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

What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.

Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology

Labour Party

Sitting MPs
404
Entries, last 7 days
646
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 11 Nov 2026

Conservative and Unionist Party

Sitting MPs
118
Entries, last 7 days
258
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 11 Nov 2026

Liberal Democrats

Sitting MPs
71
Entries, last 7 days
109
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 11 Nov 2026

Reform UK

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
15
Members
270,000 CLAIMED

Latest entry 11 Nov 2026

Scottish National Party

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
19
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 11 Nov 2026

Green Party

Sitting MPs
5
Entries, last 7 days
15
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 11 Nov 2026

Plaid Cymru

Sitting MPs
4
Entries, last 7 days
2
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 10 Nov 2026

All parties, latest first

Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,942 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

  1. ParliamentLabourMike Tapp

    Border Security: UK-Ireland Co-operation

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his well-made points. I disagree that those important diplomatic relations and agreements are hollow, but I will take away the point about the Irish border and feed it back to officials. That is disturbing, and of course I absolutely disagree with it. I turn briefly to our work on immigration enforcement. We have removed nearly 70,000 individuals since the end of March, which is a 41% increase on the number of returns recorded in the previous 21-month period. The Government will step up and intensify immigration enforcement to track down, detain, arrest and remove illegal migrants in Northern Ireland. The Home Secretary is investing more than £3 billion in immigration enforcement activity over the next three years, including in Northern Ireland, where we will see a 20% increase in officers compared with 2023. I cannot ignore the extremely important points made about the incident in Belfast, which disturbed us all. I agree that action needs to be taken to ensure that those in our country do not commit offences. Foreign national offender removals have increased significantly under this Government, but we do not hide behind that. We understand that there is more to do, and we will continue to pursue, deport and remove those who should not be here. I will not go into any more detail about that specific individual than we have already given. We have confirmed that he is Sudanese, and we know how he entered the country. An important point was made about pull factors. We inherited a situation in which illegal and legal migration was too high. Illegal migration is still too high. We see that on small boat crossings and other clandestine entry points. We have reformed and are reforming the immigration system to remove the pull factors, making it less attractive to come to the country. We are aligning our asylum system with the rest of Europe to reduce the asylum shopping that we have seen over the last four or five years. We are also making it easier to remove and deport people, which is why that number is up 41% to nearly 70,000, but we will go further, and there will be more announcements on that in due course. Illegal migration is costly, which is another reason to bring it down. Asylum accommodation costs the taxpayer far too much, so we are moving individuals out of hotels and into larger sites. In Northern Ireland, asylum accommodation has reduced by about 10%. I thank the hon. Member for Upper Bann for securing this debate. I am grateful to her and all Members who contributed. They raised important points, and I am pleased to have had this opportunity to reaffirm the UK Government’s steadfast commitment.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLabourMike Tapp

    Border Security: UK-Ireland Co-operation

    I thank the hon. Member for her contribution. I absolutely disagree with the framing that we are not taking this issue seriously. We are here today having a debate, and on top of that we are working day in, day out to fix the immigration system that we inherited. Deportations, removals and asylum processing are up, and hotel use is down. That is not by accident; it is through commitment and hard work from the Home Office. I am the Member of Parliament for Dover and Deal, and I, too, am at the front of the illegal migration problem, so I understand the frustration and the passion. I agree that it is not racist to have those views against illegal migration. We are working so hard to fix it, but it does not happen overnight. Members have an absolute commitment from the Home Secretary and all Home Office Ministers that we are dealing with it, and we are looking at the CTA, too. As I have set out, a close and active partnership is already in place, and it will undoubtedly remain an integral part of our efforts to detect, disrupt and deter the threats we face to secure our border and ultimately to keep our country safe. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLabourMike Kane

    Cost of Living: Wythenshawe and Sale East

    15. What steps she has taken to help support people with the cost of living in Wythenshawe and Sale East constituency.

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLabourMike Kane

    Cost of Living: Wythenshawe and Sale East

    My constituents Darren and Nicole shared with me their story of hardship in raising five children on one income. Like me, they are grateful to this Chancellor for ending the two-child benefit cap. Will she consider an independent process for advising the Government on how much universal credit needs to be, if people are to afford everyday items?

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Prison Safety

    I beg to move, That this House has considered safety in prisons. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. Since I was elected nearly two years ago, my office and I have been inundated with letters and calls from staff, prisoners and members of the public about the conditions at HMP Lowdham Grange in my constituency. I have heard repeated reports from prisoners of self-harm, deaths in the prison and instances of discrimination. I have also been contacted by staff sharing the impact of these incidents and the pressures on them, such as staffing and violence. These unsafe conditions are deeply concerning not only in their own right, but as a reflection of the wider challenges facing our justice system. To truly improve safety in our justice system, we must tackle the drivers of this violence. I thank the Minister for visiting HMP Lowdham Grange recently after I raised concerns with him. As he will be aware, the inspectorate released its report just yesterday, following the most recent inspection. It is reassuring to see some progress in areas such as visible leadership, improving health services and security relating to drugs. However, I remain deeply concerned about ongoing problems relating to self-harm and suicide.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Prison Safety

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. As Members will hear in my speech, mental health and safety need to go hand in hand.

