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. ParliamentLib DemSarah Olney

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. I congratulate the hon. Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist) on securing this debate and on all of her excellent work in this field. The closure of Papyrus last month was a devastating loss. Its HopeLine 24/7 helped countless people at the toughest point of their lives for nearly 30 years. I pay tribute to its staff, who will have experienced incredibly tough times while handling very delicate but vitally important calls. While HopeLine 24/7 has been disbanded, the demand for help has not gone away; it will simply move to other already stressed helpline services. Papyrus helped to alleviate the demand on other charities and health services, and the NHS even signposted Papyrus to people looking for support. I add my words to what the hon. Member for Blaydon and Consett has already said about 3 Dads Walking and the incredible work they have done to raise money for Papyrus. It is obviously a great sadness to all of us that the service has come to an end. As the demand for suicide prevention hotlines is growing, I would be grateful if the Minister would consider working with Papyrus’s administrators to restore HopeLine 24/7. The independent review of mental health conditions, ADHD and autism found that mental distress has increased significantly, especially for young people. Investment in services has not kept pace with that demand, meaning that people wait longer for support, which often exacerbates existing mental health conditions. One of the many recommendations is to close the treatment gap and strengthen specialist services for people with the most complex needs. My constituency is home to Cassel hospital, a tier 4 therapeutic community for adults with complex multiple diagnosis presentations. Patients tell me that the treatment they receive there is lifesaving and life changing, and although the hospital has proven that its work saves the NHS millions of pounds by reducing hospitalisations and the need for emergency services, tier 4 services are under review by NHS England. Withdrawing funding from a hospital that serves people suffering from the most complex mental health conditions would be a travesty, and I would be grateful if the Minister could arrange time to speak with me regarding this matter.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLib DemSarah Dyke

    Climate Change Resilience

    British food security is in real jeopardy. Extreme weather is becoming more severe, more frequent and more unpredictable. The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit warns that 2026 could be the worst UK harvest on record. What discussions has the Minister had with DEFRA colleagues on strengthening British farms’ resilience to extreme weather?

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLib DemPippa Heylings

    Gas and Electricity Prices

    Households and businesses have been left at the mercy of a broken energy system, and they are paying the price. As we have heard, gas is still setting the price of electricity. Gas is now at a three-year high and is due to go up again in January, when energy use goes up. While other European countries are responding to the energy crisis by accelerating electrification, we in the UK do not have a plan. Does the Secretary of State therefore agree with us that we need a national electrification strategy to bring down bills, to decouple gas from electricity and to make the most of our increasing renewables?

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLib DemPippa Heylings

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    The new norms of extreme weather that we are now seeing, caused by climate change, mean that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) has said, we have to think about not only warming our homes, but cooling them. Thousands of families are dipping into hard-earned savings to install heat pumps and to cut emissions. In my constituency of South Cambridgeshire, we are 25th in the country for heat pump uptake—I am really proud of that—as a result of heat pump subsidies, so I am really worried by rumours that the Government are considering deep cuts to the warm homes plan. Would the Minister agree with me that failing to electrify at scale keeps us needlessly chained to overseas gas and volatile petrostates, and that to rob energy security to fund defence is a fool’s errand?

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLib DemOlly Glover

    Draft Railways (Interoperability in Northern Ireland) (Convention on International Carriage by Rail) (Amendment) Regulations 2026

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. The Liberal Democrats support this legislation. I made my first ever trip to Northern Ireland in the spring of 2023, to do work with Northern Ireland Railways as part of Translink. That network has had huge investment this century and the user base is benefitting vastly from it. As the shadow Minister said, it has some unique features: not just its gauge but it has remained state owned throughout and is run jointly alongside state-owned buses. It also jointly operates with Irish Rail, the second, undeservedly less famous, international passenger rail service in the UK, linking Belfast with Dublin, which offers very fine views of the Irish sea coast in the Irish Republic and the Mourne mountains in Northern Ireland. I strongly recommend it for those who have not yet indulged. The arrangements that the Minister proposes will help to continue and enhance the strong partnership working between Irish Rail and Northern Ireland Railways, which is necessary for the current cross-border line and proposals for further cross-border infrastructure in the future. As the shadow Minister said, of course, in relation to Northern Ireland and its status under the Brexit agreement, the Windsor framework, there will always be some complexities and sensitivities. I hope that the Minister will address the concerns that have been raised in his comments later.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLib DemOlly Glover

