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

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

1. 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
2. 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
3. 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
4. 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
5. 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
6. 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
7. 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
8. 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
9. 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
10. 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
11. 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
12. 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
13. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Disability Living Allowance: Qualifying Period for Children

    I absolutely agree. Cancer is actually one of the clearest diagnoses that someone can get from day one. Cancer does not wait, yet families have to. The three-month qualifying period does not reflect the realities that families face. In Mabel’s case, the family were informed that they would not qualify for any support, as Mabel’s condition had not lasted for more than six months. In other words, she had not had cancer for long enough. That is despite her having undergone multiple operations and chemotherapy; to this day, she must still attend regular hospital appointments. It is my understanding that the qualifying period is meant to establish that a health condition is long-standing in nature, but with a diagnosis of cancer surely support should be given from the outset.

    Hansard source
14. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Disability Living Allowance: Qualifying Period for Children

    Absolutely. The bureaucratic system is failing families, but these issues could easily be resolved if medical evidence could be used instead of the qualifying period. I urge the Minister to look at ways in which medical evidence and research can be used in DLA to make the system better for those who rely on it. There are already provisions that allow the use of medical evidence to bypass the qualifying period, such as the special rules cases where someone is approaching the end of life. The qualifying period is outdated and does not reflect the complexities of lifelong conditions. I am aware that the Government do not know the cost of removing the qualifying period, but I do not think that any cost is worth more than parents’ ability to be there for their child when they have cancer. As it stands, we cannot cure childhood cancer. We cannot spare families the fear, the sleepless nights or the heartbreak of watching a child undergo surgery and chemotherapy. But we can ensure that when the worst happens, the Government stand beside them rather than placing further barriers in their way. Families should not have to prove their desperation for three months before receiving support. They should not have to navigate mountains of paperwork while sitting beside a hospital bed. They should never be forced to choose between earning a wage and being there for their child. Mabel’s story is one of hope. Today, she is back at school, enjoying the childhood that every parent wishes for their son or daughter. But her family’s experience has exposed a system that is failing too many in this country. The question before us is a simple one: when a child is diagnosed with cancer or another serious condition, do we respond with bureaucracy or with compassion? I believe we should choose compassion. I therefore urge the Minister to work with families, clinicians and charities to remove the three-month qualifying period and replace it with a system that recognises medical evidence at the outset. Let us ensure that no parent is forced to leave a child alone on a hospital ward because they cannot afford to be there. Let us build a system worthy of the families who rely on it—and let us act now, because cancer does not wait.

    Hansard source
15. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matthew Pennycook

