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

12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

   Youth Parliament: Government Support

   My hon. Friend is making a brilliant speech on an important topic. On ensuring that young people’s voices are heard at the very heart of Government, does he agree that the Government should consider appointing a Minister for the younger and future generations, with a team of staff whose sole job is to listen to those voices, bring them to the Cabinet table and assess all policy, legislation and proposed legislation through the lens of whether it gives a voice to young people and takes their interests into account?

   Hansard source
2. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

   Summer Health and Resilience

   I warmly welcome the Secretary of State to her place. She rightly said that the NHS is its staff, so I pay tribute to the NHS staff in my constituency. Obviously, there are the doctors and nurses, but there are some people who do not always get mentioned, such as the allied health professionals, the caterers, the cleaners, the administrators, the managers and, may I say, the porters, since I was one in my 20s. They all do a fantastic job, and we owe them a debt of gratitude. I use those services in my constituency, and they are improving thanks to the work of this Government since July 2024. However, there is obviously much further to go, particularly in urgent care services. In my constituency of Rugby, like in many towns, there are urgent treatment centres that do a very good job, and I am very grateful to the Government for their investment in those. May I make a plea for some of the £450 million that the Secretary of State mentioned in her statement? Will she take a look at the urgent care centre in Rugby, where my constituents feel that more could be provided? I fully agree with them, so I hope that she can at least take a look at that.

   Hansard source
3. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John McDonnell

   Draft Code of Practice on the Right of Trade Unions to Access Workplaces; Draft Trade Unions (Right to Access Workplaces) Regulations 2026

   I apologise, as I will need to speak and then leave as I have a Bill to present in the Chamber—I am keeping my eye on the business. I declare my interests as well; I am the chair of the RMT parliamentary group. I want to raise one of the RMT’s concerns. I welcome the Minister’s commitment to see this all through—it is an excellent piece of work—and to have a review very shortly afterwards. I want to put something on the agenda for that review, if that is possible. Let me go through some of the details. The union itself, and the seafarers’ unions overall, welcome the new regulations but they do not improve the situation for access for seafarers. In fact, they simply repeat the restrictions we already have in section 8 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, which was introduced at the height of the Conservative Government’s introduction of anti-trade union legislation and attack on trade union rights. The regulations now mean that trade unions will only be able to improve access on UK-flagged ships, whereas in the recent period we have seen a large number of companies flagging in other countries. That means, for example, that the RMT will not, as a result of the access regulations, be able to organises seafarers on P&O Ferries, Irish Ferries, Cobelfret and a whole range of other merchant ships registered overseas, even though they call at UK ports on a daily basis. When this issue was raised in the House of Lords, in an amendment tabled by our friend Lord John Hendy back in 2025, Baroness Jones gave the commitment that the Government would “explore how they could secure the objectives behind my noble friend’s amendment.”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 21 July 2025; Vol. 848, c. 69.] At that point, John Hendy’s amendment sought to apply the provisions of the access arrangements to seafarers working on ships with a sufficient link to Great Britain. That link, as the Minister will know, was 120 calls at an individual port. Ideally, that is where we want to go. It is just a matter of wanting to get in the review, as rapidly as possible, the right form of words to give the protection that the Government intend for all workers. We do not want to be in a situation where seafarers remain vulnerable, as they have been, for example, at P&O.

   Hansard source
4. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John McDonnell

   Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

   I apologise to my right hon. Friend; I should have checked this before the debate. The proposed new section 61G refers to priorities and objectives of the Secretary of State, which include a requirement for the Secretary of State to issue a document setting out those priorities and objectives for the CAA. That is to be the guiding light from the Government to the CAA. The provision specifies, for instance, how the Government and the CAA are to consult and how it will take on board environmental principles. Is that new document to be published after the passing of the legislation, or have I missed something and a document has already been produced? If so, I apologise, but this seems quite fundamental to me. If there is to be a revised document, can my right hon. Friend give us a timetable for its publication?

   Hansard source
5. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John McDonnell

   Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

   First, I want to mention the events of yesterday. I will usually get letters from constituents all over the country about such experiences, because Heathrow is located in my constituency and they therefore think I am responsible for it—I usually send apologetic replies back. Behind the suffering that people went through will be a large number of staff who were working incredibly hard at all levels of the organisation to put it right. This happens on every occasion. Nevertheless, NATS management needs to be held to account. The Secretary of State has said that she will expect a report within six months, so it would be helpful to have statements during that period to reassure people about exactly what did happen, as well as covering the actions that need to be taken.

   Hansard source
6. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John McDonnell

   Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

   I think that goes to the heart of the debate that we are having, which is about levels of accountability within our structures themselves. NATS is accountable to the CAA, but who is the CAA accountable to? I have raised with the Secretary of State proposed new section 61G of the Civil Aviation Act 1982, on the priorities and objectives of the Secretary of State in relation to aviation, which sets out that they must issue a document that is a directive to the CAA. The reason I asked about the proposed new clause is that, given the way it is drafted, I thought we were eventually going to move towards a more expansive document that would set out in detail some of the issues, particularly on the environment, for my interest, but also service delivery and so on. In fact, the document is currently simply a letter, a couple of pages long, that will be sent on a regular basis, usually annually, and laid before Parliament. I thought that this legislation would be useful in giving us something more substantial; something that would be consulted on in more detail; and something that would set out a more detailed direction to the CAA as to how it should implement its responsibilities and role, as a result of which the CAA would then become more accountable to the Secretary of State and therefore to this House. The point is that when things go wrong, actions are agreed, but we never really get the substance of the follow-up on those actions. That is the problem. I will just raise another example that people might remember taking place at Heathrow, which is when the substation went up in flames, and we then discovered that the fall-back operations were not working effectively either. There is a real vulnerability for the future. I think we need a bit more of an authoritative role for this House, in terms of how the Secretary of State can influence the CAA and make it more accountable. That is the main point I wanted to make. I do not think that people realise the massive power that the CAA has and the implications that has for the lives and health of literally millions of people when it determines flight paths and standards of performance. The legislation needs further debate on other aspects as well, but I do not think we have got much further in establishing an effective structure for airspace decision making. There is very little independent monitoring in the decision making, and it becomes impossible to challenge, as the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) said, because local communities do not have the resources for judicial review—they are just on their own. There does not seem to be the basic accountability mechanism that we would expect of other bodies performing similar public duties.

