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
1,498
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Conservative and Unionist Party

Sitting MPs
118
Entries, last 7 days
665
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Liberal Democrats

Sitting MPs
71
Entries, last 7 days
369
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Reform UK

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
28
Members
270,000 CLAIMED

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Scottish National Party

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
15
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Green Party

Sitting MPs
5
Entries, last 7 days
38
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Plaid Cymru

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

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

All parties, latest first

Showing every spoken contribution, including 11,997 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

  1. ParliamentLabourKirsteen Sullivan

    Budget Resolutions

    I will continue my speech, so that others can get in.<span id="656" class="column-number" data-column-number="656"></span> I am mindful that many people have high energy usage owing to health conditions and disabilities, so I would be grateful if the Minister outlined the support that those with health vulnerabilities will receive. I am also aware that many businesses continue to struggle with the high level of energy costs, especially manufacturers in energy-intensive sectors, so I would have liked to have seen an expansion of eligibility for the British industrial competitiveness scheme, and I hope the Chancellor will consider that. I also hope that the Scottish Government will take a leaf out of the Chancellor’s book, and replicate the cuts in business rates to give our high street businesses a boost. The Budget delivers a further £600 million for Scotland, amounting to over £18 billion more since Labour was elected in July 2024. I am calling on the Scottish Government to use that £600 million extra and invest in the services on which my constituents rely and which they use day in, day out. While we cannot predict every shock that comes from overseas, we can choose how we respond to them. We choose to protect families at the petrol pump and in their energy bills, and we choose to back British workers, British businesses and British manufacturing. That is what this Budget is about: giving my constituents greater security today, while building a stronger and more resilient economy for tomorrow.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLabourKim Johnson

    Topical Questions

    For decades, Liverpool has lived with the consequences of Thatcher’s sell-off of council housing and the large-scale stock transfer of properties leaving too many families without secure and genuinely affordable homes. Mayor Steve Rotheram’s North Docks mayoral development corporation set out a bold vision, with strong public backing. Will the Minister back the work of the MDC to support large-scale council house building in order to reverse the legacy of the past and tackle the housing crisis?

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLabourKevin McKenna

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I thank the hon. Member for securing this really important debate. I recently visited Bodylines, a salon and spa in the middle of Sittingbourne, which is run by Liza—with a z, not an s, just to confuse everyone—who made this point very strongly. Bodylines is a great salon that has been there for about 40 years—it is a well-embedded business in the town—and she used to offer lots of training places, but now she simply cannot because she is out-competed by venues that rent chairs by the hour to the pseudo self-employed.<span id="694" class="column-number" data-column-number="694"></span> Liza told me how that is a real threat to the future of the industry. My mother trained as a hairdresser in the ’60s before becoming a social worker. As the hon. Member said, these roles are vital for getting people into a whole range of employment opportunities, but without businesses that can support them, they will be gone forever. The pseudo self-employed roles will not persist, either. The biggest thing Liza raised with me was how much money from VAT the Government are losing. Those other venues are not charging VAT and the responsible self-employed are not paying it, so we are losing money in that way as well. This is something that, on every front, we have to change.

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLabourKevin McKenna

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    It has been interesting to listen to all the points that the Minister made about the potential negatives of a mandatory registration scheme, and the things that might not work. In terms of evidence, I would offer the fact that about 100 years ago, in the early 20th century, nursing was not a registered profession. <span id="700" class="column-number" data-column-number="700"></span>All those arguments are very familiar, and although people as notable as Florence Nightingale were opposed to nursing registration, it was seen as essential. A lot of the challenges that the Minister has identified were overcome—we would not conceive of nursing not being registered now, and I think that is true for other intimate professions such as beauty and hair.

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLabourKevin Bonavia

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    I welcome the principle of earned settlement, whereby contribution to our society is rewarded, and it is right that we reward our care workers. In our schools, our teachers need the support of their assistants. Will the Home Secretary say what support there will be for our teaching assistants?

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLabourKerry McCarthy

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    I welcome the change for care workers, but may I ask more about those whose five years have not worked out, for one reason or another? The Home Secretary says there will be another five-year route, but I met a care worker the other day who has injured her back because her employer did not respect health and safety rules, and she now cannot do that job. She has a master’s degree in financial management and is a specialist in AI. She knows that she has to work as a care worker, but will she really have to start again once her back has healed?

