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. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Miatta Fahnbulleh

   Topical Questions

   The Falkland Islands is independent and self-governing. It is not a matter for us. We are and have been clear that oil and gas will be part of our energy mix for years to come. We have also been clear that we will manage existing fields, and that is what we are committed to doing. I cannot reiterate enough that, if we care about getting bills down and about energy security, we must diversify our mix. That means having clean power and renewables. The Government are pragmatic, because at the very heart of this are consumers who are under pressure. The Opposition support renewables one minute—I think I have a quote from the hon. Member himself—and are against them the next. We have a plan; they have no plan.

   Hansard source
2. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Miatta Fahnbulleh

   Topical Questions

   I ask the hon. Member to show some humility. On his watch, from 2016 to 2024, 75,000 oil and gas jobs were lost, because the Conservatives had no plan. Candidly, I will not take lectures from the Conservative party. We are clear that there will be a plan for oil and gas workers in this country, because we do not do what the Tories do—industrial transition that denudes and guts our communities. That is not the Labour way. We will have a plan. They have no grounds to stand on.

   Hansard source
3. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Miatta Fahnbulleh

   Topical Questions

   We have already taken action to reduce the cost of bills—the £150 that was announced earlier this year. I come back to the point: we will do whatever we can to give households breathing space as we drive the big change, but part of the big change is diversifying our energy mix. That does mean more renewables and more nuclear, so that we are not as exposed as we are to global fossil fuel markets. The hon. Member’s constituents can see what is driving up bills. We have a plan to tackle that; the Conservative party does not.

   Hansard source
4. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Miatta Fahnbulleh

   Topical Questions

   Yes, I will meet my hon. Friend, who is a brilliant champion, and her constituent.

   Hansard source
5. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Miatta Fahnbulleh

   Topical Questions

   I obviously cannot go into the specifics of consenting decisions that are quasi-judicial. What I will say to the House is that we are trying to make those decisions at pace. The other thing I will be very clear about is that any decision I make will be compatible with our climate commitments. That is the first responsibility I have as Secretary of State, and that will be absolutely clear. My hon. Friend and his constituents should hear that loud and clear.

   Hansard source
6. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Third sitting)

   It is undeniable that there is an appetite in the country for an asylum system that is robust but fair, and it seems to be the case that people are abusing the system. With the extended period for appeals in the current process, despite the good will in the intentions behind it. This IIAA process will not only speed up the decisions, which is compassionate for people, rather than leaving them lingering in a system for months or years on end, but provide the British public with the necessary confidence and security of knowledge that the system we have employed in this country is fair and robust.

   Hansard source
7. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Third sitting)

   The Minister talks about the public interest test. Could she explain how public interest is considered under the current judicial system?

   Hansard source
8. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Third sitting)

   My right hon. Friend makes an excellent point about flexibility. Over recent years, we have seen such an increase in the number of applications and appeals. A system that pays no regard to that finds itself falling behind the times, does it not?

   Hansard source
9. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

   Immigration and Asylum Bill (Third sitting)

   One of the issues that the Bill seeks to address is the fact that, when it comes to the appeals process, people have been left for far too long. The longer they are here, the more routes of appeal they have. Does the hon. Member not agree that that needs to be resolved?

   Hansard source
10. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Third sitting)

    Is it not the case that there will be people working in UNHCR who are not lawyers, such as people who have worked in refugee charities or who are experts in migrant work, and who have been doing that for a lifetime more than the time that somebody needs to go to law school in order to practise, or to go through the glad-handing process of becoming a judge? Would such people not be equally well qualified as somebody who has gone through an academic route?

    Hansard source
11. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Third sitting)

    Will the hon. Lady give way?

    Hansard source
12. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mary Kelly Foy