   Hansard source
7. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·John McDonnell

   Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

   I fully agree, and let me also say that wheelchair compensation is significant in this legislation. Most of us have dealt with cases like that. Going back to accountability in the process, a number of different organisations have provided us with notes on the legislation. The Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise, which I have worked with for over 20 years now, provided us with a helpful note. HACAN reminds us that when the CAA sets out airspace changes, the CAA oversees the progress of the stages and approves whether the consultation—its own consultation—has been adequate or not. In addition, it decides whether the proposals may proceed. It operates its own complaints route, and complaints on issues around airspace are almost impenetrable. The CAA has immense power, and it seems to be a law unto itself in many instances. It has been said in the House today that the lack of consultation is one of its main vulnerabilities. New flight paths are already being prepared, discussed and considered. In the Heathrow expansion, when Heathrow puts forward its plan for a third runway, it will not be Heathrow that says what the flight paths will be. It cannot be; it is now the airport service that has been set up under NATS. In all my experience with Heathrow, I have never known a thorough and adequate consultation process to take place with regard to the development of airport routes. I was hoping that we might get more detail in the legislation. That is why I come back to the issue of the Secretary of State’s document, which could be a really powerful mechanism. We could determine, through debates here—therefore, instructions to the Secretary of State—how the CAA will operate in the future. On the environment, I feel that there is a real lack of firm duties and responsibilities set out in the legislation and guidance procedure that takes into account the health and wellbeing of people and communities. Reference has been made to noise. I cannot believe that we are still in the same situation where we have different noise criteria used in different mechanisms when it comes to decisions being taken. The Gatwick and Luton developments are using two different criteria—two different levels—from which they place the restrictions. I have gone through the debates and discussions we have had over time and, as some hon. Members will know, we have gone from 57 dB to 53 dB, and then to 43 dB, which is the World Health Organisation’s figure—for the life of me, I do not understand why we do not respect its expertise in all this—and we apply different measures for different decisions, which are driven largely by factors other than the health consequences for people and the impact of noise. The hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) mentioned the all-party parliamentary group meeting we had on Monday, when we received the latest research. May I put on record my thanks to Dr Charlotte Clark, professor of environmental epidemiology and population health? She has done research on all of this over the years and is the expert. She looked at some of the health implications at the lowest levels of noise that we have been debating, and there was an element of shock for some of us: we knew about the cardiovascular impact, but we now know much more about the impact on mental health in particular. One of the issues that has come out of our discussions—this includes the Heathrow expansion consultation—is that the latest research on noise and health impacts has not been sufficiently monetised in the discussions and consultations that have taken place. So decision making—particularly on the latest Heathrow expansion proposals—could be on the basis of health impact monetisation as a result of increased noise whose level should be perhaps four times what the Government have put forward so far. Our constituents are becoming increasingly aware of the health impacts of noise in particular and are demanding greater protections However, from the legislation we are debating, I cannot see how those greater protections will be translated unless we have a stronger capacity in this House to determine the guidance given to the CAA and the parameters set for it in the decision-making process. I will give hon. Members this example of the debates that have taken place. For the aviation policy framework, we dealt with 57 dB. For the survey of noise attitudes, we looked at 54 dB. We then went to 51 dB and, as I said, 43 dB in the aviation noise attitudes survey and the aviation night-time noise effects study analyses, which relate to the World Health Organisation. We cannot keep going on without a proper noise standard applicable across our whole decision-making process that reflects the latest research on health impacts. I do not think we are there at the moment. I am pleased with the legislation, because there are some meritorious proposals that will no doubt improve the passenger experience, but it really does not take into account the community experience and the impact it will have. That is why the running theme is that somehow— I will table amendments with others—we have got to get a greater level of accountability, a greater level of transparency and a greater level of empowerment of those communities who are impacted. The proposal by the hon. Member for Horsham for an ombudsman is one mechanism that could be used and could be helpful as a longstop. At the moment, when people in my constituency are faced with these problems, they do not know where to go; it is as simple as that. Finally, the debate that we will have on Heathrow expansion and the new policy statement will be interesting, given that we do not know what the flight paths will be. If I was a constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Danny Beales), I would be extremely worried. In my constituency, because the flights are largely east-west and west-east, we have the bizarre situation that they affect Longford where, when the aircraft fly over you feel like throwing yourself to the floor, and they affect a number of the Heathrow villages, but they do not as yet impact on the centre of my constituency. We now have the risk that the flight paths might well do that. So, again, we are talking about maybe another 1 million or so people being impacted by the development of Heathrow, yet in our debate in this House about the policy statement we will not have certainty about those flight paths. That cannot be right when making such a major decision. That is why I am hoping that when the Committee meets and when we come back on Report we can have a sensible debate about the sort of amendments that can be brought forward on that theme of accountability, because if we can increase accountability, we can increase confidence in Government decision making on this issue in the long term. I agree with hon. Members who have raised the importance of aviation to our economy. Of course it is important; it employs a large number of my constituents, and we are trying to make sure that we create aviation capacity that is economically beneficial to the country while protecting our constituents’ health and wellbeing overall.

   Hansard source
8. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo White

   Public Confidence in the Police

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I congratulate the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson), on his recent promotion, and look forward to working with him in the weeks, months and years ahead. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder) for securing the debate, and to all who have spoken. As my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe said at the outset, I am not the Policing Minister. The Minister for Policing and Crime, my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon West (Sarah Jones), needs to be elsewhere at this difficult time. It is very much my aim to prove a capable stand-in, but I hope Members will forgive me for any gaps in policy knowledge. Although I cannot match the Minister for Policing and Crime in that regard, I can certainly acknowledge the unique and critical role played by the police in the life of our country. Thousands of men and women go to work day in, day out with a single aim: to keep us, their fellow citizens, safe. Theirs is public service of the very highest form, and it can be performed only by those who possess exceptional courage and are willing to face risks that the rest of us could barely imagine. We had a terrible illustration of that recently in Cleveland, as we have heard, when two officers lost their lives in an awful crash on the A66. My thoughts remain with the families, colleagues and friends of PC Blades and PC Clough, who served with courage and commitment to the last. Their service and sacrifice remind us that policing is not merely a profession; it is, as the Home Secretary said in the House last week, a calling. Those who answer it deserve our support, respect and gratitude. To perform their duties effectively, the police require our confidence and our trust. That brings me to the focus of the debate, in which the range of themes and topics covered speaks to the breadth of the subject matter. There are so many different aspects of policing for which public confidence is a live issue. Let me deal with the issues that Members have highlighted. Speak to any frontline officer and they will say that our current policing system is no longer fit for purpose. The current policing model is neither national nor local enough to respond to the public’s concerns about theft and antisocial behaviour. This Government are determined to change that, which is why, in the police reform White Paper, we have set out the most significant changes to policing in nearly 200 years, to create a system that is better equipped to tackle modern threats while remaining responsive to local communities. Our reforms will rebuild public confidence by delivering a new model for policing with a clear focus on cutting and preventing crime, strengthening local policing, raising standards and ensuring that national and specialist police services can be accessed by all communities. A new national police service will strengthen our ability to tackle serious and organised crime threats to national security. The national police service will give policing the tools, technology and capability needed to tackle crime wherever it occurs.

   Hansard source
9. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo White

   Public Confidence in the Police

   Thank you for your question. You made that request in your earlier contribution—

   Hansard source
10. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo White

    Public Confidence in the Police

    Thank you for correcting me, Sir Alec. The hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) asked earlier about meeting the Policing Minister, and I am happy to pass that request on to her. We will introduce stronger national standards through the national police service, ensuring that the service the public receives is more consistent. To respond to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer), the reform programme will enable a new funding formula that will include policing areas such as Cleveland. In 2010, the number of officers in full-time employment was 143,734. During the period of austerity under the previous Government, officer numbers dropped by over 20,000 to a low of 122,405 in 2018. From 2019, the previous Government funded forces to hastily increase officer numbers, but that has led to officers being hired—and, in some cases, put in desk jobs—to meet arbitrary headcounts. The rush to recruit also led to a situation in which over 35% of officers had less than five years’ experience, placing a further strain on forces. The Government are focused on what the police are doing, not just on officer numbers. That is why we have scrapped the officer maintenance grant and focused on rebuilding neighbourhood policing, with over 3,800 more police and PCSOs now where the public want to see them—out in neighbourhoods, proactively preventing crime and dealing with antisocial behaviour.

