued an even stronger statement. They found that there was “no rationale” for Jagtar’s continued detention and stated: “Eight and a half years of arbitrary detention without a clear path to trial is not justice, it is unlawful suffering.” They went on to say that the prolonged uncertainty surrounding his case amounted to a form of psychological torture. These are exceptionally serious findings from the UN. The same experts raised concerns regarding the apparent duplication of charges, the presumption of innocence, the misuse of counter-terrorism legislation and the continued reliance on evidence allegedly obtained through torture. They stated: “International law is unequivocal: torture includes severe mental suffering caused by prolonged uncertainty while awaiting trial…It also prohibits the use of evidence obtained through torture in proceedings and requires prompt, transparent and fair trials”. Those principles should guide every justice system. They should also guide our response when those principles appear to have been breached in the case of a British citizen, as has happened with Mr Johal. There have been hundreds of hearings over the course of these proceedings, yet judges recently observed in a written order that the trial is not likely to conclude anytime soon, which is incredibly worrying. There was a significant development in March 2025 when a court in Moga acquitted Jagtar of all charges. Prosecutors had spent seven years pursuing the prosecution of that case and ultimately failed to present credible evidence. Yet despite that acquittal, Jagtar remained imprisoned because he continued to face eight other cases, which are essentially duplicates. They all have similar underlying allegations, the same disputed confession and the same questionable evidence. That is backed up by UN experts, who have raised concerns about the similarity of these charges, as well as issues around double jeopardy, the presumption of innocence and the use of evidence allegedly obtained through torture. This month, there has finally been progress. Following a bail order granted on 18 September, Jagtar was released from Tihar jail on 1 October—after almost nine years in custody. This is very welcome news, and I know it has brought enormous relief to his family, friends and supporters.

   Hansard source
3. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Douglas McAllister

   Jagtar Singh Johal

   My hon. Friend makes an important point, which I will touch on towards the conclusion of my speech. I agree entirely with her comments, and would like to take this opportunity to thank her not only for her intervention but for the support she has shown me over the last two years in our joint fight for justice for my constituent Jagtar Singh Johal. Jagtar remains subject to strict bail conditions. He remains on trial in eight outstanding cases. He remains under the threat of serious criminal charges and potentially the death penalty if convicted. He is unable to return home to Scotland. While his release represents an important step forward, it does not bring this case to an end. This debate is not intended to undermine the relationship between the United Kingdom and India. I am very aware that India is a hugely important partner to us and a valued friend. Nor do I underestimate the complexities involved in consular cases overseas. I recognise that Ministers and officials have intervened on this case over the years and that representations have been made at various levels. Indeed, a number of previous Foreign Secretaries have raised Jagtar’s case with their Indian counterparts. Most recently, the current Foreign Secretary spoke to India’s External Affairs Minister, Minister Jaishankar, last month and stressed that Jagtar’s case had been a concern for a long time. I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for raising this, but the response from Minister Jaishankar was not good enough. As he has done in the past, he insisted that he cannot interfere with the courts, but after almost nine years, concern alone cannot be the measure of success. Raising Jagtar’s case at any opportunity is not good enough, and his family saw little evidence of progress coming from these supposed discussions. The measure of success must be whether Jagtar is finally able to return home. In September 2023, a Government Minister argued that publicly calling for Jagtar’s release was not in his best interests. The Government therefore chose not to call for his release at that stage. Now, the circumstances have changed. The opportunity before us has changed, and the Government’s approach must change, too. I was pleased to see the appointment of a UK envoy for complex consular detentions, who is responsible for supporting British nationals detained overseas in complex cases. I know that he has met Jagtar’s brother Gurpreet, whose commitment throughout this campaign has been extraordinary. Since the very start, he has spoken up for his brother with determination, dignity and resilience. I thank Gurpreet for being Jagtar’s biggest supporter and advocate, and for relentlessly fighting for his release. I also wish to thank the team at Reprieve, who fight for people facing torture, unlawful detention and the death penalty—

   Hansard source
4. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Douglas McAllister

   Jagtar Singh Johal

   I thank the team at Reprieve for their diligent support and assistance to me and to Jagtar over the last two years. However, since the meeting with the envoy, the family have received little information about what concrete action is being taken. I hope the Minister can provide greater clarity today. Can we have a timeline for action, given that Alistair Burt was appointed to the envoy role some months ago? This week, the Scotland Secretary, the Business Secretary and the Environment Secretary were in India on a trade mission. That is a clear illustration of the fact that our Government are developing an increasingly strong working relationship with India. Given the strength of that relationship, there is no reason why we should not be raising Jagtar’s case at every opportunity. While I understand that this week’s visit was a trade mission, and that Jagtar’s situation may be an inconvenient truth, our Government need to do everything they can at this crucial time to ensure Jagtar’s safety. The predominant fear is that Jagtar’s release on bail could be treated as the conclusion of this case, rather than the beginning of a critical new phase. Jagtar is not out of the woods yet: the threat of further proceedings is a reality, and the threat of the death penalty remains. The uncertainty and injustice prevail. That is precisely why our Government must act now. They could have intervened when he was first detained; they did not. They could have intervened when the UN working group on arbitrary detention ruled that Jagtar was wrongfully imprisoned; they did not. They could and should have intervened when he was acquitted of all charges in the Moga district trial, but they did not.

