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

Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,868 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Chi Onwurah

   Topical Questions

   Last week in the statement on the defence investment plan, I raised with the Secretary of State the unacceptable truth that the north-east sends the highest proportion of its young people into the armed forces, yet receives the lowest proportion of investment spending, and he said that was a “reasonable challenge”. Will he meet me and colleagues from the region to see how we can ensure that the bravery in battle of sons and daughters of the north-east is at the very least reflected in the defence investment spend?

   Hansard source
2. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   I beg to move, That this House agrees with Lords amendment 1.

   Hansard source
3. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   The first duty of any Government is and will forever be to secure this country and keep all its inhabitants safe. It is a mission that has challenged us relentlessly, but it has grown and evolved in recent years. The threat posed by foreign powers will be known by all here: physical threats against individuals and property; theft of trade secrets; attempts to interfere in and influence our democracy; and cyber-attacks targeting both the state and the private sector that disrupt critical infrastructure and compromise sensitive data. As the House has heard many times before, the source of those threats has come predominantly, though not exclusively, from three countries: Russia, China and Iran. The threats from each present differently, but those threats are very real, and they are evolving. The Bill before us will strengthen the Government’s ability to disrupt hostile intelligence services and their proxies by adapting counter-terrorism tools to tackle state-based security threats to the UK. In developing this legislation, we have worked closely with the police, security and the intelligence agencies. The Bill gives our operational partners the powers that they need, and it does so in a way that reflects the differences between state and non-state actors. As Jonathan Hall himself has said, this Bill “does the job”. As the Bill progressed through its stages, the Government listened carefully to the arguments about legitimate humanitarian assistance, as well as concerns expressed by non-governmental organisations and the International Development Committee. The Government’s position remains that the Bill should not criminalise legitimate humanitarian aid work or the important work of journalists and diplomats.

   Hansard source
4. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   I do not agree with my hon. Friend’s interpretation of the Bill at all. The threats that we are facing mean that this Bill ought to be on the statute book sooner rather than later, so that we can begin to deal with them. As I was saying, the Government’s position remains that the Bill should not criminalise legitimate humanitarian aid work or the important work of journalists and diplomats, and it remains our view that the Bill does not have that effect. However, to avoid a potential chilling effect, the Government felt that it was better to accept amendments to the Bill to put that matter beyond doubt. That is why the Government supported amendments 1, 2, 4 and 6, tabled by Baroness Northover in the other place.

   Hansard source
5. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   We are very confident that the Bill as it is written does not place journalists in any jeopardy. In fact, these measures allow us to act against those who are conducting harmful activity in the UK, including targeting journalists here in the UK because of their attempts to expose activities in other regimes. The right hon. Gentleman makes a more general point about the jeopardy in which journalists put themselves in war zones, and I would agree that their news reporting is some of the bravest. We all support a free press and journalists’ ability to report in war zones, but I would say respectfully to him that these things are slightly different and he is combining the two issues. We are convinced that this Bill does not and will not put journalists in any more jeopardy in this country—certainly not for reporting. Baroness Northover tabled amendments 1, 2, 4 and 6 in the other place. They introduce a new defence into the offences at new sections 17B and 17C of the National Security Act 2023, specifically to cover legitimate humanitarian aid activity. This means that non-governmental organisations that have to engage with a designated body in order to carry out legitimate humanitarian activity will benefit from the same protections under the Bill as do UK diplomats. The Government also supported amendments 3 and 5, which were tabled by Lord Anderson. These amendments were based on the advice of Jonathan Hall KC and also had the support of Lord Carlile. They add a reasonable excuse defence in new section 17C of the 2023 Act for obtaining, accepting or agreeing to accept information from a designated body. This means that where a person has a reasonable excuse for receiving information from a designated body, they benefit from a defence. This might include, for example, a journalist conducting an interview or a charity receiving information on the location of landmines. The Government considered the case for exempting humanitarian NGOs from the offences, but we were advised by our operational partners that this would provide a loophole that hostile actors would seek to exploit, which in turn could make the NGOs themselves a target for infiltration. In fact, that is the case that I made to this Chamber in Committee. I am grateful to the other place and the International Development Committee for their engagement on this Bill and for the constructive amendments, which have helped strengthen the Bill and broaden its support. The Bill represents an important new addition to our toolkit to address the growing threat from foreign powers. As I said in Committee, my officials have worked closely with operational partners in the creation of this power and the accompanying offences, and our partners are fully supportive of the Bill. It closes a gap, and they have been explicit that it provides them with vital tools capable of addressing the sharpest threats that they are tackling.