    Hansard source
11. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo White

    Public Confidence in the Police

    The commitment is to deliver 13,000 additional neighbourhood policing personnel by the end of this Parliament, which will give us the capacity to ensure that they can be focused on the role they are employed to do. Since the election, the Government have increased funding to forces by close to £2 billion. This year funding to police forces has increased to its highest cash level of up to £18.5 billion—a 4.5% cash increase compared with the previous year. That means that all forces will receive a real-terms uplift in their funding. In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow West (Gareth Thomas), since March 2025 the Met has grown by 607 neighbourhood officers. We recognise the unique challenges faced by the Met. In 2026-27 the Met will receive up to £4 billion in funding, which is an increase of £175 million. In addition, we are supporting policing to deliver £354 million of efficiency savings by the end of this Parliament through the police efficiency and collaboration programme, but we cannot stop there. The police funding system we inherited was complex, outdated and the product of legacy decisions rather than strategic design. Many PCCs, MPs and policing partners have complained that the police funding formula is out of date and not fit for purpose. Changes to police governance, force mergers and the creation of the national police service require a new way of allocating funding between forces aligned with those new structures.

    Hansard source
12. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo White

    Public Confidence in the Police

    As I am standing in for the Policing Minister, I cannot immediately answer that question, but I am sure that the hon. Member will get an answer as quickly as possible. We are committed to a wider review of the police funding formula to ensure that force funding is fair and keeps the public safe. A new approach to allocating funding will be brought in as part of our reforms to police structures. Public confidence in policing depends on communities knowing what they can expect from the local police service and on seeing those expectations met. That is why the Government are introducing local policing guarantees, which will provide greater transparency and accountability on the policing services that matter most to the public. The Government have committed to setting clear expectations on the issues that matter most to the public, including a target for forces to attend 90% of the most serious incidents within 15 minutes in urban areas and 20 minutes in rural areas, alongside measures to improve the speed with which 999 calls are answered. However, public confidence is about more than response times alone. It is also shaped by whether victims receive a good service and whether forces are effective at tackling crime. HMICFRS’s recent “State of Policing” report urged forces to make urgent improvements in how they investigate crime and secure justice for victims. Forces must get the basics of investigation right. The Government are strengthening the way police performance is monitored and improved. Through the policing performance system, inspection findings are brought together with analysis against the police performance framework to provide a comprehensive picture. This enables earlier identification of concerns and targeted support in collaboration with the College of Policing, and intervention where required. A stronger focus on delivering better outcomes for victims and the public will play a key part in rebuilding and maintaining trust and confidence for victims of crime and communities.

    Hansard source
13. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo White

    Public Confidence in the Police

    I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman’s request is passed to my colleague the Policing Minister when she returns. All communities deserve to have trust and confidence in the police. That starts with ensuring that those who enter policing are vetted and assessed thoroughly and remain suitable to work in policing throughout their service. This year we delivered our manifesto commitment to introduce mandatory standards on vetting. As part of those standards, applicants who have a caution or conviction for relevant VAWG offences, including domestic abuse and sexual offences, are disqualified from entering policing. A presumption of withdrawal of vetting clearance applies for serving police officers in these circumstances. The Home Office has provided HMICFRS with £100,000 for this financial year to expand the scope of its integrity inspections. These will now look at recruitment and selection processes alongside vetting in every force in England and Wales. We have also provided £425,000 to the College of Policing and National Police Chiefs’ Council to develop an accredited regime on vetting. This will include the development of standardised training and stronger intervention in forces that are not complying with vetting standards. The Home Office has to date provided approximately £3.5 million towards the NPCC’s continuous integrity screening programme. This is developing a system that will provide automated alerts from the police national database to forces in relation to anyone working in policing, enabling forces to take action earlier. Where police fall short of the standards expected of them, the public rightly expect that they will be held to account. The Independent Office for Police Conduct plays a crucial role in overseeing the police complaints system. It also investigates the most serious and sensitive matters, such as deaths and serious injuries and serious allegations of corruption involving the police. The Government announced plans to reform the governance of the IOPC to strengthen its accountability and resilience. On 30 July the Home Secretary launched an independent end-to-end review of the police accountability system. It will be chaired by Dame Lynne Owens and Jason Beer KC, and will report in six months. It will establish whether the police accountability system is fit for purpose, whether it is transparent, and how we can minimise avoidable delays for victims, families and officers. I agree that public confidence and trust in policing have been damaged by the social media clips referred to by the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell). Trust cannot be built through slogans or by drawing policing into wider debates. It is rebuilt when people see officers on their streets, know that crimes will be investigated, receive a proper service when they need help and have confidence that the highest standards are upheld. I agree with the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) that we as MPs have a responsibility to develop and give respect to the police officers in our communities, and to signal the way in which we should work with the police in order to build community strength and cohesiveness in the constituencies we represent. Trust in the police matters because policing in the UK is fundamentally based on consent. When people trust the police, they are more willing to report crime, share information, act as witnesses, comply with the law and work with officers to solve local problems. We recognise that trust and confidence are stronger in some communities than in others, and that confidence has declined over time. That is why the Government are focused on practical action: restoring neighbourhood policing, increasing transparency about police performance, strengthening accountability, modernising police force structures and ensuring that forces have the support they need to tackle the crimes and antisocial behaviour that matter most to local people. The reforms are about having the right policing in the right place, so that people feel safer, see police where they live and know they will get the help they need when they need it. The programme is needed to improve effectiveness and restore public trust, creating a stronger, more co-ordinated national approach to the capabilities that underpin policing. The public do not want a police service that is distracted from its core mission; they want a police service that prevents crime, protects communities and serves victims. That is exactly what our reforms are designed to deliver. Let me turn to the matter of people knowing who their local police officer is. Neighbourhood policing is essential to restoring public confidence in the police. Officers who know their communities are better placed to understand local concerns, respond to issues that matter to residents and provide visible reassurance when needed. Every community deserves to have visible, proactive and accessible neighbourhood police officers. Through the neighbourhood policing guarantee, we are strengthening the connection between police and their communities by committing to delivering 13,000 additional neighbourhood policing personnel by the end of this Parliament. The Government recognise the profound and lasting impact that sexual violence can have on victims. We know that victims do not always receive the response or support they deserve, and that that has contributed to these crimes being under-reported. I am listening to the points raised by the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain). That is why we are committed to improving the police response to sexual violence to ensure that all victims are heard, taken seriously and treated with dignity. To ensure consistency, we established the national centre for VAWG and public protection in April 2025. The centre provides co-ordinated national leadership in policing to tackle violence against women and girls. In addition, the centre is supporting all forces to implement the learnings of Operation Soteria, an academic-informed programme that has transformed the investigation of rape and sexual offences. As part of this, forces must maintain a commitment to continuous improvement—an acknowledgment that ongoing learning is essential to improving outcomes and experiences for victims. We want every force to have the right specialist capability to address sexual offences. That is why we have asked all forces in England and Wales to implement specialist rape and sexual offence teams by December 2027. Hate crime is a priority offence under the Online Safety Act, which places clear legal duties on platforms to take proactive action against illegal hate content online. The Government also fund the national online hate crime hub, the national policing capability dedicated to online hate crime. Let me say in response to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that police and justice are devolved to Northern Ireland, and the Police Service of Northern Ireland’s main budget is allocated by the Northern Ireland Department of Justice. The Northern Ireland Executive’s programme for government recognises that PSNI officer numbers are low, and I welcome the Executive’s commitment to grow police officer numbers in line with the 2020 New Decade, New Approach agreement. In closing, I again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe for securing the debate, and I thank everyone who has contributed. We have covered a lot of ground, and yet the nature of the topic means that inevitably, there is much more that could be said. I know that the Policing Minister will take great interest in the discussion that we have had today, not least because the question of how we drive up confidence in policing is one that concerns us all and has an impact on the lives of everyone across this country. As I have set out, the Government are taking action across multiple fronts, and we will continue working closely with the police to ensure that they have everything they need to maintain public trust and deliver for the communities that depend on them.

