partytracker.uk — a sourced record of what Britain's political parties say and do, party by party, with every entry linked to a primary source

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

1. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Milburn Report

   I will add the summit to the list of places to go. I would dearly love to visit my hon. Friend’s constituency, and if I cannot, I will ensure that one of my colleagues does. On the point of substance that he raises, the problem of youth inactivity in the country has built up over many years, and not enough has been done about it in the past. We now have the youth guarantee, which is investing in the issue. We know that there is more that we must do, which is why we are looking forward to the final report from Alan Milburn in a few weeks’ time.

   Hansard source
2. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Milburn Report

   The truth is that it has been a problem for a long time. I repeat what I said to the shadow Secretary of State: under the Government that the hon. Lady supported, the number of NEETs went up by a quarter of a million between 2021 and 2024. She asks me what we will do, and in addition to the programmes I have announced, we recently announced a partnership with the British Retail Consortium to hire 100,000 young people not in education, employment or training over the next few years. The hon. Lady will be pleased to know that the latest Recruitment and Employment Confederation survey showed the strongest hiring sentiment in four years.

   Hansard source
3. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Milburn Report

   I refer the hon. Gentleman to the Chancellor’s speech at our party conference a couple of weeks ago, in which he was quite clear that we owe young people not just an income, but a future too. That is why the Government are behind the agenda I am setting out. I look forward to reading Alan Milburn’s final report in a few weeks’ time, and I remind the shadow Minister and everyone on the Opposition Benches that Alan Milburn was clear in his interim report that the problems we are talking about are deep-seated, long-term and have existed in this country for a great many years.

   Hansard source
4. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Topical Questions

   Since our last oral questions session, we have announced an agreement with the British Retail Consortium to hire 100,000 young people not in education, employment or training over the next few years; we have announced an extension of disability bus pass usage to cover peak hours; we have rolled out more of the youth guarantee; and, as has been referred to, we have announced our intention to adjust the triple lock, ensuring rising and sustainable pensions for the future and also releasing funds for a new national care service, which is a matter of huge importance to pensioners and their families.

   Hansard source
5. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Topical Questions

   I am glad that the hon. Member has given me the opportunity to point out what we inherited—exactly what was set out in The Times this morning—which was a backlog of 2 million people awaiting reassessment. As he knows, the Tories left a system with almost no face-to-face assessments. Since then, we announced at the Budget last year a plan to tackle the backlog in work capability assessments and reassessments. The Office for Budget Responsibility has costed that activity at saving over—

   Hansard source
6. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Topical Questions

   The welfare budget rose twice as fast during the hon. Lady’s party’s last Parliament in power as it is during this Parliament. We are reforming the system through changes to universal credit, more personalised employment support and the youth guarantee that we have referred to a number of times during this session.

   Hansard source
7. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Topical Questions

   I remind the hon. Lady that the system she criticises is the one designed, created and legislated for by her Government and her party. We are changing the system through the changes in universal credit announced in April this year, through more personalised support for the people with long-term health conditions who were signed off and written off by her party, and through more intervention on youth opportunity for the young people who were neglected while the NEET numbers went through the roof on their watch.

   Hansard source
8. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Topical Questions

   I am grateful to my hon. Friend; I enjoyed the visit to his constituency a few weeks ago to support young disabled people. He is right in what he says about long-term youth unemployment. That is why we have the jobs guarantee, and we will publish a full evaluation of its effects.

   Hansard source
9. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Pat McFadden

   Topical Questions

   We should all be behind “Get Hyndburn Working”. I am certainly behind it, and I would be happy to meet my hon. Friend.

   Hansard source
10. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Nick Thomas-Symonds

    International Update

    In my negotiations with Commissioner Šefčovič, I agreed not only the re-accession of the United Kingdom to Erasmus+, but that at this year’s summit we would deliver the food and drink agreement to bear down on costs in supermarkets and an emissions trading scheme linkage meaning that hundreds of millions of pounds in carbon taxes do not need to be paid by UK businesses, as well as opportunities for young people to work, travel and study in the UK. So can I say to Prime Minister that anyone who sets their face against the deal that I hope he pushes over the line on 20 November is in favour of adding costs to businesses and households?

    Hansard source
11. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    None of us wants to go back to the Brexit debates we had in this place. Looking around, I see that most Members present for this debate were spared the horrors of 27 votes in one night and the fisticuffs that took place—[Interruption.] Yes, not all Members here were spared that. I am grateful that nobody else has to go through that horror, but we do need to look again at Brexit. When we look at the real GDP per capita growth since the vote and see that the eurozone countries—Italy, France and Spain—have all outpaced us, I can only ask the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Sir Bernard Jenkin): are these Brexit benefits in the room with us now? Can anybody else see them?

