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

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

1. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Highways (Financing) Bill (Second sitting)

   <strong>Q</strong><strong><QNum HRSContentId="{041A1A1F-5890-47C8-BB37-6188A388CD4E}"> </QNum></strong> The regulation-making powers in the Bill will hopefully address those concerns if there is adequate consultation as we move forward. <em><strong>Thomas McLennan:</strong></em> I have a concern that there is too much emphasis on downstream consultation in the Bill. We want to see a requirement to enable things such as the transfer of liability in the Bill because that has not been consistent in the market to date. We need to see that embedded from the start.

   Hansard source
2. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Highways (Financing) Bill (Second sitting)

   <strong>Q</strong><strong><QNum HRSContentId="{5F6CFFF2-1B10-4AE6-9434-B90BC008F8C4}"> </QNum></strong> Good afternoon. You probably heard witnesses earlier express a little scepticism about your ability to deal with the potential cost inflation or exaggeration—whatever word you want to use. You have obviously both been involved in this project from its inception, particularly in terms of construction, and you are running the existing crossing, so you know what the running costs and maintenance costs are. Would you say that, because of that, the scope for being blinded by PowerPoint, for want of a better description, is probably more limited than it could be? <em><strong>Matt Palmer:</strong></em> The lower Thames crossing has been developed in detail over the last six years. Our development consent order fixes that scope very tightly; we cannot build any more or any less, so the scope is very well known. We are now running at 90% designed, so we literally are fully designed, and it has been competitively bid for. It is operating—we are currently on site with 3,300 people—and operating well against that very defined scope. It is, I am afraid, just a simple road. My colleagues back at base will kick me for that, but as a project it is a simple thing to build. We are not building a complex signalling<strong> </strong>system or a control system for a nuclear power station; we are just building a simple dumb asset. As for our ability to control that, control on road construction is historically very good. If you take a <span id="41" class="column-number" data-column-number="41"></span>similar project, which would be something like Thames Tideway, a similar RAB-based model, it is another simple dumb asset—that is no disrespect to my colleagues who built that. These are simple projects to build. They are large, but they are simple, and we know how to build them in the UK. The cost control on it is predominantly driven by the fact that we know what we are building and what it costs.

   Hansard source
3. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Highways (Financing) Bill (Second sitting)

   Do have anything to add, Mr Godfrey? <em><strong>Will Godfrey:</strong></em> I would reiterate the point that the development consent order tightly defines the scope of what is being delivered. As Matt said, the project is already well advanced. There are a few other points to bring up. Getting the cost forecast right, which underpins the allowed revenue for the first control period, is really important. That is the baseline against which you are holding the company to account. The instruments thereafter are what you specify in the licence, and that is really important to get right. That is not stuff you put in the Bill, but it is really important that you get it right in the licence and that you have the right incentives for the privately financed entity to deliver against that schedule. You need to make sure that the balance in the allocation of risk is right and that end users are ultimately protected from the risks of cost overruns. As I say, this project is fairly well advanced already; it is not like we are talking about starting one from scratch.

   Hansard source
4. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Active Travel

   On behalf of the Government, I add our good wishes to Tom on his final day at the Table. The Government recognise the importance of promoting active travel. On 12 June, we published the third cycling and walking investment strategy, which sets out our ambitious targets for active travel in England. The strategy is supported by more than £4.5 billion of projected investment through to 2030, helping to make walking, wheeling and cycling a safe and attractive choice for everyday trips.

   Hansard source
5. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Active Travel

   I agree with my hon. Friend that the Tour de France is an amazing opportunity to inspire more people to walk and cycle, and what a wonderful constituency for it to appear in. Active travel is a devolved matter, but officials from the Department for Transport and Transport Scotland meet regularly to discuss active travel, most recently in September. I pay tribute to the work of Portobello high sch ool. Cycling is a fantastic way to get around while cutting emissions and keeping fit. In England, we are investing £135 million in schemes such as Bikeability cycle training, with over half a million children receiving training each year. Alongside that, we are supporting the delivery of safer networks, enabling more children to walk, wheel and cycle to school. I will look into whether we can visit to enjoy some of the benefits of these schemes, along with my hon. Friend.