    Hansard source
14. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jen Craft

    Draft Code of Practice on the Right of Trade Unions to Access Workplaces; Draft Trade Unions (Right to Access Workplaces) Regulations 2026

    My hon. Friend is making a great point. I remember standing with the GMB outside Amazon in my constituency, and people were harassed by security and by Amazon itself not to join a trade union. Amazon has not come on board, despite promises that it would bring trade unions around the table. Does my hon. Friend agree that this kind of legislation is well past due, and that this is a brilliant time to start enacting it, so that people in my constituency who work for giants like Amazon can have the rights and protections that they absolutely deserve?

    Hansard source
15. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jen Craft

    Draft Code of Practice on the Right of Trade Unions to Access Workplaces; Draft Trade Unions (Right to Access Workplaces) Regulations 2026

    Queen Victoria Seafarers Rest, an organisation in my constituency, does excellent work with seafarers. It has shared some truly horrific stories about conditions on board falling below what we would expect. It has flagged that those conditions can stray into the realm of violence against women and girls. Without adequate protections for UK seafarers—particularly women seafarers—we risk making the situation worse. I would be very grateful if the Minister met me and Queen Victoria Seafarers Rest in my patch to talk about some of those things.

    Hansard source
16. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jen Craft

    Summer Health and Resilience

    I very much welcome this statement on our preparedness for future extreme heat events. As the Secretary of State mentioned, there were record A&E attendances this summer, and in my constituency, as in many others, this led to ambulances having to queue outside for upwards of eight hours. I have called on my local hospital’s trust—Mid and South Essex NHS foundation trust—to make a room available for paramedics and ambulance crews to rest and recuperate when this happens, because otherwise they have to sit in their ambulance, often with a very sick person, for upwards of eight hours, with nowhere to go for even a cup of tea and a sandwich. I have been unsuccessful thus far, so will she back my call for hospital trusts, and particularly Mid and South Essex, to make a space available so that ambulance crews can take a break when they have to sit outside A&E for prolonged periods of time?

    Hansard source
17. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jen Craft

    Education and Skills Reform

    I strongly welcome the Secretary of State’s statement, in which she set out how children can achieve, regardless of their skillset and passion, and how we will support them to do so. Far too many children are traumatised by a system that basically tells them that they are not good enough and that they are good for nothing, and that must change. My plea to the Secretary of State today is for any upcoming changes, particularly through the SEND reform, to take account of what disabled children are able to do, and for her to meet the charity Teach Me Too, which campaigns for all children, regardless of their disability, to have access to literacy from an early age and throughout their school career.

    Hansard source
18. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jeff Smith

    Ticket Price Regulation: Live Events

    My hon. Friend is making a typically entertaining and informative speech. I wonder whether she would agree that, from the customer’s point of view, there does not appear to be that much difference between tiered pricing and dynamic pricing—it is just that when the cheap seats have gone, they have to pay the premium. There is something unedifying, at best, about the whole concept of tiered pricing. Is that something that she thinks the Government should be looking at when they bring forward the Bill?

    Hansard source
19. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

    Ticket Price Regulation: Live Events

    Does my hon. Friend agree that community-owned venues are better protected against that kind of touting? If live music belonged to the people who watched it and used it, that would be the way to protect it most—through community and co-operative ownership.

    Hansard source
20. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Naish

    Summer Health and Resilience

    I welcome the Government’s approach. The Secretary of State is right to highlight how the NHS has been starved of capital over many years, and that is nowhere more obvious in my constituency than at East Leake health centre—a poorly ventilated 1960s class building, which currently has holes in the roof of one of the treatment rooms. Will she commit today to ensuring that older, rural areas are prioritised and that her team look at East Leake health centre?

    Hansard source
21. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Naish

    Ticket Price Regulation: Live Events

    One thing that has changed over time is the fact that there is now so much emphasis on live performance for musicians to be able to make an income. Perhaps my hon. Friend agrees that we need to look closely at streaming services, because the market has become distorted so that there is such a great emphasis on making money through touring.

    Hansard source
22. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Murray

    Ticket Price Regulation: Live Events

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) for a very dramatic speech. She went through places where she has seen concerts; I do not know if she, along with my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Withington (Jeff Smith), is hankering for her youth, and wishing she could go back there, but it was a tremendous speech, and I think we would agree with every word she said. My hon. Friend mentioned Bon Jovi. I would have been at that concert this evening as they took the stage, had I not been here answering her debate. It had particular relevance for me, because I am not new to this industry; I had my own business when I left university, and the very first thing that I organised was a Scotland-wide tour for a tribute band. Hon. Members will never guess which artist they were a tribute to; they were called Non Jovi. Those tickets were dynamically priced—the price would only ever go down, because nobody ever came to see them. Never mind; that is my hankering after the good old days. The UK live events sector is, as my hon. Friend said, a jewel in our national crown. From world-class sporting matches to unforgettable concerts—tonight we have heard about many that have not been forgotten—and plays, those events enrich our lives, strengthen community bonds and inspire future generations. Crucially, they provide us with stories that we can tell for years and years. They greatly benefit our economy, generating billions annually, and support a dynamic creative and sporting ecosystem. This Government understand that, and we have put the creative industries front and centre of our modern industrial strategy; we are committing to boosting investment in the sector from £17 billion to £31 billion by 2035. For too long, however, as highlighted by Lord Brennan of Canton’s report following the independent fan-led music review, the joy of attending live events has been marred by unfair practices in the ticketing market, most notably the systematic activities of ticket touts, which we heard about from my hon. Friend. They crowd out fans from the primary market and resell at extortionate prices. Ticket touts—this is a remarkable figure—take £400,000 a day from fans’ pockets; that is nearly £150 million a year. That is money that should be going into the industry. The Government are committed to tackling industrial-scale touting once and for all, improving transparency around pricing practices, and putting money in fans’ pockets. As my hon. Friend has demonstrated, far too often, fans are crowded out of the primary market by touts, who are only interested in making a quick and exorbitant profit at fans’ expense. The Government have been clear: this has to stop. My hon. Friend is correct: as I said in the Daily Record, the touts’ time is up. We want to improve transparency, consumer protection and fans’ access to live events. We also want to make sure that they have a safe and secure means of selling, reselling or transferring their tickets, and to ensure that money flows back into the live events sector and fans’ pockets. That is why we committed in our manifesto and our recently published plan for music to introducing new consumer protections for live event ticket resale, and it is why my Department, alongside the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, undertook a consultation last year on the best ways of tackling this, as well as issuing a call for evidence on pricing practices across the wider sector. We received over 500 responses from right across the live events sector. There were some clear themes for us to address, and those themes have been highlighted this evening. First, genuine fans should be able to recoup the costs of their ticket when no longer able to attend. Enforcement needs to be effective if our measures are to have impact. Secondary platforms need to play their part in ensuring that new rules are implemented and complied with, and that primary and secondary platforms are part of the same ticketing ecosystem. The former could do more to protect their sales and, where appropriate, share information more seamlessly with resale platforms. As a result, we are taking action. Last November, we announced a robust package of measures to tackle exploitative touting, including a resale price cap, a separate service fee cap, limits on the number of tickets that can be resold, and obligations on platforms, all reinforced by the Competition and Markets Authority’s new powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024. In the King’s Speech briefing earlier this year, we announced that the Government will publish a draft ticket tout ban Bill in this Session for pre-legislative scrutiny by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, of which my hon. Friend is a member. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend and the Committee through that process. Following pre-legislative scrutiny, the Government will introduce the Bill when parliamentary time allows and, as the Secretary of State said in Parliament last week—[Interruption.] We are coming to it. As the Secretary of State said last week, the Prime Minister is particularly passionate about this issue, and we will give the legislation the priority that it deserves and needs. We all want to see this on the statute book as soon as possible.

