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

11,997 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Cooper

   First-time Buyers

   House prices in Mid Cheshire are nearly £20,000 higher than the regional average and have continued to rise over the last year. The Your First Home scheme will be a big help for my constituents, but it is also important that we increase the number of affordable homes being built. The National Housing Federation estimated that we could have delivered an additional 41,000 homes outside of London in the latest round of the social and affordable homes programme. What steps is the Minister taking to increase the funding available in the early years of the social and affordable homes programme?

   Hansard source
2. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

   Immigration: Earned Settlement

   I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement and her distinction between illegal migrants and those who came legally to work and contribute. We must confront the mess left by the Conservatives, whose failure to manage our immigration system is nothing short of a national scandal. Settlement should be earned through contribution, and in Portsmouth, I have seen that at first hand from our care workers, who look after our most vulnerable. Will the Home Secretary reassure those who have already contributed so much that their contributions will be recognised, and that those who have not contributed and have tried to play the system will need to contribute to remain?

   Hansard source
3. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

   Budget Resolutions

   We live in an ever-changing world where global issues impact on our everyday lives, so I am pleased that this Budget is about making a difference to working people and families in Portsmouth North, with little changes that make a big difference. People in my city are worried about the cost of energy. This Budget responds by extending the removal of VAT on electricity until 27 July, removing gas standing charges and putting £100 directly into the bank accounts of 40,000 households across Portsmouth North. That sits alongside the new British industrial competitive scheme for businesses. However, energy is not the only cost putting pressure on families. For many people in Portsmouth North, getting to work or school means getting in the car, and the cost of filling up hits hard. Extending the 5p fuel duty cut and keeping fuel duty frozen helps motorists and businesses to manage these costs every day. Cost of living measures are also about allowing people to keep enjoying life and coming together, so I am pleased to see that changes in this Budget will mean that half of the retail, leisure and hospitality businesses in our region will no longer pay business rates at all. We must invest in our future. The Your First Home scheme means lower deposits and more opportunities for young people, and I look forward to seeing more details. We must also keep our country safe. In Portsmouth—our naval city—defence means more than national security; it means jobs, skills and opportunities for local people. The Government are spending £14 billion more on defence than the previous Government did, and the £3.9 billion for the naval dockyard is brilliant. That, alongside the investment from previous Governments, is great. One announcement is especially close to my heart: paternity pay for the self-employed. For too long, self-employed men have faced an impossible choice between spending those precious first few days with their newborns <span id="658" class="column-number" data-column-number="658"></span>and returning to work because their bills will not wait. Labour introduced paternity leave, but self-employed dads and non-birthing partners were left behind. This Budget takes an important step: for the first time, they will be able to receive paternity pay—that is a point of principle. For a builder, a plumber, a taxi driver, a shopkeeper or a farmer, this means real support at the most important moment of their life. Up to £194 a week for two weeks might not be enough, and the Minister will not be surprised to hear that I want to see longer leave and more generous pay, but for someone who currently gets nothing, this change means real help with their bills, less financial pressure and, more importantly, more time with their new-born child. Being there for your child should not be a luxury that is reserved to those who can afford it. I want to quickly thank the incredible campaigners who have helped deliver this change, including all at the Dad Shift, On The Tools and Movember. Most importantly, I thank the hard-working tradespeople across the country who have made their voice heard and trusted me to bring their voice to this place. This victory is theirs, and they should be so very proud, just as I am so very proud of them. How can we ask young men to take up apprenticeships in our trades if we do not protect their future and their families? This is personal for me: my dad was a tradie, my brother is a tradie, and so was my grandad. I am incredibly proud of all of them, and I want something different for my own sons.

   Hansard source
4. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Hack

   Budget Resolutions

   Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for giving us breathing space with a little bit more time. It is a pleasure to respond to this Budget by talking about growth in every postcode. North West Leicestershire is a former mining area, so I welcome the progress made on the miners’ pension. I welcome the confirmation that surplus sharing and the standstill will be abolished to protect bonus pensions, helping members to benefit from the success of their pensions. No Government have ever done more on pensions for former mineworkers than this one, but as the Chancellor said himself, the job is not finished. It is clear that more work is needed to resolve the substantial undistributed guarantor fund surplus currently held within the mineworkers’ pension scheme. The miners <span id="675" class="column-number" data-column-number="675"></span>who powered our country and our homes and who supported us deserve our support now, and I want to reassure my constituents that I will do just that. North West Leicestershire is home to one of the three sites in the only inland freeport in the UK. The site in Leicestershire has created considerable concern, which I share, particularly for Diseworth—an 825-year-old village with heritage status. While the new data centre covenant is helpful, I worry that it will apply only to AI and not to the creation of new mega-sheds more broadly, which impacts communities such as mine. The other two sites in the freeport are covered by the Mayor of the East Midlands, so I welcome the Chancellor’s announcement on devolution and the settlement for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland—something I have long called for. I look forward to continuing the discussions on how devolution will deliver greater benefits and strategic powers to ensure that the freeport site for Leicestershire has a mayor fighting its corner. The powers offered to mayors on transport could be transformational for Leicestershire. Transport connectivity is a significant barrier to growth locally. My constituent Eli spoke to me recently about the impact that poor public transport has on their access to further education. They said: “I wake up before six in the morning to catch a 7 am bus to college, which is always packed, standing room only due to there being too many students for the capacity of the public bus services. Even if I do everything right, the buses are unreliable—either being late or completely absent—which is treated as my responsibility by my college”. A lot is said about demand in rural areas. In fact, Arriva increased its patronage by 30% for one of my local routes because it started one bus stop earlier, connecting the route to another village and allowing more kids to get to college. Just think about what we could achieve if we want to grow even more. North West Leicestershire still has no passenger rail service anywhere in the constituency, making it home to the two largest towns in the country without any access to rail, which restricts growth and investment. If we want growth in every postcode, transport has to be a priority. North West Leicestershire has so much potential, including in our SME sector. I know that this will surprise you, Madam Deputy Speaker, but nearly 30 years ago I wrote my dissertation on small business support, so I know how much we limit our growth if we fail to invest in small businesses. I have always advocated for dedicated business support, just like we saw in the universal offer we had from Business Link. We now have a patchwork that is devolution dependent—another reason why devolution for Leicestershire is so vital.