   Hansard source
6. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   I am grateful for the contributions of all right hon. and hon. Members. The hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) was worried that we had changed the Bill in a way that would make it less effective, and my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) still made the case for having an exemption rather than a defence for humanitarian assistance. I confirm that in our view the Bill as originally written would have excluded humanitarian assistance completely, because of the primary purpose rule, but we felt that there was some merit in the argument about the chilling effect of not having a defence. That is why we accepted the amendments in the other place, but that is belt and braces—nothing has changed. We are trying to accommodate potentially legitimate worries and chilling effects that might have an effect on the operational effectiveness of some NGOs, even though the law itself would not have caught them.

   Hansard source
7. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   Yes, my hon. Friend may know her Pepper v. Hart, and I have just put it on the record in this House, but obviously I will take a close look at the guidance as it is developed. The hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) made a powerful speech, particularly about the rising level of threat that we face. That is why the Bill needs to be on the statute book as quickly as possible. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) asked about the designated threats defence. Again, the answer is the same: it is about the chilling effect.

   Hansard source
8. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dame Angela Eagle

   National Security (State Threats) Bill

   I do not want us to go into specific examples, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we keep a very close eye on what proxy actors and state actors by proxy are doing in our country. We believe that designation, which is what this quite narrow Bill will allow us to do, will make it much clearer that we know what they are doing. It will make for a harder operating environment for those who wish us ill and are directed by state actors. That is what the legislation is intended to do. Against a backdrop of growing threat from foreign states and their proxies, including through espionage, interference, sabotage and threats to life, the Bill will strengthen the ability to disrupt hostile intelligence services and their proxies by adapting counter-terrorism tools to tackle state-based security threats in the UK. It will create a new power for the Secretary of State to designate organisations involved in foreign power threat activity, backed up by new criminal offences of supporting, assisting or obtaining benefits from designated bodies. There has been some concern, both in this House and in the other place, regarding potential unintended consequences, but I reassure the House that the Bill was never intended to, and does not, criminalise genuine humanitarian activity by NGOs or journalists or other legitimate activities. We have listened to the arguments, and it is right to put that matter beyond doubt. The amendments do that. We have worked closely with operational partners, and I am satisfied that these narrow amendments do not weaken the Bill. The Bill will enable proxy organisations to be treated in practice like foreign intelligence services, making it easier to prosecute those acting on their behalf. Overall, this manifesto commitment will strengthen the national security framework so that the UK becomes a more difficult operating environment for foreign intelligence services and state-linked proxies. With that, I commend the Lords amendments to the House. Question put, That this House agrees with Lords amendment 1.

   Hansard source
9. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Connor Naismith

   Rochdale Grooming Gang: Offender Deportation

   Shabir Ahmed is a vile criminal, and the British public rightly want to see him deported. Does the Minister agree that where the law does not allow us to do so, we should change it, and that we should redouble efforts to secure returns agreements with countries like Pakistan?

   Hansard source
10. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Clive Efford

    Payment Scheme

    There are still concerns among the community about the regulations before us today. The Minister knows that the regulations were laid on the day of the Backbench Business debate on 18 June. That meant there was no opportunity for Ministers to take on board the points that hon. Members were making on behalf of their constituents, who still would like to see the compensation scheme tweaked. Through his ongoing dialogue with the community, does he accept that there must be an opportunity for that tweaking to take place in response to some of those concerns?

    Hansard source
11. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Clive Efford