   Hansard source
5. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Douglas McAllister

   Jagtar Singh Johal

   The right hon. Member is 100% correct: that would be a very potent signal, and I am sure that that point has not been lost on the Minister. I thank the right hon. Member for his intervention, and for his long-standing and continued support for my constituent, which is greatly appreciated. I am not here today to point the finger of blame at anyone specifically. We must work together with the Indian Government and use our close relationship. Right now, we have the best chance we will get to bring Jagtar Singh Johal back home to his family in Dumbarton. For years, Ministers could point to the fact that Jagtar remained imprisoned, and that court proceedings were ongoing. Today, the situation is different. Jagtar is no longer behind bars. The international pressure surrounding his case is growing, and the UN has repeatedly called for action. All the allegations against Jagtar have been tested in court, and Jagtar has been acquitted, yet with the duplicate cases against him remaining, a court has essentially acknowledged that proceedings may continue indefinitely. If there was ever a moment to intensify diplomatic efforts, it is now. This is not the time for routine engagement and simply “raising” the case with Indian counterparts; it is the time for a co-ordinated, sustained and determined effort to bring the case to a conclusion and bring Jagtar home. The Government cannot change what happened in 2017, but they can help to determine what happens next. This may well be the best opportunity we have had in years to secure a just outcome, and I urge Ministers to seize it. Jagtar’s case is not the only case of a British national arbitrarily detained abroad. Ryan Cornelius has been imprisoned in the United Arab Emirates since 2008. The UN working group on arbitrary detention found that his detention, like Jagtar’s, was arbitrary. His original sentence was extended by a further 20 years through the retrospective application of legislation, despite serious concerns regarding due process. Similarly, Jimmy Lai, a 78-year-old British citizen in Hong Kong, has now spent more than 1,800 days in detention. He was sentenced earlier this year to a lengthy prison term on national security charges, and faces what is now essentially a death sentence. Those cases are all different, but they share a common theme. When British citizens face arbitrary detention, unfair legal proceedings or serious human rights concerns overseas, our Government may be the only institution capable of advocating effectively on their behalf. Every year, significant numbers of British citizens report torture or mistreatment while detained abroad. In many cases, diplomats are the only link between those individuals and the outside world. Parliament has a duty to ensure that such cases remain visible, and that Ministers continue to pursue them with determination. Jagtar’s release on bail is welcome, but it is crucial to remember that this case is not over. For too long, his case has been characterised by delay, uncertainty and missed opportunities. Now more than ever, there is a genuine opportunity to move things forward. The Government should treat this moment with the urgency and seriousness it deserves. I recognise that Ministers cannot direct foreign courts, and I recognise the importance of maintaining a strong relationship with India, but friendship between nations should never prevent us from standing up for the rights of our citizens. I strongly urge the Government to seize this opportunity and make resolving this case the diplomatic priority it should be. Jagtar Singh Johal has lost almost nine years of his life. His family have lost almost nine years with their son, brother and husband. We cannot give those years back to them, but we can ensure that nine years does not become 10 years or more. I urge the Minister to please use every diplomatic channel available, engage at the highest levels of Government, press for a swift conclusion to the remaining proceedings, and work to secure Jagtar’s safe return home to my constituency of West Dunbartonshire.

   Hansard source
6. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Deirdre Costigan

   National Care Service

   I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a proud member of Unison. For too long, care workers in Ealing Southall have lived on rock-bottom wages with no chance to progress in their jobs, so I hugely welcome the Government’s half a billion pound investment in the first ever fair pay agreement for social care. Does the Minister agree that we will never have a good quality social care service in this country unless we value our care workers properly? Will she set out how far the half a billion pounds will go in achieving that?

   Hansard source
7. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Deirdre Costigan

   Jagtar Singh Johal

   I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate and on his tireless campaigning for his constituent, which is an example to us all. I wrote to the former Foreign Secretary and to Ministers on several occasions to raise Jagtar Singh Johal’s case on behalf of many of my British Sikh constituents in Ealing Southall, who have been hugely concerned for his safety and legal rights. Does my hon. Friend agree that this is a testament to many in the British Sikh community in his constituency, in mine and in many constituencies across the country, who have rallied behind Jagtar Singh Johal, and that that is part of the reason that he has now been released on bail from prison?

   Hansard source
8. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Smith

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fifth sitting)

   It is obviously not on the face of the Bill, but does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the Government’s intention to introduce safe and legal routes would ultimately solve the problem that he is describing, as raised by the witnesses?

   Hansard source
9. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Smith

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fifth sitting)

   I understand the point the hon. Gentleman seeks to make about the potential pool of people, but is that not theoretical? The pool of people around the world who may be refugees is tens of millions. Ultimately, it is up to the Government of this country to determine the criteria for someone to be accepted as a refugee. It seems like a slightly philosophical point, if he does not mind me saying so.

   Hansard source
10. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Smith

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Sixth sitting)

    I thank the hon. Lady for being so generous with her time. I want to build on the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk. The hon. Lady spoke about the Bill referring to core cohabiting family, but does she accept that there must at some point be a limit on what we define as family? If I were fleeing to another country, would it be reasonable for me to say, “I desperately want my third great uncle on my mum’s side to be part of my family”? Does she accept that there has to be a definition and parameters for what family actually is, which the Bill seeks to establish?