   Hansard source
6. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Active Travel

   I congratulate my hon. Friend on the news that the opening stage of the Tour de France will be finishing in Carlisle next year. I hope that she will be claiming the yellow jersey at that point. She makes the important point that hon. Members from across the House are concerned about illegal e-bikes. To be clear, those bikes have no place on our roads. At the moment, it is far too easy for retailers to put in the fine print that these vehicles are for use only on private land, and for consumers to then buy them and use them on public roads, without even realising that what they are doing is illegal. I am keen to explore how we tackle this issue as a Government, including through the newly established cross-Government ministerial group. In the meantime, I will be writing to retailers and online market places to remind them about their responsibility to market these products responsibly. I am happy to meet my hon. Friend and other interested Members to discuss this subject.

   Hansard source
7. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Active Travel

   The right hon. Member raises very important points. We have all seen irresponsible cycling, but let us be clear that cycling on pavements is an offence, except where it is permitted. Police can and do take action against careless or dangerous cycling. As he will know, the Crime and Policing Act 2026 introduced new offences covering death or serious injury caused by dangerous, careless or inconsiderate cycling. We have recently written to food delivery companies emphasising the need for them to ensure that their riders are acting legally and responsibly when undertaking their duties. I understand what he says, and I will certainly look further at that issue.

   Hansard source
8. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Active Travel

   The hon. Member makes a very fair point. One of the purposes of the cross-departmental working group is to work with Home Office officials and Ministers to understand the limitations on police actions and to see whether we can find novel methods of tackling this issue. We would be very grateful to receive any information that she has from her local constabulary.

   Hansard source
9. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

   Active Travel

   Let me be absolutely clear that this Department does not compromise the safety of anyone when they are crossing the road. The Department published statutory guidance on the provision and design of floating bus stops with Active Travel England in January, and all traffic authorities must have regard to that guidance. It provides very clear advice on floating bus stops and the need to design them with passengers, cyclists and pedestrians in mind. The most concerning and troublesome floating bus stops are no longer being built, but we continue to work on this issue. We understand the concerns, and we are absolutely determined to deal with the matter.

   Hansard source
10. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Active Travel

    I can assure the Liberal Democrat spokesperson that there is already an action plan. We have identified a number of issues, building on some of the work and recommendations of the all-party parliamentary group for cycling and walking, and those will be fed into the cross-departmental working group. The Government hear what the hon. Member and, indeed, all hon. Members are saying about this issue: we need to make our roads safe. We need to get this plague of illegal e-bikes sorted out once and for all, and this Government are determined to do that.

    Hansard source
11. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

    In 2025-26, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency issued 12.3 million driving licences, processed over 100 million individual customer transactions and issued 18.5 million vehicle registration certificates. We recognise that improvement is needed on the time taken to process medical driving licence applications, and plans are in place to address this.

    Hansard source
12. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

    I recognise the hon. Member’s concerns, and I have asked for further information on some the matters he has raised. We are taking steps to tackle the issue. We have introduced a new digital casework system, we are recruiting additional staff, and the automation of routine processes is happening. Things are moving in the right direction. In 2022-23, the average number of working days to complete a medical licensing application was 89; this time last year it was 76; it is now down to 66; and we want to get it down to 45 by March next year. I can assure the hon. Member that we will do everything in our power to ensure that happens.

    Hansard source
13. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency

    Well, if the agency was failing, then that was the condition we found it in when the hon. Member’s party left office. I am not entirely sure what he is complaining about. He is saying that we are spending more money on the agency, but that is to increase the number of staff, to improve automation and digital services take-up, and to make the service more efficient. There is a plan and it is working—the hon. Member should support it.

    Hansard source
14. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    I commend my hon. Friend for her work in this area. She is right that these yobbos are causing misery for many communities. We are determined to see retailers cleaning up their act, and I am keen to explore how we tackle the issue. I am happy to meet my hon. Friend, through my cross-departmental ministerial group, to see how we can take the matter further.

    Hansard source
15. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    I am happy to do that; I think it would probably be on my way home one weekend. We have invested a record amount of money in our networks, and there is only a finite amount, but I am happy to discuss the issue further with the right hon. Member.

    Hansard source
16. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    First, can I extend my sympathies to Shayan’s family? I am happy to meet them. I commend my predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), on the excellent work she did on the road safety strategy, on which I am privileged to be able to build. Part of that will be engaging with bereaved families.