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Prison Safety

    I absolutely agree. In fact, some of the accounts that I have been given by prison staff, particularly women prison officers, are deplorable. The inspectorate notes: “There had been two self-inflicted deaths in the previous two years and support for those at risk of self-harm was weak.” The rate of self-harm had increased by 50%, and the number of serious incidents requiring hospital had doubled. The risks cannot be allowed to continue. More must be done to support prisoners and to support staff in addressing these issues. I am also concerned that the processes for notifying the prison of a risk to life are wholly inadequate. The information that is publicly available directs individuals to the Safer Custody line, yet there appears to be insufficient training for operators handling potentially life-threatening situations. My team and I have frequently found ourselves guiding operators through the appropriate steps or being placed on hold while advice is sought from a supervisor. In some cases, we have been asked to leave a voicemail, with a response promised within 24 hours. That is for somebody who is threatening to take their life, I hasten to add. If a prisoner is actively attempting to take their own life, I think we can all agree that 24 hours is far too long. When we are put through to the orderly officer’s line, there have been numerous occasions on which no one answers and we are forced to leave a voicemail on a separate line. On the occasions when we do speak to the officer, we are reassured that a welfare check will take place, but we have found that those checks often do not take place or that, when they do, an officer simply looks through the door before moving on. These concerns are reflected in the inspectorate’s findings. Care plans under assessment, care in custody and team procedures were judged to be poor, with most prisoners not engaged in education, training or work, and with few meaningful activities identified to support them.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Prison Safety

    Absolutely. I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. Access to appropriate healthcare is another shortcoming. Prisoners often do not have access to their prescription medication or mental health services, and their medical or religious dietary needs are not met. The inspectorate also raised concerns about “prisoners with disabilities living in neglectful conditions”. Discrimination has no place in our society, and no place in prisons either. I urge the Minister to treat this as a matter of urgency. I fear that if action is not taken quickly, an incident of self-harm will lead to another preventable death. Let me move on to the subject of staff. I very much welcome the fact that the Government have taken steps to reduce the threat posed to our prison officers. Although numbers remain unacceptably high, the rate of assault and serious assault on staff has reduced. I also welcome the fact that the Government have now increased the number of staff stab-proof vests from 750 to 10,000, and that 500 officers will be trained on the use of tasers for the most serious incidents of violence. However, I support the Prison Officers Association in calling for protective equipment to be available to all officers, not only to those in high-security settings. Prison officers put their safety on the line every day to protect the public. The least we can do is ensure they have the protection they need. Can the Minister tell me whether there are any plans to make protective equipment available to all officers?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Prison Safety

    One would think my hon. Friend could read my speech over my shoulder, because that is the next thing I will talk about. There remains a staffing crisis across our prisons, with officer numbers falling and many leaving the profession after only one or two years. I therefore ask the Minister, as my hon. Friend has done, what steps the Government are taking to improve staff retention, given its direct impact on prison safety. Our prisons are losing out on experienced members of staff, meaning that officers who often do not have the necessary experience or training have to handle situations for which they are dangerously unprepared. Finally, I would like to raise the impact of the safety of prisons on the wider public. Time and again, when I speak to residents and the local police force, I am told about the endless cycle of incarceration and offending that is plaguing our streets. The local police and shop owners in Hucknall in my constituency know exactly who the offenders are who steal from businesses. The police do all they can—they collect evidence, they make arrests and they bring offenders to trial—but they know that in a year’s time those individuals will be back on the street committing the very same offences in the very same community. This is not a sustainable system. Discussions about rehabilitation and treatment of prisoners are often overlooked or trivialised, but access to addiction support, healthcare and education is essential if offenders are to break the cycle of crime. As long as our prisons do not provide adequate rehabilitation, our streets will never be safe.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Prison Safety

    I absolutely agree. If the Minister has not been to Wandsworth, I ask him to go and see that model, which perhaps is something he can do going forward. Offenders cannot focus on rebuilding their life if they are struggling simply to survive or are experiencing thoughts of ending their own life. I hope that the Minister shares my concerns about the safety and wellbeing of prisoners and staff at HMP Lowdham Grange and that he will take immediate steps to support the prison, the prisoners and the safety of prison officers.

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLabourMichelle Scrogham

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    We have talked about the changes after 2014. Might we also look back to what was referenced earlier, under the 2010 coalition Government, where the blame seemed to very suddenly shift to the Liberal Democrats? It was a joint decision to delay what was happening with our submarines. I will take no arguments from the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), because it was his party that helped to damage Barrow-in-Furness. If they had not, with Conservative Members under the coalition Government, made the commitment to pause, we would have our boats in the water now and our submariners would not be spending 200 days at sea.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    I beg to move, That this House has considered the matter of fly-tipping in residential areas and associated impacts. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer, and to see so many colleagues here to participate in this important debate. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for allowing this debate and colleagues who supported my application. Fly-tipping is often discussed as an environmental or waste management issue and a question of local authority enforcement. It is, of course, all those things, but in communities such as mine and across the country, it is more fundamental. It is about pride, belonging and whether people feel good about the place they call home. Residents often tell me they are tired of seeing mattresses dumped in alleyways, household waste abandoned on street corners and green spaces treated as rubbish tips. Those are not isolated incidents; they become part of the everyday experience of a neighbourhood. The impact goes far beyond the physical waste itself. Surveys on environmental decay reveal that 86% of people living in heavily littered or fly-tipped neighbourhoods feel embarrassed by their area. It is terrible that people should feel that. That statistic ought to concern us all. Environmental degradation damages mental wellbeing, erodes civic pride and fuels a cycle of hopelessness that can leave residents feeling disconnected from the communities around them. People deserve to feel proud when they walk down their street, and to feel that their neighbourhood matters. When fly-tipping becomes commonplace it sends exactly the opposite message. It tells residents that standards are slipping, that nobody cares and that decline is somehow acceptable. Once that perception takes hold it can be incredibly difficult to reverse. We must also be honest about some of the pressures that have contributed to the problem. Across the country, councils have faced difficult decisions about waste services. Public waste disposal facilities have been reduced in some areas, opening hours have changed and restrictions have become more complicated. Residents frequently tell me that local tips can be difficult to use, with limitations on what can be taken, who can take it and how often visits can be made. None of that excuses criminal behaviour; those who dump waste illegally are responsible for their actions. But if we are serious about solving the problem, we need to understand all the factors that contribute to it.