    Police Funding: North-east England

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. I congratulate my neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), on securing this debate. The consequences that we see today in our areas in the north-east, which we have heard about already, come as no surprise. Generational de-industrialisation causing regional economic disparity combined with austerity, deep cuts to public services and growing pressure on councils and community services have all taken their toll. We are now seeing those consequences—higher levels of social need, antisocial behaviour, neighbourhood insecurity and addiction. Our officers can often be left dealing with the symptoms of the challenges that begin long before criminality occurs. The reality is that Durham constabulary has had to manage a rising and increasingly complex demand while operating with over 100 fewer police officers than it had in 2010, despite officer numbers increasing nationally overall. It has had a real impact on our communities. Only last week, I received an anonymous letter from a serving police officer outlining their concerns about neighbourhood policing. They told me that despite neighbourhood teams seeming to be adequately staffed on paper, the reality on the ground is that these officers are routinely assigned to cover other duties, leaving PCSOs to cover the majority of neighbourhood work. Alongside that, the nature of policing has changed dramatically. Officers today are not only dealing with traditional crime, they are responding to incidents involving online offending, child exploitation, safeguarding concerns, domestic abuse and mental health crises. Those issues require significant time and resources, but are now a routine part of modern policing. The result is that officers are dealing with huge workloads. In Durham, recorded crime per officer remains above the national average. This has implications not only for the service provided to the public, but also for the wellbeing of officers and staff who continue to serve our communities with professionalism and dedication. Durham Police Federation has highlighted the pressures experienced by frontline officers. It has spoken of officers working hard to meet demand, often at the expense of their own wellbeing and family life, while dealing with uncertainty created by short-term funding settlements. We have already heard about the unfairness of forces with lower council tax bases, so I will not repeat those facts. However, as discussions continue about the future structure and funding of policing, it is important that the experiences of north-east police forces are fully understood. Any assessment of need must reflect not only population but deprivation, rurality and vulnerability. County Durham contains both urban and rural communities, each with their own challenges, and those realities should be reflected in future considerations. We must listen to the views of our constituents, whose concerns often go unanswered for lengthy periods because there are not enough officers to respond to incidents. I met Belmont Guides recently, and heard how deeply antisocial behaviour and low-level crime impacts their local community. Whether that is balaclava-clad youths riding e-bikes, vandals damaging park equipment and green spaces, acts of animal cruelty or intimidating behaviour as the evenings draw in, many of our communities are increasingly having to contend with these issues. These young girls deserve to feel safe in their communities, but they see a distinct lack of police officers on the streets. They want to know why that is. Minister, how do I reassure these young people in Durham that our county will receive the additional police officers we so desperately need and deserve, so that children feel safe enough to enjoy being out in the fresh air with their friends, instead of being attached to electronic devices? It is not just young people. I regularly hear from elderly residents who are afraid to go out alone after dark, from women who have escaped abusive relationships only to find themselves being pursued again, from public transport users dealing with antisocial behaviour and violence at bus stations, and from shop workers and market traders who have repeatedly suffered thefts while seeing little police presence on our streets. This is a real picture that I am painting, and we ignore it at our peril. Recent tragic events in the wider north-east region have served as a reminder of the risks that officers face in protecting the public, and our thoughts remain with those families. My constituents in Durham rightly expect an effective, visible and responsive police service. As future decisions are made about police structure and funding, I sincerely hope that the experiences of forces and residents across the north-east will be at the forefront of discussions, because it is time that the Government listened to them. I hope that it will be this Labour Government.

    Hansard source
13. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    This summer we all felt the impact of climate change, whether in our homes, workplaces or schools. The warm homes plan will ensure that cooling measures, as well as heating measures, are available for the most vulnerable homes. Additionally, all eligible households in England and Wales can benefit from the expanded boiler upgrade scheme, which now includes air-to-air heat pumps, which are able to heat and cool homes.

    Hansard source
14. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    I can give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. He will know that we are currently reviewing part O of the Building Regulations on overheating in order to ensure that, in the future, buildings are well prepared for the temperatures that we may face and are able to adapt to climate change.

    Hansard source
15. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    I would like to praise my hon. Friend for the work he has been doing and for working collaboratively with us to put some gentle pressure on the accreditation bodies to ensure that we see progress. I will be meeting the relevant bodies soon, and we hope to be able to unlock this at pace.

    Hansard source
16. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    We fully support the warm homes plan and the boiler upgrade scheme. We have had a record-breaking year on the boiler upgrade scheme, with over 8,000 applications in July, which is more than double what we saw in the previous year—not least because of homes that were off grid deciding to adopt a heat pump, and I am sure there are many in the hon. Lady’s constituency. We continue to support the boiler upgrade scheme, and I am sure we will see continued uptake of it over the coming months.

    Hansard source
17. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Plan: Implementation

    The warm homes plan is already delivering in communities across our country, and last month the Secretary of State announced the devolution of that plan. Giving power to local leaders and communities to make decisions about the areas they know best is essential to upgrading homes on the scale and at the pace that we need. It is key to bringing down bills, reducing fuel poverty and creating skilled jobs.