    UK Coach Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for allocating time for this debate and thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing it. She brought to the Chamber her customary passion and championing of the coach industry, of which she always makes us conscious in the Transport Committee. She articulated the distinctive requirements of the coach industry and made me aware of National Coach Week, which I confess I had not previously known was a “week”, but there are weeks on a great many topics these days. We have heard important themes raised during the debate. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) highlighted the critical rural role that the coach sector can play in getting people and to and from schools. The hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) and the hon. Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank) outlined the critical role of manufacturing for our country’s bus and coach sector, and the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) talked about his own family heritage in the coach sector. Those three hon. Members gave us an amuse-bouche of the passions that dominate Holyrood, which was very interesting for those of us who do not get there often. My hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) talked about the critical role that the coach plays in providing affordable travel. Many hon. Members, including the hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) and the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin), talked about the local coach companies that they have in their constituency. The hon. Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) talked about the need for support and encouragement of the coach sector as a whole. In my constituency, I have several coach companies that provide a critical service, such as Pearces coaches, now owned by the Go-Ahead Group at Thames Travel’s Didcot depot; JD Travel in Culham, which provides private hire; and Ridgeways Coaches in Wantage. Weavaway Travel is based in the next-door constituency, in Newbury, but took over the once-legendary Tappins Coaches brand, which was based in my constituency. The economic benefits of the coach industry are hard to overstate and yet, as the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard said, we tend not to reflect on them as much as we should. Around 450 million passenger journeys are made by coach in Britain each year. Coach passengers are estimated to spend £8.3 billion annually in local economies through tourism, retail and leisure, with inbound international visitors travelling by coach contributing a further £610 million a year. The industry estimates that a single additional coach visiting a destination each day can generate around £1 million a year for the local economy. With rail prices still generally higher than many would like, private coach operators often present an important, more affordable alternative for long-distance travel. Indeed, for inter-city rail operators, coach operators provide a vital function in the all-too-common rail replacement road service. I was on holiday in Switzerland recently and—believe it or not, fellow hon. Members—I had to go on a rail replacement bus even there, so it is not an issue unique to us. As has been said, coach travel can also be essential to providing some school transport. There are key regulatory and economic challenges facing the coach industry. It has suffered, like so many industries, from the pressure that the last decade has placed on businesses, with uncontrollable shocks such as the pandemic, and completely self-imposed ones such as the Conservatives’ botched Brexit deals, excessive red tape and the huge delays we now see at borders for international coach travel as a result of the EU entry and exit system. Some of the Government’s anti-business policies have further increased pressure, with raised business rates and employer national insurance contributions further threatening the coach industry’s bottom lines. Coach companies do not receive any of the fuel duty relief measures that other modes of passenger transport do. Operators want UK Government engagement with the EU on pre-registration and digital documentation for coach parties, a specific exemption for professional coach drivers from the 90/180 Schengen rule, and continued investment in port and border infrastructure to prevent repeats of the severe queuing seen in past peak periods. As many hon. Members have mentioned, the coach sector faces severe workforce issues. The industry reports that driver shortfall stands at an estimated 5,000 to 10,000, with around 14% of driver roles currently vacant and about a quarter of the existing driver workforce aged over 60. I hope the Minister will specifically address the issue of coach drivers not being allowed to start at the age of 18. That seems particularly anomalous given recent Government announcements about the train driving age being lowered to 18. It is quite hard to see the logic and consistency, so I hope the Minister will be able to shed some light on that. On the planning system, coaches have historically been an afterthought in both local and national transport planning, regulated in practice as an afterthought to bus policy despite being a fundamentally different and deregulated commercial method of transport. That has produced a chronic shortage of coach parking, drop-off space and driver rest facilities, directly affecting operators’ ability to comply with statutory drivers’ hours rules, and has left coaches significantly absent from local transport and spatial plans. Industry bodies are calling for coaches to be recognised as a distinct mode in planning guidance, for motorway service areas to be required to prioritise coach parking and driver facilities, and for more standardised local authority procurement to reduce the administrative burden on operators bidding for home-to-school and other contracted work. Coaches are also an important consideration in improving integrated transport policy. Whether coach operators are given access to major urban bus stations is highly inconsistent, with local authorities and owners and operators of those bus terminals making very different decisions on whether to grant access to national coach operators. Accessibility remains a challenge. The Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000 require coaches in scope to be fully wheelchair accessible, but in practice that depends on kerbside infrastructure just as much as the capability of the coaches. Level ground of up to 4 metres is needed, which does not exist at many locations coaches serve. That means vehicles can be technically compliant while still failing to deliver a reliably accessible journey. The accessibility equipment required also adds weight and takes up capacity that could otherwise carry passengers, so the sector’s ask is for a shift from a vehicle-focused compliance regime towards a whole journey accessibility framework covering booking, boarding infrastructure and arrival, developed jointly with local authorities, operators and disability groups. As the hon. Member for Falkirk said, decarbonisation is a challenge for this sector. Unlike cars and vans, coaches are not currently covered by the zero emission vehicle mandate, and no equivalent statutory trajectory or long-term support and road map exists for the sector. Zero emission coaches face a much harder technical challenge than buses or cars, with longer average journeys increasing the importance of range and refuelling infrastructure, with charging and hydrogen infrastructure suitable for coaches largely non-existent on the motorway and major A-road networks. Industry data suggests that roughly three quarters of coach operators currently have no plan to introduce zero emission vehicles, citing high up-front costs and insufficient range as the main barriers. The sector is asking Government to publish a long-delayed low-carbon fuel strategy, to extend infrastructure trials such as a zero emission and hydrogen infrastructure demonstrator to coaches on a similar footing to heavy goods vehicles, and to consider an interim fuel duty incentive for low-carbon fuels to bridge the gap until zero emission coaches are commercially viable at scale. We have heard today of the vital role that coaches play, whether as a long-distance public transport offer, helping children to get to school or enabling groups of people old and young to access tourism, hospitality, culture and so on. Coaches have not been supported or given enough attention. The hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard is moving us on the journey and I hope the Minister will say what more can be done to recognise and support this critical sector.

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLib DemOlly Glover

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    3. Whether she has made an assessment of the potential merits of adopting cooling measures into the warm homes scheme.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLib DemOlly Glover