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. Why on earth should everybody else pay for the mess that others create, particularly hard-pressed communities that are already struggling? Adding to their council tax burden or imposing additional costs is not fair.

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    My hon. Friend makes a number of excellent points. In every community there are hotspots that people go back to again and again. There is provision for local authorities to use CCTV, but it has to be monitored; there is no point in having CCTV if it is not. Local authorities also have powers to use drones to follow vehicles that are committing the crime of excessive tipping. My hon. Friend is also right about the cost to private landowners. Other hon. Members might talk about more rural communities, the impact of fly-tipping on rural land and the environmental waste their constituents are then required to clean up. It is incredibly challenging to deal with hazardous waste.

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    It is interesting that the hon. Member says there might be a gap in regulations, and I suspect that that is the case for not just rural private land but all private land. I have the same thing in my constituency, where there are alleyways or unadopted areas that are frequently fly-tipped. I was going come on to local authorities later, but I will just repeat myself—why not; this place is all about repetition, isn’t it? In those alleyways and on other private land, local authorities will say, “We don’t have responsibility for that.” I do think that the Environment Agency would be much more concerned about the dumping and fly-tipping of hazardous waste, which has a broader environmental impact and falls into its area of responsibility.

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    The responsibilities of housing associations on their land is a similar issue, as they are facing financial challenges of their own. That is why we end up relying so much on communities to come together and do the clean-up. There needs to be a much more holistic solution, but we cannot always rely on communities to step in to do something that has such a fundamental impact on them and the way people live their lives. I am sure that housing associations have an opportunity to work more closely with local authorities to try to come up with an improved solution.

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    I am very grateful for my constituent’s contribution. It is an excellent one, as always. He makes a very valid point; Phillips 66 is a great contributor to community activities across our areas, but I would not like us to rely on that all the time. It is a really welcome contribution and incredibly helpful. We are very grateful and community groups will be very grateful for any funding that they can get, but the fact that we have to rely on it so much speaks to our need to get a grip on this issue. The hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) will know that recently we had a big fly-tipping issue in Weelsby woods. That is just around the corner from where he lives, so he will know it very well. We saw an unauthorised encampment there, with a huge amount of waste left behind. There was no concern for the fact that it is one of our valued green spaces that families regularly attend. The images of what was left behind shocked local residents. What should have been valued green space was turned into a disgusting dumping ground. That demonstrated something important about our local communities and how they pull together, because when the council sent teams to clear the site, volunteers also stepped up to help. It was an encampment for only three or four days, but there were several tonnes of waste from lots of tree work that had been undertaken; all the waste from that had been dumped in the park. Although that incident highlights the scale of the challenge, it also highlighted the strength of community spirit across Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, and Brigg and Immingham. Before discussing policy solutions, I want to place on the record my thanks to the many local campaigners, volunteers, community interest companies like Empower and council staff who devote countless hours to improving our environment. I am referring to people like Zac from PickWalks, whose efforts have inspired countless residents, including lots of children, to take greater pride in their local area; and Frank Sparkes, who has become well known locally for his tireless work cleaning up the North Wall. He also taught me how to tie a fisherman’s net at the weekend, so thank you very much, Frank. I am not sure I can remember that or repeat it, but he was excellent. I am referring to people like Jim Elliott, who has become known as the canoe river cleaner for spending his time removing rubbish from our waterways by canoe. I joined Jim on the water and quickly discovered that clearing litter while in a canoe requires considerably more skill and balance than I possess. Jim made it look effortless, but I think he spent just as much time trying to keep the boat upright as he did collecting the rubbish. I am referring also to our local Wombles litter-picking group, which quietly and consistently makes a difference every week in our local area, and to members of our local Labour group, who have been working alongside these residents and volunteers, have cleared 11 rubbish-filled alleyways across the constituency and continue to organise clean-up operations throughout the area. That is tough work; it is not just turning up for a photo opportunity. They are grafting to clear the alleyways, and their efforts demonstrate something important—people care deeply about the area in which they live. The challenge for us as policymakers is ensuring that those residents are supported, rather than being forced to fight the same battles over and over again—the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards) made earlier. That is why I welcome the action already taken by the Labour Government. For too long, fly-tipping has been treated as a low-level nuisance rather