    Hansard source
18. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Plan: Implementation

    I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for all the work that he is doing to champion his constituents in Blackpool South. Around 600 households in his constituency received home upgrades in 2025-26. I encourage any of his constituents who want advice on how to upgrade their home to go to gov.uk and search for energy grants—they will find information there. I will soon launch a new tool to make it even easier for people to find support.

    Hansard source
19. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Plan: Implementation

    We have guaranteed that the grant will be there until March next year. Decisions for the future of that scheme and the uplift are for the Chancellor to take later at the Budget. That uplift has led to a significant increase in the number of heat pump applications, and applications to the boiler upgrade scheme—there were over 8,000 in July alone—so we can see the success that it is having, and the support that it is providing to off-grid homes.

    Hansard source
20. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Warm Homes Plan: Implementation

    I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new position. He would not expect me to stand here and make commitments that will be made by the Chancellor at the Budget at the end of this month. The hon. Gentleman’s party is trying to make us more dependent on fossil fuels, and to turn back the clock on the future homes standard—changes that would leave people across the country tens of thousands of pounds worse off.

    Hansard source
21. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Topical Questions

    I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for combining two of my favourite things, energy efficiency and the pub, in one question. I encourage the Wat Tyler to access the UK Business Climate Hub, which provides advice to businesses on how to reduce energy costs. It may also be eligible for the boiler upgrade scheme, which offers a grant of up to £7,500 to replace a fossil fuel boiler with a heat pump or other clean technology.

    Hansard source
22. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Martin McCluskey

    Topical Questions

    As my hon. Friend will know, decisions on tax are a matter for the Chancellor, but my Department has announced our intention to make heat batteries eligible for a £2,500 grant under the boiler upgrade scheme, and a Committee of this House will be considering legislation for that on Wednesday.

    Hansard source
23. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Marsha De Cordova

    Pensions Triple Lock

    I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and welcome the action that the Labour Government are taking, with a plan that will protect pensioners and ensure they have access to good quality care when they need it, unlike the Conservatives who did nothing to fix the broken social care system and created a hostile social security system. Does he agree that pensioners deserve clarity from the Conservatives, given that the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat), has called the pensions triple lock a “Ponzi scheme” and “not sustainable”?

    Hansard source
24. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Markus Campbell-Savours

    Topical Questions

    Last year, some of us warned that distributing heating oil support through local authorities carried risks, with some councils imposing strict means tests that help too few and others setting limited criteria, meaning nearly all applicants were successful but got very little and then blamed the Government for insufficient support. In Cumbria, that is exactly what happened. What more can the Secretary of State do to ensure that the right people receive the right level of support?

    Hansard source
25. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Markus Campbell-Savours

    Iran: Threats to British Interests

    There is wide acknowledgement of Iranian efforts to weaponise social media in order to promote Iran’s propaganda, spread disinformation and shake UK politics. What work is being done to hold to account social media companies whose algorithms boost dangerous content?

    Hansard source
26. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Markus Campbell-Savours

    Pensions Triple Lock

    Rural pensioners are often more reliant on the state pension and experience higher heating and travel costs and poorer service access. Many often experience strict criteria or less outreach for council support. How do we ensure that changes to the triple lock do not leave my rural constituents behind, and that rural communities are not the last to benefit from the vitally needed national care service, especially considering the recruitment challenges we have in areas such as Cumbria?

    Hansard source
27. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Sewards

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech. The Education Committee and the Health and Social Care Committee worked together on this subject and found that the NHS and local commissioners are not taking advantage of the expertise in those third sector organisations. Does she agree that the Government should take note of their report and act on its recommendations?