    Payment Scheme

    I pay tribute to the Paymaster General for getting us to this point. It is time to move on, but there are still concerns, as I have mentioned already. I hope that those will be taken on board as we move forwards because, as he set out, the community out there are concerned about the pace with which payments are being made, particularly now that we are into the claims from those affected. It is time for test and learn to move us on and to ensure that those payments are made as soon as possible. I urge that the ongoing dialogue, to which my right hon. Friend referred when he made his original statement in response to the inquiry report, continues and that those people’s voices are heard. I am grateful for the meeting he had with me following the Backbench Business debate. I raised all the issues that I raised in that debate, and I am also grateful that he will come back to me about those issues. I will not go through all of them again today and will instead give other hon. Members the chance to speak, but it is important that they are taken on board. My right hon. Friend referred to the pace of payments, which is important, and to the evidence. We have to take note of the fact that so many of the people infected and affected have had to campaign for 40 years or more to get to this point and to get justice. It is unlikely that they will have evidence—the payslips and all sorts of evidence—that they were living with their parents at the time when a sibling was infected. It is not possible for people to provide that depth of information so late on. We have to be considerate in the way that we approach that. My right hon. Friend and I have debated and discussed unethical testing, and we differ on this issue. I, along with those people who were the children who were deliberately infected, feel very strongly about this. It is a sobering fact that they were deliberately infected by the state that should have been there to care for them. For them, the compensation is not about the money but about the degree of recognition within this scheme of just exactly how badly treated they were. The level of payments for that should be much higher than they are. I welcome these regulations. It is important that we move on as fast as possible now that we have them in place. Again, I congratulate the Paymaster General on all the work he has done.

    Hansard source
12. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Webb

    Civil Service Pensions

    I am sure it will come as no surprise to anyone in this House that the deadline was missed today, on top of the previous deadlines. I do not think that anyone has faith in the ability of Capita to deliver. In my constituency and across Blackpool, the Fylde coast and in the neighbouring constituency of Blackpool North and Fleetwood, we see such cases come to our surgeries week after week. Will the Minister outline when, and how quickly, the Government can bring this provision back in-house to ensure we have a transition? Enough is enough. Too many of our constituents—in my constituency and across the country—are suffering and this issue needs to be resolved.

    Hansard source
13. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Topical Questions

    T7. May I welcome my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) to his rightful place on the Front Bench? I also welcome the publishing of the defence investment plan last week. Will the Minister outline how the additional £15 billion of Ministry of Defence spending will benefit towns like Harlow?

    Hansard source
14. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Rochdale Grooming Gang: Offender Deportation

    I thank the Minister for framing his comments around the victims of these terrible crimes, who should always be in our thoughts during such debates. I know that he is committed to doing everything that he can to ensure that foreign nationals who come to our country and break our laws, particularly in such vile and disgusting ways, are made to leave. Will he repeat that commitment from the Dispatch Box and reassure residents in Harlow that this Government will keep them safe?

    Hansard source
15. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Police Leadership Commission Report

    rose—

    Hansard source
16. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Police Leadership Commission Report

    This is the closest I am ever going to get to the Front Bench. [Laughter.] Having spoken to police officers across my constituency of Harlow, I know that the two things they want to do are keep my constituency safe and—to paraphrase a new Labour manifesto pledge—tackle crime and the causes of crime. Can the Minister outline what she is going to do on the back of this review to ensure we take away the barriers, so that police officers can do their job of protecting my community and keeping the country safe?

    Hansard source
17. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Payment Scheme

    I thank the Paymaster General for his speech and the way he is framing the debate by talking about the victims of this scandal, which is really important. Can he confirm the number of interim payments of £100,000 that have already been paid out?

    Hansard source
18. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Payment Scheme

    On that point, will the Minister give way?

    Hansard source
19. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Payment Scheme

    I thank the Minister for giving way again; he is being very generous with his time. It strikes me that the victims of these sorts of scandals—sadly, this is not the first we have discussed; I think of the Horizon Post Office scandal—are put in this position through no fault of their own and do not necessarily have degrees in how to access compensation schemes. What support—for example, through some sort of caseworker—is he giving to people who are looking to claim?

    Hansard source
20. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Vince

    Payment Scheme

    This is a friendly intervention, because the hon. Gentleman’s response has been very supportive, and we all recognise the cross-party consensus on getting this right. As he will be aware, last week the Prime Minister made a formal apology to the women impacted by the forced adoption scandal; some of the evidence that we got on the Education Committee was about the way that they were treated when they tried to get the records. Does he recognise the importance of the front-facing organisations that support victims of these scandals being sympathetic and supportive?