    Draft Nature Restoration Levy regulations 2026

    I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Nature Restoration Levy Regulations 2026. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Alec. The draft regulations were laid before the House on 18 June. When it comes to development and the environment, this Government have been clear that we want to unlock a win-win for the economy and for nature. To that end, we legislated through the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 to introduce a nature restoration fund that will unlock and accelerate development, going beyond simply offsetting harm to unlock the positive impact that development can have in driving nature recovery. The purpose of the NRF is simple: to end the current suboptimal approach to discharging environmental obligations, in which developers are required to pay for localised and often costly mitigation measures, only to maintain the environmental status quo; and to replace that with a more strategic approach that will streamline delivery of new homes and infrastructure, while efficiently delivering improved environmental outcomes by leveraging economies of scale and reducing need for costly project-level assessments. As hon. Members are aware, the core principles and purpose of the NRF were subject to extensive scrutiny by both Houses. Relevant clauses of the original Bill were strengthened in a number of important ways during its passage to provide further reassurance that the fund will deliver the improved outcomes for nature that are at the core of the model. It would not be appropriate to relitigate the lengthy debates that took place in the Bill Committee, but I take this opportunity to emphasise that strong safeguards were built into the 2025 Act to ensure that the fund will restore, not harm, nature. Those include a binding overall improvement test, monitoring and back-up measures, remedial action and the ability to amend or revoke plans if necessary. Shifting to a strategic approach requires positive planning, which is why the creation of environmental delivery plans sits at the heart of the model. EDPs will be developed by Natural England, the Government’s adviser in respect of the natural environment, and will demonstrate how the proposed package of conservation measures delivered by the EDP will materially outweigh one or more impacts of development on a protected site or species. Those conservation measures will then be deployed by Natural England where they will have the greatest environmental benefit. Each EDP will be subject to public consultation, providing an opportunity for stakeholders to scrutinise the evidence presented by Natural England before an EDP can be made. At the conclusion of that process, the Secretary of State will consider whether the EDP meets the overall improvement test established under the Act before they formally make the EDP. Where an EDP is in place, developers will have the option to pay the nature restoration levy to discharge the relevant environmental obligations that the EDP covers. That levy is the subject of the draft regulations that we are considering. The draft nature restoration levy regulations set out how the levy mechanism will work in practice. They will provide the statutory framework for key elements of the levy’s operation, including how liability to pay the levy may be assumed, imposed or transferred, and they explain how the amount of the levy will be calculated, when payment will be due, and the enforcement mechanisms available to Natural England when obligations are not met. The purpose of the nature restoration levy is to enable the delivery, management, maintenance and monitoring of the conservation measures identified in the relevant EDP. The draft regulations therefore provide clear safeguards to support the effective delivery of such measures. They ensure that payments from developers are sufficient to meet the costs of the relevant conservation measures, are properly recovered in a timely manner, and are aligned with the commercial realities of development. Levy rates will be set through individual EDP charging schedules, which will form part of the EDP, which is consulted on. Those charging schedules will be based primarily on the cost of delivering the conservation measures needed to materially outweigh the development impacts. At times during the passage of the Planning and Infrastructure Act, concerns were expressed that funds collected through the NRF might be diverted to pay for other, unrelated priorities. I assure hon. Members that the draft regulations will ensure that levy funds can be used only for the delivery of the conservation measures set out in the relevant EDP and for the administrative expenses connected with that EDP. Clear reporting requirements on how levy receipts are spent will further enable the NRF to operate transparently and with appropriate scrutiny. I stress that levy receipts are subject to a statutory ringfence and must be used to deliver the EDP for which they were collected. Only costs reasonably attributable to that EDP can be funded through levy income. I am also aware of concerns regarding the potential impacts of EDPs on development viability. I want to make it clear, however, that we have put in place important safeguards to protect developers who choose to use the NRF from unjustified costs. Public consultation and rigorous Secretary of State scrutiny of each EDP will ensure that proposed levy rates are carefully considered before any EDP is made. It is also worth reiterating—we debated this issue at length in Committee—that in almost all cases EDPs will be voluntary and developers will have the option to meet obligations through existing routes if they do not believe that discharging their obligations through the NRF represents good value for money. Although the levy regulations are a key part of the new system, we recognise that users will need proper support to navigate the NRF. I am pleased to say that initial guidance has now been published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and Natural England to support the implementation of the first EDPs. The guidance sets out the key steps for NRF users and explains the core operational processes that will underpin the NRF system. We will continue to work with stakeholders to identify further areas where guidance might assist as we work to roll out the NRF. To conclude, the regulations will support the effective implementation of the NRF by ensuring that the levy operates effectively, transparently and fairly so that we can build the homes and infrastructure our country needs while improving our natural environment for future generations. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

    Hansard source
16. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matthew Pennycook

    Draft Nature Restoration Levy regulations 2026

    I thank both my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire and the shadow Minister for those questions. Let me deal with them each in turn. It may be useful if I set out in plainer terms how an EDP will be made and how the levy will be set. The shadow Minister asked first about Natural England capacity. We debated that at length during the passage of the Bill: we believe that Natural England is the appropriate delivery body for the NRF, given its internal expertise and ability to operate effectively across the whole of England. It is also worth saying that when carrying out its functions under the nature restoration fund, Natural England remains bound by its wider statutory duties and general purposes, as set out in the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2026. Those include promoting nature conservation and protecting biodiversity. We think that Natural England is the appropriate body. It will be supported to take strategic action to deliver the conservation measures set out within individual EDPs, using income from the nature restoration levy. This is a really important point: the levy is based on full cost recovery. As I made clear in my opening remarks, the levy can be used to support administrative duties tied to the EDP, but is primarily to fund conservation measures that EDPs will bring forward, on a full cost-recovery basis. The regulations also enable targeted use of levy funding to cover management, maintenance and other things. That will enable Natural England to build and maintain the capacity and capability needed to design, implement and monitor EDPs effectively. The important point to convey to the Committee is that each EDP will be subject to public consultation. In line with the commitment we made in the other place, we have been working for many months with Natural England and DEFRA on the first EDP, which deals solely with nutrient pollution; we thought that was the best constraint to take the first EDP forward on. In bringing forward an EDP, Natural England will have to project and estimate the maximum amount of development that that EDP can cater for and set a levy rate based on what is necessary to deliver the conservation measures required to discharge and meet that overall improvement test; I will come back to that in a second. Natural England will set a levy for each individual EDP. That will be subject to public consultation. Environmental groups, local residents, local authorities and developers will each have a say on the particular levy being consulted on. That gives the public a chance to have input into what is taken forward.

