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

What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.

Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology

Labour Party

Sitting MPs
404
Entries, last 7 days
973
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Conservative and Unionist Party

Sitting MPs
118
Entries, last 7 days
345
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Liberal Democrats

Sitting MPs
71
Entries, last 7 days
216
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Reform UK

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
20
Members
270,000 CLAIMED

Latest entry 6 Nov 2026

Scottish National Party

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
10
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Green Party

Sitting MPs
5
Entries, last 7 days
20
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

Plaid Cymru

Sitting MPs
4
Entries, last 7 days
10
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 4 Nov 2026

All parties, latest first

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

  1. ParliamentLabourAnna Turley

    Immigration and Asylum Bill (Fourth sitting)

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for that. I do not recognise that figure, but of course, the Government want to make sure that we are fully aware of the figures. As was detailed at the start of the Committee’s consideration, the Government know that there are a huge number of appeals in the backlog. As the authority is developed and starts to come into force, the transition will be made. I am afraid that I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any projections, as I would not want to mislead the Committee with any numbers or predictions we could make at this stage. Question put and agreed to. Clause 14 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 15 Power to specify cases to be heard by First-tier Tribunal instead of IIAA Amendment made: 43, in clause 15, page 13, line 2, at end insert— “(4) The Lord Chancellor may by rules made by statutory instrument make amendments to Tribunal Procedural Rules in connection with regulations made by the Secretary of State under this section. (5) Before making rules under subsection (4), the Lord Chancellor must consult the Senior President of Tribunals. (6) A statutory instrument containing rules under subsection (4) is subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.”—(Anna Turley.) This amendment would give the Lord Chancellor the power to amend Tribunal Procedure Rules in connection with regulations under clause 15 transferring cases back to the First-Tier Tribunal from the IIAA. (See also amendment 46.) Clause 15, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 16 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Ordered, That further consideration be now adjourned.—(Jade Botterill.)

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLabourAnna Dixon

    Climate Change Resilience

    10. What recent progress she has made on improving the UK’s resilience to the impacts of climate change.

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLabourAnna Dixon

    Climate Change Resilience

    As hon. Members have said, we endured one of the hottest summers on record, with 10 days reaching 35°, which is double the previous record. We also saw deaths from extreme heat. When we think about insulating homes, we think about keeping ourselves warm, but home insulation is just as critical in protecting against extreme heat. So can the Minister tell the House a little more about the steps the Government are taking to ensure that the new homes we are building are designed to protect people against extreme heat?

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLabourAndy McDonald

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) for securing this debate. Let me start with a simple proposition. Cleveland police cannot be expected to tackle the highest levels of recorded crime in the country with the lowest levels of police resource. It is not fair on our officers or our communities; it is not good enough. The figures are stark: Cleveland has about 123 recorded crimes per 1,000 people—the highest rate of any police force in England and Wales—and Middlesbrough has the highest recorded crime of any local authority area. What has happened to police numbers? Since 2010, we have suffered the worst percentage reduction in full-time equivalent officers of any force. It is down 15%, from 1,652 to just 1,405, or 247 fewer officers at a time of extraordinary demand. That is the disgraceful legacy of the Conservative party. Yet against that backdrop, Cleveland police is still one of the most improved forces in the land, and I commend Chief Constable Victoria Fuller for that achievement. It is now dealing with significant increases in recalls to prison, which have rocketed in recent times. Our officers are being asked to do more with less. They are confronting serious crime, antisocial behaviour and major incidents with a depleted workforce. The appalling A66 collision in August brought the pressures into sharp focus. Seven lives were lost, including two magnificent and brave Cleveland police officers, PC Matthew Blades and PC Tom Clough. I pay tribute to them and their families, and to their colleagues, who have continued to serve our communities in the most difficult of circumstances. The incident also exposed the demands placed on a small force, which has required mutual aid from other constabularies and continues to be ravaged by the ongoing evil of organised crime. The A66 collision rightly brought Cleveland’s resources and funding under renewed scrutiny. We must learn the lessons, but we must not pretend that this terrible incident created the problems. The underlying pressures have been building for years. I welcome the Government’s £2 million of additional support. It is right that Cleveland receives help, given the exceptional demands, but let us be honest: a one-off £2 million payment is not a permanent solution to a structural funding deficit. The scale of the challenge is substantial. In any event, given that the mutual aid bill is already way north of £4 million, Matt Storey, our wonderful police and crime commissioner, said that the £2 million “won’t touch the sides.” With the mutual aid, Cleveland has delivered 100% of 999 calls answered within the prescribed period and has made massive inroads into clearing arrest warrants, but it will end soon. As my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer) said, realistic and conservative estimates put the additional annual funding required at north of £24 million per annum recurring. I welcome the Government’s commitment to review the police funding formula, but the published timetable concerns the review of police structures, and we have no firm date for a new funding formula to be implemented. My colleagues, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Anna Turley), and I have said repeatedly that Cleveland cannot be told to wait while Whitehall works through another lengthy process. The Government have acknowledged that interim measures can be considered to better align funding with policing priorities, so I ask the Minister directly: why not start with Cleveland? I urge the Government to consider piloting a revised needs-based allocation for Cleveland for 2027-28, taking proper account of its exceptional crime rate, deprivation and depleted officer numbers, followed by a decision on additional recurring funding. That would not pre-empt national reform; it would demonstrate that the Government understand the difference between a long-term plan and an immediate responsibility to keep people safe. We cannot rebuild policing on the cheap, and we cannot ask our communities to wait indefinitely for change. That funding must deliver something people can see and feel in their daily lives: effective neighbourhood policing and the eradication of organised crime groups. People want to feel safe walking home and raising their children. I beg the Minister to hear the pleas of the bereaved families, who have let it be known that they want the legacy of PCs Tom Clough and Matthew Blades to be fairer funding and an equitable policing settlement for Cleveland. Minister, do not let their deaths be in vain. Their tragic loss has further galvanised and unified our community. That is why restoring police capacity matters. It is not simply about figures on a spreadsheet or allocations made in Whitehall; it is about having enough officers to prevent crime, respond when things go wrong and build lasting relationships with the communities they serve. This Labour Government was elected to change things. In Cleveland that means correcting an indefensible funding imbalance, rebuilding police capacity and putting officers back into our communities. The test is not what we announce in Westminster: it is what people see in the streets. I ask the Minister to come to Cleveland with a clear commitment, an urgent assessment of its needs, serious consideration of additional recurring funding and a needs-based pilot in 2027-28. The people of Cleveland have waited long enough. This Government must deliver visible change on the ground for our communities in Cleveland and across the north-east.