    Hansard source
12. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    I will not give way; we have already had to listen to the hon. Gentleman. It would be easy to be angry about our performance in Brexit, but these debates are too often fuelled by blind beliefs rather than careful consideration—witness the hon. Gentleman. Do we really understand how bad the Tory hard Brexit has been for this country and the scale of the challenge we face? The challenge is not just about the economic impact of leaving the largest trade bloc in the world. I was just shocked by Tory shadow Ministers in the Chamber being surprised to realise that their hard Brexit means that we do not get information in real time from our European counterparts to help British farmers with bio and food security alerts. We also left Eurodac—for all the people who are concerned about stopping the boats and who might want that asylum data—because, again, they hated the term “Europe”. Countless bands will never get the chance to be the Beatles or Oasis because of the 90-day rule, and 20,000 businesses have given up on trading with Europe altogether, because the only Brexit “benefit” that anyone can quantify is the amount of paperwork it created. The second blind belief, however, is that it would be simple just to go back. We have to be honest. The British problem is that we too often think that the difficult bit is us deciding what our future relationship with Europe should be, and then we tell the Europeans, as if they do not read our newspapers. Some humility is needed, to say the least. In the last 10 years, the continent has faced war and the antics of President Putin and President Trump. It now has new deals on migration and asylum, a new green deal, and trade deals of its own with Canada and the South American Mercosur nations. It has challenged Chinese exports so that “Made in Europe” is now a serious prospect. We are simply an afterthought and casualty of that process. None of that is an argument against looking to the future, but if the status quo is not acceptable, we have to be honest with our constituents about what is and what we should be fighting for. Frankly, we should look at how others have approached Europe. To go into a negotiation and saying what we do not want—“No, no, no”—is to act like a toddler, yet that is too often what the red line approach has been for this country. Let us contrast that with the approach of Mark Carney, who has talked about the shared challenges and the issues facing all of us in the world today. Perhaps the biggest lie of all those told to us in this place was about cakeism and cherry-picking, as if Europe is not flexible and does not want to find ways forward, when it is very clear that it does. The truth that must now be told is that we need to do more than repeat the mistakes of the past. We left the European Union without knowing what leaving would entail. We must not make that mistake again. We must seek the consent of the British people and ask them what rejoin would be and about our future relationship with Europe. That is exactly what the Prime Minister is talking about doing. Twenty-one nations have been through accession, taking an average of nine years to do so. This country deserves better. We need to take the Brexit blinkers off and look to our future—a future that is clearly with Europe.

    Hansard source
13. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    Are the benefits in the room with us?

    Hansard source
14. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

    Hansard source
15. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    You quoted me!

    Hansard source
16. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    On that point, will the hon. Gentleman give way?

    Hansard source
17. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    I am pleased to hear the hon. Gentleman talk about the CPTPP, because that is the first time he has deigned to defend anything that has happened since we took this country out of the European Union, and I notice he has not defended the status quo. The Conservative Government’s own impact assessment found that the CPTPP added 0.08% to GDP. That is 50 times smaller than the impact of Brexit. What does he want to say to the 20,000 businesses that have given up trading with Europe altogether because of the Brexit that his Government negotiated? Does he really think that the CPTPP makes up for that?

    Hansard source
18. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    rose—

    Hansard source
19. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Rejoining the EU

    Perhaps we can find a point of consensus in this debate in that one of the things lacking in Parliament over the last couple of years is a European Scrutiny Committee where all of us as parliamentarians could be a part of the debate about what the future with Europe might be. Perhaps the Minister will take the merits of such a proposal back to his colleagues in the Cabinet Office, given the nature of the debate today and the concerns about facts. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

    Hansard source
20. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    International Update

    I for one am really relieved that the Prime Minister is not going to take any lessons from any member of the previous Conservative Government on negotiating with Europe, given what a mess they made of it. Their irrational hatred of anything to do with Europe meant they took us out of the biofood security alert, meaning British farmers do not get told when there is foot and mouth, and took us out of the Eurodac system—[Interruption.] You took us out. I am watching the right hon. Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins) say, “What?” She might want to look at some of the details that she helped negotiate. They took us out of the Eurodac system, meaning we do not get the asylum data, which makes protecting our borders harder. So will the Prime Minister assure me and my constituents that he will not let Tory mistakes make border control and British farming harder to do, but will put the national interest first, seek that data and ensure that we have a future of working with Europe, not hating it?

    Hansard source
21. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi

    International Update

    I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement and in particular his efforts to assist our allies, to forge closer ties and to help de-escalate the situation in the middle east. It is clear that President Trump’s efforts to lift sanctions on Russian diesel and then buy it are a real kick in the teeth for our Ukrainian friends and will allow Vladimir Putin to further fuel his deadly war machine. Nations such as India, which was slapped with tariffs for buying Russian fuel, will no doubt decry that move and be left bemused by these haphazard, hypocritical policies that prevent our long-term strategic aims from being achieved. However, there have also been reports that United States officials have been contacting European counterparts to stop Ukrainian attacks on Russian refineries, and are also limiting the supply of weapons and intelligence. Has the Prime Minister had any such discussions with our US or European allies about why we need to continue to support our Ukrainian friends?

