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

12,868 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy Burnham

   Public Office (Accountability) Bill

   I feel tempted to start this speech by saying, “As I was saying 10 years ago in this place,” but it feels fitting to be here tonight, and particularly to be with my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister. I remember very clearly that at the conclusion of the second Hillsborough inquest, he worked with me, as part of the shadow Health team back then, to draft the original Bill that was presented to Parliament. Tonight, it is before this House. Tonight, it feels like life is coming full circle. In passing this momentous piece of legislation, which will change the way this country thinks about and works towards justice, we are truly rewiring the state and passing power from the authorities to the hands of ordinary people. It is happening because of the Prime Minister’s commitment to a country based on justice and fairness, and we thank him for that. He has honoured his commitment to the Hillsborough families, and what this House will do in passing this Bill tonight is rebalance the scales of justice so that we have justice for ordinary people going forward. That is some legacy indeed. We have all recognised that we simply would not be here tonight were it not for the dignity and determination of the Hillsborough families, who are with us in this Chamber this evening. They have been supported by the wider group of campaigns as part of Hillsborough Law Now. I want to recognise their lawyers, Pete Weatherby KC and Elkan Abrahamson KC, who are with us this evening; INQUEST’s Deborah Coles, who is with us as well; and all the people who supported the campaign. That is the reason we are here, but we are also here because of the city of Liverpool, which is represented so well by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne), who has been the parliamentary lead on this Bill and has been entirely true to the people of his city, as has my friend Steve Rotheram, a former Member of this House and now the Mayor of the Liverpool City Region, who also carried the campaign to this point. I cannot describe my pride in being in the House tonight to see this Bill plant the values of the city of my birth at the heart of this country. That is something of huge and profound significance that has been brought about by the Hillsborough families. We recognise the significance of that tonight. As Steve Rotheram has said, the Hillsborough law cannot do any more for the Hillsborough families. It will do much more for those who come after them, but that is what makes their campaign so special. They have done this for others, not for themselves. It is important to remind the House of the other campaigns, which we hope will now be lifted by this legislation as we pass it this evening. We do think this evening, as the Prime Minister said, of the Grenfell survivors and families—I am sure all London Members will want to echo that—who are still waiting for justice and accountability over nine years after the Grenfell fire. We think tonight of the Primodos families, who have fought so hard for fairness, supported by my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South East—

   Hansard source
2. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy Burnham

   Public Office (Accountability) Bill

   I have been away for a while, but I will get there in the end. I know that other Members in this House have supported those who have suffered other treatment disasters—sodium valproate, mesh, PIP implants. These are still ongoing campaigns, and we need to recognise these campaigns in the House tonight, as we do that of the Chinook families, who were in court today—only just now, I was speaking about that to the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) in the Lobby—and we pay tribute to them this evening. Let us not forget in this list, and I know they have support from across the House, the servicemen who served this country in the post-war period in the south Pacific—our nuclear test veterans. How often in this House do we praise our veterans, and how in this case have we left those veterans without truth and justice about what happened to them all those years ago? I think this House needs to hear their call for a special tribunal, which is entirely consistent with the aims of the Bill we are passing tonight. This Bill advances all of these just causes, and the campaign for truth and justice does not stop here; indeed, it accelerates from here. I hope it ends the cover-up culture that has failed so many ordinary people in this country. We can never forget that for 20 years an entire English city was crying “Injustice!” correctly, yet this place ignored those people for all that time. We cannot forget that, and we cannot take away the hurt that that caused. We cannot forget that postmasters and mistresses serving communities up and down this country were branded as petty thieves, and carried that stigma with them for years. Likewise, those infected by infected blood were blamed for having brought it on themselves through their lifestyle. We cannot forget that. Let me finish where I started, with the Liverpool supporters who were blamed for harming their own fellow supporters at a football match. That is what was done, and that was left to stand for all those years. The families here tonight had to live with that for all those years. Imagine what that must have felt like. We have had a situation in this country where people suffered the trauma of the initial bereavement—the incident that took their loved ones away—and then were retraumatised by the behaviour of the state. We cannot take that hurt away tonight, but we can put decency back at the heart of the British state, and that is what this Bill does. I finish by again praising the Prime Minister for making it happen. This truly is his legacy.

   Hansard source
3. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Pakes

   NHS Trusts: Digital Infrastructure

   5. What steps he is taking to improve access to digital infrastructure for NHS trusts.

   Hansard source
4. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Pakes

   NHS Trusts: Digital Infrastructure

   It is welcome that the Government are making progress on digital infrastructure and the single patient record, which is good news for patients and for the NHS, but patients in Peterborough risk missing out on some of the benefits because of the poor state of the local hospital and the North West Anglia NHS foundation trust’s IT. I thank the Secretary of State and those on the Front Bench for engaging with me on this issue previously, but what reassurance can he give that the Department will work with the NWAFT to ensure that we have the infrastructure we need in Peterborough, so that patients in my constituency benefit the most?

   Hansard source
5. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Hack

   Public Office (Accountability) Bill

   One of the things that has always struck me about this law is how we can change accountability. Just a couple of weeks ago, Donna Ockenden’s report about the Nottingham maternity scandal set out the fact that public officials did not come forward to tell the truth about those tragic incidents. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Bill addresses issues that go far wider than the Hillsborough disaster and that although the Hillsborough families have had to go through so much, many other families have suffered and endured as well?

