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. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Rachael Maskell

   EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

   Thank you for chairing the debate, Ms Butler, and I thank the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) for securing it. If you ask the wrong questions, do not be surprised by the consequences. Brexit was about the politics of the time in the Conservative party, not about the economic future of our country. Let us remember the history and the poor deal that Lord Cameron tried to secure ahead of going to the country with this referendum. Our country is now poorer and more fractious. Trade is more challenged, and we see queues at the border, horizons closing to our young people and increased migration levels. We have to ask the value of the deal that was struck after 2016. As a country, we are now significantly weaker on the global stage in a more unstable world where we should be taking the lead as we did in Europe. Locally, we know that the consequences are significant. Our constituents are £3,000 poorer as a result, and they are now faced with the cost of living challenge. We have to dig deep on where we go next and ask the questions that should have been asked in 2016. How can we have a stronger and safer economy? How do we have good trade? How do we best control migration, collaborate on a destabilised planet and ensure that our interactions abroad bring people here at home better job security, financial security and, of course, hope for the future? As we move forward, yes, we need pragmatism, but we need boldness too. As the Minister enters the fray of negotiations, I ask him to look at rebuilding an economic union with Europe that will be of value to our constituents by ensuring that trade brings good-quality jobs and powers the research that drives our economy forward. On immigration, I ask him to consider the asylum and migration management strategy that Europe has adopted and look at a risk-sharing approach so that we can rebuild balance in our system to ensure that we are supporting vulnerable people in the right way instead of pointing the finger at them. That will help our communities and our country. And ultimately, our leadership will help our world.

   Hansard source
2. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Rachael Maskell

   Disability Living Allowance: Qualifying Period for Children

   I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her incredibly powerful speech. She is right that this is not a necessity; it can be addressed. Does she agree that the Department for Work and Pensions needs to ensure that parents get support from day one so that they can address the increased financial costs that they face from the beginning of a diagnosis, and the real need for parents to be present to support their child?

   Hansard source
3. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Rachael Maskell

   Disability Living Allowance: Qualifying Period for Children

   In the light of the fact that we are moving into a new era of a can-do Government, will the Minister look, together with clinicians, at the opportunity and benefit of delivering DLA from day one, and then bring the evidence back to the House?

   Hansard source
4. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Phil Brickell

   EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

   As secretary of the all-party parliamentary group on Germany I spend a lot of time meeting German businesses that want to invest in this country. One issue that comes up time and again is exactly the point that the hon. Gentleman has made about business mobility and persuading German boards to invest in British companies to grow the economy, and one constraint on that is the ability of German professionals to come here. Does he recognise that point, and will he join me in paying tribute to Ulrich Hoppe, the director general at the German-British Chamber of Industry and Commerce, who does formidable work trying to resolve some of these issues to support the British economy?

   Hansard source
5. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Phil Brickell

   Representation of the People Bill

   First, let me put on record my thanks to the Minister and her predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), for their collective engagement so far on this Bill. As a former anti-corruption specialist for more than a decade and chair of the APPG on anti-corruption and responsible tax, I have had the pleasure of working with Members from across the House on this Bill in seeking to drive foreign interference, dirty money and undue influence out of our democracy. To that end, I wholeheartedly endorse a number of amendments: new clause 34 from my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne) on cryptocurrency; amendments 31 to 34 from my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) on strengthening “know your donor” requirements; new clause 61 from my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) on closing the political party start-up funding loophole; new clause 70 from my formidable right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) on reducing campaign spending limits; new clauses 93 to 95 from my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) on foreign source donations and loans; and new clause 86 from my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) on overseas donations. I hope the Minister will respond substantively to each of those amendments when she winds up. I want to focus my remarks on new clause 121 and amendment 151, which are in my name on the amendment paper. Both are ultimately about one deliverable that I know the Government want to achieve—namely, restoring trust in politics as a force for good. On new clause 121, I welcome the Government’s move over the weekend to expedite their existing ask of the Electoral Commission to review campaign spending limits. However, if the Electoral Commission concludes that spending limits should come down, we need to ensure that that decision is future-proof, and that is what my new clause 121 would secure. Critically, it would ensure that spending limits are set according to three key tests: first, the fairness of elections; secondly, the impact on the political parties; and thirdly, public confidence in electoral integrity. The new clause would also ensure that future increases could take place only following an independent recommendation from the Electoral Commission. This matters because politics is caught in an increasingly unsustainable fundraising arms race. In 2023, spending limits were increased unilaterally by the Government of the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) by 80%. The result was that the 2024 general election became the most expensive in British history, with parties spending £94 million between them. As spending limits rise, so does the pressure on parties to raise ever larger sums of money, and when the demand for money grows, it follows that the risk appetite for parties accepting donations, and therefore the window of opportunity for bad actors, also grows. The Rycroft review made exactly that point. Reducing spending limits can help reduce incentives to seek funding from problematic sources and lessen the pressures that fuel concerns about foreign interference in our politics. Secondly, on amendment 151 in my name, I welcome the Government’s decision in July to move to a profit-based cap on corporate donations—a clear improvement on the previous proposals, which would have tied the cap to revenue, and something that the APPG I chair had for months been calling for. However, two significant loopholes remain. Amendment 151 would close both loopholes by ensuring that only the profits of the donating company itself are counted, and by calculating donation limits using average profits over five years, rather than accumulated profits. That would provide a more accurate measure of genuine economic activity, and make it far harder for corporate structures to be used to circumvent the intention of the law.

   Hansard source
6. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Peter Swallow

   Rewiring the State

   As the Government work at pace to move power out of Westminster and into our communities, I am keen for Bracknell to get a share of that. That is why I support devolution for the Thames valley. The First Secretary of State will know that leaders across Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Swindon have written to her setting out their ambition for a mayoral strategic authority. That is excellent progress, but we have been here before and I do not want to see us lose the momentum. Will she set up a meeting for herself and her No. 10 North team with leaders and MPs from across the region so that we can sign on the dotted line, get this agreed and finally get the devolution that the Thames valley so badly needs?

