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 12,942 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Oliver Ryan

   Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI, 2026, No.457)

   The reassessment changes that we are introducing through this statutory instrument and other measures will save something like £2 billion by the end of the Parliament. I am sure we all agree that would be welcome, given the increasing size of the welfare bill. Why is the hon. Member opposing that saving, and how would she fill the gap instead?

   Hansard source
2. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Oliver Ryan

   Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI, 2026, No.457)

   The hon. Gentleman talks about the types of assessment and the way in which the assessment is done, and he is right to talk about capacity. Just before the election, the previous Government signed new contracts that said 80% of new assessments would be done virtually. The changes to reassessment in these regulations will save money and move more of those assessments from being virtual to face to face, which will better serve people on PIP. Does the hon. Gentleman not support the introduction of more face-to-face assessments?

   Hansard source
3. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Oliver Ryan

   Universal Credit, Personal Independence Payment, Jobseeker’s Allowance and Employment and Support Allowance (Decisions and Appeals) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 (SI, 2026, No.457)

   As the Minister is reading out his list of achievements, may I add to it? Does he think it is a good thing that we have put nearly £1 billion into support for the sick and disabled? That will partly come from savings from this and other measures, which we hope will save £1.9 billion by the end of the Parliament. As he says, the act of government is about making these difficult decisions and trade-offs in order to provide people with more support in the long run.

   Hansard source
4. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Noah Law

   Farming Road Map and Profitability Review

   I really welcome the ambition of the road map, particularly the focus on buying British and the nod to honest food labelling. We must now make that ambition real and focus steadfastly on the drivers of farm profitability, so that farmers are making more money from their core business of farming by the end of this Parliament than they were when it started. In that spirit, the Labour rural research group continues our calls for honest origin labelling for food. I hope the Secretary of State will back those calls and commit, as did her predecessor, to meeting the LRRG to discuss this issue further.

   Hansard source
5. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Natasha Irons

   Media Green Paper

   I declare an interest: I worked for a public service broadcaster and my husband still does. I say as somebody who understands the sector a bit that it is not just about public service but about recognising Britishness on our screens and in the media and, essentially, protecting what it is to be us, as well as providing opportunities for people to get into the sector. I really welcome the thinking on this issue, but can the Secretary of State give us a bit more detail on how the changes will ensure that our public service media are protected for the future, so that people can continue to access high-quality news and content in general, and are given opportunities?

   Hansard source
6. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Nadia Whittome

   Nottingham Maternity and Neonatal Services

   First, I want to thank the families who were bereaved and harmed by Nottingham University hospitals NHS trust—some of the most courageous and selfless people I have had the privilege of knowing, including my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh). They have for years relentlessly pursued the truth, justice, accountability and real change, often at great personal cost, and not only for their own families but to prevent future families having to endure similar trauma and cruelty. I also want to express my sincere gratitude to Donna Ockenden for her service to Nottinghamshire. I am so thankful that it was her who led this review. The scale and magnitude of the systemic failures uncovered by the review are truly harrowing. Mothers and babies were harmed and even died through the most shocking negligence and indifference. Families were lied to, disbelieved, blamed and gaslit. Mistakes were covered up and regulators failed to do their jobs. One of my constituents included in the review summed up well where we go from here when she told the Secretary of State that “we need immediate action and we need long-term accountability”. On immediate actions, will the Secretary of State set out a timeline of when he expects to be able to implement the recommendations in full? On accountability, is he open to a statutory inquiry, provided that it does not delay criminal proceedings?