   Hansard source
6. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alison Taylor

   Extreme Heat: Preparedness

   I thank the hon. Member for Waveney Valley (Adrian Ramsay) for raising such an interesting and timely topic as extreme heat. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. We were warned more than 20 years ago that extreme temperatures would be the consequence of uncontrolled greenhouse gas emissions, and what did we do? Not enough. Not enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and not enough to adapt to climate change. Across the UK, new high temperatures are being set. In my constituency, the highest temperature was recorded at a mere 26.7°C in 2018, but I would not be surprised if that were surpassed soon. What used to be a one in 100 or 200 event has, as we were warned, now become the new normal. While we ask ourselves how to get through this summer, I gently suggest that we need to heed the warnings of climate scientists and think about what the heat map of Europe and the UK will look like over the next 20 years. Short-term fixes such as air-conditioning will set the average household back several thousand pounds, but also add to the demand for energy. As a regular visitor to London these days, I can see how much more extreme the heat is here compared with in my constituency of Paisley and Renfrewshire North. My constituency benefits from a more northern latitude, wide open spaces, lower population, lower density and a mix of urban and rural areas. My constituency will always be cooler than London, at least on the thermometer. Having missed the opportunity over the past 20 years, we need to look forward, with short-term relief and long-term strategies to retrofit buildings, emphasising design and construction techniques that reduce the impact of extreme heat, and to look to the circular economy. We need to consider embodied carbon in buildings, the topic of last night’s interesting Adjournment debate from the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns). As I mentioned last night, local authorities need to look at how buildings are demolished, so that cleared sites do not hypothetically hold embodied carbon and are not adversely affected by industry benchmarks, such as the Building Research Establishment environmental assessment method—BREEAM points are impacted by poor and thoughtless demolition practices. In conclusion, I stand ready to help the Government meet our 2030 and 2050 targets on climate change and greenhouse gases.

   Hansard source
7. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alison Hume

   Coastal Communities: Isolation and Hidden Deprivation

   In coastal communities such as mine in Scarborough and Whitby, we see persistently high levels of domestic abuse where victims and survivors are hidden and isolated. Scarborough has the highest rate of reported domestic abuse in North Yorkshire. A landmark report found that, on average, victims in rural areas, including North Yorkshire, were subject to abuse for 25% longer and were half as likely to report it compared with victims in urban areas. Referrals to the Independent Domestic Abuse Services in North Yorkshire, the largest charity supporting victims of domestic abuse and sexual violence in the county, continue to rise. In 2025, it received over 20,000 referrals, compared to 18,000 in 2022. I have worked on countless heartbreaking cases on behalf of my constituents where women experiencing domestic abuse have been denied the support that they need. A constituent recently told me that she contacted multiple organisations to try to get help so that she and her child could move away from her abuser, but they kept saying, “There’s not much help we can give you.” Another survivor wrote to me to say she was homeless, and paying to live with her three children in hotels. My constituents desperately want to move on from their isolating and traumatic experiences of domestic abuse. Sometimes, dispersed accommodation is the answer, and other times the answer is a refuge, but there is no refuge in the North Yorkshire council area, the largest county by area in England. I urge the York and North Yorkshire combined authority to deliver a women’s refuge on the coast. I would be grateful if the Minister could outline how she is working across Government to provide targeted support to hidden and isolated victims of domestic abuse in coastal communities.

   Hansard source
8. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alison Hume

   Extreme Heat: Preparedness

   At the moment, there are 19 live wildfires across England and Wales. Last year, a devastating wildfire on the North York moors raged for 40 days over 10 square miles. It was caused by a campfire. Does the hon. Member agree that it is time to ban the use of disposable barbecues in public areas?

   Hansard source
9. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Mayer

   Topical Questions

   T2. The Houghton health hub, which I recently visited, is very well located in the town centre next to a library. It is owned by the council and leased by NHS Property Services, which in turn is paid by the integrated care board for the modern clinical rooms, which are on the right as people go in. So far, so good. The problem is that those clinical rooms are empty. Public money is going around in circles but is not creating any health provision or helping patients. Will the Minister meet me to see whether this sorry saga can be sorted out?

   Hansard source
10. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Davies-Jones

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    The shadow Secretary of State will know, given his background working in the Home Office, that a duty of candour is not the same as the duty to disclose sensitive information. The two should not be conflated, and he should not be doing so on the Floor of the House.

    Hansard source
11. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Davies-Jones

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    It is more than a privilege to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne), and to speak in support of the Government amendments and in favour of the Bill as a whole. This law represents far more than legislation; it represents a promise—a promise that the suffering endured by the Hillsborough families, and all those who have been sadly failed by the state, will never be repeated. It is a promise that no bereaved family will ever again be forced to spend decades fighting and fundraising to challenge the very institutions that should have been helping them to uncover the truth. For far too long, we have seen a devastating pattern emerge after major public tragedies. Families are left grieving the loss of those they love, only to find themselves caught in secondary trauma, battling against secrecy, defensiveness, delay and denial. Instead of compassion, they encounter obstruction; instead of openness, they face silence. Instead of truth they are met with half-truths—or worse, with lies, missing evidence and institutional self-protection. That is why the duty of candour matters. A duty of candour is not about punishing honest mistakes. It is about ensuring that public authorities and officials understand that their first duty is not to protect reputations or institutions; it is to protect the truth. Because when institutions close ranks, ordinary families pay the price. When evidence is concealed, justice is delayed, and when facts are distorted, truth is destroyed. When those in positions of power fail to tell the truth, confidence in our public institutions is eroded for generations. The Hillsborough families know that better than anyone. For 37 years they have carried a burden that should never have been theirs. They have fought not only for the memory of the 97 people who lost their lives, but for something much bigger: the principle that no institution is above accountability, and that no grieving family should ever have to fight the state simply to establish the truth about what happened to their loved one. Their courage has changed this country. They have exposed failures that many hoped would remain hidden. They challenged narratives that should never have been allowed to stand, and they refused to give up, even when the odds were stacked against them. The Hillsborough families’ determination has become a beacon of hope for countless other families seeking justice. We owe them so much more than our admiration—we owe them action. We cannot stand here, praise their courage and thank them for their persistence, only to fail to deliver the very reforms that they have spent decades fighting for. If we do, what message does that send to every family still waiting for answers? What does it say to those affected by Grenfell, the infected blood scandal, the Post Office Horizon scandal, the Manchester Arena terror attack—and so on, sadly—and to every future family who may one day find themselves seeking truth after tragedy? It says that lessons are spoken about but not learned. The duty of candour is the mechanism by which we begin to rebuild trust between the public and the institutions that serve them. It changes the culture from one of defensiveness to one of openness; from protecting organisations to protecting people; from asking families to prove the truth, to requiring public authorities to tell it from the very beginning. That is not, and should not be a radical principle or idea. It is the minimum standard that the public should expect from those who exercise public power. That is why I support the Government amendments, as they finally allow the Bill to have the worthy title of “the Hillsborough law”. The amendments stand as a testament to the families, victims and survivors who would never give up—the Manchester Arena attack victims, nuclear test veterans, the Chinook disaster families, and anyone who has had to fight for the truth against the army of the state, and then the intelligence services on top. If we are to have a true principle and a true duty of candour, then that principle must be applied consistently. It cannot be the case that we champion transparency and accountability with one hand while creating an exemption with the other. A duty of candour that applies only when convenient is not a true duty at all.