    Hansard source
17. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matthew Pennycook

    Draft Nature Restoration Levy regulations 2026

    That is an appropriate question. The shadow Minister may recall that during the passage of the Bill we committed to some upfront funding for Natural England. However, we have come to the regulations before us: the point is that the levy is designed to operate on a full cost-recovery basis. Rates are required to reflect the cost of delivering the necessary conservation measures, as well as covering the costs of monitoring and maintenance activities. Some of the levy can be used on the cost of setting up and consulting on an EDP but it is primarily for bringing the conservation measures forward. The shadow Minister also asked about payments in lieu—off-site payments, as I took it. The regulations do not provide for that. That is not the assumption that we are working on. I come back to what an EDP means in practice. Let us take the case of nutrient pollution, which will be the first we consult on. Natural England will have put together a suite of conservation measures across a designated area that it can call on to ensure that the overall improvement test is met. As I said in my opening remarks, each individual developer can still decide to discharge relevant environmental obligations under current arrangements if they do not feel that the levy rate provides value for money. However, we hope that the workings of the EDP will show that it is a very effective, efficient way to discharge those obligations. We hope that more developers will come in. As the levy payments come in, Natural England will begin to draw on the suite of conservation measures available to it. We are taking forward separate regulations on the prioritisation of conservation measures: as part of an EDP, Natural England will have to set out in general terms a prioritisation and sequencing of conservation measures. Those are not mutually exclusive; some might be relevant and used in different instances. This is about what it brings forward to meet those requirements. As more developers come within the given area where the EDP is operating, Natural England will be able to leverage economies of scale. That is the big win here: allowing those economies of scale and that strategic approach. The regulations are not designed for payments in lieu. I hope that I have dealt with the cumulative impact. When it comes to individual planning applications, developers will have to indicate that they wish to discharge their obligations through the EDP. At that point, there will be a commitment to pay on the part of Natural England. The developer can then use that commitment to take that through the relevant planning process. The planning process may not be successful, but if it is, the liability to pay is ensured and there will be payment into the scheme. In terms of cumulative impact, a particular developer may seek to discharge its obligations on a site-by-site, project-level basis, using EDPs only on some sites in the catchment—again, we would hope not; we want as many developers to be using EDPs as possible. That is probably unlikely if developers see that EDPs are working for them as an efficient way to discharge the obligations. I am sure that developers will start to make better use of the scheme. Let me address the points that my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire raised, including on changing the levy without consultation. The Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 sets out the circumstances where reconsultation on an EDP is required, such as where new conservation measures are proposed or the amount of development coverage is increased. There are a couple of scenarios where that might work. Say the projected development of homes or infrastructure increases; there might be a need to amend the EDP. Alternatively, additional conservation measures might be required. Under the powers in the Act, the Secretary of State may direct Natural England to reconsult when there are changes to the EDP’s charging schedule. That allows the levy rate to change to meet the cost of the EDP, in line with the overall improvement test, but it does not require reconsultation in all circumstances. We would not want a wholesale public consultation on minor changes to the levy rate; when there are significant changes, the Secretary of State has the power to do that. The levy rate for developers is set at the point where Natural England accepts the commitment to pay. If the levy rate subsequently needs to be increased to ensure that the required conservation measures can be delivered, the new rate will take effect only for future requests made to the EDP. In terms of independent oversight, EDPs will not be black-box exercises; as we said, they are subject to public consultation. In the very near future we will launch the consultation on the first EDP, which is on nutrient neutrality. Before an EDP can take effect, local authorities, environmental groups and others will have a chance to scrutinise it in its entirety. Natural England must then consider the consultation responses before finalising the EDP and the Secretary of State retains statutory oversight through the approval of the EDP itself and whether it meets the overall improvement test. I do not want to relitigate the extensive debates in Committee, but that overall improvement test is the test that must be met. In the case of the first EDP that we bring forward, it will be the DEFRA Secretary of State who makes the judgment on whether the EDP is to be made following consultation. I have covered whether the levy funds are not required to meet costs in full. My hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire raised the absence of a legal route to exit a commitment if circumstances change, but we have designed the draft regulations to accommodate the changing circumstances that developers might face. The regulations allow for levy-related commitments to be cancelled in specified scenarios, ensuring that the system can respond when a development does not proceed as anticipated. That reflects a proportionate approach to provide certainty for Natural England in delivering the necessary conservation measures, while recognising that plans can change over the lifetime of a development.