   Hansard source
7. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Julie Minns

   Farming: Financial Sustainability

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. About 55% of my Carlisle constituency is agricultural land. Farming remains vital to our local economy, our identity and our communities. However, more than half of the farmland in our county—some 54%—is classified as “less favoured area”. As a result, farmers in my area require substantially more land to support their livestock and maintain viable businesses than is the case in other areas. That is why it is important to recognise the distinction between a farm’s physical size and its economic size. A holding may cover a large number of hectares but that does not mean it generates a proportionally large income or profit. Against that backdrop, in February I wrote to the then Minister of State with concerns about the first round of SFI allocations because SFI funding was open only to farms under 50 hectares. My concern is not with the principle of supporting smaller farms but rather that an approach that focuses solely on physical size does not always reflect the realities of farming across different parts of the country. Farmers in my constituency with holdings of more than 50 hectares will have to go into the next round of SFI and compete with farms that are genuinely large in terms of productive output, with farms that are much larger, and often with land agents. I therefore have two questions for the Minister. Will he please consider how future schemes will consider the impact of LFA land? Will he also confirm that common land farmers will be eligible to apply for the SFI?

   Hansard source
8. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Julie Minns

   Conversion Practices Ban

   4. What steps she is taking to ban conversion practices.

   Hansard source
9. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ms Julie Minns

   Conversion Practices Ban

   The work of Cumbria Pride and Pride in North Cumbria in supporting people to feel accepted and confident in their sexuality stands in stark contrast to those who peddle cruel and abusive conversion practices. The last Conservative Government failed multiple times to introduce a ban on these practices. Will the Minister please confirm that this Government will legislate, and will she set out the steps that the Government are taking to do this?

   Hansard source
10. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Farming Road Map and Profitability Review

    First, I echo the Secretary of State’s thanks to Baroness Batters for this excellent report. She is also right to observe that Reform MPs have not bothered to turn up for this statement. She might also note that no Green MPs have bothered to turn up. They used to be interested in the environment, but sadly those days are long behind us. On the sustainable farming incentive, can the Secretary of State tell us any more about how she will make sure that its new iteration not only is spent and gets to where it is needed, but is available for a wide range of farmers, including the family farms we speak so much about, and is not all snaffled by the major farm companies?

    Hansard source
11. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Taxation (Energy and Vehicles)

    I do not intend to detain the House for long. I welcome the motion to increase the electricity generator levy, which—alongside the Government’s plans to encourage participation at a competitive price in long-term fixed contracts for low-carbon generators—will weaken the link between electricity and gas prices, with the overall effect of bringing down energy bills for my constituents and consumers across the UK, as well as for British businesses. I also welcome the long-overdue increase in the approved mileage allowance for workers from 45p per mile to 55p. It is very noticeable that over the 14 years I was in Parliament under a Conservative Government, that rate stayed exactly the same, while the cost of petrol rose by around 33% and the cost of diesel by around 44%. Every single year, those workers were worse off than they had been the year before. The motion to temporarily reduce vehicle excise duty is also welcome. Right now, HGVs pay about £1,700 on average per vehicle; the motion would change that to £1 this year. Last month, I visited Spectrum Freight in Chesterfield, where we discussed the challenges the industry is facing. It and other businesses in the industry will very much welcome the Government’s sensible approach to supporting the sector at this difficult time.

    Hansard source
12. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    Will the right hon. Member give way?

    Hansard source
13. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    I am happy to do so. Is the right hon. Member aware of the evidence from the Climate Change Committee that says that the cost of doing nothing is more expensive than the cost of everything that is needed for net zero? When she attempts to stand in the way of the transition, what she is actually doing is attempting to pile up the costs on British business and consumers, and on the sustainability of our country. She should understand the impact of her policies, rather than attempting to row back on one of the few things the previous Government should have been proud of.

    Hansard source
14. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    I very much welcome the draft Carbon Budget Order 2026, which sets the level of the seventh carbon budget on the way to our long-term and previously cross-party aim to balance the UK’s carbon emissions by 2050. I have to say that the speech we have just heard from the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) was quite remarkable because, at the most fundamental level, it failed to understand what we are doing today. The sixth carbon budget passed by the previous Government in 2020 only got its delivery plan in 2025. Today, we are debating our aim for 2038 to 2042. At this moment, it is not prescriptive about how we get there. That is why, at the most fundamental level, the shadow Secretary of State did not understand what she was debating, and why she failed to get answers to some of the questions that she thought should be answered. I am afraid that, at the most fundamental level, she was on the wrong path.