    Hansard source
12. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Davies-Jones

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    I totally agree with my hon. Friend. She is making a powerful point about the Nottingham maternity scandal, and I know that the Hillsborough families have been supporting those families in their fight for truth, justice and accountability. That is why this law is so important: it is so much more and has become so much more than just being about the Hillsborough families. It has encompassed everything that we know that we need regarding our public institutions and the duty of candour. That is why the Government amendments regarding the intelligence and defence services are so vital. I recognise, of course, that the work of our security and intelligence services is unique. They perform an essential role in protecting national security, keeping our citizens safe and responding to some of the most complex threats that our country faces, some of which we will never and should never know about. I know from first-hand experience that this has not been an easy position for the Government to reach. It has been difficult to try and meet the necessary balance of maintaining and securing information that must remain confidential to protect ongoing operations, intelligence sources and national security. I place on the record my sincere thanks to the whole army of amazing, dedicated public servants who have fought to bring the legislation to this place today, so that we are able to take forward this Bill with the Government amendments intact; and to the families who never gave up, even when the process of developing this legislation took an emotional, physical and mental toll on them. I say to the Hillsborough Law Now campaigners, and to all the campaigners and organisations who have become part of that wider family: you have been bonded by grief, trauma and the failure of the state to provide you with truth and justice, so thank you for adopting me into that family and for giving me support, friendship and inspiration to drive forward this meaningful change. The principle at the heart of the legislation is that public authorities must act honestly, must not mislead, must not conceal wrongdoing and must co-operate fully with investigations and inquiries when, sadly, tragedy strikes. Those principles should not cease to exist simply because an institution operates in a field of national security. Indeed, where public power is exercised most extensively, the need for accountability is arguably at its greatest. Public trust in our institutions is not strengthened by blanket exemptions. It is strengthened when the public can be confident that every institution, regardless of its status, influence or function, is subject to the same fundamental expectation of honesty and integrity. The Hillsborough families did not spend decades fighting for a culture of accountability only for Parliament to decide that accountability should have limits. They campaigned for a principle that no public body should ever be able to place institutional reputation above the truth. That principle must be universal, because once we begin carving out exceptions, we risk undermining the very foundation on which this legislation rests. We risk creating the perception that some institutions are accountable while others are not, and that candour is expected from some public servants but not from others. That cannot be right. If the duty of candour is a moral obligation, as I believe it is, then it must be a moral obligation that applies across the whole public sector. Appropriate safeguards for national security can and should exist—and they do exist, as we have heard from the Minister. Sensitive information can and should be protected where necessary, but those safeguards must not become a shield behind which truth, accountability and justice can be denied. All the families who have fought for this law have spent decades challenging the idea that powerful institutions should be allowed to mark their own homework. They have taught us that accountability is not a threat to public confidence; it is the foundation of it. We honour their legacy not by creating exemptions from candour, but by embedding candour as a universal principle—a principle that says no institution is above honesty, no authority is above accountability and no family should ever be denied the truth because of the organisation they happen to be seeking answers from. If you will indulge me, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will reflect on the words that have come to symbolise not only my beloved Liverpool football club, but the Hillsborough families’ extraordinary campaign for truth and justice—“you’ll never walk alone”. For millions, that is an anthem sung from the Kop before kick-off, but for the Hillsborough families it has become something far deeper. It has become a promise that, even in the darkest moments, they would not face their fight in isolation. It was a reminder that when institutions failed them, communities stood beside them. When others sought to rewrite the truth, it was ordinary people who refused to let their voices be silenced. When grief threatened to overwhelm them, they found strength in one another. That spirit has carried them through more than three decades of heartbreak, resilience and determination.

    Hansard source
13. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alan Gemmell

    Business of the House

    Is the Leader of the House as surprised as I am by the faux outrage from so many Conservative Members? Would it not have been better to see them in the Lobby with us, voting to increase workers’ rights and the minimum wage, and to lift the two-child benefit cap?

    Hansard source
14. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Adam Jogee

    Health Inequalities: Staffordshire

    11. What steps his Department is taking to help tackle health inequalities in Staffordshire.

    Hansard source
15. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Adam Jogee

    Health Inequalities: Staffordshire

    Audley health centre in Newcastle-under-Lyme is the fifth worst practice for asthma prevalence in our ICB and the rural practice with the highest number of people living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Local GP Dr Richard Page puts that down to the prevailing wind blowing pollution from the M6 on the west side of the practice area, and notes that if green-belt land is released for the AB2 development, pollution will only get worse. It is excellent to see my hon. Friend the Minister at the Dispatch Box. Will she set out what the Government are doing to ensure that the people of Audley—and anyone else living in areas with high levels of pollution—are not disproportionately affected by respiratory diseases? Will she meet me to discuss that?

    Hansard source
16. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

    Coastal Communities: Isolation and Hidden Deprivation

    The hon. Gentleman is speaking about the transport challenges that people face in rural communities. We know that the Government have plans to introduce additional charges for purchasing an electric vehicle, which seems paradoxical when we are trying to encourage people to be more environmentally friendly. Does he agree that the Government should think carefully about support for people in rural and isolated areas when they consider that policy?

    Hansard source
17. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

    Coastal Communities: Isolation and Hidden Deprivation

    The hon. Gentleman is speaking very powerfully about the need for connectivity around coastal ports. Is he aware that the two largest towns in the UK with no railhead, Fraserburgh and Peterhead in my constituency, have been left in exactly that position after the Beeching cuts of the 1960s? Does he agree that, if the Government bring forward a new strategy for these areas, they have to look at rail connectivity?