    Hansard source
22. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Luke Charters

    Rejoining the EU

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. I thank the nearly 200 of my constituents who put their signatures to the petition. I will start on familiar territory. This year, I took two of my boys to Spain. On the trip, my eldest, who turns four this week—he is an inquisitive fella—looked at the border queues and asked me bluntly, “Daddy, why aren’t we in that empty one?” My youngest, who is one, and clearly not ready for a debate about sovereignty, took a rather different approach, instead choosing to run underneath the barriers altogether. That story is just a reminder that all the children of Britain know is a Britain standing apart from its closest neighbours. Let’s unpack that. A fortnight ago in Liverpool, I heard the Prime Minister make a clarion call about something that many of us have felt for years: our present relationship with the European Union is not good enough. He did not stop at diagnosis; he actually had the courage to say that he would set out options for Britain’s long-term relationship with our nearest partners. He carried that message to Berlin last week—schöne Arbeit indeed. Clear-eyed pragmatism about our relationship with Europe is what my constituents in York Outer expect. As the Prime Minister outlined today, we have a great opportunity on 20 November to take steps forward on agrifood, energy and immigration, and to build a new long-term strategic direction that is not based on just slogans and soundbites. My own family see it the way that millions do, and many of them voted to leave. If I ask them about Brexit today, I do not get a lecture about the referendum a decade ago; I get a shrug and a modest dose of “Bregret”. That is because in West Yorkshire, North Yorkshire or wherever, they are paying the price in their weekly shop or standing in endless passport queues. By working with our European partners on an agrifood deal, as the Prime Minister set out today, it does not have to be this way. By reducing red tape in the food sector, we can lower the cost of the weekly shop for millions of working-class families. By co-operating on immigration and working on other issues of mutual interest, such as immigration and energy, we can get control back. The Prime Minister, however, said that the British public are the boss, and that is why this conversation must not be held just in Westminster Hall. In a fortnight, I will be holding a town hall for my constituents about the relationship they want Britain to have with Europe. York has always been outward looking. In fact, it voted nearly 60:40 to remain—the strongest remain vote in Yorkshire and the Humber. I believe that the proportion is far higher for those who now want a stronger relationship. I always end up coming back to the fact that I am the youngest parent in Parliament. Rebuilding this relationship means restoring opportunity for young people like my children. A young person from York should find it no harder to study or work in Barcelona, Amsterdam or Copenhagen than they do in Sydney or Toronto.

    Hansard source
23. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Luke Charters

    Rejoining the EU

    I absolutely do. My right hon. Friend is a great advocate for universities in her constituency, as is my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell), my constituency neighbour. I think about the first day that my boys will go on the Eurostar on their own to go adventuring or even to study. As they set off, I will tell them how proud I am of them for the fact that, with every friendship they make along the journey, they are helping to make our continent more peaceful and more prosperous in the process. I welcome the Prime Minister’s boldness in daring to get things done. We should be honest: Brexit has not worked. As a nation, we have a collective case of “Bregret”. It is time to get on with the job and build on the Prime Minister’s bold honesty about our future relationship with Europe.

    Hansard source
24. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Luke Charters

    Baby Loss Awareness Week

    The hon. Lady’s comments remind me of our family’s experience. We had a traumatic first birth, and the second birth was an elective C-section. That was the only game in town; that is for sure. We said to the registrar—I will never forget it—“Do you tell women about the clinical risks of a vaginal birth—the same clinical risks that you have talked to us about for half an hour? Do you give women and families that data, so that they can make an informed choice?”. The registrar said, “No one’s asked me that in my entire career.” That is the precise point that the hon. Lady is making, and I thank her for making it.

    Hansard source
25. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Luke Charters