    Hansard source
21. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank everybody who has contributed to the debate. I am sure that those observing from the Public Gallery will have seen that there is huge support in Parliament for the ceramics industry, for its communities and for its jobs. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) for securing the debate, and to Hayley for organising the petition. I am sure that many of the petitioners will have been following the debate and will have heard the support for the sector from Members, as well as from Ceramics UK and the GMB trade union. There were a number of speeches on several issues, and I will endeavour to address them all, but if I could sum up the debate in one line, it was probably put most succinctly by my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee): “Thank you for the £120 million —can I have some more?” To which I have a short answer: “You’re welcome—and I want to do more.” I will talk a bit about what that “more” might be, and address some of those issues, because I do recognise that more needs to be done. It is important to recognise the pride of the communities we have heard about, because the ceramics industry is integral to the history and heritage of so many communities throughout the country. Staffordshire is the home of the ceramics industry, but it spans the whole country: we heard that it includes the china clay pits in Cornwall and extends right up to communities in the north of Scotland. There is also a diverse range of subsectors: bricks, pipes, tiles and tableware, of course, and advanced technical ceramics, with many applications in sectors such as energy, defence, medical and technology. I am most grateful today for the application of ceramics in air conditioning filtration systems—I thank the industry for that. The ceramics industry is represented in some great traditional and heritage tableware. It is very much possible to value things not only for their utility but for their beauty, as we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher). I am quite a fan of traditional Staffordshire stoneware. I also have a very special Dunoon mug with a Union Jack on it, and I want to let those in the Public Gallery know that I use it every morning for my first cup of tea. We heard about bricks from my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme, and from the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mr Reynolds), about the lifetime assessment of bricks. To be clear, I am very aware of the disadvantage in respect of bricks with a short lifetime assessment. I have bricks in my house that are over 200 years old and still doing sterling service. I am interested to hear more representations from Members throughout the House on that issue. We have of course talked a lot about ceramics, but my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe (Juliet Campbell) made a much wider point about manufacturing in her area of the east midlands. The issues facing ceramics are also faced by manufacturing industries around the country: high energy costs, the import of cheap goods and challenges with decarbonisation. The challenges have been exacerbated by the geopolitical instability due to the invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in the middle east, which has put pressure on our energy prices. The ceramics industry has continued to demonstrate resilience, and the people who work in the industry have demonstrated resilience, but I was very sad recently to learn of the closure of and job losses at Denby Pottery. I worked closely on that issue with my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth), and she represented the community so well in this place. There was also the closure of a tunnel kiln at Armitage Shanks. I pass on my personal sympathies to all the workers, families and local communities that were impacted by events at those firms, as well as at Royal Stafford and Heraldic Pottery. Manufacturing has now ceased at Denby Pottery, and the administrators were unable to find a buyer. My officials at the Department for Business and Trade worked diligently with the administrators to take the process forward. The Government’s priority now is to ensure that all affected workers are given the support they need. I commend Fran, Kate and Daizy and wish them every success with their new venture. I realise that my words may sound somewhat clinical to the workers and communities who are so rightly proud of Denby, so I want to take this opportunity to say how sorrowful I am that Denby has closed and that those workers, and others in the local community, can no longer work there. That is why I am so determined that we will fix some of the problems with the underpinning of the business environment, not only for ceramics but for other parts of industry. So many Members mentioned the ceramic industry support scheme. My hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley thanked many people involved in the creation of that scheme—our right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer played such an important role—but she was not able to thank herself, so I thank her on behalf of us all. I wonder whether the scheme would have been brought forward so speedily were it not for her work. It is important to recognise the scheme as a great vote of confidence by the Government in the ceramics industry. We are determined to work with the industry to provide support with decarbonisation, and I thank all my parliamentary colleagues who have advocated for it. A number of Members raised issues relating to the design of the support scheme. My hon. Friends the Members for Stoke-on-Trent North (David Williams) and for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) raised issues around eligibility, consultees and so on. I reassure them that we are determined that the scheme will have the maximum eligibility to enable firms to win support for both capital and operating expenses around their decarbonisation, and to make that decarbonisation makes sense as well. This is perhaps an opportune time to firmly put down some of the myths around Government policy pushing up the price of electricity. Of course, that is not the case at all. After the previous Government, the UK was left in a position of high electricity costs, both for industry and for domestic consumers, because our electricity market is dependent on the price of gas. The cheapest form of electricity we have is solar, the second cheapest is onshore wind and the third cheapest is offshore wind. That is why the Government’s clean power 2030 mission is designed specifically to give this country a strategic and competitive advantage in electricity price from the 2030s onwards. It is particularly challenging to manage the period from now to 2030, because during that period our electricity is still set to a great extent by the gas price. For economic reasons alone, and to ensure that we have a competitive business environment, we need to work through that.