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLabourAndy McDonald

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I am listening intently to what the shadow Minister has to say. Does the picture he is painting cause him to reflect on the savage cuts to Cleveland police under his party’s stewardship, which saw the force lose 500 officers? Will he apologise for that error?

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLabourAndy McDonald

  7. ParliamentLabourAndy McDonald

    Police Funding: North-east England

    The Minister says that it is a complicated process, but the graph that I am sure she has seen showing the changes in full-time equivalents between 2010 and 2025 is stark, and there is political bias built into that. We on the Labour Benches are saying that that urgently needs to be corrected. It is an inequitable, unfair formula that visits badly on the constituencies in the north-east of England, and it is that that needs attention. We cannot wait months for the formula to be recalibrated to come up with a better answer. The need is now. There is one point on which I agree with the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers): if we carry on as we are, we will be losing more officers in Cleveland, so the need is urgent. It is not a matter for months; we have to do this in days. If the Minister needs any further information from Victoria Fuller, the chief constable of Cleveland police, I am sure it can be provided, but we need that progress immediately.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLabourAndrew Lewin

    Pensions Triple Lock

    I congratulate the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister on having the courage to grasp this issue. I was saddened, but not surprised, by the response from the Opposition Front Bench. However, there may be cause for hope, because the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), who is not in his place, has been a consistent advocate of reform of the triple lock, proving the maxim that wisdom comes with age. Will the Secretary of State confirm that, under our adjusted triple lock, pensioner poverty will continue to fall in the 2030s and beyond?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLabourAmanda Martin

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. Any death by suicide is devastating, but the death by suicide of a child is unimaginable. Although suicide rates are highest among the middle-aged, there has been a concerning increase among children and young people in recent years. One worrying trend linked to the health problems and suicide rate in Portsmouth is the troubling rise in the use of ketamine. In February 2026, Sarah lost her daughter Honor to suicide following a battle with ketamine addiction. Honor was bright and loved, but she was let down by a system that did not recognise the danger until it was too late. She was 23. Ketamine addiction among young people is a growing crisis hiding in plain sight. Unlike with alcohol or vaping, most parents do not see the signs of it. Most schools do not teach it, and most GPs do not even screen for it. Search engines and information online do not highlight the dangers and the damage it does to a person’s body and mind. Drugs like ketamine are frequently marketed on mainstream social media. The widespread availability and low cost of this substance make it particularly accessible to teenagers, and the class B classification it carries does not deter people from selling or buying it. That is why Sarah set up the H23 Foundation to fight ketamine addiction and prevent more lives like Honor’s from being lost. The foundation aims to reach as many students and young people as possible, to provide support for families and to create a lasting legacy through systemic change. Efforts by our Government since 2024 to address ketamine addiction have been a welcome start. However, there is more to do. I would be grateful if the Minister could outline any other efforts the Government are making to address the specific challenges rising ketamine use and wider drug addiction pose to young people’s mental health and risk of suicide, and how we can ensure that the truth about the damage this drug does to people is available. Stories like Honor’s show just how devastating the consequences can be if left unaddressed.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLabourAlistair Strathern

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    With this summer’s extreme heat showing that the effects of climate change are very much with us in the here and now, it is vital that we support households to adapt to the new reality, as well as tackling the effects of climate change at source. The inclusion of air-to-air heat pumps, which provide clean cooling, and heating tech in the boiler upgrade scheme is very welcome, but despite this announcement, the delays in accreditation mean that uptake has been incredibly slow. I convened more than 50 MPs over the summer to push the accreditors to get a move on and ensure that more homes can benefit from this. How are Ministers holding the accreditation agencies to account, to ensure that more households in my constituency can benefit from cooling tech?