than the serious offence that it is. This Government’s new approach rightly recognises that waste criminals should face meaningful consequences. I particularly welcome proposals for clean-up squads. Under those plans, local authorities will be able to issue conditional cautions requiring offenders to undertake community payback—unpaid work cleaning streets, parks and public spaces, including the areas where they have dumped. That sends an important message about accountability. I welcome the plans that will allow councils to recover money directly from offenders to fund clean-up operations and ensure that taxpayers are not left carrying the cost, as my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley also mentioned in his intervention. Councils already have the power to seize vehicles involved in fly-tipping, but Ministers are encouraging local authorities to go further and use the power that they have to crush vehicles used in these offences, increase public awareness of enforcement action and make better use of technology such as CCTV, drones and automatic number plate recognition. Those are practical tools that can help to identify offenders and improve conviction rates. I welcome the fact that repeat fly-tippers now face the prospect of penalty points on their driving licence, with the possibility of disqualification for those who repeatedly offend. For some offenders the threat of losing their licence may prove a far more effective deterrent than a fine alone. Those important reforms deserve recognition, but we can still go further. First, we need much stronger public awareness about waste carrier licences. Many residents unknowingly and unwittingly hand over waste to individuals who are advertising cheap disposal services online or through cold calling. They assume that the waste will be disposed of legally; instead, it often ends up dumped in alleyways, fields and green spaces. Too many people simply do not know that they have a responsibility to check that waste carriers are properly licenced. Public education must become a central part of our strategy. Secondly, we need to address the cost and availability of bulky waste collection. If we want people to dispose of waste responsibly, the legal route must be straightforward, affordable and accessible. I would like consideration to be given to a more universal approach across local authorities so that residents can dispose of bulky household items without facing excessive costs or barriers. There could be joint bulky waste disposals between residents as well. Thirdly, there is a role for landlords. In areas with a high turnover of private rented accommodation, waste accumulation often becomes a recurring problem during tenancy changes. Landlords should work much more closely with local authorities to ensure that proper waste disposal arrangements are in place and to prevent alleyways and communal areas from becoming dumping grounds. It will work in their favour too; it is much easier to rent a property in an area that looks like it is being cared for. Finally, we need to look carefully at the enforcement processes. Local authorities frequently tell us that gathering evidence, issuing penalties and pursuing court action can be lengthy, expensive and resource intensive. If we want councils to make greater use of enforcement powers, we must ensure that those powers can be exercised efficiently and effectively. Reducing the cost, complexity and evidential burden associated with prosecutions would help authorities to take action more quickly and consistently. Earlier we touched on the “not on our land” approach from local authorities. If local authorities are not in a position to keep an area clean, what are they for? They are there for local people and to take care of our local areas. If local authorities support devolution and want power to be in the hands of those who know their areas better, then they should also be concerned about those areas and not be so quick to say, “There is nothing that we can do about that.” I do not know if colleagues have found the same but in my local area, when fly-tipping is on private land, the local authority has often advised local councillors to utilise their ward funding to come up with a solution. In some cases, people are turning to private companies, as my constituency neighbour the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham said. That is not what ward funding is intended for. It could all get sucked into tidying that up when it should be used for much more productive, proactive and positive actions. As for the cost benefit, we could have economies of scale. If local authorities, housing associations and other public bodies that have an interest in keeping our areas clean, tidy and safe came together, it would prove a much more effective use of public money. It does not matter whether it is ward funding, local authority money or housing association money; it is all public money, so let us use it as effectively and efficiently as we can. I will conclude to allow the many colleagues who are interested to contribute to this debate. Fly-tipping is often seen as a hyper-localised issued, but its consequences are national. It affects how people feel about their communities; it affects mental wellbeing, health and environmental health; it affects perceptions of safety and security; it affects tourism, investment and neighbourhood confidence; and most importantly, it affects whether people believe that their community is valued. The people of Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes have a right to expect to live in neighbourhoods that they can be proud of. The volunteers, campaigners, CICs and council staff who I have mentioned are already doing extraordinary work. The Government have taken welcome and significant steps to strengthen enforcement and hold offenders to account, but by improving awareness, strengthening disposal options and supporting councils in tackling the wider causes of waste crime we can go further still. I look forward to working with the Government to ensure that communities across the country are cleaner, safer and places that people are proud to call home.