    Baby Loss Awareness Week

    I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I am reminded of the words of Jo Cox that we have more in common. In sharing experiences tonight, I hope that the public and my constituents will see that there is more in common between us in this House. We all recognise that baby loss brings an unimaginable grief. No family should have to face that loss in isolation. This is the 24th Baby Loss Awareness Week, and I pay tribute to Tommy’s, Sands and the many charities, NHS staff and volunteers in York who are supporting families through their darkest moments. Through their compassion, they help to ensure that bereaved families know that they are never alone. For too many families, baby loss could have been preventable. Too often, families have said that they were not listened to when they raised concerns. Although my own family’s experience is different from that of families who experienced a loss, this debate is personal. When my wife and I welcomed our first child, we experienced a traumatic birth. We are fortunate, blessed and lucky, but it was traumatic none the less. It left a profound mark on our family, particularly on my own mental health from witnessing it all. I pay tribute to the Sky journalist Sarah-Jane Mee who, with her empathy, gave me the confidence to share my story. The findings of Baroness Amos’s independent review into maternity and neonatal services are important, but in the short time I have, I would say that they are insufficient in terms of non-birthing partners. I warmly welcome the new Health Secretary to her place, and I am appreciative of her predecessors who met me and showed me empathy in sharing my experiences. I know that many other Members feel the same and share her view that there is a national crisis around the standards of maternity care. I will touch on what my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) said. Given the time limit, I will focus on just one of her remarks, which was around the GMC, professionals and holding people to account. As one of those families affected, too few professionals seem to have been struck off or held to account. That is echoed through some of the work in the Ockenden review and the other investigations at Nottingham. I am now working with her in her review of maternity services at Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS trust, where ours was one of the families involved. I will just say on record that Donna has been respectful, kind and empathetic, and I thank her for that. At the heart of every recommendation must be one simple principle: that families must be listened to, that no non-birthing partner should feel helpless as their warnings go unheard, and that no bereaved family should be left wondering whether a different response could have changed the outcome for their baby. I pay tribute to Hayley Patrick-Copeland and the two daughters that she lost: Alya and Aleah. She is a powerhouse of a northern mum, and her knit and natter groups, which I have visited in my constituency, have been knitting hats and gowns for stillborn children. She texted me to say that awareness was important so that people feel less alone and can more openly share their wonderful babies’ stories. She has channelled her grief into helping others, creating ribbon displays across York that offer remembrance, comfort and solidarity to families affected by baby loss. I pay tribute to Hayley, and to the local organisations supporting her. I thank Huntington working men’s club and the Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust, and I say, “Hayley, you are amazing—you really are.” I will end my speech now, because I want to let other Members in, but I will first speak with some candour. The test of every review, recommendation and action plan is whether families’ experiences actually improve, not only in the immediate aftermath of loss but in the months and years that follow. I was immensely grateful to the team at York hospital who were there for us during the second birth. On Thursday evening, the global “Wave of Light” will bring people together to remember those who have been lost too soon. However, I must say that the overwhelming message I receive from families in York is that sympathy is never enough, and I hope that tonight’s debate is a clamouring call for action. We owe those families the action that they deserve, and we owe it to the babies we remember this week to learn every possible lesson from their loss.

    Hansard source
26. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Baby Loss Awareness Week