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLabourAlison McGovern

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    As ever, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Wishart. I would like to thank Members from across the House who participated in such an important debate, and especially my hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist) for securing this debate. She does a very important job in chairing the all-party parliamentary group on suicide and self-harm prevention, and she will have heard today just how much her colleagues from across the House of Commons support her in that work. Officials have very kindly drafted me quite a long speech. I am going to try to answer Members’ questions, but given that you diligently tried to get so many people in, Mr Wishart, Members may have things to say that were missed. I think it would be better if they intervened on my speech, if that is acceptable to you, Mr Wishart, but that may mean that I miss paragraphs that officials have diligently written.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLabourAlison McGovern

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    Through my hon. Friend, I thank Papyrus and all those in her constituency for all their hard work. I will update colleagues in just a moment on the steps we will take from this point, but by way of context, people have mentioned the suicide prevention strategy for England, which shows that while suicide rates among children and young people are relatively low compared with older age groups, the longer-term trend is really concerning. Right across the House, we share that worry about the increase we have seen in suicide among the young. The strategy requires tailored and targeted support, early intervention and collaboration right across the public sector, which we all want to see. Before I turn to Papyrus and respond to the questions that my hon. Friends and others have put to me, I want to draw Members’ attention to the publication last week of the Fonagy review, which gave the wider context of rising mental distress, particularly for young people and especially for young women. If Members have not read the report, I strongly recommend it to them, because that is the context against which we will move forward before Christmas to publish the mental health strategy, which will pick up many of the issues that Members have mentioned. Turning to Papyrus, I hope that all those who have worked for Papyrus, been involved in it and raised funds, including 3 Dads Walking and so many others, will have heard the support for its work today. I want to add the Government’s gratitude. Officials are in touch with administrators to try to work with them in the way that colleagues have suggested. My recommendation would be that Members who are interested meet officials in the Department as soon as possible to be updated on that work, if that is acceptable to colleagues. Youth suicide prevention and mental health will be a part of the mental health strategy going forward. We need to take immediate steps to make sure that the process through the administration happens. Colleagues will understand that I cannot give more details at the Dispatch Box just now, but as I said, I suggest we have a meeting for colleagues with officials very soon so that they can understand the detail. Then we will need to make sure that the mental health strategy, which the Prime Minister has committed to before Christmas, takes into account all the issues that colleagues have raised today.

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLabourAlison McGovern

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    I wholeheartedly agree with that point. We need to move to a system where children and young people are able to get support quickly, in an open, non-stigmatising way, so that we do not see them reach crisis point. That is the direction of travel that the Fonagy review suggested last week, and we will take it forward through the mental health strategy. I am conscious that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford), asked me some direct questions, including about funding. I want to respond to his point and the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards). There has been a real problem with short-term funding. Again, we need to think about what principles we should put in place to try to resolve that. We know that the best care and support from a mental health point of view often comes from the community and voluntary sector, and Members have described quite accurately what the funding environment has been like—too short term. I ask colleagues to work with me as we try to get to a better, more long-term arrangement.

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLabourAlison McGovern

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    I agree that connectivity between organisations is really important. One of the things that the suicide prevention strategy has said is that preventing suicide is everybody’s business. We all need to have that in our minds and work together across organisations to support people. My hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) asked me about ketamine use. The suicide prevention strategy identified substance misuse as an issue for suicide prevention, and I will be working very closely with colleagues across Government to try to support their work on substance misuse. The shadow Minister asked about evaluation, and I will write to him with the details on that. He is quite right to point out that it is extremely important that we understand the efficacy of what has been done before, so that we can bring that into the mental health strategy to come. The hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) asked about the mental health investment standard. I will write to him with the details of how we are taking that forward. Spending forecasts show that we should reach £16.1 billion on mental health in 2026-27, which is a good thing. I have concerns about outcomes, because it is very important that while spending increases, recovery also increases. We want to make sure that we see continuous improvement in outcomes from those spending increases, particularly for some of the conditions that are most stigmatised—schizophrenia, bipolar and other conditions where we have not seen the better outcomes that we have for conditions that people find easier to talk about. A number of hon. Members, including the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), asked whether I would meet them to discuss this topic, matters in their constituency or organisations that they have supported. My time for meeting MPs is Wednesday after Prime Minister’s questions, and if a Member of Parliament asks me to meet, I will meet. Please get in touch via the Department, and I will be happy to meet all hon. Members who wish me to. Members have also mentioned Samaritans and its number, 116 123, which is there to support those who need it. The NHS 111 service with the mental health option can also be used when people need that support. I wholeheartedly encourage us all to keep helping people to know where they can reach that support if they need it. Of course, we do not want children and young people to get to a crisis point. I hear from schools and teachers again and again about how they need support to make sure that they are addressing challenges where they come up for young people. That is why I am pleased with the progress being made through our mental health support teams in schools and colleges. The latest data shows that nearly 6 million pupils and learners are now covered by a mental health support team—about 60% of pupils and learners in England. We obviously have more to do, because we want coverage to be complete by 2029, but we are making progress. We are also investing in early support hubs, which a number of hon. Members have mentioned. They will provide that community-based, destigmatising support. Again, we have more progress to make on that. I want to finish by saying that it has been good and important to hear about hon. Members’ experiences with their constituents on this issue. We all want to work together to make sure that we can find any possible solution to what has happened with Papyrus. I suggest that we meet again shortly to discuss that, but my final message is really for any young person out there: you are not by yourself. You are not alone; reach out for help and you will be able to move forward, so please do reach out. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Government support for youth suicide prevention charities and mental health support for young people.

