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. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Cat Eccles

   Engagements

   Q14. Stourbridge is famous for many things: the glass industry, Jude Bellingham—[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”]—Robert Plant and, most importantly, the Stourbridge shuttle, the UK’s shortest railway line at just 0.8 miles, or 1.3 km for those who prefer metric. It links Stourbridge Junction with Stourbridge Town. Despite its small size, it achieves an impressive 99.6% reliability compared with the west midlands average of 64.4%. One of my highlights as an MP was unveiling a shuttle car named after local legend George, the Stourbridge station cat, whose global social media following made him a beloved fixture at the junction. Today marks the start of “Shuttle Shorts”, a short film festival celebrating the journey. The shuttle shows how community railway can improve local mobility. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that Pre Metro’s ambition to introduce a VLR—very light rail—service between Stourbridge and Brierley Hill is a valuable opportunity for Great British Railways and that local businesses should be supported to do this?

   Hansard source
2. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Brian Leishman

   Rearmament and Warfighting Readiness

   I took the underground to Westminster this morning, and at the bottom of the steps at the entrance into Parliament there was a homeless man sleeping against the wall, lying on the cold, dirty floor of the tube station. He was the last thing I saw before coming into this grand palace where we sit as legislators, taking decisions and making political choices that impact that man and everyone else in the country. Last week, £15 billion was found for weapons that will get us ready for a conflict that many politicians, much of the media, and various think-tanks and lobbyists say is imminent. That hawkish rhetoric is ramping up—of the 22 questions asked at Defence questions on Monday, three contained mention of Russia, and two were about defending the High North. A consistent theme ran throughout, pushing the narrative that we must spend on defence above all else. Of course, I appreciate that the first duty of Government is to keep our citizens safe and to defend the realm, but what about that man at the bottom of the tube station steps? Who is keeping him safe? What about the children who are going to school with no food in their bellies—do they feel safe? Over 3 million people need a food bank to survive—people who, when the winter comes, will have to decide whether to eat a meal or put their heating on. How safe do they feel because of political choices that have seen other departmental budgets cut? I do not think it needs to be this way. Tony Benn used to say regularly in this place that if we can find money to kill people, we can find money to help people. When I watch the news on television or scroll through my phone and I see conflict, ethnic cleansing, the displacement of millions, the destruction of Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan, and Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal war on Iran—remember, a girls’ school got bombed—I do not think, “You know what the world needs? We need more weapons. We need more death.” I think that what we need is obvious. We need diplomacy, we need the de-escalation of tensions abroad, and we need a domestic agenda not of war, but of prosperity and peace. I want us to invest in health, education and public services—all the good stuff that keeps communities together. I want better wages, the reindustrialisation of forgotten heartlands across the country, and the redistribution of wealth and power to create equal opportunities for people. I want a social security system that is a genuine safety net, one that stops people from descending into poverty. We are at war right now with poverty and inequality, and our people are dying because of it, so I urge Members not to look the other way the next time they are in Westminster tube station.

   Hansard source
3. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ben Coleman

   European Entry and Exit System

   I am grateful to my hon. Friend for all that he is doing to sort out this mess. Does he agree that the queues and delays facing British travellers under the EU’s entry-exit system were entirely avoidable? Had Britain kept its seat at the table, we would not be subject to these to checks at all, we would have had a voice in the system design and roll-out over the past five years, and we could have made it work better. Instead, just as with steel and electric vehicles, we find ourselves on the receiving end of decisions rather than shaping them. Does he agree that is precisely why we need an ambitious new partnership with the EU, so that Britain can genuinely take back control and British people’s European holidays do not start and end in chaos?

   Hansard source
4. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anneliese Dodds

   Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

   It is a real pleasure to speak in this debate. I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) for securing it, and I agree with many of his remarks and those made by other speakers. I particularly agree with his remarks about the New Contract initiative. The UK’s AI sector has grown 23 times faster than the rest of our economy. We must ensure continued investment and the realisation of productivity gains from appropriate use, but we must also secure greater domestic control and resilience, and mitigate near and later-term risks from inappropriate use, if we are truly to become an innovation nation. I believe that we must change our approach to AI, and I want to spend the time that I have setting out the case for doing that. Above all, we must seek sovereignty as if we actually mean it. Supporting UK niches, such as photonics and quantum, is key to sovereignty and to boosting growth from Southampton to Sheffield and from Belfast to Birmingham, but we must recognise how crucial access to frontier models is to our sovereignty. The recent debacle with Fable 5 and Mythos 5 only serves to underline that. The sovereign AI fund needs a clearer rationale. It should be developing UK companies and partnerships, and public stakes should genuinely put our people and our places first. We must also work more concertedly with allies to develop joint sovereign capability. AI development needs to be part of an economic security reset with the EU, and we need to be able to participate in the Scaleup Europe Fund. Interestingly, Mistral AI’s chief executive recently claimed that the EU has at most two years to build its own AI or become permanently structurally dependent on the US or China. The UK must be included in that EU-level debate before it is too late. Delivering stronger sovereign control and resilience also means the Government putting their money where their mouths are and supporting UK AI and UK partnership AI in procurement. All Departments should be assessed publicly on that, and the Competition and Markets Authority should be engaged on how to ensure more advanced market commitments to support our sovereignty. We can learn from other countries on that. Look at France, which recently dropped Palantir from its intelligence services. Of course I realise that changes cause disruption, but we cannot work purely on the basis of cost or short-term capability any more. We have to make assessments on the basis of control and resilience, given their significance for our national interest. In public services, we must move beyond no, low and performative adoption to appropriate and transparent adoption that puts people and places first. It is critical that the UK can deploy sufficient compute to support those aspirations. I hope that the AI Energy Council can develop plans for a line delivery of renewable energy and data centre projects, as well as fixing difficult issues such as demand modulation to unblock additional capacity. There can genuinely be a win-win here, but for that and greater adoption to be achieved, I agree with what others have said: we have to face up to public concern about the risks. We need only look at what is happening in Scotland right now to see that. First, on unemployment, half of all UK workers feel that they will lose their job to AI. From what I can see, there is very mixed evidence about that so far, beyond the field of software development. Pleased as I was to see the Early Careers Jobs Alliance and the AI adoption insights agreement from the Government, we must go further. Lessons should be learned from the consultation on the social media ban, “Growing up in the online world: a national consultation”. I would like to see the Government launch a consultation on starting work in a world of AI, so that we can involve young people who are worried about that, gather their good ideas and show that the Government are engaging with that crucial issue. We should be doing far more in our schools and colleges to prepare our children.