    Warm Homes Scheme: Cooling Measures

    The Government’s commitment to improving the energy efficiency of our homes is welcome and is a stark contrast to the Conservatives’ apparent embrace of a Fred Flintstone home standard. This year saw the hottest summer on record, and climate change science indicates that such temperatures are going to become the norm. Can the Minister assure the House that the standards that he mentions will take full account of those trends and the need to efficiently cool our buildings?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    As has been said many times before, and ignored just as often by Conservative Members, the Tories’ legacy Act utterly failed our veterans, drawing an unacceptable equivalence between the actions of those seeking to defend peace and uphold the rule of law, and the terrorists who sought to undermine it by maiming, murdering and doing all they could to encourage sectarian division and hatred. Of course, the Conservatives are trying to argue that they are defending the interests of our brave veterans, when in reality they are cynically using them to score political points. That is why so many veterans organisations will have nothing to do with their grandstanding. The legacy Act failed to uphold our obligations under the European convention on human rights. At the time, that was just collateral damage, but now it has become central to the Conservatives’ ill-conceived plan to leave the ECHR, and thereby fatally undermine the Good Friday agreement and the Brexit deal of which they are so unjustly proud. The legacy Act failed the communities of Northern Ireland. No political party, be it from the Unionist, nationalist or non-aligned tradition, supports the Conservatives’ flawed legislation, which fundamentally failed to gain the support of those it was supposed to protect. Most devastatingly, it failed innocent victims and their families by barring the pathway to justice, truth and reconciliation. As we have seen throughout these debates, the Tories are still in denial about the legacy Act’s failings, just as they are in denial about their many other failings in government—from Brexit to their financial mismanagement. I am sorry to say that it is what we have come to expect from a once-great party. It is shameless, and they should be shame-faced.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Labour party’s willingness to deal with these failings is most welcome. At this point, may I, with your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, give my brief thanks to the previous Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Leeds South (Hilary Benn), who was the architect of the original Bill, for the courtesy and time he gave me when I first became my party’s spokesperson for Northern Ireland? I am pleased to acknowledge that it is an approach normally followed by the shadow Secretary of State, and followed by the new Secretary of State. Although 156 Government amendments landed with a thud in my inbox yesterday morning, we are not meant to be discussing them today. Under the mysterious procedures of this place, we are simply revisiting the carry-over motion we passed before the end of the last parliamentary Session. I am sure there are good historic reasons for such repetition, but I trust that the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope) and his fellow trailblazers on the Modernisation Committee will give due consideration to reforming many of our time-wasting practices. The Bill we are considering today is the same one we considered the last time we debated it, so my party will again vote against the motion. I have worked closely with veterans organisations, such as the British Legion and the SAS Regimental Association, throughout my time as spokesperson on Northern Ireland. Anxiety about future threats of lawfare, and veterans being dragged through repeated investigations, has been at the heart of every conversation I have had. Against that background, clear and robust safeguards must be established. The original safeguards in the Bill were vague and did not go far enough to ensure that the process does not become the punishment. I commend both the Secretary of State and his predecessor for engaging with me on these issues. As they both promised, the Secretary of State has now published the aforementioned raft of 156 amendments. However, there is just a week before the Committee stage. That raises serious concerns about scrutiny, as we and the various veterans organisations wade through pages of bizarrely numbered and then re-numbered Government amendments. The devil, after all, is in the detail. Only today, I had to ask the Secretary of State to point me in the direction of one of the most important amendments.

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    He did, but I have now discovered a table, helpfully produced by the Northern Ireland Office, detailing the key ones. It is very useful, but what we and the veterans groups need is time to work through the implications of each amendment, and to talk to our veterans. That is simply not possible in only a week. As the Secretary of State knows, I also have concerns that scrutiny is being undertaken via a Committee of the House. What this legislation requires is detailed line-by-line examination of each clause, but what we will have is two days of the usual pantomime in this Chamber.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    I thank the Secretary of State for his intervention, but I was coming on to that. I am told, as he has just told me again, that the reason we have a Committee of the whole House is that we need to include our colleagues who represent Northern Ireland. However, I do not see why that absolutely legitimate point could not have been addressed by the three major parties giving up some of their places to MPs who represent Northern Ireland constituencies—a solution that I suggested, but that the Secretary of State ignored. This legislation will have profound consequences for victims and veterans. Getting it right is essential to maintaining the confidence of communities across Northern Ireland, and the confidence of current and former members of the armed forces. Our amendments propose clear statutory safeguards to prevent repeated investigations, unless there is materially new evidence that is certified as necessary and proportionate. They establish a presumption of remote participation, so that veterans are not compelled to relive traumatic experiences in person unless it is strictly essential. They also provide for anonymity, proper welfare support and regulated contact through official channels. Additionally, our amendments seek to ensure that veterans’ views are properly represented, including by guaranteeing veterans a place on the victims and survivors group. We would also establish an independent reviewer, who would report annually to Parliament. This would ensure that protections were consistently applied, properly scrutinised and upheld in practice. The Government’s amendments do indeed seek to address many of those points, but we need to work through the detail of the drafting before we can say whether they achieve what is needed. For example, the clause requiring compelling new evidence to exist, or be reasonably expected to exist, before a witness can be contacted is already giving us cause for concern, as the director of investigations will be the sole judge of his own decision.

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    The point is that we have only a week to consider 156 amendments, and then we have only two days to discuss them. We need line-by-line scrutiny. The legislation does not exist in a vacuum. The House is aware that tensions have increased in the wake of the decisions to allow the Drumcree march, and then to ban it. Against that backdrop, it is even more important that the legislation provides genuine routes to reconciliation, so that future generations growing up in Northern Ireland no longer have to experience the divisions of the past. On that point, I am still disappointed by the lack of weight given to restorative justice in the Bill. The process cannot only be about legal mechanisms that conceive of justice through an all-too-narrow lawyer’s lens. That is why the Liberal Democrats have proposed a statutory duty to promote reconciliation, alongside a framework for restorative justice. That would offer victims and survivors, where they choose to participate, the opportunity for truth telling and acknowledgment outside of purely adversarial processes. For many, the primary question is not about punishment but understanding. The recent report from ICRIR into the death of Rory O’Kelly, who was murdered by an IRA gunman, shows that answers, not retribution, are key. His daughter Frances issued a powerful statement, describing the catharsis and closure that the report brought to her and her brother Roger, who died shortly before its publication. The work undertaken ensured that Roger did not die without knowing what had happened to his father. Yes, this was a form of restorative justice, but our amendments would allow more intensive forms of RJ.