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLabourKate Dearden

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) on securing the debate, and I thank her for the constructive and determined way in which she has championed this issue in the House and through her presentation Bill. I also recognise her close work with her constituent Mike Taylor, whom she mentioned this evening, and whose business is an accredited outstanding provider of barbering apprenticeships. I pay tribute to him, and to the hairdressers and barbers whose experiences the hon. Member has shared with the House this evening. I was brought up around this industry. My mum was a hairdresser—I am very lucky that I can still persuade her to do my hair today—so I recognise how important it is to be a voice in Parliament for hair and beauty, which is an absolute powerhouse of an industry. I am proud to be the Minister responsible for personal care. Hair and beauty does not just make a significant £28 billion contribution to the economy and provide almost 600,000 jobs; it is also about the salon on the high street that brings people into town, as the hon. Member said. It supports our local communities, helping them to thrive. For many women, it often starts as a passion, a set of professional skills and the ambition to build something of their own, and that can grow into a successful business, creating employment and opportunities for others. With more than 85% of businesses in our sector owned by women, hair and beauty is a powerful example of female entrepreneurship, independence and resilience. Behind every salon is a story of hard work, skill, creativity and determination. I recognise the significance of our industry, which is made up mainly of women, and I thank them for all the support that they give to women across the country. The hon. Member mentioned that, when we get our hair done, they are often our therapists, and we walk out feeling amazing.<span id="697" class="column-number" data-column-number="697"></span> Let me turn to where we agree. The harms that the hon. Member described are real. Customers should feel safe and protected in a salon chair, and good employers should not be undercut by those who cheat and do not play by the same rules. Young people need a route into the profession, and criminals should not be hiding behind barber shopfronts on our high streets. The question before the House is not whether those problems matter—of course they do—but whether a mandatory register is the right way to fix them. I will take a number of her arguments in turn, explain where I would like to hear more evidence about what would work instead, and explain what we are prioritising. It is first worth being clear about what a register is. As the hon. Member mentioned, the Hairdressers (Registration) Act 1964 already provides for a register of qualified hairdressers and barbers. Making it mandatory would record that an individual holds a qualification. Although that would improve visibility, it would not inspect a salon, check who owns a business or where its money comes from, or decide whether somebody is genuinely self-employed. It would not create a single new apprenticeship place. That matters, because each of the harms that she and many other hon. Members have discussed comes from something other than a missing qualification. On consumer safety, I want to highlight two examples: ringworm and chemical burns, because these are distressing and I do not want to dismiss them for a moment. Ringworm comes from poor hygiene and infection control. A qualified stylist working with unclean equipment poses the same risk as an unqualified one. Chemical burns come from the unsafe use of hazardous products. Every salon—whoever works in it—is already legally required to control these risks under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the associated regulations, such as the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002. Local authorities already have the powers to enforce health and safety legislation and are responsible for managing hygiene standards in businesses. Where there is evidence that risks are not being properly managed, local authorities can intervene and take appropriate enforcement action to ensure that employers and customers are protected. A register would not send anyone through the door to check, but enforcement does, and where the evidence has shown serious risks of harm, the Government have acted. Last month we launched a consultation proposing that high-risk cosmetic procedures should be carried out only by qualified, regulated healthcare professionals, with providers registered with the Care Quality Commission and criminal penalties for breaches. We have also committed to a licensing scheme for lower-risk cosmetic procedures and have acted because there was strong evidence showing a scale of harm. So far we have not seen comparable evidence for hairdressing, but if the hon. Member has cases—she has raised some tonight—I want my officials to see them. The hon. Member is right that bogus self-employment, too, is unacceptable. Self-employment, as she mentioned, is a legitimate and long-standing part of the sector, and many workers value that flexibility in their way of working. But no employer should deny the basic rights of people by calling them self-employed when they are <span id="698" class="column-number" data-column-number="698"></span>not. Here, too, it is not clear how a register might help. A fully qualified registered barber could still be falsely self-employed. What will make a difference is fixing the employment status framework itself. We have published a consultation on targeted reforms, including a proposal of worker status and stronger enforcement. These proposals are designed with workers like those in hairdressing in mind. Alongside that, the important work of the Fair Work Agency now brings together employment rights enforcement into one place with a dedicated hidden economy team. I know that Fair Work Agency officials have met the sector. His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs will investigate where people have been misclassified for tax purposes and take action to recover the tax and national insurance owed. I am of course happy to keep the hon. Member updated on the employment status consultation and to discuss it further with her. The hon. Member spoke powerfully about apprenticeships. I will not pretend that the recent figures that she alluded to and that decline we have seen in apprenticeship starts is comforting—it is not. As she mentioned, hairdressing businesses play such an important role in employment and training opportunities, particularly for young people. That is why it is important to strengthen the sector’s skills pipeline for those opportunities for social mobility and career progression. The challenge that employers describe is the cost and capacity to take on and train a young person. It is not clear how a register that requires qualifications may help, and we are mindful of the costs for small businesses that do the training, which she referred to.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLabourKate Dearden