    Hansard source
23. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Murray

    Ticket Price Regulation: Live Events

    As I replied to my hon. Friend at the Select Committee meeting I attended last week, there were 39 Bills in the first Session of this new Government—39 very important Bills—that took us nearly two years to get through. In this Session, through the King’s Speech, we have of course introduced a number of Bills, and this one is a draft Bill. I can only reassure my hon. Friend and the House that we want to get this done as quickly as possible. That means we need to find the parliamentary time, once the draft Bill has been prepared and is ready, which should be imminently—not too many sleeps left; it depends on how many days we want to sleep for. We will then have a draft Bill that we can take forward, but there is a commitment from my Department and the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade to getting this done as quickly as possible. My hon. Friend had her private Member’s Bill, which she is waving around, on this topic in the last parliamentary Session. I share her concern for fans. It is worth noting that her Bill was drafted before the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, which imposes new requirements around price transparency, came into effect in April last year. Our legislation will be focused on ending the scourge of touting, thereby improving access to live events. Tackling touting, and ensuring that fans are at the heart of live events, cannot be done by Government alone, of course; industry needs to play its part. It is industry-led action, innovation and best practice, alongside the Government’s new measures, that will truly transform the fan experience. The Government recognise that many ticketing platforms, event organisers and venues have devoted a lot of time, energy and resources to this issue in recent years. We know that significant money has been spent combating ticket fraud, touts and bot use, as well as educating fans on what to look out for when they are buying tickets online, all to ensure that buying tickets is as safe and seamless for fans as possible. Nevertheless, the strength of feeling from respondents to our consultation and the call for evidence was clear. In fact, they share our strength of feeling about the touting issue. Industry must build on existing guidance to do more to tackle exploitative practices. This is why we strongly welcome the commitment by the Society of Ticket Agents and Retailers—STAR for short—to convene the sector. It will establish new best practice that ensures that pricing information is clear and up front, and that fans are empowered to make informed purchasing decisions, free from undue pressure. This work is already under way; I attended the inaugural meeting in March this year. The work is organised under four headings, to address some of the key issues in the ticketing sector. First, it will look at pricing transparency. Secondly, the industry will look at how the primary market can continue to be healthy. Thirdly, another workstream will look at accessibility issues. Finally, the industry will look at consumer education. Let us have a look at dynamic pricing. We know this is a subject that many people are concerned about. Businesses should feel free to use whatever pricing strategy meets their needs, but they must comply with the law. Where it appears that this is not happening, the CMA has the powers to enforce that and act upon it, and when businesses fall short of what is expected of them under the law, the CMA has powerful enforcement tools to ensure that businesses can be penalised and brought into line. Drip pricing is another one that my hon. Friend mentioned. It is not right when fans are shown a price for a product, only to find that it has increased by mandatory charges that are added as the transaction proceeds, particularly if they have been waiting all day on a screen to get to the front of the queue to buy tickets. I do not know if my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) has sat in his parliamentary office doing that at any point, but it is a real problem. In June this year, the Competition and Markets Authority fined StubHub International close to £900,000 and ordered it to issue refunds exceeding £590,000 to 50,000 fans for using this illegal practice. The CMA is also investigating Viagogo for similar practices. Lastly, on a related point, I continue to encourage the industry to adopt the voluntary £1 ticket levy for live events to support our grassroots music and grassroots music venues. The industry is doing the levy, but is it doing enough? Is a big question mark, and we just keep encouraging it to do as much as it possibly can. I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate on such an important issue, which affects the dedicated fans who sustain our live events sector. I would like to reassure the House that this Government are tackling industrial-scale ticket touting with urgency and will bring forth the legislation to ensure that fans are not priced out of major cultural and sporting events. That is a priority for this Government, and we will do that. I look forward to returning to this House with the draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny, and I welcome further engagement with my hon. Friend, and many other hon. Friends who have a deep interest in this issue, to help tackle ticket touting once and for all. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
24. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Lavery

    Draft Code of Practice on the Right of Trade Unions to Access Workplaces; Draft Trade Unions (Right to Access Workplaces) Regulations 2026

    I refer Members to my declaration of interests; I am secretary of the trade union group of Labour MPs, Mr Stringer. Does my hon. Friend recognise that these union-busting firms in America—Amazon, for example—paid up to $14.2 million to bust unions and refuse union access? That is one of the reasons why we have to make sure that the £500,000 cap has the total review and overhaul it needs to protect workers in the workplace.

    Hansard source
25. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Lavery

    Engagements

    Q10. With tech billionaires driving the deployment of artificial intelligence, many of my constituents are concerned about job losses, misinformation and the infrastructure needed to support the technology. In Sleekburn and Cambois, three vast—I mean vast—data centres are proposed on scarce industrial land that could be used for other industries that create far more local jobs. Communities are being asked to give up valuable land and suffer local disruption. Will the Prime Minister support a moratorium on future data centres until regulation catches up, and will he introduce a critical national infrastructure levy, so that host communities can share in the rewards? Will he also visit my constituency to hear local people’s concerns for himself?

    Hansard source
26. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Helen Hayes

    Education and Skills Reform

    I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and welcome her to her place. I also warmly welcome the Government’s focus on boosting technical and vocational education, and giving them parity of esteem with academic routes. The Children’s Commissioner has today highlighted the unacceptably high number of young people who are registered at college but attend less than 50% of the time. Colleges need the resources to address this problem by monitoring attendance more effectively and intervening to provide targeted support to students who need it, but despite being part of our state education system, colleges are on an uneven financial playing field, because, unlike schools, they are unable to claim back VAT. They have told my Committee again and again that they could do far more if this unfair and unjustifiable tax anomaly was corrected. May I therefore ask the Secretary of State to make representations to the Chancellor, ahead of the Budget, about colleges being allowed to claim back VAT in the same way that schools can?

