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

12,832 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

1. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jon Trickett

   Rugby League Clubs

   My hon. Friend is right that rugby league is a sport that grew up in working-class communities and especially in mining communities, so it is surprising that it has not taken root in his constituency. However, when we consider the discrimination that rugby league has suffered from over the years, it is maybe not so surprising. One of the things I will argue is that we need to do more to develop the sport across the whole country, especially in communities such as his. My hon. Friend is right, too, that whenever a player was injured in Featherstone in my patch, they would go to the pit head and shout down, “Send us up another forward,” or whatever it was, and one would emerge quickly, get changed and get on to the pitch. It was very much part of the mining tradition.

   Hansard source
2. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jon Trickett

   Rugby League Clubs

   The hon. Member makes an important point, and I agree. To develop a bit about rugby league, in the areas I am most familiar with, rugby league—and sport in general—can be the most important agency for social cohesion. Sport can provide something that brings everybody together, whatever their different points of view or life experiences. In my constituency, Featherstone Rovers have played for decades, and there is a massive amount of pride in the fact that we have that team. I will come to the difficulties they are facing, and I hope we can find a way forward. Let me remind the House that the BBC used to cover rugby league more or less weekly on “Grandstand”. Most people in this room are probably not old enough to remember the famous commentator, Eddie Waring, but I do well. So familiar was rugby league in those times, because of the BBC coverage, that many of Eddie Waring’s favourite expressions were well known across the whole country. Mike Yarwood, who was a great mimic at that time, used to talk with Eddie’s accent—which I cannot do. He used to talk about “up and under”, which was one of the ways a ball could be kicked. More importantly, when somebody was sent off, his favourite expression was, “Well, he’s been sent for an early bath”—I very much hope that you will not send me for an early bath today, Ms Vaz. Rugby league ought to be a nationally recognised sport. I will come to the discrimination and the problems with television in a second, but let me remind the House that anyone who wants to watch rugby league on TV now has to go to two separate pay-per-view channels. It costs £61 a month, which is 5% of the total income of a person living on the minimum wage. People are being priced out of the spectacle, which is a great shame, because it is leading to the atrophy of the sport across the communities where it ought to be played. It is also stopping us from spreading rugby league further—I will come back to that in a second. Rugby league was a product of the class system that operated in sport in those days. The so-called gentlemen, who did not need to be paid, would play rugby union. Those who were too poor could not afford to play rugby union, so rugby league was set up, so that players could be paid. That was the start of rugby league as a code; but the truth is that the divisions that existed then continue today. I have identified one or two statistics that may surprise the House. If we look at the honours system, eight rugby union players have received a knighthood; there have only been two from rugby league, one of whom is the great Kevin Sinfield, who was knighted for his contributions to charity. That difference shows a level of discrimination. When we look at the national squads for rugby union, two thirds or more went to public school. I cannot find a single player for the national rugby league side who went to public school. It shows the class divisions, which surprisingly continue in sport after all these years. It is disappointing that fewer than 40 universities have a rugby league side, whereas every single university that I can find has a rugby union side. Again, that shows that something is not quite working between the two codes. When it came to covid, as we know, sports were remunerated, but here is an astonishing fact: rugby union received about £130 million, whereas rugby league got £10 million or £11 million—ten times more went into rugby union from covid. I do wonder—perhaps the House would agree—whether those in the civil service making these decisions are often people who went to universities and schools that had rugby union, but have little comprehension of the importance of rugby league in areas such as mine. I think that demonstrates clear discrimination, and I hope that the Labour Government are aware of that—if they were not, then they are now, because I have drawn it to the Minister’s attention. I want to move on to the situation facing Featherstone Rovers. Wakefield, which I now represent, has the honour of having three separate professional rugby league sides: Wakefield, Castleford and Featherstone. Unfortunately, due to bad management, Featherstone has gone into administration, and we have been struggling to find a way to bring the Rovers back to life. The team is the core of the people of Featherstone’s identity, as was mining—mining was stripped away many decades ago, but references to mining can still be seen everywhere in the township in Featherstone. The rugby league side, Featherstone Rovers, is a matter of great pride, and the fact that it went bankrupt and there is nobody playing on the pitch at the moment is heartbreaking for so many people I represent. Gradually, we have been putting together a plan to try to bring Featherstone Rovers back to life. That has been difficult, and I have spent many hours trying to achieve it, but thanks to the recent appointment of a new chief executive at the Rugby Football League, we are now making progress. The RFL has said that it is prepared to help to acquire the assets, bearing in mind that there is a stadium with buildings around it and several acres at the back of it. The administrator has been difficult, but he has come to the view in the end that, because it is a community asset, he is prepared to sell it for slightly less than he might have thought it was worth in a completely commercial sense. We think that it can be acquired for about £1 million. When Labour was in charge of the council—it has changed hands recently—it put aside several million pounds for each of the three rugby league clubs. There is £700,000 still unallocated to Featherstone, and the council, under its new management, has now said that a substantial part of that, possibly half a million, will be made available to the rugby league for it to be able to acquire the assets. Here comes the interesting part, because in Featherstone, thanks again to the Labour Government, we have something called Pride in Place, and we have been allocated £20 million over the coming ten years. I am a member of the Pride in Place board, by virtue of being the local MP—I do not know if I need to declare an interest, but I do in any event. The board has said that it is prepared to make a substantial contribution to the acquisition of the stadium and the surrounding land. It has been difficult to put this together, but the board is unanimous, and, led by the by the chair Kay Binnersley, we are now in a position to say that, when the money arrives from the Government in the next financial year, it can then be made available to the RFL. I have met the new chief executive of the RFL, who is a dynamic and progressive individual, and we have agreed that we want to create a partnership between the Pride in Place board and the RFL to try to take this whole thing forward. That is desperately important, because without Featherstone Rovers playing, it has not been easy to create a fixture list, because there will be one less team than is required to set up the fixtures. There is an urgency to this. I have to say that it has been frustrating dealing with the RFL over the last year and a half on this matter, as it went from one temporary chief executive to another, but now it has a decision maker in place, and I am confident that he is determined to make this happen, and clearly he needs to do that for all the other teams in the rugby league.

   Hansard source
3. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jon Trickett

   Rugby League Clubs

   Many years ago, as a builder and plumber, I did lots of work on Morley Labour rooms, which my hon. Friend is probably familiar with to this day—that is completely by the by. My hon. Friend is right that Pride in Place is there to give or reinforce pride in communities, now from the bottom up, with local people deciding what they need. Rugby league is part of that, but decisions needs to come from the community, not from above. In Featherstone and other areas, local councils need to be aware that their rules and codes do not apply to Pride in Place, although they currently manage the finances. The board itself has to decide the priorities. We have a vision for a town of sporting excellence, bringing together all existing services. That could mean education, for which there is much to do in Featherstone, or health services, as there are many people with long-term illnesses and mental health problems. We have a vision for a town built around sporting provision, reaching out to the various cultural, health and educational needs of Featherstone people. They may have different views and experiences in life, but the one thing they have had is Featherstone Rovers, so it is important that the club is brought back together. Our vision is for a renewal of the town, building on its existing pride, so that it is a place where people are extremely proud to live. They will be able to join in social and cultural activities as well. That all requires Featherstone Rovers to be brought back. We understand that the RFL cannot own the assets for ever, because other clubs will begin to resent it. The other clubs need to understand that, without Featherstone Rovers playing, they will not have a functioning league. It is important that the RFL does the things that the chief executive has said he wants to do. The Labour administration at the council put in place a resilience fund. We have had different figures from the current leadership of the council, but I believe that there is still £700,000 in the kitty, with £500,000 going to the RFL. The other £200,000 will be needed for renovations to the stadium. I have now explained the background. It has been helpful for me to speak about rugby league in general, including the discrimination that it suffers and the situation in Featherstone. As I said, I am delighted to see the Minister in her place, and I will press her on three matters. Could the Department consider carefully the RFL’s bid for funding? We need to develop the sport and take it into new areas. Many people are hungry for that kind of sporting experience. Secondly, could she take a close interest in order to ensure that the partnership I have described between the PIP board and the RFL proceeds at speed? We have an empty stadium and people asking what has happened to their team. I have a final point. The problem for rugby league is that the feedstock has been cut off—that is, the ordinary kids who watch sport on TV and who live in poorer families. A lot of rugby league clubs are in deprived communities, such as Featherstone, where people are not able to pay for pay-per-view TV, so they do not see their heroes and they do not see the sport, its code or how it is played. That leaves us with a problem. The Department has the power to list sporting events. It is disappointing and tragic that the rugby league world cup, which is happening right now, is not on terrestrial television. Of course, the BBC says that it has a deal to broadcast the event on the radio, but listening to it on the radio is not the same as watching our heroes on the pitch, as I did at 17, when I watched the match that I referred to earlier. Will the Minister consider carefully whether we can list some of those matches so that communities everywhere can see the great sport that is rugby league? I look forward to hearing what I hope will be a positive response.

   Hansard source
4. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jon Trickett

   Rugby League Clubs

   The Minister is right to raise gender. It is fair to say that in the dim and distant past, rugby league was kind of a male sport, but now there are women’s teams all over the country, including in universities. We are very proud that Featherstone Rovers has one of the most successful women’s rugby league teams in the country. I thank her for giving me the opportunity to celebrate their success.