    Hansard source
22. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    This replays some of the conversations we have had on the Floor of the House. Ultimately, it is important to remember that the prices we are quoting take into account both the capital and operating costs. Our existing gas fleet would also require renewal if it was to continue beyond the mid-2030s, so there would be a capital and operating cost element for that as well.

    Hansard source
23. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    My hon. Friend put it exactly right. We need to take both capital and operating costs into account. Fundamentally, the issue comes down to a belief or view—or, in my case, looking at the economic evidence and corporate finance. Is it possible to decarbonise and reindustrialise? Yes, of course it is, and that is precisely what the Government want to do. No one in the industry is asking us to tear up climate policy—they are using the policy to invest, and have invested £100 billion since the general election on that basis. Many people mentioned the supercharger scheme, which currently supports around 10% of the ceramics industry. Quite obviously, 10% is not 100%, but the recent uplift in the scheme to 90% compensation has benefited members. The British industrial competitiveness scheme will offer further support on advanced and technical ceramics from 2027, backdated to the current year. That will reduce electricity bills by up to £40 per megawatt hour.

    Hansard source
24. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    I will continue, but I will address a point that the right hon. Gentleman raised. He focused on the parts of the sector that are unable to electrify, which I am also very concerned about. Larger brick kilns and some sanitaryware items, which my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield spoke about in relation to his constituency, are difficult to electrify. The main decarbonisation options on the table are hydrogen, or biogas —that was not mentioned today but it could be a solution—but it is important that businesses remain competitive and able to raise capital until such a time as those occur. I reassure the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge that I am focused on that issue. I am not pretending that processes that cannot be electrified can be, but the policy is to electrify first, where that can happen. However, I realise that I need to work with the brick sector and others. I am also concerned about capacity utilisation in the brick sector currently, which was mentioned by other hon. Members, because that situation, of course, makes everything much more difficult. Many people talked about international trade. I presume that all hon. Members in the room are in favour of free trade on a level playing field basis; unfair trade was what was particularly referred to. That can be an issue of energy—overseas companies having access to energy from sources that we would not use in the UK, such as Russian gas—or, as we have heard about, some have inappropriate labour practices. When the Government decide to enter into a free trade scheme and liberalise tariffs we are always cognisant of the overall economic benefit to the country but, ultimately, we want free trade. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire, asked about interaction with the Trade Remedies Authority, which is our means of correcting that. I am incredibly keen to continue to encourage the sector to engage with the Trade Remedies Authority. If there are any difficulties with that, I want to know about it.

    Hansard source
25. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    I will allow one more intervention.

    Hansard source
26. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    My hon. Friend makes a reasonable point. The Trade Remedies Authority recently took some steps to try to speed up and reduce the cost of the process, but I understand that it is particularly difficult in a sector such as ceramics, in which there are so many small businesses—often, that is where a trade association might have a role. I will continue to work with the sector to understand the issues and to help, encourage and support companies to take cases to the Trade Remedies Authority where they feel that there are unfair trading practices. My hon. Friend thanked me in his speech for engaging with his private Member’s Bill, which I assure him I will continue to do. The ceramics industry has faced great difficulties in the business environment, as have many of our manufacturing industries. I am sure that the Government’s measures to support the business environment will also support other parts of our manufacturing sector. Just as people in the potteries are proud to be potters, so people in other manufacturing areas in the country—

    Hansard source
27. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris McDonald

    Ceramics Industry

    I will not detain Members for very much longer. Earlier, the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) mentioned the former Prime Minister Harold Wilson and the many great things he did, one of which was his extremely strong focus on British manufacturing. The hon. Member for Lichfield talked about the opportunity we now have for reindustrialisation. Unashamedly, I lay claim to having recently introduced that word into the lexicon, and I am delighted at how quickly it has caught on. However, I hope people might follow me if I introduce a few more words: increasing British productive capacity; improving British productivity; and increasing our exports and our balance of trade to improve our manufacturing competitiveness. That way, we can reindustrialise, we can provide good jobs for working people and we can put pride back into working communities around the country. In the case of the ceramics industry, I am very much looking forward to working with parliamentary colleagues to ensure that it continues to be a great British industry into the future.

    Hansard source
28. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Chris Hinchliff

    Topical Questions

    All the military hardware we can buy will not serve its purpose if our nation goes hungry, should our reliance on food imports be turned against us. What reassurances can Ministers give that they are leading conversations across Government to ensure that if push comes to shove, the UK has the necessary food security to stand on its own two feet?