   Hansard source
5. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anneliese Dodds

   Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

   The hon. Member raises a really important point, and it is part of a broader picture. My understanding is that something like only half of all schools have an appropriate AI policy. Simply saying to students, “Don’t use AI”, having an unorganised approach to it, or just taking a company’s word for it without a broader set of guidance and frameworks for deployment is not supporting our children and young people. Saying, “Just don’t use AI”, when we know children and young people are using it, is not fair to them, and will do a disservice to our economy in the future. Our children and young people need to understand how AI works, as well as the risks of cognitive offloading and the negative impacts on social interaction from inappropriate use. I also want to see us encouraging international discussion in the OECD and the United Nations about taxation—taxation of permanent establishment, capital gains and the cost of human labour compared with tokens. That does not need to have an immediate impact; we could set a threshold of employment impact to trigger a token tax, for example. However, we cannot run away from this debate, especially given how much services dominate our economy. Secondly, we have to engage with concerns about the safety of frontier models. As I said many months ago alongside the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, just regulating applications after harm has been done is unacceptable. Grok should not have been able to produce 3 million non-consensual nudified images in the first place. New York, California, Illinois and the EU have moved towards approaches requiring mandatory assessment of frontier models, and we should too. We should place the AI Security Institute on a statutory footing as a first step, and we should use our presidency of the G20 next year to reinvigorate global attempts at co-ordination, which started with the Bletchley conference but have effectively stalled since. We can work with EU countries to do that as well as with nations from India to Brazil. Thirdly, and finally, although AI can release huge productivity gains, we have to recognise that unscrupulous and inappropriate use is already imposing huge costs too.

   Hansard source
6. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anneliese Dodds

   Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

   I absolutely agree. That phenomenon of so-called cognitive offloading and the lack of scaffolding in skills is a genuine concern. Equally, we see how rapidly and accurately AI can assess tumour scans, for example, working with human beings to deliver the highest possible quality of healthcare. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) about the potential there. We need to have a sensible approach to this issue. I also want to mention some additional harms. We are now seeing ubiquitous slop on the internet, AI-enabled fraud and cyber-attacks, and the impact of AI summaries on local media use as well, so I want to see the CMA using its powers for competition-focused action on strategic market status services. I want the Government to adopt a maximalist approach to the “Watch this Space” White Paper, and I want us to stop treating bots as separate, because AI is increasingly going to be integral to our interface with the internet, as well as to so much else, so we need to adopt a safety-by-design approach to online regulation, and that needs to recognise the increasing ubiquity of AI.

   Hansard source
7. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Gelderd

   Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) for securing this crucial debate. The quality of the contributions reflects how timely this conversation is. Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant future challenge; it is here, shaping our economy, public services and daily lives. The challenge is how we ensure that these changes work for people, strengthen our communities and deliver benefits that are shared across the country and internationally. The UK has an opportunity to lead by embracing innovation and making sure that the right safeguards are in place to protect our communities, build confidence and ensure that the benefits are shared. It is vital that we recognise how we can share in that new economy, and that we act now to safeguard public value and wealth generation. Every day, through our public services, our NHS, our transport network and countless interactions with the British public, we generate data that has enormous value. AI is the technology that unlocks that value, but the resource it is built on is our human data, which belongs to us all. As I outlined in a recent article, we must learn the lessons from the past on this. In the past century, Norway decided to turn the national resource of fossil fuels in the North sea—the original driver of modern industrial development—into lasting public wealth. In the UK, we did not invest the revenues from North sea oil; we spent it to cover day to day costs. We must not make that same mistake twice. Rather than allowing the value created by AI from public data to flow permanently into a few private hands, we must ensure that British public services share in the wealth generated from that value—from the national assets we have created—by creating a national data wealth fund. The Government have already recognised the strategic importance of data through the national data library and the AI opportunities action plan. Those are welcome steps forward, but we must do more to build the institutions that capture this value before it slips through our hands. I fully agree with the comments made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) about the need for real sovereign AI capabilities and urgent collaboration with our European allies. Keeping our communities safe and defending our democracy are essential parts of the AI challenge. I recently met the Minister for AI and Online Safety to discuss the growing impact of AI on children and young people particularly. We need to ensure there are strong safeguards around AI-generated content. If we cannot trust what is shown to us online, and if we cannot distinguish between what is real and what has been artificially created, the consequences can reach far beyond individual users and can undermine trust in our democratic institutions themselves. That brings me to accountability. Companies with influence over what millions of people see should be held accountable and made responsible. Social media is not a village noticeboard. It is driven by algorithms that control what is recommended and amplified to millions of people every day. Technology companies act as editors: they decide what people see, what spreads, what is promoted and what disappears. AI will increasingly determine the information that people consume not only through social media, but through search engines, digital assistants and the services people use every day. That is why transparency, accountability and effective regulation are crucial. As AI use grows, so too does the demand for further infrastructure, as I have outlined before. Data centres will become increasingly important to Britain’s economy. As the Member for South East Cornwall, I know that nature is not a blocker to growth. With careful planning, meaningful engagement and strong environmental protections, we can protect the landscapes that make Cornwall special while creating skilled jobs, attracting investment and ensuring that local communities benefit from a new technology, which, concentrated in companies in London as it is, can often feel very far from South East Cornwall. The economic revolution is happening whether we welcome it or not, but our responsibility is to ensure that we are ready to unlock the opportunities, that we protect children and vulnerable people, and that we hold the powerful platforms to account. I am ready to ensure that the remarkable technology being developed today strengthens my community and does not leave them behind.