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLabourAlex Norris

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time. Before I turn to the substance of this important Bill, let me recognise those who have helped bring it to this stage: those who have sat in the Chair, both in this Chamber and in Committee; the excellent Clerks of the House, who serve us so well; the Whips on all sides; the hon. and right hon. Members who served in Committee with such vigour; the Minister for Courts; my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy); Members from across the House for their contributions to debate on the Bill, today and at previous stages, especially those who shared their or their constituents’ experiences; and those legal professionals from outside who have engaged with us. I give specific recognition to the artist formerly known as Sir Brian Leveson for his landmark review. During this process, he has been elevated to the other place, where he is the noble Lord Leveson of Liverpool. What a public servant he is, and what work he did in his review! I recognise his efforts, in this area and in many other aspects of British life. It is a real pleasure to work with him, and we are grateful for his work, which underpins the Bill. Crucially, I recognise the victims and survivors who have shaped the reforms, including those who join us today in the Public Gallery. They should be proud of what they have done. I know that they bring forward their stories at a cost to themselves, in order to make change, and we are very lucky that they do so. The Bill has victims at its heart. Its purpose is urgent and long overdue: to ensure that justice in this country is fast and fair, because victims today face intolerable delays. People suffer appalling crimes; they summon extraordinary courage to come forward; they relive their most traumatic experiences; and they put their trust in the system, and hope that justice will be done. What happens next is that they wait, and wait, and wait. Trials are pushed back. Cases drift further into the future, and there are years of anxiety before a trial can even begin, while confidence in the system drains away. All too often, victims give up because the process is unbearable. As the Minister for Courts said—and as the age-old maxim goes—justice delayed is justice denied. This Government cannot and will not accept that. The Bill grips a problem that the previous Government simply would not. It tackles the record and rising Crown court backlog that we inherited, which now sits at nearly 81,000 cases—more than double the level in 2019. I am afraid that is testament to the Conservative party’s record in government, and their failure to grasp the nettle and tackle the reform needed to wrestle our criminal justice system back on track. Again, today we have seen the Conservatives simply deny the reality; they refuse to be reconciled with their record. Our modelling shows exactly where this trajectory leads, if things are left unchecked: to even deeper delays, collapsing confidence, and a justice system that cannot fulfil its most basic promise, which is that justice will be done swiftly and fairly. This Government will not normalise that delay and allow victims, witnesses and defendants to bear the burden of a system under strain. We cannot continue to try to meet 21st-century pressures with a 20th-century model. On Report and throughout this process, we have heard colleagues call for greater investment. They are right, and we are investing at record levels. There are unlimited sitting days for our criminal courts. Others have called for modernisation. They are right to do so, and we are modernising. Through greater use of technology and AI to maximise our capacity, we can speed up justice and ensure that our system responds to the changing nature of crime, which has meant massive increases in digital evidence and demands on court time. But investment alone will not solve the crisis, nor will modernisation. As the noble Lord Leveson of Liverpool made clear, and as all the evidence shows, only when we have structural reform in the form of pragmatic changes can we really begin to turn the tide on the backlog. That is what this Bill will deliver. I make no apology for looking again at this proposal— I myself as the new Lord Chancellor and my right hon. Friend as the new Prime Minister. Of course we looked again at some of the measures in the Bill. We listened to the strength of feeling from across the House and the legal sector, and we have made changes that mean that now almost all defendants facing trial in the Crown court will continue to be tried by a jury. The Bill is not solely about bringing down the backlog. It is about making the system work better. I am proud that through other legislation alongside this Bill we have already been able to bring forward measures to improve victims’ experiences of court, with new specialist courts for survivors of rape and sexual offences. I want to recognise, as other colleagues did, the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington North (Charlotte Nichols) at previous stages of the legislation to bring us to this point. The Bill goes further in supporting that wider effort and challenging the damaging myths that have so often silenced rape victims. It makes it easier for victims to access special measures in order to give their best and proper evidence. Crucially, in the family courts it will finally repeal the presumption of parental involvement. The safety of children must always come first. I recognise the incredible efforts of Claire Throssell to bring this change forward and make it a reality today. It has come at extraordinary cost. I hope that this is a day of pride at what is a significant step forward. Much of the debate around this Bill has invoked tradition, but the history of our justice system has never been a history of standing still. It has always been a history of adaptation and institutions evolving to meet the demands of a changing society and a changing age. This Bill represents those timeless values applied in a modern context. We are acting to put the interests of the British people first, because the status quo, which would take our courts to a point of no return, which continues to deny fast and fair justice to those who need it, and which damages public confidence and consent, is simply unacceptable to us. The Government are the only ones with the courage to address the challenges we face head-on, and we have heard that in debates at all stages of the Bill. We are pulling every lever within our power to rebuild a court system capable of delivering justice fairly, swiftly and sustainably. With this Bill, we choose that path, because the cost of doing nothing is simply too high. I commend the Bill to the House.

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    I beg to move, That this House has considered the future of the UK coach industry. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. A couple of years ago, I was invited to speak at the conference of the Coach Operators Association. Being a reasonably diligent MP, I checked how many mentions of “coach” there had been in that parliamentary Session. There were rather more than I expected. Delving deeper, I found many references to cricket coaches, football coaches, basketball coaches and various issues that hon. Members wished to drive a horse and coach through. Parliament has been talking about coaches for almost as long as they have existed. In the 1790s, Parliament debated people who leapt on to stagecoaches and, just as they reached the tollgate, jumped off and got on again at the other side, in what seems the short ticketing of the past. In 1839, there was a mention of Dunstable and coaches. A coach proprietor, Mr Johnstone of Dunstable, was worried about taxation on stagecoaches and competition from newfangled railways. I have to report that, unfortunately, the Chancellor was not sympathetic to the plight of stagecoaches. I hope the Minister today will be more so to the modern coach industry. Coaches have been described to me by many in the industry as a social glue. They are certainly not niche; we see them all around us. They offer flexible, affordable and sustainable transport for millions of people. They take 600,000 children to school every day. One million people take coach trips and tours in the UK each year.