    I want to start by thanking the Secretary of State for making maternity and neonatal safety a priority and for publicly stating that as her priority from the outset. Personally, it felt like a relief, especially after the uncertainty there has been. I wish to personally thank her for that. Baby Loss Awareness Week is a time to remember the babies we have lost, stand alongside bereaved families and recognise that pregnancy and baby loss can change a life forever. Behind every case discussed in this House is a baby who is loved, a family who imagined a future, and a life that will always be part of theirs. In preparing for this debate I watched last year’s debate again, and what saddened me was how much of what we raised then remains painfully familiar today—families still fighting for answers, women still describing concerns that were dismissed, staff still frightened to speak up. Last year I said that grief must be the engine for change. Today I want to go further. Families have carried the grief. It is time that the system carried the responsibility. There has been an important change over the past year. Baby loss, maternity safety and neonatal care are being discussed openly and treated as Government priorities. The work of Donna Ockenden, Baroness Amos and Lady Justice Thirlwall has brought devastating failings into sharp focus. I thank them, their teams and, above all, the families whose courage made that work possible. For the last six-and-a-half years I have fought for change and listened to over 1,000 families and organisations, my own experience of miscarriages and birth leaving me with both physical and mental scars. I am so proud to serve as the Government’s national maternity and neonatal adviser and contribute to the national taskforce. The taskforce brings together families, clinicians and others with the experience and expertise to shape reform. Bringing those voices together in this way is a significant step forward, and I welcome the determination to work together. I also wish to thank the civil servants working behind the scenes, often to demanding deadlines, to turn that determination into action. The measure of our success will be what changes for women arriving at hospital frightened, the midwife trying to keep them safe and the families who sadly leave without their baby. Our goal must be clear: safe care, informed choice and compassionate births, with support that continues when things go wrong. That must be the standard that every family can expect. That includes families experiencing early pregnancy loss. We must never confuse an early loss with a small loss. A woman may have known she was pregnant for only a short time. She may have already imagined a name, a face, a future. She may be grieving privately before she has told anyone that she is pregnant. Whatever her circumstances, she deserves compassion. We must think about where care takes place. A woman who has just been told that her pregnancy ended should not have to sit beside someone celebrating a reassuring scan. A woman losing her baby should not be placed on a ward where she must listen to other babies crying and families celebrating their arrival. We should not ask people to endure avoidable distress because the service has failed to consider their needs. We need appropriate private spaces, timely assessment and scans, sensitive explanations and clear information about what happens next. Women need to understand their treatment choices. They need pain relief, follow-up and someone to contact when they are frightened or unsure. Partners need support too. A woman should never be left feeling that because miscarriage happens relatively often, her own loss somehow matters less. The care we provide cannot remove that grief, but it can make the difference between being supported through it and being traumatised further. That brings me to something very simple: time to care. In Nottinghamshire, when someone is struggling we often say, “Come on, let’s have a cuppa.” We put the kettle on and make a brew, but what we really mean is, “Stop for a moment. Take a breath and sit down. I’m here and I’m listening.” In maternity care, time matters: time to hear a woman say something feels wrong, time to explain a scan result, time to answer a father’s question and time to sit with parents after devastating news. A hurried conversation can leave someone frightened and confused. A compassionate conversation can help them understand, feel heard and know what support is available. We cannot ask staff to provide that care while giving them neither the time nor the staffing to do it. Time to care must be built into the service. That means a properly funded, ring-fenced perinatal workforce plan and enough midwives, obstetricians, neonatal staff, sonographers and bereavement specialists with the training and support they need. It means continuity whenever possible so that women are supported by professionals who understand their history, their fears and their circumstances. Compassion must be supported by the way in which we organise and resource care. Listening must also lead to the right action. We need timely access to the right scans, skilled interpretation of the results and prompt referral when concerns are identified. Safe, informed choice depends on having that information and the opportunity to discuss it. We must also confront the inequalities in whose concerns are heard. Black, Asian and ethnic minority mothers continue to face an unacceptable disparity in maternal outcomes. Racism, assumptions about pain and failures to listen must be addressed directly. We need services that take women’s symptoms seriously, provide appropriate interpretation and examine outcomes honestly. A national improvement in safety cannot be judged a success while some women remain much less safe than others. Where you live, the colour of your skin and your ability to make yourself heard must never determine whether you receive compassionate, safe care. It would be an omission on my part if I did not speak about responsibility and accountability, because I know how deeply this hurts in Nottinghamshire. Women were left traumatised. Families described fathers sleeping on windowsills only hours after their precious baby had died because there was not even a chair available. Some of those who held senior responsibility during those years did not engage with Donna Ockenden’s review. For families who have revisited the worst moments of their lives to help establish the truth, that refusal hurts. It runs deep. It stings. Families have answered the difficult questions. They have shared intimate details. They have found the strength to speak when speaking has cost them so much. They deserve answers from those who held responsibility. For far too long, we have had a system in which excellent midwives are frightened to speak up and families must fight for answers—and some explanations they have been given are clearly untrue. Women have been made to feel that what happened was their fault. We have to address that. A culture that supports honest learning must protect staff who raise concerns and distinguish between human error and reckless or dishonest conduct. It must also ensure that failures of leadership have consequences. Protecting staff who speak the truth and holding people accountable for concealing it are both essential to safer care. That is why the maternity and neonatal commissioner must have teeth. The commissioner must have the independence, authority and resources to listen to families and staff, identify patterns, obtain information and challenge failures. There must be clear routes to require a response and escalate concerns when organisations fail to act. Families should not have to wait for another major inquiry before someone in authority listens. National oversight must be matched by accountability in every trust. Every trust board should be able to say who is responsible for maternity safety, what concerns have been raised, what action is being taken and how progress will be demonstrated. Improvement plans should have named owners, deadlines and evidence that care has changed and improved. We also need consistent national data that helps us identify warning signs early, and accountability must reach the ward, the boardroom and the organisations overseeing them. We must therefore review our regulatory bodies and how they are fulfilling their purpose. The GMC, the CQC and the Nursing and Midwifery Council have different responsibilities, but all have a role in protecting patients. We need to examine how they respond to concerns, share information and act when warning signs emerge. We have those three regulators, yet families still need large-scale investigations to establish what happened and secure change. The question is simple: how could serious concerns at Nottingham University hospital trust have persisted for over 20 years while bereaved families had to stand up, organise and fight before meaningful change began? That is a broken system. A system that leaves grieving parents to expose its failures is unfit for purpose, and when it forces those parents to fight for the truth while carrying the loss of their baby, it is cruel. We should call out that cruelty. We should reject it, and we should change it. Bereaved parents should never have to become the safety net for a system that failed their children. I know that there are exceptional midwives and obstetricians working every day across this country. They listen, they care, they save lives and many have themselves fought to raise concerns. They too deserve a system that supports them, protects them when they speak up and acts on what they say. It is for those staff, for the future of our services and, above all, for babies, mothers and families that we must make change happen. I welcome the Health Bill’s proposal to extend the time limit for bringing relevant prosecutions from three years to five, but we must go further. Families facing bereavement can spend months simply trying to survive, and understanding a complex regulatory system should not fall entirely on them. They need clear information about where to raise concerns, what each organisation can do and how to access support.

    Hansard source
27. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Baby Loss Awareness Week