    Hansard source
27. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time. Today is an important day, as this Bill starts its Commons journey, but it is a hard day on which to talk about the criticality of our civil aviation sector, given the disruption endured by so many over the past 24 hours. With your permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will take a few moments to address this issue. A four-hour air traffic outage yesterday left hundreds of thousands of passengers facing cancellations, diversions and delays. I apologise wholeheartedly to passengers for that disruption. We often take for granted the way in which our aviation system just works, but yesterday that was not the case. Safety must remain the overriding priority for air traffic controllers. This morning I spoke to the chief executive of the National Air Traffic Services, Martin Rolfe, who informed me that this outage was due to a technical issue at their Swanwick site. While my understanding from that is that we can rule out a cyber-attack on this occasion, I do not believe this issue was unavoidable. We also spoke this morning about how NATS responded to resolve and minimise the disruption as quickly as possible. I am grateful to the airports and airlines that responded straightaway, but I am clear that passengers should not have to face this disruption. I have therefore asked the Civil Aviation Authority to conduct an independent review, to establish cause and ensure that our air traffic control systems can get passengers where they need to be. The review will report to me within six months. Robust systems that support our national infrastructure are the bedrock of the measures contained in this Bill, from better rights for disabled passengers and modernised airspace to slot reform and quicker enforcement of passenger rights. While passengers undeniably experienced a bad day yesterday, it is still true to say that few industries match the ability of aviation to adapt, evolve and innovate. For generations it has pushed the boundaries of what is possible, from faster aircraft and new destinations to safer technology and cleaner fuels. Bad days, like yesterday, just serve to underscore how central aviation is to Britain’s success, not only making our summer holidays and family reunions possible, but connecting businesses to the global marketplace and supporting thousands of skilled jobs across our island nation. Right now, fresh challenges and opportunities are emerging. Drones are beginning to transform our airspace and flight numbers are climbing year after year, all while global headwinds continue to put enormous pressure on the sector and those who depend on it.

    Hansard source
28. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    My hon. Friend is right to raise the impact on people who were caught up in this disruption. I have read reports of people having to sleep overnight in airports and people who have potentially missed weddings, so we cannot say enough about how important it is that we address this problem. I have learned in politics that absolute guarantees when it comes to managing the operation of a vast and complex transport system can be unwise, but what I can say is that I will leave no stone unturned in seeking to understand what has happened here and what can be done to drastically reduce the likelihood of something like this ever happening again. We need to ask tough questions about the resilience of NATS’s systems and progress with planned upgrades, and we need to think about consumer redress issues.

    Hansard source
29. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    I am keen to address these significant issues today. The public would rightly expect the Transport Secretary, while standing at the Dispatch Box, to answer questions here and now, so I am happy to take any interventions. As many colleagues will know, most civil aviation legislation is assimilated EU law, and the Government’s power to update it has now expired. The Bill will restore that power, giving the Government the flexibility to regulate at a pace that will enable us to keep up with the world around us. I should say that I am very grateful to my noble Friend the Minister for Rail for his excellent stewardship of the Bill through the other place. I will now outline the main elements of the Bill and what we hope it will achieve. Aviation serves millions of us well each year, but when things go wrong, passengers must have confidence that they will be protected. The Bill will allow passenger rights to be bolstered through secondary legislation, helping us to tackle the issues that matter most.

    Hansard source
30. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    The Minister with responsibility for aviation, my hon. Friend the Member for Selby (Keir Mather), has kindly just said that he will be very happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss that in more detail, and I know it is something that my officials are looking at. The Bill provides extra consumer protection on the things that matter most, whether that is delays, cancellations, baggage and, crucially, accessibility. The Government listened carefully to concerns raised in the House of Lords about the experience of disabled passengers and those with reduced mobility. That is why we are committing to consult on a range of accessibility issues. We want to hear directly from passengers about the problems they face and what we can do to ensure that everyone feels safe and is able to fly. We have also acted immediately to scrap the unfair compensation cap for damaged wheelchairs and mobility equipment on domestic flights. Those items are essential to the lives and livelihoods of many disabled people, and lifting the cap reflects that reality. I hope the whole House agrees that this was absolutely the right thing to do. Turning to enforcement, the Civil Aviation Authority currently relies on slow and resource-intensive court action to secure redress for consumer protection issues. The Bill will grant the CAA direct enforcement powers for consumer protection, bringing it in line with other regulators such as the Competition and Markets Authority. That means faster action when rules are broken and less burden on consumers to fight for what they are owed. Taken together, these measures will ensure that all passengers have meaningful, enforceable rights that help them to travel with ease and confidence. The Bill will also help to unlock the full potential of our aviation infrastructure, driving economic growth across the country. The UK has some of the world’s busiest and most complex airspace, yet much of it is still based on designs from the 1950s. An aviation industry fit for the 21st century simply cannot rely on infrastructure that was built for the last.

    Hansard source
31. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    We want to move swiftly on these issues, and the provisions in the Bill are designed to do just that. I recognise that Glasgow airport is an important economic hub for my hon. Friend’s constituency, and I look forward to discussing with her what more we can do to support it. I was talking about how our airspace is still based on designs from the 1950s. That is why this Government believe that we must move quickly to modernise that airspace, for reasons of safety, reliability and capacity, and for the communities who deserve cleaner and quieter skies.

    Hansard source
32. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    I can guarantee my hon. Friend that there will be meaningful consultation with local communities about airspace changes—this Bill does not change the processes around that. I also appreciate the impact that noise has on local communities, and nothing in the Bill changes the process that will take place, for example, in the case of expansion at Heathrow. My hon. Friend will be aware that the draft Heathrow expansion national policy statement, which we have consulted on, includes a proposal for a night-time ban for 6.5 hours, between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am. I guarantee that I will continue to work with her and other London colleagues on these important and sensitive issues. Airspace modernisation is important, both to tackle noise issues and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft—if we can have planes pursuing simpler, more direct flight paths, that will reduce the amount of time that those planes are in the air. However, the truth is that if we do not act on airspace modernisation, it will be passengers and businesses that end up paying the price, with up to one in five flights estimated to face significant disruption by 2040 unless we act. That is why we have wasted no time in setting up the UK Airspace Design Service, which is already getting on with the job. This Bill strengthens the Government’s ability to ensure that airspace changes that have been properly consulted on and approved are delivered. We are also updating the rules on who can be charged for air traffic and air navigation services, so that costs can continue to be recovered fairly as new airspace users emerge. Finally, we are making it easier for the Government to respond quickly and proportionately to pressure on the aviation sector.

    Hansard source
33. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    It is not the case that noise above 5,000 feet will not be considered in airspace design changes. This is about the relative balance between noise considerations and greenhouse gas emissions. We need to find a simpler way of making these changes, because the previous mechanism was too cumbersome, and I believe that this is a sensible and proportionate change. I was talking about some of the changes that this Bill will enable the Government to make in future, so that we can be more responsive and flexible as a Government. As Members will know, there has been significant uncertainty for the aviation sector, given the conflict and crisis in the middle east and the impact of that on jet fuel. A few months ago, my Department introduced temporary changes to relax slot usage requirements and reduce disruption to passengers. However, some of those measures relied on powers that were introduced after we left the European Union, and the power that I had to act in that way expired in June, which was why we made our decision before that point. The Bill will introduce permanent powers, and will therefore support a more agile and resilient approach to the regulation of airport slots. That means that the UK can continue to act decisively when appropriate, safeguarding passengers and maintaining airport capacity.