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    I point out, with respect, Madam Deputy Speaker, that the Secretary of State told the House much about his amendments in his speech.

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLib DemMr Paul Kohler

    Northern Ireland Troubles Bill (Carry-over Extension)

    I remain to be convinced that the Bill, even after 156 amendments, can deliver on its essential function, and I am concerned that we cannot properly scrutinise the proposed wording to see if it will. For those reasons, the Liberal Democrats will continue to oppose the motion.

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLib DemMr Joshua Reynolds

    Household Energy Bills Support

    Cornwall Insight forecasts that the energy price cap will increase by a further 16% in January. The Secretary of State has spoken about taking VAT off electricity bills, but that amounts to £45 for an average household. In reality, that is like trying to fill a swimming pool with a thimble—it is not going to work. How will she help to protect families who are already struggling, and will she consider an essential energy guarantee so that all the energy that we need can be affordable for every household?

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLib DemMr Alistair Carmichael

    Wildfires: UK-Welsh Government Co-operation

    The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee will soon be publishing a report. When it comes to who will be in the room come that wildfire summit, will the hon. Member give me an undertaking that it will not only be the organisations, but the private individuals, the gamekeepers, land managers, farmers and shepherds, who are very often the first line of response? Can she ensure that their voices will be heard at the same time as all the organisations?

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentLib DemMr Alistair Carmichael

    Topical Questions

    I welcome the announcement today about the Government’s intention to regulate the market in heating oil. For communities like mine that are completely off the gas grid, with the highest levels of fuel poverty in the country, this could be a significant moment. What my constituents would like to know, however, is when they might see this proposal become an implemented reality.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLib DemMax Wilkinson

    Police Funding: North-east England

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Wishart. I commend the hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) for securing this debate. I begin by putting on the record my party’s thanks and admiration for our police services up and down the country, and for the vital role that officers play in keeping our communities safe. The tragic A66 collision that claimed the lives of two police officers, Matthew Blades and Tom Clough, horrified us all. The disorder that followed in the days after that tragedy disturbed people far beyond the north-east, and we must hope it has brought renewed focus on the area’s safety. I commend all the MPs from the region who have spoken so powerfully with one voice in this debate today. This summer’s disorder underlines the importance of having a police service that is properly resourced, that is visible and that is trusted by the communities it serves. We have long called for a return to genuine community policing, focused on preventing crime through policing that builds relationships with local communities. Just a few days ago, I was in the north-east, in Peterlee, to appear on a televised political panel debate. It was clear that crime is a real concern for residents in that area. Indeed, it was raised by the audience member who asked the first question. The audience spoke about the impact on their communities and the underlying causes, including the fact that many communities have been hollowed out economically over the last few decades. What came across was a deep frustration and, very sadly, a sense of helplessness from those in the room. Police presence must be part of the focus to address the concerns of residents across the north-east. Under the Conservatives, Cleveland police lost hundreds of officers—I think around 400—and after the disorder this summer, 200 officers had to be drafted in to deal with what unfolded. This is not an acceptable state of affairs. The Liberal Democrats welcome the Government’s pledge to recruit 13,000 additional police officers, but police numbers have sadly not matched the Government’s ambition. If the Government are serious about restoring neighbourhood policing, they must get more officers back on to our streets, and they will need to recruit many more. We cannot expect overstretched officers to do more with less, as other Members have said, and too many crimes go unsolved. We hear about these issues regularly in relation to the north-east and elsewhere; they are common to so many places across the country. The Government will tell us that they have increased national police funding, but with reference to the north-east, Cleveland’s funding increase is the lowest in the country, worth £1.65 million a year less than if it had received the 4.5% average increase. On top of that, Cleveland police is being asked to find £3.88 million of savings to balance its budget. Regardless of the regional issue, it is clear that policing must refocus on finding more resources and making the best of the resources it has. There is also the issue that a huge amount of police time is taken up by online crime, principally fraud but also including child sexual exploitation and violence against women and girls. Unfortunately, the companies that facilitate this behaviour have not acted strongly enough to prevent it from happening. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for a new police agency to tackle serious online crime, funded by a levy on big tech and AI companies. Will the Minister commit to taking steps to ensure that the companies that facilitate online crime are called to account and asked to pay for some of the problems that they create, on a “polluter pays” basis? That would help to redirect police resourcing to the frontline, to build and maintain the physical policing presence that our communities rightly expect. It would help to restore a police counter in every community, giving people accessible, convenient places to share information and engage with the police within their communities. The Government talk about their neighbourhood policing guarantee, but we now need to see change in our communities. We believe that our proposals can help. One other concern lies in police force reorganisation. If merging forces means that officers become more distant from the communities they serve or are less able to respond to local crime—or, indeed, if three underfunded forces become one massive underfunded force—the reforms will have failed. Will the Minister ensure that police reform does not lead to resources being directed away from smaller communities, which are often in rural areas, to larger urban centres? That is particularly important for the rural communities we have heard about today, where crime has become increasingly organised, serious and persistent. We are calling for a countryside copper guarantee, with properly resourced, dedicated rural crime teams or specialists in every police force. Will the Minister commit to ensuring that forces serving rural areas have the resources they need? Finally, transferring police and crime commissioners’ powers to mayors without sufficient democratic scrutiny risks replacing one flawed model with another. Local crime and police boards made up of local residents and representatives of the community can provide meaningful local accountability and oversight of policing. Is that being considered by Ministers in their police reforms? That is vital, because only by empowering communities to work with local police will we reduce crime across the country, including in the north-east.