    Hansard source
11. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Smith

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Sixth sitting)

    I was one of the Members who referred earlier in the debate to safe and legal routes, which are a very good idea. May I ask a very simple question: are there any specific restrictions at all that the hon. Lady would like to add to our immigration system?

    Hansard source
12. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Smith

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Sixth sitting)

    I have a fundamental question. The hon. Gentleman is outlining the word “normally”; if, to his estimation, all asylum lawyers or whoever is involved in the process would look at their individual case and say, “That’s not normal,” surely none of it would be exceptional.

    Hansard source
13. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Smith

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Sixth sitting)

    Does the Minister agree that unless we introduce a definition of a family, the term becomes entirely subjective?

    Hansard source
14. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Pinto-Duschinsky

    Business of the House

    Sometimes in our lives, we are fortunate to meet someone truly inspirational. Rabbi Bernd Koschland was such a person. Bernd came to this country in the Kindertransport, aged just eight. His parents were not so lucky; he never saw them again. Many of us would have been broken by such a tragedy, but Bernd triumphed over that adversity. He dedicated his life to education, teaching generation after generation and telling his story to children around the globe. In 2018, he was awarded an MBE for his role as one of this country’s leading Holocaust educators. Bernd was a man of huge compassion, warmth, humility and humour. He loved his family and was a proud great-grandfather. It was my honour to call him a friend, and to talk to him almost every week for many years. We lost Bernd over the recess. Our community in Hendon mourns him deeply, but his legacy will live on. Will the Leader of the House join me in celebrating Bernd’s life, thanking him for his huge contribution to this country and passing on this House’s deepest condolences to his family?

    Hansard source
15. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·David Burton-Sampson

    Business of the House

    As the shadow Leader of the House and the Leader of the House have pointed out, today is the fifth anniversary of the tragic murder of Sir David Amess in my constituency. My thoughts are with his family, his Conservative colleagues here and in Southend and all colleagues and constituents who knew Sir David. As his plaque behind me says, may his light remain. The Children’s Parliament was founded by Sir David Amess, and it was a project that was close to his heart. I am delighted that, on this anniversary, we will be joined by the child MPs in Parliament, and I am sure that it will be a lively debate. Will the Leader of the House join me in celebrating the enthusiasm of these children, who are showing a keen interest in democracy at a young age?

    Hansard source
16. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Darren Paffey

    National Care Service

    I join my hon. Friend in praising care workers up and down the country, and I pay particular tribute to those who gave such excellent care to both my parents in their final years. From day one as an MP, my constituents have come to me with increasingly distressing stories of what is happening when things go wrong, so I really welcome the long-term statement to put it right. While we wait for Baroness Casey, can my hon. Friend assure us that there is a plan to do the most urgent improvements starting now?

    Hansard source
17. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Danny Beales

    Smoke-free UK

    It is an honour, Ms Vaz, to serve under your chairmanship. Like colleagues, I thank the co-chairs of the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) and my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy), for their excellent introductions to the debate. They superbly put across the points about the impact of smoking, and the importance of our ambition for a smoke-free generation and a smoke-free country. Like many other Members, I approach this debate with my personal perspective of smoking and my experience of growing up in a smoking household. Most of my family have smoked at various points, some of them for quite a long time—my mother did for more than 40 years. Smoking was always present in my childhood and adolescence, so my rebellion was to not smoke. That was probably a good, rebellious side to have, compared with the other options available. Based on my experience and what I saw around me, I was an anti-smoker from day one. I saw the power of addiction and how difficult it was for so many of my family members, including my mother, to quit smoking, despite their best efforts and despite knowing that it was the right thing to do and that it was harming them, those around them and even their children. Smoking is incredible in its power to keep people addicted. My grandfather, who was a smoker for much of his life, passed away from lung cancer and my mum, who is fortunately still with us, has suffered from various forms of cancer throughout her life, potentially caused by smoking, among other issues. I am passionate that we must do all we can and continue to be a leader in smoking cessation. We know the evidence; it is clear. We have had clear marketing campaigns. We have had the horrific images on the front of cigarette packets for some time, but people have almost become numb to them and turn away from them. The power of those things alone is not enough to get us to where we want to be. Personal responsibility arguments are often used by people with libertarian or far-right perspectives—Reform UK has been mentioned today—but we know that is not enough. Throughout the historical crusade to end smoking, public health measures have proved the doubters wrong time and again. The ONS data shows that we have achieved the historic milestone of falling below 10% prevalence; for the first time, fewer than one in 10 people in the UK smokes. We have to recognise that, positively, for some time, this has largely been a cross-party mission. The right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), when he was Prime Minister, led the campaign and proposed ambitious legislation. But there is a risk we will see that cross-party consensus evaporate. Reform UK’s relationship with big tobacco has already been mentioned. Unfortunately, both that party and the Opposition have had free votes on this issue, and it has not been possible to get a consensus on the legislation. I hope that changes, because we all know the difference it can make. Within 20 minutes of stopping smoking, blood pressure resumes to normal levels, and within eight hours, nicotine and carbon monoxide levels in the blood reduce by half and oxygen returns to normal. Within two to 12 weeks, circulation improves; in three to nine months, coughing and wheezing problems fade and lung function increases by 10%; in five years, the risk of having a heart attack falls to about half compared with a person who is still smoking; and in 10 years, the risk of lung cancer falls to half of that of a smoker and the risk of a heart attacks falls to the same level as someone who has never smoked. Those powerful figures show it is never too late to stop smoking and see the health benefits. We have to sustain the progress we have made. The last 10% of people smoking are fundamentally harder and more expensive to reach than the first 10%. As has been said, there is also a social justice element to this campaign; it goes beyond finance and public health. ASH data shows that smoking has pushed just under half a million households into poverty, including 137,000 children. I have seen in my constituency that those in that last 10% often have complex lives; they may experience deprivation, mental health issues, and drug and alcohol issues alongside smoking. We need targeted and specific outreach to support those people to quit smoking. I have met the fantastic women who run the Hillingdon stop smoking service. They have talked passionately about the work they do to provide incentives, support, nicotine products, vapes and other alternatives that are now on the market. However, that outreach is ever more expensive the closer we get to eliminating smoking in this country. In the limited time I have left, let me make a pitch to the Minister. We should look to reinvest tobacco duty revenue directly into stop smoking services. I support the calls that have been made for a specific levy on the profits of tobacco companies that is targeted and reinvested into stop smoking services. The public health case and the economic case are clear, and I hope the moral case is clear. We have to do more. We have to become the first country in the world to become smoke-free.