   Hansard source
7. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Peter Swallow

   Representation of the People Bill

   I chair the all-party group on schools, learning and assessment, and we conducted an inquiry on votes at 16. We were speaking directly to young people, and they are delighted that the Bill will empower them with the vote. However, they are equally concerned about misinformation and disinformation, and having the tools that they need to engage in the democratic process. Does the Minister agree that that is a key issue, and that if we are to empower young people with the vote, we must also empower them with the tools that they need to use that vote in an informed and engaged way?

   Hansard source
8. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Peter Lamb

   Representation of the People Bill

   Regretfully, I think that the hon. and learned Member is confused about the constitutional process. That 67-year-old constituent of his votes for a representative to come to this place, and this place takes decisions on their behalf equally, on any part of the United Kingdom. This institution decided that it was in the best interests, and continues to be in the best interests, of this country and of Northern Ireland to maintain the Windsor framework in lieu of any better alternative on the table. I find using that issue to try to withhold the ability of 16 and 17-year-olds to have directly elected representation in this place to be spurious at best.

   Hansard source
9. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Peter Lamb

   Representation of the People Bill

   May I express my delight at my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi) making it on to the Front Bench? She is going to do a fantastic job. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate. I had 14 years in local government, and I was very involved in electoral administration in my area. So much of what we are talking about today involves the Elections Act. I was appointed to chair the Local Government Association working group that went through it, which was a cross-party group. By the end, we came up with a consensus viewpoint: based on the evidence and expert testimony we received, very little of that Act was thought to make much sense. I will not insult Conservative Members by saying that it was a nakedly political attempt to rig the electoral system to their benefit, but if they were going make a nakedly political attempt to rig the electoral system to their benefit, it would have looked exactly like the Elections Act. The basis on which they argued the case at the time was personation. It is vanishingly rare that people actually turn up and try and pretend to be anyone else at a polling station. I will deal with that in just a second, but I must respond to the remarks of the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam), at the start of this debate. We knew that the Opposition would say something to try to explain why widening the franchise or making it easier for people to register to vote was a bad idea, but I was not expecting that. It was a good thing we had free hearing tests in Parliament just before recess, but I did not need one: the dog whistle across the Chamber was so loud that it was apparent to all of us. When Reform eventually turned up to say something, it was the exact same talking points. Conservative Members will not rebuild their party by aping the Reform party. Parties have had this issue time and again; what they are doing might play well within their own ranks, but it will not rebuild their party with the country. Although I have never voted for the Conservative party, I know that there are many moderate Conservatives who must feel a great deal of shame at what is happening to their party, which is driving towards the right and away from common-sense positions. Personation is vanishingly rare in our system. The reality is that someone would need to know that a seat was on an absolute knife edge to make it work at all. They could not do it as a single person going around all the polling stations—they would need hundreds of people to go around with them. It could not be rigged in a way that would not leak out; they would run into someone in the process. They would need decades of marked registers, which are available to purchase only for six months after an election. Someone would need so many people and to run such a well organised campaign, and even then, they could just get unlucky in the process. I can confidently say that personation has never changed the result of any national election, and it is very unlikely that it has affected a local seat. What has caused a real problem—personation is not a real-world problem—is foreign interference in our political system. We know there are people who we may soon be at war with who are trying to intervene directly in our elections. We know that questionable money is a problem. Frankly, Russia was pretty happy to give the Conservatives money at one point. We know that tens of thousands of people have been turned away from polling stations since the introduction of voter ID. We know that millions of people are not registered. One in seven eligible voters is not registered in our system, and individual voter registration helped to make that the case. Disenfranchisement in our system is an absolute travesty, and this Bill gives control back to the British public by re-enfranchising them.

   Hansard source
10. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. I thank the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) for securing this debate. There can simply be no argument: Brexit has been one of the most disastrous decisions that the UK has made in modern times. This extraordinary moment of self-harm has irreparably damaged the British economy and society, and for what? There are longer queues at airports, bureaucracy at the ports and hundreds of thousands of boats crossing the channel every year. Let us never forget that there were no small boats before Brexit. Ten years on, Brexit has perhaps had the greatest impact on Cornwall, as my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) mentioned. Thanks to the tireless campaigning of the late Member for Falmouth and Camborne, Candy Atherton, Cornwall secured objective 1 status from the EU, which greatly supported our economic development according to all metrics. As was mentioned, Cornwall received over £100 million a year, which included support for the Eden Project, Newquay airport, our combined universities, superfast broadband and improvements to the A30. It was a transformational programme. The Vote Leave campaign promised that not a penny of that funding would be lost. It said that the money we sent to Brussels would be reinvested back into Cornwall, but that promise never materialised, and we are now looking to the Government to reinstate our economic development funding in the devolution deal that the Prime Minister alluded to at the Dispatch Box yesterday. We have lost not only our objective 1 funding, but the common-sense free trade we once had with our closest neighbours and allies. All told, Brexit has been an unmitigated disaster, and the time has come to rethink and renegotiate a relationship with our nearest trading partners, our allies and friends in the European Union.