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentLabourMelanie Onn

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    I thank the Minister for that response. I welcome the news about the tax checks and greater intervention of HMRC and the Organised Crime Task Force. Perhaps it would help to bring Louisa Rolfe into Parliament for a roundtable to discuss how police forces are co-ordinating on this matter across the country; there would be widespread interest, judging by the number of people who have contributed today. I am very grateful to colleagues for turning up and supporting this debate. I am keen to explore what the point about councils having the funds but not the will or the skills means in practice. Fundamentally, the issue is about an agreement between the people and the state. We pay our taxes with an expectation that services will be provided. The social contract is quite fragile at the moment and easily undermined. It is disappointing that so many of our fellow citizens are undermining it for the majority in the country. It is worth remembering that the social contract remains and continues; perhaps we should focus on the positives, given that so many people believe in it, reinforce it and give their time. I thank Members for their time and contributions. It was all incredibly thoughtful. I look forward to continuing discussions with the Minister. Question put and agreed to.  Resolved, That this House has considered the matter of fly-tipping in residential areas and associated impacts.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLabourMatthew Pennycook

    Forest City: West Suffolk

    Madam Deputy Speaker, please accept my sincere apologies for being slightly late to the Chamber.

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLabourMatthew Pennycook

    Forest City: West Suffolk

    Excellent. I am very glad to hear it. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I congratulate the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) on securing this debate. I assure him that I have heard loud and clear his concerns about the high-level Forest City 1 proposals, and that I will reflect carefully on them. I also thank the other hon. Members who have made contributions to the debate. Setting aside the detailed criticism made of the proposals in question, the core argument the hon. Gentleman has advanced is that the Government have to date refused to “say no” to it, which I think were his words. I want to respond to this charge head-on at the outset, because as he knows full well, it is not the role of the Government to opine on every development proposal that materialises across the country. For good or ill, depending on one’s viewpoint, we have a discretionary planning system in which schemes of various sizes are judged on their site-specific merits by individual local planning authorities. The Secretary of State has powers to call in or recover planning applications where they involve matters of more than local importance, and they are exercised where necessary. The Department can also take forward specific initiatives and programmes involving the delivery of large-scale new communities. The recent consultation and decision to establish a Greater Cambridge development corporation and the ongoing work taking place to progress a new towns programme are two good examples, but in each instance the Government clearly set out the parameters of their support and consult where appropriate. What we do not do—indeed, we are obliged not to do it, given the quasi-judicial role of Housing, Communities and Local Government Ministers in the planning system—is to publicly pass judgment on every unsolicited proposal that the Department receives. The hon. Gentleman looks somewhat confused by that notion, but that is how the planning system operates. The hon. Gentleman kindly provided me with advance notice of the questions he asked, so in response to each of them, let me give him as much clarity as I can. He asked whether the Government recognised that the Forest City promoters do not seek to go through “the appropriate local consultations and approvals”, and plan to rely instead on the legal, financial and political support of central Government. In response, I say to the hon. Gentleman that, while the size and nature of the proposed development would suggest as much, it is not entirely clear from the high-level material published by the promoters. Their website states, for example, that subsidy is not sought. A clear preference is expressed, however, for a development corporation as the delivery model, but it is not made explicit whether they are seeking Government backing for a centrally-led urban development corporation or are interested in a future mayoral or locally-led approach. In short, we simply do not have enough detail about this proposal to be able to say with any certainty precisely how its promoters believe it should be delivered. When it comes to the east of England, however, the Government’s focus is firmly on the establishment of the Greater Cambridge development corporation and using it to deliver nationally significant growth in Cambridge and its surrounding areas, in partnership with local leaders and communities. The hon. Gentleman pressed me on whether the Government will take this opportunity to rule out Forest City for good. For the reasons I have just set out, it is not for the Government to rule in or out any proposed scheme in general terms. He is aware that when the promoters of Forest City 1 applied to be part of the new towns programme, officials reviewed the application and concluded that it did not meet the programme’s objectives, specifically the deliverability objective. However, as per the remarks made by Baroness Taylor in the other place on 10 June, which he cited, it is open to the promoters of the scheme to engage with the relevant local planning authorities and communities about their proposals.

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLabourMatthew Pennycook

    Forest City: West Suffolk

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question, which pre-empts the next of his questions that I was going to come on to. He asked me specifically to rule out the establishment of a development corporation and the use of compulsory purchase powers for the construction of Forest City. I believe I have already confirmed to him, in answer to a written answer on 9 February, that the Government have no current plans to consult on the establishment of a centrally-led urban development corporation to deliver the Forest City 1 proposals. I do not think we can be clearer than that. The Government are not exploring creating a development corporation to take forward this speculative proposal. The hon. Gentleman invited me to provide an assessment of the financial modelling and subsidy gap in respect of the Forest City 1 proposal. It would not be appropriate for me to do so, even if the evidence base on which to make a rigorous assessment existed, which to the best of my knowledge it does not given that a business case has not yet even been put together by the promoters. Finally, the hon. Gentleman asked me to publish details of all meetings and conversations held between Ministers, officials and advisers and the promoters of the scheme. I can confirm that neither I nor the Secretary of State have met the promoters. I have met some of the board members in the past, but not in relation to the Forest City 1 proposals. The promoters met my officials earlier this year and proposals were reviewed by officials when the promoters formally applied to be part of the new towns programme. As we have discussed, special advisers in our Department have had a single meeting with the promoters with the aim of learning more about the proposals. As he will know, details of meetings that special advisers have with external organisations are published on gov.uk, in line with requirements set out in the relevant guidance. To conclude, I appreciate fully the hon. Gentleman’s desire to have the Government express an opinion on the high-level scheme proposed, but I am afraid there is not much more to add to what I have set out already. As I have made clear, when it comes to the east of England, the Government’s focus is firmly on delivering high-quality, sustainable growth for Cambridge and its environs. We announced the establishment of the greater Cambridge development corporation on 2 June, and the required statutory instrument was laid two days later. Subject to forthcoming parliamentary scrutiny and approval, the development corporation will be established as an entity. A powers and functions statutory instrument will be laid later in the year, which will grant the development corporation both plan making and development management powers. The development corporation will be expected to work closely with neighbouring local planning authorities, including West Suffolk, engaging collaboratively to ensure that growth delivers positive outcomes across the wider area. On that note, I welcome the support he has expressed for the Government’s focus on Cambridge. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLabourMatt Bishop

    Transport Connectivity: Border Communities

    10. What discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on potential funding for improving transport connectivity for border communities.

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLabourMatt Bishop

    Transport Connectivity: Border Communities

    I thank the Minister for her answer. The Forest of Dean sits on the English-Welsh border, and many of my constituents rely on cross-border transport links to access work, education and healthcare. Does she agree that improving connectivity in border communities can play a significant role in driving economic growth? What consideration is the Treasury giving to supporting investment in key cross-border transport infrastructure?