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I thank the hon. Member for sharing those examples from the representatives she meets. We are keen to engage with those and understand the impact. I have given my reflections on those concerns today, but it adds to my wider point that we want to hear that evidence and pick that up. That is why our focus in the meantime has been on helping those employers directly on apprenticeships, whether that is the £2,000 hiring payment for smaller employers taking on 16 to 24-year-old apprentices, a £3,000 youth jobs grant, no employer national insurance for apprentices under 25, or fully funded apprenticeship training for eligible under-25s. Those measures are important for driving up apprenticeships across the country. In particular, we are working with the sector on assessment reforms so that hair and beauty apprenticeships are rigorous, proportionate and trusted by employers. On money laundering, serious and organised crime damages our high streets and undermines honest businesses. I thank the hon. Member and my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for raising that issue, as tackling it is a priority for the Government. A criminal front can employ a registered barber as easily as anyone <span id="699" class="column-number" data-column-number="699"></span>else, and a register with reflections on who owns a business, where the money comes from and whether that could even lend a business respectability that it does not deserve, is a key consideration. My hon. Friend mentioned Operation Machinize, which since March 2025 has been led by the National Crime Agency. That has seen over 3,000 suspect high-street premises visited, and nearly 1,000 people arrested. We are building on that with a £30 million crackdown on cash-intensive businesses, including barber shops. That also includes £20 million for law enforcement, £6 million for trading standards, and a new cross-Government high street organised crime unit.

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLabourKate Dearden

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I know that my hon. Friend is working closely with colleagues across Government on this issue, and I thank him for his continued campaigning and advocacy. We must double the maximum duration of closure orders so that criminal businesses cannot simply reopen while investigations continue.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLabourKate Dearden

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention, and I hope that he and other colleagues hear that we want the same things. We want customers to be safe, workers to get the rights they are entitled to, young people to have a route into this brilliant profession, and criminals to have nowhere to hide on our high streets. As colleagues will have heard, I am not yet persuaded that a mandatory register would deliver those things, but I am open to evidence and I thank hon. Members for their offers this evening. I am also persuaded that enforcement, employment reform and direct support for employers will deliver. As the Barbers and Hairdressers (Registration) Bill is before the House, it would not be right for me to comment on its specific provisions this evening, but if the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole has evidence of harms that existing powers are not reaching, I would like my officials to look closely at that. I thank her for securing this debate, and all colleagues for their contributions and for championing a sector that matters so much to our communities. <em>Question put and agreed to.</em>

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLabourJudith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    With an immediate three-minute time limit, I call James MacCleary.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLabourJudith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    Order. Members have been very disciplined with interventions, but they may wish to note that several Members have absented themselves from the Chamber without any notice.

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLabourJosh Newbury

    Topical Questions

    <Question HRSContentId="{53B43989-6B20-41CC-A0CA-76FCEC9B44D5}">T8. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{7C16F4A4-268C-4555-A30C-88572226DEE2}"></QuestionText>This summer’s wildfires showed us how incredible but stretched our firefighters are. Their ability to prepare for and confront fires and floods will match the ferocity <span id="574" class="column-number" data-column-number="574"></span>of what they face only if we in this House do our part. Following the Budget and ahead of the spending review, will the Department make strong representations to the Treasury so that wildfire risk can be taken into account when fire and rescue budgets are set?</Question>

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLabourJosh Newbury

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    The Home Secretary is absolutely right to talk about the British people’s sense of fairness; I heard about exactly that on the doorstep in Cannock Chase just this weekend. Not only did the Conservatives let millions into Britain over just a few years, but they left indefinite leave to remain at five years, regardless of someone’s contribution. Does the Home Secretary agree that these changes will introduce fairness, and that those who want to settle here will have to make a fair and positive contribution?