   Hansard source
8. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Gelderd

   Maritime and Coastguard Agency

   I thank the Minister for his continued engagement with me and with other Members, but given the unique nature of the role of coastguard rescue officers and their extraordinary commitment to responding at all hours in areas including my own constituency, will he ensure that the Department undertakes a comprehensive assessment of all viable options so that the Government can reach a fully informed decision that is right for both CROs and the communities, such as mine, that they serve with such dedication?

   Hansard source
9. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Dixon

   NHS Corridor Care

   I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. She has spoken about some of the impacts of this issue. My 80-odd-year-old mum was recently admitted to Airedale hospital with acute respiratory issues. She had to wait in a chair for over 12 hours, alongside my dad, in a very undignified way. Does my hon. Friend agree that ideally we should be preventing admissions for older and frail patients, and does she believe that the stronger proactive primary and community care services proposed by the Government with neighbourhood health teams could help to prevent some admissions for older and frail elderly people like my mum?

   Hansard source
10. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Dixon

    NHS Corridor Care

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that it is not about fixing the problem at the front door; it is about fixing the problem at the back door. Does she agree that closer integration of health and social care is part of the answer to enable that flow through hospitals out into the community? During the summing up, I hope the Minister might carefully consider my amendment to the Health Bill on health and care integration—my hon. Friend might also look at that.

    Hansard source
11. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy MacNae

    NHS Corridor Care

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) for securing this debate and all my esteemed colleagues for covering the issue so brilliantly and with such expertise. You will be glad to hear, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that allows me to be brief and to focus on Blackburn A&E. Blackburn A&E is one of the busiest in the country, serving east Lancashire. It has been one of the starkest examples of corridor care, and I could tell so many stories of constituents suffering the indignities and poor care that are the inevitable consequence of that. There is the 70-year-old lady with spinal cancer who was stuck there for 72 hours; the young woman who was a historical sexual assault victim, physically shaking with fear at being left in a corridor surrounded by men; or the 90-year-old with dementia and double incontinence, reliant on her daughter to change and clean her, and desperate for privacy, comfort and reassurance. I too have been there, unable to walk after a fall, for 13 hours overnight in a corridor that felt like a war zone, next to an old lady who was in constant pain, fearful and alone, crying out for her family—just one voice among many. Corridor care is at best undignified and at worst heartless, heartbreaking and cruel. Its normalisation is a scandal and is one of the starkest examples of a health system failed and broken by Tory austerity. We must end it, and I am pleased to say that in Blackburn we are finally seeing progress.

    Hansard source
12. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy MacNae

    NHS Corridor Care

    The investment in prevention and in repairing the massive damage done by the previous Government to our valued health system is crucial and fundamental. We are finally seeing progress in Blackburn, and that is because of additional resources and support from NHS England and the Government’s getting it right first time initiative. East Lancashire Hospitals NHS trust and the leadership must be praised for that. They have been working hard and with real focus to address the underlying drivers of corridor care, such as safe and timely discharge, and the presence of senior clinicians. This is not about quick fixes but about looking to end the practice for good. So far, waits of 12 hours-plus have reduced by 18%. That means there is a long way to go, and myself and fellow east Lancashire MPs are working with the trust both to challenge progress and to argue for the resources needed to do the job.

    Hansard source
13. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andy MacNae

    NHS Corridor Care

    The crucial thing is that we recognise the scale of the challenge and work together to solve it. This needs to be a shared mission on behalf of our residents, our friends and our families. In a year’s time, I intend to be standing here after we have together ended corridor care in Blackburn A&E for good, and I hope the Minister and the Department of Health continue to share this commitment. This is a moral imperative, and together we must deliver the care and dignity that our residents deserve.