    Hansard source
18. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Zeichner

    Sustainable Farming Incentive

    The plain truth is that, when the Conservatives introduced this scheme in the previous Parliament, it was a complex scheme and the IT systems in particular were not in place to administer it properly. Conservative Front Benchers know that. These IT systems take years to develop. Colleagues at the Rural Payments Agency have done a heroic job working around the existing systems. That is why it is so difficult to make this scheme work in the difficult circumstances across the country. Does my hon. Friend agree that a little contrition from the Conservatives would be welcome as we try to fix this system?

    Hansard source
19. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Topical Questions

    Over the past year, I have also had countless constituents contact me about the adequacy of postal delivery services across Bexleyheath and Crayford. Along with colleagues, I met the chief executive of Ofcom yesterday to look at what more it can do, but will the Minister outline what assessment has been made of the adequacy of services across Bexleyheath and Crayford and set out what more the Government can do to help my constituents?

    Hansard source
20. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Highways (Financing) Bill

    Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

    Hansard source
21. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Highways (Financing) Bill

    I have listened to the debate, and I think Opposition Members have amnesia over some things that have happened over the years. The A282 Trunk Road (Dartford-Thurrock Crossing Charging Scheme) Order 2013 and the Silvertown Tunnel Order 2018 are measures that directly impact my constituents every single day, and they happened under their watch. Conservative MPs in my part of south-east London go around campaigning, saying, “How dare you increase the Silvertown charges this year?” But it was their legislation that insisted that that happened; they really do forget what happened under their watch. I should have started by declaring that I am an officer of the all-party parliamentary group for better roads and the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for wheelchair users. I also drive a Motability vehicle on behalf of my daughter, as I will refer to later. My constituency of Bexleyheath and Crayford sits less than 3 miles from the Dartford Crossing, and for businesses—particularly industrial businesses—in Crayford and Slade Green, it is an essential link. A number of those businesses are located around Thames Road in Crayford. Over 20 years ago, as Bexley’s then cabinet member for transport, I worked to ensure that funding was forthcoming from the then Labour Government and Transport for London to upgrade Thames Road in Crayford to a dual carriageway. Unfortunately, one part of the scheme was never completed, which leaves a pinch point at the Cray Mill railway bridge on Thames Road that carries the North Kent railway line. The road is constricted due to that single carriageway to pass through the bridge arches, and that pinch point can cause long queuing during busy periods. I will continue to raise that matter with both my local authority and the Government. Similarly, a couple of miles down the road in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson) at the Littlebrook interchange, there are further delays for my constituents as vehicles approach the Dartford tunnel to travel north across the Thames. Those issues are resolvable through engineering, but the congestion at Dartford each day is a lot harder to resolve. The delivery of the lower Thames crossing will reduce the number of vehicles—particularly lorries that have crossed the channel and need to cross the Thames—and will therefore relieve that congestion. I warmly welcome that the lower Thames crossing will double road capacity east of Crayford. For my businesses, the lower Thames crossing will deliver reduced costs and opportunities to grow. I am amazed that later today the Conservatives will vote on a reasoned amendment calling for the Bill not to progress, as that would leave the scheme without a funding mechanism. This afternoon, the Conservatives will actively try to stop a Bill that supports growth and investment for businesses in my constituency and across south-east London and the Thames estuary. I say to Conservative Members that if they have concerns, the time to try amendments is in Bill Committee and on Report, rather than trying to kill the Bill in its entirety this afternoon. As the Bill progresses, issues will need to be looked at. I know that my constituents and businesses would want us to look at mechanisms in clauses 7, 8, 24, 25 and 26 to ensure consistent tolling arrangements between the lower Thames crossing and those existing ones at the Dartford crossing. In particular—I am afraid this is a mouthful—schedule 3 to the A282 Trunk Road (Dartford-Thurrock Crossing Charging Scheme) Order 2013, which was passed under the previous Government, outlines that a vehicle exempt from vehicle excise duty due to carrying disabled people does not pay the toll. That normally relates to Motability vehicles. I am clear that we need to ensure consistency in the legislation for both the Dartford and lower Thames crossings for Motability users. We also need to look into the detail of clauses 33, 87 and 92 as the Bill progresses in order to protect consistency and the current tolling arrangements. Clauses 87 and 92 allow arrangements that would see the removal of toll booths at other toll roads and crossings, such as the M6 toll or the Mersey tunnel. I warmly welcome that, as it would relieve congestion. As the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) said, these removals are happening more and more in France. I had a moment of panic this year, when I was on a toll road without a toll booth, and I realised I had not paid. That is happening more and more, and there are lessons that we need to learn from our French counterparts on this matter. Relieving congestion is of real benefit to business. The Bill is not all we need, but it can be a catalyst for beginning to look at the interoperability of toll systems. Currently, a business in Crayford that wants to cross at Dartford, then use the M6 toll and then maybe use another toll somewhere else, will have to set up several accounts across different toll roads. We have to look at the cost for businesses, including the amount of work in their internal accounting systems. We must look at the interoperability arrangements, both for businesses and for disabled people. At the moment, people need a separate Motability account on every single toll road. Dartford and Silvertown are free, but people have to register at Silvertown and do not have to register at Dartford. For the M6 toll and the Mersey tunnel, people have to register and pay an annual charge. It is hugely confusing for disabled people that different arrangements exist at each toll road. I warmly encourage the Government to work on interoperability, both for business and for disabled people. I know that conversations are already being had between the operators of the Dartford crossing and the M6 toll road about interoperability, bringing those systems into one arrangement and encouraging that across all toll systems in the country. I am sure that businesses in Bexleyheath and Crayford would welcome those toll roads and crossings being brought together into one system, as would Motability users. I support the Bill. It will bring benefits for my constituents through the delivery of the lower Thames crossing, and I hope it will start the conversation on interoperability, which will support Motability customers and businesses, reducing complexity for them and helping to encourage growth in our economy. I warmly welcome the Bill, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments.