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLabourJosh Newbury

    Budget Resolutions

    In this third day of the Budget debate, I worry about repeating what has already been said, so I will focus on two issues of particular importance to my communities in Cannock Chase. Before I do so, briefly, I welcome the cost of living support in this Budget—£100 back on council tax, VAT kept off electricity bills for longer, standing charges taken off gas and the continuation of the fuel duty freeze. Those measures will not solve every financial pressure, but they will provide welcome relief at a time when it is needed most. Let me turn to my beautiful home county of Staffordshire, which, thanks to this Government, will soon be able to catch up with the likes of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire with the announcement of a mayoral strategic authority. That is a massive opportunity, particularly for our towns, which, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) always says, must be at the heart of the national growth and renewal that this Government stand for. Our big cities have done well, but it is the turn of the towns, and having those powers and the funding that comes with devolution gives us the tools we need to turn our potential into reality. Perhaps surprisingly to many, our towns have, on average, more than twice the proportion of their workforce employed in manufacturing as our cities, at around 9% compared with 4%, yet employment growth over the past decade has been almost twice as high in cities, at 10.7%, compared with just 5.4% in our towns. We cannot seriously talk about rebalancing our economy while allowing that gap to persist, but that requires investment and, crucially, proper transport connections. For too many people, particularly young people and those without access to a car, getting to work, college or an apprenticeship remains unnecessarily difficult. That is where devolution matters, because a mayoral authority with meaningful powers over transport, skills and economic development gives Staffordshire the opportunity to join those things up and be the masters of our own destiny. I hope that it will also bring some much-needed stability to our county’s leadership. Since last May, Staffordshire county council has had not one, not two, not three, but four leaders, courtesy of the chaos of Reform UK. Staffordshire needs a little less political musical chairs and a lot more long-term focus on the priorities of our communities.<span id="680" class="column-number" data-column-number="680"></span> Let me turn to the second issue: the mineworkers’ pension scheme. As the proud representative of nearly 1,000 MPS members, I will always raise my voice in support of those who risked their lives to power our nation. Alongside them and my fellow coalfield Labour MPs, we pressed the Government to release the £1.2 billion guarantor’s fund, end the standstill mechanism and ensure that all future surpluses go to those who earned that money in the first place. The MPS investment reserve was returned to members by this Labour Government two years ago, and the Chancellor’s decision in this Budget to end surplus sharing and the standstill are major steps forward. However, we are deeply disappointed that the Budget did not include the transfer of the guarantor’s fund—a measure that would have put money back into the pockets of our retired miners. There was a clear expectation that this would be done, finally righting the wrongs of the past 32 years. I welcome the Chancellor saying from the Dispatch Box that it will be done, but we must never forget that this money came from the graft of our miners —it is their deferred wages, and it belongs in their bank accounts. With 100 MPS members passing away every week, we must move as quickly as possible, and we certainly cannot wait for next year’s Budget. This Budget brought forward support with the cost of living, and it is allowing Staffordshire to take control of its own destiny. I wish it had sealed full justice for our MPS members, but we are now so close to ending their fight, and they can count me as an ally right until the very end.

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLabourJosh Fenton-Glynn

    Budget Resolutions

    For my constituents and those across the country, life is hard, and it has not shown signs of getting easier. The previous Government were the first in decades to preside over a fall in the standard of living and, with Trump’s war in the middle east, things are unlikely to get better as quickly as we would like. That is why I welcome the support being provided to households facing higher <span id="671" class="column-number" data-column-number="671"></span>energy costs. For many families, an extra £100 will not transform their circumstances overnight—no one is pretending otherwise—but every pound matters, and that support matters, too. In Calderdale, almost nine out of 10 houses are expected to be eligible for the £100 household energy payment. That means that the overwhelming majority of my constituents will receive direct support this winter. For many people, the support will ease some of the pressures on their household budgets at exactly the moment they need that the most. I welcome the expansion of the warm home discount, too. By widening eligibility, the Government have almost doubled the number of households in the scheme to 6 million. That means millions more families receiving £150 off their energy bills this winter. Too often, those on the lowest incomes have faced what is known as the poverty premium, made famous by Terry Pratchett with his “Captain Vimes’s Boots” theory of economics: the less money you have, the more things cost. We see that in our insurance costs, in the costs of credit and, importantly, in the cost of fuel. That is why ending standing charges will make a difference, as those who use less energy will pay less. Helping those households is not simply about fairness; it is also good economics as the money from these measures will not sit unused, stored thousands of miles away in the Cayman Islands, but be spent in local communities on local high streets, helping local people. People will use it to pay bills, buy essentials and support local businesses, which will contribute to their high streets. The same principle applies to our businesses across Calder Valley. Business owners are ambitious to innovate, are determined to succeed and want it to be easier to invest, grow and create jobs. Whether because of energy costs, red tape or being locked out of Government contracts, for many of them the main concern has been staying afloat, not growing or taking on new people. That is why I welcome some of the changes to business rates announced in the Budget. Raising the threshold for small business rate relief for retail, hospitality and leisure from £12,000 to £18,000 means that 70,000 additional businesses will pay no business rates at all. In Calder Valley, that will make a huge difference to our collection of independent shops, cafés and pubs. Speaking of pubs, I am proud to see support for Britain’s small independent breweries. Calder Valley is home to fantastic independent breweries including Eagles Crag and Vocation. I am proud to have made a significant contribution to them over the years, but finding room to grow has not been easy. The support announced in the Budget will be welcomed across the brewing sector. While some Budgets look worse as time goes on—the famous omnishambles Budget and the Liz Truss Budget among them—this is one that will look better, with its help for small businesses and support for households. This Budget backs working people. This Budget backs British industry. It backs communities in Calder Valley, and I am proud to back it.