    Hansard source
14. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    Draft UK-EU Agreement on Gibraltar

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John, in this important debate. For more than six years, the people of Gibraltar have lived with uncertainty. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Gibraltar, I have had the enormous privilege of visiting the Rock several times since Brexit. I have met businesses, politicians, officials and residents. Wherever I have gone, I have heard the same message: people want certainty, so that they can get on with their lives, grow their businesses and plan for the future. I want to put on record my thanks to the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) for not only securing this debate but producing a full and thorough report, alongside Baroness Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, after their visit in May. As he noted, after years of determined negotiations we finally have an agreement that delivers certainty. I congratulate the Minister and his team on that, and I pay tribute to the Government of Gibraltar, whose steadfast commitment was instrumental in securing this outcome. I also recognise the constructive engagement of Spain and the European Union. Agreements of such significance are only possible through patience, dialogue and a shared determination to find a way forward. This matters because every day more than 15,000 people cross the frontier to work, trade and support their families. Removing unnecessary barriers will make a real difference to people’s lives, give businesses greater certainty and confidence, and help Gibraltar look to the future with certainty. However, the practical benefits need to be seen and felt, so I would be grateful if the Minister could say a little more about when people can expect to begin seeing them. The economic case is compelling. Gibraltar estimates that the agreement could unlock around £200 million a year for its economy, without costing the UK taxpayer a penny. The agreement is good for Gibraltar, good for British business and good for our wider economy. More importantly, it changes nothing about sovereignty. Gibraltar remains British. The treaty is clear, the Government of Gibraltar’s independent legal advice is clear, and the right of the people of Gibraltar to determine their own future remains untouched. Chief Minister Fabian Picardo said in one of his national day addresses: “We are an integral part of the British family of Nations. And no one can or should try to untie the knot that binds us and Britain.” Those words capture exactly what the treaty has achieved. It provides certainty for Gibraltar’s future while protecting the enduring bond between Gibraltar and the United Kingdom. It is also important to remember that this is the agreement the people of Gibraltar wanted. It was backed by a Government elected on a mandate to deliver, approved unanimously by the Gibraltar Parliament and supported by every former Chief Minister. As we heard from the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham, it was backed by the many stakeholders that he met during his visit in May. Alongside the constitutional protections come real practical benefits: easier movement across the frontier, improved trading opportunities for Gibraltar businesses, and simpler travel for British and potentially European visitors. The agreement gives Gibraltar the opportunity to thrive while remaining proudly British. However, I hear the concerns that have been raised with regard to the retail sector, security, health and access to the university. Along with the Gibraltar APPG, I look forward to supporting and raising any concerns where possible with our Government. As the Member of Parliament for Portsmouth North, I also welcome the protections for our national security. Gibraltar has stood alongside Britain for more than 300 years and remains one of our most strategically important overseas territories. The strait of Gibraltar is one of the world’s most important maritime gateways, and the ability of the United Kingdom to operate freely from the Rock is fundamental to our national security. I particularly welcome the clear guidance that the movement of UK military personnel and equipment will not be impeded. That was an essential principle throughout the negotiations and I am pleased to see it so very clearly protected. National security is the first priority of any Government, so I would welcome anything the Minister can say about how those defence interests were protected throughout the negotiations and the close work undertaken across Government to secure that outcome. The agreement is about more than protecting and resolving the legacy of Brexit. It gives Gibraltar certainty, protects sovereignty, strengthens our security and creates the conditions for long-term prosperity. For generations, Gibraltarians have shown extraordinary loyalty to the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom has stood firmly with Gibraltar. The treaty honours that relationship, safeguards its future and allows Gibraltar to look ahead with confidence. As the chair of the Gibraltar APPG, I warmly welcome it.

    Hansard source
15. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    Rearmament and Warfighting Readiness

    We live in an increasingly unstable world. From Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine to the conflict in the middle east, the threats to our national security have grown, and families across the country have felt the consequences through higher bills and rising prices. We cannot afford to ignore the reality of the world we face, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns) so eloquently put it, the question we need to address is this: “What does warfighting readiness actually mean to this Government, to our forces and to our country?” It is worth reminding the House and our constituents—as it would not have been thought from the opening speeches today—that this Government inherited armed forces that had been hollowed out by years of under-investment, overstretch and a failure to keep pace with modern warfare. Let me point out to the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) that this destruction was a result of initiatives such as the coalition Government’s 2011 defence basing review, which reduced the number of times our Type 45s were serviced, thus giving us this challenge. Ships, aircraft and tanks, and indeed personnel, are not built overnight, so I am proud that this Labour Government are beginning to put that right—and to put it right across Government, because this is not just the role of the Ministry of Defence. This Government deserve credit for changing course. Over the next four years, we will invest £298 billion in defence. The defence investment plan will help us to modernise our armed forces by investing in drones and autonomous systems, building at least six new warships, and strengthening the capabilities that our services need to respond to today’s security challenges. It reflects and learns from the lessons of recent conflicts, and ensures that our defence capabilities will keep pace with the changing nature of war. Although I do not agree with the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells that this is too little too late, I do agree that we need to move and ensure that the sector is more rapidly equipped for national security and for growth. We know that increasing defence spending alone is not enough. We also need stronger industrial bases and a system that allows for swift procurement, and that means backing British defence manufacturers and innovative small and medium-sized enterprises with better access to finance so that they can grow and create skilled jobs and apprenticeships and strengthen our national resilience. In my constituency, for instance, defence jobs and national security go hand in hand. That is why I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government will look again at joining the Defence, Security and Resilience Bank. Spearheaded by Prime Minister Carney in Canada, the DSRB could help unlock private investment for the defence sector and support the industrial capacity that our armed forces really need. We should seize every opportunity to work with our allies to strengthen our defence industrial base, and we should seize every opportunity to ensure that we can not only have research and development here, but have the opportunity to scale up British companies so that they choose to invest and grow here and not abroad. Defence is about far more than equipment and technology. Our greatest strength is the people who serve this country. That is why, as well as improving defence design and manufacturing, we must continue to improve the support that those people receive. When we extend the armed forces covenant across Government, we must ensure that our people know about it, and we must continue to deliver the £9 billion defence housing strategy to improve service homes. As I have constantly argued, we should also seek to improve paternity service leave for fathers and families. If we are serious about national security, we must also be serious about recruiting, retaining and supporting the people who keep our country safe. Britain faces significant security challenges, and meeting them requires sustained investment, a strong defence industry, and a firm commitment to those who serve our country. It also requires—as my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) so brilliantly argued—an open and honest conversation with the public, so that citizens in the United Kingdom can really understand what warfighting readiness means; so that they can understand the challenges and the very real threats that we face in the UK, the priorities that we may need to make, and the misinformation and dangers that the cyber world holds out there. These are conversations that we know are happening in our allied countries, such as Norway and Finland—conversations that will make us all warfighting ready. This Labour Government are rebuilding our armed forces, they are backing British defence jobs, and they are strengthening our national security for the future. Much has been done, and there is still much more to do, but I have every faith that we as a Labour Government will rise to the challenge.