    Hansard source
34. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    We have sought to prioritise work on airspace changes in the London region, given the benefits that it could bring to London and the south-east. I am aware that there has been agreement over the summer to resume work on airspace modernisation in Scotland, which will be important to my hon. Friend’s constituents. We have to get the balance right by bringing benefit quickly to the communities that are currently seeking changes, which will improve the quality of my hon. Friend’s life and those of her constituents.

    Hansard source
35. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Heidi Alexander

    Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill [Lords]

    I regularly produce a letter for the CAA setting out my priorities, and I would be happy to write to my right hon. Friend in detail about the timeline, as he requests. The Bill is also about improving safety. The Government are determined that UK airspace should remain among the safest in the world. Our current safety framework is fragmented, and updating it is cumbersome. It holds back innovation, and it puts the UK at risk of falling behind on its international obligations. To fix that, the Bill will hand over responsibility for technical aviation safety and operational rule-making to the CAA. This is not a blank cheque; it follows a well-established model in which trusted regulators make rules within boundaries set by Parliament. Indeed, ministerial and parliamentary oversight was strengthened during scrutiny in the other place. The Bill also reinstates the Government’s ability to update or create aviation safety-related criminal offences in assimilated legislation, which was lost after our exit from the EU. That will allow safety rules to keep up with international standards while ensuring that they are enforced consistently, now and in the future. These steps will create a clearer, more workable system that maintains the UK’s strong safety record and sustains public confidence in air travel. I know that some Members will be interested in what the Bill means for airport expansions. I should make clear that it does not determine whether any airport should expand, and neither does it change the processes involved in that. These measures are sector-wide reforms that will support a safe, efficient and resilient aviation industry. Questions about airport expansion will continue to be considered separately, outside the Bill process. Despite a bad day yesterday, aviation has refused to stand still for over 100 years. The industry remains at the forefront of innovation and progress, taking every challenge and every opportunity in its stride. Quite simply, the type of country that we want to be—aspirational, outward-looking and full of opportunity—depends on giving the industry the tools that it needs to go from strength to strength. This Bill will do just that by bringing passenger protections into the 21st century, unlocking sustainable growth that works for our communities, and maintaining the UK’s safety record in an ever-changing world. I hope that hon. and right hon. Members will agree that this is not a Government who drag their feet. We have moved swiftly to address the concerns raised by the Lords, particularly on accessibility, accountability and passenger protections. The Government have not just listened but acted, and I believe that provides a strong foundation for the Bill to continue its passage. I commend this Bill to the House.

    Hansard source
36. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Grahame Morris

    Draft Code of Practice on the Right of Trade Unions to Access Workplaces; Draft Trade Unions (Right to Access Workplaces) Regulations 2026

    I do not have a formal speech, but I want to make a couple of points about context and put a particular question to the Minister, if that is okay. First, I declare an interest: in a previous life, I was a member of the RMT; as a Member of Parliament, I am a member of the RMT parliamentary group, and of most of the trade union groups as well. In the last Parliament, I also served in Committee on the Seafarers’ Wages Bill and on the Transport Committee that we heard evidence from the chief executive of P&O Ferries, Peter Hebblethwaite—it might actually have been in this room. I remind the Opposition spokesman—the hon. Member for Bromsgrove is new to the House, so he may not be aware of this—that the chief exec of P&O Ferries admitted publicly, to a joint sitting of the Transport Committee and the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee, that he was fully aware that P&O Ferries were breaking the law in three areas, not just on consultation, and yet it went ahead with the issuing of redundancy notices to all 800 British-based seafarers. Some of them were sacked at a minute’s notice by video call. There was uproar in the House, including on the Government Benches at the time—that was in 2022. It happened on St Patrick’s Day, on 17 March, and there was a commitment that it must never be allowed to happen again. I have been involved in discussions, lobbying of Ministers, members of my party and shadow Ministers to ensure that the legislation affords a degree of protection to UK-based seafarers. I fully understand the Minister’s point about the difficulties that we face: the size of the British UK merchant fleet has declined quite dramatically—I think we now have about 8 million gross tonnes of UK or GB-flagged ships, which is quite a dramatic reduction—and the majority of UK-based seafarers work on ships flagged in other countries. We have to be able to offer them some measure of protection. I fully understand the difficulties and the complexities of international law, but that cannot be a get-out for P&O Ferries, Irish Ferries or any other commercial entity to simply walk away from their legal responsibilities in respect of employment protections. While I thank the Minister for her reassurances, I urge her to continue discussions with the RMT on how we can effectively provide these minimal protections to UK seafarers, in particular those who work on overseas-flagged ships.

    Hansard source
37. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Grahame Morris

    Draft Code of Practice on the Right of Trade Unions to Access Workplaces; Draft Trade Unions (Right to Access Workplaces) Regulations 2026

    I am grateful for the Minister’s engagement, but can I point out a practical problem in the context of seafarers? With the vast majority of the merchant fleet not flagged with GB owners, the problem—including on the ferries and so on that are working out of British ports for more than 120 days a year—is that there is a relatively small number of UK-based seafarers, perhaps fewer than 21, among the complement of a crew. The Government have set that arbitrary figure, and I can understand what the Minister is saying in relation to small businesses more generally on terra firma, but I think a bit of flexibility needs to be applied in the maritime setting. While I am on my feet—forgive me, Mr Stringer; I do not want to interrupt again—we are seeking assurances in relation to that threshold and the fines that were being applied. If the Minister is unable to give that assurance within the context of these statutory instruments, could we could press for a meeting with the Minister so that we can explore the options that might be available?

    Hansard source
38. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Georgia Gould