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLib DemLiz Jarvis

    Gas and Electricity Prices

    1. What recent progress she has made in decoupling the price of gas and electricity.

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLib DemLiz Jarvis

    Gas and Electricity Prices

    I raised the decoupling of gas and electricity prices with the former Energy Secretary in March, so I welcome the Government’s continued commitment. However, eight months into the illegal war in Iran, rising gas prices have pushed the price cap up by 4% this month, wiping out VAT savings on energy bills, while Trump’s lifting of sanctions on Russian diesel leaves fuel prices once again at the mercy of Putin. In my constituency of Eastleigh, more than a quarter of households are in fuel poverty, and I have spoken with many businesses that are struggling with spiralling bills. Will the Secretary of State therefore go further and faster on decoupling gas and electricity prices, including by investing more in home-grown renewable energy?

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLib DemJosh Babarinde

    UK Coach Industry

    I am going to talk about coaches. The hon. Lady mentions local businesses, which include Eastbourne Coaches and Lynns Travel Eastbourne. Does she agree that there is a role for those businesses, and also for big business such as National Express to bring their coaches to Eastbourne, especially in the light of the terrible railways we are experiencing in our patch?

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLib DemJohn Milne

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    On 27 September, it was five years since my constituent Jess’s son Mason died by suicide. His death was one of several examined in a local safeguarding review, but it took three years of Jess chasing and pressure from my office just to see its recommendations. She has still not seen the full report. Does the hon. Member agree that we should install a national oversight mechanism so that families can see whether lessons are acted on without feeling that they have to fight the system that is supposed to support them?

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Prisoner Early Release Scheme

    The prison capacity crisis that the Conservatives left behind is unforgiveable, but the situation we find ourselves in two years later is a national emergency waiting to happen. The entire criminal justice system is in freefall. Victims have been left looking over their shoulders for their released perpetrators; more than a third of the places that were freed up by the last wave of releases were filled again within a week; and the very probation officers who are overseeing these releases will decide in the coming weeks whether to take strike action. The Government have never had a grip on this issue. Everyone who comes into contact with the criminal justice system is being failed, and tinkering around the edges will not fix the problem. Will the Minister commit to tagging prisoners immediately upon release—at the gates—as called for by the Victims’ Commissioner, ensuring that perpetrators are not allowed to evade being tagged or left unmonitored for days? Will he also commit to a royal commission on the entirety of the criminal justice system, so that we can finally get to grips with the deep-rooted issues caused by successive Governments’ complacency and mismanagement?

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    The entire criminal justice system is on the brink of collapse. We can all agree today that the current backlog in our Crown courts is unacceptable, untenable and unsustainable. The situation we face—a backlog sitting at over 80,000 cases and victims of rape waiting on average 424 days for their case to complete—is the direct result of the historic and monumental failings of successive Governments. Whether it is a lack of prison places, soaring reoffending rates or the horrendous backlog in the Crown courts with a growing backlog in the magistrates, it is a national emergency waiting to happen. But the Government’s plans to address this situation have been equally dangerous. Under Keir Starmer, this Government led us down a path—

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Under Keir Starmer, this Government led us down a path towards curtailing jury trials, presenting it as the only way to deal with the backlog. That was despite widespread opposition from the legal profession and Parliament, including from their own Benches, and despite the absence of any coherent modelling or trialling to demonstrate the impact of the proposed Crown court bench division. Political capital was wasted pursuing a solution that was never feasible. What we are presented with today is still fundamentally a flawed plan. We remain deeply concerned about the pressure that these changes will place on magistrates courts. The plans for those charged with either-way offences to lose their right to elect trial by jury, alongside the increases in sentencing powers and the removal of the right to appeal, will place immense and dangerous pressure on magistrates courts, while simultaneously removing vital safeguards. The Government now predict that an additional 25,000 cases will be added to magistrates court caseloads each year, and the current rate of increase in the backlog of open cases is expected to be 9%—it is exceeding that of the Crown court backlog. Increased complexity also raises questions regarding the suitability of summary justice to deal with these cases—a point that has been raised by the Bar Council and others. I also have profound concerns about the experiences of victims in summary justice; it is not just the Crown court where victims are so often failed. The Minister spoke very powerfully about Morwenna. I remember Morwenna’s powerful testimony. I am thinking today about Georgia, whose case in the magistrates court was postponed four times in a row. She spent months and months of building herself up for that moment before being totally failed because she did not get her day in court. The Government have done little to address those concerns, which is why amendment 11, tabled in my name, remains on the amendment paper. It would prevent magistrates’ sentencing powers from being increased beyond 12 months. The Liberal Democrats also fundamentally oppose the removal of the automatic right to appeal decisions made by magistrates. This is a vital safeguard for summary justice, where lay magistrates are expected to make decisions with significant and real consequences. On the whole, we all agree that they make these decisions very well, with fewer than 1% of cases being appealed. But of those cases, the latest figures show that 56% were successful. We are now expecting magistrates courts to hear more complex cases carrying higher sentences at the same time as the Government are bluntly removing this protection against those miscarriages of justice. The Government want to speed up the process within a system, but changing the appeals process at this point is unnecessary and frankly dangerous. The reasoning, as per their own response, is: “If we do not reform the appeals process, we expect absolute volumes of appeals to the Crown Court to increase given the impact of other reforms will be to retain more cases in magistrates’ courts.” Let us reflect on that for a moment. Over half of current appeals are currently successful, and because the Government believe this number may increase, they are satisfied to remove that safeguard. How can the Minister defend a position that removes that vital safeguard in summary justice, while also accepting that it would be more needed than ever? There is also scant provision in this Bill for, or consideration of, the implications for legal representation in magistrates court. Currently, there are differing income thresholds for legal aid between the Crown and magistrates courts. Shifting cases from the Crown courts will mean that many more defendants who may be accused of crimes carrying sentences of up to 24 months will be ineligible for legal aid, leaving them unrepresented. Baron Leveson reflected in his review that the differing thresholds for legal aid could be creating a “perverse incentive” for a defendant to choose the Crown court, but the Government rejected Baron Leveson’s recommendation in their response yesterday. This not only has a profound effect on fairness in our justice system; it also affects the Government’s assumptions about how quickly the backlogs can be cleared. A lack of legal aid impedes efficiency and will slow down cases, leaving victims and defendants waiting once again. That is why we have tabled amendment 18, which links legal aid to the severity of the sentence, rather than the venue of the trial, and we have written to every Member of the House asking them to support it. New clause 20, tabled in my name, requires all new contracts for court-related services to include performance penalties, to put an end to these sham contracts that are currently failing to deliver prisoners on time. The Liberal Democrats also believe that opportunities have been missed to maximise the use of time within the existing court structures. There is scope to increase the number of trials heard in selected courtrooms across England and Wales from one to two a day. That approach was trialled during covid, and it resulted in 3.5 trials per week being cleared, compared with fewer than 0.9 trials in courtrooms operating under standard hours. New clause 4 calls for a review of the feasibility of hearing two trials a day in selected courtrooms, split between morning and afternoon sessions, with each trial sitting for four hours. Solutions such as this—which have not been explored by this Government, as confirmed in Committee—would supercharge the Crown court process, with a specific focus on clearing the backlog.