    Hansard source
18. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matthew Pennycook

    Draft Nature Restoration Levy regulations 2026

    I thank the shadow Minister for his question. That brings me back to my point about how the levy is set and how it is tested through public consultation. It will be for Natural England to judge the quantum of development to be taken forward and to divide the individual charge on a per-hectare or per-dwelling basis in the most appropriate way. However, at the point when the developer seeks to discharge its environmental obligations through the use of the levy it will have consented to pay that levy amount. We will test the levy amount through public consultation, but the test of whether the levy is set effectively is that it allows for the conservation measures to be deployed. There is a statutory ringfence on the funds, so it is not as if the funds could be diverted to other uses. As we made clear repeatedly throughout the passage of the Bill, EDPs will be based on the best scientific evidence available and on all the expertise in Natural England to allow it to judge whether it has the levy rate right. As I said, that will be tested in consultation. To answer the shadow Minister’s point, I should say that the value should not be exceeded. I think I have responded to all the points. I thank Members for their questions. To be clear, this draft statutory instrument sets out a framework for the nature restoration levy and provides Natural England with the tools it needs to implement the nature restoration fund effectively. The draft regs are a necessary precursor to that first consultation, which as I have made clear will concern nutrient pollution only. That is the commitment that we gave. We will return to the House with an evaluation of how that consultation worked before we proceed, although Natural England and DEFRA are working on the early stages of the EDPs for other interventions—great crested newts are a priority for colleagues in DEFRA. I hope that the draft regulations will be welcomed by the Committee and I commend them to it. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
19. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Marsha De Cordova

    Representation of the People Bill

    I thank my hon. Friend for her work on the Bill and on trying to level the playing field to ensure that every Member and every person has the ability to vote independently and in secret. She rightly highlights that one group, which includes me, are unable to vote independently and in secret because we are unable to see our ballot paper clearly. Does she agree that it is time for everyone to work together to ensure that we level the playing field so that every person has the ability and the right to exercise their vote independently and in secret?

    Hansard source
20. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mark Sewards

    Representation of the People Bill

    I know that many of my colleagues are keen to get in, so I will try to keep it under five minutes. I will speak specifically about amendments 31 and 34. When the Government brought forward this legislation, I was so pleased that they referenced enhanced “know your donor” checks, because before accepting donations from anyone all political parties should know who those donors are and where the money is coming from. We know that malign state actors are seeking to influence our politics. They often try through wealthy individuals who have the means to try to distort things here in the UK, so I was pleased with the Government’s announcement on donor checks. However, I did not think that the original Bill as drafted was strong enough, and with the support of my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) I drafted some amendments that I think will greatly strengthen those checks. For example, amendment 31 states that parties must consider things like the location or jurisdiction of the donor, any links the donor has to politically exposed people, and the source of the wealth being donated from. I was equally delighted a few months ago when the Government, in a statement from the Dispatch Box in response to the Rycroft review, said that location would be incorporated within the “know your donor” checks. However, it is now the second day back, I have had two Select Committees and some work on funeral regulation, and I have looked through the amendment paper and have not, other than in my amendment, been able to find reference to location in any of the Government’s amendments. I would appreciate the Minister’s comments on that and on whether the Government are still committed to ensuring that location is something that political parties have to check before accepting a donation. I would also like to ask the Minister about two other areas. Why did the Government not consider that it was necessary to include politically exposed people or the source of the wealth being donated from? I ask that because recommendation 5 of the Rycroft review said that “know your donor” rules should “more closely mirror the customer due diligence provisions in the anti-money laundering regulations.” If a young couple from Leeds South West and Morley seeks to take out a mortgage, they have to answer these questions. It is reasonable and fair that a political party accepting millions of pounds in donations should also have to answer them. If the Government have fully accepted the Rycroft review yet not incorporated those two recommendations, I suggest there might be a contradiction, which I would like the Minister to acknowledge. It is worth saying that the things in amendment 31 are not radical; they are not new. The Electoral Commission said as far back as 2018 that such changes could prevent foreign money from being used to influence UK politics. The Committee on Standards in Public Life said in 2021 that such measures would be useful and that, again, the money laundering regulations are the model that we should follow. I would be interested in the Minister’s comments on why those additional two things were not incorporated in the Bill.