    Hansard source
28. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Myer

    Police Funding: North-east England

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) on securing this debate on a critical issue for our region. I join him and colleagues in paying tribute to our two brave police officers in Cleveland, Tom Clough and Matthew Blades, who tragically lost their lives recently. I also pay tribute to their colleagues and friends in our force, particularly Chief Constable Victoria Fuller, who has conducted herself with incredible professionalism in this difficult time. Thank you to all of the police officers who deal with my office every day and who report and tackle crime, including Inspector Neil Deluce and Inspector Ian Mitchell, who are the pinnacle of professionalism, despite these challenging circumstances. I also take a moment to thank everyone, including in the community, who has supported our police force amid everything they have been going through in recent weeks. The chief constable said to me recently that every single police station has been filled with gifts, cakes and cards for our officers—there has been a huge outpouring of support from the public. As she cannot speak in these kinds of debates, I take a moment to recognise my constituency neighbour, the right hon. Member for Redcar (Anna Turley), given that this incident took place in her constituency and she has been engaged in all the same conversations as I have been. Cleveland has a relatively small police force, but it suffers from some of the greatest demands in the country. We have among the highest recorded crime rates in England and Wales, alongside severe deprivation, serious violence, organised crime and immense pressure on public services, yet our funding has failed to keep pace for well over a decade. I heard from my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham how the percentage change since 2010 in full-time equivalent police officer numbers shows that there are serious issues, not only in Cleveland, but across the north-east. We are not allowed to use props in these kinds of debates, but if I were to get out a graph, it would show Cleveland, Durham and Northumbria suffering the worst cuts in the country. The chief constable said that an estimated 500 additional officers would be required in Cleveland to bring workload closer to the national average. That is just to catch up to the average, not to deal with the additional demands in our region. Those pressures are being felt by frontline officers every day and Cleveland Police Federation has warned about unmanageable workloads, with officers responding to traumatic incidents involving domestic abuse, serious violence and vulnerable people. In my constituency, that means officers dealing with antisocial behaviour in places such as Hemlington and Park End, illegal off-road bikes, as has been mentioned, in places such as Easterside, and the very different challenges of policing our rural villages in East Cleveland. In Guisborough, our town has suffered from shoplifting on the high street, and I want to recognise the work that Councillor Bill Suthers has done to convene residents, police and the council to discuss what more can be done, and to get results from that discussion. At the same time, Cleveland has made real progress. The force has come out of special measures and has been recognised for its improvement. Our officers are delivering results, despite the pressures they face. This is nothing short of a miracle. So, too, our councils are delivering programmes to support their work tackling antisocial behaviour and crime. I welcome the decision taken just this week by Mayor Chris Cooke to introduce new public space protection orders in places such as Hemlington Lake to help address some of these issues. However, the reality is stark, and the PCC and chief constable have called for at least £20 million in additional funding each year, to keep pace with demand. It is a clear and practical request, backed by cross-party leaders across Cleveland. When the Government take forward their police funding reform, they must ensure that deprivation, crime rates and demand are properly recognised, so that Cleveland finally receives the funding that reflects the challenges our officers face every day. I also mention the similar challenges facing our fire brigade—the fire service funding formula also needs to change. It has also lost a third of its full-time firefighter posts since 2010 and now faces a £1.2 million funding gap. This is the legacy of austerity writ large in a region that desperately needs an urgent injection of funding for its police and fire brigade. We need a particular focus on our region as police reforms progress, and special consideration must be given to accelerating those reforms in the north-east, perhaps through a pilot programme, given the challenges across the whole region. We also need clarity about what will happen with PCC funding beyond 2028. My hon. Friend the Member for North Durham spoke about domestic abuse in our region. We have some fantastic organisations on Teesside, including ARCH Teesside, My Sister’s Place, EVA Women’s Aid, the Halo Project and many others. Many get their funding from police and crime commissioners, and they do not have clarity about what will happen after PCCs are abolished, so I would welcome some clarity on that from the Minister. The message today from me and colleagues is that residents need safer streets and proper neighbourhood community policing again, which means that our Government must back our police force with the resources it desperately needs.

    Hansard source
29. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Myer

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I welcome the commitment to changing the funding formula. That is genuinely a seismic change. The point that my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald) is making is that we cannot wait. This Government have already been in for two years, and it will be another two years until PCCs are abolished. We are encountering these incidents every single day. Last year, Norfolk had 20,000 fewer crimes than Cleveland but received £50 million more in funding. That cannot be justified. It is unfair and it is un-Labour. I urge the Minister to look at what can be done in-year and to look at the proposal to accelerate reforms in the north-east in particular.