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentLabourMary Creagh

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) for securing this very well attended debate. Let me also thank hon. Members from across the House who have made valuable points. It is great to hear from the Opposition Front-Bench spokespeople about everything that this Government need to do, but it was under the coalition Government and their cuts that the beginnings of this public squalor occurred. In the so-called big society of David Cameron, we did not realise we were all going to have to become litter-picking Womble troops, set up our own food banks to feed our communities and end up being lollipop crossing wardens as well, because of the severe cuts that happened to local government on the coalition Government’s watch. It is fitting that we are having this debate at the beginning of London Climate Action Week. Everybody’s environment starts at their front door—it is not something out there in the oceans and forests; it is about stuff that is literally in the streets where we live. As my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) said, this is a matter of social justice. It is about environmental justice, but also about the poorest people bearing the consequences of environmental crime. It is an epidemic that proliferated under the coalition and it became a pandemic from 2015. The failure to implement any new policy and the starvation of local government that saw local tips close led to this criminal activity and this waste crime epidemic. Fly-tipping scars our streets and parks and takes pride away but it also robs us, as taxpayers. In the 2024-25 financial year alone, waste criminals—they are not cowboys; they are criminals—evaded at least £1 billion of landfill tax. Every fridge and bit of kitchen equipment dumped as a result of a refurb has not been disposed of correctly in either landfill or incineration; that is unacceptable. We are determined to take back control of our streets, parks and countryside from those criminals. The hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) talked about setting up the Joint Unit for Waste Crime. Since coming into office, we have boosted the Environment Agency’s enforcement budget for the current financial year by 50%, from £10 million to over £15 million. Over the next three years, we will give the Environment Agency an additional £45 million, so that budget is going up from £10 million to £15 million this year and then up to £30 million—we have trebled it. We are not producing action plans, but putting our money where our mouth is. That will mean more boots on the ground and more drones in the air. We have pursued major regulatory reforms and boosted the Joint Unit for Waste Crime. Since the Government came to power, the EA has stopped illegal waste activity at over 1,500 sites and has achieved 125 prosecutions, with 10 people going to prison. Crimestoppers has launched a national campaign encouraging the public to play their part by calling 0800 555 111 to anonymously report suspicious activity. I encourage all hon. Members to amplify that campaign, which is running on social media at the moment. Our waste crime action plan is the next step and it is a scale-up. First, we are preventing illegal activity before it starts; secondly, we are strengthening enforcement so that offenders are caught and punished; and thirdly, we are cleaning up the most harmful sites. Let me take each of those points in turn. First there is prevention. Stopping waste crime means putting legislation through Parliament that will replace the outdated paper systems, an issue neglected under the previous Government, with mandatory digital waste tracking: a single UK-wide platform that will monitor waste movements in real time. Regulators will be able to spot diversion away from legitimate pathways and spot fraud, such as misdescription of waste, at a much earlier stage in the chain. We have laid secondary legislation that will overhaul the regulation of the waste carriers, brokers and dealers system so that there will be no more Beau Vines registered as waste dealers. We are moving from a light-touch system to full environmental permitting. We are removing widely abused waste permit exemptions on tyres, end-of-life vehicles and scrap metal, and tightening up seven other waste permit exemptions. We are also going after the tax avoiders. HMRC is expanding tax check rules to the waste sector, so if someone’s tax record is questionable, we will ask them questions before renewing their licence.

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLabourMary Creagh

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    I will make some progress. We are matching prevention with tougher enforcement and pursuing the criminals with every tool in the box. We are increasing the Environment Agency’s budget, as I mentioned, and giving it new police-style powers to intervene earlier, disrupt the criminals and bring them to justice before their illegal operations become established. We have to nip this in the bud when it happens; that is what we know works.

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLabourMary Creagh

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    No, I will finish my point. The Joint Unit for Waste Crime is strengthening its hand. It is bringing together environmental watchdogs, police forces and the National Crime Agency to dismantle the serious organised crime networks that blight our communities. The penalties for waste crime must match the harm it causes. The carriers, brokers and dealers reform will increase penalties for offenders to up to five years in prison. We know that sometimes those offenders will not be prosecuted for environmental crime but potentially for money laundering because they are not just criminals in one area; they have an entire criminal enterprise of which waste crime is just one branch. On the clean-up, we are going after the criminals to make sure that they pay. We have worked with other Departments to publish criteria for cleaning up those sites where intervention is most needed. We are currently funding clean-up for Bolton House Road in Wigan, Alan Ramsbottom Way in Hyndburn and Worthing Road in Sheffield. We will go much further to prevent land owners picking up the bill in the future and work with the insurance industry to explore new models to shield farmers, business and land owners from bearing the cost of waste in their areas. We recognise the role that councils have and the different challenges that they face. Thanks to this Labour Government, they have more powers at their disposal than ever before: issuing fixed penalty notices, prosecuting offenders and launching investigations. Ealing council, for example, has issued 1,993 fixed penalty notices for fly-tipping in 2024-25. When councils say that they do not have the money, it is often that they do not have the will or the skills. They can also seize the vehicles of suspected fly-tippers and crush them—or, for those interested in reuse, as I am, sell them. We have published best practice guidance and case studies on vehicle seizure to give councils the confidence to use those powers. The National Fly-Tipping Prevention Group, chaired by DEFRA officials, has that guidance and Members may wish to bring it to the attention of their local councils. We have secured powers in the Crime and Policing Act 2026 for courts to impose up to nine penalty points on driving licences for fly-tipping offences. That is a strong deterrent and will make people think twice before they do such a job for their mates on the weekend. We are also consulting on a proposal to give local authorities powers to issue conditional cautions to suspected fly-tippers. Those are a range of pre-court community-based sanctions. We all want to see these guys—it is mostly guys—going to prison, but this Government inherited a court backlog along with prisons full to bursting. However, these cautions could see offenders cleaning our streets or parks in an unpaid capacity, and being required to pay back the cost of cleaning up the waste that they have dumped. It gives local authorities another tool in the box. I pay tribute to all the volunteers who have worked in this area, not least in my own city of Coventry, including at Destination Ball Hill and the Reverend Matthew Bull at St John the Divine, where I spent a very sweaty two hours cleaning up Willenhall last Friday.

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLabourMary Creagh

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    I will not. I went back on Saturday and already someone had littered their Burger King wrapper out of a car. The issue is about people and it is very annoying. As a cyclist, I remember posting a cigarette box back through the window of a motorist who had just littered it right in front of my bike; that was one of my more fruity exchanges. We need to follow Coventry city council’s lead and have a wall of shame and CCTV, as there is in areas such as Clements Street in my constituency. Regarding the situation in Hexham, there is Waste and Resources Action Programme guidance on the accessibility of household waste and recycling centres. I urge my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) to bring that guidance to the attention of his council. It is also important that we have more tidy Fridays. Assistant Commissioner Louisa Rolfe has been seconded from the Metropolitan police to the National Police Chief’s Council to co-ordinate this work between police forces across the country. I am disappointed to hear about the Lib Dems in Portsmouth. It is really important for us to work with National Highways and crowd everybody into this space.