    Hansard source
15. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    That is a very good place to start, because the shadow Secretary of State suggested that the Climate Change Committee has attempted to silence her. It has not attempted to silence her. What it attempted to do, on a point of fact, was inform her of the basis on which her letter to the committee was wrong. This was not a matter of opinion; the Climate Change Committee was simply explaining to her where the cost of electricity comes from. My hon. Friend makes a good point. The shadow Secretary of State talked about transparency, which is interesting because the fact that we are having a debate on the seventh carbon budget is completely different from what happened on the fourth, fifth and sixth carbon budgets. The sixth carbon budget, under the previous Government, was approved in 17 minutes in a Delegated Legislation Committee, far away from public scrutiny. These are crucial matters. I agree with the shadow Secretary of State that they will have wide-ranging impacts on all of us, and they should be debated on the Floor of the House. I welcome that this Government, unlike the previous one, have brought this forward and reserved time to debate it. In debating this order, it is so disappointing that the political consensus that previously existed has evaporated. It lasted from the Labour Government’s seminal introduction of the Climate Change Act 2008, which was strengthened and updated in 2019 by the Conservative Government. With the introduction of the Climate Change Act and the pathway to net zero, Britain was world-leading in our ambition. The approach was so admired that, far from what the shadow Secretary of State said, it was copied by many other legislatures. How tragic that the Opposition should choose to jettison one of the greatest achievements in their 14 years in government in the face of a threat from the climate deniers in Reform. The approach pursued by successive Governments is working. Since 1990, the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions have been cut by 54%. At the same time, the UK economy has grown.

    Hansard source
16. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    There are many different things that impact energy prices. We have seen £150 taken off the price of bills. I think there is more that can be done to reduce electricity prices, and I will come to that. The reality is that the hon. Gentleman is an advocate of a greater reliance on gas and oil. If anything is explained to us, it is that we have no control over energy prices while we are reliant on gas and oil. Everything that has happened since 2022—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman puts his head in his hands. I say to him that the amount that the Government spent in 2022 to cover the cost of the increase in energy prices caused by the start of the Ukraine war was greater than the cost of everything that we will do on net zero between now and 2050. That is the reality: £44 billion pounds was spent propping up people’s gas, electricity and fuel bills at the time of that crisis. That is why we need to get away from that dependence. As I was saying, since 1990, the UK economy has grown, partly powered by the green economy, which last year was found to be growing at three times the rate of the rest of the economy, providing jobs and growth across the country. The most recent CCC assessment found that the UK remains among the leading group of countries that demonstrate sustained emissions reductions. The transition is the pro-business choice. This year’s CBI and Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit report on the net zero economy found that green businesses and their supply chains generated £105 billion in gross value added for the UK economy, as well as supporting over 20,000 small businesses and a million jobs.