    Hansard source
17. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    We recognise the impact of coastal erosion on Cowbar Lane, and we aware of the plans set out by Redcar and Cleveland council to move the road further inland. The Government have already provided more than £300 million of city region sustainable transport settlement funding to the Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen to deliver on that, but we are clearly not seeing anything happening on the ground. I am happy to meet my hon. Friend to see what more we can do to encourage the mayor to deliver on this issue.

    Hansard source
18. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    I am sorry to hear that the hon. Lady’s constituents are having to endure these issues. There have been a number of trials, which have found that it is not that straightforward to isolate the noise. Police forces have powers to tackle this issue, and I am happy to write to her with further information about what they can do.

    Hansard source
19. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    The Department recognises the importance of that particular road, and we are ready to crack on with this. I join my hon. Friend in encouraging the Reform-led county council to release the funding necessary and get on with the job.

    Hansard source
20. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Justin Madders

    Topical Questions

    I am grateful to Aura Mobility for engaging with the Department’s consultation, which we will respond to very shortly.

    Hansard source
21. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Juliet Campbell

    Business of the House

    Residents in my constituency have reported to me dangerous racing, speeding and other forms of antisocial behaviour on the A52 near Bardills roundabout. I have raised this issue continually with the Highways Agency, Nottingham city council, Nottinghamshire county council and Nottinghamshire police, but to no avail. Will the Leader of the House assist me in bringing together relevant Ministers, so we can get those agencies together and secure safety on that stretch of the road?

    Hansard source
22. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Judith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    Order. I am struggling to hear the hon. Gentleman. Please let us hear the words being said.

    Hansard source
23. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Judith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    Order. Before I call the next speaker, I remind the Members who are heckling from the Back Benches while also trying to catch my eye that they may want to be mindful.

    Hansard source
24. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Judith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    I thank the hon. Member for his point of order. I did not hear any comments in the Chamber and it is not a matter for the Chair—I did not hear it.

    Hansard source
25. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Judith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    I thank the right hon. Member for his point of order. That is clearly not a matter for the Chair, but a matter of debate. I ask Members yet again to treat each other with the courtesy and respect that we expect in this Chamber.<span id="527" class="column-number" data-column-number="527"></span>

    Hansard source
26. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Judith Cummins

    Budget Resolutions

    Order. I call Adam Jogee, after which I will reduce the time limit to three minutes.

    Hansard source
27. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Josh Newbury