    I agree with my hon. Friend. Bereavement care also needs proper scrutiny. A poster on a wall cannot demonstrate that a family has received compassionate care. Families need appropriate spaces, trained staff, sensitive communication and support after they leave hospital. Where families wish, equipment such as cuddle cots can allow them precious times with their baby. Parents should be supported to make their own choices about holding their baby, creating memories and saying goodbye. Nobody should be rushed, and nobody should be made to feel there is a correct way to grieve. The quality of that care should never depend on which hospital door a family walks through. I also want to raise the No Breath Required campaign. In England and Wales, coroners generally cannot investigate a stillbirth. Their jurisdiction depends on whether a baby was born showing signs of life. That distinction can leave families in very similar circumstances with different routes to independent scrutiny. The need for answers does not disappear because a baby was stillborn. We should give coroners the power to investigate stillbirths, with appropriate safeguards, expertise and resources. We have seen the harm caused when inadequate reviews fail to identify what went wrong or prevent it from happening again. An extension of coroners’ powers must sit within wider reform, with sufficient capacity, specialist understanding and compassionate support for families. We must also recognise that some losses occur despite good care. Every family deserves an honest explanation, support and the opportunity to ask questions, and that support must continue beyond discharge. Grief does not end when a hospital episode closes; it follows people home into work, relationships and, sometimes, subsequent pregnancy. Families must have access to bereavement and mental health support for as long as they need it. They should not have to prove that they are struggling badly enough to deserve help. Bereaved and harmed families have already given us so much. Their testimony has exposed failures, their persistence has driven reviews and their determination has brought us to this point. They should never have needed to become campaigners to make the system listen. As the Government and the taskforce move forward, those families’ voices must remain central, and our promises must be tested against their experience. We need time to care, power to act and responsibility to answer. Last year I said, “Let grief be the engine of change.” This year, we must show families where that change is happening. Families have carried the grief; it is time that the system carried the responsibility. Baby Wynter, baby Harriet, baby Sebastian, baby Koupar, baby Teddy, baby Quinn, baby Aubrey, baby Grace, baby Poppy, baby Dexter, baby Luna and baby Ladybird—we must remember every baby, support every family, and do everything in our power to prevent avoidable loss.

    Hansard source
28. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

    International Update

    Traders at Grimsby Seafood Village will welcome any action to reduce the Brexit red tape and bring down their energy bills. I think that they would also want to hear the Prime Minister say explicitly—he danced around in his response to my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder) earlier—that there will not be a return to freedom of movement and that in these negotiations we will not have to capitulate and join the euro?

    Hansard source
29. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Maureen Burke

    Employment Support: Young People

    18. What steps he is taking to support young people into employment.

    Hansard source
30. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Maureen Burke

    Employment Support: Young People

    The Prime Minister hit the nail on the head when he said that too many young people have been failed by a schools system that focused too much “on the university route, and not enough on technical education.” It is not surprising that the number of young people on benefits has grown so significantly when the education system has failed to equip them with the skills they need for today’s jobs market. When I speak to unemployed young people in my constituency, they tell me that they are desperate to find work not just for the pay, but for a sense of purpose and the independence to shape their own future. The choice before us is clear: invest in young people’s success or create a lifetime of dependency, carrying a huge price for the taxpayer. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that we need to invest in young people’s success rather than leave them to languish on benefits?

    Hansard source
31. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matt Turmaine

    Baby Loss Awareness Week

    It is an honour to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham). I pay tribute to all Members who have made such emotional, moving and powerful contributions this evening. A number of hon. Members have mentioned continuity of care. I must confess to experiencing something of a thrill when, quite soon after being elected to this place in July 2024, I found myself in a Committee Room in Portcullis House next to Professor Chris Whitty, discussing continuity of care. It may not surprise you, Madam Deputy Speaker, to hear that he also thinks continuity of care is a good idea, as do many people in the Chamber. The right hon. Member for Godalming and Ash (Sir Jeremy Hunt) mentioned the importance of a well-functioning NHS team to ensuring decent outcomes. I saw this last week, when I visited my local hospital to see a team of surgeons and other staff delivering really good outcomes by operating a robot to remove a gall bladder from a patient. Having a well-integrated team is absolutely vital. This is an important debate. Those experiencing baby loss have an especially tragic bereavement. The loss of a loved one or friend is always tragic, and something to be sympathised with in solidarity, but those experiencing the loss of a baby are particularly deserving of our kindness, sympathy and support. There is the life cut short; there is the potential that has disappeared; and the joy of growing and living together—of shared love and laughter—is relegated to the imagination, and the hopes of what might have been. The Secretary of State’s intention is clear: to support women and families let down by maternity services. I am glad to see that early loss is being recognised through the baby loss certificate scheme, which covers pregnancy loss before 24 weeks. The Government are investing in services to support families who are dealing with the tragedy of baby loss, so that every integrated care board can fund specialist bereavement midwives and bereavement services. In Hertfordshire, where my Watford constituency is located, many organisations are doing amazing work to support those grieving a miscarriage or the loss of a baby, including Alternatives Watford, West Herts Hospitals Charity, Petals, CHUMS, Sands and Tommy’s, as well as GP practices and the county council, which has a network for staff who have experienced baby loss; it provides much-needed support. In a former career, I worked in health and social care, including for the Hertfordshire safeguarding children’s board. From my experience of supporting serious case reviews into the death of a child, or the child death overview panel, it is important to recognise the engagement of health staff in determining what has gone wrong, and we should acknowledge that. I welcome the efforts of the Government and those supporting this work to minimise the incidence of baby loss and to ensure that nobody goes unsupported when experiencing it.