    Hansard source
17. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    My hon. Friend makes an important point, and I will come to the zero emission vehicle mandate shortly. I agree with the shadow Secretary of State that we need to be careful that we do not just offshore emissions, so I will come to some of the stuff that we need to do about energy-intensive industries. None the less, I think it is important that we give business the certainty that it requires. During the EAC’s inquiry into carbon budget 7, we heard time and again from business and investors that a long-term plan and policy certainty are needed. The forthcoming delivery plan and CB7 are exactly the sort of long-term planning that businesses need to have confidence about the UK’s direction of travel, in order to invest and innovate. As a world leader on clean energy, our approach puts Britain on the front foot in a globally competitive and quickly changing world. The setting of the seventh carbon budget today is not just a technical milestone but a statement of our long-term ambition to secure the UK’s economic future and our competitiveness on the global stage, alongside a greener and healthier future for our children. The EAC analysis confirms that the pathway to CB7 is both credible and achievable. It is clear that, although they accept the overall figure, the Government will not adopt all the approaches suggested by the CCC, and the delivery plan that the Government adopt is what will dictate the success or otherwise of CB7. That is why the shadow Secretary of State was unable to get answers to all the questions she was posing. This provides an overall framework but it is not the Government’s delivery plan. It is within the delivery plan that we might expect to get some of the answers to the shadow Secretary of State’s questions, which she would have known if she understood what the carbon budget order process was all about. The Climate Change Committee has said: “The slow pace of electrification is putting the UK’s climate targets at risk and is a missed opportunity to enhance UK energy security in the face of rising threats, leaving the UK exposed to geopolitical shocks…Following the recent increase in fossil fuel prices, bills have increased almost four times more for a typical household with a gas boiler and a petrol car, compared to a household with a heat pump and an EV.” People need to know how net zero will result in a stronger, more resilient economy, lower bills and greener and healthier places to live. The EAC’s report is tagged to the debate today, and I would like to place on record my thanks to Committee specialist Dawn Amey for her work on that really important report. Our report identifies several areas in which further action is needed to achieve the seventh carbon budget. I would like to highlight just three. First, the Committee identified that bringing down energy bills and making electrification attractive and affordable was fundamental to making the green transition work for businesses and people. This Government are accelerating the roll-out of renewables in Britain and investing in grid and network infrastructure, both of which will have the effect of bringing down bills, but more action is needed. We recommended removing further policy costs from energy bills and putting them on to general taxation. This will improve the cost differential for making cleaner choices for households and industry.

    Hansard source
18. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    Absolutely, Madam Deputy Speaker; I will move straight on. Secondly, we heard again and again from businesses that long-term policy certainty and delivery across Government was crucial. Thirdly, we heard that fairness was key. The green transition is necessary and brings huge potential benefits, but it must be done in a way that brings people and businesses along. Decarbonisation must not mean deindustrialisation. Forcing production to relocate abroad weakens the UK’s industrial base and undermines support for decarbonisation while failing to reduce global emissions. In summary, the path laid out by this order is credible and achievable. The goal is a vital one—indeed, this is the fight of our age—but it must be done in a way that allows our economy and our people to thrive, and ensures that it is fairly distributed so that it is accessible to all. The prize is not just a more sustainable future but quite possibly the future of our race on this planet.

    Hansard source
19. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    Well, I think they might be laughing at him, but I do not think they are laughing at all of us. The hon. Member is talking about our climate leadership as though we should be ashamed of it, but the reality is that China installed more solar panels in 2024 than the entire world did in 2023. China is not ignoring the opportunity to transition; it is leading the way.

    Hansard source
20. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    Will my hon. Friend give way?

    Hansard source
21. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Toby Perkins

    Climate Change

    What my hon. Friend has just revealed is absolutely shocking. Does that not show that even at a local authority level, Reform will put its ideology in the way of helping businesses and individuals to bring their bills down?

    Hansard source
22. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Jonathan Brash

    North Sea Oil and Gas

    I fully support more drilling in the North sea and the granting of more licences—I believe that is important for energy security—but I think it is important to be straight with the British people. As things currently stand, that would not lower their bills, because the oil and gas are sold on the international markets. Would it not be better to follow the example of Norway and put this under public control, which actually would lower people’s bills?

    Hansard source
23. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Connor Rand

    Violence against Women and Girls

    9. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help tackle violence against women and girls.

    Hansard source
24. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Connor Rand

    Violence against Women and Girls

    Suicides caused by domestic violence are growing at such a rate that a woman in an abusive relationship is now more likely to take her own life than to be killed by her partner, yet we know that there is a significant under-reporting of cases, and criminal accountability for the men responsible is all too rare. Could the Minister update the House on what the Government are doing to tackle this crisis, and to bring to justice the men who drive women to end their lives?