    Hansard source
16. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    NHS Corridor Care

    Does my hon. Friend agree that often this is compounded when somebody has been arrested and police officers are sitting for hours? I was recently in A&E, and there were two police officers there for the duration that a member of the public was there. They may also need somewhere else to deal with that situation.

    Hansard source
17. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    NHS Corridor Care

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) for her service and for securing this debate. There is no clearer sign of the failure of the NHS under the Conservatives than the fact that corridor care was allowed to become normal. Only a few weeks ago, I was in the Queen Alexandra hospital in my constituency watching my dad being cared for in a corridor. It brought home just how far standards have fallen and no family should have to experience that. Corridor care has real consequences. As we have heard, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine estimates that in 2025 alone there were more than 15,000 excess deaths associated with long waits in emergency departments. It is not just the physical impact on patients that is damaging, but the emotional impact on patients, loved ones and the NHS staff who come to work every day wanting to provide the care that their patients deserve, yet are too often forced to do so in impossible conditions. It is degrading, undignified and should never have become an acceptable norm. Before I go further, I want to thank the incredible staff across Portsmouth’s NHS and care services. From those working at the Queen Alexandra hospital, to our ambulance crews, GPs, pharmacists, community teams and carers, they continue to deliver outstanding care despite extraordinary pressures. Last winter, it was an absolute privilege to spend a night shift with Nigel and Sam from our local ambulance service. Seeing at first hand their professionalism, compassion and resilience only strengthened my admiration for everything they do, often in incredibly difficult circumstances. I recognise the work already being done across Portsmouth to help people access the right care. Strengthening general practice and supporting people who arrive at A&E with non-emergency conditions to receive care elsewhere helps to ensure our emergency department is there for those who need it most. That work matters and deserves recognition, so I thank Linda Stead and her team at the Portsmouth Primary Care Alliance Ltd, and the team at the Southern Hampshire Primary Care Alliance. I welcome the decision of the previous Health Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), to ensure NHS England has finally introduced a clear definition of corridor care and begun publishing trust-level data. We cannot solve a problem if we refuse to see it and measure it. Sadly, the first set of figures makes difficult reading for Portsmouth. In May this year, Portsmouth hospitals university NHS trust ranked eighth worst for corridor care on hospital wards and ninth worst in emergency departments. That is simply not good enough. I welcome the Government’s commitment to shift more care into communities. Preventing unnecessary admissions is essential if we are to reduce pressure on our hospitals, because corridor care starts with a lack of community services. However, I remain deeply concerned by my integrated care board’s approach and its failure to engage meaningfully with me. The initial discussions on health hubs focused on potential sites, yet astonishingly, although not surprisingly, the proposed locations were all in Portsmouth South. That is simply unacceptable. If we are serious about reducing health inequalities and improving access to care, these services must be available across the whole city. Yet, as with so many decisions affecting Portsmouth, residents in Portsmouth North are neglected and overlooked. To help me change that, will the Minister outline what expectations have been placed on integrated care boards to work constructively with local MPs? Of course, reducing admissions is only one part of the answer. We must also improve patient flow through our hospitals, so I welcome today’s announcement about a 10-year capital plan for health and social care. Buildings and modern facilities are important if we are to move people from corridors to beds and from A&E to GPs, but too many people remain in hospital because the social care support they need is simply not available or because the pharmaceutical system is not fit for purpose. Will the Minister update the House on what further action is being taken to improve hospital discharge and tackle the pressures in social care and pharmaceutical services? I am proud that this Government have already begun to turn our NHS around. We have seen the fastest ambulance response times in five years, the shortest A&E wait for four years, and the biggest fall in dissatisfaction in the NHS since 1998, but none of us should be satisfied while patients are still receiving treatment in corridors. People in Portsmouth deserve dignity when they need care, NHS staff deserve the resources and conditions to do their jobs, and together we must ensure that corridor care becomes not the accepted reality of our NHS, but a thing of the past.