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLabourJosh Fenton-Glynn

  18. ParliamentLabourJosh Dean

    Social Media: Ban for Under-16s

    It is a pleasure to serve with you in the chair this afternoon, Sir Roger. I thank my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for his opening speech and the petitioners for bringing this important issue forward. There are a range of views on this debate, and it is so important that we listen to the young people who want us to look in detail at what the impact might be on them. It is absolutely right that we look at the concerns raised by all the young people, adults, teachers, parents and families on the impact of social media on children’s wellbeing, mental health and development. It is important that we recognise that they are genuine concerns shared by many. I was rather looking forward to saying that I am the youngest Member in the room, but that claim has been stolen by my hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling). However, I am one of the few MPs who grew up with social media. Like many of my friends, I accessed social media before the age of 13. I have seen at first hand how rapidly evolving platforms have given rise to harmful content, misinformation and addiction, affecting adults as well as young people. The vast majority of colleagues in this place can remember a time before social media. Today’s generation of young people have not had that benefit. They have grown up with it, with their lives intertwined with the digital world. Parents, teachers and young people have every right to be angry. When children are exposed to harmful content, online bullying, unrealistic expectations, addictive platform design and material that damages their mental health, it is no wonder that people feel we have not <span id="275WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="275WH"></span>acted quickly enough in this place. I remember being a young person at school desperate for the Government to do more, and they did not. Parents are right to demand action. Parliament has a responsibility to respond. The question is not about whether we should act—of course we should. It is about what will be most effective, and it is so important that we get this right. Earlier this year, I held a series of roundtables with secondary school pupils across Hertford and Stortford to hear directly from them about their experiences online. Many described social media as a source of anxiety. Others spoke about exposure to graphic content and misinformation—online pressures that previous generations simply did not have to navigate. The conversations I had with young people also highlighted that social media is not simply a straightforward source of risk. It can be a vital source of information, connection and support. Indeed, I first became politically engaged through the online world because, after the referendum in 2016, I was encouraged to join a protest to lower the voting age to 16, and I stood outside here with other young people calling for the voting age to be lowered. I would not have been there, and I would not be here had I not come across that through the online world. Many of the young people I spoke to shared similar experiences and stressed that, too often, this debate overlooks the positive role that social media can play. When safe and well regulated, it can help to combat isolation and foster meaningful connections, particularly for those in semi-rural communities like mine. It can provide a lifeline for young people who are LGBTQ+, neurodiverse, or living with a mental health condition, helping them to understand their identity and access peer support networks. Many of those young people will be on long waiting lists for traditional services. Those online communities provide an essential source of support in the interim, and I worry that a blanket ban could risk pulling the rug out from under those young people and removing the safety net altogether. One of the strongest messages I heard from young people was that they actually want us to do something to tackle online harms. Those young people were not white-knuckled, clinging on to their phones. They were telling us about their experience and that they want us to act. That should mean looking seriously at stronger age assurance, tougher regulation of harmful content, greater transparency around algorithms, meaningful parental controls and restrictions on deliberately addictive features. What it should mean is that we take the fight to the social media companies. I am, as of recently, 27 years old, and I have been waiting for this for a long time; young people today should not have to wait as long as I have. I am cautious about the idea of a blanket ban. It is important that, whatever we do, we get it right. We must ask ourselves what happens next. If mainstream platforms become unavailable, how confident are we that young people will simply stop using online services altogether? Do we risk pushing them towards smaller, less-regulated platforms, where safeguards are weaker and oversight is more difficult? We should recognise the role that those platforms now play in civic and democratic engagement. For many young people, social media is a gateway to current affairs, public debate and political participation. This is about not just learning about <span id="276WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="276WH"></span>politics from the online world, but engaging with it from the online world and holding politicians like us to account. While protecting children from harm, which I absolutely agree must be the priority, we need to be careful not to close off legitimate opportunities for engagement.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLabourJosh Dean

    Social Media: Ban for Under-16s

    I quite agree. Another colleague touched on the cliff edge: the idea that the day someone turns 16, they might get access to social media for the first time and then head off to the polling station to vote. It is right that we have more education on media literacy in schools but hands-on, practical experience in a safe and regulated online space is important as well. We have to consider how restricting young people’s access to this source of information might affect their long-term democratic participation. If we are serious about encouraging the next generation to take part in our democracy, we have to bring young people with us on this journey, not exclude them from it. I commend the Government on their engagement with young people, parents, teachers and families across the country. Young people I spoke to were very pleased that their MP came to speak to them and hear their views, but the feedback from young people since the announcement has been less positive. It is so important that we bring them with us as we do this. During the pandemic, we pushed more of young people’s lives online. They had no say. Education, social interaction, public services and democratic engagement increasingly moved into digital spaces. Many young people developed the habits of accessing news, discussing current affairs and engaging with campaigns through the very platforms we are now debating. We cannot rip them back out without giving them a proper say again. Protecting children from harm must be our priority, but I worry that if the answer is simply to ban access, we risk alienating the generation we seek to protect. They will not forgive us if we get this wrong, nor will their parents. If we shut them out of conversations, information and opportunities for participation that increasingly shape modern civic life, we should not be surprised if they choose not to engage going forward. The challenge before us is not simply to restrict access to a list of platforms, but to create an online environment in which young people can participate safely, responsibly and confidently as future citizens. Yes, we should act. Parents are right to expect action. Young people themselves are asking for action. But let us focus on the features, the business models and the failures of regulation that are causing harm rather than assuming that a blanket ban is the only solution available and putting the pressure of companies’ failures on the shoulders of young people. Will the Minister update the House on how the Department is assessing evidence from countries, such as Australia, that have pursued a social media ban for young people? Will he confirm that restrictions will be regularly reviewed and remain adaptable, given the current pace of technological change?