    Hansard source
25. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Mr Bayo Alaba

    Farming: Financial Sustainability

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this debate, which I know resonates deeply with many farming families living and working in my constituency. Farming is more than a job: it is a lifestyle, a history and an identity that has defined rural communities for the entirety of this country’s history. Last week in my constituency, I spent time with members of my local NFU—a quiet and shy bunch. We spoke about the challenges they face, the concerns they have and the support they need from Government. They told me about pressures from rising fertiliser costs, driven in part by the conflict in Iran, and about how so-called equivalent standards are giving favourability to imported foods over home-grown produce. I have also heard from local farmers who say that outdated and underfunded rural infrastructure is preventing them from scaling up and delivering growth. It is clear from those conversations that food production must be a priority in planning for growth and in ensuring that the UK is resilient in the face of global instability. That also means creating a level playing field that does not restrict farmers with complex regulation, and that supports them with predictable funding streams. The financial sustainability of the farming sector depends on forward-thinking and informed planning. I am grateful this key sector is the focus of today’s debate, and I hope meaningful conversations continue.

    Hansard source
26. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michelle Welsh

    Nottingham Maternity and Neonatal Services

    I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. For openness and transparency, I note that I have been campaigning on this for six years and I am a harmed mother at Nottingham University hospitals NHS trust. I start by thanking the brave families—my friends—and Donna Ockenden and her team. What has happened is horrific: bullying, cover-ups, racism, discrimination and appalling practice. The way babies have been treated at birth and then at the end of their life is a national disgrace. One of the most uncomfortable truths in this report is that it was not a regulator, a policy, a protocol, a law or a Government Department that brought us this inquiry; it was families—bereaved families, harmed families—having to speak again and again about their most horrendous and traumatic experience for more than a decade. That does not signify a system that is working. The report identified avoidable deaths, harm and profound failings. The publication of this report is simply not enough. What is required now is action, accountability and change. Can the Secretary of State therefore assure the House that there will be a plan with robust oversight and questioning of regulators and senior staff? Will he work with Nottinghamshire families and Nottinghamshire MPs to ensure that justice is truly and fully delivered?

    Hansard source
27. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michael Shanks

    North Sea Oil and Gas

    It is a pleasure to serve in this debate, Ms Furniss. I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas); at least I know his constituency, even if the shadow Minister does not—so much for being an hon. Friend. I also thank those who have contributed to the debate; the shadow Minister reeled off all the constituencies, so I do not have to, and I am eternally grateful to him. I warmly welcome the hon. Member for Aberdeen South (Douglas Lumsden). I was also a by-election MP and know what it feels like to arrive in this place without a cohort of 100 other new people. I wish him the best of luck finding his way around this building. I got on hugely well with his predecessor and appreciated his contributions—at the risk of misleading the House, I must say for the benefit of Hansard that that was sarcasm, but I welcome the hon. Member none the less. I also welcome the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is ever charming and kind to us all. We could all do with a daily affirmation from him in our debates. I certainly appreciate it. This debate has been helpful for a number of reasons. The shadow Minister and I know each other’s arguments well enough by now, so there was nothing hugely illuminating in his speech, and I suspect there will not be for him in what I have to say. It was illuminating to hear from Scottish National party that it now has an energy strategy, but it is being kept secret. I hope we will see that strategy published soon, because for three years we have not known the SNP’s policy on oil and gas and a whole range of other things. That matters for the industry that the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter) says—and I believe him—that he cares about. It will help the industry to have clarity on the SNP’s policies. On devolving energy policy, many of the things he calls for, including further investment in renewables, have been driven by the strength of being part of the United Kingdom, of pooling and sharing investment in those hugely successful projects in Scotland, which I suspect would not be possible—[Interruption.] He is about to intervene to tell me how it would be possible, if they were devolved, to fund all those renewable projects and a whole series of other things, and how the electricity market would work in an independent Scotland. I am sure he will briefly explain that to us.