    Pica Eating Disorder: SEND

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) for bringing this deeply important discussion to Westminster Hall. The story she told shows her effectiveness as a local MP. I know that she has listened to parents, professionals and school leaders at a number of different events in her local community. Bringing their voices directly to us is much appreciated. I am grateful to the parents and professionals in the Public Gallery for making the time to be here today and for their leadership in campaigning on this issue. I would be keen to sit down with the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham and campaigners to discuss it in more detail. We have heard powerfully the profound impact that pica can have and the huge stress it can bring to parents who are desperately monitoring their child’s circumstances and safety. As I have been going around the country talking to parents and visiting schools, I have seen schools with brilliant and extraordinary provision, and young people with pica who are really thriving. I have also spoken to parents who present stories similar to those we have heard today and who feel that support is not in place, leaving them in fear. Sometimes they have had to give up work to support their children. The tragic cases we have heard today show how important this issue is: it goes to the heart of the relationship between special educational needs and health. All Members, I think, mentioned the importance of us working in partnership and having clarity on the role of teachers in supporting and safeguarding pupils, and the role of health professionals in diagnosing and giving advice and guidance. My hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) talked about the importance of that guidance and of roles and responsibilities of health and schools. Earlier this year, we consulted on revised statutory guidance on supporting children and young people with medical conditions. That reflects our commitment to ensuring that every child or young person can participate effectively in education, notwithstanding their medical conditions. Schools, colleges and early years settings should understand the risks that a medical condition poses and manage them proactively. That includes ensuring that staff understand the relevant medical conditions and their impact and can recognise and respond to an emergency. We had a really positive response to the consultation and are still working through the responses. We had a lot of detailed feedback, including on specific medical conditions. The draft guidance did not make reference to pica. Given the conversations we have had, the responses to the consultation and today’s discussion, I can confirm that we will rectify that when we finally publish the guidance, to provide clear information and guidance around pica for schools. As part of the SEND reforms, we are looking at developing national inclusion standards that will provide a baseline of ordinarily available provision that we expect of all schools. We have an expert panel working on those standards and on specialist provision packages, which will determine the support needed in an area for a range of different special educational needs and disabilities. Currently, our independent panel, which sits across health and education, is leading that work. I commit today to ask the panel to take a specific look at the issues that my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham raised in relation to pica, specifically those that relate to research and identifying gaps in support. More broadly, a number of questions were asked about the SEND reforms, including about how we will support early intervention and ensure that the right training is in place and that we have the right professionals in schools. As part of the SEND reforms, we are investing £4 billion in early intervention. That includes £1.6 billion going directly into mainstream schools, and all schools are being asked to develop inclusion strategies. We are putting £1.8 billion into an experts at hand service, which includes occupational therapists, educational psychologists and specialist teachers. I had a brief conversation, just outside this Chamber, with an occupational therapist who specialises in pica. We talked about their critical role, and it is important to reflect on that as part of the experts at hand service. We are also developing a new package of teacher training, into which we are putting £200 million. The purpose of that training is to support all schools to be inclusive, including by identifying needs and adapting classroom practice to support children. It will not be detailed training on specific conditions, but it will include how to provide wider support and adaptions for pupils. We should also give teachers the tools and strategies to find the relevant information about specific issues as they occur in the classroom. We are currently working with parents, disabled children’s organisations and teaching organisations to develop that training, and I welcome Members’ thoughts about the process. Many Members mentioned the importance of engaging with parents. One of the components of the training will be ensuring that teachers are listening to the voices of parents and having strong relationships with them, so that schools can pick up on what is happening at home and put that into their plans.

    Hansard source
39. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Georgia Gould

    Pica Eating Disorder: SEND

    I will absolutely take away the issue of reporting. Members spoke about the need to invest in inclusive spaces. We are continuing to invest £3.7 billion in the creation of new specialist places. That money can go into new special schools, inclusion bases or adaptions in mainstream schools. I have visited really high-quality inclusion bases, and I know that part of that investment has been about creating safe spaces for children with pica. We have also issued new guidance about how to create estates that are inclusive by design, which includes guidance to schools about how to work with children and understand their experience of the school. That will make sure that schools are genuinely inclusive for those young people. That is another area that is relevant to the conversation. The hon. Member for South Devon made a really important point about accountability across our systems and about working in partnership. We are working closely with Health Ministers on this issue, as we recognise how critical that is. The hon. Lady also spoke about experts at hand and the workforce. We are investing £40 million in training up new ed psychs and speech and language therapists, and a lot of work is going on with Health colleagues about workforce planning to ensure we have a sufficient workforce to support experts at hand and specialist settings. It is critical that we have that specialist resource to deliver early intervention. I was asked about how the funding will work in the new system. It is envisioned that for children with individual support plans, schools will get dedicated funding that is ringfenced for pupils with SEND, so that the necessary staff can be employed and the right support can be put in place. At the moment, the funding often comes quite late in the day after a huge battle for support, and it leaves with the child. The idea is to give schools sustained budgets so that they can build the necessary provision. For pupils accessing a specialist provision package, the funding will come with the package and the child into the school. Depending on where the child sits in the system, the funding will flow differently. I welcome the tone of the debate—there has been cross-party recognition of the scale of the issue—and the way that Members throughout the House are working together to address these really difficult questions. I have heard so many stories of families who have been badly let down. We all acknowledge that things need to change and that we need to get it right. I am committed to continuing to work in partnership with all Members, and really appreciate their bringing stories like the ones we have heard today to me, so that we can continue these really important conversations. Critically, we must talk to young people and families. I really hope this is just the start of the conversation, and that we will have a longer conversation soon so that we can look at the issues raised today.

    Hansard source
40. 9 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Gareth Thomas

    Public Confidence in the Police

    I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle and Clitheroe (Jonathan Hinder) on securing the debate and on the way in which he approached the subject. I join him and my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland (Luke Myer) in paying tribute to the police officers from the Cleveland force who lost their lives so tragically just recently. I want to raise two or three points on the question of confidence in the police and the role of Government. Too often, the police get criticised for the failings of other agencies and I want to talk about that issue in the particular context of my constituency in Harrow. As other Members have already alluded to, I also think that we need to keep the funding—in the case of Harrow, that is for the Metropolitan police—under very close scrutiny. I also want to suggest that the Metropolitan police does not get recognition across the whole of the UK for its hugely important work in tackling national and international crime, and that perhaps more recognition of that is required in the funding formula. Lastly, I want to dwell on the issue of online crime and the hatred that gets stirred up online, which can make the job of the police much more difficult. I am struck by the criticism that I have heard in my constituency about the police. So often when one gets into the issues that people are concerned about, they are actually the responsibility of other agencies locally and it is the police having to respond to the other agencies’ failure to take action that has led to the criticism of the police. In particular, in Harrow, we recently saw enforcement teams contracted out to an organisation called Kingdom. The responsibility for that contract was with Harrow council. There was widespread criticism of the way some of the staff employed by Kingdom tried to levy fines on a number of young people in south Harrow, in my constituency. The council could have taken much tougher action against Kingdom. It could have used some of the funding from the contract to pay for additional police officers, instead of contracting the work out to people who are far less well trained than the police. Even at this late stage, I hope that Harrow council will use some of the funding it is spending on the Kingdom contract to fund additional police officers. Local councils such as Harrow need to invest more in youth facilities that divert young people away from crime. Some of the CCTV projects in my constituency that Harrow council has turned down—in Wealdstone, south Harrow and central Harrow—should get funding. It is not clear to me that the council is investing in drug addiction services, tackling street homelessness or tackling poor performance by the owners of large blocks of flats to prevent antisocial behaviour. More Government scrutiny of the performance of local authorities in tackling antisocial behaviour at a local level would be timely, certainly in the case of Harrow council. The Metropolitan police saw a £1 billion real-terms funding cut between 2010 and 2014. That led to a marked drop in policing in my constituency and across London more widely. Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has done a huge amount to try to redirect funding from other parts of his budget to minimise the impact of that cut. I also welcome the fact that the Government have delivered on their manifesto commitment to boost police funding more generally, so that an extra 3,000 police officers can be recruited across the country. We are seeing the benefit in Harrow, where there has been an increase in police numbers, but we are certainly not back to the level of policing that we had when the last Labour Government left office in 2010. I seek assurance from the Minister that we will never again see the scale of real-terms cuts to the Metropolitan police that my constituents had to endure between 2010 and 2014. One way we can further support the Metropolitan police is by allowing it to keep more of the proceeds from successful operations, such as recovering stolen funds hidden in bitcoin assets. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister on her elevation to the Front Bench, and urge her to go into battle with the Treasury to help the Metropolitan police use more of the funds it recovers for investment in local policing, police stations and so on. We also need to do more about what goes on online, which feeds criminal activity in our constituencies. Will the Minister update the House on the effectiveness, as she sees it, of the Online Safety Act 2023, and on what other work crime agencies are doing with Ofcom to crack down on online hatred?

    Hansard source