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLabourJosh Dean

    Social Media: Ban for Under-16s

    We agree on the cause; it is the methods that we have different views on. I recognise my hon. Friend’s point about the development of the brain, but should the onus not be on social media companies to clean up their act across the piece, so that every 16-year-old accessing social media, and indeed everyone over 16, is free from the harms currently found there? Should the aim not be to make sure that the harms are gone, not that the under-16s are gone?

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLabourJonathan Hinder

    Budget Resolutions

    Like many of my colleagues, I am delighted with the new Prime Minister’s clear ambition to reindustrialise Britain, which can drive economic prosperity in areas that really need it. My constituency is an example of somewhere that can drive and reap the benefits from this reindustrialisation. In Pendle and Clitheroe we do not trade financial derivatives; we make aeroplanes, furniture, chemicals and cement, and we produce food. Not only does manufacturing make up over a quarter of the jobs, but they are often the best jobs, too. However, the truth is that, as I speak, Britain is still deindustrialising. We are as vulnerable to global supply shocks as any major economy without the sovereign capability in key sectors to look after our basic needs. I am glad to see the Chancellor deliver immediate relief for households, but in the long run we must not just treat the symptoms of this failed economic model—with fiscal transfers patching up the gaps—but overhaul it entirely. The British economy remains too reliant on the City, foreign money and importing increasingly expensive essentials. True economic security can only come from the British economy being productive enough to convert world-leading innovation and research into valuable industrial output. I was pleased to see some of the announcements at the Budget last week reflect this challenge, with measures including: serious public investment into productive British industries via the National Wealth Fund and the British Business Bank; an acknowledgement of the need for cheaper power and protections offered to energy-intensive manufacturers; support for vocational apprenticeships, which is essential for skills development in manufacturing and aligned sectors; and a long-term partnership with Rolls-Royce, whose Barnoldswick site in my constituency provides well-paid jobs for hundreds of my constituents—a reminder that Britain could still be home to world-leading industrial champions in highly competitive sectors. But there is a lot more to be done. We must be clear about what we mean when we talk about reindustrialisation. The clue is in the name—it is about industry. Reindustrialisation must mean increasing physical production of goods needed at home and abroad. I hope that we will see more detail on how we will achieve this in the forthcoming 10-year plan. As a short-term measure, I would like to see an expansion of the British industrial competitiveness scheme to a much wider range of manufacturing firms in Britain. We cannot expect our productive sectors to thrive and grow with energy costs as high as they currently are. Over the long term, we must improve our energy sovereignty by making it cheaper to build nuclear power stations urgently and reducing our reliance on gas imports by using our own North sea supply.<span id="629" class="column-number" data-column-number="629"></span> I would also urge the Government to include in the 10-year plan an ambitious plan for rebuilding our defence industrial base, alongside a continued commitment to British procurement. Building our domestic capacity for defence and other critical sectors can be supported beyond procurement through investment in equity stakes, taking control of essential inputs, as the Government did with British Steel, and accelerating planning decisions for key sectors. So many of our challenges stem from a lack of quality work in productive industries. That is not talked about enough.

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLabourJonathan Hinder

    Budget Resolutions

    I am sorry, but I am rushing through my speech.

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLabourJonathan Hinder

  24. ParliamentLabourJonathan Hinder

    Budget Resolutions

    I definitely think that the House needs to come back to plan 2 loans. That will become a bigger and bigger issue. So many of our challenges stem from a lack of quality work in productive industries. We do not talk about the link enough, but high streets are crippled by a lack of good jobs that provide a decent income and give people money in their pockets to spend in their area. Young people are stuck at home, unable to get a place of their own and start a family, and we see the selling-off of British assets to fund a current account deficit. There is something even more fundamental at play when we talk about reindustrialisation. Sometimes in these economic policy debates we lose a sense of what really matters in life. Why is it that so often those jobs that appear to be the most socially useless are paid the most and those that contribute something so important to our society are often paid the least? If our economy is driving those perverse incentives that push bright young people into careers trading securities—some people call them “BS jobs”—we had better change those incentives, had we not? We need an economic framework that, instead of incentivising rent seeking, incentivises productive, meaningful work, providing people with not just a sense of satisfaction, pride and a good living but something useful to society—imagine that? I know that this is not easy, but our economy cannot go on consuming too much and producing too little. I urge the Chancellor and his Ministers to ensure that reindustrialisation, which has struck such a chord with the British people, is turned into a fully-fledged plan for national reconstruction.