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    Absolutely. The right hon. and learned Member makes a really important point about the prisoner escort and custody services contract and ensuring that defendants are delivered to court on time, but not all defendants going into a Crown court are being held on remand. There are also defendants on bail who can get themselves to court, and it would be up to the listing officers to ensure that those cases are heard in the morning, which would take off the pressure that the PECS contracts clearly have in delivering people to start at a 10 am slot; instead, those defendants might be arriving for a 2 pm slot. He raises an important point and gives me a lovely opportunity to explain why I have thought about that and how we would overcome it. New clause 2 supports the implementation of fast-track courts for rape and serious sexual offences. We have heard powerful testimony across the House during the passage of the Bill about the need for rape and serious sexual offence courts, which we on the Liberal Democrat Benches have called for. It was therefore welcome when the Government announced their plans to implement them, but it is puzzling that they have not included those provisions in the Bill, because there is no point in waiting—these courts should be implemented urgently, to bring an end to the disgraceful waits that these victims are facing. The Government also announced when they agreed to roll out these RASSO courts that all judges presiding over them will undergo specialist trauma-informed training. Given the Government’s decision not to include domestic abuse cases in these RASSO courts, that would surely strengthen the case for having universal specialist trauma-informed training for all of the judiciary, which we have called for throughout the passage of the Bill. New clause 11 would give victims the right to receive transcripts of all judicial summings-up and bail decisions relevant to their case. Amendment 15 is particularly relevant given the direction of the Bill, as it would ensure that magistrates court transcripts are free for victims and accessible within 14 days. On the issue of transcripts, the Government have made real progress, which I welcome. Many victims choose not to attend the entirety of their hearing or trial, and even when they do attend, being able to process the events of a court case afterwards provides a valuable opportunity to better understand why those decisions were made. Transcripts being freely accessible aids in moving forward with one’s life, and at every turn, the Liberal Democrats will continue to push the Government to go further. Finally, I turn to new clause 17, tabled in my name. The Courts Act 2003 introduced Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Court Administration, which was established in 2005 but then closed in 2010. A 2022 Justice Committee report found that the argument for closing the inspectorate had not stood the test of time and called for the re-establishment of an inspectorate body. In his review, Baron Leveson also recommended a mechanism to inspect His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service, which was rejected by the Government. This is a particularly important time to introduce the additional oversight that a courts inspectorate would provide—a position that was also supported by the Victims’ Commissioner. In conclusion, the Government have approached this issue in the wrong way, pushing unworkable measures, opposed by those working in the legal sector who have to deliver the reforms, and eroding the safeguards that protect those who come into contact with the criminal justice system, be it defendants or victims. The Bill before us today makes dangerous changes that will have little effect on the backlog. That is why the Liberal Democrats will be unable to support the Bill, which is unfortunate especially given the good clauses at the end of the Bill that deal with the serious issues around presumption.

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    As the hon. Lady has just turned a page, I am confident that she will go on to the fact that, at the same time, the Government are proposing to remove the automatic right of appeal. If somebody has no legal background and cannot navigate a system that is totally alien to them, they will not know how to follow the process or what legal backing they could have if they had grounds for appeal.

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    I thank the hon. Member for her bravery in sharing her powerful story and for highlighting how special measures do not work if people do not know that they available to them. During the Bill Committee, I argued that special measures should be there as standard, with people having the ability to choose to remove them to face their perpetrator in court. Does she agree that we could easily roll that out across all our courts so that every victim would be protected from the moment they arrived?

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLib DemJess Brown-Fuller

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    The hon. Gentleman mentioned that many in the legal profession are sounding the alarm about the perceived bias of juries. Will he please state which legal organisations have expressed that view to him?

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLib DemHelen Morgan

    Electricity Grid Connections

    Bute Energy is planning to build a big wind farm in mid-Wales, and it is going to connect that wind farm over 47 km of pylons into a substation in North Shropshire that does not yet exist. I found out on the National Energy System Operator’s website that that substation is likely to be a 24 bay, 400 kV substation in a place with no substantial roads and a good amount of useful farmland. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the appropriateness of the site? I think it could go elsewhere, which would require a shorter run of pylons for Bute Energy. There are more appropriate places to build it than Lower Frankton.