   Hansard source
5. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Hack

   Budget Resolutions

   I thank my hon. Friend for making that incredibly important point. The Mayor of the East Midlands does not cover the whole of the east midlands, and I think that gives us the opportunity to continue to talk.<span id="676" class="column-number" data-column-number="676"></span> Because I now have a bit of time left, I note that the Chancellor confirmed that land sold to social housing providers will now be VAT free. After two decades working in the social housing sector, I cannot express the difference that that will make to social homes and growth in our communities. House building is also a massive builder of growth; it helps brick manufacturers in my constituency, and it helps builders and local tradespeople to grow. We should not underestimate that important step forward.

   Hansard source
6. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex McIntyre

   Immigration: Earned Settlement

   There was a certain irony in the shadow Home Secretary lecturing the House on who should be defined as highly skilled. He was certainly highly skilled at opening asylum hotels, including the one in my constituency. Can the Home Secretary confirm that the proposals she has made today, along with the other work she is doing in the Department, will mean that that hotel is closed by the end of this Parliament?

   Hansard source
7. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Adam Thompson

   Budget Resolutions

   I start by thanking the Chancellor for presenting us with the Budget, and the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and <span id="649" class="column-number" data-column-number="649"></span>Local Government for introducing today’s debate on growth in every postcode. When the Prime Minister began his tour of the country in August, he started in Ilkeston. There, he, the Secretary of State and I listened to people talk about the loss that they feel, having watched our town centre decline over decades. Whether I am in Ilkeston or Long Eaton, people in my constituency share that sense of loss. They remember how our town centres used to be. They had vibrant high streets and markets and great pubs. They were bustling centres of commerce and the beating heart of our community, all at the same time. The Chancellor is absolutely right to help level the playing field by recognising the fundamental shifts in our economy, and helping out struggling small local businesses while asking thriving online giants to finally pay their fair share. Following the Chancellor’s announcement, almost 400 Erewash businesses will no longer need to pay a penny in business rates. That is money that they can now spend on creating jobs, pass back to their customers, reinvest, or keep hold of to reacquire some breathing space. More than 80 additional shops in my constituency no longer pay any business rates at all, and I know that the Chancellor will be very glad to hear that 10 great pubs have been given full business rates relief, including the fantastic Dewdrop in Ilkeston, and the Mill and Brook in Long Eaton.

   Hansard source
8. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Labour·Adam Thompson

   Budget Resolutions

   I will not, because so many people want to speak tonight. If the Chancellor is looking for somewhere to celebrate his first Budget, I invite him to Erewash to try out the newly done-up function room at the Mill and Brook, or perhaps enjoy one of the Dewdrop’s famous cheese and onion cobs. I turn to the measures that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has introduced for families. I was heartened to hear him present such an extensive raft of measures to help pull back the cost of living for so many people across Erewash and the country. Alongside the removal of VAT from electricity costs and scrapping standing charges on gas, there is the direct £100 payment this winter. It is an enormous step that pulls down energy bills for more than 40,000 families, from Sawley to Sandiacre and Shipley View. I also thank the Chancellor for his continued investment in Rolls-Royce. Royce’s is a huge employer in my constituency, and it is a great point of pride for us in Derbyshire that the most groundbreaking innovation in the world happens on our doorstep. The Chancellor has recognised how much Rolls-Royce and my constituents have to offer our country. That is what a Labour Budget is all about—rooting our economy in society and making them both fairer, and supporting working families, pensioners, carers and small businesses. It is great to have a Chancellor and a Government who listen to people, who will allow our communities to hope again, and who will put our communities back at the heart of our economy.

   Hansard source
9. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·SNP·Pete Wishart

   Immigration: Earned Settlement

   I was hoping when I turned up today that I would hear the Home Secretary say that she was abandoning all the proposals around ILR. While it is positive that she has responded to the cross-party campaign on social care workers, she still has a long way to go to address the unfairness at the heart of these proposals. The un-British retrospectivity is still in place, and those who thought they had a contract with the UK will still be let down. When is she going to be positive about immigration, including its economic benefits and the value that it brings to our communities?