    Hansard source
29. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Catherine McKinnell

    Civil Service Pensions

    The family of a terminally ill constituent contacted me in desperation last month after trying to resolve the pension issues of their family member since January. She died yesterday, with her pension still unresolved. Can the Minister be more specific for that family about what will be done to resolve this issue? It is too late for my constituent, but her family have been through enough.

    Hansard source
30. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Bill Esterson

    Civil Service Pensions

    Paul and Susan Robinson each worked for the Health and Safety Executive for more than 40 years. They have not been able to plan for their retirement since finishing work last year; they have been living off their savings and the small loan that they have had. They are typical of the dozens of constituents who have contacted me. The Minister has talked quite rightly of his anger at the missed deadlines. How can he give us confidence that we will not be back here again in a few months’ time with another deadline having been missed?

    Hansard source
31. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ashley Dalton

    Payment Scheme

    Will my right hon. Friend give way?

    Hansard source
32. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ashley Dalton

    Payment Scheme

    My right hon. Friend is being very generous; I thank him for giving way. It was my sombre privilege to work with him on this matter when I was a Minister in the Department of Health. He is talking about driving forward the scheme; can he outline what work he has done with our devolved Governments in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales to drive forward the final compensation scheme?

    Hansard source
33. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ashley Dalton

    Payment Scheme

    I thank the Minister for his kind words earlier. Could he clarify whether co-infected people will be able to make a compensation claim for each round of interferon that they had, or whether those are being lumped together?

    Hansard source
34. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Anna Dixon

    Patient Safety Review

    I commend the hon. Gentleman for speaking so clearly about why having an independent HSSIB—independent of those providers—to investigate is so important. Time and again, we hear about devastating failings in the NHS. He alludes to maternity services, but we could add to the list infected blood and pelvic mesh. Does he agree that professionals and those working inside the NHS must be able to speak freely when things go wrong in order to learn lessons, and that that is only possible with an independent investigating organisation?

    Hansard source
35. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Cooper

    Ceramics Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. As we have heard, the ceramics industry is a vital part of Britain’s manufacturing heritage and economic future. It supports thousands of skilled jobs, sustains local communities, strengthens domestic supply chains and contributes significantly to our economy. These are highly skilled jobs and preserving that expertise must remain a national priority. However, like other energy intensive industries, including those in my Mid Cheshire constituency, the ceramic sector has faced significant pressure from high energy costs. Manufacturers are competing in a global marketplace while dealing with energy prices often far higher than those faced by international competitors. Those pressures have placed additional strain on businesses already working hard to invest, innovate and plan for the future. That is why tackling high energy costs and supporting the decarbonisation of energy-intensive industries must go hand in hand; those objectives are not in conflict. If we are serious about delivering net zero while maintaining a strong industrial base, we must ensure that the transition protects jobs, skills and domestic production rather than driving investment overseas. While the ceramics industry is concentrated in places such as Staffordshire, the challenges it faces are not unique. In the north-west, energy-intensive industries are grappling with the same pressures of high energy costs, international competition and the need to decarbonise. The question we face is whether we allow those industries to decline, with the resulting impact on the communities around them, or whether we provide them with the tools they need to remain competitive. Hydrogen is one tool that can help achieve that. It offers a credible pathway to reducing emissions from high-temperature industrial processes, where electrification is not an option, while preserving the skilled jobs and manufacturing capability on which communities depend. We already see that potential here in the UK through the development of the hydrogen cluster in Cheshire. Although it is centred on the industrial clusters of the north-west and north Wales, the project demonstrates what hydrogen can achieve for hard-to-abate sectors across the United Kingdom, helping manufacturers reduce emissions while remaining competitive and attracting future investment. Whether we can realise that potential across the wider north-west, Staffordshire and the country as a whole is now the key question because we stand at a crossroads as we await the publication of the updated hydrogen strategy. I hope that we make the right choice to bring forward a strategy that backs those of our industries for which hydrogen is the only option—crucially, wherever they are in the country and not simply by picking winners and losers. The north-west has seen too many manufacturing sites close in recent years. We cannot afford to lose more industrial jobs, skills and investment. I hope that Ministers will publish the updated hydrogen strategy at the earliest opportunity and bring forward a hydrogen network that delivers for the communities that we represent. If we get this right, we will support not only industrial decarbonisation but skilled jobs. We will unlock private investment and help ensure that British manufacturing continues to thrive for generations to come.