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    My hon. Friend makes a fantastic point. Cambridge, along the Backs, is often full of coaches. It is important to get across to residents that one big coach stops a lot of small cars. Although we need more coach parking spaces, it is important to think about the environmental benefits that a coach brings. Coaches also take people to concerts and football matches—Wembley is home to Europe’s largest coach park—and they provide rail replacement services. Importantly, they bring passengers to the door. A railway station might be a little away, but a coach will take passengers to the door of Alton Towers or a National Trust property.

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    Coaches can be booked to get people anywhere they want to go. They are also important for growth, a defining mission for Governments of all stripes. The coach industry brings £17 billion to the UK economy. When I pitched this debate to the Backbench Business Committee, I compared coaches to the fishing industry, which brings about £1 billion, saying that coaches should feature in as many debates as fish in this place. Coaches are easy to deploy. There is no need to spend years building railway tracks, for example. Despite all that, coaches remain under-appreciated. Why is that? Surveys show that about a third of respondents think coaches are uncomfortable, outdated and infrequent. That is an outdated view; today’s coaches are comfortable and modern, and often take passengers precisely where they want to go. I think one of the reasons for that view is that they are family businesses and do not necessarily employ public relations folk to talk to us here and get the messages across that they need to. I also think it is down to us. MPs and journalists do not often use coaches in the way that we use trains. There is a good statistic that says that 97% of people have never heard a politician talk about coaches. I hope they are all tuning in today so that we can right that wrong.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    Coaches have the potential to bring people to all kinds of tourist destinations and to fantastic seaside areas. We should appreciate them for that. Within the Department for Transport, there are specific teams for bus and for rail, but not a specific coach team. Might the Minister be willing to comment on that? On that theme, one issue facing the coach sector is that it gets lumped together with other sectors, most noticeably bus, but also HGV. Having waxed lyrical about coaches, I come to my next question: what is a coach? That might seem a bit odd at this stage, because I think we all instinctively and intuitively know what a coach is: the passengers climb up into it, there is a space for luggage underneath, they sit—there are probably seatbelts—and the coach takes them a reasonable distance. However, in law it is a bit more of a muddle. When granting an operator’s licence for a coach, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency mixes coaches and buses together, so coaches cannot be specifically counted. When it comes to accessibility rules, the Department for Transport says a coach is something that passengers sit down in and there are no standing passengers. A coach can even become a bus as it is driving along—it can start being regulated as a coach, but if it picks up and drops off passengers with a 15-mile gap between them, it becomes a bus for that bit of the route, before magically turning into a coach again. When I have asked parliamentary questions on this subject, Ministers cannot reliably tell me how many coaches there are. I do not think it should be down to enthusiasts to be counting them. As well as not being able to count coaches, we cannot count coach drivers. It is the same issue: the standard occupational classification data used by the Office for National Statistics puts bus and coach drivers together. When I was looking at that dataset, I did the same thing as I did with Hansard and did a keyword search to find out where coach drivers appeared. They were indeed in with bus drivers. Then I looked again at sports coaches, which have their own subcategories of cricket coaches, football coaches, and the like. Why can we not do the same for coach drivers? If we had better data, we would ultimately be making better policy. While we are on the subject of drivers, we need more of them. There are 5,000 to 10,000 vacancies in the sector at the moment and about a quarter of coach drivers are over the age of 60, so it is a challenge that is likely to get worse. What we need is a plan to get young drivers straight from school into the driver’s seat. Back in 2024, there was a consultation on one of the issues for young drivers. The mileage that young drivers do is limited by law at the moment. For example, if a young driver started off from 10 Downing Street and drove north to No. 10 North, they would only get as far as about Milton Keynes before they had to stop. The Minister has said before that he is looking at the results of that consultation and assessing proposals. Might he be able to give us a timeline for when we might hear more about that? While the Minister is at it, could he also talk to his colleagues in the Department for Education? Yesterday, I received a letter from a Minister about skills bootcamps, but although HGV drivers can use the good funding available in skills bootcamps, coach drivers cannot. Lumping things together also happens on the path to net zero. Coaches are lumped in with HGVs, rather than buses, although the requirements can be quite different. If an HGV driver stops at a motorway service station, they park, plug in, and away they go, but a coach driver has 50-odd passengers to deal with, all of whom need to be got safely off the coach and into the motorway service station to buy some overpriced sandwiches, so the requirements are very different. A zero emission HGV and coach infrastructure strategy is due soon. Can the Minister assure me that adequate attention will be given to the specific challenges for coaches? In a recent pilot programme to install charging infrastructure, which was shared between trucks, HGVs and coaches, it turned out that less than 3% of the funding went to the coach sector. Coaches have also been excluded from the van and truck zero emission grants because they are not vans or trucks, and from ZEBRA—the zero emission bus regional areas scheme—because they are not buses. In dealing with issues around net zero, we need more support for the industry, which is hard to decarbonise, because coaches by their nature go to lots of places and do not necessarily have predictable routes. At the moment, 75% of operators say that they do not plan to buy net zero vehicles. Will the Minister commit to a long-term road map so that the coach industry knows where it is going? Has the low-carbon fuel strategy, which was consulted on back in 2022—some in the industry are still awaiting the outcomes—been lost in the mists of time? Should we be waiting for something else, or will we get some results from it? Fuel costs are one of the issues that many in the industry are talking about. Because of Trump’s ill-thought-out war in Iran, diesel prices have absolutely rocketed—they are up 46% since February—and that is having a real impact on operators up and down the country. I am sure we will hear some examples of that after I have finished speaking. I know the Minister cannot comment on what is likely to be in the Budget, but would he be willing to talk to some of his Treasury colleagues ahead of the announcement to make the case for the coach industry?