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentLib DemHelen Maguire

    UK Coach Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing this important and timely debate. Coaches are often primarily viewed as being used only for holidays and leisure, but that is just a small part of the important services that operators provide. In fact, coaches account for 450 million passenger journeys a year in Great Britain and support 81,000 jobs, generating £6.4 billion of economic value for the economy. Coach passengers are estimated to spend £8.3 billion annually in local economies—and perhaps service stations, to which the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard alluded—through tourism, retail and leisure. Coach companies such as Edward Thomas & Son, which operates in my constituency, provide essential services. They transport children safely to and from school every day, support educational trips and are available for private hire and transport for local groups, organisations and communities. Coach journeys present an important and often more affordable alternative for travel across the UK, particularly with the current high rail and fuel prices. Without a healthy network of independent coach operators, services will become more expensive to provide and more difficult to access. The coach industry is struggling and we must do more to support it. High fuel prices are a massive concern. Coaches are high-mileage vehicles, and fuel represents one of their largest operating costs, so any significant increase or volatility in diesel prices immediately impacts operators, particularly where fuel contracts have been agreed well in advance at a fixed price. It is really difficult for coach operators to absorb substantial cost increases of this nature without ultimately affecting the costs or availability of their services. But it is not just about fuel: the general costs of operating a coach company have increased significantly, whether that is the price of coaches, insurance, maintenance, parts, tyres, wages or regulatory compliance. Modern coaches are a huge capital investment and can cost upwards of £250,000—that is massive. To make those investments, coach operators need certainty and support to justify continued investment in their fleets. The Government’s anti-business tax regime, with increased business rates and employer national insurance contributions, has hugely impacted the industry’s bottom line. That is threatening the future commercial viability of the coach industry. The availability of drivers is also a major challenge, as has been alluded to. The current driver vacancy rate is 14%. Recruiting and retaining suitable professional passenger-carrying vehicle drivers continues to be difficult. Coach driving is a skilled and responsible occupation, but the industry has an ageing workforce, with around 25% of drivers aged 60 or above. Attracting enough new drivers remains challenging, not least because of the Government-led barriers to training new and young drivers, with regulatory restrictions on drivers aged 18 to 20 limiting the journeys they can take. That makes coach driving an unattractive early-career option, which compounds recruitment difficulties as the workforce ages out. It restricts the amount of work operators are physically able to undertake, even when high customer demand is there. The coach industry continues to be overlooked in Government planning and infrastructure. That has caused the sector to suffer, like so many other industries, from the pressures that the last decade has placed on businesses. It has been left to deal with blows from uncontrollable shocks such as the pandemic, Brexit red tape and the push for net zero, with limited support. If a coach operator wants to commit to zero-emission coaches, it needs to secure, at high cost, vehicles with sufficient range, and ensure that there is reliable charging infrastructure across its routes. Coaches travel longer-than-average journeys, and there are currently limited charging provisions on motorways and A roads. Operators need greater certainty before committing to the significant investment required to reach net zero. However, unlike cars and vans, coaches are not currently covered by the zero-emission vehicle mandate, and no equivalent statutory trajectory or long-term road map exists for the sector. We must do more to support the coach industry. We must engage meaningfully with the sector to fix those fundamental issues. If we fail to do so, we will lose this industry and the vital services it supports. I therefore urge the Minister to reflect on all the contributions and calls made by me and other colleagues today.

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentLib DemGideon Amos

    Courts and Tribunals Bill

    I am extremely grateful to the Minister for throwing the kitchen sink at the problem, including court repairs. We wish to see those repairs make progress at Taunton Crown court. The Minister was good enough to write to me at the beginning of the summer to explain that the court, which has been closed since 2023, will be closed for longer. Will she contact me to give us an update on when Taunton Crown court will finally be reopened?

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentLib DemEdward Morello

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    On the impact of short-term funding, there is a very human cost. More often than not it is the young people involved who pay the price. I have had casework about people losing probably their only outlet for therapy when funding for their point of contact—someone they had built up a relationship with—has gone, and that has thrown them back into a crisis. Does the hon. Member agree that short-term funding has real-world impacts on young people?

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentLib DemEdward Morello

    Iran: Threats to British Interests

    The incident at RAF Fairford proved yet again a point that we have long known, which is that Iran is an exporter of terrorism and violence around the world—not just in the UK, but, crucially, in the region. We have seen the support for Hezbollah undermining security in Lebanon, and we have seen the attacks on our ally Saudi Arabia. What are the Government planning to do to increase the support that we provide to our allies in the region to counter the Iranian threat?

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentLib DemEdward Morello

    Falkland Islands

    I welcome the Minister to her place. I also welcome her restating Britain’s commitment to the fact that the Falkland Islands are British as long as the people of the Falklands wish to remain so. The Minister has said that Argentina has threatened to seek provisional measures through the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. President Trump, an ally of the Argentinian President, has spoken in support of Argentina’s claim and has recently sanctioned the International Criminal Court. What are the Government doing to ensure that no pressure is brought to bear on international tribunals and that the rule of law is protected?

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentLib DemDr Danny Chambers

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Wishart. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist) for giving such an eloquent speech at the beginning of this difficult debate. When I became an MP two years ago, there were half a million children on waiting lists for mental health services—about two months ago, that number has risen to a million. That is a million children needing help and a million families who are probably stressed beyond belief, worrying about the impacts of being on a long-term waiting list. The Darzi report showed that mental health accounts for 20% of the NHS caseload, yet at the time, in 2024, it was receiving only 10% of funding. We are really disappointed that the Government removed the mental health investment standard, which ensured that the proportion of money spent on mental health increased in line with the money spent on physical health. As a result of the standard being broken, NHS mental health services now receive 8% of funding. The proportion is dropping while we have record waiting lists. The cuts to mental health services are not limited to NHS services. Last year, the Government cut the VCSE grant—a vital fund that contributes to many charities and organisations, such as Samaritans, men’s sheds, young farmers’ groups and youth groups. One such organisation was Papyrus, which many Members have spoken about. It offered support for children and young people experiencing suicidal thoughts, and its loss is devastating. Organisations like Papyrus and the amazing Winchester Youth Counselling in my constituency are vital because they give children support before they need clinical NHS services. That support is early, targeted and often self-referred. They offer counselling and talking therapies, which not only helps children to maintain their mental health but saves the NHS money, because young people are less likely to end up in extreme cases that lead them to A&E, which is probably the worst place for them.