    Hansard source
22. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Highways (Financing) Bill

    I hear what the hon. Member says, but the 2018 changes, made under the previous Conservative Government, introduced tolling at Blackwall and Silvertown. They were voted for by Conservative MPs who now run around south-east London blaming that on the Mayor of London. Can he assure us that if we were to take these matters forward, the Conservatives would take ownership of the changes, rather than pointing the finger at other people, as they are now doing?

    Hansard source
23. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Highways (Financing) Bill

    May I seek clarity on that matter? My understanding is that not all the bridges in London are the responsibility of Transport for London. Some belong to local authorities and some belong to charities; the Mayor of London does not have direct power over them all. Can the hon. Member clarify that, for the record, given that he has just said that this is a Transport for London and Mayor of London responsibility?

    Hansard source
24. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Highways (Financing) Bill

    We were all very interested to hear the view of the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope) that charging should be spread across London river crossings. What is the shadow Minister’s analysis of the proposal that the cost of river crossings be spread more widely among taxpayers in London?

    Hansard source
25. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Daniel Francis

    Highways (Financing) Bill

    I am aware that my neighbour the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) has not been here for the debate. We have discussed the fact that the charges at Blackwall and Silvertown were introduced, as a result of the 2018 order, under the Conservative Government. The increases were made under that order, introduced by the previous Conservative Government. Can the shadow Minister confirm that all those measures were introduced not by this Government, but his?

    Hansard source
26. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Diana Johnson