    Hansard source
18. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

    Topical Questions

    Following recent evidence of a long-term increase in colorectal cancers in the under-50s, the Scottish Government are calling on the National Screening Committee to extend eligibility for bio-screening kits to improve outcomes. I understand that Australia has reduced its screening age to 45. Will the Secretary of State join the Scottish Government in urging the NSC to review the recommended age for starting screening, so that more lives may be saved?

    Hansard source
19. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·SNP·Seamus Logan

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    I rise to speak as a member of the Bill Committee and principally in support of amendment 20 in my name, which seeks to provide a necessary layer of democratic parliamentary scrutiny of the actions of the intelligence services. I listened very carefully to what the members of the ISC present—the hon. Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) and the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright)—had to say. Ultimately, behind my amendment was the fact that democratic accountability does not lie with a High Court or with the head of an intelligence service, but here, with us. We are where the buck of democratic accountability stops. That is why I gave prominence to the ISC in my amendment. Before turning to my amendment, I must acknowledge the work of the Hillsborough families and their supporters for their courage, tenacity and determination over the past 37 years, which has brought us to this point today. We in the SNP and the Scottish Government fully support the aims and objectives of this legislation so that never again will people face lies, injustice and wilful cover-ups by public bodies without accountability under the law. That is why tonight, with the exception of new clause 3, which we will support, we will vote with the Government in support of this legislation. That said, I cannot let today pass without making some reference to the fact that, considering the long journey that we have been on—considering the meetings; considering the way in which the Bill Committee was forced to truncate its work into a very limited period; considering the negotiations that followed; considering the pulling of the Bill, the series of amendments and the counter-proposals—the indecent haste of the Government these past 24 hours to push this legislation through is actively working against proper parliamentary scrutiny. That is my view. Amendment 20 has not been selected for a vote tonight. The intent of the amendment, which is supported by Members from a wide range of parties across the House, was to ensure that we here in Parliament, who are elected by the people, would, through the Intelligence and Security Committee of the House, have had oversight of any decision by the head of an intelligence service to hide information from public scrutiny under the cover of national security. I have concerns not about the Bill’s use today but about the possibility that a future right-wing Government of this country—perhaps even a far-right Government—might use this legislation as it currently stands to escape the scrutiny that we all seek and support. It is not scaremongering to say that. We should learn the lessons of history. I have seen in my own lifetime, in the land of my birth, how information can be hidden in the name of national security when in fact the interest is not that of the nation but of the Government of the day. That is why I believed that amendment 20 was important, and I am glad to say that 24 MPs from across the House agreed with me. Before I conclude, I have to make reference to something that the Minister said earlier. She talked about stress-testing elements of the Bill and said that a full timetable would be brought forward in due course. It sounded to me as if, even if the Bill passes through all its final stages, some of these elements will still be subject to a future timescale. Perhaps she might address that point in her closing remarks. The only other thing I want to say before I finish is the old French saying, “plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”. We need to be careful about the implementation of this law, so that we do not see the repeat of these mistakes at some point in the future. In conclusion, I reiterate our support for this legislation. I commend the work of the many determined and tenacious individuals who have brought us to this point, not least the Hillsborough families, who suffered the terrible loss of their loved ones and the industrial-scale cover-up that followed. Today is about them and everyone who will benefit from their efforts.

    Hansard source
20. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·SNP·Lara Bird

    UK-Switzerland Enhanced Free Trade Agreement

    I apologise in advance to those on the Opposition Front Bench, because I, too, am going to ask a question about Brexit. A study last month showed that the Scottish economy has been hit to the tune of £30 billion every single year because of Brexit, so deals like this—as much as I congratulate the Minister on securing them—do very little to comfort Scottish businesses, especially those in the food, drink and agriculture sectors. So although I welcome some of the additional benefits that will come from this deal for Scottish agricultural industries, there is still a deep feeling among Scottish farmers that they have become collateral damage and are constantly overlooked as the UK Government scramble to secure trade deals in a post-Brexit world. What does the Minister have to say to my farming constituents who feel that they have been overlooked in new trade deals?

    Hansard source
21. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Reform·Sarah Pochin

    Topical Questions

    Now that the capital spending plan has been published, can the Minister confirm whether Warrington and Halton will receive funding for a desperately needed new hospital? The existing hospital estate has not been substantially upgraded since the 1960s and no longer has the capacity needed to serve the growing local population. Will he commit to delivering a modern hospital for the next generation, including the residents of Runcorn and Helsby?

    Hansard source
22. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Plaid Cymru·Liz Saville Roberts

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    I am proud to have sponsored the original proposal, promoted by the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne), and I salute the survivors and the victims’ families. I am glad that the UK Government have listened to them, and that the Bill reflects the level of accountability required of our public authorities. Plaid Cymru stands in firm solidarity with the Hillsborough families and other families in their long campaign for justice. Considering the Labour Government’s reset next week, will the Minister assure me that this law will be implemented in partnership with devolved Governments, and that constructive engagement with Wales and elsewhere will be ensured throughout the legislative process?

    Hansard source
23. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Wera Hobhouse

    Support for Bereaved Parents

    Dorothy House runs spaces called bereavement help points, where people who are grieving can meet others who are grieving. The service relies entirely on volunteers. The trauma of baby loss can last a lifetime, and a charity like Dorothy House cannot cover all the need. Does the Minister agree that this service should be not a “nice to have” but an essential part of trauma care?

    Hansard source
24. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Vikki Slade

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    I am grateful to the Minister for giving way on the matter of the safety of our citizens. I have been contacted over the last couple of years by the family of Major Anthony Hornby MBE, who was a victim of the Chinook crash. Today, the Ministry of Defence is in the High Court, fighting for them not to have rights under the duty of candour. Will the Minister step in and ensure that the victims of the Chinook crash are given the same dignity and respect as others, and that their case can come under a full public investigation?