    Hansard source
18. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Hack

    Defibrillators in Police Vehicles

    The hon. Member is giving an impassioned speech. I share his sadness about the loss of Jay, whom he mentioned in his opening remarks. In my constituency we did a defib dash, where I encouraged constituents to understand where their nearest community defibrillator was. The average return journey was 12 minutes by foot. In semi-rural constituencies like mine, adding a defib to the back of emergency vehicles would make a massive difference. Does the hon. Member agree that rural and semi-rural constituencies face an issue of access to defibs?

    Hansard source
19. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alison Hume

    Seasonal Scampi Fishers

    4. What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for the Home Department on the potential merits of introducing bespoke fishing visas for seasonal scampi fishers in Northern Ireland.

    Hansard source
20. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alison Hume

    Seasonal Scampi Fishers

    Unfortunately, jobs at Whitby Seafoods, the country’s largest supplier of scampi to caterers, remain at risk. That is because, as the Minister knows, about 70% of crews operating out of Kilkeel who catch the nephrops, or scampi, are foreign workers who will no longer qualify under the new visa rules from the end of this year. While efforts to hire more domestic workers are under way, a small number of bespoke seasonal visas could save the scampi industry. Will my hon. Friend redouble his efforts to work with colleagues to secure a solution and protect those jobs in both Northern Ireland and Whitby?

    Hansard source
21. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alison Hume

    Maritime and Coastguard Agency

    I declare my interest as co-chair of the APPG for coastal communities. I recently met coastguard rescue officers from Ravenscar who are seriously concerned about the future of the service. These CROs bring decades-long experience and routinely respond to complex call-outs in my constituency of Scarborough and Whitby, including, sadly, those involving suicide. As my hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) has mentioned, we are holding an evidence session next week in Parliament. May I invite the Minister to attend and hear at first hand from CROs about their fears for the future?

    Hansard source
22. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his important question. The entry-exit system is an EU scheme and its implementation is the responsibility of the European Commission and participating member states. This Government have been working closely with the EU, member states and industry to understand the impacts, particularly for the juxtaposed border controls at the port of Dover, at Eurotunnel and at St Pancras, and to advocate for the pragmatic use of the flexibilities available within the legislation to minimise disruption for UK citizens. The Government have supported all three juxtaposed ports to ensure that they have the right technology and processes in place to make sure that EES registration runs as smoothly as possible. That has included providing £3.5 million of funding to each one to help them make changes to their infrastructure and purchase the equipment they need to ready their sites for EES. It is not unusual to see queues at the Kent juxtaposed ports at peak times due to the unique geography, and that has been the case prior to EES. However, we want to minimise its impact. On the late May bank holiday weekend, both Ministers and officials engaged with French authorities to ensure that arrangements were in place to handle large volumes of traffic. This resulted in assurances from France that it would have adequate staffing levels and clear escalation plans in case of severe disruption. These arrangements were made use of on 23 May, when the French police aux frontières employed flexibilities available within the regulations to alleviate congestion on the road network. I and my officials and ministerial colleagues across Government are actively engaging with France and the EU to make similar arrangements ahead of the summer period. The Department for Transport continues to support the Kent and Medway resilience forum, which has tried and tested plans in place to manage disruption to the road network in Kent. For passengers travelling to Schengen countries by air, EES registration will take place at their destination. It will not take place in UK airports, and queues in EU member states are for those states to manage. However, this Government continue to engage with the Commission and relevant member states to advocate for the pragmatic use of the EES flexibilities allowed to avoid delays for passengers. We are also engaging with our European partners on the use of technology, such as the EES app, to move elements of registration away from the border. We continue to encourage travellers to check with their travel operator before departing so that they know when to arrive and are aware of any possible impacts on their journey.

    Hansard source
23. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I recognise that it is a shared goal for ourselves, for locally affected Members of Parliament and for the French to ensure that we do not see scenes of huge queues. We know the impact that has on individuals and on businesses. The right hon. Gentleman talks about making more efforts, and I can assure him that we will be doing this on a daily basis, as we already are, both with France and with the Commission. We have pushed on this fundamental point. This is a complex scheme in operation, and when volumes peak shortly, the fundamental question will be the prioritisation of flow or of compliance with the scheme. We are pushing heavily, as we will every day between now and then, to ensure that the French use the flexibilities available to prioritise flow. That is what I want, it is what he wants and it is in everybody’s interest.

    Hansard source
24. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I am grateful to the Chair of the Select Committee for that characteristically thoughtful question. As she would expect, a lot of ministerial focus is on juxtaposed ports as they involve things that happen on UK soil and have an impact in UK communities. Nevertheless, we want our travellers to have the best possible experience wherever they are. The checks in Schengen countries are a matter for them, but as I have said, we are engaging with all countries, not just France, to ensure that a proportionate and sensible use within flexibility is made. My hon. Friend and other colleagues will know, too, about the changes that we are making with our own e-gates, including lowering the age involved, so that passengers who have had a difficult journey out have the smoothest arrival back on to UK soil.