   Hansard source
5. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Slinger

   Higher Education Funding

   My hon. Friend is making a very compelling speech. I wonder if he noticed the coverage in The Telegraph, which reported that graduates on the minimum wage will be making repayments on three out of the five student loan plans from next year onwards. Does he agree that this, in many ways, breaks our social contract with the student population, who were essentially told that they would earn a huge amount more and should therefore contribute to their higher education?

   Hansard source
6. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

   Financial Statement and Budget Report

   This is a Budget for the working people of Britain, for British businesses big and small, delivered at a time when global uncertainties and pressures are swirling worldwide and hitting people here at home. It is a Budget built on fiscal discipline, which matches immediate action today with clear direction for the future: first, by giving Britain some breathing space on the cost of living and the cost of business; secondly, by backing the enterprise of British business to unleash innovation and growth in every postcode; and thirdly, by tackling the big challenges on energy, national security, public service procurement and transformation, and housing. In this Budget, I will set out the new approach that this Administration is taking—led by the vision of our new Prime Minister, demonstrated in our first 100 days and carried through today’s Budget, the 10-year plan for Britain and the spending review next year, to steer us through the global economic storms today, chart a new course for Britain in the years ahead, and give people fresh hope for Britain’s future. It is an honour to stand here as Chancellor of the Exchequer to deliver my first Budget. I had hoped that I might be the most closely watched member of the Government this week until the Prime Minister went on “Gogglebox”. At the outset of this Budget statement, I want to pay tribute to my predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds West and Pudsey (Rachel Reeves)—Britain’s first ever female Chancellor after 800 years. She brought fiscal discipline to this country. She took—[Interruption.] She took the decisions required to boost investment, cut NHS waiting lists—

   Hansard source
7. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

   Financial Statement and Budget Report

   My right hon. Friend took the decisions required to boost investment, to cut NHS waiting lists and to lift half a million children out of poverty. I also want to thank my outstanding team of Treasury Ministers and officials, and the Office for Budget Responsibility for producing today’s forecasts. Analysts like to speak of economic headwinds, but what we face today are global economic storms, with trade tensions acting as a drag on global growth and Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine approaching now the end of its fifth year. The OBR sets out that the war in the middle east is a key driver affecting its forecasts today. The Government continue to work with our allies to end the conflict and restore shipping through the strait of Hormuz. We did not want this war, and we rejected the calls from the Leader of the Opposition to jump two-footed into it. It is a war that has driven up costs on British families and on British businesses. Inflation, which was due to fall earlier this year to the 2% target, has now risen, driven by higher oil and gas prices. Oil is up from around $70 a barrel to well over $100 and gas prices have nearly tripled since February. For families, that means higher prices at the pump, higher energy bills and higher mortgages. For businesses, it means higher running costs and more expensive business loans. The impact is felt in the public finances, too. Driven by the conflict in the middle east, Government borrowing costs across the G7 are reaching highs not seen for decades. In today’s forecast, the OBR predicts that we will spend £14 billion more on debt interest this year. Those are the storms we face. We cannot wish them away. We must choose the course we steer through them. Fiscal discipline is my first commitment as Chancellor. More than ever, it underwrites every promise the Government make to the British people. In the Budget today, I meet the fiscal rules: the stability rule that day-to-day spending must be covered by tax receipts; and the investment rule that Government debt, defined as public sector net financial liabilities, must be falling as percentage of GDP. This year, for the first time, I must meet those rules in the third year of the forecast, and I do. My plans continue to reduce Government borrowing so that we spend less on debt interest and more on the priorities of the British people. First, the stability rule. In the Budget today, I have chosen to use some of the headroom established last year to absorb the impact of the Iran war to protect the economy and to protect family budgets. My choices in the Budget mean that I have kept the Labour manifesto promise not to raise tax on working people—[Interruption.] I have rejected—[Interruption.]

   Hansard source
8. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

   Financial Statement and Budget Report

   I have also rejected broad-based tax rises or slashing public services, recognising that families and businesses need breathing space. The OBR confirms today that headroom against the stability rule will be £15 billion in 2029-30 before rising to £22 billion in 2030-31. That is what a buffer is for: use it when you need it; rebuild it when you can. Despite the global challenges, the Budget puts us on track to eliminate the current budget deficit and get Britain’s finances into the black within three years. As a Labour Government, last year we cut borrowing to its lowest level in six years, from 5.1% to 4.4% of GDP. I continue that work today. In today’s forecast, borrowing falls to 4.2% this year, 3.4% next year, 2.9% in 2028-29, 2.1% in ’29-30 and 1.8% in ’30-31 and ’31-32. Our debt as a percentage of GDP is 83.2% this year, 83.8% next year and in ’28-29, before falling to 83.1% in ’29-30, 82.3% in ’30-31 and 81.7% in ’31-32. It is because of our Labour decisions and it is because of our Labour plans that the International Monetary Fund has said that the UK now stands out as a country where “action to reduce debt and deficit has been taken decisively”. It projects our UK deficit will be the lowest in the G7 by 2029. The last time the IMF called the UK a standout was when Liz Truss crashed the economy. Her new book says she could have taken the British people to Mars. In reality, what she achieved in government, with help from the shadow Chancellor, was blowing a big black hole in the budget. That is the difference between Labour in government and a Conservative Government before us. During this year of global economic shocks, forecasters predicted that the UK economy would slow down. Those predictions of gloom were about as accurate as the predictions of who would be the Chancellor. [Laughter.] Britain is defying expectations. In the first half of this year, our economy was the fastest growing in the G7, alongside the US. That is testament to the British people—the innovators, the business leaders and the workers on the frontline—and it is testament to the Labour decisions taken over the last two years. Government investment, up; business investment, up; productivity, up; and real wages, up. More since the election than in the first 10 years of the previous Conservative Governments. I will never be complacent, but these are signs of resilience in the UK economy. Three months ago, the Bank of England upgraded its forecasts for UK growth this year, two weeks ago the IMF did the same, and today the OBR has upgraded its forecast to 1.2% this year, followed by 1% next year, 1.6% in 2028, 1.8% in 2029, 1.7% in 2030 and 1.6% in 2031. Yes, there are real challenges ahead, but Britain has beaten the forecasts this year, and with the action I am taking today, I believe Britain can beat the forecasts again. Despite our economy’s resilience, I know that people are under pressure. Too many people feel this country is not working well for them. In particular, households and businesses face challenges from rising energy costs due directly to the conflict in the middle east. In the face of that, what matters is how we respond as a Government, and my choice in the Budget today is to give families and businesses some breathing space now and to begin the radical reform of energy to reduce bills in the future. Last week, my right hon. Friend the Energy Secretary opposed—approved—[Laughter.]