    Hansard source
28. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michael Shanks

    North Sea Oil and Gas

    I have made my position very clear on that project. We were carrying out national security assessments, which should always rightly take priority. The First Minister of Scotland has been briefed on the security grounds for doing that. He is aware of why we reached the decision that we reached. I am obviously not going to comment further on that. Our national security always comes first. Something that I have always said in this role is that our domestic production in the UK does matter. It sustains jobs and it delivers tax receipts and the gas that flows into our pipes every single day. We are not a Government that are for turning off the taps, and we never have been. But we are for recognising that a transition is under way and that investing in what comes next is critical. I am afraid that that is at the heart of the problem with the argument put forward by the Opposition, because they say that we need to build up the jobs that come next, but then oppose all the decisions that drive forward that investment. They criticise that there are not enough jobs coming from renewables but then say that we should not invest in the renewables projects that create those jobs. That is not a coherent argument to have.

    Hansard source
29. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michael Shanks

    North Sea Oil and Gas

    My hon. Friend is right on that point, and I will come to it in a moment because it is the main thrust of my speech. I will start with what my hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) said and also welcome Donald MacKinnon into his place. I know he will be a strong advocate for the western isles. My hon. Friend rightly recognised that this is about a sense of identity. Yes, it is about a job and a pay packet at the end of the month, but it is also about a sense of belonging to an industry that many people have worked on in incredibly difficult circumstances for a long time. Since I came into this job as Energy Minister two years ago, and as a Scottish MP and someone who has friends and family working offshore right now, I have always said that getting the transition right for those workers is central. We have seen too many failed economic transitions in the past, so we have to learn the lessons from that. As hon. Members have made very clear today, we must also see the huge potential that comes from the projects that we need in the future, not least in the supply chain that will build many of the projects that we need as part of our transition to clean energy. That will come from those very workers, so it is hugely important that we put them at the centre of all of this. We also have to recognise that this did not somehow just start happening in July 2024. We have been in a period of transition for decades now. A third of jobs in the industry have been lost in the past 10 years, and we cannot accept that failed status quo any more. Burying our heads in the sand and ignoring the realities of the need for us to fund this transition properly will not protect a single job, nor will it create a new one. Nor will abandoning the sector entirely and turning off the taps as others would seek to do. I notice that this is yet another energy debate where no Green MPs—who have the most extreme positions on this issue—have bothered to turn up. It must never become a binary conversation. The North Sea Future Board, which I chair, has just produced a statement on what we are seeking to do to drive forward this transition. That says that, at the heart of it, that transition is not about one industry being pitted against another. It is about stewarding the future of the North sea through collaboration and through managing all the opportunities that come, as well as an obligation to work together. There is always rightly a lot of heat in these debates, but I honestly believe that underneath it all there is a lot more consensus about the need, not for one or the other, but for all the energy that we can get and for all the jobs that come from it. I will briefly say what our position is on the North sea. Gas has been flowing into this country for more than 60 years and is continuing to flow into this country 24/7. I was pleased to be at Bacton gas terminal a few weeks ago to see the skilled work that they do to manage up to a third of this country’s gas. It will continue to be a vital resource for decades to come, but it is also a basin that has been in decline. The most accessible oil and gas has been extracted. Production has been in decline for a quarter of a century, and it reduced by approximately 75% between 1999 and 2024. That did not begin in July 2024.

    Hansard source
30. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michael Shanks

    North Sea Oil and Gas

    Because we want to steward the future of the basin and have a strategic plan that industry can get behind. Very few of the licences that have been issued in the past few years have come to production, so they are not the route to that, but the process had so far not had clarity from the Government. That is why we said what we said on licences. The second part of our manifesto commitment, which is often ignored in this conversation, is that we will continue to manage existing fields over their lifetime. We are not rescinding any licences—we are not saying that new production could not come forward in existing licensed fields—or rescinding any projects that currently exist. My hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar made a point about the importance of tiebacks. This is the pragmatic approach that industry has called for, recognising that the most economically viable route to sustaining the fields is to have a tieback to an existing field that produces new oil and gas. That maintains the critical infrastructure and supply chains, as well as prolonging jobs. That is what industry called for, and that is the pragmatic approach we took in the North sea future plan.