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    Absolutely. The hon. Gentleman makes the point well. Coach operators normally sell tickets in advance, whether for tours around the country—the brochures are printed perhaps a year in advance, they go through letterboxes, and half the places are filled up by Christmas—or for school transport, for which they bid for a contract from the local authority at a time when they thought the fuel price would be different. Coach UK warns that, without help, some schoolchildren could be left stranded, so I hope the Minister will look into that. This debate is about the future of the coach industry, which I think is bright. We have a brand-new trade body, Coach UK. Coaches were mentioned in the Government’s “Better Connected” strategy, which many people in the industry were enthused and excited about. Pursuing a closer relationship with our European partners and neighbours might sort out some of the issues that coach drivers face at the border during international travel.

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    The right hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and I am keen to hear from the Minister when we might hear back from the Government about the consultation that was undertaken. To make sure the coach industry succeeds as much as possible, we need to make sure that the industry is visible and that the Government really focus on it. That could involve big things like a net zero strategy, and also little things to make coach operators’ lives a bit easier. I cannot understand why, a quarter of the way into the 21st century, coaches still have to display a paper disc on their windscreen showing their operator’s licence when we got rid of all that kind of thing for cars years ago. We might be able to sort out those kind of little bureaucratic things. I have been bothering the noble Lord Hendy about the new Great British Railways app. Trainline—other apps are available—allows users to toggle between train and coach. The new GBR app ought to be able to do the same thing if we believe in an integrated transport system and in giving people choice. Choosing to travel by coach is often much more affordable. Coaches are unique and vital. We should celebrate them for what they are, not for what they share with other forms of transport. I am convinced that they will continue to adapt as we move into the future. On that note, I wish everybody a happy National Coach Week.

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    UK Coach Industry

    A wide range of issues have been raised today: accessibility, driver recruitment, planning, international travel and, perhaps most of all, fuel. What struck me about today’s debate was the wide range of local coach companies that were mentioned and how this is really all around the country, in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We have had a magical mystery tour all around the UK, and I think the coach sector should perhaps adopt the slogan, “Everything you need, satisfaction guaranteed”. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the future of the UK coach industry.

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLabourAlex Mayer

    Topical Questions

    I recently met Paul Hughes, who proudly showed me his AI-enabled heat battery boiler. I am delighted that the Government have made that tech eligible for the boiler upgrade scheme. Would the Minister consider speaking to Treasury colleagues about this technology being part of the energy-saving materials VAT relief framework?

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentLabourAlex Ballinger

    Iran: Threats to British Interests

    In July, the Government took the very welcome step of designating the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, thus criminalising support for its hostile activities. Given Iran’s support for the Houthis, their recent attacks on Saudi Arabia and their threats to international shipping in the Bab al-Mandab strait and the Red sea, are the Government considering taking this step against the Houthis, or are they looking at proscribing the organisation as a terrorist group?

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLabourAlex Ballinger

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    I will be supporting the carry-over motion today. I would also like to pay tribute to the victims from the WAVE Trauma Centre, who, alongside many of us, have shared their powerful stories with parliamentarians in the last two days. Nearly 30 years on from the Good Friday agreement, these men and women are still seeking truth and justice for the awful crimes inflicted upon them. With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will share a couple of the stories that they shared with me. The first is the story of Jennifer Gillespie. Jennifer was just 12 years old when masked Provisional IRA men broke into her house, took her and her mother hostage, and forced her father, Patsy, to drive into an Army checkpoint as a human bomb. Patsy, who was a civilian cook in the local barracks, was chained to the driving seat of a van packed with 1,000 lb of explosives, followed by kidnappers in a separate car, while his family was held at gunpoint. He was forced to drive into the checkpoint. As he approached, Patsy shouted a desperate warning to the troops guarding the checkpoint, but the IRA detonated the van, killing Patsy and five soldiers from the King’s Regiment. That was just one of three co-ordinated proxy bomb attacks that evening. Jennifer and her mother, Kathleen, are still seeking justice so many years after that horrible attack. I also met Mo Norton, whose brother, Bombardier Terence Griffin, was one of 12 killed in the M62 bombings. A Provisional IRA bomb was stowed in their coach luggage locker, and exploded as the young soldiers and their families were returning to Catterick after their weekend leave. Nine soldiers and three civilians were killed, including two children, aged just five and two. Mo is still devastated after all these years, and she and her family in Wigan are still seeking answers. I never served in Northern Ireland myself, but I have served alongside many soldiers and Marines who have. They spoke of the constant threat of snipers and bombs, of not knowing who among the local population might be trying to kill them or when they would strike. They took on strict rules of engagement, serving in the United Kingdom among British citizens to protect them. They fought paramilitaries that were unencumbered by those same rules, as the cowardly attacks I described earlier show. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to these veterans, but victims and veterans are not two separate groups. Two hundred and sixty-four members of our armed forces were murdered by terrorists. They had their unresolved cases terminated by the 2023 legacy Act. We owe these families a chance at justice. The last Conservative Government attempted in good faith to draw a line under the troubles, but their offer of conditional immunity was unacceptable to bereaved families, and the courts found it unlawful. The legacy Act must be replaced, and today’s motion allows for that work to continue. The families have waited for decades. I urge the House to pass the carry-over motion and allow the Bill to proceed.