    Hansard source
25. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tom Morrison

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    I wish to speak to amendment 25, which has been tabled in my name, among others. Hillsborough, the infected blood scandal, Windrush, Grenfell and the Manchester Arena are all tragedies that everyone across the country knows too well, because the campaigners, the survivors and the families of those who have been lost have bravely made sure that we will never forget what happens when the state not only ignores them, but actively works against them to protect its own interests. As you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, the journey to this point has been far too long for the Hillsborough families. It is 14 years since the independent panel finally confirmed that public officials had hidden the truth. It was a day of hope that, finally, we might see justice be done. I remember sitting in Liverpool’s council chamber after the news broke. I remember the joy and relief that spread throughout that room, and the way that councillors from all parties came together to unite behind the families and campaigners who fought so hard, and for so long, to get that verdict. But there were more blocks and heartbreaking moments to come. This Bill has taken far too long to get here, but it is really important to acknowledge Members from across the House and in the Government, especially the Prime Minister, in getting us to this point. I know how much has been said about legacy over recent weeks—especially by the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy)—but I genuinely believe that this a legacy worthy of any incumbent in No. 10. Today, it is long overdue. What has been achieved by the families and all the campaign groups pushing for this legislation is nothing short of astounding. To take the most unimaginable heartbreak, and the most unimaginable grief and suffering, and turn it into positive action that will not only make our country safer and more just, but make the legacy of the 97 synonymous with a country that protects its people and gives them a true level playing field in the eyes of the law, is quite simply remarkable. It must not be forgotten that the campaigners and families worked so hard to find common ground to progress this Bill, and that needs to be celebrated. The campaigners at Hillsborough Law Now have worked relentlessly to push the Government to the position they have reached, and I am sure the whole House will join me in applauding them. This Bill will change the way that this country works and operates. A legal duty of candour on all public authorities will bring groundbreaking change not only legally, but culturally, and a cover-up culture will no longer thrive. In Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt) and I analysed the Bill in detail and learned how true accountability could and should be built into institutions. It became clear that command responsibility over corporate liability was badly needed, and that no organisation should be exempt from the duty of candour, no matter how secret, important or unique their role in our society may be. I was proud to support the amendments put forward by Hillsborough Law Now to ensure that the Government properly addressed these issues. It also became clear that there were other gaps. For example, we believed that the issues of wilfully destroying records and the provision of legal aid were not sufficiently addressed. That is why my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) has tabled new clauses 2 and 4, to make the legislation watertight. I believe other gaps still need to be filled, so I have tabled amendment 25, which outlines explicitly that a public authority or public official providing misleading information to a recognised news publisher would be an offence of misleading the public. We all in this House know well how intertwined the relationship is between the state and the media. There is a continuous cycle of give and take, and it is vital that this is not misused or abused. The impact of the briefings given to the press by the police and senior politicians and advisers after Hillsborough is still felt today. It was a despicable smear campaign that demonised communities and a whole city, and even worse, it made the victims of the disaster appear to be at fault and somehow to blame for what happened. All those responsible for that disgraceful act will never be forgiven. This situation can never be allowed to happen again, and amendment 25 would ensure that misleading the press has direct consequences under the legislation. This Bill still has many stages to undergo in the other place, but today we can truly celebrate in the knowledge that we are one giant step closer to justice. We see a future where people are protected from the powers of the state when the state fails our residents and moves to protect itself over those it should serve. We see a future where victims are cared for by the state, not treated as villains. We see a future where lies and deceit can no longer cover up public scandals, and where public officials are empowered to do the right thing. Today belongs to the 97 and their families, and I could not be prouder of them.

    Hansard source
26. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    One of the hon. Gentleman’s former colleagues went to Downing Street just a month ago with a letter that says he believes he was misled by his own Department when he was the Secretary of State for Defence, so why on earth is the hon. Gentleman arguing this particular case? If Defence Secretaries are misled by their Departments, I do not really understand his faith in leaders of intelligence services and others not being able to hide the truth purely to defend their own Departments.

    Hansard source
27. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    Can the hon. Member spot the irony in the fact that today, while the Government are considering this legislation, which is designed to prevent public bodies from obstructing the truth, the Ministry of Defence is in the High Court in London, trying very hard to silence the Chinook families by saying that they are out of time in seeking an independent inquiry on why their loved ones were allowed to board a Chinook helicopter that the Ministry of Defence knew was unairworthy, positively dangerous and not to be relied on in any way? There is surely an irony in that. It is absurd. I know that the hon. Member was talking about the intelligence services, but the Bill surely has to cover the Ministry of Defence and how it behaves, too, because it is utterly inappropriate.

    Hansard source
28. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Tessa Munt

    Public Office (Accountability) Bill

    My sense is that we could have some equity in the amount of legal aid given to families and individuals fighting big organisations, such as public bodies. If the rates of the specialists and professionals who are supporting the public bodies came down, and matched the rising rate of legal aid for the support of those individuals and families, we might be in a situation where could be some equity. That would make investigation much simpler for the courts and inquests dealing with such cases, because they would have people who understood the process better.

    Hansard source
29. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Steve Darling

    NHS Buildings: Extreme Heat

    7. What plans his Department has to increase the level of resilience of NHS buildings to extreme heat.

    Hansard source
30. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Steve Darling

    NHS Buildings: Extreme Heat

    Torbay hospital is the third oldest estate that celebrates being part of the NHS. In heatwave conditions, the tower block is like an oven and that has a massive impact on patients, staff and even equipment. Does the Minister think it is time to acknowledge that buildings are time-expired, and that in the light of that we need to accelerate investment in Torbay hospital?

    Hansard source
31. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Sarah Olney

    Topical Questions

    T3. Studies show that iodine deficiencies in pregnant women can result in complications for their children, including impaired foetal growth and psychomotor development. Recent studies have shown that iodine levels among women of reproductive age in the UK are only 82 micrograms per litre, with 30% of women recording levels below 50, but World Health Organisation guidance says that pregnant women are iodine deficient if they have less than 150 micrograms. The last governmental review into iodine deficiency was in 2014. Will the Secretary of State ensure that a new review is urgently commissioned?