    Major Trauma Centres: Helipads

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I congratulate the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who represents a beautiful part of Ulster, on securing the debate. I thank him for doing so and for his keen interest in debates that I have secured in the past. I have one in Westminster Hall next Tuesday on train services; I hope to see him there. When somebody is seriously injured, every minute matters. For people living in or visiting the most rural parts of my Cannock Chase constituency, getting to the right hospital can already mean a long journey. Air ambulances do an incredible job: they bring expert care to the people who need it most, often in the most frightening circumstances imaginable. My husband’s family have personal experience of this because, 20 years ago, when my niece was just a year old, she came down with a nasty pneumonia infection. It got to the point where she was in a critical condition and doctors said she needed to get to A&amp;E as quickly as possible. I think there was some trouble on the roads that night, so she was taken by air ambulance from Evesham in Worcestershire all the way to the Royal Stoke university hospital. She had to be in hospital for a few weeks after that, such was the severity of that infection, but the air ambulance undoubtedly saved her life that day, and she lives to tell the tale as a brilliant 21-year-old. In January, I went to the Cosford airbase, headquarters of the Midlands Air Ambulance Charity. I met its CEO, Hanna Sebright, and one of my constituency predecessors who is working with them. I heard about the challenges that the sector faces. Air Ambulances UK’s review has identified significant gaps in hospital helipad provision across the country. Royal Stoke, which serves many of my constituents, has been given an amber rating, meaning that further action is needed. New Cross hospital in Wolverhampton has been given a red rating, meaning that priority action is required. That is genuinely concerning for patients.<span id="229WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="229WH"></span> New Cross does not currently have a hospital helipad, which means a patient who needs urgent specialist care might face a long journey by road, or air ambulance crews might need to fly them further to another hospital, as was the case for my niece. Every extra minute matters, so the longer a crew spend getting from one hospital to another, the longer they may be unavailable to help the next person who needs them. We have seen a similar problem at Birmingham children’s hospital, which provides specialist major trauma care for children right across the west midlands, including Staffordshire. There is no helipad at the hospital, meaning that children brought in by air ambulance need a further road transfer, just like that described by the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire), typically adding 10 to 15 minutes to the journey. That is despite the fact that the hospital sits right next to Queen Elizabeth hospital Birmingham, which has a helipad. For families facing what might be the most frightening day of their lives, those are precious minutes. In some cases, crews from Staffordshire might need to consider flying a child to Alder Hey children’s hospital in Liverpool, because that often offers a quicker route to getting the care they need. I am very concerned about that. These are hospitals that people across my region and in the wider west midlands rely on at the worst moments of their lives. Where a helicopter cannot land directly, patients might need to be transferred. As we have heard, that can have disastrous consequences. For someone with, for example, a serious head injury, major trauma or another life-threatening condition, this is the time we should be doing everything we can to save their life. I think about my constituents in our rural villages who are already likely to be further away from emergency services. They deserve the same confidence as anyone that, if the worst happens, everything possible is being done to get them the right treatment quickly. I know how strongly people in Cannock Chase feel about access to healthcare. We have lost our minor injuries unit, so local people know what it means when a service they once relied on is no longer there. That is one reason why I am really pleased to see this Government’s focus on improving access to healthcare, including through neighbourhood health centres, because bringing services closer to people’s homes really matters. I welcome that ambition. However, we also need to think about what happens when someone needs emergency treatment that cannot be provided locally. Our neighbourhood services must be backed up by hospitals that can receive patients quickly day or night. A helipad that cannot be used around the clock can leave a gap in that journey, and when an emergency happens at 2 am, a patient cannot wait until the hospital’s facilities are fully up and running. I appreciate that not every hospital has the same needs. We have heard very different cases from across the country, but we should have a clear understanding of which hospitals need helipads, which need improvements to their helipads, and which have facilities that cannot be used at all hours. We also need to make sure that recommendations are followed through. If an assessment <span id="230WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="230WH"></span>identifies a problem, there should be a plan to address it, rather than the same concerns appearing in report after report, which we have seen for many years. I too have a few questions for the Minister, which echo some of what she has already heard this debate. Will the Government look at a clearer national approach to hospital helipads, so that hospitals and the NHS trusts that look after them know what is expected of them when it comes to access around the clock? Will the Minister work with relevant trusts to look at the concerns raised around Royal Stoke and New Cross, and make sure that any necessary improvements are properly considered? Will the Government look at how essential helipad improvements might be funded where charities cannot meet the full cost? Nobody wants to think about the moment in which a family member is seriously injured and an air ambulance has to be called, but those moments do happen. When they do, people need to know the system is ready for them. For my constituents in Cannock Chase, particularly those living in rural communities—or those in trouble in the forest itself—this is about knowing that that distance will not count against them when they need urgent care. We are right to focus on bringing more healthcare closer to home, but we must also make sure that, when people need specialist and emergency treatment, there is a clear and reliable route to get them there. Thanks to air ambulances, that is often the case—they often step in and do incredible things for our constituents. If they can save someone’s life, we should be doing everything we reasonably can to make sure that a hospital is ready for them when they arrive.

    Hansard source
28. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Josh Newbury

    Local Government Reorganisation

    I will start by thanking the Minister for the part he played in getting the announcement of a strategic mayoral authority for Staffordshire over the line in time for yesterday’s Budget. However, despite the potential efficiency and simplicity gains of local government reorganisation, the shifting goalposts and the stop-start process have caused deep frustration in our county. Can the Minister confirm what the coming months will bring in terms of consultation with MPs, councillors and, most importantly, our constituents, so that they are clear on how they can again have their say over the future of our councils?

    Hansard source
29. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Josh Dean

    Railway Stations: Disability Access

    <Question HRSContentId="{D34671DE-ECEC-4AF9-8DE9-EBBA5D8FAF17}">7. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{9773D9F0-455E-48D3-8C38-DDFF1D00625E}">What steps she is taking to help improve disability access to train stations.</QuestionText> </Question>

    Hansard source
30. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Josh Dean

    Railway Stations: Disability Access

    Disabled residents and anyone who relies on the lift at Bishop’s Stortford train station have found it consistently out of service in recent months. That is making it harder for them to get to work, school and other activities. I understand that discussions regarding a long-term fix are ongoing, but our community still lacks clarity on what those works will involve and when they might take place. The Rail Minister kindly supported my campaign to get the platform 1 lift at Hertford North train station over the line. I would be grateful if Ministers could lend their support again by asking Network Rail and Greater Anglia to bring forward a clear plan for restoring reliable step-free access at Bishop’s Stortford.