   Hansard source
9. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

   Financial Statement and Budget Report

   At least they are still awake, Madam Deputy Speaker. Last week, my right hon. Friend the Energy Secretary approved the Jackdaw gas field, boosting our energy security. This will protect hundreds of jobs and add an estimated £2.9 billion to the UK economy—a pragmatic, common-sense decision. Alongside that, I launched a new energy wealth fund for the UK. Today, I am setting a new course on energy to get UK energy costs down in line with Europe. From this point, our Labour Government priority is, first and foremost, cheaper energy, with clean power key to achieving it. This is possible because of the progress we have made towards clean power over the last two years, and this Government remain unshakeably committed to net zero by 2050. This will demand deep reform of our energy system, starting at the Budget today and carried through the 10-year plan into the months and years ahead. For many years under Conservative Governments, policy costs were simply loaded on to household bills through levies. Today, I am putting an end to that. We will introduce a new cost control framework to drive down all aspects of energy bills, and I will scrap the upcoming gas shipper obligation—a levy to fund hydrogen projects—and instead back those projects directly from Government. I am making further big changes to bring bills down in the long term. First, on clean power generation, this Government will only buy and build new projects when they lower bills and when they can connect to the grid. Secondly, we will further break the grip of international gas prices on our bills by moving more of our old renewables on to fixed-price contracts. Thirdly, we will build cheaper, faster grid connections through GB Grid, and reform the complex web of institutions that govern the system. This is how we deliver the radical change that Britain needs on energy. It will not happen overnight, so I am taking immediate action to give families and businesses breathing space in the here and now. In the first week of this new Government, we took VAT off electricity for 29 million households. Today, I am extending that VAT cut through the winter and spring to July, taking £50 off the annual price cap. For business, our new British industrial competitiveness scheme will take 25% off electricity bills for 10,000 firms at the heart of British industry. It will go live in April, and I confirm that we will make backdated payments for energy costs this year too. Next year, working with my right hon. Friend the Energy Secretary, we will go further to make bills fairer. Gas standing charges cost people over £100 a year, regardless of how much gas they use, so from next year, through Ofgem, we will remove standing charges from household gas bills. We will set out similar reforms to follow for electricity bills. Let me say this to families at home. I know that, with the conflict in the middle east, rising energy bills are a real worry. I know that people look to the Government at times like this, not to solve all their problems but to give them a bit of breathing space—so today, I am taking one further step. This winter, for 20 million households in council tax bands A to D, I am announcing a £100 energy payment for households. It will be paid directly into people’s bank accounts to deal with rising energy bills. That is a £2.6 billion scheme to take the pressure off in the coldest months and see people through to the spring. The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland Governments will receive their share of this funding, and I call on them to do the same and give people in all nations of the UK breathing space on their energy bills this winter. Madam Deputy Speaker, £50 off VAT, £100 off council tax. For this winter, two tax cuts; for next year, fairer bills; and for the long term, radical reform of the energy market to produce cheaper power. Breathing space now and hope for the future, delivered to the British people by this Labour Government. For millions of people, the cost of living and the cost of doing business are the same—the home is the office, the van is the family car. Earlier this year, the Government extended the 5p cut to fuel duty and slashed red diesel to its lowest rate in over 20 years. With the war in the middle east still driving high fuel prices, I am extending these tax cuts for motorists through the winter and spring to July, supporting households, hauliers and farmers. For anyone who relies on their car for work, from care workers to engineers, I am increasing the higher mileage rate from 25p to 35p per mile, and I am making permanent the increase to the standard mileage rate introduced earlier this year. In this Budget, I am acting on other costs, too. To help with the weekly shop, I am suspending tariffs on over 100 supermarket products to keep prices down. For pensioners, I am delivering the new pension tax allowance, so that pensioners with income of up to the value of the full new state pension will not pay income tax in this Parliament. For ex-mineworkers, I am guaranteeing that every penny of the pension fund surplus now goes to miners. I know the job is not done, and I will go on to ensure the full transfer of the guarantor’s fund. For carers, I am getting rid of the cliff edge on earnings, so that people do not lose their entire carer’s allowance when they earn a penny over the threshold. For 2.3 million of our lowest-paid workers, I am increasing both the national minimum wage and the national living wage by 3.9%. I know that, for families, the worst thing is feeling that their kids are missing out—even on little things—because money is tight. So today I am announcing £15 million for organisations like Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library and BookTrust, which give books to children. I have heard calls for pay transparency on job adverts to close the gender pay gap, and we will act soon to make sure that women are paid and promoted fairly. This Labour Government are determined to make the economy work better for all families, so I have listened to representations from colleagues across the House about paternity leave, and I am making a down payment on change today. As a mark of respect for their role, I will make self-employed fathers and partners eligible for paid parental leave for the first time. Since day one, I have said that I will be a Chancellor who champions the small British firms that give character to our communities: the bakeries, the cafés, the hair salons—they make the places we live and work the places we love. I want these businesses to invest, to recruit and to expand, so today I am taking action to support our high streets. In the first week of this Government, we cut 20% off business rates for pubs, clubs and music venues from April next year. I have heard calls from Members across this House and a call from one Member in particular—my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham)—so I am increasing the threshold for small business rate relief for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses from £12,000 to £18,000. That means for 70,000 more businesses, I am not just cutting their rates; I am taking them out of paying business rates altogether. That means half of our shops, restaurants and gyms will pay no business rates at all. For all other businesses in these sectors, I will freeze their rates in real terms so that none faces an above-inflation rise for the next two years. To pay for this support for our high streets, I am raising taxes on gambling by increasing machine games duty from 20% to 25% for higher-stakes machines, while protecting pubs and seaside arcades. I will carve out adult gaming centres and vape shops from business rate reliefs and extend the business rates transitional relief supplement for another two years. I will also strengthen the requirements for online marketplaces so that sellers cannot avoid paying VAT when they sell online. For those who feel like celebrating tax cuts for our high streets, I am providing a £10 million alcohol duty relief for around 2,000 small British brewers and British cider makers. Breathing space now, fresh hope for the future—delivered to the British people by this Labour Government. I have made my commitment to fiscal control clear, and every policy in this Budget is fully funded. I have begun by making sure that people pay the tax they owe when they owe it and by closing loopholes in our tax system. First, I am giving His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs funding to improve compliance and stronger powers to collect overdue tax from those who can clearly afford to pay but ignore repeated contact. I am reforming the administration of self-assessed income tax from 2029, bringing more of these taxpayers in line with the majority, so that they make smaller, more regular payments instead of facing large bills that are often harder to pay. Secondly, I am changing outdated rules so that people taking profits out of their companies are taxed consistently, and I will protect the treatment of genuine commercial transactions and families passing their businesses down to the next generation. Thirdly, I am modernising the tax treatment of investment by foreign sovereigns. This will bring UK rules more in line with other investment and other nations, while remaining still one of the most generous regimes in the world. Fourthly, I will resolve the question of VAT for larger taxi companies, ensuring they play by the same rules no matter where they are located, while still protecting smaller local firms. Providing support for British families and businesses has meant raising some tax to meet my commitment to fiscal discipline. I have done this in a balanced way, protecting the incentives for business investment and the incentives and income from work. I am maintaining full expensing in corporation tax for eligible assets. For other assets, I will provide greater up-front relief for new investment, increasing the main rate first-year allowance from 40% to 50%, while reducing the main writing down allowance rate from 14% to 12%. I am reducing the threshold for business asset disposal relief in capital gains tax from £1 million to £500,000, meaning no change for three in four claimants. I am increasing the rates of tax on income from property and savings by a further two percentage points from April 2027, with no change to tax on income from dividends and no change to tax on income from employment. Eighty-eight per cent of people will pay no more tax on their savings, and I am taking a new approach today to encourage people on ordinary incomes to save and to invest. I will not go ahead with the cut to the tax-free amount that people can put into a cash ISA. The limit will stay at £20,000 per year tax-free for people of all ages. To make investment more accessible, I will work with the sector to create a new “starter ISA” to reward first-time investors. Finally, let me turn to banks. Our world-leading banks make a huge contribution to this country—in the tax they pay and in the jobs, industry and investment they support. As Chancellor, I want to say directly to our banks: I celebrate, and am grateful for, the role that you play. Amid the global economic storms, I am looking to our banks to help fund breathing space for British families, so banks will pay an extra 3% on the bank surcharge. This will be time limited to pay for immediate support on energy bills, starting in January and ending 15 months later. I have made my choice at this Budget: asking a bit more of our banks to support ordinary people and raising taxes on gambling to support good growth on every high street. I challenge the Leader of the Opposition. Does she support today our support for British families and British firms, and does she back the action we are taking to pay for it? The only way we keep Britain’s families and Britain’s finances secure for the long term is with an economy that is growing strongly. Our country is one of the most innovative in the world. We have top-ranking universities, vibrant start-ups and deep capital markets. Just today I can announce over £1 billion of new life sciences investment from Kindeva, Vertex and Convatec, backed by almost £70 million of Government funding, and supporting over 1,000 jobs. I can announce that Rolls-Royce will develop its next generation of turbine engine technology here in the UK, in partnership with this Government—a £2.5 billion investment supporting thousands of jobs across the midlands, Bristol and the UK. I want to build on our strengths to unleash the innovation power of Britain to drive competition and raise profits in British business—drawing a line on the costs holding business back with stronger public control, as I have done today on energy; proudly backing Britain’s entrepreneurs to succeed; and unlocking the potential of every part of this country with a new wave of devolution. The biggest barrier to fast-growth firms here in Britain is investment here in Britain. In today’s Budget, I am boosting investment through our public financial institutions, with a further £20.4 billion for the National Wealth Fund and the British Business Bank over the coming years, supporting 140,000 jobs. I will work with pension providers, asset managers and the wider industry to accelerate more private investment into Britain’s innovative, fast-growth firms. We will prevent regulation from holding back investment by removing regulation and tariffs worth £800 million to business. We will legislate for a regulatory carve-out so that innovative products such as drones and medicines can be safely tested and rapidly scaled. I am re-establishing the Better Regulation Executive to cut outdated regulations and admin burdens on businesses and workers—scrapped by the Tories; re-established by this Labour Government. I am determined that we use public procurement to back British businesses, buy British goods and promote British exports, so I am expanding challenge-led procurement, just as I did in Defence, so that the Government can be the first customer for innovative firms. I am developing a new definition of UK supplier, to identify companies that are creating genuine wealth, genuine investment and jobs here in Britain. [Interruption.]