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLabourAlan Strickland

    Police Funding: North-east England

    It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) for securing this crucial debate. Building on the powerful speeches by other hon. Members, I want to set out three reasons as a County Durham MP why this review of police funding is so important. First, we must recognise the additional costs of policing areas that are both semi-rural and post-industrial, such as my constituency. Communities like the ones I am proud to represent have a strong industrial heritage of coal mining and other industry, but it is often forgotten across the public sector that they are, at the same time, largely rural. Of the population in County Durham, 43% lives in rural areas, and my constituency is entirely villages and small towns. They are often not farming communities, but former pit villages that still experience the serious, scarring effects of major losses in employment and social infrastructure in the ‘70s and ‘80s, while at the same time experiencing significant geographical isolation. Those issues have caused a growth in county lines, organised crime and other very serious issues. Durham constabulary is dealing with complex problems across a sprawling county, which creates obvious policing challenges. Will the Minister consider how police funding can better take into account the challenge of increasingly serious criminal issues that one might expect in an urban area, but in rural settings that are much more expensive to police, and where effective neighbourhood policing, which can be important in preventing crime, is more difficult? Secondly, there are ongoing challenges of deprivation in County Durham, without enough wider public sector support. We need to see it better reflected in funding. Durham constabulary works in communities with families affected by higher levels of complex need, intergenerational unemployment and poverty. For example, parts of Ferryhill, in my constituency, are in the top 1% of the most deprived communities in the country. Half of children are on free school meals. That brings significant challenges—social challenges and lack of opportunity—and with that comes greater crime, criminal justice issues and other problems. As my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham rightly pointed out, that creates a dual challenge for the police in my area, with more difficult issues to tackle while a higher number of households in the very lowest council tax bands reduce the funding available. The complexity of some of the families that Durham officers are working with can mean that officers are not just dealing with criminal justice matters but have increasingly had to step in to fill gaps left by cuts to social services, mental health support and addiction and homelessness services caused by the deep austerity cuts of the last Conservative Government. Our police officers in Durham are to be congratulated for the myriad ways that they step up every day to support residents. But the message should be clear: the police cannot be expected to do everything. I would be grateful if the Minister could set out how the Home Office can work with other Departments across Government to support more investment in family intervention projects, schemes to reduce youth reoffending and other measures outside of policing that could reduce and prevent crime. My final point is about the growth in poorly regulated private landlords who too often allow crime and antisocial behaviour by their tenants to go unchecked. This is again creating more complex policing problems. I particularly urge Ministers across Government to put more pressure on authorities such as Reform-led Durham county council that are simply failing to act in many cases where irresponsible landlords are allowing their properties to become magnets for crime and disorder, often in previously quiet streets that had very low levels of crime. This is coming up again and again in my constituency. We know that council enforcement teams have got powers to tackle landlords who are refusing to take ASB seriously, but too often this simply is not happening. I am pleased to report to the Minister that residents facing these serious incidents who I have met recently have been incredibly complimentary about the police force for responding quickly, but it is clear that the force is bearing significant costs, which the wider public sector could be helping with more effectively. To finish, I support the calls for a review of funding. I would also like to echo the thanks given by colleagues to all serving police officers, but let us see what more we can do to make sure that our brave men and women in uniform have the proper resources they need.

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLabourAl Carns

    Falkland Islands

    I thank the Minister for her support for the upcoming 45th anniversary of some pretty heroic action from the UK armed forces—it involved Buster Brown, who took me through marine training many, many years ago. Does she agree that the UK Government will not cower in any way, shape or form or be intimidated by any aggressive or threatening language from Argentina?

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLabourAl Carns

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    I thank the Secretary of State for his engagement throughout the process. Generals, veterans, veterans’ commissioners, ex-chiefs of the defence staff, victims, those who live in Northern Ireland—he has engaged with them all and collectively they are thankful for it. The Government amendments are also welcome; they are moving in the right direction. There is one thing that I request from those on both sides of the House. Behind the victims, the soldier Bs and the soldier Fs, and underneath the passion and the emotion, there are human beings. We have to ensure that the message we send to them in this House is that we are after their best interests. We must remember that they will be watching this debate and that it affects every single factor of their lives. I know what it is like to be in the dark, facing terrorists, when snap decisions have to be made in a difficult environment. Unfortunately, I also know what it is like to console the family members of lost loved ones. I do not know what it is like to have all that wrapped into a community and into neighbourhoods—neighbour on neighbour, street on street. I pay tribute to and commend all the individuals in the Gallery. Thank you so much for attending. I resigned from Government in part because I could not support our approach to legacy. In particular, I remain concerned about the different routes we created to examine the same conflict and some of the same incidents. It is my belief that we are adopting a twin-track approach to truth, justice and reconciliation. On the one hand, we have inquests, where the chance of prosecution is vanishingly small, but the prosecution is often not the end state. The process has become the punishment. With a minimum cost of £20 million, on average, and a maximum cost of £20 million per inquest, the total equates, as one Policy Exchange paper put it, to in excess of £1 billion of taxpayers’ money. On the other hand, we have the legacy commission. Let us build it. Let us make it better. Let us make it the single route to truth, reconciliation and justice. It has more investigative powers, it can move faster and it will bring the end state at a delivery cost of a fraction of that of inquests. What other country delivers reconciliation through a twin-track approach? It just does not happen. I will vote in support of the carry-over motion tonight, but there is more to be done to streamline the route towards truth, reconciliation and justice, so my vote tonight should not be taken as support of the Bill as it stands. I believe that there is a better way, and more work to be done: one route, one process, no more lawfare, no more twin-track approach, stop the legal exploitation of the system, and put all the inquests through the legacy commission. I will vote tonight to carry the Bill over, but when we get to Committee, it must change.