    Hansard source
21. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Representation of the People Bill

    Could the hon. Lady confirm to the House whether the Conservative party has ever published election leaflets in particular constituencies or wards in languages other than English? I have a vague memory of seeing Conservative party election literature in community languages during elections in various parts of the country, and my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) has memories of that as well.

    Hansard source
22. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Representation of the People Bill

    Will the hon. Member give way?

    Hansard source
23. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Representation of the People Bill

    Does my hon. Friend agree that the objective of the new clause that we are not talking about, because it is not in—

    Hansard source
24. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Luke Akehurst

    Representation of the People Bill

    Does my hon. Friend agree with me and the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns) that it does not require legislation for the Government to set up a commission to look at electoral systems?

    Hansard source
25. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    With your permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the work of the newly formed Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the change it will bring. On the steps of Downing Street six weeks ago, the Prime Minister set out the priorities that will guide this Government. He was clear that 40 years of overly centralised decision making and over-privatisation have stripped power and resources away from communities in every nation and region of this country; that public control over the things that matter so much to people’s lives has been systematically eroded and become a barrier to businesses wanting to start and grow; and that a broken economic and political model has cost good jobs and opportunities in many parts of the country, while delivering sky-high prices in exchange for poorer customer services. The Prime Minister was clear that this Government will be the circuit breaker that our country needs: a Government who will take power from Westminster and Whitehall, and put it in the hands of the communities who are best placed to use it; who will rewire Britain, so that our politics and our economy work for every person and every place. On a bedrock of fiscal discipline, we will build a pro-business culture and an innovation-led economy that delivers good growth in every postcode. We have wasted no time in delivering on that commitment. In the newly formed Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, we are rewiring the machinery of government so that the Prime Minister has the resources and levers he needs to deliver on his priorities. By stripping out many of the bureaucratic functions of the office, we have created a stronger, more focused Department that is capable of driving forward the Prime Minister’s agenda. This Government recognise that for far too long there has been a disconnect between the Cabinet Office and No. 10, and it is that lack of joined-up thinking that has hampered the ability of successive Prime Ministers to drive forward their own agendas across Government. We have had a dichotomy at the heart of Government: the most centralised state in the G20, with one of the most underpowered centres. In the newly established OPMC, we are ensuring that the Prime Minister has the support and resources he needs to deliver the change that the public are impatient to see. From that office, we will drive forward work across Government to put the essentials, such as water, transport, energy and housing, under greater public control, in order to regenerate our communities, breathe new life into our high streets and give people more room to breathe through action on the cost of living. That work of change has begun. Working closely with the Prime Minister and the Cabinet Secretary, we have begun the work of shifting power and resources away from Whitehall. Through our devolution blueprint and the establishment of No. 10 North, we have created a new engine of regional economic growth that will empower places that have been overlooked by Westminster for too long. We are granting new powers to strategic authorities to take more control over the future of their regions: a greater share of locally generated revenues, beginning with business rates; and more control over housing, public transport and infrastructure. For the first time, local leaders will have the power and resources they need to invest in the things that matter most to their communities. This Government are filling in the map to bring an end to the system of two-tier devolution, so that by the end of 2028 we are able to extend to all parts of England the same offer that the rest have enjoyed for many years. This is how we can empower communities, drive local economic growth, create new jobs and deliver maximum benefit to the people who live there. This is devolution by design and devolution by default, and by working across Government we will build a new economic model that begins to put life’s essentials back under stronger public control and make them affordable for people again. Working with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster Central (Sally Jameson)—and building on the strong foundations laid down by my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bristol North West (Darren Jones), whom I thank for his work—we are delivering a once-in-a-generation rebalancing of power in this country. This is what a rewired state looks like: one that is relentlessly focused on delivering for the people of this country, with empowered communities and good growth in every postcode. These are the tests against which our decisions will be measured and the metrics by which our actions will be judged. Last month, the Chancellor and I announced reforms to public procurement that will cut red tape and unleash a new wave of British job creation. Too often, small and medium-sized businesses have struggled to navigate complicated procurement processes that seem to prioritise everything. When we prioritise everything, we prioritise nothing, so we are making the process simpler and doing things differently. From next year, businesses seeking to win a share of £90 billion in central Government contracts will be left