    Hansard source
25. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I am grateful to the shadow Minister for his questions. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, I share his point about the importance and impact that preauthorisation can have. We want that to become the norm, and as I said, we are engaging with member states to encourage them to take up use of the EES app. He asked about the intent of our colleagues in the European Union, whether in the Commission or in member states, and I do not detect a lack of intent. They are keen to engage with us, and we engage with them frequently. They want this system to work, and it is important that it does. It is a good thing that our neighbour wants good security arrangements, and we benefit from that too—we certainly have that level of engagement. The hon. Member talks about full suspension, and as I said yesterday to the right hon. Member for Staffordshire Moorlands in the Home Affairs Committee, I would not set that as the goal and aspiration because I do not believe it is deliverable. What we delivered in May, and what we will seek, is that when we get to peak times and the system is clearly not managing flow appropriately, we need the right flexibilities in place on the ground for staff to make changes that prioritise flow. That is my priority. The hon. Member talks about the facility, and I say gently that of course that facility cannot be used until the technology that it is based on works. We want that to be the case as soon as possible, but that is not a business for us. We have made the money available so that the infrastructure is there. We have delivered on that element, but the technology is clearly taking time to stand up. The hon. Member talks about pressure, and we are engaged at all levels of Government. In the Home Office, the Home Secretary has engaged with her counterpart and with the Commission, as have colleagues from the Department for Transport, including the Secretary of State, and the Minister for the Cabinet Office, and we are raising these issues on a daily basis. On contingencies, let me take this opportunity to say what a good job the Kent and Medway Resilience Forum has done on this. I am a big resilience forum enthusiast: those are local people making direct local changes to improve their community under pressure. There is also the Dover traffic assessment protocol and Operation Brock. Those arrangements are in place, and we will work with people so that they make the best operational decisions they can along the way.

    Hansard source
26. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    Sustained engagement with the French is crucial, and it is happening at all levels, be that ministerial, senior official, or operationally, to ensure that prioritisation of flow. This is not something that has just started, and neither is it coming to its end. We are in that constant position and have been for many months, even before the EES started its operations, and that will continue. I say gently that it is not just the French but all EU member states. At some point this summer our constituents will end up in all those different member states. I want them to have the best possible experience, so we are also having those engagements.

    Hansard source
27. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    To address the point about Brexit, we must be clear—for example, the Republic of Ireland, which is outside Schengen, also has these challenges, so the idea that reversing to previous arrangements would change that reality is tricky. There is a fundamental choice here, as real practical measures will affect the hon. Gentleman’s community and those of many right hon. and hon. Members, and lots of British holidaymakers. We can choose to use our efforts and leadership collectively to have conversations about the past, or we can work together to ensure that those people have the best possible experience. That is what we are doing, and why we are engaging with France and the Commission. That is the best approach, rather than having global conversations about things that do not really go anywhere.

    Hansard source
28. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    My hon. Friend makes an exceptionally important point about vulnerable users. Operation Brock and the Dover traffic assessment project give scope for the KMRF to stand up contingency plans to make movement for domestic travel easier, because the last thing we want is for people, particularly vulnerable people, to be in cars for long periods of time. On my hon. Friend’s point about communications from the carriers, we work closely with the carriers and they are working hard, as are the ports. My message to travellers would be to check in with the advice they are getting from the carriers, particularly on how long to give themselves. They should not change their travel plans, but they should engage to ensure that they arrive on time. I am a sinner on the Eurostar because I leave things as late as possible, but that is not a prudent approach at the moment. Instead, travellers should check in with their carrier to get the best up-to-date information. I will undertake to have conversations with carriers to ensure that things are as good as possible, in the spirit he suggests.

    Hansard source
29. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    That is an excellent point. Ahead of the May bank holiday, we demonstrated that we were able to use that rich sense of who is coming—it is not a surprise—and to plan for when the system needs flexibility, particularly for PAF officers. We did that for the May bank holiday and we are doing it again now. We are having conversations to give flexibility in the service of the goal that we all want to see: the prioritisation of flow.

    Hansard source
30. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I share some of my hon. Friend’s analysis, but not all of it. If we are dealing in counterfactuals, which I am usually loath to do but this one is quite entertaining, if we were within these arrangements, a Minister—probably me—would be at the Dispatch Box being pressed, quite rightly, by right hon. and hon. Members, who would be saying “Is your system going to work? Is it going to stand up?” The reason I know that is because that conversation is happening in every EU member state. I encourage colleagues away from the idea that a single counterfactual change in our history would mean that we would have no issues with travel at our ports, because the evidence does not bear that out. However, I agree with my hon. Friend wholescale about having a close relationship with the EU. Whereas our Conservative colleagues spent a lot of time thumbing their noses at our neighbours, which is never in the interest of the British people, we have a close partnership on data sharing and more, as I told the Home Affairs Committee, so that we work as well as possible with our neighbours to ensure flows of travel and to secure borders.

    Hansard source
31. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    It is important to recognise, as I did at the start, that these queues are not new, but the entry-exit system risks being a compounding factor. I too look at the weather and think that I would not want people, including vulnerable people, and pets to be stuck in cars for long periods of time, and we absolutely recognise that. I agree that the operations that I talk about are not a panacea—they do not make queues disappear—but they are about pragmatic ways, in challenging circumstances, of trying to make things better for people, which is a good thing. The resilience forum does a good job with that and we will work alongside it to deliver that. On the hon. Lady’s point about engagement, I hope that she has heard that our approach is not to wait and see—it has not been in the past and it is not now. We want to plan ahead of time so that PAF staff can make flexibilities to prioritise flow.