    Hansard source
11. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities

    Meur ras —it is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I congratulate the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) on securing this important debate. I want to focus on SEND and home-to-school transport. On SEND, Cornwall is the 11th lowest funded of 151 local authorities, receiving less than half the per pupil funding of Kensington and Chelsea. Over the last eight years, the number of our pupils with an EHCP has almost doubled, but the delays in issuing EHCPs are far longer than average. In Cornwall, two thirds of those waiting for an EHCP wait for more than 20 weeks, compared with about 50% in England, meaning more stress and uncertainty for Cornish children and their parents. In a very large, long and remote coastal region, the additional costs of transport show up persistently in every aspect of Cornish life. Cornwall council’s expenditure on home-to-school transport has increased by nearly 300% over the past seven years—a far steeper rise than for our urban counterparts. When it comes to funding more broadly, being a coastal community with some of the UK’s finest beaches is actually a double-edged sword; in fact, it could be argued that we are damned by our natural beauty. Significant in-migration by wealthy English retirees not only places additional pressures on healthcare and our housing market but masks the true extent of deprivation in Treasury funding models. In my constituency, the average weekly wages in Camborne, Redruth and Hayle are nearly £100 less than the national average, and child poverty is currently at 35%. We were very thankful that the costs of being remote and coastal were recognised in the local government funding settlement for adult social care, but the cost pressures for home-to-school transport were not reflected. I respectfully say to the Minister that a principle cannot be half applied.

    Hansard source
12. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities

    I do agree with the hon. Lady. I cannot believe that in the 21st century it is beyond the wit of man or woman to calculate the major costs that affect our rural and remote coastal areas compared with the costs for our urban counterparts. We are not trying to deprive the services available in urban areas; it is about raising the level of services for remote coastal and rural communities to the same standard. That brings me back to my central point. Despite the rising costs and demands, Cornwall is being asked to do far more with far less, which is why we need a comprehensive, non-mayoral, Cornwall-only devolution deal that allows us to overcome some of the challenges of life in the Duchy.

    Hansard source
13. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities

    If His Majesty’s Opposition are so unhappy about the local government reorganisation, why is there not a single Opposition Member here to make that point other than him?

    Hansard source
14. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities

    On that specific point, part of the reason why there is a conflation of devolution and the local government funding settlement is that, because our local councils in some areas are so deprived of funding, they have to get funding from something like a visitor levy, which would not typically be allocated for that, in order to supplement the services they need to provide. That is potentially why there is a mix-up of views about devolution and the local government settlement. Does the Minister recognise that point?

    Hansard source
15. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    Global Tin Availability

    I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of levels of global tin availability on the economy. Meur ras, Mrs Barker. It is an honour to serve under your chairship once again for such an important debate, not just for the UK’s domestic energy security but for global climate change. We were expecting more numbers when colleagues thought this was a Tinder debate, but when I explained that it was a tin debate, the numbers dropped off slightly. The ill-informed may associate tin with cans, but in fact our cans are made almost exclusively of aluminium and contain no tin. More learned colleagues will know that tin, which is used in virtually every electrical device, is increasingly indispensable in the technologies that underpin modern industries. The digital economy, the green economy and the artificial intelligence economy—tin is foundational to each. However, as with other critical minerals, the overconcentration of processing and supply among a small number of countries a long way from western Europe presents massive economic and geopolitical risks. While debates about critical minerals are often focused on lithium, tungsten, nickel and rare earths, tin is often inexplicably overlooked. I have to declare an interest, not only as an officer of the all-party parliamentary group on critical minerals but as the MP for the constituency of the last tin mine in the country to close in 1998. However, it is not only in Camborne and Redruth that the stirrings of excitement are almost palpable. Every single Cornishman and Cornishwoman across the globe will celebrate the return of an industry that goes way beyond just a job. Cornish tin may invoke something far more visceral and emotional, but before becoming a little starry-eyed about the return of Cornish tin mining, I feel it is incumbent on me to highlight tin’s new practical applications, the strategic case for it and the opportunity that we have in this country to rise to the challenges of global supply constrictions. About half of all tin is used as solder for electronics. It is simply unrivalled in connecting components on circuit boards, enabling electrical conductivity while preventing oxidation. As a result, it is integral to almost every piece of modern technology—every smartphone, laptop, data centre server, semiconductor, telecommunications network and advanced manufacturing system. They all totally rely on tin. Without tin, there are no circuit boards, and without circuit boards, there is no new industrial strategy. The 21st-century growth sectors—those at the global technological cutting edge—are increasingly driving demand for tin skywards. Electric vehicles require up to three times the tin of a combustion engine vehicle. Tin demand for solar panels has trebled over the last five years. Tin is required in 5G infrastructure, emerging battery technologies and renewable energy. Interestingly, tin is increasingly important in the development of AI. AI is often discussed in terms of software and algorithms, and less so the vast physical infrastructure that sits behind it, but from the racks to the power modules and networking switches, tin is essential to the physical architecture. In the fabrication of advanced AI chips, molten tin droplets are struck thousands of times per second by high-powered lasers as part of the extreme ultraviolet lithography process used to manufacture cutting-edge semiconductors. As Governments and companies invest billions in data centres and computational capacity, demand for tin in the UK is soaring. In the growth-driving IS-8 sectors alone, demand is expected to grow at an average of 19%, year on year, until 2035. Between now and then, a cumulative total of more than 27,000 tonnes of tin will be required. Here is the crux of the debate. Although demand is rapidly expanding, huge questions remain about the security and resilience of global supply. Extraction and processing are currently heavily concentrated in six countries: the Democratic Republic of the Congo, China, Indonesia, Myanmar, Bolivia and Peru. Those countries currently supply over 90% of primary production, while China alone refines more than half of global tin. With that comes blindingly obvious risk. We have seen in the strait of Hormuz what happens when a state weaponises its control of a choke point in global supply. The ramifications spread rapidly through entire economies. With tin, the UK is even more exposed to such global shocks because we currently produce none. We have already seen what happens to pricing with localised disruptions over the past few years: Myanmar’s 2023 Wa state mining ban; export licensing issues in Indonesia; and military conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Because the tin market is relatively small in volume compared with other metals, it is the least traded by volume on the London metal exchange. Those modest disruptions have fuelled massive price increases. In 2025, the tin price surged 40% and has rallied a further 34% this year to date, rising to nearly £40,000 a tonne. Come 2035, there will be an expected shortfall of 85,000 tonnes per year in global supply. I will say that again: come 2035, there is expected to be a shortfall of 85,000 tonnes per year in global supply. The challenge with tin is also one of geology and ethics. Many producing regions are experiencing declining ore grades, often between 0.3% and 0.8%—I will come to it later, but the grade at South Crofty is well over 1%—and that means greater volumes of material must be processed to achieve the same output, which inevitably increases costs. At the same time, there are legitimate concerns about environmental impacts, labour standards and illegal mining activity throughout the global supply chain. I ask the Government to recognise the following. First, tin is fundamental to our advanced economy. Secondly, demand for tin will continue to far outstrip the inherently risky global supply chain. Thirdly, therefore, tin production and processing should be considered of strategic national importance, and an investment case for a tin smelter, based on UK economic security, should be developed as a priority. When it comes to UK critical minerals, we are falling well behind competitor states such as the United States, Canada, France and Australia. The US has announced more than $40 billion in funding for critical minerals projects since 2022, alongside major equity stakes in domestic mines. Our friends and neighbours in the member states of the European Union have committed more than €6 billion to critical mineral projects in this year alone. The UK has committed a tiny fraction of that sum. In that context, I turn back west to Cornwall. For four millennia, Cornwall has supplied tin to Britain and the world. Tin mining is woven into our history, identity and DNA, nowhere more so than in my constituency of Camborne, Redruth and Hayle, where the old engine houses still grace our landscape. Tin is once again one of Cornwall’s greatest opportunities. Anchored by £28 million of National Wealth Fund investment, Cornish Metals is on course to reopen the South Crofty mine that shut 30 years ago. Hopefully, that will be achieved in 2028. South Crofty has the highest grade of unmined tin in the world. It is expected to produce up to 4,700 tonnes annually, equivalent to up to 1.6% of globally mined tin production, which could meet the demand from Britain’s growing IS-8 sectors. That is one mine; there are hundreds of mines across Cornwall with critical minerals. The range of those critical minerals is yet to be defined, but there is an awful lot of exploration going on at the moment. Nationally, this offers an opportunity to strengthen domestic supply resilience, reduce dependence on overseas extraction and support the development of strategic industries. For Cornwall, South Crofty could be transformative. My constituency of Camborne, Redruth and Hayle contains some of the most deprived neighbourhoods in the country. Weekly median wages are £95 less than average, and the number of young people claiming unemployment benefits has risen by 26% this year alone. The opening of South Crofty will directly support hundreds of skilled jobs and thousands more in the wider supply chain. Multiplying that by the number of mines shows the importance of critical minerals to the Cornish economy. If we are serious about good growth being felt in every postcode, we must champion this kind of investment. I have previously raised concerns in the House about the UK’s domestic processing and refining capacity. At present, tin mined in Britain would need to travel to east Asia for processing before returning in a form that British manufacturers can use. That is economically, geostrategically and environmentally dire. What steps will the Government take to strengthen domestic critical minerals supply chains? What progress has been made in implementing the critical minerals strategy? What consideration has been given to supporting domestic processing and refining capacity? Can energy support schemes such as the British industrial competitiveness scheme play a greater role in ensuring that our critical minerals projects remain internationally competitive? I look forward to the Minister’s response.