    Hansard source
36. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Andrew Cooper

    Ceramics Industry

    rose—

    Hansard source
37. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    Topical Questions

    T6. Two weeks ago, alongside colleagues, I met a network of families and parents from all three armed forces. I heard from serving personnel about the real strain of starting a family while serving our country. A recent snapshot survey by the Dad Shift of over 450 serving forces members found that 90% believed that two weeks of paternity leave is not enough. Does the Minister agree that increasing paternity leave for those who serve in the armed forces would boost retention, strengthen resilience and give our children a better start in life? Does he agree that our armed forces deserve better?

    Hansard source
38. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    Employment and Training

    The levy proposals may sound technical, but at their heart they are about investing in people and in Britain’s future, because, let us be honest, everything we touch and see is supported, repaired and built by these industries. As the Labour MP for Portsmouth North, this debate matters deeply to me. Portsmouth is proud of its industrial heritage. Our city once helped to build and maintain the ships that defended our country. Skilled engineering and trade shaped our communities for generations, but many people in my constituency also know what it feels like to be left behind.

    Hansard source
39. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    Employment and Training

    Too many of those skilled industrial jobs have disappeared and too many young people today do not see the same opportunities that previous generations had. When we talk about levies like this, we are really talking about whether today’s young people will be given the opportunities that their parents and grandparents had. It is about creating the next generation of engineers and skilled workers who will build, maintain and modernise the infrastructure our country depends on. For many young people, particularly those who do not choose the traditional university route, apprenticeships offer a pathway into secure, highly skilled and well-paid work. By supporting the levy, we are investing in those opportunities and in the workforce our economy will need for decades to come. We need to ensure that the levy enables maximum opportunity and flexibility, for example by supporting those in the construction industry to use the levy creatively for transport by maybe providing driving lessons, as it is not easy to get public transport to building sites at the hours and times that people need to be attending. Will the Minister work with me to consider how we can use the levy flexibly across the sector? The truth is that our ambitions for clean energy, advanced manufacturing, industrial decarbonisation and major infrastructure projects will succeed only if we have the skilled workforce to deliver them. No single employer can solve the skills shortages alone. A collective approach allows industry to invest together in training, ensuring we develop not only the workforce we need today but the workforce for tomorrow. We need to find a way to ensure that larger businesses who do not use their full levy work to support the smaller businesses that need it. Earlier today, the all-party parliamentary group for tradespeople held a roundtable with Checkatrade, presenting new research into young people’s attitudes towards careers in the trades. The findings were encouraging. Almost half are considering becoming a plumber, builder or electrician, while 40% of under-25s now say an apprenticeship is more appealing than a degree. Just 10 years ago, that stood at 3%. An apprenticeship is slowly becoming their first choice. That is a remarkable shift, but it also creates a responsibility. If more young people want to pursue skilled trades, we must make sure the training and opportunities are there. That is particularly important when more than 1 million young people are currently not in education, employment or training. Will the Minister support cross-party, cross-Government working to ensure that this opportunity is available in Portsmouth, where it is much needed and much wanted? I also know there has been a consultation taking place on the future of the ECITB and the CITB. I ask the Minister to engage with the APPG for tradespeople on those discussions and on the progress that will be made. Finally, there is a wider national interest at stake. Engineering construction underpins our critical national infrastructure, from our energy networks to defence facilities. In an increasingly uncertain world, Britain cannot rely solely on importing the skills we need. We must develop the home-grown talent, and indeed the city-grown talent, that strengthens both our economy and our national resilience. To do that, we must recognise the barriers to taking up and completing apprenticeships, and ensure we remove them. For communities such as Portsmouth North, this is about restoring opportunity. It is about giving young people the chance to learn a trade, earn a good wage, build a rewarding career and take pride in contributing to Britain’s future, as they once did in my city.

    Hansard source
40. 6 Jul 2026·Parliament·Labour·Amanda Martin

    Employment and Training

    As someone who studied STEM—science, technology, engineering and maths—subjects at college, I agree with the hon. Member. We need to ensure that our young people have the maximum number of opportunities to give our country resilience, whether that is in defence, farming or maritime—also something close to my heart—so I whole heartedly agree with him. For those reasons, I am pleased to support the proposals.

    Hansard source