    Smoke-free UK

    It is a pleasure to serve under you this afternoon, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) and my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham (Mary Kelly Foy) on securing this important debate, and on their steadfast advocacy in support of creating a smoke-free generation. I am grateful to all hon. Members who have contributed today. I note that the two hon. Members who secured this debate co-chair the APPG on smoking and health and are obviously a formidable duo. I am not surprised that they were able to secure this debate, which I understand was granted by the Chair and members of the Backbench Business Committee. They obviously made a very powerful case. Hon. Members raised a number of questions this afternoon, which I will try to address in my remarks, but I would also be very pleased to attend a session of the APPG to discuss the issues further. It is really important that we carry on with the cross-party nature of this debate and the work that has gone on by previous Governments. I pay tribute to the work of the previous Government and previous Prime Minister in this particular area, ably assisted by the hon. Member for Harrow East. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) told us about the rather drastic action his grandfather took to ensure that he remained smoke-free throughout his life. My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend (Mary Glindon) spoke about the role of vapes in helping people quit smoking. Importantly, she also talked about the illicit products and traders, and the fact that organised crime is funded by those products. My hon. Friend the Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones) talked about her professional experience as a physiotherapist and the challenges that are faced particularly in Wales. My hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Danny Beales) talked about growing up in a family of smokers; he is very anti-smoking. He set out really clearly the health benefits of giving up smoking and how quickly those benefits can materialise. My hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank) talked about vapes. He chairs the APPG for responsible vaping and also made the case for vapes in helping people cease smoking. Again, I would be very happy to attend and talk to the APPG if that would be helpful. The hon. Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones), who speaks for the Liberal Democrats, made a very personal statement at the beginning of his speech about the role that smoking had played in his family, with his dad dying at a relatively young age. The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford), set out the work of previous Governments and asked a series of questions, which I will try to address. I think we are all agree that tobacco is a uniquely harmful product and smoking is the single most entirely preventable cause of ill health, disability and death in the UK. It is responsible for around 75,000 deaths each year. Smoking reduces life expectancy by an average of 10 years, and almost every minute of every day somebody is admitted to hospital because of smoking-related harm. Smoking contributes to a range of serious long-term conditions, including stroke, heart disease, diabetes, dementia, asthma and complications during pregnancy. The cost of smoking is not just measured in lives lost and poor health. There are significant economic costs. Smoking is estimated to cost the NHS and social care system £3 billion annually, resources that could otherwise be used to fund millions more appointments, scans and operations. In terms of health disparities, smoking remains one of the greatest drivers of health inequalities in this country, with the burden falling disproportionately on our most disadvantaged communities. The disparities are stark. For example, the number of women who smoke at the time of delivery varies drastically according to deprivation—from 12% in Havering, 8% in Kingston upon Hull, where my constituency is, compared with less than 1% in Richmond upon Thames. Those are not merely statistics; they represent real families, communities and children whose health and life chances are being diminished by tobacco addiction. Turning to the smoke-free generation, it is a real privilege to have responsibility for implementing the landmark Tobacco and Vapes Act. As many Members will be aware, the Act will create a smoke-free generation by ending the sale of tobacco products to future generations across the UK. In practical terms, that means than anyone who has turned, or is turning, 17 this year will never legally be sold tobacco. Over the next 50 years, that will save tens of thousands of lives and could boost the economy by up to £48 billion pounds. Since Royal Assent, the Department has made significant progress towards the implementation of the Tobacco and Vapes Act. We have laid enabling legislation in Parliament, engaged extensively with stakeholders across public health and the retail sector, and published detailed guidance. We are also in the process of developing a nationwide awareness campaign to inform the public. We are expecting that to be rolled out in November with a particular focus on areas with high smoking rates. The hon. Member for Harrow East asked about what progress has been made on the manifesto pledge for opt-out smoking cessation interventions in all routine care. I want to address that, but first I will say that protecting future generations through our smoke-free generation must go hand in hand with helping current smokers to quit. Through the public health grant, we have ringfenced a record investment of £153 million each year for local stop-smoking services specifically, with funding targeted towards those areas with the highest smoking rates. As I said, the hon. Member for Harrow East and my hon. Friend the Member for City of Durham raised the question about services and opt-out. Those services are currently available in 99% of maternity services and 92% of inpatient services. On top of that, ICBs have access to funding for tobacco dependence treatment services in those particular settings. Many comments were made about youth vaping, and we know that vapes can play an effective role in helping adult smokers to quit, as my hon. Friends the Members for Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend and for Falkirk stated. However, young people, and adults who do not smoke, should never vape. That is because we know that they are not harm-free and the longer-term harms are still unknown. We are taking firm action to protect future generations from the risk of nicotine addiction. That is important given that a million 11 to 17-year-olds have tried vaping this year. We have also banned single-use vapes, and a vaping product duty is now in force. From 29 October, we are introducing a ban on vape vending machines, banning free distribution and extending the age of sale to 18 for all nicotine and vaping products, including nicotine-free vapes. The Tobacco and Vapes Act also introduces a comprehensive ban on the advertising and sponsorship of tobacco, vaping and nicotine products. We intend to bring that into force across the UK from 1 June 2027. My hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk asked how we will ensure that striving for a smoke-free generation does not mean banning key smoking cessation tools such as vapes. The measures consulted on have been carefully assessed to ensure the right balance between protecting children and ensuring that adult smokers can still access vapes to quit smoking. In terms of upcoming policy changes, in May we concluded our consultation on extending smoke-free places to certain outdoor settings and introducing vape-free places. Our consultation on proposals to reduce the appeal of tobacco, vaping and nicotine products closed on 2 October. We are now carefully considering the responses as we develop effective and proportionate policies that continue to protect public health. Turning to enforcement, to ensure that measures in the Tobacco and Vapes Act are effective, we are providing up to £30 million a year for enforcement agencies until 2028-29. That will support legitimate businesses and enable stronger enforcement against those who break the law. The Tobacco and Vapes Act also provides new powers for enforcers. New fixed penalty notices come into force on 29 October, supporting trading standards to crack down on retailers who break the rules. The Act also provides powers to introduce a licensing scheme for the retail sale of tobacco, vapes and nicotine products in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and to expand the retailer registration scheme in Scotland. To answer the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend, we intend to consult on those issues next year. Several hon. Members asked what comes next after the implementation of the smoke-free generation measures on 1 January and for a longer-term road map for tobacco control and the introduction of a “polluter pays” levy. We share the ambition to drive down smoking rates. Indeed, new figures published just last week show that smoking prevalence across the UK has fallen to 9.8%, which is the first time it has fallen below 10%. That is a significant milestone that demonstrates the progress we are making. We must not mistake progress for completion, however. Around 4.9 million adults across the UK still smoke, and we remain determined to go further. Our immediate priority is delivering the Tobacco and Vapes Act successfully and ensuring that these landmark reforms achieve their full potential. The Act represents the most significant advance in tobacco control in a generation, and getting implementation right will deliver benefits for decades to come. I am very happy to look at all the issues and suggestions that have been made by hon. Members; perhaps we can discuss them at the APPG. In supporting smokers to quit, protecting children from nicotine addiction, strengthening enforcement and creating a smoke-free generation, the Tobacco and Vapes Act represents one of the most significant public health reforms of our time. Future generations will look back on this moment as a defining milestone in public health. It is legislation that will save lives, reduce inequalities, improve health outcomes and create a healthier, fairer future for communities across the United Kingdom.