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLabourMarsha De Cordova

    Clergy Conduct Measure (HC 221)

    I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the Clergy Conduct Measure (HC 221). It is a pleasure to serve under your chairwomanship, Ms Lewell. I know that for many colleagues across the House the prospect of being on a Delegated Legislation Committee considering Church of England legislation is not the true highlight of their parliamentary week—and in this weather; I am so sorry. However, while our setting today might be routine, the legislation before us is anything but. The Measure is a cornerstone of the Church of England’s ongoing vital reform of clergy discipline and safeguarding. During the passage of the Measure through the General Synod, the Church acknowledged that the current system has not served complainants well; they have far too often found the process to be retraumatising, opaque and painfully slow. Equally, it has not served clergy well, leaving many in a state of prolonged anxiety and limbo. The new Measure is the result of six years of detailed work to address that situation. To that end, the Clergy Conduct Measure will replace the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 in its entirety. It is clear that the system was not fit for purpose: it was outdated and needed reform to better protect and support individuals. Before I turn to the detail of the Measure, hon. Members will see from the report by the Ecclesiastical Committee that it initially found the Measure “not expedient” on the basis that clause 31(3) provided that the tribunal hearings were to be held in private by default. I am pleased that the Church withdrew that and the General Synod looked at the issue again. In February, the Measure was amended for hearings to be in public by default. Concerns were also raised about the working relationship with the Church. The Church has assured me that it recognises the need to work collaboratively with the Ecclesiastical Committee and with Parliament. It should know that robust parliamentary scrutiny is not a hurdle to be cleared, but an essential part of ensuring that our legislation is fair and transparent and commands public confidence; we are, after all, legislators. The Measure at the heart of the new system is proportional. It introduces three different tracks to allocate complaints to: as a grievance, as misconduct or as serious misconduct. Each track has its own procedure for investigation and resolution of the complaint, and by triaging cases effectively from the outset, the Measure seeks to ensure that every complaint is handled appropriately and with the right level of seriousness. Crucially, that will lead to a much quicker process. Justice delayed is justice denied, both for those raising complaints and for those facing them. By streamlining investigations and hearings, the system seeks to end the agonising multi-year delays that have so heavily characterised the current process. The Measure also makes vital strides in aligning safeguarding and discipline processes. The one-year limitation period will be abolished for allegations of serious misconduct, meaning that those who have been seriously harmed by the Church will be able to bring a complaint regardless of when the alleged conduct took place. In cases involving children or vulnerable adults, safeguarding professionals will automatically become party to the complaint, providing critical input into the decision-making process. That alignment will be significantly better for both complainants and respondents, ensuring that safeguarding is not treated as a separate silo but is central to the disciplinary framework. Alongside that, new statutory duties are placed on bishops to implement support for all those affected by a complaint, and there are significant protections for the clergy through the introduction of restraint orders against those who persistently harass them with vexatious complaints. For the most serious cases where the cleric is prohibited from ministry for life, the outcome of deposition from holy orders has been reintroduced. The new system provides greater protections for vulnerable witnesses and ensures that those who have the immense courage to come forward and report abuse or misconduct are properly supported and shielded throughout the proceedings. The Measure will be supplemented by rules made under secondary legislation, which will be considered by the General Synod next month. Ideally, the Committee would have had the rules alongside the Measure, and I hope going forward that the Church will look at ways to implement this. Should that legislation pass the General Synod, it will be laid before Parliament under the negative procedure. Behind every clause of the Measure, and behind every complaint that it will eventually govern, are real human beings. There are victims seeking justice, congregations needing leadership and clergy dedicating their lives to service. The Church has listened to survivors, to the clergy and to Parliament in devising this new system. The Measure is serious and comprehensive, and it is a response to those voices. I am pleased to commend it to the Committee today.

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLabourMarsha De Cordova

    Clergy Conduct Measure (HC 221)

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his very thorough welcoming of this Measure, and for wanting to ensure that we support it. As I said in my opening remarks, this is a progressive step forward. It brings much transparency to the process and more fairness to all, whether that is a complainant or somebody being complained about. I welcome the fact that he will be supporting this Measure. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLabourMark Sewards

    Fly-tipping: Residential Areas

    My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. Many of my residents are sick of persistent fly-tipping blighting our community. This Government have passed laws that allow us to prosecute fly-tippers, but residents are also frustrated by the cost of cleaning up this mess. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is imperative not only to clean up our communities but to make the fly-tippers pay for it?

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLabourMark Sewards

    Topical Questions

    T7. Last week, the Chancellor announced the biggest insourcing of Government caterers, cleaners and security officers that we have seen in a very long time, when the current contract ends. Does she agree that that move will finally recognise workers who have been undervalued and under-appreciated for far too long?

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I thank our armed forces for their work to keep this nation safe every single day—the regulars, the reserves, the cadets, the civil servants who back our forces, and the men and women of our defence industry who keep our fighting forces on the frontline with the kit and equipment that they need to keep Britain secure at home and strong abroad. I have heard the pride in our armed forces from both sides of the House today, and though there was quite a lot of politics, in particular from the Opposition Front Bench, I think that all those who serve in uniform can take from this debate that, regardless of party, we back them and we will continue to support them. I agree with the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) that it is a shame that Reform Members are still not here for a defence debate. None the less, in their absence, I will press on. There were a number of common themes raised today, but before I mention them, I will say this to the House. I am proud to be a Plymouth MP; I am proud to represent Devonport, the largest naval base in western Europe; I am proud to be the son of a Royal Navy submariner; and I am proud to be an RCDS graduate. I wish the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) all the best for his graduation in due course. On Saturday, I will be on Plymouth Hoe for Armed Forces Day, which is a brilliant annual event. I know that there is cross-party support for the men and women of our armed forces, but in particular, I thank one set of armed forces personnel who have done an amazing job in Plymouth over the last year, clearing all the second world war bombs that we keep finding in our city. The armed forces have a lot of roles, but the role that has been on the TV news is the one played by the brave men and women who have been moving second world war bombs around, putting their lives at risk to safeguard others from a conflict that took place many decades ago. I thank them for that.