in no doubt about what we want from them: creating good jobs and giving young people the skills they need for the future. These new rules will ensure that the £90 billion spent each year through Government contracts supports British jobs, skills and people in every postcode. We are going further in our reforms to public procurement to ensure that taxpayers’ money is delivering more for our communities. For the first time since 2020, we are removing the defence exemption from social value. That means billions of pounds of defence contracts will soon give weighting to jobs and skills for young people across Britain. This is how we back businesses in every part of the country. In my ministerial colleagues, Parliamentary Secretaries to the Cabinet Office my hon. Friends the Members for Gateshead Central and Whickham (Mark Ferguson) and for Chipping Barnet (Dan Tomlinson), businesses looking to build and grow here in Britain—creating those good jobs and driving that good growth—will have strong advocates in this Government. The work of my Department in strengthening our national resilience and co-ordinating the Government’s response to emergencies remains central. Over the summer, we saw communities across the country impacted by unprecedented wildfires precipitated by one of the hottest and driest summers on record—a reminder of the very real and present threats to the UK posed by climate change. During the third week of August, four major incidents were declared across south Wales, Hampshire, Cambridgeshire and the west midlands. By 13 August, fire and rescue services were tackling 47 wildfire incidents, and 79 separate requests for additional equipment and resources were made by fire and rescue services. In south Wales alone, more than 200 military personnel were deployed to tackle 14 separate incidents. Such was the extent of support provided across the country that almost every service was impacted or involved in the response, and some of the most stretched services faced the prospect of having to deprioritise certain call-outs due to the pressures on the system. The day before the national alert was issued, close to 12,000 999 calls were recorded in a single day, which is six times the average call volume. Many services were stretched to breaking point, but continued to work around the clock to protect lives, communities and properties. I am sure everyone in the House will join me in thanking our emergency services and military personnel, who put themselves in harm’s way to keep us safe. On 14 August, when the Government received direct requests from fire and rescue services for urgent Government intervention, we took decisive action. A national emergency alert was issued to provide the public with clear guidance on the steps they should take to avoid inadvertently contributing to an already dangerous situation. It should come as no surprise that the British public did their bit. Within 48 hours, there was a 42% decrease in the number of 999 calls, falling from 12,000 to 5,200, and by Monday morning the number of live wildfire incidents had fallen from 47 to 27. This gave our fire and rescue services the breathing space they needed to tackle existing fires and keep us all safe. Over the coming weeks, I will continue to work closely with Cabinet colleagues to ensure the Government’s response meets the scale of the challenges we face. I will also be working closely with my right hon. Friend the Minister for Security in ensuring that this Government take a long-term and strategic approach to the country’s preparedness. The Government will continue to work closely with our frontline services and local resilience forums to mitigate the risks posed by extreme weather and drought, including a £100 million increase in funding for the fire services and a £65 million boost in support of our farmers. In the interests of brevity, I will touch briefly on the work that is happening elsewhere in my Department. I have been delighted to welcome my right hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Kanishka Narayan) not only to his role as the Minister for Artificial Intelligence, but to join us around the Cabinet table. The Prime Minister has been clear that he sees harnessing the potential of artificial intelligence as a central part of our country’s future, and the elevation of this role reflects the ambition this Government have to make Britain a world leader in these advanced technologies. I am also pleased to welcome the Minister for Intergovernmental Relations and European Relations to his role. My right hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) has wasted no time in the vital work of building stronger ties with our closest neighbours and allies. I was very grateful to him for interrupting his honeymoon to come home and be appointed to the post. My Department is also bringing forward a programme to modernise the operation of the state. We are taking public control of the way Government work—cutting out the unnecessary processes and needless reviews that slow decision making and stifle innovation. At the heart of this agenda will be the restoration of Ministers’ responsibility and agency to deliver the change they promise, with increased accountability to Parliament and the public for the direction they set and the decisions they take. We will bring forward new methods of public deliberation in policy development and do away with box-ticking consultation with the usual suspects. Fewer decisions will be delegated to unelected bodies, and the way decisions are made will be scrutinised in Parliament, not in the courts, ending the warm bath of constructive ambiguity that politics has been too happy to soak in for far too long. I am aware—I am deeply honoured—that I am the first woman to hold the role of First Secretary of State since the late, great Barbara Castle. I am confident that if I can channel even a fraction of the energy and determination that she brought to this role, collectively we can change our country for the better. For too long, too many places have been written out of our national story; their contribution ignored and their potential overlooked. People feel like the system just does not work for them. That is why in 2024 they voted for change. This Government are on a mission to ensure we can deliver on the Prime Minister’s and the public’s priorities. This is a collective endeavour, and together we will deliver the lasting change that people deserve. I commend this statement to the House.