    Hansard source
16. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Perran Moon

    Global Tin Availability

    I thank everybody who has contributed to this debate. Perhaps next time I should actually advertise it as a Tinder debate, and we can educate people while they are here. I will thank a few people specifically. My hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law) is very knowledgeable, particularly in the areas of midstream and downstream work; he talked about processing supply chains. Both he and my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd) mentioned the Kernow industrial growth fund. Right now, that fund is being used for exactly what it was designed to do—to support some exploratory mining opportunities, among other commercial opportunities in Cornwall. He also mentioned unblocking planning and permitting issues, which we need to take on board. My hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall is a superb champion for Cornwall Resources, which is doing amazing things to maximise the opportunity in tungsten. She talked insightfully about the local benefits, including in relation to the skills agenda. We really need to tie that agenda in with our devolution deal, which I know the Prime Minister has mentioned several times in the last 48 hours. For us in Cornwall, the skills agenda will be critical—excuse the pun—to maximise the opportunities in this particular sector. I totally agree with the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mr Reynolds), about the exploration that is urgently needed on these critical minerals. I heard what the Minister said, but we are not just talking about tin, tungsten and lithium, the three we know about at the moment; we know from previous records that we also have nickel, cobalt, uranium, silver and many others, but we need the data that exploration can provide and we need support in that regard. The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Grantham and Bourne (Gareth Davies), clearly grasps the importance of Cornish tin mining. He also mentioned energy costs; perhaps that is a debate for another day but, because of our Cornubian batholith, which is the granite formation on which Cornwall sits, we have vast geothermal opportunities. We are looking at whether there is a commercial case to make use locally of that geothermal energy to drive some of our industrial regeneration. I have already mentioned the importance of aligning this issue to the devolution deal. Really, this debate was more of a clarion call to Government to focus very closely, not only on lithium and tungsten, but on a huge opportunity within the tin sector across the whole of Cornwall. Finally, I warmly extend an invitation to the Minister to visit the South Crofty tin mine. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the impact of levels of global tin availability on the economy.

    Hansard source
17. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Paula Barker

    Employer National Insurance Contributions: Small Businesses in Hampshire

    I will call Alex Brewer to move the motion, and I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other hon. Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and from the Minister. As is the convention for 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.

    Hansard source
18. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Noah Law

    Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities

    I am sure that the issues in Shropshire that the hon. Lady mentions are the same as those that we in Cornwall have experienced. Does she agree that the move to a mayoral share of income tax is not a detriment to non-mayoral areas like ours but an opportunity to reset the model? We have seen integrated settlements and money being thrown at mayoral regions, but this is an opportunity to turn the taps off for those regions and turn them back on for areas like ours that have not proceeded with a mayor.