    Hansard source
32. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Sarah Olney

    Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill

    We have a duty to stand by the steel sector, especially as it navigates unprecedented challenges, including President Trump’s unfair steel tariffs, China’s anti-competitive state aid practices, and the transition to environmentally sustainable production methods. If we are going to foster a thriving steel industry, we cannot allow more producers to collapse, more jobs to be lost, or the risk of our last blast furnaces going cold. That is why the Liberal Democrats broadly welcome this legislation as a temporary emergency and targeted step aimed specifically at turning around British Steel before it can be returned to the private sector. I am particularly glad that the Government have accepted Liberal Democrat amendments that will require the Secretary of State to have regard to the costs of nationalisation before they table regulations to nationalise a company, as well as amendments that would ensure the consideration of environmental liabilities. Those Liberal Democrat amendments will strengthen the legislation, ensuring that these measures—and indeed the Government’s broader steel strategy—move us in the right direction to set the industry on a truly sustainable footing for the long term, while providing taxpayers with real value for money. Lords amendments 2 and 3 ensure that if the Secretary of State is to exercise the principal transfer power, the Government must consider the expected cost to the taxpayer. That is important not only for business and industry to have certainty over the nationalisation process, but for taxpayers, who need to know that their money is not being wasted or paid to foreign owners who will leave our industries high and dry. I am glad that the Government have also agreed to Liberal Democrat amendments that will strengthen the treatment of environmental liabilities in relation to the steel undertaking and ensure that they are explicitly identified and accounted for before compensation payments are made. On top of those legislative concessions, we are glad that the Government accepted other Liberal Democrat calls, including holding a debate in each House within 12 months of Royal Assent and requiring any future chair of a nationalised company to appear before the Business and Trade Committee. Those significant improvements to the legislation promote parliamentary scrutiny and accountability. We also welcome the Government’s having listened to Liberal Democrat peers and introduction of written ministerial statements on the day of acquisition, which will be repeated every three months until we reach a year from nationalisation. Again, that change boosts transparency, enabling Parliament to scrutinise the measures’ impact on local communities and jobs. Lastly, we are glad that the Government adopted Liberal Democrat proposals to strengthen the UK Steel Council and its role in facilitating nationalisation within the context of the steel strategy. Steel is a vital sector, bringing far-reaching benefits across the UK. It provides key materials for our national infrastructure from defence to renewable energy, and creates thousands of good jobs across the UK. The Liberal Democrats welcome the action that the Government are taking to protect British steel, backing a key plank of our critical national infrastructure. I am glad that the Government have worked constructively with the Liberal Democrats and that Ministers have adopted many of our proposals to improve transparency and accountability around the financial and environmental costs of any forthcoming measures. We will continue to constructively scrutinise the Government as they put these new measures in force to ensure that steel producers, local jobs and British taxpayers are properly supported and treated fairly.

    Hansard source
33. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Richard Foord

    Coastal Communities: Isolation and Hidden Deprivation

    It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Alec. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing this debate on our coastal communities, which are so often forgotten. Those of us who represent coastal communities like Honiton and Sidmouth can sometimes forget that we represent such a beautiful, stunning part of the world. Sometimes it is only on a Friday or Saturday, when my mind is here or on work, that I drive over a horizon and see the sea and am reminded what a beautiful place it is. But coastal communities often contain pockets of hidden deprivation. In particular, they are susceptible to low social mobility, which is what I want to spend a couple of minutes speaking about. The latest report by the South-West Social Mobility Commission highlights a paradox: the south-west region performs really well on some measures, such as employment and economic participation, but it is one of the weakest in England educationally for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. If we want there to be stronger local economies, higher productivity and better-paid jobs, we need a pipeline of young people with the skills, qualifications and opportunities to access them. The south-west peninsula has some fantastic opportunities for the economy and for the UK as a whole. Our agrifood, our defence industries and our clean energy are second to none. Yet the South-West Social Mobility Commission found that just 41% of pupils eligible for free school meals in the south-west achieved the expected standards in reading, writing and maths at age 11—the lowest level of any region in England. By the age of 19, only 30% of those eligible for free school meals achieved a level 3 qualification. Too often, ambitious young people are faced with a choice: stay in the community that they have grown up in and that they love or leave in search of better-paid and more varied career opportunities. That could be different. If we really value our coastal communities and the economic opportunities that they offer, we can set regions such as the south-west alight.

    Hansard source
34. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Rachel Gilmour

    Coastal Communities: Isolation and Hidden Deprivation

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. There is a version of coastal communities that we like to tell ourselves, of chocolate-box fishing villages and tight-knit communities where people look out for one another, and there is certainly truth in that. In Tiverton and Minehead, I represent one and I see it. We talk of coastal areas being at the end of the line, but there is no line for west Somerset. It is a cul-de-sac. The west part of my constituency, for all its natural beauty, suffers from the lowest social mobility in the country, and it ranks among the poorest travel times to employment, at the 96th percentile. Education and employment opportunities for those living along the coast are so limited that teenagers are catching a bus at 6 o’clock in the morning, with a two-hour journey each way, just to reach the further education courses they need. It is a material hit to a young person’s aspirations, forcing them to compromise before they have even started and putting them at a direct disadvantage to their peers elsewhere. It creates a profound poverty of aspiration and ambition, brought about by an environment that tells people they have been forgotten. That is why my party has consistently called on the Government to apply a fair funding formula that properly takes into account the realities of coastal and rural life for education, travel, health and much more. Perhaps the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), much of whose political brand rests on regional empowerment, might turn his attention to the south-west as he closes in on No. 10, because the coastal and rural premium is real and is felt acutely. Over the last few months, my office has produced a report into dementia in Tiverton and Minehead. Isolation and loneliness ran through it as a constant, unrelenting theme, not as one issue among many, but as the backdrop against which everything else is experienced. This year alone, the west Somerset coastal area has lost dental services, its post office, hospital scanning equipment and its local citizens advice bureau. They are services that young and old alike depend on, and one by one they are disappearing. Devolution in Tiverton and Minehead means meaningful evolution to prosperity, opportunity and a better future for all my constituents.

    Hansard source
35. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Rachel Gilmour

    Coastal Communities: Isolation and Hidden Deprivation

    I hear what the Minister says; as a lifelong Liberal, I personally found those years extremely difficult. That said, rurality is not taken into account when the Government give out money for local areas. Accounting for rurality and remoteness in local government funding outcomes would make a massive difference to my constituency and others.