   Hansard source
10. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·SNP·Graham Leadbitter

    Budget Resolutions

    Scottish voters were promised change, but instead this Budget delivers a real-terms cut of £650 million to Scotland’s block budget. It treats Scotland as an afterthought, syphons off our energy wealth and fails to protect hard-working families facing a bitter cost of living crisis this winter. Rather than delivering economic growth or protecting the vulnerable, this is a Budget of broken promises. Turning first to the cost of living crisis, during the election campaign Labour explicitly promised to cut household energy bills by £300, yet under its watch, energy bills are forecast to surge by 27% this coming January, taking average annual bills to £2,192, before climbing further to £2,389 by April. Scottish families will face energy bills a whopping £1,275 higher than Labour promised.<span id="645" class="column-number" data-column-number="645"></span> Even worse, the Chancellor’s decision to replace standing charges with higher gas unit prices creates a deeply unfair geographical penalty. Recent YouGov polling shows that 84% of people in Scotland already had to turn their heating on this year, compared to 59% in London, and independent analysis from the Scottish Parliament confirms that over 800,000 Scottish households face higher gas bills under these changes. Scots are effectively being forced to pay higher bills to subsidise warmer homes in the south of England. This Budget ignores the 142,000 Scottish households who rely on heating oil, leaving them exposed to soaring fuel costs with negligible support. At the pumps, drivers face a similar squeeze. Since July, diesel has rocketed by 34p per litre to over £2 a litre in many locations, leaving diesel drivers £130 worse off each year. Regrettably, the Prime Minister and Chancellor are frankly asleep at the wheel. Nowhere is Westminster’s contempt for Scotland’s economic future clearer than in the decision to axe grant funding for the Acorn carbon capture project in Peterhead. Despite explicit promises that capital was secured, the Government have removed Acorn grant funding. Out of the £200 million promised by Ministers, a mere £12 million in grant funding was delivered, with the rest now being converted to a loan or—possibly, maybe—equity proposals. This continues a 20-year history of Westminster betrayals, from Gordon Brown to the Tories, and Acorn being snubbed, with carbon capture projects being left on the scrap heap all over the place. The decision deals a direct blow to a just transition. In its Budget documents, the Treasury has banked £5.1 billion in revenue from Scottish oil and gasfields. Over decades, more than £400 billion in oil and gas revenue flowed from Scotland’s waters into Westminster’s hands, with the Chancellor admitting that a Scottish sovereign wealth fund would today be worth £1 trillion, had that wealth been properly invested, as Norway chose to do. Every single penny generated from Scotland’s natural resources should be reinvested in Scotland to secure a genuinely just transition to a renewables future.

    Hansard source
11. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Reform·Suella Braverman

    Nolan Principles

    The Prime Minister has made it clear that Labour councils should end their power-sharing agreements with local Green parties, following the disgracefully antisemitic motion passed by the national Green party that Zionism is racism. However, the Labour leader of Havant borough council has refused to condemn her Green party coalition partners for supporting that motion and has refused to withdraw from the coalition. Does the Minister agree that that is a breach of the Nolan principles, and will he clarify who is right: the Prime Minister, or the Labour leader of Havant borough council?

    Hansard source
12. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Reform·Sarah Pochin

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    In August last year the Government admitted that they had no idea how many people who came in on care worker visas were still working in the care sector. How can the Home Secretary make an informed decision on their earned settlement when she has no idea whether they are still here doing the jobs they came in to do?

    Hansard source
13. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Reform·Robert Jenrick

    Topical Questions

    Summer was a difficult time for Nottinghamshire fire service; it battled with wildfires and a lot of heat-related incidents. The firemen and women had to wear protective equipment and clothing in which it was simply unbearable to work in that type of heat. I know that the Secretary of State has made some funding available for this, but will she work to ensure that by next summer, if we have the same hot weather and wildfires, brave firemen and women will have the clothing and protective equipment that they need to work in those conditions?

    Hansard source
14. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Reform·Robert Jenrick

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    I respect the Home Secretary, but these are not the reforms that she wanted. When she said that the Boris wave was destabilising and unprecedented, and that it would cause incalculable damage, she was absolutely right. The Boris wave was the worst public policy failure of the 21st century, and now she risks locking it in for generations to come. When the last Conservative Prime Minister—my Prime Minister—ignored my advice on immigration, I resigned. Her Prime Minister has ignored her advice on immigration, and the damage is going to be disastrous for this country. Why has she not considered her position?

    Hansard source
15. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Reform·Lee Anderson

    Nolan Principles

    Kinver Business Solutions has secured more than £1 million in project management fees from Ashfield district council. It now turns out that one of the project managers is actually the son of the chief executive of Ashfield district council. <span id="560" class="column-number" data-column-number="560"></span>I thank the Department for arranging an appointment this week, but does the Minister agree that it is time to send the commissioners in to Ashfield district council? There is not a minute to spare.

    Hansard source
16. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Reform·Danny Kruger

    Topical Questions

    Swindon and Wiltshire councils are building a lot of new housing, which is excellent, but the Government have now abolished an essential safeguard for communities against inappropriate planning, which is the power of councillors to call in applications. What steps are the Government taking to review that particular measure, and will they reconsider if it turns out that it is not working?