    Hansard source
30. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    UK Coach Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for bringing us here. I want to speak about Stanley Travel, a coach business based in my North Durham constituency. Established in 1961, Stanley Travel remains a family-owned and operated business. It operates more than 50 vehicles and employs 95 staff. From serving schools and colleges in my constituency to allowing tourists on a budget to get around the country, it provides constituents with a great deal of value, like other coach companies we have heard about today. Unfortunately, Stanley Travel and other coach businesses face severe pressures on their operations, so I want to raise four questions with the Minister. Rising fuel prices have substantially increased costs. Diesel prices have risen from £1.08 per litre in March to £1.59 per litre last week. That represents an additional £9,690 each week across Stanley Travel’s operation. Where transport contracts have already been agreed at fixed prices in advance, it is local family businesses that are forced to absorb that cost. Those challenges will only be compounded by future increases in fuel duty. We ought to recognise coaches as essential users of fuel, delivering education and community transport and lower-carbon group travel. Therefore, my first question is, will the Minister support an essential user fuel rebate for coach operators and urge the Treasury to cancel the proposed fuel duty increases? Driver and technician shortages make it harder for operators to maintain and expand services. Recruiting and training new staff requires lots of investment, while restrictions affecting younger coach drivers make it difficult, as we have heard, to recruit directly from schools and colleges. Stanley Travel tells me that it needs a clearer pathway into coach driving and engineering, supported by accessible training and apprenticeships. Will the Government support funded category D licence training, review driver apprenticeships and remove unnecessary barriers to younger people entering the sector? Too often, coaches are overlooked in transport and destination planning. Inadequate parking, unsuitable pick-up points and insufficient space for wheelchair boarding create practical difficulties for drivers and passengers. What steps will the Government take to ensure that councils and visitor destinations provide adequate coach parking, accessible boarding facilities and suitable driver rest areas? Finally, coaches already offer an efficient way of moving groups while reducing individual car journeys, but operators also want to invest in cleaner technology. However, vehicle costs, range and charging infrastructure must reflect the demands of long-distance and touring work. A clear, coach-specific road map to cleaner technology would give businesses greater confidence to plan investment, supported by practical infrastructure and appropriate financial assistance. Will the Government develop that road map with operators and provide funding support that recognises the coach sector’s needs? Currently, trading conditions for coach businesses such as Stanley Travel are exceptionally difficult. Supporting coaches protects local jobs, affordable travel and essential services while helping communities to access experiences and opportunities across the country. I hope the Minister can set out what the Government will do to address each of the concerns I have raised and to support companies such as Stanley Travel, which has delivered so much for my constituents over the last 65 years.

    Hansard source
31. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I beg to move, That this House has considered police funding in the North East. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, MrI know that I will not be the only Member in the room who was deeply disturbed to see the scenes emerging out of Cleveland earlier this year. I pay tribute to PC Matthew Blades and PC Tom Clough.

    Hansard source
32. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    My hon. Friend has anticipated the general thrust of my remarks. I join him in paying tribute to PCs Matthew Blades and Tom Clough, who lost their lives trying to protect the public. While the Labour Government were right to provide an additional £2 million for Cleveland police in response, it struck me that the challenges facing Cleveland are not unique in the north-east region. They are faced across the Durham, Cleveland and Northumbria police forces areas. Police numbers were cut in the years after 2010. Public safety has therefore deteriorated, and our constituents are paying the price. It terrifies me to think that communities like those I represent could ever face a breakdown in law and order of the kind that occurred temporarily in Cleveland. It drew me to ask the question: why was our region left so under-resourced that it became vulnerable to such pressures? Sadly, I can only conclude that the answer lies in an ideological choice by the Conservative party during the 14 years in which it was in government that places such as North Durham were not deserving of the necessary police resources, despite the severe social and economic challenges that our communities have faced following decades of deindustrialisation. Frankly, that decision should be regarded as nothing short of a national scandal. As I hope to demonstrate today, it has reduced safety, security and opportunity for the people of our region. The numbers paint a damning picture of how badly the last Conservative Government failed the north-east of England. Our three police forces all sit in the top four across England and Wales in terms of percentage reduction in police numbers between 2010 and 2024.