    Hansard source
26. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    The Prime Minister set out how he plans to cut tax on the very first day of his premiership. I thank the shadow Secretary for his kind words. My title is First Secretary of State; he may wish to be the shadow deputy Prime Minister, but that would not be shadowing me. I am glad that we can find common ground. I will start with the cost of No. 10 North, which I imagine the hon. Gentleman knows already, given the sheer quantity of parliamentary questions and freedom of information requests that have come in over the summer. No. 10 North has been fully funded from existing Cabinet Office budgets, with no additional spending pressure. We are grateful to colleagues in Manchester for hosting us in Heron House so graciously; that is working exceptionally well. I absolutely agree—I hope we can work together on this—with the hon. Gentleman on looking at where we can streamline the state and ensuring that elected Governments of any stripe can make the decisions that they have been elected to take. There is an awful lot of common ground and frustration that people from across this House share about unelected regulators and quangos standing in the way of democratically elected politicians. There is a serious commitment from this Government to tearing away that red tape and ensuring that we can deliver the change that we were elected to deliver. I therefore gently point out the irony in his asking me to ensure that a quango, the Local Government Boundary Commission, takes decisions on local government reorganisation, rather than the democratically elected Communities Secretary. We have already been clear that the central civil service is expected to shrink, that we want it to be more streamlined and efficient, and that our commitment to devolution and rewiring the state absolutely means fewer civil servants at the centre and building the capacity and capability of regional and local government. Local government was a huge victim of the decade of austerity, which held back growth in our local economies. We are moving policy functions out of the Cabinet Office in order to streamline things and ensure that we can be ruthlessly committed to delivering the Prime Minister’s priorities; I make no apologies for that. We have transferred a number of strategic functions into No. 10 North, including local economic growth and devolution strategy, which we have moved from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and local economic growth policy, which we have moved from the Treasury; that is a little bit of a chip at its empire.

    Hansard source
27. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and my constituency shares that exact same problem: in the east, there are fewer sixth-form options than in the wealthier west of the constituency. That is huge issue for educational inequality for our constituents, and I will take it away and look at it with the Education Secretary. My hon. Friend will also note that we have committed to devolution of 16-to-19 funding as well.

    Hansard source
28. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I am grateful to the hon. Lady, and I can confirm that my motto of moving fast and fixing things is still firmly in place. She is absolutely right that in order to deliver devolution effectively and deliver the growth and improved public services that we need, resource and revenue are needed. We have committed to allowing strategic authorities to take a share of income tax and business rates, so that they are incentivised to grow their economies, and can take their fair share to reinvest in those economies. On digital sovereignty, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Artificial Intelligence is looking at that, through his taskforce. It is one of the important workstreams that he is considering with colleagues across Government. I am sure that he will update the House in due course. As the hon. Lady says, we will debate the elections Bill this afternoon. She and I absolutely share a commitment to stopping big money, and foreign money in particular, interfering in our politics. I will work with colleagues across Government through the defending democracy taskforce, chaired by my right hon. Friend the Security Minister, to look at what further steps we can take beyond the Bill. Finally, on preparedness, my predecessor announced in July that we will deliver a campaign to raise awareness of the simple steps that households can take to keep themselves safe during everyday emergencies, like extreme weather. We will announce more information and begin that campaign later this year.

    Hansard source
29. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I am extremely grateful for my hon. Friend’s enthusiasm for that settlement for Lancashire. He is absolutely right that it is the way to deliver power and resources for his community and unlock its potential. I am sure that you agree, Mr Speaker. No. 10 North will be extremely busy, given the number of requests that are pouring in, but I will make sure that my hon. Friend is top of the queue.

    Hansard source
30. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    A significant programme of civil service reform is under way, led by the Cabinet Secretary. That programme has already begun reforming the civil service recruitment system to ensure that it hires and promotes truly brilliant people. It is reviewing the talent strategy to develop and grow talent right across the civil service and the whole UK, and is launching capability reviews to assess departmental delivery. It is identifying areas for improvement and building on the successful transformation already under way through the Places for Growth programme. However, I absolutely agree that we need to go further.