    Hansard source
17. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Plaid Cymru·Liz Saville Roberts

    Topical Questions

    Following this summer’s wildfires, we saw that the devolution of fire policy was no barrier to mutual aid co-operation between the UK Government and the Welsh Government. Can the Minister tell me how any additional air firefighting capability will be allocated fairly across the nations of the United Kingdom?

    Hansard source
18. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Plaid Cymru·Liz Saville Roberts

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    The list of public sector jobs eligible to apply for the five-year settlement route does not appear to include prison officers. What assessment has the Home Secretary made of the effect that these changes will have on the crisis-hit Prison Service?

    Hansard source
19. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Zöe Franklin

    Budget Resolutions

    I welcome the Government’s recognition that economic growth cannot be driven solely from Whitehall and that local leaders and communities must have a greater say in shaping their future. The Liberal Democrats have long argued that decisions should be taken as close as possible to the people they affect. We support genuine devolution, greater fiscal autonomy for local government and the empowerment of communities to shape their own future. The real question before us today, however, is whether this Budget will actually deliver the Government’s ambition of good growth in every postcode.

    Hansard source
20. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Zöe Franklin

    Budget Resolutions

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We need that support to ensure that people can get from where they live in rural constituencies to other areas for work and education. Growth is measured not by the number of new governance structures we create, but by whether people can find an affordable home, access GP appointments, travel to work, start a business and build a secure future in the place that they call home. For the Liberal Democrats, this Budget must meet three tests: democratic consent, sustainable local government finances and tangible improvements in everyday lives. The first test is democratic consent. Devolution should bring power closer to communities. We should be careful not to mistake devolution for decentralisation. Power removed <span id="626" class="column-number" data-column-number="626"></span>from Whitehall but concentrated in a single regional office, such as a mayor, is not necessarily power shared with local communities. In Surrey, the home of my Guildford constituency, that distinction is becoming increasingly apparent. The Budget confirmed that the Government are in the final stages of agreeing arrangements for a mayoral strategic authority in Surrey, despite Ministers previously assuring the House that no area would be forced into a mayoral model. What has changed? There has been no vote of the councils that will have to operate within this structure, and residents have not been given an opportunity to express a view on what model they want. In fact, the bulk of the discussions appear to have been had with Surrey county council—a council that will be defunct in just six months—rather than the new east and west unitaries. How can the Government claim to be bringing power closer to communities when those same communities have had so little say? Of course, a mayor is democratically elected, but representing an entire county or region is very different to representing a specific town, village or ward. Local councillors understand the character, challenges and priorities of the communities they serve; they are often the first people residents turn to when problems arise. I ask the Minister what meaningful influence locally elected leaders will retain and how the voices of villages and rural communities will be protected under the new arrangements. Devolution should not be forced on communities; it should happen with them. My second test is whether the Budget delivers sustainable local government finances. The Budget contains announcements on strategic authorities, borrowing powers, business rates retention and new fiscal freedoms. Some of those measures may prove beneficial, but we must not confuse devolution with funding reform. Local government’s central challenge is not governance but financial sustainability. While Ministers talk enthusiastically about new structures and powers, councils across England face profound financial pressure. The Local Government Association has warned of a billion-pound funding gap over the coming years. Against that backdrop, many councils are struggling simply to maintain core services. To return to my area of Surrey, the six councils coming together to form West Surrey will inherit £4.5 billion of debt while simultaneously facing rising demand for adult social care, children’s services and support for children with special educational needs and disabilities. My concern is about how implementing measures without funding reform solves any of those problems. How does the new governance structure address historical debt? How does it ease pressure on social care budgets? How does it help councils meet rising demand for frontline services? The Budget includes a £1.5 billion borrowing facility for the strategic authorities. While borrowing may help investment, it is no substitute for financial stability. We must learn lessons from councils such as Woking, where serious financial failures—failures caused by previous Conservative administrations—have left residents paying the price. Nowhere is the gap between structural reform and real-life outcomes clearer than in special educational needs.

    Hansard source
21. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Zöe Franklin