    Hansard source
31. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Josh Dean

    Business of the House

    Sandra Morphew is best known as the 82-year-old former landlady of the Rose and Crown in Bishop’s Stortford, and she is much loved by our community. She is currently on life support in Turkey following a serious accident. Due to a dispute over her medical insurance, Sandra’s family now face spiralling medical costs and a potential £80,000 bill to bring her home, which they are now raising money to pay. Will the Leader of the House join me in encouraging residents in Bishop’s Stortford to support this crowdfunder and sending best wishes to Sandra’s family? Will he kindly use his good offices to help me raise Sandra’s case with the relevant Minister?

    Hansard source
32. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jonathan Hinder

    Topical Questions

    Not a single rail service has run from Clitheroe on a Sunday for a very long time. I know that the Secretary of State and her team of Ministers have heard many representations from me on this issue, but can they reassure me that they are doing everything they can to get those Sunday services back up and running?

    Hansard source
33. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

    Social Housing Bill (Third sitting)

    Perhaps the hon. Gentleman was going to come on to this point, but what practical steps would he suggest for his Liberal Democrat local government colleagues? I think it is fair to say that they do not have the greatest reputation for approving housing developments in their areas. He has, admittedly, said that he is more in favour of social home building than private dwellings, but what practical steps would he take to encourage his local government colleagues on his target?

    Hansard source
34. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

    Social Housing Bill (Third sitting)

    I very much like and respect the hon. Gentleman, but does he agree that education and health resources, for example, in towns—where brownfield sites invariably are—are often relatively busy or full up, and face real challenges and pressures? Other conurbations such as villages, which admittedly do not have all the transport links that make town brownfield sites the most prominent in the planning system—let us not forget that they are prioritised by this Government—also need additional housing and social housing. Quite often, when I talk to people in those villages, their pubs and schools are struggling because they do not have enough people who want to use them.

    Hansard source
35. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

    Social Housing Bill (Third sitting)

    Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the need for social homes—and for affordable homes, although we are talking about social homes here—exists not only in our towns, but in our villages? If we are to deal with the long-standing problems with the high cost of homes on the private market, we will need social homes across the range of conurbations in our country.

    Hansard source
36. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

    Social Housing Bill (Fourth sitting)

    On the new clause, I recall the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington, mentioning the word “prioritise”, “prioritising” or “prioritisation”; perhaps he will intervene if he feels that I am not being accurate. New clause 32, however, is categorical. I have checked the Cambridge dictionary, which defines “prioritise” as: “to decide which of a group of things”— for the purposes of this debate, I will say “people”, rather than “things”— “are the most important so that you can deal with them first.” I emphasise “first”. Perhaps he will explain to me how his use of the word relates to the new clause, which is categorical in stating that someone cannot gain access to social housing unless they are a British citizen. I note that he is not intervening. Other groups of people who live in this country would be affected by the new clause, although I will not rehearse points so ably made by my hon. Friends. Such groups include people under the EU settlement scheme, which was brought in under the previous Conservative Government. The scheme allows people who are not British citizens to live here, and without doubt they contribute hugely to our economy, through taxation and in other ways. Finally, many Gurkhas have proudly served our armed forces. I am sure all hon. Members have met some of them, and we have the utmost respect for them. Often, they struggle to gain indefinite leave to remain, and are not British citizens, so they would also be excluded from social housing under the new clause.

    Hansard source
37. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo Stevens

    Passenger Rail Services

    <Question HRSContentId="{5C711B84-AA16-4E87-9790-C06147A0757E}">10. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{B35118A9-F8D5-490E-9B77-81B69EEA1C6A}">What steps she is taking to improve passenger rail services. </QuestionText></Question>

    Hansard source
38. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jo Stevens

    Passenger Rail Services

    I thank my right hon. Friend, because my Cardiff East constituents were absolutely delighted with the announcement yesterday of £30 million for Cardiff Parkway station. Mine is the only constituency in the capital city without a train station, so this will be transformational for growth, jobs and travel. Before the Senedd election, the Welsh Labour Government agreed to a funding contribution, alongside private investors, to ensure that this project is delivered. Can she please confirm whether, in the five months since that election, the minority Plaid Government have said they will honour that intergovernmental agreement?