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I thank my hon. Friend and neighbour for her comments. HMS Raleigh is an important training establishment for the Royal Navy. Right across the country, whether in the Navy, Army, Air Force or the new direct entry scheme for cyber, we have some brilliant people training the next generation of talent in our armed forces. I join my hon. Friend in thanking all those who serve at HMS Raleigh. This has been a good debate with some passionate speeches across the House. People are passionate because they care about defence; indeed, that is why I stand here as a Defence Minister. I care about defence, I care about our national security and I am proud that I am part of a Government that also do. A number of themes have been discussed and I will detail them here. Across the House, we have spoken about defence spending, readiness, armed forces personnel and veterans, and about how we deal with the inheritance left by the previous Government, how we value our people more and how we publish the defence investment plan. I will return to each one, but first I will turn to the DIP. Those who were present at Treasury questions this morning will have heard the Chancellor say: “The Ministry of Defence is producing a defence investment plan that will meet the scale of the challenges and meet the moment with increased readiness. I am confident that the new defence investment plan will be published before the NATO Ankara summit. It will involve more money spent more effectively and will meet the scale of the challenges facing our country.” I think that answers the question.

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I will make some progress. That was a clear answer to the questions that have been asked on the matter. When it comes to defence spending, which was raised by a number of colleagues across the House, let me be clear: this Labour Government are spending more on defence. I welcome a debate that asks how we can spend even more and faster, but we should be clear that we are spending more on defence. Next year, we will spend 2.5% of GDP on defence. That figure was not met in a single year of the previous 14 under the Conservatives—[Interruption.] The shouty people on the Opposition Front Bench say the world has changed. The hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East (David Reed) must be terrible when he goes to the cinema in terms of being shouty. I agree that the world has changed; that is why we are spending more on defence. Would I like to spend more? Of course I would.

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    No, I will make some progress. We are spending more of this increasing defence budget with British companies. The hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) mentioned Kraken in his constituency, which I visited very recently. He will be pleased to hear, if he is not familiar with this, about the increased orders that we have given Kraken for its K3 Scout. I believe there is a K3 Scout on show in Speaker’s Court at the moment. Kraken is a brilliant company investing in cutting-edge technology that we are backing not only for 47 Commando in the Royal Marines, which is in receipt of K3s for Project Beehive, but for the autonomous hybrid Navy options, especially in the strait of Hormuz. It is a brilliant company doing brilliant things. When it comes to readiness, let me say clearly that we need to develop our warfighting capabilities, moving from an era of expeditionary warfare. The strategic defence review set out clearly the change that is required. Our forces have been postured and resourced for a period of expeditionary warfare for quite some time, leading up to where we are today, and the SDR set out that we need to move away from expeditionary warfare to warfighting readiness against a peer adversary. That means a number of things. First, it means retiring old kit and equipment that is not suitable for that task. Secondly, it means massively reforming our procurement system so that we can procure faster. We inherited a broken procurement system that we are fixing, and I am pleased that the new national armaments director is leading much of that work. I know that we can achieve improvements in procurement because the brilliant men and women of our Ministry of Defence do so in the support that they provide to our friends in Ukraine. On one side of their desks, they can use increased permissions to procure kit and equipment for Ukraine faster. On the other side of their desks, we are trying to make it easier for them to procure what could be similar equipment for our own armed forces.

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    No, I am going to make some progress. The third area that people have spoken about today is armed forces personnel and veterans, and I am grateful to a number of Members from across the House for mentioning people who are doing incredible things in their own constituencies. I believe it was the hon. Member for South Northamptonshire (Sarah Bool) who spoke about Tony McCawley, who runs the veterans breakfast. I thank him and the hundreds of people like him who run veterans breakfasts up and down the length of the country. I know it makes such a difference for veterans, especially those who might be having a tough time, to go somewhere where there are other people who have walked in their boots—maybe in a different unit and maybe at a different time of service, but having someone they can relate to makes such a big difference. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin), who spoke about Muster Point and Stuart Mendelson from Stevenage, who is doing such a good job in supporting veterans in his community as well. I know that if there were more time, every single Member who has spoken would have been able to single out brilliant people doing brilliant things in their own constituency, and I thank them.

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I am still going to make some progress. Let me now answer the questions about the inheritance that we face. I have already spoken about the SDR wanting us to move from expeditionary warfare to warfighting readiness, but we now need to deliver the changes that we have set out. We have made good progress, but we inherited a situation where 47 of 49 major defence programmes were over budget and delayed. I believe that the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) was responsible for those delayed programmes when he sat in my seat.

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I am still going to make some progress. Let me also be clear about the inheritance that we have in housing and in morale. We inherited a situation where many of our armed forces were living in housing that was frankly unacceptable. They had black mould in their children’s bedrooms, leaky boilers and leaky roofs. We are sorting that out with a generational repair, and nine in 10 military homes will be either refitted or rebuilt in the next decade. We have already delivered the first 1,200, with the worst homes on our military estate being able to be refitted. That has been delivered by taking those houses back into public control.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    I am still going to make some progress. Let me also—

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentLabourLuke Pollard

    Defence Spending and Readiness

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes) did say that I was a good Minister, which I am sure is a kiss of death for my career, but I welcome it none the less. He asked me how I am trying to answer the questions; I am answering the questions by not giving way, so that I can answer the questions that have been asked. I have taken copious notes.

    Hansard source