    Budget Resolutions

    I think we need to recognise that we are looking forward. Multi-year settlements are a positive step, but there is still ultimately no fix for local government finances, which is causing enormous problems for local councils. Returning to the issue of SEND, families do not lie awake worrying about governance models. They worry about whether their child will receive the support they need, about delays to assessments and about whether an education, health and care plan will be delivered in time. I welcome the Government’s commitment to cover 90% of eligible historical high needs deficits accrued by March, but uncertainty remains about whether deficits accumulated in subsequent years will also be covered. This Budget also does not provide the scale of additional adult social care funding needed to address rising demand. Finally on local government finance, I want to address business rates. I welcome the principle that more locally generated revenue should remain in local areas. Giving councils a stronger stake in local economic success is sensible. However, retaining more revenue does not necessarily mean receiving more funding. The reality is that councils only benefit from the share of business rates that they are allowed to retain. If a national policy decision reduces revenues, local government must be appropriately compensated. We must ensure that areas with fewer opportunities for growth are not left behind. Rural communities in particular should not find themselves disadvantaged by a system that increasingly relies on locally generated revenue. On my second test, the jury very much remains out. My third test is whether the Budget will deliver tangible improvements to people’s lives. Good growth should mean growth that people can actually see and feel. It means a young family being able to afford a home and people being able to secure a GP appointment. It means reliable public transport and thriving town centres. It means ensuring that infrastructure arrives alongside development, rather than the reality we see, which is that the infrastructure arrives years afterwards. My constituency of Guildford is home to a strong local economy, world-leading innovation and enormous potential, but beneath that prosperity, families are struggling with housing costs, children are growing up in poverty, and residents are frustrated by pressures on local services and infrastructure. That experience is not unique; it is being felt across the country. If the Government genuinely want growth in every postcode, investment must translate into improvements. That means ensuring that the delivery of infrastructure comes with housing development, because people will support the development if they can see it. It also means growth beyond our major cities. As my hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson) mentioned, it has to include our rural communities. Our high streets, of course, must also be central to that vision of growth.<span id="628" class="column-number" data-column-number="628"></span> In conclusion, the Liberal Democrats believe that genuine devolution must mean more than transferring powers from Whitehall to an equally centralised regional mayor. We want decisions to be taken closer to communities, and we want growth that reaches every community. The Government recognise those things, but there is still so far to go. We want to see tangible change for our residents.

    Hansard source
22. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Wera Hobhouse

    Social Media: Ban for Under-16s

    Order. Before the Minister replies, may I encourage everybody to speak through the Chair? I do not want to be too pompous about it, but the convention is that the debate goes this way, not that way. Before you start a conversation among yourselves, please remember that.

    Hansard source
23. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Wera Hobhouse

    Social Media: Ban for Under-16s

    Order. May I remind the hon. and learned Member that a winding-up speech is not a new speech? It is two minutes. If he could come to an end, that would be great.

    Hansard source
24. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Wera Hobhouse

    Houses in Multiple Occupation

    HMOs are the only way many young people can afford to rent, but their unregulated growth leads to the loss of family homes. However, Bath and North East Somerset council has taken action, and has included in its draft local plan a ban on the conversion of homes that would otherwise mean the loss of three-bedroom homes in Southdown, Twerton and Odd Down. Will the Minister congratulate Bath council?

    Hansard source
25. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    First-time Buyers

    I welcome the Government’s focus on first-time buyers, because so many young people cannot get their first step on the ladder. My concern with the properties that are being built—not on the green belt but within town-centre boundaries—is that first-time buyer properties are being manipulated out of the system, in the same way that affordable homes have been on the green belt. I know the Government have done some stuff around the green belt golden rules, but what are they doing to ensure that we have first-time buyer homes on every development?

    Hansard source
26. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    I am aware that businesses not offering high-quality employment, such as mini-marts, barber shops, vape shops and nail bars, are still able to get sponsorship licences. Will the Home Secretary commit to reviewing the types of businesses that can access those licences and stop these people being able to exploit people who are not high-quality employees?

    Hansard source
27. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    More than 60 years ago, this House passed legislation establishing a register for hairdressers. The purpose was clear: to encourage professional standards; to support qualifications and training; to provide consumers with confidence; and to recognise hairdressing as a skilled profession. The principle was right then, and it remains right today—what has changed is the world around it. The high street has changed. The labour market has changed. Increasingly, the sector itself is warning us that the voluntary system, put in place in 1964, is no longer enough to ensure a sustainable future for hairdressing and barbering. Tonight, I want to make the case that moving from a voluntary register to a mandatory one is not a radical step, but a natural next step. Crucially, it is not a proposal to create a new register. Parliament has already established that principle; the register already exists. I am simply seeking through mandatory registration to strengthen a framework that Parliament itself put in place when Harold Wilson was first Prime Minister. The proposal would help to tackle the collapse in apprenticeships, strengthen public safety and support the legitimate businesses that form the backbone of our local high streets. What is perhaps most striking is that the sector itself has now reached this conclusion. The British Hair Consortium, the National Hair and Beauty Federation, the Hair and Barber Council, employers, educators and industry leaders are all increasingly united in calling for a mandatory registration scheme. This is not Government regulation being imposed on an unwilling industry, but a solution designed by the industry for an increasingly urgent problem. As I am sure you are aware, Madam Deputy Speaker, hairdressers and barbers are far more important than many people appreciate. We all know the feeling of walking out of a salon or barber shop feeling better than when we walked in. Many people value the relationship they have with their hairdresser, such as my cousin Jayne and her daughter, Lucy, who travel several hours every couple of months to see their stylist after he moved to Dorset. Nick supported my mum, Lin, as she lost her hair through chemotherapy, and still managed to make her feel a million dollars. These professionals improve confidence, wellbeing and self-esteem. These businesses provide social connection. In an increasingly isolated society, they often offer something that technology never can—genuine human interaction. One survey found that 42% of young men had experienced weeks when visiting a barber or personal care professional was the only in-person interaction they had.