   Hansard source
10. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

    Financial Statement and Budget Report

    Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Nowhere is the necessary role for the state clearer than in artificial intelligence, and we must forge a British way to seize opportunities and guard against risks that is based on security. We are already world leaders in AI safety and security, which today’s Budget backs with an extra half a billion pounds. It is based on sovereignty, with our first-of-its-kind sovereign AI unit protecting UK interests by channelling Government investment into strategic British AI firms, backed today with another £140 million. To ensure that our most sensitive data stays under British control, I am setting out a new deal for data centres in the UK. When the NHS uses AI to treat patients, we want that data here. When our armed forces use AI to keep us safe, we want that data here. So here’s the deal: I am today launching a new British data centre covenant with strict tests that data centres must meet to invest in local communities, create local jobs and protect local water supplies. In return, critical data centres will get the grid connections they need, and where necessary be allowed to build onsite generation while they wait. Built on sovereignty and security, I want to ensure that the British people can benefit from the huge potential upsides of AI, with a new AI challenge prize to find innovative uses for AI in public services, and the union learning fund to back workers. That is how Britain leads on AI: secure, safe and working for the British people. Let me turn to enterprise. Britain does not lack great entrepreneurs, but too often we invent the technologies that the world wants here in the UK, then see the jobs and profits go somewhere else. High-growth firms make up less than 1% of small and medium-sized businesses, and they generate more than half the output. From the start-ups of today to the scale-ups of tomorrow and the billion-pound companies of the 2030s, I want to see them succeed and stay in Britain. So for those just starting out, I am tripling the trading allowance—the amount someone can earn from a new venture tax-free—from £1,000 to £3,000. I am launching a new young entrepreneurs allowance, which will cover a year of living costs for young founders while they turn their ideas into businesses. As recommended by the women in tech taskforce, I am also announcing a new scale-up programme to support female founders, and the British Business Bank will double its commitments to women-led businesses and funds to £200 million. We need to get the best talent into our fast-growth firms, so I am reforming skilled worker visas and non-compete clauses in contracts, so that people who help build one successful company can move easily on to the next. Building on our world-leading enterprise management incentives scheme, today I am launching EMI2, doubling the generosity of the company share option plan so that more companies can hire and retain top talent as they grow. Let me say this to the men and women building their businesses in Britain: I know that starting a company means taking a risk, often leaving a secure job to build something when there is no guarantee that it will work. I believe that when business founders take that risk, build an exceptional company and create wealth for Britain, we should recognise that success and keep those people here to invest again. That is why today I am announcing founders’ relief, a brand new relief in capital gains tax, with a 10% rate on lifetime gains up to £10 million for the founders of our most successful firms. That is how we make Britain the place where the companies of the future are built: entrepreneurs backed by this Budget, investment backed by this Budget, talent backed by this Budget, innovation backed by this Budget, growth backed by this Budget, and delivered to the British people by this Labour Government. When I talk about unleashing Britain’s innovation power, I mean in every part of Britain. That is why we reformed the Treasury’s investment manual, the Green Book, so that we can invest in the potential of every town and city. That is what I do today in the west midlands with £10 million for a new market hall in Stafford; in the south-west with £10 million for Bristol’s Temple quarter and £3 million to help Plymouth’s young people get jobs in defence; in the east of England with new access to Government borrowing for the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation; and in the north with £15 million to upgrade the Leeds College of Building, £10 million for Bury’s indoor market, £20 million to restore Liverpool’s Littlewoods building and £3 million for a tech company incubator in the Don valley. I can announce that we will hold the next international investment summit in Gateshead in the spring. The devolved Governments will receive equivalent funding for the measures in this Budget, and today I am also investing directly in high-growth industries in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In Wales, there is £2.5 million for a science park in north Wales, £11 million for the Aberavon bridge and £30 million for Cardiff Parkway station; in Scotland, there is £18 million for advanced chip design led by Edinburgh University and £6 million for Glasgow’s Scottish event campus; and in Northern Ireland, there is £7.5 million for AI and cyber in Belfast. [Interruption.]

    Hansard source
11. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

    Financial Statement and Budget Report

    All power to your elbow, Madam Deputy Speaker. London is the UK’s economic powerhouse, but if our other great cities matched their counterparts in France and Germany, growth in this country would be transformed. Local leaders should not have to come cap in hand to Whitehall to build a new tram or a new concert hall, and when those projects lead to growing local companies and rising local incomes, it should be those same areas that keep the proceeds. This radical rewiring of the state is a dual mission, led by the Treasury and No. 10 North. In today’s Budget, I am announcing new good growth funds for mayors and incubator capital for areas without mayors. I am announcing flexible funding to invest in local economies, boosted by a further £1.5 billion of devolved loans for mayoral authorities—funds that will back projects such as the new Black Country metro extension, led by the Mayor of the West Midlands; the urban regeneration in Gateshead Quayside, led by the Mayor of the North East; and, in my home region, the reopening of Doncaster airport, led by the Mayor of South Yorkshire. This is unfinished business for me. As a Treasury Minister in the last Labour Government, I was proud to help create the regional development agencies. They delivered economic growth and local regeneration, before they were axed in 2010 by the Tory-Lib Dem coalition Government. But there is a further step that we never took—the most radical act of devolution in a generation: the devolution of tax revenues. That is the step I take today, alongside this Budget—a road map for fiscal devolution. For the first time, I am making the commitment that 100% of business rates will be retained locally by the end of the decade, so if local leaders help businesses to start and grow, more of the rates they pay will stay in that area. From next year, 20% of business rates revenues will go to mayors, and from 2028, a share of income tax receipts will go to mayors as well. Also from 2028, mayors and other strategic authorities will have new powers to introduce an overnight visitor levy. Taken together, these are long-term funding streams that they can use to back investment into big local infrastructure, so that more of the money that is raised locally can be invested and spent locally, on projects like the Trent sports district, led by the Mayor of the East Midlands, and the Bakerloo line extension, led by the Mayor of London. These are new powers for the people who know their areas best—not sentimentality, but supply side economics. It is the biggest wave of devolution in a generation, driving good growth in every postcode, delivered to the British people by this Labour Government. I decided on an early Budget to give the country a bit of breathing space, and to provide stability and direction in the face of speculation. We will continue to map out that direction for Britain through the Prime Minister’s 10-year plan and the spending review. The Labour party is the party of public services. Since 2024, we have rejected austerity, we have been rebuilding our public services with over £40 billion a year of extra day-to-day spending, and we are making our streets and borders safer, fixing crumbling classrooms, extending childcare and restoring our NHS, spending £37 billion more on health this year than in the last year of the last Conservative Government. Today I am accelerating our work to halve violence against women and girls, and setting up a new misogyny prevention fund, partnering with the private sector. I want to pay tribute to my Cabinet colleagues and thank them for everything they are doing, prioritising within their Department budgets in the face of tough fiscal constraints. In today’s Budget, I am fully funding the defence investment plan, including through capital reprioritisation across Whitehall. This honours the commitment made both by me and by the Prime Minister. As we look ahead to the spending review, we start from a position of strength, with spending at that higher base. There will be choices we have to make about priorities, as we have shown we can, and efficiencies we must deliver, as we have shown we can. Last year, Departments hit double their productivity and efficiency target, generating £16 billion of savings. Asylum costs, which tripled under the last Conservative Government, have been cut by £1 billion under this Labour Government. Strong public services and strong fiscal discipline are two pillars of our Labour approach, but delivering the next spending review will also require a fundamental rewiring of the state. First, a digital overhaul of Government. In the Budget today, I am investing in AI for the civil service transformation, to support saving a further £600 million from back-office costs. Alongside my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary, I am launching a review of NHS productivity and AI, so staff can spend their time with patients and not on admin. Secondly, streamlining the state through devolution, reducing the double running between central and local Government. Today’s Budget provides £100 million for a local apprenticeship service to match young people with local firms, funded from savings in welfare fraud and error. Thirdly, a new focus on prevention. Just as we ringfence capital spending to invest in future success, so at the next spending review I will ringfence prevention spending that brings down costs in the future, with new preventative departmental expenditure limits. When it comes to welfare, the last Conservative Government left a broken system—a broken system that we are changing. Bringing back face-to-face assessments, rebalancing universal credit so it does not force people to label themselves as too sick to work, reforming Motability and clamping down on those living abroad from accessing a UK state pension on the cheap, but there is more to do. I refuse to write off a million young people, like the last Conservative Government. I refuse to see disabled people suffer the indignities of a system that has been found “not fit for purpose”, and I refuse to allow the burden of paying for this failing system to fall on taxpayers for decades to come. As the Prime Minister and I have both said, we will bring down the welfare bill, and we will do it in a Labour way. Alan Milburn and the Timms panel will publish their final reports next month. This Government will then set out our response before the end of the year, with a White Paper and legislation to follow next year. The Prime Minister has already announced that from 2030 we will adjust the triple lock, so that the state pension rises every year and keeps pace with earnings and inflation. This will save £15 billion a year by the end of the 2030s—£50 billion by 2050. A new settlement for older generations: a rising state pension and a national care service that is there when older people need it, taking the burden off families and taking the burden off our NHS. Taken together, these reforms reject crude cuts that intensify cost of living pressures and drive up costs elsewhere in the system. Taken together, these reforms will rebuild our welfare system so that it supports people from youth into old age. This is our Labour approach—tackling long-term challenges, improving public services and restoring hope for the future. Let me now come to two more long-term challenges, First, defence. The week in Kyiv started with Russia launching another brutal ballistic missile attack on the city. This morning, the Prime Minister and I called President Zelensky to tell him about our commitments in the Budget. He told us, “You have made my day.” There will be £10 billion of additional economic and military support, based on loans, export finance guarantees and half a billion in urgent military funding for this winter. The whole House—the whole country—is united for Ukraine. Today, we send a clear message to Moscow: Britain will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes. In this new era of threat, the demands on our UK defence are rising. Keeping the people safe by equipping our armed forces is the first duty of any Government. I say this as Chancellor; as a former Defence Secretary; and as a dad whose son is an Army reservist—a reservist who came back four years ago from early training to say that they had no kit and no bullets to fire. That is the truth. For 14 years, Conservative Governments hollowed out and underfunded our armed forces. I am proud to be part of a Labour Government who have made the biggest increase in defence spending since the end of the cold war. This year, our defence budget is £14 billion higher than it was in the Conservatives’ last year of government. At the spending review next year, I confirm that I will set out the details of how we will meet our NATO commitment to spend 3.5% of GDP on defence by 2035, with a target date for 3% in 2030. Today, I am getting work under way to get there in a fiscally sustainable way. That will include looking hard at public spending, as I have done today to fund the defence investment plan, but I am also determined to use more innovative financing, alongside the private sector and our international allies. First, I am launching today the new innovative defence finance taskforce to lead this work ahead of the spending review. Secondly, I am now confirming that we will commence treaty negotiations on the multilateral defence mechanism—or bank—with Finland, Poland, and the Netherlands to boost defence investment and joint procurement across NATO allies. Thirdly, we will expand our defence industrial base by getting the maximum amount of private investment into defence, including through public-private partnerships. Fourthly, as an immediate step, I can tell the House that the national wealth fund and the British Business Bank will launch a new focus on defence, dual-use technology and sovereign capability, deploying up to £5 billion of investment and lending over the next four years. I will ensure this record defence investment works twice: once for our national security, and once for British jobs and British business. Places across all four nations—Barrow, Rosyth, Aldershot, Plymouth, Glascoed and Belfast—reindustrialised and transformed. Security for our nation, jobs for our people, fresh hope for the future—delivered for Britain by this Labour Government. Let me now turn to housing. On Monday, the Prime Minister and I met Les at the Connection project at St Martin-in-the-Fields, just a stone’s throw from this Chamber. He had spent three months sleeping on the streets; now, he has a room, medical help and a bit of hope for the future. Les told me: “Now I have the chance, I want to make something of my life.” Anne, the nurse at the project, put it this way. She said that they “put the team around the person”. That is what we will do as a nation. The Conservatives did promise to end rough sleeping, yet when they left office it had doubled. Ten years ago, as shadow Housing Secretary, I argued that rough sleeping was a shame on the nation. I said it could be solved, but only with national will. Government can fix this, if they choose, and this Government have chosen. We have already promised everyone sleeping rough a route off the streets this winter, and today, I confirm a further £430 million to keep that offer open for the rest of this Parliament—not just this winter, but every winter. This is a moral mission for me, a moral mission for the Prime Minister and a moral mission for the Labour party. Home is the heart of all our lives. It is the foundation on which we raise our families and build our hopes. Rough sleeping is the sharp end—a symptom of a system that feels broken to too many people. Since the 1980s, Britain has lost over 2 million council homes. Tonight, more than 170,000 children will sleep in temporary accommodation. Two in five young people are trapped, paying more than a third of their income in rent while they watch their hopes of buying their own home slip away. I am taking action today to deal with immediate pressures and taking decisions to start to deal with the long-term challenges. To get more homes built, I am drawing the line on constant changes to building regulations. There will be no major changes to building regulations in this Parliament, except where critical for safety, and I am removing biodiversity requirements for more brownfield sites. To get more council homes built, I am extending cheaper borrowing for councils and making all land sold to social housing providers VAT-free. Today, I am providing an additional £1.5 billion for the social and affordable housing programme, taking our total Government commitment backing council housing to £40 billion. The Conservatives sold off our council houses; Labour is now building them back. Finally, for every young person who is working hard, saving what they can and dreaming of their first home, I am taking action. I am announcing that a first-time buyer ISA will replace the lifetime ISA. From today, I am dealing with the LISA penalty, so that if the home you want costs more than the limit, you will get back at least what you put in. And I am going further. From next spring, we have a new scheme for first-time buyers who do not have the bank of mum and dad behind them: Your First Home—an equity loan scheme, which I am funding today with £4.7 billion of Government-backed lending. Hope starts with a home. A route off the streets, a secure home to raise your kids, the keys to your own front door—delivered to the British people by this Labour Government. This is a Labour Budget for the worker, the sole trader, the parent at the school gate, and the young person desperate to start their first job or start their first business. These are my choices: raising revenue from those who can afford to pay; no tax rises on wages or dividends; and cutting taxes for millions of families and businesses. Just as the British people helped to support our banks 20 years ago, it is our banks that will help to give families breathing space today. For our high streets, it is gaming machines and vape shops that will help to provide the funding for our pubs, shops and cafés to thrive—breathing space now, while taking the long-term action to get costs down for good. The decisions I have taken today will help to steer Britain through. When the storms pass, what matters is where Britain is heading—a Britain reindustrialised; a Britain with power returned to communities, threats deterred and global opportunities seized. In our first 100 days, this Labour Government have set a course for fresh hope, good growth and support for those who need it. We know who we are, and we know where we are going. [Interruption.]