    Hansard source
33. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    Obviously, I do not share the hon. Gentleman’s knowledge and expertise of the unique policing challenges in Northern Ireland, but I appreciate his support for north-east England in this debate and his points about community policing. I do not believe it is a coincidence that, over the same period, Durham, Cleveland and Northumbria recorded the three largest increases in crime, excluding fraud, of any police force areas in England and Wales. Today, County Durham still has 120 fewer police officers than in 2010, equating to 102 full-time roles and a decrease of 6.7%. Across the whole north-east, 578 officers have been lost since 2010, a fall of 7.8%. In stark contrast, the areas that saw the greatest increase in police numbers were Surrey, Cambridgeshire, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Norfolk and Thames Valley. If one were being cynical, one might point out that those are all areas that, on the whole, had Conservative MPs when the Conservative party was in government, and generally greater levels of prosperity and lower levels of policing demand than many of the communities represented in this room. Although officer numbers across the country sit 1.5% higher than in 2010, the regional disparity in which communities benefited from increased police numbers is clear and has grown. That prompts the question: why did successive Tory Governments deem those places to be most deserving of frontline police presence? Why did politicians in Westminster at that time decide that working-class families in North Durham were less deserving of police protection than people living in more prosperous areas with lower crime levels, where police officer numbers were increased? To compare the demand that different police forces face, we can look at the measure of police recorded crime per officer. In County Durham, there were 42 recorded crimes per officer in 2025-26, which is much higher than the national average of 36. If our county received the same funding per recorded crime as the national average, it would be £29 million a year better funded. Not only are policing numbers on the ground lower than 2010, but our area faces more incidents requiring police time. During July 2026, Durham Constabulary received more than 10,000 emergency 999 calls, an increase of 11% compared with the same month the previous year. Demand remained high throughout the summer, with crime-related incidents more than 14% above normal levels in August. Antisocial behaviour related to off-road bikes, e-bikes and scooters poses another challenge in policing in County Durham. My hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Lola McEvoy), who cannot be here, has been campaigning on this issue over the past year, as have many others in the room. I commend her for highlighting the support that police officers in our area need to tackle this issue blighting our communities. Just last week, she observed 70 illegal bikes and scooters being crushed after being confiscated by Durham Constabulary. Police chiefs in our area tell me that there were more than 1,000 more incidents each month over the summer than for the same period in 2025, representing two full days of additional demand each month. In particular, high levels of deprivation in our county translate into higher police demand related to mental health crises, drug or alcohol abuse and cases of missing children. In the Durham and Northumbria police force areas, officers face the especially challenging combination of high levels of deprivation and extremely rural areas. It takes more money to police rural areas, due to additional travel costs and the need to maintain smaller, less efficient police buildings. I hope the Minister will set out what consideration has been given to the additional needs of police forces in rural areas that also have high levels of deprivation, and how the Government are supporting them with the unique challenges that that combination poses. Although the Durham force has managed to maintain performance in responding to public requests for help, despite severe challenges, in other areas demand is affecting performance. According to the latest inspection, Durham had the highest rate of repeat domestic abuse incidents per thousand of the population of anywhere in England and Wales. Of 188 priority domestic abuse incidents, 118 did not meet the attendance target. That is shocking evidence of the scale of demand facing our police force and why it needs the resources to do more to protect vulnerable people and prevent abuse. Can the Minister please set out what assessment the Government have made of this particular problem and say how they will ensure that those experiencing domestic abuse in my constituency and across the region receive the same level of support as domestic abuse victims anywhere else in the country? My message to my North Durham constituents is this: I will not allow our area to be denied the support that it needs and deserves from the state. A Labour Government will always stand up for our area and I look forward to hearing the Minister set out how we are doing that later on in the debate. Having told Members what the numbers show, let me tell them what the impact is on typical constituents in North Durham. For a family in Stanley, it means worrying about their children being the victims of antisocial behaviour on their walk home from school. For a small business on Chester-le-Street Front Street, it means accepting that shoplifting is an inevitable cost of doing business. For a farmer near Lanchester, it means having no support to fend off perpetrators of agricultural crime who damage or steal their expensive machinery. For residents of Craghead, it means worrying that stretched police resources might prevent the prompt response and support they deserve when a crime occurs. The consequences of stretched policing resources were hammered home to me in Parliament just last month when I hosted a group of women and