    Hansard source
31. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michael Shanks

    North Sea Oil and Gas

    The right hon. Gentleman raises an important point about what the stewardship of the basin has to look like, and he made another important point earlier about not conflating oil and gas. Equally, the story we tell about the North sea is often what the North sea looked like 30 or 40 years ago. It has changed significantly; the operators in the basin have changed, but so too has the structure of many of the operations. The North Sea Transition Authority has a role in planning the future of the basin and identifying issues relating to sustainability and infrastructure. It also has a role in looking at how we can do more around, for example, the electrification of platforms, so that we can reduce emissions from the platforms wherever possible and tie into offshore wind projects where possible. Let me turn to the critical issue of the workforce. Under the North sea future plan, we will introduce a statutory objective for the North Sea Transition Authority to consider workers, communities and supply chains in its decisions. The NSTA has been looking at how it can support the transition for a long time, but this gives it a statutory objective to do so. This is not just about production and infrastructure. It is about people and places; it is about the workers who built the North sea success story, and with it the success of the British economy, the communities that supported it and, crucially, the supply chains that go with it. We will also extend employment rights and protections to offshore renewables workers, and I hope that everyone in this House will support that. Coming to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm), we recognise that the clean energy workforce of the future has to have strong and fair protections, be trade unionised and have good, well-paid jobs. That is partly why, for offshore wind, we have driven forward the fair work charter as part of the clean industry bonus, so that rights are at the heart of these jobs and that, wherever possible, workers can transition from oil and gas into these jobs with good terms and conditions. That was opposed by some Conservative Members when we took it through Parliament recently, but I hope that they will rethink, because it is hugely important. The hon. Member for Bromsgrove made a point about energy security, which is absolutely right. Our energy security is our national security. It is perhaps more important now than in recent years that we recognise that, in an uncertain world, our energy security is a hugely important part of how we build much more security at home. The point made about refinery capacity was right. We lost two refineries in this country, and I regret hugely that we did not do more to prevent those closures in the years leading up to them. We have now to protect our four refineries, which are hugely important sovereign capacity. In a global fuel crisis, those refineries have been key to ensuring that Britain has not suffered fuel shortages. We have to continue to support them. On the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), we committed to invest £200 million in the future of Grangemouth, and other projects are coming through. I gently say to him that we had to pick it up with no planning done in advance, and I am afraid it is not possible for us to get projects off the shelf, invest money in them and get them built immediately. We need business and industry to come forward with propositions, and the Government have an open door to engage with them directly on how we can deploy that money to Grangemouth. I meet them regularly to make sure that is happening, and we will continue to do that. Again, I thank the hon. Members who have participated. It is hugely important that we talk about these issues. I hope we can also find a way, at some point, of reaching some consensus on how we can have an all-energy approach to the future of the North sea. I recognise that needs a pragmatic position on our side, but it also needs a pragmatic position from those who, in recent years, seem to have become anti the very investment that will drive forward the future of the North sea. It is not possible for us to secure the long-term future of the North sea purely by calling for new licences in oil and gas. Anyone who believes that is the long-term answer is ignoring the reality in front of us. Oil and gas is hugely important, but the transition works only if we also invest and build up what comes next. We need both of them. A fair, managed and prosperous transition means investing in all of that—in offshore wind, carbon capture, long-duration energy storage in Scotland and elsewhere, and in supply chains so that we are building energy in Britain again, not towing it in from somewhere else and offshoring the jobs. That is the opportunity in front of us. None of this will be easy. We will have to wrestle with some real challenges, but if we move fast to invest in the future and take a pragmatic position, I believe the North sea has a strong future ahead of it. I do not pretend that it is straightforward or that that will somehow give comfort to the workers who are facing it just now, but I am absolutely committed to making this work, and so are the Government. I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove for securing the debate, and I thank everyone who participated.