    Hansard source
32. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    It is reasonable for the House and the Government of the day to have a real focus on the juxtaposed ports, because the issues happen on UK soil and have impacts in UK constituencies. My hon. Friend is right that our constituents will go to all EU member states and, I would be willing to venture, they will travel to all ports in all EU member states at some point over the summer period. I do not want to see them delayed there, have their holidays ruined or to have a less enjoyable time. In the spirit that he suggests, we have talked to the European Commission and we have talked to member states individually. We have a rich sense individually of not just where every member state is, but where each port is, so that we can impose on them the clear view from the British people that they want flow prioritised, and that is what we are doing.

    Hansard source
33. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    There is a lot in the hon. Gentleman’s question. I would slightly challenge the assertion that the CTA is an open border. If an individual crosses that border into the UK, they have to have a reason for being there. They have to have real leave and they are subject to enforcement activity if they do not. I would not want anybody, whether they are connecting into the EU or anywhere else in the world outside the CTA, to have the idea that any of our ports are an open border. I want to know who is coming and who is going: that is in our nation’s interests. On his final point about there being no practical benefit, it is not for me to make the EU’s arguments for it—it can do that for itself—but given the conversations that we have in the Chamber about the flows of people across the European Union and then to the UK, it is really good thing that the EU wants to have borders where it knows who is coming and going, because that plays an important part in ensuring that we have a safe border. I think that is a good thing.

    Hansard source
34. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    My hon. Friend raises an important issue. On HGVs, there is degree of ease because the majority of HGV drivers are European nationals and are not subject to the same degree of checks, so that makes things flows more easily. That does not help if they are in the queue, but it helps to ensure that they do not cause the queue. On his point about the checks themselves, the good thing about the scheme is that once people have done the check, they supposedly will not need to do it again for three years, so things will get easier over time. We are looking at the impacts on the economy and the ordinary lives of the British people. Our clear message is to prioritise flow, and that is why we are having those conversations in that way.

    Hansard source
35. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I have always taken the view that I get to do the answers, but I do not get to do the questions as well—you know that well, Mr Speaker. I will seek to address whatever is put to me to the best of my ability. The hon. Gentleman is right; I spend a lot of my time clearing up the mess made by Tory predecessors, but I am not necessarily sure that this is one of them. However, there are plenty of other messes, including the rampant use of hotels that they allowed, small boat crossings in their entirety, and plenty more.

    Hansard source
36. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    Along with me, my hon. Friend holds that most exalted status of being a Labour and Co-operative Member of Parliament. By instinct, I am the same as him; in anything in my life, I have never found that a problem with my neighbour, whatever its nature, got better by shouting rather than by co-operating. That is the spirit of our engagement at the moment. I believe that is the best approach going forward, and that is what we will continue to do.

    Hansard source
37. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    The hon. Gentleman is testing my GCSE French—maybe I will be found wanting in that regard. On his first point, we absolutely accept that for some products, time is absolutely crucial. That is why the ports have put their money where their mouth is, but we have also put the British people’s money into that, because it is important for his constituency and for all of us to ensure that British seafood thrives. That is the right thing to do. I do not his approach is the most effective way of engaging. Rich conversations are happening on a daily basis, and it is better that we do that, rather than summoning the ambassador or anybody else. Our approach with France and with the Commission is better.

    Hansard source
38. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    The nature of who is driving short-use freight can make that easier, but there is a challenge in terms of prioritisation. As I have said to colleagues, there is a very good reason for the prioritisation of vulnerable individuals in cars for long periods of time, and there is flexibility in KMRF’s plans. There is a real challenge in finding that, because many if not most people have a good reason to move through at the quickest possible pace, and we want everybody’s flow to be as good as possible. The hon. Gentleman makes a really important point about travel information. We need people to avail themselves of that information at early points, particularly the amount of time that they need to leave, in order to plan their travel.

    Hansard source
39. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    I might contest the idea that we do not do very much European scrutiny in this place. That would be very difficult to say, because I do not recall ever standing at the Dispatch Box without talking about the European Union—it seems there are some colleagues who seek to talk about nothing else. We do have the chance to look at these plans adequately. On the point about off-site infrastructure and similar matters, the issue is not with the infrastructure available. We can have the best infrastructure available, but if the technology that pulls through to it does not work, the system will not work. My absolute belief, which the hon. Gentleman will get to challenge in due course, is that when that tech is operational, the infrastructure will be in place and in the right parts of the ports, but we need the tech to work before we can properly test that.

    Hansard source
40. 8 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Alex Norris

    European Entry and Exit System

    On the point about alliances, I have always taken the view in this Chamber that if I agree with somebody, I say that I agree with them; if I disagree with them, I say that I disagree with them. It does not really matter which party or what part of the UK they come from. That is in the interests of all our constituents. The hon. Gentleman has heard my answer to the point about Brexit. Whatever the well-meant and different positions we may hold, I know for certain that if we went tapping on the windows of people in queues to say, “By the way, do you know that this is about Brexit?”, they would not consider that a suitable or sufficient answer from their leaders. I do not recognise the point about the French and schadenfreude. I have not heard that in this debate, and it is certainly not the view of the Government. We always see these things as shared challenges with our neighbours. We have what we think is a very important way forward, and we are having conversations with our neighbours.

    Hansard source