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLabourJonathan Davies

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    I look forward to chewing through the details of what the Home Secretary has published today, but it is good to hear her talk about the role of societal contribution as a route to residency and about the allowances for care workers. Some 4.2 million economic migrants came to this country under the previous Government, while we have hundreds of thousands of British young people not in education, employment or training. What conversations is she having across Government so that our immigration intake marries up to what we need in our labour market and economy?

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLabourJohn McDonnell

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    Because of the nature of my constituency, I work with a large number of people who come here—often on the boats—and their families as well, and the years of waiting for <span id="595" class="column-number" data-column-number="595"></span>security have an impact on their mental health. I would like some clarity on the third paragraph of page 4 of the Home Secretary’s statement, where she says: “The standard qualifying period for all refugees who have not come by a safe and legal route will become 20 years. A further 10 years will be added for those who entered the country by an illegal method, such as by small boat.” I have not misread that. Does it meant that earned settlement could take 30 years for some people?

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLabourJohanna Baxter

    Budget Resolutions

    The cost of living is the No. 1 issue that is raised with me on the doorstep by constituents across Paisley and Renfrewshire South, so there is much to welcome in this Budget, which gives much-needed breathing space for many working households. We Labour Members do not think that the increase in the national minimum wage is a bad thing—it is a good thing. The increase in the mileage rate will help working people, and I am glad that the Chancellor has extended the VAT cut for energy bills and will look to abolish gas standing charges. I also welcome the £100 household energy payment for households in council tax bands A to D, and I am hopeful that the SNP will pass this on to people across my constituency.

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLabourJohanna Baxter

    Budget Resolutions

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that the SNP should pass on that much-needed change. I also note that the Budget provides an additional £600 million for the Scottish Government, and I hope that they will actually spend it on improving our public services. Today’s debate focuses on achieving good growth in every postcode, an ambition I wholeheartedly support. One route to growth in postcodes PA1, PA2, PA3 and PA4—I could go on, but Members get my drift—is revitalising our high street in Paisley. Paisley is Scotland’s largest town, and we have a shovel-ready project in the <span id="681" class="column-number" data-column-number="681"></span>middle of our high street that received planning permission four years ago, which is regenerating the Paisley Centre. Realising that ambition needs Governments to come together, but it could bring 330 jobs to our area and breathe life into our high street. If Treasury colleagues would like to see that potential for themselves, I would be very happy to show them around the area. Our Government were elected on a clear manifesto commitment to end the need for emergency food parcels. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on ending the need for food banks, I know that food banks provide a lifeline when people have nowhere else to turn, but emergency food provision should never become a normal part of life in Britain. A report published last week by the Trussell Trust laid out the scale of the challenge. Some 9 million people across the UK—more than the entire populations of Wales and Scotland combined—are at severe risk of hardship and needing to turn to a food bank. Hardship does not happen in isolation; it is driven by inadequate incomes, the high cost of essentials, and a lack of the support that people need in their communities. We also know that some groups of people are at higher risk of hunger and hardship than others. People who have disabilities, those who are in low-paid or insecure work, and children remain disproportionately affected by severe hardship. As such, I hope that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will reaffirm this Government’s commitment to end the need for emergency food parcels, and ensure that the upcoming 10-year plan sets out a clear path towards tackling the severe hardship that blights our communities. The Government are rightly steadfast in our support for Ukraine. This House will be aware that I have campaigned extensively on the forcible deportation of Ukrainian children by Russia, and it was a pleasure to work with my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) when he was the Minister responsible for that issue. We worked on establishing a tracing pilot that provided vital intelligence on the whereabouts of thousands of Ukrainian children who had been taken by Russia. Save Ukraine is the leading non-governmental organisation working on the return and rehabilitation of Ukrainian children. When I met Save Ukraine representatives in September, they told me that the UK has been a leading partner. As of this morning, that practical support has helped them return 1,887 children. I therefore warmly welcome the announcement in the Budget that the Government have committed an additional £3 million to support the tracing programme until at least 2028, because the defence of Ukraine must also ensure the defence of its future. By committing to this vital work, we are doing just that. I thank the Chancellor for those measures.