    Hansard source
39. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim McMahon

    Local Government Reorganisation

    The Government are committed to shifting power from Westminster and Whitehall to the places where people live and work. Yesterday’s Budget shows that we are committed to giving local leaders, local councils and local communities the tools to shape their future. But our ambition to rewire the state and ensure that the country is ready for devolution depends on strong, sustainable local government, and it is only through reorganisation that we will create those strong foundations. We know that reorganisation is difficult, but we also believe that it is worth it. The decisions we take now will be the building blocks for how the country is governed for generations to come. Our vision is clear: mayoral and strategic authorities, underpinned by strong unitary councils with real powers to take decisions in the interests of their communities. On 7 September, the Secretary of State announced a review of the programme to ensure that it was robust and aligned with the Government’s priorities. Since then, we have listened to local leaders, sector partners, mayors, and Members of Parliament. I place on the record our thanks to them for their work and for engaging constructively. Consensus will not always be possible, but I know that all of us are putting forward arguments for what we believe is best for the different areas of England. I am committed to hearing all those views before coming to final decisions. I also want to take a moment to recognise the impact on councils, councillors and their staff. I appreciate their desire for clarity. Today, I can provide some clarity on what comes next. I can announce to the House that the first phase of the review is now complete. I have tested the programme framework, including whether the criteria set out in February last year continue to support the Government’s priorities. I have concluded, on the basis of the programme, that it is robust and that the existing criteria are correct on their own terms and continue to support the Government’s policy agenda. We are content that we can take forward local government reorganisation in line with the existing criteria. In concluding the review, I have also considered the best way to bring clarity quickly while making sure that each area receives the deep and thorough consideration that it deserves. We will inform councils of outcomes at the earliest possible opportunity—with some areas getting those outcomes more quickly than others. Today, I am able to give further clarity on some of the 14 areas who had decisions in July. The Secretary of State and I have carefully considered all the proposals and the evidence for those 14 areas. Following that initial consideration, we are minded, subject to representations and parliamentary approval, to implement the following proposals in five areas: in East Sussex and Brighton and Hove, the two-unitary proposal, including the boundary changes requested by Brighton and Hove city council except for the parish of Falmer; the one-unitary proposal in Gloucestershire; the three-unitary proposal in Oxfordshire, including boundary changes; the two-unitary proposal in Warwickshire; and the two-unitary proposal <span id="463" class="column-number" data-column-number="463"></span>in Worcestershire. Those decisions are for the same council structures that were previously announced in July, or they are new decisions following full and thorough consideration. Before final decisions are taken, there will be a minimum three-week period during which those who are interested may make further representations to me. The start and end date for that period will be confirmed shortly, as well as further details on how councils and other interested parties can make representations. Any final implementation decisions will be subject to the normal parliamentary approval. We are going to take more time on the remaining nine areas announced in July, and we will use the coming months to consider further the proposals submitted before coming to a view. To give councils clarity on the legal status of existing decisions we are withdrawing the decisions announced in July for the following areas: Derbyshire and Derby; Devon, Plymouth and Torbay; Hertfordshire; Kent and Medway; Lancashire, Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool; Leicestershire, Leicester and Rutland; Lincolnshire, North Lincolnshire and North East Lincolnshire; Nottinghamshire and Nottingham; and Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent. I want to be clear that this is no reflection on the work underpinning those proposals. I can now set out the plan for the final phases of the review. The review will now focus on the 15 areas that are due to have a “minded to” decision. Those are, in no particular order, the nine areas I have just mentioned, the four areas where decisions were withdrawn in September, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, and West Sussex. All options and proposals for those areas will remain under consideration, and I will approach them all with an open mind. As such, it should not be assumed that the same proposal will automatically be selected. It is important to allow the process to run its course and to allow full and proper consideration. We will move faster where we can, and some remaining areas may receive an outcome decision before others. I commit to coming back to the House with updates for another set of areas by Christmas, and every area will have an outcome by early next year. As we set out in September, the local elections scheduled for May 2027 will now go ahead to existing councils. That means that elections to new councils will be made in 2028, followed by a vesting day in April 2029. That is for all areas apart from Surrey. I have also heard concerns about cost uncertainty, and we appreciate that areas have incurred costs in good faith. All areas will receive half the transition funding that they were previously due, which equates to £450,000 per new unitary previously announced. Those guaranteed payments will be made in the coming weeks regardless of the outcome of the review. Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, and West Sussex, will also receive £500,000 per area. After final decisions, we will pay any remaining balance, depending on how many councils are chosen. I have heard from Members across the House about the pride, history and identity sitting behind our cities and counties. City status and ceremonial matters play a valuable role for local pride, so we will work with areas to ensure that city status is preserved following reorganisation. Subject to final decisions, we will continue <span id="464" class="column-number" data-column-number="464"></span>to work with places to protect their city status by working through all the options, including bringing forward legislation where necessary—<em>[</em><em>Interruption.</em><em>]</em> Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have been struggling with a cold for about a week. Usually when a Minister comes up in the morning with a croaky throat it is the result of a long night of karaoke, but I am afraid this is the result of back-to-back LGR conversations all morning, which does not carry quite the same sense of fun or rhythm. I want to use this moment to build consensus and deliver a programme where central Government and local government work together. This programme must be a joint effort. It is the foundation of rewiring how our country works, and getting foundations in place to devolve new powers and functions in every area. This Government will be an active and reliable partner, and we stand ready to work with councils to support them to deliver these significant changes. I promise to keep the House updated, and I commend this statement to the House.