    Hansard source
28. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    In my constituency, one such barber is Mike Taylor of Bond’s in Broadstone. He recently created a retro-style, one-to-one barbering space, specifically recognising the role that barbers play in supporting men’s wellbeing and mental health.<span id="692" class="column-number" data-column-number="692"></span> Barbering and hairdressing are not just socially valuable but economically vital. The wider beauty and personal care sector contributes more than £28 billion to the UK economy and supports almost 600,000 jobs. These are jobs that cannot be offshored or replaced by artificial intelligence, and they drive footfall to our town centres. When people visit a barber or salon, they often spend money elsewhere on the high street too. They are anchors of our local economies in villages, market towns and city centres. For generations, hair and beauty has acted as a ladder of opportunity. It has provided first jobs for young people, offered flexible careers for parents and carers, and enabled thousands of people to build businesses of their own. Following the introduction of my private Member’s Bill in September, I was contacted by Nova who owns NovaLux salon in Poole. She reminded me that when we first met 25 years ago, she was an apprentice at Karen’s Hair Design in Broadstone where I was a customer. I ran a business on the same high street. She trained, qualified, gained experience and, ultimately, has built a successful business of her own. Hers is exactly the sort of journey that this sector has made possible for generations. Nova’s story is the story of hair and beauty, but she shared with me that professional qualified business owners who follow the rules increasingly feel that they are competing against businesses that do not. People like Nova increasingly tell me that the profession that they love is becoming harder to sustain. The concern I hear repeatedly is not about competition but about unfair competition.

    Hansard source
29. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention. Indeed, the number of barber shops on our high streets has doubled in the last decade or so, and I am fairly sure that the number of us requiring a weekly haircut has not. The point is not about competition but about unfair competition, alongside what are, it has to be said, quite impossible trading conditions.

    Hansard source
30. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    It is interesting; although this campaign is specifically about hair and barbering, there have been calls for a similar registration system for those industries that do piercings, tattoos and that sort of thing, but the industry itself is struggling to work out exactly what it should look like. There is a big issue around insurance, which I will come on to. According to analysis commissioned by the British Hair Consortium, employee numbers in the sector fell by about 23% in 2025, which is equivalent to the loss of 20,000 jobs. To put it another way, that is the equivalent of 20 employing salons making all their staff redundant every working day for a year. Industry estimates suggest that more than 70% of those working in the sector are now classified as self-employed. Of course, genuine self-employment is not a problem—many talented stylists and barbers have always chosen to rent a chair as a stepping stone towards their own business—but the concern is about places where self-employment exists entirely on paper. When I met representatives of the National Hair and Beauty Federation a couple of weeks ago, they described workers who were, in their own words, employees on Friday and self-employed on Monday. Nothing about their work or the business had changed; only their employment status had changed. They continue to work at the same chair in a single salon with no control over their prices and unable to determine their own working practices, but they no longer have sickness cover, pensions or any rights. The change involves reduced tax receipts for the Government and, crucially, fewer apprenticeships—without workers, a business cannot hire apprentices. It is in apprenticeships where the consequences are most serious. Hairdressing apprenticeship starts in England fell from more than 13,000 in 2015 to just 4,000 in 2023, and forecasts suggest that recruitment could completely collapse within a couple of years if current trends continue. That should concern every Member of the House, because those are not just statistics but lost opportunities for young people, for social mobility and for skills development. The sector reports that about a quarter of its apprentices have special educational needs, which is a significantly higher rate than the wider apprenticeship sector. Many of them have also spent time not in education, employment or training. For thousands of young people who struggle to access traditional academic pathways, the sector has provided a route to qualifications, employment and independence.

    Hansard source
31. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. This issue is about tax receipts. I am not talking about stopping people cutting their family members’ hair or stopping genuinely self-employed people running a start-up from home. This is not about where people trade; it is about whether they trade legitimately and how we sustain the next generation of the industry. I am really glad that the hon. Member mentioned that point, because I want to tell a story that was shared with me by Mike Taylor about an apprentice who has taken up his programme. Mike has an incredible academy that takes on about a dozen young people—mostly NEETS—aged 16 to 18 in Broadstone, where I live. He has an apprentice who every week is travelling from Kent—it is a long way from Kent to Dorset, but he could not find a local training placement—to stay with his aunty in Dorchester for his training so that he can develop his skills. He could not get an apprenticeship close to home. The only opportunity available to him was working for an unscrupulous barber, who paid him just £1 an hour, despite the employer charging customers for his services. That is not entrepreneurship; that is not business. That is exploitation. That young man wants to learn a trade and build a career, and he should not have to choose between exploitation and abandoning his ambitions. Legitimate businesses, like those mentioned by the hon. Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Kevin McKenna), should not have to compete with such people. That brings me to the issue of public safety. The House of Commons Library notes that anyone can practise as a hairdresser or barber without holding any recognised qualifications. In a profession involving chemicals, blades and close physical contact with the public, that is increasingly difficult to justify. Most practitioners are highly skilled professionals who take enormous pride in their work, but consumers deserve confidence that those offering professional services have met the appropriate standards and wield their scissors safely. Most members of the public would reasonably assume that someone advertising themselves as a professional hairdresser or barber had demonstrated some level of competence, but that assumption cannot always be made. Poorly applied chemicals can cause burns, overuse of bleach can lead to hair loss and poor hygiene standards can contribute to skin conditions such as ringworm. A mandatory register would help provide the public with confidence that practitioners had achieved recognised qualifications and, just as importantly, it would enhance the reputation of those who already meet those standards every day. This proposal is practical, proportionate and achievable. We are not trying to create a system from scratch. The register already exists, and the Hair and Barber <span id="695" class="column-number" data-column-number="695"></span>Council already administers it. The infrastructure is in place. We want to build on the infrastructure that is already there. Mandatory registration would simply strengthen and modernise an existing statutory framework for the realities of today. The sector estimates that costs to hairdressers would be likely to fall if registration was universal, and that registration could become a recognised prerequisite for securing insurance and demonstrating professional competence. It would improve standards for consumers and it would support legitimate businesses. It could help enforcement agencies to tackle the tax evasion, illegal working, employment status abuse and criminal activity associated with rogue businesses. Indeed, support for the proposal now extends beyond the industry itself. The all-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, chaired by the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell), has highlighted concerns about the extraordinary growth in barbering alongside declining tax enforcement activity.