    Hansard source
19. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Noah Law

    Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities

    Does the hon. Member recall the enormous slashing of the budget of Cornwall council under his Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition Government?

    Hansard source
20. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Noah Law

    Global Tin Availability

    I thank my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon)—the Tin Man —for securing this important debate. I would like to concentrate our focus, no pun intended, on the midstream and downstream applications of tin, of which Cornwall is the cornerstone and which is an important part of the supply chain, as well as on some of the blockers to securing the supply that my hon. Friend talked about so eloquently. That is not to say that I do not worry about the upstream mining opportunities, but it is fair to say that Cornwall’s riches are abundant on that front. Yes, there will be bumps in the road, and yes, there will be successes and failures, as there have always been in the relatively high-risk business of mining, but what I really worry about is securing midstream processing. In the case of tin, it is the crucial smelting process that will enable us to keep our supply chain onshore. I will give a brief nod to Cornwall’s other, perhaps less famous but equally important critical minerals—namely lithium and tungsten, which are under our feet today. There are many more, but it is fair to say that, as it stands today, the big three—if I can use that term—are tin, lithium and tungsten. It is imperative that, across each of those three mineral resources, where we now have absolute clarity and visibility on the security of supply upstream, we start to think about the next stage of building those supply chains. Practically, what do we believe the Government can do to ensure that that happens? Let me start with why the Government should be involved in such a high-risk business. The fundamental question is what market failure are we trying to resolve here? No matter what a person’s ideology or political perspective on this matter, we have to accept that there is no way to build a supply chain like this from scratch and just leave it to the whim of the market. The example of China, where there has been huge state involvement, is perhaps an extreme one, but there is no way essentially to build a domestic supply chain of this kind from scratch by simply leaving it to the whim of individual firms to go out and do the right thing. That is why the Government’s involvement is crucial. We are not trying to solve a trick here; it is basic economics that the Government have a role to play in ensuring that we nurse the development of those supply chain projects, from a nascent idea or from something that various firms are thinking about on the side but which is not core to their business. Those junior miners already have a proper job on their hands, and it is not reasonable for the Government to snap their fingers and expect the processing opportunities to come about. That is where Government support is really valued. We already have the Kernow industrial growth fund, and I am hugely grateful to the former Chancellor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds West and Pudsey (Rachel Reeves), and to those in the Minister’s Department, for the work that they undertook to help us secure that investment, which is already being put to work on a pipeline of projects not just across this most promising of industries, but in many other Cornish industries besides. It will create those desperately needed jobs and help us to secure our industrial supply chains. What can the Government do? It is imperative that we involve ourselves wholeheartedly in the upstream development of those projects, work with credible industrial sponsors and source the financial capital needed. That is not to say that we should do it all alone. Private and public partnerships—which we are already seeing through partners such as the National Wealth Fund and the industrial growth fund—need to thrive to ensure that we create the conditions for success. Of course, there are many blockers, too, and it is important that the Department works with colleagues across the Government. For example, where there are challenges in getting a grid connection, securing appropriate transport links or unblocking planning barriers, we need a joined-up, cross-Government approach. I am proud to say that in Cornwall, the groundwork has been done. We have the visibility and the makings of a plan for how we might build that supply chain out. We have done the substantive work and the number crunching, and we have worked out what the capital need is and how much of it can be privately invested versus publicly catalysed. I ask that the Minister continues his work with us. The work has already begun, and I am incredibly grateful for his time and interest in this sector, but I implore him to bring colleagues from across the Government to meet the challenge and to help us secure the vital tin smelter and solve the energy cost issue, which is probably the immediate need. I implore him to go beyond that for the home-grown supply chain, in an industry in which I know Britain can succeed and Cornwall can be at the forefront. I implore him to work across Government to get this to the top of our agenda and make a success of it for everyone in Cornwall and Britain.

    Hansard source
21. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Noah Law

    Rewiring the State

    I welcome the steps taken by the First Secretary to ensure that strategic authorities such as Cornwall have the capacity to deliver on our growth agenda, but I want to ask specifically what steps she has taken to ensure that both national and local government have the financial analytical capability to identify those most promising investment cases and help shepherd them towards success.

    Hansard source
22. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Nick Thomas-Symonds

    Strengthening the Union

    We saw the practical benefits of the Union with the Minister’s swift action on military personnel coming to deal with the wildfires. Will he join me in paying tribute to the farmers and firefighters who dealt with those wildfires, and does he also agree that, as climate change makes them a more regular occurrence, we need a long-term plan to deal with them?

    Hansard source
23. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Neil Duncan-Jordan

    Representation of the People Bill

    It is clear from this debate that the public have lost trust in politics and the political process, and that is linked to them seeing money have an undue influence on the decisions that politicians make. In 2015, just 1% of private donations came from individuals or companies giving £1 million or more. By 2024, that figure had risen to over a third. We have seen the obscene amounts of money that some MPs have made doing second—or even third and fourth—jobs while they are supposed to be representing their constituents. Equally, we know that businesses that donate to political parties are often in line for Government contracts in return. That has got to stop, because if it does not, more than half of all political donations could soon come from just a handful of individuals, leaving elected politicians increasingly reliant on the patronage of a small elite. We will have wealthy individuals and companies with influence over the direction of our country, despite never having won a single election. New clause 26, in my name, would begin to address those concerns. It would ban political donors from securing government contracts from the Administrations they paid to elect. Over the past 25 years, companies that donated to political parties have secured £60 billion-worth in government contracts, including during the covid era. In the middle of a national crisis, people needed confidence that decisions were made on merit and in the public interest, not shaped by big donors. The Government are quite rightly starting to claim back some of the covid contracts money, but they would also benefit from distancing themselves from those donors who are only interested in the party as a vehicle for achieving their own ends. In this debate, we are rightly having a wider conversation about our democracy. There is scrutiny of a Westminster-centric political culture in which communities have often been left behind. Redistributing power on the basis of place is one side of the coin, which must go hand on hand with redistributing power on the basis of wealth. According to a recent Oxfam report, the super-rich exert influence in three main ways: buying political influence by funding parties and candidates; gaining direct access to decision makers and institutions; and shaping public opinion to defend elite power. That is why I am supporting amendments to limit donations from harmful lobbying interests and place stronger caps on what wealthy individuals and private companies can give.