    Hansard source
32. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Marsha De Cordova

    Rejoining the EU

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward. I thank the many tens of thousands of people, including hundreds of my constituents, who signed the petition to rejoin the EU. Today’s debate is timely and important. In my constituency we are proud Europeans, and during the referendum that took place 10 years ago, Battersea voted overwhelmingly to remain, with 78% of voters choosing to stay. The UK’s relationship with Europe is essential, and the Prime Minister was right when he said he believed leaving the European Union had done “more harm than good” in the UK. Many people voted for Brexit because they were promised greater prosperity and opportunity. However, those promises have simply not been realised. In my opinion, the UK leaving the EU has been an unmitigated disaster and has left us poorer as a result. If we are serious about growth, prosperity and opportunity, we must look at our relationship with Europe. The economic case is clear, despite what many Members have already said. Rejoining the EU would significantly boost the UK’s GDP. Indeed, much research has shown that, including research from Best for Britain on UK-EU integration, which found that full membership would unlock between 2.5% and 3.6% growth in UK GDP. Moreover, rejoining the EU is an issue that many constituents, including mine, continue to raise with their parliamentarians. As the co-chair of the UK-EU Parliamentary Partnership Assembly, I work closely with colleagues here in Parliament and with Members of the European Parliament. Those conversations demonstrate our shared values and our steadfast commitment to work closely and constructively. They also show how much effort has gone into managing many of the unnecessary barriers and complications that did not exist before Brexit.

    Hansard source
33. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Marsha De Cordova

    Rejoining the EU

    Absolutely. My hon. Friend is right that there are so many areas where we could benefit. It is not just the economy. Those conversations with our colleagues across Europe have also reinforced my belief that, as our close neighbours and historical allies, we are stronger when we work together. When the PPA meets in London next month, which again is timely, ahead of the UK-EU summit, we will continue to call for deeper co-operation between the UK and EU and for practical agreements that support growth—agreements on food and drink, emissions trading and creating opportunities for young people. That will support growth, security and resilience. In an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment, strong relationships with our oldest neighbours and closest allies matter even more. We have seen that through our collaborative work on the issues facing Ukraine. The Prime Minister has opened the door to a national conversation about our future relationship with Europe and we must seize that opportunity. It is not an opportunity to revisit what happened more than 10 years ago, but we must be honest about the lessons of the last decade and ambitious about the decades to come. What will that look like? If we want growth, prosperity, security and resilience, we must choose a future that brings us closer with the European Union once again.

    Hansard source
34. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Markus Campbell-Savours

    National Security

    I thank the Home Secretary for her statement. Adults in the UK seeking to access pornographic material online are now required to upload identification to pass age verification checks, yet those choosing to share extremist material or incite hate and terrorism on social media can enjoy anonymity. What consideration has the Home Office given to ensuring that social media users can be identified? My constituents, some of whom have been victims of online harassment, simply do not understand why anonymity is allowed.

    Hansard source
35. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Sewards

    International Update

    In August I had the privilege of visiting the Falkland Islands, an amazing place, where Government representatives told me all about the opportunities presented by the Sea Lion oilfield development fund. Whatever one’s opinion of the Sea Lion development, it is clear that the Government of Argentina cannot threaten those who choose to get involved in that project and cannot try to scupper it with external actions that do not match our ambitions. I ask the Prime Minister today to set out his view on that. Will he also unambiguously state that it is the Falkland Islanders’ right to determine where their resources go?

    Hansard source
36. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

    Rejoining the EU

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship for the first time, Mrs Barker. You have certainly caught yourself a lively one early on a Monday evening. I thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for moving the motion on behalf of the signatories of the e-petition relating to the UK applying to rejoin the EU. Some 10 years ago, the people of the UK voted to leave the EU. That decision was made on the promise that leaving the EU would boost UK growth and reduce immigration. During this debate the clock appeared to turn backwards. That was probably a bit of a heavy metaphor even for this place, but we have had a lot of legacy language. We have had lies and truth, rancour and dispute over facts. Everyone has brought their own version of the polls. We have had surrender, small print and even the odd straw man. At one point, the hon. Member for East Wiltshire (Danny Kruger) said that we were not having a debate, but exchanging our speeches. If I am honest, that took me back to the way this debate has been conducted for much of the last decade. When my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) described Opposition Members I was worried we had strayed into the realm of unparliamentary language, but I am glad to hear that he in fact said “Cnuts”. It is important always to enunciate that word as my hon. Friend did. In all seriousness, this debate was called because the British people know that the current arrangements with the EU are not working. Brexit has not given us control. We have lost some of the control we had over our economy. Last year, goods trade with the EU was down 7% on 2018. The hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex (Sir Bernard Jenkin) said that such trade is 6% of UK GDP. It is 5.96%, so we will allow that 0.04%, but the use of the figure 6% belies its size. According to the ONS, that is £181.4 billion of goods; if we include services, it is £384.4 billion. As the saying goes, if you start adding up the hundreds of billions of pounds, you start talking about real money pretty quickly. The research suggests that more than 16,000 UK exporters stopped exporting to the EU as a result of Brexit.