girls from the Just for Women Centre in Stanley and St Bede’s school in Lanchester. In our discussion, the group highlighted their public safety concerns, recalling that they no longer feel safe walking home at night. They were clear that rather than simply catching perpetrators when awful crimes happen, our priority should be to prevent harm in the first place. I firmly believe that visible neighbourhood policing has an important part to play in preventing violence against women and girls, and in helping women to feel safe in their communities. I would be grateful if the Minister could specifically reflect on the safety of women and girls in the north-east of England and update the House on efforts in our region to tackle the scourge of VAWG and on any assessment that the Government have made of the gendered impact of the previous policing cuts in our area. Of course, policing is not just about officers patrolling the streets in our neighbourhood; when the worst happens, it is also important to have enough officers in the response team to deal with the fallout. Too often, police shortages have meant that when major incidents occur, officers are pulled out of neighbourhood policing to respond, leaving our communities with a reduced police presence. In County Durham, such support for response teams from neighbourhood policing was provided on 129 occasions in August and 233 occasions in September. Will the Minister set out the Government’s thinking on the balance between neighbourhood policing and response teams, in particular explaining how she will ensure that when incidents occur, the towns and villages in my constituency and across our region are not stripped of their neighbourhood policing? I now come to the rallying cry of this debate. As MPs from across the north-east of England, we are here today to call for more resources from central Government to deal with the challenges that our communities face. What we need is recognition that, because of decisions by previous Tory Governments, we are starting from a lower baseline of officer numbers than we should be. That is why I am calling for Ministers to deliver additional police numbers to the north-east on top of what is already promised through the neighbourhood policing guarantee, to reverse the cuts to policing in our area that have compromised our safety since 2010. I welcome the Labour Government allowing Durham exceptional flexibility over our policing precept in order to prevent further avoidable cuts to our policing presence. I commend our police and crime commissioner, Joy Allen, for her consistent advocacy for policing across County Durham and Darlington, and for taking the difficult decision to propose a modest precept increase to ensure that residents are protected from crime and ASB. However, she has rightly pointed out that because our area has a low council tax base, the amount of money that we can raise locally to invest in policing is very limited. About 70% of County Durham properties are in council tax bands A and B, and I note that I am standing next to a proponent of council tax reform for those reasons, my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash). Although a 1% council tax increase generates £1.9 million in Surrey, the same change in County Durham would raise only £500,000. The safety of my constituents should not depend on the value of property in their postcode. In fact, it is areas such as ours that need investment most desperately. I know that the Police Federation, which represents 145,000 serving officers, has highlighted that reliance on council tax precepts risks a postcode lottery of funding. The Police Federation has called for a long-term funding settlement that takes that into account. Does the Minister think it is fair that local areas are expected to raise money for policing themselves when the areas that have the least ability to raise money are the same that, because of their levels of deprivation, need a police presence most? In making this case, I am optimistic about our Labour Government, who have already shown that they care about these issues and want to deliver a fairer settlement for the north-east. Nationally, the Labour Government have been robust in making the case for a visible police presence on our streets to improve public safety, backed by a neighbourhood policing guarantee to deliver a named police officer for every community. Police funding is increasing, and after the unrest in Middlesbrough the Government acted swiftly and firmly to deliver more funding for Cleveland’s police force. The Home Secretary is also committed to a wider review of the police funding formula to ensure fairness. Will the Minister confirm when that review will happen, whether it will consider incidents of crime and ASB and whether we will see a real cash increase in funding for our north-east police forces during this Parliament? As the Minister responds, I urge her not to lose sight of the fact that the north-east is still dealing with the consequences of years of disproportionate policing cuts. I hope she can outline what role that context plays in the Government’s thinking on the fairness of the current formulas, and how she is ensuring that this review properly takes into account the policing demand and lack of funding so clearly presented by our region. Our constituents are not asking for special treatment; they demand that they are afforded the same level of protection as people elsewhere in the country. The safety of a family in Stanley, Chester-le-Street, Annfield Plain, Sacriston, Pelton, South Moor or Craghead should matter to politicians just as much as that of a family anywhere else in the country. That is why the Government must ensure a fair funding settlement that accounts for the challenges facing our communities to ensure policing that the public can have confidence in. Today, we are sending a clear message: the Government must do more to ensure that policing in the north-east of England is adequately funded to deliver for our constituents.