    Hansard source
12. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Healey

    Financial Statement and Budget Report

    We know who we are, and we know where we are going. We can see the Britain we want to be. It is a vision burned into every line of this Budget statement—breathing space now, fresh hope for the future, delivered to the British people by this Labour Government. I commend this statement to the House. Provisional Collection of Taxes Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 51(2)), That, pursuant to section 5 of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act 1968, provisional statutory effect shall be given to the following motions:— (a) Stamp duty land tax (local government pension scheme pools) (motion no. 49); (b) Stamp duty land tax (withdrawal of group relief) (motion no. 51); (c) Value added tax (electric vehicle charging) (motion no. 55).—(John Healey.) Question agreed to.

    Hansard source
13. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Grady

    Clean Energy Projects

    4. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to support clean energy projects in Scotland.

    Hansard source
14. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·John Grady

    Clean Energy Projects

    Large clean energy projects and transmission project lines need planning consent from the Scottish Government. Delays mean that Scottish electricity consumers pay more. In a recent report, CBI Scotland says: “Planning is the concern business leaders across Scotland raise with us most consistently, and the frustrations they describe are…too much inconsistency, not enough speed” and a growing sense that planning has become a barrier to investment and growth—a responsibility of the Scottish Government. Does the Minister agree that the Scottish Government need to get a grip on the planning system?

    Hansard source
15. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Johanna Baxter

    Engagements

    Q3. Last week, the US special envoy to Ukraine described Vladimir Putin as a “humanitarian”. My constituents were horrified that our closest ally could use such words for a man wanted by the International Criminal Court for the systematic abduction of 20,651 Ukrainian children. The following day, my constituency welcomed the Ukrainian Member of Parliament for Poltava with open arms and a determination to deepen our solidarity and co-operation. Will the Prime Minister remind our American partners that appeasement, flattery and sanction-dodging deals will only embolden Putin and risk further aggression to our NATO allies?

    Hansard source
16. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim Dickson

    Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation

    It is always a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart). He is always very entertaining, and I am always intrigued by how there seems to be an inverse ratio between the number of interventions he makes and the number he takes. I reassure him that on the lousy predecessor test, this Government were truly blessed in 2024 by the former right hon. Member for South West Norfolk and the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak).

    Hansard source
17. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim Dickson

    Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation

    I welcome the Budget, and it is a pleasure to follow distinguished members of the Treasury Committee from across the Chamber. As others have noted, when the IMF published its most recent forecast, it highlighted how despite the consequences of US military action in Iran, our economy is proving more resilient than expected, with 1.3% growth for this year and similar for next. That is largely underscored by the OBR forecast. I back our Government to exceed those forecasts, as they have done this year, and we wish them well in doing so. We should not underplay the damage done by the conflict, with price rises in important commodities such as oil and fertilisers pushing up inflation, but it is positive that the IMF has upgraded our growth prospects. That, I believe, is a testament to the work of the current and previous Chancellors, and it is welcome that we remain towards the top end of the G7 for growth, even though—as always—Members of the House would want growth to be higher, and we hope very much that it is. In my view, it remains essential to reassure the markets that we will stick to the fiscal rules, and I welcome the Chancellor’s pledge today to keep doing so. We must ensure that we continue to keep sufficient headroom against those rules, and again the Chancellor has done that.That was recognised by the IMF, which singled out the UK among the G7 for the way that we are managing our debts. As shown in chart 3.4 in the Red Book, which sets out the distributional impact of the Budget, we are doing that while ensuring that those at the bottom end of the income scale do better proportionally than those higher up the income scale. I believe that means this is a proper Budget for working people. This careful and fair economic management will allow us to ramp up defence spending to meet the spending target of 3% by 2030, after our armed forces, frankly, languished under the previous Government.

    Hansard source
18. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim Dickson

    Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation

    I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, but I am very confident that the plans laid out today will take us to 3% by the end of this Parliament, and to 3.5% by the middle of the next decade. That is what we have committed to do and that is what I believe we will do.

    Hansard source
19. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim Dickson

    Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation

    The situation that the right hon. Gentleman is describing sounds like what pertained for the previous 14 years. We are turning that around. Since the 2024 election, this Government have demonstrated a clear strategy to get on and fix the foundations of our country, most obviously in public spending, that had fractured under the previous Administration, and that includes defence spending. The Budget is built on long-term investment in infrastructure and crucial new projects. Nowhere is that better illustrated than in my constituency, in north Kent, where the funding for the lower Thames crossing—public funding, supporting big private sector investment of over £10 billion—will make such a difference to Dartford residents once it is complete. The Chancellor’s announcement that he is expanding support to businesses and infrastructure projects through the National Wealth Fund and the British Business Bank is most welcome, and it has the potential for an investment boost right across the UK. As a tangible, practical example of how investment can make a difference in our constituencies, I commend the spending review that saw the announcement of the structures fund to invest in distressed transport assets across the country that were beyond the capacity of local authorities to repair. In Dartford, we hope to hear that funding has been allocated to repair the collapsed Galley Hill Road, which links Dartford with Gravesend, in the coming weeks. As the Chancellor made clear, and as other hon. Members have pointed out, another long-term impact of the situation in the middle east is the rise in energy bills, which is likely to affect all of us over this winter. I remain extremely worried about the impact that will have, particularly on the most vulnerable households. Only this week, EDF Energy put out a new forecast that has the average household energy bill rising by more than a quarter, to £2,192 per year in January and potentially even higher in April. Clearly the blame for these price rises should be put squarely on the architect of the conflict between the US and Iran. I welcome all the work that this Government have done since 2024 to begin to transform our energy system. I welcome very much today’s announcement that standing charges will be removed from gas bills next year, and the additional £100 of support for all those living in homes in council tax bands A to D, which will support over 35,000 households in Dartford over the next year. It may or may not be true, but I heard that Conservative spokespeople were taking to the airwaves following the Budget to say that they opposed the £100 discount. If that is the case, I think it is wrong and disgraceful. However, I hope that Ministers will look further at what we can do to shield the most vulnerable and accelerate the work to break the link between increasingly volatile gas prices and the prices that we pay for electricity. I have also been among those calling for more support on business rates for small businesses. I am really pleased to hear about the changes that will see many cafés, shops and pubs taken out of business rates entirely, paid for rightly by a rise in machine games duty. I think most of us in this House can support that tax. In my previous life as a local councillor, I saw the growing levels of homelessness on our streets, as I do now, and the dire consequences for those stuck there. It is therefore right that the Government are putting in place funding for the rest of the Parliament to offer a route off the streets to anyone sleeping rough. We have needed a comprehensive strategy to tackle rough sleeping for the past 14 or 15 years, and we finally have one. I also support the proposed changes to bring in a first-time buyer ISA to replace the lifetime ISA. I look forward to more details on the Your First Home scheme, which I believe will be a boost to new developments such as those in Ebbsfleet Garden City in my constituency. I am really pleased to see that the Red Book published along with today’s Budget confirms the formation of either a mayoral or foundation strategic authority for Kent. That is important news for our region. If a foundation authority or a mayor was in place, for instance, they could find the investment to ensure that we bring international rail services back to Kent after they were lost six years ago.

    Hansard source
20. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim Dickson

    Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation

    I believe that the same case is being made strongly to Ministers on exactly that point by Members of all parties, not least Members on the Labour Benches—I have heard it being made myself. That really underscores how important devolution is. Every part of the country needs local powers and the ability to invest, which a foundation authority or a mayoral strategic authority gives. I wish the hon. Gentleman good luck with that, and I hope that it is made available to Gloucestershire as soon as possible. Devolution remains the right thing to do from both an economic and a democratic perspective, bringing decisions closer to people and giving our regions—Kent, in my case, but there are others across the House—more power over our future. I believe that residents in Dartford will welcome the measures in this Budget, not only for the short-term relief that they bring, but for the promises to keep our economy growing in a sustainable way into the future.

    Hansard source
21. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jessica Toale

    Higher Education Funding

    I thank my hon. Friend for setting out the real challenges that our higher education institutions face. Does she agree that the difficult financial position universities are in is causing them to oversubscribe their courses, putting unsustainable pressures on their workforce, reducing the student experience and increasing financial instability as a result of that boom and bust?

    Hansard source
22. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

    Higher Education Funding

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) for securing this debate. Access to higher education can be life changing for young people. However, this opportunity is already harder to grasp for young people in Cornwall. Students face the high costs of travelling from remote, disconnected areas or, if they stay local, the high costs of private renting in a tourism-heavy region. Students across the south-west face the second highest monthly living costs in the UK, at £1,212 per month, which is only £114 less than London. These financial barriers directly impact whether young people pursue higher education. While the 2025 UK-wide entry rate for 18-year-olds was 36.3%, the rate in the south-west was joint lowest at 30%, and in Truro and Falmouth it was 27.2%, which is the lowest rate on record since 2016. Having universities close by with a variety of courses and offerings is key for young people in Cornwall to be able to access the higher education opportunities. HE is an investment in place, and nowhere more so than in Cornwall. It leads to economic growth, productivity and innovation, including higher wages, skills and regional development. There are ongoing funding concerns in relation to higher education institutions in Cornwall, and it is integral that support for these vital institutions is considered. Losing higher education opportunities there, especially with the campus that is across the border in the constituency of the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), means that Cornish students risk losing out on these opportunities. Falmouth University, which began in my constituency, offers traditional creative arts alongside technical and entrepreneurial courses and produces nearly 7,000 highly-skilled graduates each year. Tuition fee income does not meet the costs of delivering these degrees, particularly in creative and technical universities like Falmouth. That leaves universities with a difficult choice: sacrifice their core academic delivery for research investment or engage with more corporates. Government funding is cost-intensive to obtain and competitive, and frequent changes to Government funding models make it very hard to plan effectively. Specialist institutions like Falmouth are unevenly affected by those higher costs to secure fewer grants. Funding for these integral institutions cannot fall by the wayside. They offer local employment opportunities, produce wider economic benefits and give young people in Cornwall a tangible place to pin their aspirations. I welcome the Government’s reintroduction of funding for higher education through targeted, means-tested maintenance grants, which will support low-income students from deprived areas to access and excel in higher education. We need to ensure that funding for a diverse range of courses that allow young people to gain skills and access to new experiences is accessible, realistic and enables the higher education sector to continue to foster ambition in Truro and Falmouth, Cornwall, the south-west and across the UK.

    Hansard source
23. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

    Higher Education Funding

    It is important to note that in the 1980s, only about 10% of people went to university. The Blair Government opened that up to 50% of the population, and that is worth putting on the record.

    Hansard source
24. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Janet Daby

    Budget Resolutions and Economic Situation

    Unlike the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood), I commend and welcome today’s Budget. My contribution will be around cost of living support, care leavers’ support and NHS funding, in particular funding for sickle cell emergency bypass units. I put it on the record that I am chair of the all-party parliamentary group on sickle cell and thalassaemia. I welcome that the Chancellor and the Prime Minister have prioritised the cost of living. Since Liz Truss’s disastrous mini-Budget, my constituents have faced high prices and rising interest rates. In 2023, an estimated 11.5% of my constituents were in fuel poverty, over 2% higher than the London average. As fuel costs rise, that figure can only increase. That is why I welcome the Chancellor’s confirmation today that he is temporarily removing VAT on electricity bills this in winter. Further, the announcement of the £100 discount for council tax bands A to D means that most of my vulnerable constituents—in fact, over 45,000 of them—will benefit from that funding to help them stay warmer this winter. I also welcome the Chancellor’s help to make bills fairer by scrapping fees added to gas bills. That will all help people to maintain a decent standard of living. That leads me on to care leavers, who are some of our nation’s most vulnerable young people. Some of them face life’s highest barriers. The Nuffield Foundation found that 40% of care leavers aged 19 to 21 were NEETs, compared with 30% among the same age group in the general population. The Children’s Commissioner found that 25% of care leavers experienced homeless in the first two years of leaving care. I ask the Treasury to consider care leavers aged 18 to 24 living independently, who receive the same benefit rate as other people aged under 25. Most under-25s live at home, yet both groups receive the same rate of benefit. I ask the Chancellor to work with the Department for Work and Pensions to consider paying care leavers the rate of benefits for the over-25s to support them with their independent living. The other issue is that care leavers who are in work often experience in-work poverty because of the rent and bills that they have to pay. The information from the Chancellor today helps care leavers, but there is still more to do. I cannot but mention the Bakerloo line, which I was pleasantly surprised to hear mentioned in the Chancellor’s speech. I thank the Chancellor for backing the Bakerloo line coming to south-east London. His announcement will allow the Mayor of London to retain income tax receipts, which will allow him to invest in this vital infrastructure project in Lewisham and south-east London to improve transport links. That will have a positive impact on our economy. I also welcome the £37 billion spend on our NHS. The Chancellor spoke of spending £37 billion more on health next year compared with the last year of the last Conservative Government, and I applaud that. We need to do more to bring down NHS A&E waiting lists and get rid of corridor care, to name a few things, but I wish to focus on the benefits of funding for specialised health services—namely, sickle cell bypass units. There are currently seven such units in total in London and in the north of England, one of which is at my local hospital in Lewisham. I have spoken to the amazing staff and seen the provision of care there. Sickle cell disorder is the fastest growing genetic condition in the UK. Around 19,000 people live with it, and roughly 250 babies are born with it each year. It causes sudden and excruciating pain. More needs to be done to ensure that we fund the right provisions and units to ensure that that provision continues for people who have sickle cell disorder. I ask the Government to carry on working to ensure that sickle cell bypass units continue to be provided in those seven places and are more spread out across the country.

    Hansard source
25. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·James Naish

    Higher Education Funding

    My hon. Friend will be aware of there being around 600 job cuts at the University of Nottingham. There have been alternative proposals from staff—120 in total—but the impact will be significant. What has been noticeable in my conversations with the university is the emphasis on commercial elements, whether that is covenants, 30 days’ access to cash or access to a revolving credit facility. Does she agree that that emphasis has gone too far? We have forgotten what the public benefit of universities is, and the Government and universities need to reflect on that.