    Hansard source
24. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Natasha Irons

    Engagements

    Q7. A wise man recently called for“good growth in every postcode and hope in every heart.”In Croydon, these cannot come soon enough. Gatwick’s expansion could provide Croydon’s young people with world-class employment and training opportunities close to their homes, but the previous Conservative Government’s cuts to rail infrastructure investment around East Croydon station could still put them out of their reach as they cannot physically get to them. Will the Prime Minister look again at the Croydon area modelling scheme, back my campaign to unblock the Croydon bottleneck and outline what this Government are doing to give young people in Croydon East access to the opportunities they deserve?

    Hansard source
25. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Representation of the People Bill

    I start by paying tribute to the new Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi), for all the work she did on the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee on these issues. I know that she will do a brilliant job in this role. I also pay tribute to everyone who has played a part in this Bill to date, because for all our ambitions for the things we would like to change in the world, if the process by which we make those changes is not fair and free, we will not be able to achieve anything. We all know and understand that. Like everybody else, I recognise that new clause 31 is out of scope. I would gently suggest to the shadow Minister that there are many versions of proportional representation and electoral reform—those of us who have nerded out over this for years know that. We would welcome her having that conversation, which might be more illuminating than whether she is concerned about Zach Goldmsith’s leaflets. I add my support to the amendments tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum) on domestic abuse and those supported by many of my colleagues from east London—maybe that says something about politics in our part of town—about abuse of candidates. I know well what my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali) has been through, and it is a testament to her character that she is here fighting for change. I also support the amendments tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne) on crypto donations. I do not really understand the technology, but I know that he does, and I understand and share his fear accordingly. We come here today to debate this Bill because we all know that trust is a bygone issue in our politics. It takes something for us in this House to be lectured by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, but we are being lectured on this. It is like turkeys being told that Christmas is a good idea. IPSA has pointed out to us that only 28% of the public think that MPs care about their local community at all—so two thirds of our constituents think that we are here out of our own self-interest—and only 4% think that we are doing anything good for the country. The difficult question that we all have to take on the chin is: in whose interest do the public think we are acting? From today, if we do not take a stand with this Bill to tackle the ways that money has infiltrated our politics, the risk is that they will think we are acting in the interests of our own back pockets. We have heard a lot of quotes today, so let me bring in William Blake, who said: “Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but foresight is better”. We have all seen it. We know that money is coming in. We know that this is something different, and we know enough to know that it is a problem.

    Hansard source
26. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Stella Creasy

    Representation of the People Bill

    That is incredibly welcome news. Will the Minister commit that this Government will always act to protect the integrity of the next general election?

    Hansard source
27. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Julie Minns

    Representation of the People Bill

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon) for all her work on the Bill. I also welcome the Minister to her place. I will speak briefly to new clause 48, tabled in my name. I thank the many Members from across the House who have supported it and the Royal National Institute of Blind People for its assistance and support in drafting it. The Bill takes a significant step towards strengthening and protecting our democracy and extending the franchise. However, we must recognise that one group of voters remain disenfranchised and unable to vote independently and in secret because they cannot see the ballot form in front of them. I first worked on the issue of accessible voting at the 1997 general election, when I had the privilege of working for Scope on the “Polls Apart” campaign. “Polls Apart” shone a light on the physical barriers that disabled people face when exercising their right to vote. It went on to secure changes in the law to remove many of those barriers. Nearly three decades on, however, blind and partially sighted people still cannot reliably vote independently and in secret.

    Hansard source
28. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Julie Minns

    Representation of the People Bill

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That right was first enshrined by this Parliament in 1872, as my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) said earlier in the debate. More than 150 years later, blind and partially sighted people are still being denied that right. It is time that was brought to an end. One of those people currently denied that right is my constituent John, who on arriving at the polling station with his guide dog at the last general election found that there was no usable tactile device. John had to fold his ballot paper to make creases as reference points and ask the staff to read out the names in order as he navigated the creases to identify his candidate of choice. Unlike me and most of the people in this Chamber, John could not be sure that his vote was private, accurate or truly his, because he was dependent on someone else verifying it for him. John’s experience is echoed by RNIB research that found that only a quarter of blind voters said they were able to vote independently and in secret, while two thirds had to rely on a companion or polling station staff. New clause 48 offers a practical way forward, and I am grateful to the Minister for engaging constructively with me and my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova) and for indicating the Government’s readiness to act, as the Bill moves to the other place, to give blind and partially sighted voters the right to vote independently and in secret.

    Hansard source
29. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Julie Minns

    Representation of the People Bill

    I absolutely agree. From my work in the 1997 election I know that Mencap has looked extensively at the issue of accessible information for people with learning disabilities. In conclusion, I ask the Minister to place on record the Government’s commitment to dealing with this issue once and for all when the Bill moves to the other place, and to ensuring that blind and partially sighted voters are able to make their own choice, mark their own ballot and know that their vote is their own.

    Hansard source
30. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Rewiring the State

    I congratulate my right hon. Friend on securing this role; I have no doubt that she will do a wonderful job. I was particularly interested in what she said about her Department strengthening national resilience, which will remain central. We have just had the hottest summer on record. This country was built for a climate that no longer exists, as we were told on the Environmental Audit Committee, and 2,500 people are estimated to have died this summer as a result. Diabetics, asthmatics, the very old and the very young are particularly at threat. Does my right hon. Friend have any plans to bring forward the new national adaptation plan? The national adaptation plan 3 under the previous Government was widely derided, but there is currently no plan for a new one until 2028, and it is clear that the pressures we are facing in summer are worse than ever before. Can she tell us whether there will be a new national adaptation plan or, if not, what she is going to do to ensure that we are better prepared next summer than we were this summer?