    Hansard source
34. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I am grateful to the Minister for her remarks and for getting to the crux of the matter, which is that the funding formula was ripped up under previous Governments. I am grateful to the shadow Ministers, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) and the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson), for at least understanding that the problem is low levels of funding in the north-east, but I regret that they were not able to bring themselves to explain that Conservative Governments, and a coalition Government including the Lib Dems, ripped up the funding formula. I am grateful to my hon. Friends on the Government Benches for the eloquent way in which they have expressed the extreme pressures that policing is under in the communities that they represent, and some of the tragic events that have happened partly due to that pressure. With that, I am conscious of the need to sit down before the turn of the hour. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered police funding in the North East.

    Hansard source
35. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Rigby

    Draft Overseas Prudential Requirements Regime (Credit Institutions and Investment Firms) Regulations 2026 Draft Over the Counter Derivatives (Intragroup Transactions) Regulations 2026 Draft Building Societies Act 1986 (Assimilation to Company Law and Changes to Funding Limit) Order 2026

    I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Overseas Prudential Requirements Regime (Credit Institutions and Investment Firms) Regulations 2026.

    Hansard source
36. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Rigby

    Draft Overseas Prudential Requirements Regime (Credit Institutions and Investment Firms) Regulations 2026 Draft Over the Counter Derivatives (Intragroup Transactions) Regulations 2026 Draft Building Societies Act 1986 (Assimilation to Company Law and Changes to Funding Limit) Order 2026

    Although the three instruments before us concern distinct parts of the financial services regulatory system, they share a common purpose, which is to ensure that the UK regulatory framework remains clear, proportionate and able to support growth, while maintaining appropriate safeguards and financial stability. I will address each instrument in turn, beginning with the overseas prudential requirements regime regulations. Following EU exit, the UK retained a body of EU-derived financial services legislation, including the UK capital requirements regulation, which sets prudential requirements for banks, building societies and larger investment firms. The first instrument supports the Government’s programme of replacing that assimilated law with a framework tailored to the UK. It brings the existing UK capital requirements regulation equivalence regimes together in a single overseas prudential requirements regime. It also makes targeted changes so that the treatment of exposures to overseas exchanges better reflects the underlying risk; updates the definition of overseas investment firms without changing the overall scope of existing treatment; and enables eligible overseas covered bonds to be recognised in future, subject to a further statutory instrument. The second SI makes a targeted and important reform to the UK’s framework for regulating over-the-counter derivatives—those traded directly between buyer and seller—by addressing intragroup transactions. It replaces the temporary intragroup exemption regime, which everyone present will know as TIGER, with a permanent framework. In doing so, it provides firms with long-term certainty while preserving appropriate safeguards and regulatory oversight. The benefits of oversight of intragroup transactions are well recognised, so exemptions from certain clearing and margin requirements for certain transactions are a feature of regulatory regimes in the UK and other jurisdictions. TIGER was introduced following EU exit to provide a temporary regime for exempting certain transactions, but it was only ever intended to be temporary. Having been extended once already, it is due to expire at the end of this year, and the Government consider that a further time-limited extension would not provide the long-term framework and stability that firms need. The instrument therefore establishes a permanent framework for qualifying intragroup transactions. The third SI concerns the legislation governing building societies—specifically the Building Societies Act 1986. The order makes two specific changes. First, it removes the requirement placed on building societies to execute legal documents such as mortgage deeds using a common seal, enabling them to use authorised signatures instead. That is a practical and proportionate modernisation, reducing unnecessary administrative burdens. Secondly, the order makes specific and limited exemptions from the wholesale funding calculation that building societies are required to make, to ensure that they continue to be majority owned by their members. Taken together, these instruments modernise our financial services framework. They replace or update inherited arrangements, provide greater clarity and certainty, and support the effective functioning and competitiveness of the UK financial sector, while maintaining appropriate safeguards. I commend them to the Committee.

    Hansard source
37. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Lucy Rigby

    Draft Overseas Prudential Requirements Regime (Credit Institutions and Investment Firms) Regulations 2026 Draft Over the Counter Derivatives (Intragroup Transactions) Regulations 2026 Draft Building Societies Act 1986 (Assimilation to Company Law and Changes to Funding Limit) Order 2026

    I welcome those comments, and I suspect that this is a preview of the Budget debate.

    Hansard source
38. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Liz Twist

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for youth suicide prevention charities and mental health support for young people. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Wishart. I am grateful to have secured this debate on a subject that touches every single constituency represented in this House. Last month, I introduced a debate for World Suicide Prevention Day; many of the same hon. Members were present, and there was a strong focus on recognising that we all need to do more. Sadly, in the same week, Papyrus Prevention of Young Suicide, a charity that supported young people and their families for nearly 30 years, went into administration. We are just over one month on from that day, and following the news of this debate, many charities and third-sector organisations have been in touch to ask if they can contribute, not because they want recognition but because they all feel the strain of funding and fear what will happen if no one listens to their pleas.

    Hansard source
39. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Liz Twist

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    I most certainly agree that people coming together and working together can really make a difference. Well done to my hon. Friend’s community for doing that.

    Hansard source
40. 13 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Liz Twist

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    I most certainly agree that we need to do all we can to support young people—in fact, all people—facing ideas of suicidality. I will touch on the issue of funding. As I was saying, we are just over a month on from that day, and so many organisations have been in touch wanting to contribute. I apologise to those who I cannot mention and whose specific points I cannot refer to. I know that they provide a lifeline to so many people, and I will do my best to do them justice. Papyrus had a national focus and offered hope to thousands of young people across the UK. It offered specialist support for young people, which I am sure the Minister will know was a vital support given that the biggest killer of young people is suicide.

    Hansard source