    Hansard source
26. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West (Mr Barros-Curtis) for securing this incredibly important debate and raising these issues, both in the Chamber and outside of it with me and others in the weeks preceding the debate. I start, as many have, by paying tribute to my hon. Friend’s constituent Sian, who is here today. She has shown extraordinary courage in fighting to make sure that the death of her daughter, Keely, was not in vain, and to make changes to improve the country for others. We should applaud her for that. It is not easy, and it is hugely admirable. I want to apologise Sian, too, because she wrote to me, through her Member of Parliament, and did not receive a prompt response. There has been an error in my office. That is unacceptable, and I am getting to the bottom of it. I look forward to meeting her later today, hopefully to talk about the substantive issue, but also to apologise to her personally. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean). I met him and the Watermans, and it is good to see Derek and Sue here again today. After that meeting, I committed to raise the specific issues of their campaign and the tragic death of Jess with the then Roads Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood). I did so in writing and then met her, her officials and her special advisers, who are political appointees in the Department for Transport, to make sure that those issues are really high on the agenda as the Government’s strategy on road safety comes into force. There is more that we can do; this is work in progress. The Roads Minister has changed since then, but I have also met the current Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders)—indeed, because of the debate today, I wrote to him again this morning—to make sure that the campaigns and issues we are talking about are right at the top of his agenda. I am not trying to duck the issues raised during the debate, but some of them are for the Department for Transport. I will try to address as many of them as possible and, of course, to deal with the sentencing aspects, but if I cannot address an issue, I will make sure that the Member who raised it gets a written response from the Roads Minister, who deals with some of the road safety issues.

    Hansard source
27. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    Critically, it is not for my Department to consider it, but the Department for Transport is certainly looking at it and is alive to the international evidence that has been raised by a number of Members. I cannot get ahead of what the Roads Minister will set out, but I will make sure that he has heard the contributions to this debate. I thank hon. Members from all parties for raising difficult cases, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh). I was not aware of the work that Debbie has done around Lillie’s tragic death, so it was very moving to hear about that, and particularly about the café, which so many people will enjoy in her memory. I am very happy to meet Debbie if that would be helpful to her—or, indeed, I will get the Roads Minister to meet her if that would be more beneficial.

    Hansard source
28. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    I look forward to Debbie marching into my office. Victims do not want to meet with a conveyor belt of Ministers from all different Departments. It is important that we have those meetings, because it is important that victims are heard and it is important for us to understand that behind every statistic in every paper we get to read in our ministerial boxes is a human life and a human tragedy, and I look forward to meeting her in due course, but what victims want is action. I hope that as I develop my speech, she will be reassured that we are taking these issues seriously and taking action. Many other Members, some of whom made interventions and are longer here, raised important cases. It struck me, having been a Member of Parliament for only just over two years, that MPs get exposed to aspects of our country that normal citizens perhaps do not, and one of them is the prevalence and tragedy of road deaths. MPs are often notified if there has been an accident or if a criminal offence committed on our roads has led to a serious injury or death, and that happens far too regularly in our country. When you meet the families, as I have done in my Rother Valley constituency, it stays with you. I am determined to play my role to try to bring about safer roads. I turn to the sentencing framework, because there has been some conflation of death by careless driving and death by dangerous driving. I am certainly not trying to educate Members, but it is my responsibility to set out the regime as it is today. Hon. Members know that sentencing within the framework that is set out in legislation is rightly a matter for the independent courts. Judges consider the facts of each case, weigh up any aggravating and mitigating factors, and follow relevant Sentencing Council guidelines before arriving at a sentence that is just and proportionate. Some of the issues that have emerged in this debate are perhaps less about sentencing—although some certainly are about sentencing—than about the charging decision. I discussed this with my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford and the Watermans. The CPS charging decision—the decision about what offence a defendant is charged with—is, and obviously should be, made independently of the Government, but the victims need to be involved in that decision. I am not saying that the CPS should do what they say, but it should involve them and communicate and engage with them. Too often, I meet victims of road traffic offences and other offences who simply have not been engaged with at all. I am talking to the Victims Minister to ensure that the CPS, where it can and where it is appropriate, is communicating with victims to make sure that the charging decision is the right one. The law must reflect both the harm caused and how responsible the offender was for causing it, because while two drivers can cause the same terrible outcome, they may have done so through very different actions. That does not, of course, make one family’s loss any less than another’s, but the law has to distinguish between those different levels of blame. Let me turn to the offences themselves. The most serious driving offence is causing death by dangerous driving. That is where someone’s driving falls far below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver, and where the danger should have been obvious. We are talking here about things such as excessive speed, racing and dangerous overtaking. For offences committed since June 2022, as mentioned by the spokesperson for the official Opposition, the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan), the maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is now life imprisonment. There is also a minimum five-year driving disqualification and a compulsory extended driving test before an offender can return to the road. Those are tough penalties, and rightly so. They give judges the power to impose the most serious punishment in the very worst cases. There is also the offence of causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving. That covers driving that falls below the expected standard but does not reach the higher threshold for dangerous driving. The maximum sentence is a five-year imprisonment, alongside a minimum 12-month driving ban. I raise the issue of the CPS because, of course, what the defendant is charged with is what the judge and the court can deal with. The charging decision is often just as important to get right for victims, families and wider society as the final sentencing, which then may not seem fair or sufficient to victims. The distinction between dangerous and careless driving is really important in our law, although of course I recognise that it is difficult for grieving families to accept that when, clearly, the loss they have suffered is exactly the same. I want to deal with some of the specifics that have been raised in the debate, in particular by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West, about driving disqualification and whether there should be automatic disqualification—I think the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt) also raised that. That is part of live discussions that I have had with the Department for Transport. It strikes me—I am very happy to put this on the record—that I have come across too many cases where driving disqualification is not taken seriously as part of the punishment. Often, a ban runs concurrently with a prison sentence, so there is the absurd situation that someone obviously cannot drive while they are in prison, and then they get out and they have never had any disqualification from driving at all. I raised this issue in a meeting with the chair of the Sentencing Council; perhaps it was after the meeting with the Watermans that I raised it personally with the chair. I am not breaching any state secrets when I say that she was not persuaded, but I have asked the Sentencing Council to look again. The DFT is looking at the evidence to ensure that we have evidence-based policy, and I will continue pushing to see how we can ensure the judiciary use driving disqualification in a more muscular fashion. The judiciary has the power to act. In this case, there is an issue about automating, but the judiciary has the power to implement lifelong driving bans, yet too often they seem not to be considered. I am not criticising our independent judges—I would never do that—but we must consider what we need to do as a Government and as a Parliament, while also considering the Sentencing Council’s role, in pushing this issue forward.

    Hansard source
29. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that Parliament could pass a law to introduce an automatic driving ban, but I think he was referring to a ban after conviction for dangerous driving. Automating such a ban before conviction would be more complex. There is a general principle. As a Government, like Governments before us, we try to allow judicial discretion. Every case is different. I accept the hon. Gentleman’s point; I am not trying to hide from the argument. The judges have the power. We need to get and understand the evidence on how often they use it and why they are not using it. Legislating to force judges’ hands can lead to further absurdities and injustices in very different ways. We allow judicial discretion because every case is different, but as I say, I accept the point.

    Hansard source
30. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    The hon. Lady is right to raise the duration of the period before trial or conviction; too often, it is far too long, but solving this problem is not as straightforward as potentially suspending someone immediately after the event. As she is no doubt aware, often very complex investigations have to take place. Of course, suspension can be a bail condition, and I am trying to assess why in too many cases it is not used. I remember a case raised with me by my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes), in which someone had been bailed for causing death by dangerous driving—I think that is correct. They immediately got in a car and were convicted of drunk driving just a few hours later. That is absurd. More generally, we have to start taking driving offences, whether they are low level or high level, more seriously. The road safety strategy seeks to do that, and we want to get on with it. I am pushing the Roads Minister to work with me to make sure that seriousness of these offences is reflected in sentencing guidelines as much as possible. As well as sentencing, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West spoke about graduated driving licensing. I hope I have dealt with that issue; it is on the agenda. It is very much a DFT issue, so I do not want to comment too much on it. On sentencing guidelines, I am in a constitutional dialogue with the Sentencing Council on lots of issues and that is one of them. I will be careful what else I say about it, but I am very much alive to it. I am also very alive to the ULS scheme. The Law Commission is working on the ULS scheme, as my hon. Friend no doubt knows from his time working with the Law Officers. We need to assess whether death by careless driving should be added to the list of offences that can be considered under the scheme. I can commit today to doing that.

    Hansard source
31. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    I am happy to write to the Law Commission to ask whether to consider that specific issue. I am going to consider it anyway. I want the Law Commission to do it—evidence would be helpful—but we will work with the Attorney General’s office to do that none the less. There will no doubt be some effects to that, but let us see what we can do. My hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West talked last about prevention. Again, at its heart the road safety strategy tries to reach its 65% reduction target by through prevention. There is a serious amount of investment. This is the first road safety strategy in a decade, and it is backed with, I think, £18 million in prevention work, which is not an insignificant sum. We would like to do more, but I know that my hon. Friend the Roads Minister will work hard. In terms of other questions from Members about the road safety strategy more generally, it is not my strategy, so it is difficult for me to comment on timings and when that will be. I will ask my hon. Friend the Roads Minister to write to Members who have raised specific questions and make sure that my office gets in touch with him on that.

    Hansard source
32. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    The hon. Lady raises a wider point about defendant conduct during a criminal investigation and how that should be taken into account in the sentencing. There are mechanisms by which that is done already. The judge considers a large number of factors, including whether the defendant has taken responsibility for their actions. If they have undertaken a “no comment” interview consistently, and simply not engaged with the criminal investigation process, that should be taken into account in sentencing.

    Hansard source
33. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    I think the Lord Chancellor announced last week further action on getting defendants to face up to their actions as much as is possible. Frankly, that is what we are talking about. We cannot force a defendant to give answers if they do not want to, but that can certainly be reflected in the sentencing regime, and it is reflected in the sentencing regime. If there are any other suggestions about how we can go further, I would be more than happy to hear from the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills, as a member of the Justice Committee. She always gives me the signal that she will write to me, and I look forward to responding to her in due course.