    Hansard source
31. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi

    Engagements

    Q13. The British people should be under no illusion that the nation faces a significantly increased threat level, especially from Russia, but also that we have a US leadership for whom European security is no longer a focus or a priority. That is why it is imperative that we invest in our armed forces in the here and now, rather than being sorry later. Indeed, defence is definitely one area where vibes alone just will not be enough. Rather than kicking the can down the road, waiting for a fiscal event in a future year, will the Prime Minister urgently commit to charting a pathway to reaching 3% of GDP being spent on defence by 2030? As his Chancellor rightly noted, that is critical to keeping our country safe.

    Hansard source
32. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Paul Foster

    Rewiring the State

    Lancashire has missed out on Government investment for decades, and my constituents in South Ribble have been treated to nothing but the scraps of investment left in the pot at the end of the year. We now have an opportunity like no other in generations. Lancashire needs devolution and an elected mayor. Will the First Secretary of State facilitate an urgent meeting for me and Lancashire colleagues with No. 10 North to unlock this desperately needed opportunity for real investment and prosperity in Lancashire?

    Hansard source
33. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Hamish Falconer

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. I extend gratitude to the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) for providing a rich opportunity on our second day back. Much history has been discussed: two referendums and what should have been in our manifesto. I was disappointed to see colleagues from the right unwilling to enter into greater detail of the debate about Maastricht and John Major. I must confess that I suspect our constituents are slightly less interested in going through the entrails of the history. It is important to focus on the future. I will quickly say three things about my overall position regarding the negotiations to come. I will also try to answer some of the specifics raised. Some hon. Members may wish to intervene, which they are welcome to do, but I will try to cover a little ground initially. First, I want to pay an enormous tribute to my predecessor, who did incredibly important work in resetting our relationship with the European Union. In the spirit of unity, I will resist the temptation to respond to the accusation from the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood) that I am providing “a masterclass in the art of the bad deal.” My predecessor faced a true masterclass of a bad deal left to him by the previous Government, and he did incredible work on a reset. I want to be clear on three points. First, I want to go even further and faster than my predecessor. There is great urgency to address the shortcomings in our arrangements. Secondly, there are challenges facing Europe of security, defence and the economy. I discussed those challenges with my European counterparts in Austria this week. Thirdly, Britain is part of Europe. We are Europeans. European security is British security. We must be a close partner with our European friends in dealing with shared challenges.

    Hansard source
34. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Hamish Falconer

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    I am glad that someone is grateful for my coming back, and I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s courteous tone. Of course, the Windsor framework is important. As he and many people across this House know, it is an incredibly complex arrangement that seeks to preserve the delicate balance in Northern Ireland. I have heard comments from all sides of the debate. I look forward to visiting Northern Ireland soon. It is vital that the people of Northern Ireland get the benefits of both. I understand the criticisms that he made during his remarks, but at the moment it is the one part of the UK that benefits from both, and I want to see that benefit maximised to the absolute fullest. I was saying a little about European challenges. As the Prime Minister was clear yesterday, there are challenges for our economy, as there are for other European economies—I discussed that during my time in Austria, and the Foreign Secretary will discuss it with his counterparts. There are of course real conversations to be had with our European friends on the whole range of issues that have been discussed. I want to confirm a few things. First, to colleagues who spoke up for their farmers, I understand the pressures on British farmers. I understand the support that I have heard this morning for concluding an SPS deal. I intend to do so with British farmers’ interests at its very heart. I heard some of the specifics, including the barriers and costs that have accrued when seeking to export. I do not like to disagree with my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles), but there was a suggestion that sausages were not the most important thing. As a Lincolnshire MP, I would like to say that they are, and their easy export is a priority for me and would benefit not just Lincolnshire and Europe, but the whole of the UK. I also heard the other important points that were made. I will again try to strike a brief moment of unity with the Opposition: we have great strengths in services. Many European firms look to the UK for those strengths. It is a shame that those arrangements and services remain as immature as they are. That was a frustration before 2016 and it remains a frustration afterwards. It is in the whole of Europe’s interest to free up the services trade within Europe. I discussed that with my counterparts just this week.

    Hansard source
35. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Hamish Falconer

    EU Membership Referendum: Impact on the UK

    The hon. Gentleman will understand that I cannot provide much comment on the structures of parliamentary scrutiny, which are obviously not a question for me, but I can confirm that if we are able to conclude the ambitious deal that I hope we will be able to in the months ahead, I will of course return to Parliament and there would be a full scrutiny process. He refers to changes in the law. That happens in this place, and I would expect proper scrutiny processes of any legislation that was required to enact the Bills in question. I was talking about services, and I pay tribute to the musical talents in this place. It is not just the Prime Minister who knows how to play a guitar. It is a great shame for Europe and Britain that touring is not easier for British bands in Europe. I discussed those issues this week. It is a source of frustration to me that it has not been possible to make faster progress. I heard the Liberal Democrat advice to change our manifesto commitments, but I would question the political wisdom of doing so. It is a manifesto commitment for us to make progress on this issue, and we will continue to do so. There are a range of complex issues being raised by the European Union about securing the changes that we want to see. I am sure it is a sentiment shared right across the House that music should flow freely, and that the UK and Europe benefit from the closeness of those relationships. Some questions were raised about the timing of the summit and the negotiations. Obviously, we will need to agree timing with our friends in Europe and announce it in the usual way, but I want to be clear to the House that I am ambitious to move quickly and I would like to see progress within the coming months. There was much else upon which I could touch. I will leave the debate about the statistical doppelganger proxy method for checking whether the British economy could have grown more or less quickly than other European economies to the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire. All I will say is that our relationship with Europe is absolutely vital for our economy. In our constituencies, we will all have experienced businesses that are finding exports and recruitment harder; a whole range of issues have been made more difficult by the poor deal that we were left with. I would like to reassure the House that it is my intention during my time in this role to make it easier for the whole of the UK.