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentLib DemDr Danny Chambers

    Youth Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Support

    I totally agree with the hon. Lady. Those organisations are so important. Some politicians from some parties have been using mental health and children’s mental health as a bit of a political football, such as by calling young people struggling with mental health “snowflakes”. That is absolutely shameful, and those comments affect families who have lost children, and children who have lost brothers and sisters. When there is one less child in the school football team, when there is one empty chair at the dining table and when there is one fewer pair of shoes at the front door, the loss affects families for the rest of their lives—forever. I pay tribute my constituent Martyn Pond in Alresford, who lost his son Archie at only 19 years old. Martyn got a bench put in, made by an amazing organisation called Legends on the Bench. The bench is solar-powered and has a light on at night time. There is a QR code, through which people can read a memorial to Archie. There is also support and signposting to organisations such as Samaritans, so that anyone who comes across the bench at a time of crisis, feeling alone, can get support. It is an amazing tribute to an amazing young man. I want to finish by urging the Government to restore the mental health investment standard. Politicians overuse the word “crisis”, but it is really hard to think of another word to describe the state of children’s mental health and mental health services at the moment.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentLib DemDr Al Pinkerton

    Falkland Islands

    I welcome the Government’s commitment to Falkland Islands sovereignty and the islanders’ right to self-determination. In the light of President Milei’s escalating campaign, I think a little history may be in order. The Falkland Islands were first sighted by English navigators in 1592, claimed by Britain in 1765 and continuously settled since 1833, and some Falkland Islands families can trace their roots back nine or even 10 generations. Of course, there is a particular irony in Argentina’s claims of colonial injustice. Of the two countries in this dispute, it was only Argentina that systematically dispossessed indigenous peoples of their homes and homelands. Argentina’s sovereignty claim rests substantially on its asserted inheritance of the Spanish empire, whose imperial ambitions were sanctioned by a 15th-century Pope and the treaty of Tordesillas. The colonial history is rather more complicated than the Government of Argentina perhaps like to acknowledge or remember, which is precisely why self-determination matters so much. In 2013, I was in Stanley to witness the referendum in which 99.8% of islanders voted to remain British. They spoke for themselves as a self-governing, self-determining, distinct and identifiable people, yet President Milei now seeks to use UNCLOS arbitration to deny the islanders of economic sovereignty and the right to shape their own future. That is neo-colonialism dressed up as anti-colonialism. I have three questions for the Minister. Will Britain challenge any attempt to use UNCLOS to determine territorial sovereignty? If she is not willing to give an express account of the CPTPP negotiations, can she at least acknowledge that the Auckland principles that underpin the CPTPP are inconsistent with Argentina’s desire to undermine the islanders’ right to develop their own economy? Finally, what concrete measures will this Government take to ensure that Argentina’s threats do not deter investment in the islands?

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentLib DemDavid Chadwick

    UK Coach Industry

    It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing this debate, and I commend her on her informative speech. Earlier this year, I had the pleasure of visiting AE Gough & Sons coaches in Llandrindod Wells, where I heard at first hand some of the challenges facing the industry. I am also fortunate to have other excellent coach operators in my constituency, including Herdman Coaches and Williams Coaches. These family-run businesses are the hidden workhorses of our economy, but right now they are absorbing a lot of pain. The coach industry is particularly important to the Welsh economy and plays a vital role in connecting rural communities and destinations that cannot always be reached by rail. That is particularly important in my constituency, which contains major attractions and sites such as the Brecon Beacons, Hay-on-Wye and Waterfall Country. However, the coach industry faces significant challenges, particularly when it comes to rising operating costs and recruiting the next generation of drivers. On fuel costs, the Government must continue the freeze on fuel duty to protect operators and passengers from further inflationary pressures. The Liberal Democrats believe that a lot more must be done to help. Donald Trump’s reckless war with Iran, cheered on originally by the Conservatives and Reform, has pushed up prices at the pump, while the Treasury stands to receive an additional £2 billion in tax revenues as a result of soaring prices. The Liberal Democrats believe that money should be returned to motorists and businesses through a 10p cut in fuel duty that would reduce pump prices by around 12p per litre. For the coach operators that we have been talking about, who rely on fuel every single day, that would provide some much-needed relief. We must also see work being done to address the industry’s growing workforce crisis. That point has been made several times, which makes it apparent how pressing that really is. The bus and coach sector faces an estimated shortage of between 5,000 and 10,000 drivers, with almost a quarter of existing drivers thought to be over 60. At a time when so many young people are struggling to find employment, particularly in areas such as rural Wales, it is extraordinary that an industry that is crying out for skilled workers is facing such significant barriers to recruitment. That is why we need to see funded category D licence training and reform of the driver apprenticeship system. That was one of the issues raised with me by AE Gough & Sons, which highlighted the difficulties that operators face by taking on apprentices directly, rather than having to rely on college-led arrangements. Ultimately, if we want a thriving tourism economy, better rural connectivity and more opportunities for young people, we must give our coach industry the support that it needs. I hope the Minister will take those concerns seriously and work with the industry to secure its long-term future.

    Hansard source