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Nolan Principles

    Standards in local government are important. The Localism Act 2011 requires every local authority in England to adopt a code of conduct that conforms to the Nolan principles. The Government are committed to a whole system reform of the local government standards framework to make it stronger and more efficient, including with stronger sanctions, and we will legislate when parliamentary time allows.

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Nolan Principles

    My hon. Friend raises concerning point. I thank my hon. Friend and Councillor Ben Weston too for highlighting the issue. I obviously cannot get into the specifics of the case—local authorities are independent employers, so individual employment decisions are a matter for them—but I am concerned that there is a pattern of conduct and behaviour in Reform councils that we would not usually find acceptable, and we should not allow it to be normalised.

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Nolan Principles

    I know that the hon. Gentleman raised the same point at Prime Minister’s questions last week, and it is clearly concerning. There should not be that type of conflict. I have written to him today, and he should have a copy of the letter in his office. We take such matters seriously. I have asked the Department to conduct an urgent best-value assessment of the local authority. Meetings are taking place with officials and the council’s chief executive to find out exactly what is going on.

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Nolan Principles

    My hon. Friend has raised this matter on a number of occasions, and I hope she received a copy of my letter on Friday after raising it further. The issue is very serious. In addition to the points I have made about the rapid best-value review and the conversations taking place with the council’s chief executive, I can also say that our officials will be contacting the external auditor to understand more details of the case.

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Nolan Principles

    For the avoidance of doubt, I should point out that the Prime Minister is always right. I will take no lectures from Reform on standards and conduct in local government. We hear repeated complaints about the conduct of Reform-led councils across the country—about the way in which they treat their staff, the way in which they treat each other, and the way in which, quite often, the toxicity that we see online is brought into council chambers.

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Nolan Principles

    The only pressure on us is the pressure that we place on ourselves to do the job well. As I said in my statement last week, there are no easy decisions on local reorganisation, and there is no perfect solution for most counties in England. What the Government have to do is balance competing interests and ensure that we assess the evidence base objectively, that we challenge when there may be gaps in the information provided, and, ultimately, that we make the best possible decision, and that is what we are getting on with doing.

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Pride in Place: Wales

    Twenty-two local authorities in Wales, including Monmouthshire, have received £34.5 million through the Pride in Place impact fund, resulting in over 200 projects to support high streets, public spaces and community facilities. The Pride in Place programme will also deliver £280 million to areas in Wales over the next 10 years, with local communities deciding how the money should be spent, helping to restore pride in local places.

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Pride in Place: Wales

    My hon. Friend is a fantastic champion for her constituency, and she shows the difference a local MP can make when they have a real vision for their constituency and support local communities to realise their potential. The Government are committed to making sure that communities across the UK have the tools needed to get things done in their areas. In addition to the Pride in Place funding programme, we have announced a further £210 million package to support high streets and community assets. Although that relates to England, the Welsh Government also receive corresponding funding through the Barnett formula that they can allocate on their own priorities.

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    High Streets: Vape Shops and Barber Shops

    We are giving local leaders and communities more control over their high street mix of shops and their <span id="567" class="column-number" data-column-number="567"></span>high streets through the “Hope on the High Street” strategy, which the Secretary of State just referred to. We are also consulting on requiring planning permission for new vape shops and a new licensing regime for vape shops and tobacco retailers. The Budget confirmed that we will remove business rates relief from vape shops and adult gaming centres to better target that relief on businesses that support thriving high streets. Furthermore, we are investing £30 million per year in funding for agencies such as trading standards to tackle these dodgy shops.

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    High Streets: Vape Shops and Barber Shops

    The point the hon. Gentleman raises is exactly why the Government are taking action. People look at how our high streets and town centres have been transformed, and they see in plain sight that something just is not right. They see the type of convenience stores he is talking about, and the barber shops and the vape shops, and they know like we know that what is going on inside those premises is not lawful. The connection to human trafficking and other illegal activity is quite clear from the investigations that have taken place. The additional funding we have provided is about targeting it to where the assessed need is, but to be clear every police force and every trading standards department should be prioritising this matter as a matter of course.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    High Streets: Vape Shops and Barber Shops

    My hon. Friend raises a fair point. There is a world of difference between a routine trading standards visit, which is about assessing routine compliance, and not giving organised criminals a heads-up to clear the store out of any evidence, so I will certainly take away her point and confirm the next steps in writing. I put on record my thanks for the work she has been doing on this issue for a long time.

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentLabourJim McMahon

    Rural Local Authorities: Funding

    Under this Labour Government, rural authorities in England will see a total increase in core spending power of £958 million from 2024-25 to 2028-29—an increase of 21.1%. As a result of the fair funding reforms, nine in 10 councils will receive funding that more broadly matches their assessed relative need by the end of the multi-year settlement, up from around a third before the reforms took place.

    Hansard source