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLabourAfzal Khan

    Topical Questions

    I am proud to stand behind a Government who are taking climate action seriously. However, we are already overshooting critical limits, and climate change will only get worse if we do not stop burning fossil fuels. Will the full direct climate impact of Rosebank and the implications of the international community’s efforts to transition away from fossil fuels be considered in making this decision?

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLabourAdam Jogee

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    Why did you not say that?

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLabourAdam Jogee

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I enjoy working with him on the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. I have also enjoyed listening to him talk us through his many amendments. Does he not realise, though, that we will not be able to consider or vote on those amendments if he does not back this motion this evening?

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentSNPSeamus Logan

    UK Coach Industry

    Does the hon. Member agree that it might be more reasonable for him to focus on issues reserved to Westminster, rather than speaking about issues reserved to Holyrood, given that he is not an elected Member there but is an elected Member here?

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentSNPSeamus Logan

    UK Coach Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under you, Mr Turner; I thank you for keeping the best wine to the end. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her excellent speech. Would I be right in saying that Toddington services is in her constituency? If not, it is very close. It is a place I am very familiar with, as I will explain in a moment. Maynes Coaches in my constituency represents one of the many hundreds of family-owned and run coach companies up and down these islands. I must declare a non-financial interest because my mother and father founded a coach company more than 50 years ago. Along with my brothers Liam, Sean and Enda and my sister Una, I was part of a ready-made, non-unionised labour force that my parents ruthlessly exploited, but that is all part of history now. Coaches connect our rural communities, transport pupils to school, provide resilience when rail services fail and ensure that major cultural and sporting events run smoothly and can take place successfully. Additionally, coaches play a very important role in the tourism sector. For those who do not drive or for those who take coach tours, for example, coaches can be the only transport option to many world-class tourism facilities. In fact, they are the bees that pollinate all those places. For example, research has highlighted that one coach calling at the same location every day each year can introduce at least £1 million to the local economy. Although much responsibility for transport is devolved to the Scottish Parliament, I want to focus on issues that are in the remit of the UK Government, as opposed to some colleagues who wasted valuable time in their speeches speaking about matters that are devolved to Holyrood.

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentSNPSeamus Logan

    UK Coach Industry

    No, I will not, because we have heard quite enough from those on the hon. Gentleman’s side of the House on these matters. I want to focus on two points. The European Union entry/exit system poses a significant challenge to international coach operators, with the 90 and 180-day rule already causing havoc for operators trying to comply with EU regulations with a limited supply of drivers who are compliant. The EES will increase the logistical challenges of the channel tunnel and ports, driving up costs and causing delays. That will result in unfair advantages for less green forms of international travel, such as air travel. The UK Government, as part of their ongoing discussions with the EU, should simplify border controls and explore pre-registration for coaches and ways to make international travel easier for the coach sector. I look forward to the Minister’s response to that point. My second point concerns the cost of fuel, which has already been mentioned. This is a crucial issue. Fuel prices are increasing significantly due to the war in the middle east and the Government should outline what action they are taking to mitigate that increase as much as possible. To many households, coaches offer a lifeline of affordable travel. Support is therefore more vital than ever. We look to the Budget in the next two weeks to tell the coach industry what help it can expect in that area. If Scotland seeks to grow its visitor economy, improve connectivity, support rural communities and meet ambitious environmental targets, coaches must be part of the solution.

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentSNPSeamus Logan

    UK Coach Industry

    No, I will not. I make this penultimate point: I recognise that the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard said that sometimes it is a coach and sometimes it is a bus, but I can assure her that a coach, and a coach driver, is a very different thing. Finally, I urge Ministers to work closely with operators and industry bodies to address the issues with coach travel. I seek their assurance that further action will be taken on fuel costs in the forthcoming Budget.

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentSNPSeamus Logan

    Pensions Triple Lock

    Based on the Government’s own figures, pensioners in Scotland will be £4 billion worse off by 2050. [Interruption.] Those are the Government’s own figures. That is £2,000 for every pensioner in Scotland in the context of what has already been referred to as one of the worst state pensions in Europe. We already have free personal care in Scotland, and suspicions abound that Scottish pensioners are now being asked to fix a failed English social care system. Will the Secretary of State give me a cast-iron assurance that for every pound spent on fixing that English social care failure, there will be a Barnett consequential for Scotland so that we can restore that money to Scottish pensioners?

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentSNPPete Wishart

    Police Funding: North-east England

    My apologies for my tardiness. I call Luke Akehurst to move the motion.

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentSNPPete Wishart

    Police Funding: North-east England

    Order. If we all try to take about six minutes, everybody will get in sufficiently. I will not put a time limit on just now, but we will see how we get on.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentSNPPete Wishart

    Police Funding: North-east England

    Order. I hope the hon. Gentleman will be concluding his remarks so that his regional colleagues get a chance to say a few words.

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentSNPPete Wishart

    Police Funding: North-east England

    Order. There are four speakers left and we have 20 minutes, so if Members stick to a strict five minutes, we will get everybody in.

    Hansard source