    Hansard source
37. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

    Rejoining the EU

    I thank the hon. Member for his optimism about the next Conservative Government. To be serious—and we must be, because this is a serious issue—research suggests that 16,000 UK exporters stopped exporting to the EU as a result of Brexit. That represents businesses in every single one of the constituencies represented in this room today, and across the whole House. Those trading with Europe are paying for the privilege. Since 2023, British businesses have had to obtain over 1 million multi-page export health certificates to trade with the EU and Northern Ireland, at a cost of anywhere between £90 million and £210 million. When it comes to security, opportunities to work more closely together were lost. This Government are choosing to take another path. The previous Administration made significant progress in strengthening relations with the EU, announcing a new common understanding at the first ever UK-EU summit in May last year. At the summit, the UK secured a new security and defence partnership agreement with the EU—a partnership that represents our joint commitment to the important issue of European security, which has been mentioned many times today. That is built on the long-standing commitment by the UK to support Ukraine, which is shared, I think, by all those in this House today and complements our cross-continent work to protect our NATO allies. That co-operation has been further strengthened by the recent agreement for the UK to join the EU’s Ukraine support loan initiative, which will bolster Ukraine’s defence while creating new opportunities for British defence firms, jobs and investment. The UK and the EU also agreed to work towards a sanitary and phytosanitary deal—what a tongue-twister that is! It is nearly as difficult as CPTPP, which I have managed to get out in one go.

    Hansard source
38. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

    Rejoining the EU

    The hon. Gentleman does me an honour if he imagines I will go beyond what the Prime Minister said this afternoon. I refer him to what the Prime Minister said, but—[Interruption.] I am coming to the point made by the hon. Member and others. The sanitary and phytosanitary deal will make food and agriculture trade with the EU cheaper and easier, something that I hope we would all welcome. That agreement, combined with the emissions trading systems linking measures, is set to add £9 billion a year to the UK economy by 2040, in a significant boost to growth. Finally, the UK and EU committed to working towards UK association to Erasmus+, which was asked about earlier, with a deal being struck on association less than a year later, opening up world-class opportunities for learners, educators, young people and communities from 2027. We are committed to building that process. As the Prime Minister announced earlier today, we will hold the next UK-EU summit on 20 November, when we want to strike important deals that will boost our economy, cut red tape, help our businesses grow and provide opportunities to young people denied since Brexit. These are important, concrete steps.

    Hansard source
39. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

    Rejoining the EU

    I will come on to touring musicians. If my hon. Friend wishes to write to me on the second matter, I would appreciate that. What is planned is the floor, not the ceiling, of our ambition. We must go further to restore a higher level of growth and prosperity for Britain. As the Prime Minister recently announced, he will lay out options for Britain’s long-term relationship with our European partners around the summit in November and find consensus on what is best for Britain. The views of Members of this House will be crucial as part of that process. The youth experience scheme was mentioned by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe, who I commend for the way in which he introduced the debate today. At the last summit the UK agreed to work towards a balanced youth experience scheme, with the UK creating new opportunities for cultural exchange between the UK and the EU. That will give young people the opportunity to broaden their horizons through travelling, experiencing other cultures and learning languages, as well as working and studying abroad, as it did for me when I briefly lived in France—although the less said about my French ability, the better. A question was raised about Chinese EVs. Europe and the UK face many of the same challenges, which is why it is vital to protect trade between us. On haulage, all UK nationals are bound by the 90/180-day Schengen area rule. The Government will of course continue to listen to the sectors impacted and advocate for UK nationals. I particularly enjoyed the well-made point from my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq) about the price of tulips—an impressive way of referring to her name in the Chamber. There are clear economic benefits of upcoming EU-UK deals that may bear some benefit there. I also enjoyed the reference by my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) to his nephew Freddy. This Government are committed to exploring how best to improve arrangements for touring artists across the EU and EU member states. However, challenges remain, as touring artists need to navigate visa requirements across EU member states and hauliers that transport equipment face stricter limitations on their type of movement within the EU. I also commend the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer); it is good to see her back in her place speaking up on behalf of her constituents. She referred to music venues in her constituency that are affected. The hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) asked about Erasmus. The UK will associate to Erasmus+ from January 1 and contribute around £570 million to the programme, which is down from the approximately £810 million that we would have paid under devolved terms. Reference was also made to the “Made in Europe” initiative, and we are listening to industry and actively engaging EU partners on it. We face the same global challenges, and we are clear that we should work together to bolster UK-EU supply chains and growth, rather than putting up barriers to trade in Europe. On a future relationship, the Prime Minister will say more about the path ahead for the UK and the EU around the summit, as I have said. He has been open about the fact that there are a range of options, and he intends to establish consensus around which option is best for Britain. He is clear that Brexit has damaged our economy and that, as we face a more dangerous world, we need a closer, stronger relationship with the EU. It is right to open up that discussion because, a decade on from Brexit, the country is not where it could be. In 2016, the people of Britain voted for change and full control, but Brexit has done more harm than good. As the PM said, “Sticking with the status quo is not good enough for Britain.” We must ensure that our relationship with the EU is fit for the challenges we face now and in the future.

    Hansard source
40. 12 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Ferguson

    Rejoining the EU

    My hon. Friend makes a compelling point. I will not commit to anything of that nature today, but I urge her to continue making the argument for that, as I am sure she will.

    Hansard source