    Hansard source
40. 29 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim McMahon

    Local Government Reorganisation

    First, let me say that we do not take for granted concerns about the implications of the delay on the councils, councillors and officials who have been working on these schemes. We know that the pause was disruptive, and that people put a lot of work into their proposals and the transitional work in preparation <span id="466" class="column-number" data-column-number="466"></span>for the new unitary councils. Equally, it would have been wrong had the Government not taken into account the legal status of those that were in court and not used that as an opportunity to review the programme overall, which was the decision that we announced in September. That was the right thing to do to give clarity to the programme and move forward with confidence; to ensure we were reviewing the criteria, the process, the decision making and the evidence base; and to allow us to come to fresh decisions, where needed. From my perspective, I am playing this with an absolutely straight bat—I want to do this with integrity. It is important to say that there are no Government proposals on the table because the only proposals that a Minister can consider are those that councils themselves have submitted during the process. Our job is to ensure that we take into account local opinion and test the evidence base, the assumptions, the alignment with public service boundaries and the financial modelling. Through that work, we then make a balanced determination. By the way, there is no perfect solution for quite large parts of England that I have seen, but that does not mean we cannot reach a solution that is the best that it can be. Our job is to make a decision in an objective way and with an open mind, which is why I cannot understand the shadow Minister criticising what is objectively the right thing to do. It would be entirely wrong, in a legal process, to predetermine the outcome we most desire and railroad that through. All the vulnerabilities with LGR that she speaks about were features of previous rounds of LGR, which the Conservative Government undertook on a fairly regular basis. No Government decision is not open to legal challenge if somebody wants to make that challenge. On LGR, the Government found themselves in court defending previous decisions. Cumbria is a good example: the Government were taken to court, the case was heard by a judge and the Government had to explain why they came to their view. We should not pretend that a legal challenge somehow represents a fault in the system, but it does bring a pause for thought, and we have used that pause to ensure that the reorganisation is right going forward. On the question of how we will proceed, the approach I am setting out does not have the tranching up of areas that we had previously, so quite deliberately, we do not have tranches 1, 2 and 3. However, we are going to work through authorities as quickly as possible. The commitment that we have made is that, rather than waiting for an artificial date—a particular point in time—if we can come forward with a few earlier, we will do that, so we do not have to wait for the whole programme to be confirmed later in the process. Finally, on the point about costs and how much has been incurred, there are different ways of looking at that. There are the costs of producing the proposals, but they are not abortive because those proposals are real today and they will be considered as part of the new process. Those are not wasted costs at all; they are the normal costs that are incurred in reorganisation. Then there are the costs of transfers and, once the decision is made, preparing the ground to move to the new shadow unitary authorities, but those costs are required whatever decision is made in whatever county, so that is not abortive work either.<span id="467" class="column-number" data-column-number="467"></span> However, we accept that the decision to pause and to ask staff in particular areas to stop working on the proposals has led to a cost being incurred by those authorities that would not have been incurred had we not decided to pause the programme. On that basis, we have decided to release the money that I have set out today, and I think that is the right thing to do. We believe strongly in central and local government working in partnership together and being respectful to each other. If councils say that they have incurred costs that they would not otherwise have incurred, it is right for the Government to say that we are willing to meet them halfway.

    Hansard source