    Hansard source
27. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Chi Onwurah

    Joint committee on Human Rights

    I thank my hon. Friend the Chair of the Joint Committee for this report. I should declare an interest as the Chair of the Science and Technology Committee. I guested on the inquiry, and I share the concerns regarding the potential harms to human rights and support the report’s call for effective principle-based regulation now. Does my hon. Friend agree with me, and with His Holiness the Pope in his “Magnificent Humanity” encyclical, that human rights are for humans, that the anthropomorphising of AI—going as far as ascribing human consciousness and human rights to AI—is an attempt by tech companies to limit their own liability as well as boosting the potential value of their shares?

    Hansard source
28. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Chi Onwurah

    Science and Research Investment

    I welcome the Minister to his new role as well as this Government’s emphasis on driving growth through innovation in every region of our country, as recommended by my Committee’s recent report, “Flying Blind”. It was called that because it identified a lack of data and information about the factors that drive growth and how to measure success in our regions and across clusters. The report called for a dashboard. Will the Minister tell me what progress has been made on that dashboard, and has he looked at the Cambridge x Manchester Partnership baseline report, which identified a number of indicators, including company stock, funded count, and disclosed funding by employee band?

    Hansard source
29. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Clive Efford

    National Care Service

    I very much welcome the statement and any move towards a national care service, but my hon. Friend knows as much as I do that people often experience a clash of bureaucracies, which leads to a slowdown in the delivery of care or care packages. People are stuck in hospitals for a variety of reasons, but for many it is because that clash cannot be resolved to move them from hospital in a timely fashion. We cannot wait for that to be resolved; we need to resolve it now. Can she reassure me that she is working on that, because if we can solve that, we can solve large parts of the problem in this Parliament and not have to wait for the next?

    Hansard source
30. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Ward

    Topical Questions

    T6. I know that the Secretary of State, and the Minister, enjoy a good pub as much as the next person, so do they share my concern that in Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven, our pubs and hospitality sector is under real strain? We recently lost two iconic LGBTQ+ bars, Charles Street Tap and R-Bar. Will the Secretary of State come to the south coast to meet me and local businesses, to see what more we can do to support our hospitality and pub sector?

    Hansard source
31. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Unpaid Carers

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) for securing this debate and for succeeding me as the chair of the APPG for young carers and young adult carers. She knows that when we talk about unpaid carers, we must include young carers and young adult carers. We know that the number of young people under the age of 18 who care for a loved one or family member has increased; in fact, the amount of time for which those young carers care for a loved one has also increased significantly. The Carers Trust estimates that more than 50,000 children, young people and young adults in the UK provide more than 50 hours of unpaid care a week to their loved ones, and more than 3,000 children between five and nine take on heavy caring responsibilities. In my role as APPG chair, along with the hon. Member for Mid Sussex, we are calling on the Government to consider three significant things. First, we must find ways to better recognise young carers. I speak regularly to young carers across my Harlow constituency, and many of them do not realise that they are young carers until they are much older; other MPs would say the same. Secondly, we have to look at how we train teachers. I will not reiterate the story I have told a number of times in this place, but as a teacher I missed that one of my students was a young carer until it came to parents evening, and that is always in my mind. Thirdly, we must ensure that all schools have a young carers lead. I am pleased to hear from comments made by Ministers and MPs that the Government are listening and taking action to support our young carers and young adult carers. I ask the Government to think also about the transition from being a young carer. Sometimes, the person has got older and become an adult carer; sometimes, tragically, they stop having caring responsibilities for other reasons, such as bereavement. We need to think about how we support those young carers and adult carers if that is the case.

    Hansard source
32. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Unpaid Carers