    Hansard source
32. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Michael Payne

    Nottingham Maternity and Neonatal Services

    Today’s publication of Donna Ockenden’s report into maternity services in Nottinghamshire is a difficult and deeply emotional moment for families across our county and city. I want to place on the record my thanks to Donna Ockenden and her outstanding team for the care, compassion and thoroughness with which they have exposed the devastating cases of these families. Let me also place on the record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh). She is a fearless and formidable campaigner for justice and has walked this journey with the families every step of the way, and I know just how proud her son Billy will be watching her from home today. My thoughts are first and foremost with the families whose lives have been changed forever by the loss of their babies, and the mothers who should have received safe care but were harmed. Behind every page of this report are families who have endured unimaginable grief and who have spent years fighting simply to have their voices heard. I pay tribute to their courage, dignity and determination. In the face of heartbreak, they refused to be silenced. They fought not only for answers about their loved ones, but to ensure that other families would not suffer the same pain. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that he will consider all options available to deliver justice and accountability for those families who have waited far too long for answers? Will he assure me and the whole House that the lessons identified in the report will be fully implemented and embedded throughout maternity services in Nottinghamshire and around the United Kingdom, so that no family has to endure what far too many families have already endured?

    Hansard source
33. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

    Climate Change

    Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

    Hansard source
34. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Melanie Onn

    Climate Change

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I wonder whether he agrees with the Reform leader of North East Lincolnshire council, who has said that he fully supports the renewables sector. Given that he was working for the hon. Gentleman until recently, why is there such disparity between what Reform says here and what Reform says in its local patches?

    Hansard source
35. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Maya Ellis

    Farming: Financial Sustainability

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing this timely debate and welcome the Minister to his place. I asked local farmers in Ribble Valley what they would like to highlight in this debate about profitability. As hon. Members would expect, the responses included the increasing tax on fertiliser, energy prices, the short-sighted farming vision, the public’s understanding of where our food comes from and its value and quality, seasonal staff and many other things, so I am really grateful that the Government today outlined their farming vision to 2050. In the interests of time, I want to highlight a broader question about who we what to be as British society. We could choose just to import most of our food, but to me, farming is core to our Britishness. We value our local farm cheese brands, we value our rolling green hills, and we value the role farmers play in maintaining our walkways and gritting our paths in winter.

    Hansard source
36. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Maya Ellis

    Farming: Financial Sustainability

    I completely agree. The main point I want to make, alongside all the powerful financial and security arguments that have been made, is that we need farming to be financially sustainable because we want it to be sustainable. We want it to be part of what we prioritise as this country. A More In Common poll found that, after the NHS, our British countryside is what British people value most about this country, so please, let’s not take it for granted. With no farmers, the countryside is not sustainable either.

    Hansard source
37. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matt Turmaine

    Media Green Paper

    As a former employee of the BBC for 15 years, I know the importance of those Reithian principles to educate, inform and entertain, which are at the core everything the organisation does. Dissemination of fake news and misinformation online is a genuine risk to our democracy. Does the Secretary of State agree that even if people are going to trusted sites and sources online, such as the BBC, ITV and Channel 4, there is a real risk of the mix of slop around it polluting people’s ability to see accurate information, and that this demonstrates the absolute need for trusted news sources online?

    Hansard source
38. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matt Rodda

    Public Libraries: Bournemouth East

    rose—

    Hansard source
39. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matt Rodda

    Public Libraries: Bournemouth East

    Thank you, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for his time. Just to add to his words on this issue, many local councils are doing the right thing. I had the great pleasure of attending the opening of the new Central library in Reading, in great contrast to the experience of my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) in his town.

    Hansard source
40. 24 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Matt Rodda

    Farming Road Map and Profitability Review

    Will the Secretary of State provide more detail on the innovation fund, particularly on how it will support increased profitability while, at the same time, driving reductions in the emission of carbon dioxide, methane and other dangerous, climate-damaging gases?

    Hansard source