    Hansard source
36. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Rachel Gilmour

    Extreme Heat: Preparedness

    It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I thank the hon. Member for Waveney Valley (Adrian Ramsay) for introducing this important debate. The reports this week have been horrifying. That thousands may have died in this heat shows how ill-equipped we are as a country to deal with this kind of weather. I represent the rural and coastal constituency of Tiverton and Minehead, with a disproportionately elderly population, and the underlying health inequalities that often go with an area of its character. When the heat comes, my constituents are among the first to suffer and the least equipped to cope. I wish to highlight plainly where preparedness has failed them. In part of my constituency, not only has this period not been managed, it has been completely mismanaged. Some children cooling off in the River Exe on hot summer’s day, as any of us would want to, fell ill because of an alleged discharge into the river. The children’s father kayaked up the river later yesterday evening and reports encountering a pungent sewage odour in the vicinity of one of Tiverton’s sewage treatment work sites. He witnessed what appeared to be active discharge, which the company’s tracker failed to reflect, because it had not been updated. A monitoring system that does not monitor is worse than useless; it is a fig leaf. There is a hosepipe ban, although the company had months of warning. A wet start to the year gave way to weeks of record heat that was forecast and foreseeable. Yet, when the pressure came, South West Water was not ready. The imposition of the ban is on mid-Devon and parts of east Devon but nowhere else in the region. My constituents want to know why they alone are paying the price of a company’s failure to plan. Where was the investment? Where was the foresight? That is not bad luck, it is dereliction of duty. It is hard to shake the distinct impression that to South West Water stakeholders come a distant second behind shareholder interests, which is unacceptable. The consequences go beyond garden hoses. At a slaughter site in Willand, water pressure was cut to a quarter of its normal levels, leading to an unfolding animal welfare crisis. It posed a potential public health risk, as a site that cannot access adequate water cannot maintain hygiene standards. As the MP for the area, it took me five phone calls yesterday before someone from South West Water picked up the phone. I found the lack of urgency and concern to be outstanding. I am assured that some water pressure has now been restored, but this is on a cliff edge, and major welfare issues remain a concern. Despite what I heard from its new chief executive in a breakfast meeting just a few weeks ago, it seems as though South West Water has not learned any lessons. Finally, heat preparedness is also as much about the everyday infrastructure that people rely on. Buses, in particular, are used disproportionately by elderly residents, the very group most at risk of heatstroke. Too many buses still lack adequate air-conditioning. That has to be part of the preparedness conversation. This heat will come again and again. We need a system and the infrastructure that meets it head on and corporate entities that put people first, not profit.

    Hansard source
37. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Pippa Heylings

    Extreme Heat: Preparedness

    It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I congratulate the hon. Member for Waveney Valley (Adrian Ramsay) on securing this timely debate. As Britain experiences yet another summer of extreme heat, we cannot ignore the fact that the UK was built for a climate that no longer exists, as we have heard from all hon. Members here today. Climate change is not a distant threat; it is here today. Minister, it is an issue of national security. It affects our constituents, damages our economy and, increasingly, costs lives. On our current trajectory, average summer temperatures in my constituency of South Cambridgeshire could rise by more than 4°C. Days above 30°C are expected to increase six-fold, while summer rainfall could fall by more than a fifth. Those are just statistics, but like others I have heard stories of children struggling to learn in overheated classrooms, older people becoming dangerously ill in care homes, critical incidents in our hospitals, farmers facing drought and water shortages, and communities and wildlife under threat from wildfires, yet despite these growing risks the Climate Change Committee has concluded that the Government’s approach to climate adaptation is clearly not working and we are woefully unprepared. Can the Minister confirm that the Treasury has now accepted the forecast of 2°C warming by 2050, and, if we now have an agreed forecast, whether each Department is doing what it should be doing and setting adaptation goals, given we can now model what that means for every sector? Preparing for increasing climate impacts must be seen as an issue of national security and resilience. The Liberal Democrats are calling for adequate cooling to be installed in all NHS hospitals, care homes and schools in high-risk areas in the next five years, and for work with local authorities and mayors to create a network of air-conditioned cool hubs for vulnerable people. We also agree that we should have maximum workplace temperatures, as many of our European neighbours already have; increase green space and plant more trees to cool our towns and cities; and support households to insulate their homes and install heat pumps that can provide both efficient heating in winter and cooling in summer. Without greater resilience, the foundations needed for our UK security will struggle to function, but we have all the answers in our hands. That is the message of the multiple people’s emergency briefings that the South Cambridgeshire climate and nature group arranged across my constituency and which I have attended, and which have happened across the country. Does the Minister support the call for a Government-backed, televised national emergency briefing? People deserve the facts, and they need and want to be better prepared.

    Hansard source
38. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Pippa Heylings

    Extreme Heat: Preparedness

    Just before the debate, we hosted a solar-powered ice cream van from the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) in Speaker’s Court. Given the heat, it was very nourishing, and it was lovely that the Doorkeepers and those who work with Mr Speaker were able to come out and have some. It was fantastic to see Electrify Britain’s campaign to get bills down while we reduce emissions, and Styles Ice Cream’s fully solar-powered ice cream production and ice cream vans gave everybody a bit of comfort.

    Hansard source
39. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Pippa Heylings

    Extreme Heat: Preparedness

    I presume that we are talking about degrees of warming. I want to confirm that we are looking at going beyond—keeping warming below 1.5°C, and that 2°C is not a minimum but a forecast that we would not like to see but is probably happening. If we do not do more, it will rise by 4°C by the end of the century.