    Hansard source
32. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. The vast majority of people in the sector are doing the right thing. The problem is that they are watching other people in the sector with empty chairs all day, and wondering how on earth they support five or six employees or other people working in the space. The sector has said that it is happy to share the information so that we can know the scale of the industry, how many hairdressers are working in it and where we need more training places. This is a means of using a register that already exists to professionalise the system and help the Government to move it forward for the future. Rather than relying solely on expensive raids and investigations after problems have emerged, the register could allow for standards to be established from the outset, and for the scale and shape of the sector to be mapped, with sufficient training providers in the right place to help people such as the young man who needs to have training available in Kent. A survey by the National Hair and Beauty Federation found that support for a mandatory register in the sector is at around 80%. That figure should give Ministers pause. Industries do not often ask Parliament for regulation, yet this one is—not because it wants bureaucracy, but because it wants a sustainable future. Some critics suggest that registration could increase costs or unnecessary burdens, but I disagree. The greatest threat to consumers and the industry is not professionalisation, but the <span id="696" class="column-number" data-column-number="696"></span>continued erosion of standards, legitimate businesses being forced from our high streets by those willing to ignore the rules, the loss of apprenticeships, the loss of public confidence and the gradual devaluation of a skilled professional. When the Hairdressers (Registration) Act 1964 was debated, its promoter described hairdressing as both an art and a science. The Government of the day recognised the need for standards, qualifications and public confidence. They were right then, and those principles remain just as relevant today. Making the register mandatory would not create a new principle; it would just bring what was considered a pioneering proposal in 1964 into the 21st century. It has the potential to increase revenues and make it harder for illegal businesses to operate in our town centres. Ultimately, it would support the next generation of hairdressers and barbers. If it succeeds, perhaps that would mean fewer bad hair days for all of us. When a profession, its employers, its training providers and its representative bodies are all asking Parliament to act, Parliament should listen. Parliament recognised the importance of standards in hairdressing in 1964. The time has come to finish the job that Parliament started more than 60 years ago. I commend these proposals to the House, and I look forward to working with the Minister to deliver them.

    Hansard source
33. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Hair and Beauty Sector Regulation

    The various agencies, in my discussions with them, have said that the cost of being in the voluntary register is currently about £75. They have suggested that if a mandatory register was extended to all people working in the area, that would reduce the cost to £25. It would cost probably less than the cost of a haircut to be on a register with an organisation, which then itself would be involved in some of those enforcement activities that would benefit the Government.

    Hansard source
34. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tim Farron

    Topical Questions

    <Question HRSContentId="{701D69C2-466F-49B5-8E54-10AFC395B626}">T4. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{5393DA83-0986-431A-A4D0-A8467F75F41F}"></QuestionText>Westmorland and Furness council is England’s most rural unitary authority, but the Government’s new formula has punished us for being rural with a crushing 31% cut in our funding, putting care homes, help for the homeless and support for schools at risk. Does the Secretary of State think that is fair? Will she revisit this travesty urgently and provide emergency support?</Question>

    Hansard source
35. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Topical Questions

    Councils spend far more on enforcing against a breach of planning controls than the offender is ever fined—and even then, that money goes to the Treasury. When it is cheaper to break rules than follow them, we lose any sense of deterrence, and there is a perception that breaches have few consequences. Will the Minister look again at the amount of fines, and at whether councils could receive the proceeds of fines, so that they can recover their costs?

    Hansard source
36. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    The 2009 Gurkha justice campaign, spearheaded by Joanna Lumley, achieved settlement rights for British Army Gurkha veterans, and my understanding is that many progressed to settlement here by virtue of the access to indefinite leave to remain. Will the Home Secretary reassure the House that none of these changes will adversely affect the ability of those heroes to settle in the UK when they retire?

    Hansard source
37. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Sarah Olney

    Immigration: Earned Settlement

    I have constituents who are waiting on the five-year route to ILR, who have brought their spouses and children with them to this country and taken on high-skilled, high-paying roles. Their spouses will now have to apply separately and will be on a 10-year scheme. If their children reach adulthood before both spouses have achieved ILR, they will not be eligible to remain in this country, despite having been here since childhood. Can the Home Secretary give any reassurance to those families in my constituency who are deeply worried about their children being left without citizenship?