    I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution and for her visit to Harlow to see NAPA at first hand. I pay tribute to the work that NAPA does in my constituency. I am sorry to hear about the case of her constituent. I hope that she is able to lobby the county council and get the situation sorted. I hope also that the Minister and those who are introducing the national care service will consider what she said regarding support for disabled children. NAPA is a fantastic organisation but not everyone can afford or have access to that support. The difference NAPA has made to young people with cerebral palsy is significant. We can see the huge difference in their quality of life because of the support they get from NAPA. I thank my hon. Friend for raising that and pay tribute to David and all those who work at NAPA. I also take this opportunity to pay tribute to some of the schools in my constituency, which do fantastic work to support young carers, particularly the Mark Hall school—I had the pleasure of inviting some of their young carers to Parliament—and Saint Nicholas school, as well as Purford Green primary school and many others. I ask that when the Government consider the national care service—I am so pleased the Prime Minister is incredibly committed to it—the important role of young carers and young adult carers is considered as part of the tapestry of carers, which obviously also includes adult carers and kinship carers. I hope that the national care service will provide support to all unpaid carers. As hon. Members may be aware, I previously worked for a charity that supports young carers. That is part of the reason I am so passionate about this subject. To some extent, we have a postcode lottery when it comes to support for young carers and young adult carers. Often that support is provided by charities such as the one I worked for. If we are honest with ourselves, successive Governments have relied heavily on the charity sector because they have seen it as a cheaper option, but funding for charities is short term and not always consistent across the country. If the national care service is to get to the heart of the problem, it will address that issue. A previous Labour Prime Minister described charity as a “grey loveless thing”. I think we are in a very different place now, but we should not use charities because they are cheaper. We should work with charities because they have the expertise. We have mentioned some of those charities in this debate already. Of course, caring for someone who we love can be a real honour. Often when I talk to carers and young carers they do not even think about being carers; they do it because they love that person and believe it to be the right thing to do. However, we must recognise that it can also be extremely challenging. I pay tribute to all unpaid carers in my constituency and beyond who absolutely deserve our thanks and admiration but also our support. The theme going through this debate is the need for action and not just words. After all, who cares for the carers?

    Hansard source
33. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    National Care Service

    I also declare an interest as a member of the trade union Unison. I thank the Minister for her statement and welcome her and the PM’s comments and commitment to a national care service, which has the potential to make a big difference to residents and carers in my constituency. I am really interested in the role of the unpaid carers champion. This is not me putting in a pitch for the job, but how will this role ensure that the voices of carers and young carers—she will know I have a passion for supporting them—are heard as part of this conversation?

    Hansard source
34. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Science and Research Investment

    As this is my first run-out in my new brief, I thought it might be nice to just take a moment to recognise the work of Lord Vallance as Science Minister and Lord Stockwood as Investment Minister, and thank them very much for their work. As we have just heard from the Secretary of State, the Government are making record investments in science and technology to keep the UK at the forefront of global research and innovation. We are committing £86 billion to R&D between 2026-27 and 2029-30, including £38.6 billion for UK research and innovation. These investments are translating into jobs, innovation and economic opportunity across the UK, including in the east midlands.

    Hansard source
35. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Science and Research Investment

    It is important to recognise that the changes have an impact on the staff that work for the STFC. I have been in the unfortunate position of working in a company undertaking such a restructure—and of having to do such restructures in the past—and I appreciate how difficult that is for staff. I have spoken to the executive chair of STFC, and at the core of the programme —exactly as my hon. Friend has described—is a desire to get STFC into a position where it has appropriate financial management, while also increasing productivity and modernising in response to new technology. The Government are supporting that with an increase in STFC’s funding to £842 million by 2029-30, from the £835 million of 2025-26.

    Hansard source
36. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Science and Research Investment

    I agree with the hon. Member’s point about the need for Britain’s discoveries to be scaled at home rather than abroad. I am taking an end-to-end approach on that, starting with scientific discovery and hopefully ending with large companies listed on the London stock exchange, supporting businesses throughout that process. UKRI and Innovate UK are doing great work in that area, supported by the increased role of the British Business Bank.

    Hansard source
37. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Science and Research Investment

    My hon. Friend and I share a great confidence in data and a desire to make decisions based on it. With the regional disparities that she is describing, I have looked at the data and there is a clear distinction between the proportion of UKRI funding and UKRI spin-outs, for instance, and then the ability of those companies to attract investment. In fact, the level of funding they received is based on their proximity to London. I share her concern, we are looking at the data on that, and I am happy to work with her and the Committee on how we ensure that regional funding is more appropriately spread.

    Hansard source
38. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Science and Research Investment

    The situation that the hon. Member described about the loss of UK quantum companies, largely under the previous Government, is exactly why my predecessor was determined to set up the ProQure programme, to ensure that the UK is leading the procurement of quantum computing and enabling the growth of UK businesses to do that. In March 2026, the Government announced a landmark commitment of up to £2 billion for the next stage of the national programme, and our ambition is to see UK quantum companies scale and stay in the UK.

    Hansard source
39. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Topical Questions

    I commend my hon. Friend on the work of the Bletchley investment taskforce and I thank him for the many letters that he has sent me updating me on its work. I have learned about Bletchley’s strengths in innovation, advanced manufacturing and digital technologies, which are all aligned with our industrial strategy, so of course I would be keen to come and meet the investment taskforce. Perhaps we can talk about how the work of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor can link in and bring more investment to Bletchley too.

    Hansard source
40. 15 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Topical Questions

    It is quite a number of years since I was underground at Boulby, but I do remember the experience and how important that dark matter laboratory is. The particular issue at the Boulby mine is that it has increased its capacity, so its rental charges have gone up, and within the scope of its existing budget, that means about half a million pounds of its £1 million operating budget has been taken forward into the £4 million overall budget it has. The Government have funded the development of the laboratory that my hon. Friend describes until 2027-28; if the UK is successful, though, that would require additional funding above and beyond existing budgets.

    Hansard source