    Hansard source
40. 14 Jul 2026·Parliament·Lib Dem·Olly Glover

    Extreme Heat: Preparedness

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher, and I thank the hon. Member for Waveney Valley (Adrian Ramsay) for securing a debate on this very important topic. His wide-ranging speech highlighted the worsening climate outlook that we face; the impacts on physical health, mental health and sleep of the extreme heatwaves we have recently been suffering; and important issues about water storage. The hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) rightly highlighted the impact that extreme heatwaves have on people with lower incomes, who may not be able to go and buy air-conditioning units and so on. As well as highlighting the mitigation of putting ice lollies in the freezer, the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talked about the impact on the elderly population in older, rural properties. The hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Alison Taylor) added to her comments in last night’s Adjournment debate about the importance of embodied carbon in buildings. My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) joined a number of hon. Members in highlighting the failures of water companies—South West Water’s failings in her case—and the need to improve the reliability of water supply. The hon. Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) highlighted the fact that Department for Education guidance has focused on open windows. I will come on to whether opening windows helps, after some experimentation that I have done in my own house as to how to deal with this. The hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) rightly highlighted the fact we have had long-term knowledge of climate change and we have collectively, as a human species, failed to take decisive action thus far. The hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns) talked about the impact of learning. Finally, my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) talked with her customary passion and expertise on this topic. She said that the impact of climate change is here today and that it should be considered a national security issue. We Liberal Democrats share the concerns of hon. Members in this Chamber. We are acutely aware of the serious public health threat posed by heatwaves, particularly to those with underlying health conditions, residents of care homes and people living in temporary accommodation. Back in summer 2023, an estimated 2,295 deaths were associated with five periods of heat. This year so far, more than 2,700 people may have died from heat-related causes in England and Wales, as suggested by expert estimates. We have also seen wildfires. Very tragically, a wildfire led to the deaths of British citizens in Almeria in Spain, but I have also had fires locally in the Astons and West Challow in my constituency, although thankfully they have not led to fatalities. My constituency has also faced the challenge of hot school buildings. At recent school visits, I have felt this for myself—for example, at the Stanford in the Vale Church of England primary school but also at Aureus secondary school, despite that building not even being a decade old. That shows how we continue to not get these things right. I have attended a community national emergency briefing in Wallingford, and there has also been one in Didcot. That shows there is rising popular concern about these topics and that we need to take more action. Let us think about this issue through three categories. First, what can we do to prevent the root cause? Secondly, what can we do to mitigate it? Thirdly, what coping measures do we have in place? On prevention, I feel very strongly, as do several other hon. Members, that we cannot keep shunting carbon emission reductions down the road. We have made progress in a number of areas in the United Kingdom but there is a lot more to be done. Globally, the same issue applies: when we are confronted with a choice between making further and faster progress on reducing carbon emissions and other factors, it is often the other factors that win out. Progress has been pretty stagnant on introducing electric vehicles and adapting our infrastructure, and the UK’s hopeless record on rail electrification, including under this Government, and on industrial production needs lots of attention. That is before we even think about rainforest loss and the destruction of nature both here and elsewhere. That is why we, as politicians who care about these topics, must tackle net zero scepticism head on. We are directly seeing the impacts of climate change now, and we will spend far more money if we focus solely on mitigation—which, alas, we need to do because of our lack of progress—rather than on tackling the root causes of carbon emissions. The second theme is mitigation. Building design is important. The hon. Member for North Herefordshire made embodied carbon in buildings the focus of her Adjournment debate last night, and we can also learn how to design our buildings better so that they are resilient for the future. We know from some of the buildings here on the parliamentary estate what a long way we have to go: elements of the Palace can be very cool, but Portcullis House is hardly a triumph of modern building design, given that the atrium—and frankly every room in that place—is a greenhouse. I am personally delighted not to have won a room in Portcullis House in the ballot. I am happy to be in Derby Gate where the air-con actually works—for half of it anyway, but that is another story. It is not right that so many people are left to endure dangerously high temperatures in poorly insulated homes and buildings. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for a 10-year emergency home upgrade programme, beginning with free insulation and heat pumps for low-income households, while ensuring that all new homes are built to zero-carbon standards. That builds on our recent success of getting the Government to commit to putting rooftop solar on all new builds, which was encouraged by the sunshine Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson). When we are dealing with heat pump scepticism, it is important to remember that heat pumps have the capability to provide air-con in summer. Successive Governments have comprehensively failed to take climate adaptation measures seriously, guaranteeing misery for people and communities affected by heat stress, as well as flooding and wildfires. That is why we would prioritise protecting communities by implementing a comprehensive UK adaptation strategy, embedding climate resilience into decision making across all Government Departments and agencies—rather than the current siloed approach—to prevent problems before they happen. We would deliver adequate funding to local communities to empower them to combat flooding, drought and heatwaves, including through nature-based flood management, sustainable drainage, water supply enhancement, building retrofits and urban greening, backed by stronger planning and regulatory frameworks. People continue to ignore the evidence that even simple solutions, such as more trees and more shade in urban areas, can make an enormous difference to our ability to withstand heatwaves. The Liberal Democrats would develop resilience standards for the energy, water, transport and telecommunications sectors, and support homeowners to install proactive adaptation measures against flooding and overheating. We also believe that no one should be expected to work in unacceptably high temperatures, and we support the Climate Change Committee’s recommendation to introduce a statutory maximum workplace temperature. The third theme is coping measures, and cool hubs are our policy solution. They would be rather like warm hubs with areas of heating, which are popular in Ukraine in winter when Russia attacks infrastructure, but they are the summer equivalent. Community spaces with air-conditioning, such as gyms, leisure centres and libraries, could provide much-needed respite from soaring temperatures in summer months, following similar “cool bank” schemes in other countries. We need to do more to make our transport networks resilient. We need to consider whether our current rail stress temperatures need to be increased, given a much wider range of temperatures and much hotter summers. The more modern railway electrification that we have in this country is much more resilient than older equipment installed in past decades. Melting tarmac can be an issue for roads and aviation. Public health advice and information will be more and more important. We need to ensure that people understand good practice for keeping houses cool. I have realised from contributions to the Didcot community Facebook group that I have been doing this all wrong and that, actually, having the windows open often does not help. Somebody said, “You’re such idiots for opening your windows. Keep them closed when it’s hot.” I have tried that and, I have to say, it is a lot better. Perhaps that exposes my embarrassing lack of understanding of science, but it shows that we can do a lot more to help people to reach the best conclusions for their own houses. Finally, we need a public information campaign on what we can all do to prevent fires and reduce the risk, particularly in the countryside where we should not be smoking, vaping or having barbecues in areas that have been subject to drought and are at much higher risk. This is clearly a very challenging topic, and one that needs action across Government Departments. For that reason, I look forward to the Minister’s comments.

    Hansard source