    Hansard source
38. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Sarah Gibson

    Budget Resolutions

    I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree that rural economies rely on transport. In my constituency, colleges have had to cut their hours because the bus does not come late enough and employers have had to put on their own buses in order to get shift workers. Does my hon. Friend agree that for rural economies to thrive, we really need to look at transport?

    Hansard source
39. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Pippa Heylings

    Budget Resolutions

    As we head into winter with bills rising again in January, households and businesses across the country are worried. This Budget needed to match the scale of the energy and climate challenges, but we as Liberal Democrats are concerned that it does not. While the standing charge removal and the proposed energy bill cost control framework are welcome, struggling households cannot wait until the next spending review in 2027 for policy costs to be taken off bills—one of the quickest ways to reduce bills while supporting electrification. The Government could have introduced the Liberal Democrat essential energy guarantee to protect basic household energy needs. If we are truly to break free from the volatile fossil fuel prices driven by despots and Trump’s stupid wars, we must accelerate renewables, grid connections and electrification. That is why I am disturbed by the seeming inconsistencies in the approach taken in the Budget. First, the Treasury says that it is setting an entirely new path on energy, while Ministers tell us that their clean energy ambitions remain unchanged. With the allocation round 8 auction budget due within weeks, Ministers must urgently clarify what that means for investment certainty in floating offshore wind and port regeneration, which is critical for supply costs and supply chains.<span id="639" class="column-number" data-column-number="639"></span> Secondly, cheaper energy does not automatically lead to electrification on its own. As winter approaches, why is the Treasury cutting the flagship warm homes plan—the surest way to electrify heating in our homes and reduce wasted wind energy? The Budget slashes £1 billion of capital funding from the programme and reintroduces VAT on clean technologies from 2027, effectively creating a solar panel and heat pump tax. I ask the Minister to confirm or deny reports that a further £1.5 billion could be removed from the warm homes plan’s financial transactions funding. That is the very zero-interest loan schemes that have just been launched and lauded. With 90% of domestic bill increases since 2020 linked to wholesale gas price spikes, despite and contrary to all the protestations from the Conservatives and Reform, the answer is clear: a national electrification strategy, making it easier, not harder, for households to move away from fossil fuels. This Budget should have advanced that mission; instead, it risks setting Britain back.

    Hansard source
40. 2 Nov 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Olly Glover

    Budget Resolutions

    For all the positives in this Budget, the real disappointment is that it does not match the radicalism and the claims of the now endless Government social media and TikTok barrage. It is extraordinary, given everything that he said when he was Secretary of State for Defence, that the Chancellor has kicked the big defence spending decisions down the road. There are warm words, but there is no plan for helping people back into work—and, of course, nothing concrete on Europe, something that even the previous Chancellor acknowledged over the weekend needs to be addressed. A big theme for my constituents is the need for infrastructure to support housing. I believe that there would be less despair and opposition to new houses if central Government listened to calls for transparency and ambition when it comes to infrastructure and public services to support housing growth. Setting and publishing targets for the amount of primary healthcare, transport, large-scale leisure or policing per head of population, based on an analysis of local demographic needs, and showing progress or otherwise against those metrics, would help to restore trust and would highlight where investment is needed. That is all the more important as local councils do not have direct control of most of these areas. The lack of acknowledgment of such challenges, let alone action on them, in the Budget is disappointing. It is also regrettable that there are no rolling funds or investment programmes for major transport improvements. Without them, no hope has been created for a new railway station serving Grove and Wantage, accessibility improvements to Cholsey station, or electrification from <span id="655" class="column-number" data-column-number="655"></span>Didcot to Oxford. We have to hope that the Government’s slow embrace of devolution, amid the utter shambles of local government reorganisation, will fill this void, but that very much remains to be seen given the number of unanswered questions. There are some welcome measures to support hospitality, but small producer relief for small-scale producers of alcohol still excludes vineyards such as Hendred vineyard, which produces a few thousand bottles a year. That makes little sense: the alcohol intensity of a drink does not inherently correlate with how much it is abused, and English wine has a promising future. Let me end by referring to what the Budget says about science and high tech. Despite some positive measures on AI safety and capital gains tax founders’ relief, the Government’s previous decisions on science mean that this is the biggest area of disappointment. My constituency contains a wide range of science and technology organisations, and the Government’s decision to cut Science and Technology Facilities Council funding significantly is incomprehensible and unforgivable. No wonder that after three months the Government have still not had the basis courtesy to reply to my letters about that. The 15% funding cuts in Harwell’s three national and globally significant research facilities—Diamond Light Source, the ISIS Neutron and Muon Source and the Central Laser Facility—will lead to significant decreases in operating time, of up to 25%. I am used to the Government ignoring me, but perhaps they will listen to the deputy general secretary of Prospect, Sue Ferns, the Liverpool city region mayor, Steve Rotherham, and the physicist Brian Cox, all of whom have warned that the cuts would “cause lasting and possibly irreparable damage to the UK’s scientific capabilities”.

    Hansard source