    Hansard source
36. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Clive Betts

    Rewiring the State

    I offer two congratulations: first, to my right hon. Friend and constituency neighbour, the First Secretary, on her well-deserved promotion—I am sure she will do an excellent job. Secondly, I congratulate her and the Prime Minister for their real commitment to devolution, which I have wanted to see for an awfully long time. I hope it is devolution to local councils, as first-tier authorities, as well as to strategic authorities. One area that has not been covered so far is education. The First Secretary is probably aware that in five wards in my constituency with high levels of deprivation, there is not a single sixth form. Responsibility for that rests totally with academy trusts, and the local council has no power or influence over it whatsoever. When she looks again at devolution to bodies with democratic control, could she look at the education system? That will be key to tackling the problem of those not in education, employment or training.

    Hansard source
37. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mohammad Yasin

    Engagements

    The Labour Government have already delivered real investment for Bedford, including our community diagnostic centre, urgent care centre and funding for the Putnoe walk-in centre. I was pleased to open Bedford’s new mental health crisis house this summer, but the in-patient mental health services that my constituents lost in 2017 have never been replaced. Will the Prime Minister commit to working with me to take the next steps towards restoring adult and young people’s in-patient mental health provision in Bedford, so that my constituents can access the right care in the right place at the right time?

    Hansard source
38. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mike Reader

    Representation of the People Bill

    Thank you for calling me so early, Madam Deputy Speaker. Without wanting to upset you, I was going to talk about new clause 31. I will keep my comments on that to a minimum for fear of upsetting you.

    Hansard source
39. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Disability Living Allowance: Qualifying Period for Children

    I beg to move, That this House has considered the potential merits of removing the qualifying period for Disability Living Allowance for children. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Butler. It is right and fitting that I start this debate where it all began for me, with dear Mabel—a brave, kind, clever, funny four-year-old girl who lives in my constituency—and her tenacious mum Rachael. When I was first elected to Parliament, I met with Rachael, my constituent, and she shared her experience with her daughter Mabel, who sadly had been diagnosed with cancer. Aged four, Mabel was diagnosed with Wilms’, a form of kidney cancer. After a horrifying six months, including two major operations and a tough course of chemotherapy, the family received the news that Mabel was free of cancer. Now, aged six, Mabel attends her local school, where I was fortunate enough to meet her, and is enjoying her life as a young child should. I know that the House will join me in wishing Mabel well. Following Mabel’s diagnosis, Rachael made an application for disability living allowance, which required completing a 40-page questionnaire that asks questions such as whether the four-year-old needs help monitoring their blood oxygen levels. Disability living allowance is supposed to support families of children with disabilities and serious conditions such as cancer. It can provide a lifeline of financial support at the time when it is most needed, yet the current system requires families to wait three months for the qualifying period. Let me be clear: the financial impact of cancer does not begin after three months. It is instant. Rachael shared with me that Mabel being diagnosed with cancer was the toughest time of her family’s lives. Despite that, she felt that they were in a more fortunate position than many of the other families on the ward. Rachael’s employer gave her six months off work as sick leave and her partner was able to work flexibly so that they could both spend time with their daughter at hospital. That time allowed Mabel to have support and care from her loved ones, and it allowed support from their family. I cannot even begin to imagine the anguish that families face with such a diagnosis—all the more when it is their child. Unfortunately, not every employer is able or willing to offer that support. That disparity should leave us asking: if we cannot be there when a child is diagnosed with cancer, what are we doing?

    Hansard source
40. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Disability Living Allowance: Qualifying Period for Children

    I absolutely agree. Too often, the financial impacts of a cancer diagnosis are forgotten. People think about the hospital visits, the sickness and the endless tablets, but a disability or serious condition such as cancer has an impact on every single part of someone’s life. Following a diagnosis, families immediately have to deal with the financial impact. It is a sad fact of life that bills do not care whether a child has cancer; they will still be due. But we can care. Cross-party, we can care. We can unite and do the right thing. Families with children with a disability or serious condition have to wait seven months on average before receiving a single disability living allowance payment. That is months and months of rent, mortgage payments, electricity bills and council tax, and it is weeks and weeks of food shopping. It is compounded by the fact that household income drops by an average of £6,000 per year. For one in three, that can reach over £10,000. Sadly, it gets even worse: the delay in receiving DLA means that a parent’s ability to claim any carer’s allowance as an additional or an alternative has a further impact on the financial strain. It is also important to note that parents in work are unable to apply for universal credit, and that that cuts out other potential streams of support. All this leaves parents with an impossible choice, a cruel choice that no parent should have to make: do they leave their child alone in hospital to face this battle by themselves, or do they not go to work? Do they skip bills? Do they run the risk of losing their home? Do they not eat? Do they turn the heating off? This is the reality. These are decisions that families should never have to make, yet they happen daily for families up and down this country. During my meeting with Rachael, she told me about a young boy of just six years old who was also on the ward. His parents were left with no option but to carry on working. As the nurses were unable to provide round-the-clock care, Rachael helped him to use the toilet, helped to dress him and helped him to eat. It is heartbreaking to think of the many children who have no one beside them—not just for the children, but for the mothers and fathers being left with no choice. I missed my son’s first day back at school today and have cried about it, but that is nothing in comparison with having to leave a child who is suffering from cancer in a hospital bed. Let me be clear: DLA is not designed to act as a source of income. It is there to help with the extra costs of looking after a child with a health condition.

    Hansard source