    Hansard source
31. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for the work that she has done on this issue—I know that she is extremely expert in this area. Work is ongoing, with mobilised action across Government and industry, asking Cabinet Ministers to work directly with regulators and supply chains and writing to UK businesses with clear steps to strengthen their cyber-defences. The National Cyber Security Centre has engaged with more than a thousand stakeholders in the wake of Mythos’s release to galvanise action and share best practice. She is absolutely right that over the summer, during a routine cyber-evaluation, the AI Security Institute identified an incident in which AI agents took sustained unsanctioned action that was directed at real people and organisations. It was detected within an hour. We have been completely transparent about the incident, and we have immediately learned lessons from it.

    Hansard source
32. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    Mr Speaker, I am loving all the common ground that we are finding with Opposition Members today. I completely agree that we need to look at outsourcing across Government. The previous Administration already took significant steps to reduce spend on consultancy and began the work on the largest wave of insourcing in a generation, as promised in our manifesto. I have worked with the hon. Gentleman in the past, and he has witnessed my energy up close. He can be assured of my continued commitment to this agenda.

    Hansard source
33. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I congratulate my hon. Friend on her sustained campaign in this area. I know that she has done an extraordinary amount of work in continuing to raise issues around PPE when they have fallen out of the public spotlight post covid. The Minister responsible for procurement will be delighted to meet her to discuss this issue.

    Hansard source
34. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The reforms that have been proposed through the devolution blueprint and Cabinet statement are designed to address exactly that issue. For too long, devolution has been two-tier, allowing certain areas of the country to steam ahead while others have not been given the powers and resources that they deserve. Devon and Cornwall will be incentivised with potential powers and resources, including the overnight visitor levy. The hon. Gentleman will have heard the Prime Minister mention his trip to Cornwall and engagement with the authorities there, including Devon. I appreciate that it is a long journey to Manchester—it is quite an irritating trip even from Sheffield, to be honest—but I hope that he will engage with No. 10 North on this important issue so that we can deliver for his constituents.

    Hansard source
35. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his continued work in this important area and on the environment. Tackling the threats posed by climate change requires consistent and co-ordinated action across every Department. From £710 million to fund upgrades to our school estate to the construction of nine new reservoirs across the country, this Government are taking the necessary steps to ensure that our country is more resilient and our communities are kept safe. He will have heard the Prime Minister refer to an upcoming wildfire summit. I hope that he will participate fully in that. I will return to him on our commitment on the national adaptation plan.

    Hansard source
36. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    The right hon. Gentleman is right that traditionally the model of moving people or roles out of London has meant duplication in the centre. That is exactly what we are attempting to fix. We want new senior roles across the country. I pay tribute to the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), who created the Darlington campus. That campus is a proper model of delivery, with senior policy making and civil servants in Darlington, based around the Treasury there. It has helped to deliver and change decision making, and that is exactly what No. 10 North is attempting to do.

    Hansard source
37. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    It is an excellent question and something that my hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Dan Tomlinson), who sits in the Treasury as well as the Cabinet Office, has been working on through No. 10 North. We are planning a brand of civil service reform that will move civil servants from the centre to regional and local government in order to share expertise, and we will provide them with the AI and data expertise that we have at the centre in order to do exactly that.

    Hansard source
38. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. My thoughts and sympathies are with all those affected in his constituency by the wildfire. Some £100 million has already been invested in fire and rescue services, and we will continue to look at the issues that he raises to do with equipment in future Budgets. We are engaging with our European neighbours on exactly this issue, and we are well aware of the opportunities that arise from it.

    Hansard source
39. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    It was a great pleasure to visit my hon. Friend and announce our procurement reforms at Griffon Marine in her constituency. The Prime Minister has been repeatedly clear that more public control of our water industry is not just desired but absolutely necessary. The current system, with the poor infrastructure, investment, higher water bills and the kind of sewage, leakage and poor quality that she described, can continue no longer. We will set out our plans for reform shortly.

    Hansard source
40. 2 Sep 2026·Parliament·Labour·Louise Haigh

    Rewiring the State

    I am extremely grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his characteristically constructive and thoughtful contribution. I will, of course, raise that with DEFRA and look into the specific issue on his behalf.

    Hansard source