    Hansard source
34. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jake Richards

    Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

    No. Too often, families feel let down by the justice system in lots of different ways, whether by the final sentence, by the way they were treated, or, in the case that my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West raises, by misinformation being given about options at the end. That can cause huge damage. I am not criticising the individuals in that case; they are hard-working individuals and it is a complex area of law. We just need to get some of the basics right to make the system as amenable as humanly possible for victims when they are navigating the most traumatic time in their lives. Too often it is not. I accept that point in relation to sentences as well. We are in a complex constitutional relationship. I am not going to criticise independent judges or the sentences given in any individual case—it would be wrong of me to do so—but I accept that too often victims feel that justice has not been done. When I knock on doors in my constituency, road safety is top of my constituents’ priority list, and that is the case in so many places, especially in rural villages, as the hon. Member for Cardiff West said. There is a real disconnect between the prioritisation of road safety and how often we talk about it in this place. If we can all do our bit to raise these issues—with me, but also across Government—we will be doing a service to the country and even more so to victims. I thank everyone here today, particularly those in the Public Gallery. I look forward to continuing this discussion and to taking action in the coming weeks and months.

    Hansard source
35. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Imran Hussain

    The Global Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Sanctions Regulations 2026

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. Like other colleagues, I welcome these important regulations. They strengthen our firm commitment to international humanitarian law and make it clear that there will be consequences for those who breach those laws. I also welcome the wider change in direction announced by the Foreign Secretary recently. However, as has been made clear, the regulations are only enabling powers. They do not in themselves sanction a single individual or company. The real test will be how effectively Ministers use the regulations. The predecessor regulations were used very effectively, and continue to be, with widespread sanctions against Russia. We must now see these regulations, with their widened scope, used for widespread sanctions against Israel for its war crimes and breach of international humanitarian law. Again, I welcome the fact that the Government have acknowledged the unlawful occupation, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the west bank by settler terrorists, and the increasing evidence of war crimes in Gaza. We must now act to stop the war crimes. It is clear that we cannot continue to allow the people, companies and institutions sustaining them to retain access to British finance and markets without consequences. To be clear, we cannot stop at a handful of sanctions against violent settlers or apply them only to future expansions. The existing settlement system is unlawful and sustained by a wider machinery: Ministers and state bodies, banks, construction and property companies, and technology companies providing surveillance, used daily against Palestinians. I therefore have a number of questions for the Minister. Will he make it clear that these powers target those maintaining existing settlements, as well as those expanding them? The E1 bids can be opened from 19 November, yet no E1-related designations had been announced as of yesterday. Will he confirm that designation cases are being prepared by the Government and that the Government will act before the tender advances any further? Will he confirm that banks, contractors, technology companies and others involved in supporting the E1 project and the wider settlement enterprise will be included? Will the Minister also confirm that the new powers will be used against those responsible for and involved in obstructing humanitarian aid to Gaza? Will he confirm—this was referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Riverside (Kim Johnson)—that the new powers will be used against those who are involved in the serious and arbitrary arrest and unlawful detention of Palestinian children? Can he also set out the timetable for all of the above? Once again, I am very grateful to you, Mr Stringer.

    Hansard source
36. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Lavery

    Rugby League Clubs

    I congratulate my hon. Friend for securing this important debate to Westminster Hall. My constituency, Blyth and Ashington, is well renowned for some world-class sportsmen—as it is commonly said, “You shout down the pit shaft, and world-class sportsmen will emerge.” Given my hon. Friend’s great wisdom and knowledge of rugby league, I wonder if he could say why, despite it being a traditionally working-class sport and despite the many opportunities, rugby league has not flourished areas such as mine in working-class Northumberland.

    Hansard source
37. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Byrne

    The Global Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Sanctions Regulations 2026

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. First I want to pay tribute to Father Bashar, a Palestinian priest who spoke so movingly this afternoon about his experiences of settler violence in his town of Taybeh in the west bank. What he said about what people were living through was extremely moving. I welcome the Government’s regulations to extend our sanctions framework to serious violations of international humanitarian law. The Foreign Secretary rightly warned businesses on 19 October not to accept tenders relating to the expansion of illegal settlements in the E1 area of the west bank. Yet, as I understand it, the UK sanctions list shows no new designations connected to that warning since the regulations came into force. The warnings will only be as strong as the action that follows. The regulations we are discussing today give the Foreign Secretary the power to enforce his calls. I raise that in the context of charities. It has been reported that a UK charity gave around £5.7 million between 2017 and 2021 to a school in an illegal settlement in the occupied west bank. Further reporting has identified UK charitable funds reaching organisations that pursue settlement expansion. The British public give to charity in good faith and do not expect their generosity to finance the occupation of the west bank, which the British Government recognise as unlawful. I ask the Minister for three clear commitments. First, will the Government work with the Charity Commission to issue guidance so that trustees know what due diligence is expected, to avoid funding organisations or people directly or indirectly involved in enforcing the illegal occupation of the west bank? Secondly, will the Minister confirm that UK individuals, businesses and charities financing or supporting settlement activity can be considered for designation where the legal criteria are met? Thirdly, will he set out how the Government will investigate evidence of charitable funding supporting serious human rights violations, and will he act on that evidence and report back to Parliament? Every designation must meet the legal test, but under the standard procedure, the test is reasonable grounds to suspect that a person is involved. A criminal conviction is not required. We cannot condemn illegal settlements while failing to confront the money that sustains them. The Government have rightly strengthened their powers. What Parliament, charities, businesses and, above all, the Palestinian people now need to know is when the powers will be used.

    Hansard source
38. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Georgia Gould

    Higher Education Funding

    It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) on securing this really important debate. She is a passionate advocate for these issues: she has chaired the APPG on students and has regularly raised issues related to universities and students, and from her speech we heard how thoughtful and knowledgeable she is on these issues. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester (Pam Cox) for her characteristically thoughtful speech. She called for a wider debate, discussion and focus on these issues, and we have had a very important debate today. We have heard the range of expertise in the Chamber, from lecturers to others who have real experience of working in universities, and about the range of decades when everyone went to university—I cannot believe that anyone here looks old enough to have gone to university under Margaret Thatcher. We should rightly be proud of our world-class higher education sector, which remains, by any objective metric, one of our nation’s greatest exports and a global beacon of intellectual excellence. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) that the UK’s university sector includes four of the world’s top 10 universities, of which we can be very proud. It contributes more than £265 billion to the UK and supports more than 750,000 jobs. In my work as Schools Minister, I get to see directly the contribution that universities make to places and how integrated they are in local innovation, support and access. I have spent quite a bit of time in Sheffield and have seen the contribution that the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University make to the local area, whether through their pioneering work on opening up participation to university or some of their wider research: Sheffield Innovation Spine, the work that Sheffield Hallam University is doing on early years and Sheffield Children’s University, and the work that the University of Sheffield is doing on adult social care. As my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson) was talking, I was reflecting on being in Sunderland two weeks ago, where we are working on Mission North East, and the role that Sunderland University is playing in partnership to support better outcomes for children in the area. The Government are committed to maintaining a world-class higher education sector that delivers for students, our society and the economy. We of course recognise that the sector’s financial environment is challenging. The sector is rightly independent from Government, with providers managing their finances and ensuring that their business models provide long-term sustainability. However, I recognise the long-term challenges that many Members have raised and the strain that we saw over the last decade, including the legacy of seven years of frozen tuition fees. Universities have had to deal with the issues caused by that.

    Hansard source
39. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Georgia Gould

    Higher Education Funding

    Of course, I always support greater funding for education and young people, but I was just about to talk about some of the changes the Government are making to support sustainability. After they were frozen for eight years, we increased tuition fee caps in line with inflation for 2025-26. We will increase them once again in line with forecast inflation in 2026-27 and in 2027-28. We will then legislate when parliamentary time allows to increase tuition fee caps automatically for future academic years. Over the coming year, that is £6 billion-worth of safeguarded indexed increase in income underpinned by the Government, which will make a real difference. My hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central asked about the Government’s vision for universities. We have set out an ambitious programme of reform through the post-16 education and skills White Paper, with a clear vision for a more sustainable and collaborative higher education sector. We want providers to be clear about their distinctive roles but to be working in collaboration. My hon. Friend also mentioned the importance of research. My hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Dr Prinsley) talked about the pioneering research on prostate cancer at East Anglia. Research is a critical role that universities play. The Government are investing a record £86 billion in R&D from 2026-27 to 2029-30; as part of that, UK Research and Innovation will deliver an expected £38.6 billion of research investment, rising to nearly £10 billion per year by the end of that period. In the Department for Education, we are working closely with the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology to deliver the White Paper’s commitments, which include research funding reform and improvements to research grant cost recovery. We heard from almost all the Members who spoke in the debate about the importance of opening up access and ensuring that young people who want to go to university can always pursue that route. That is why we do not support the Conservatives’ proposals, which would pull up the drawbridge because they are about reducing the number of young people going to university. We know that young people from disadvantaged backgrounds will be the ones who do not get that opportunity.

    Hansard source
40. 28 Oct 2026·Parliament·Labour·Georgia Gould

    Higher Education Funding

    We want two thirds of young people to participate in higher-level learning, whether that is going to university, pursuing an apprenticeship or a technical route. We see all of those as deeply connected.

    Hansard source