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

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

1. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·John McDonnell

   Brain Cancer

   First, I thank all those families in my constituency who have been raising funds for years for the Brain Tumour Charity. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh), who has pioneered our debates on this issue over recent years so effectively, and I thank my friend Sonya Kean, who has consistently brought me up to speed on all the recent developments. I just want to ask one question, which comes out of the opening speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies). Let me just run through again the stats from the Brain Cancer Justice provisionals, as they have been described: there is a 30% shortfall in consultant radiologists, which he referred to; only 40% of patients report having access to a clinical nurse specialist; there are only 40 consultant neuro-oncologists nationwide, so there are huge regional gaps; many trusts lack dedicated trial nurses and clinical nurse specialist support; 60% of pathologists report inadequate staffing and resources; and there is no mandatory neuro-oncology training or protected research time. I have just one question, because it is important to give the Minister time to respond to the debate. I just want to know what immediate action will be taken—now—to address the workforce shortages and how we can develop, in a very limited time, a workforce strategy that addresses some of the issues identified in this briefing.

   Hansard source
2. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Joe Morris

   Brain Cancer

   A constituent of mine, Daniel, passed away while he was part of the BRAIN-MATRIX study. Daniel’s tumour progressed from stage 2 to stage 4 before the pathway could properly inform his care. Does my hon. Friend agree that much more needs to be done, not only to improve primary care recognition and referral pathways for brain tumours, but to maximise access to clinical trials?

   Hansard source
3. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Joe Morris

   Topical Questions

   Rural housing availability is in crisis, and all the tenants of an estate near Haltwhistle in my constituency, many of whom are elderly tenants in their 70s and 80s, received section 21 notices a week before the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 came into effect. In a rural community like that, there simply is not similar housing nearby. It is the dismantling of a rural community. Will the Minister therefore meet me to discuss the support he can offer for constituents and the further steps we can take to stop rural communities being victimised by these practices?

   Hansard source
4. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim McMahon

   Social Media Ban for Under-16s

   I welcome the ban on social media for under-16s. I wish we were not here, but the ban represents the failure of the social media platforms to get their house in order. It was inevitable that we would get here in the end. Does the Secretary of State agree that we need to make social media safe for everyone, including through measures on foreign influence and accountability for the owners, so that when children turn 17 or become adults at 18, they are safe, along with the rest of us?

   Hansard source
5. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jim Dickson

   Russian Shadow Fleet

   I thank the Secretary of State for his update and welcome him to his place. I join him in paying tribute to the exceptional bravery and skill of those who carried out the recent operation on the shadow fleet. Does he agree that it is vital that we continue to squeeze the Russian economy in every way we can, including many more operations of that kind against the shadow fleet, so that we can ultimately support Ukraine in a successful outcome in resisting Putin’s illegal war?

   Hansard source
6. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jessica Toale

   Defence Investment Plan

   At a Falklands war veterans conference last week in Poole, I was asked to reassure our serving personnel that the funding is there for the deterrence we need to keep this nation safe. This Labour Government have already given our armed forces a pay rise, invested in defence housing, increased defence spending and increased retention and recruitment in the Army. By contrast, because there has been a lot of groaning on the Conservative Benches today, between 2010 and 2024 under the last Conservative Government, the size of our Army shrank by 30%. Can the Minister confirm that there will be a fully funded plan to deliver this Government’s vision for defence, and can he reassure my constituents that we will always keep this nation safe?

   Hansard source
7. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jessica Morden

   High Streets

   Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Two thirds of businesses in Newport city centre are independent businesses, and it has been brilliant to see businesses such as Kingsway Market, Rock and Scallop and Banc open in recent weeks. However, this is undermined by shops selling illegal cigarettes, illegal vapes and counterfeit goods. What more can Ministers do, working with Home Office colleagues, to help trading standards—which does an excellent job in Newport; it shut two shops last week—tackle the issue of shops opening up again after being shut?

   Hansard source
8. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jess Phillips

   Social Media Ban for Under-16s

   As somebody who was in some of the rooms where this policy was being discussed, I pay tribute to the Secretary of State. She has fought incredibly hard, and by no means has any of it been rushed for an announcement; she has worked incredibly hard on it. Last week, the Government announced that we would be age-verifying on the basis of the device. Why can we not use that same age verification at the device level for accessing social media?

   Hansard source
9. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

   Topical Questions

   T9. The King’s Speech contains proposals for an overnight visitor levy. The decision on whether to introduce it is to be devolved to mayoral strategic authorities and, potentially, foundation strategic authorities. Most coastal and rural areas that struggle with the impact of tourism are not in mayoral areas—[Hon. Members: “Hear, Hear!”]—so can the Minister confirm that FSAs will also receive the power to use the levy, and will she and Treasury officials meet me to discuss this?

   Hansard source
10. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

    Defence Investment Plan

    This Government are not year zero. The 2.5% target has not been hit since 2010—the end of the last Labour Government—and there has been an extra £11 billion since the end of the last Conservative Government. I met my ex-husband in the Fleet Air Arm in 2003, just in time to witness some of the hollowing out of the armed forces, with the loss of capability and good people. I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for providing the continuity needed for these detailed negotiations. Can he confirm that there will, by the NATO summit, be a fully funded plan on defence for the first time in a generation?

    Hansard source
11. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jayne Kirkham

    NHS Dentistry

    I thank the hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) and others for securing this important debate. Cornwall is a dental desert. Healthwatch Cornwall’s 2024 report found that every single NHS practice was closed to new adult patients. In Cornwall, under 30% of adults have seen a dentist in the last two years; across England, that figure is 40.7%. That is a stark reflection of the regional inequality, and the lack of access to basic healthcare. At the same time, the number of dentists in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly has fallen dramatically, from 285 in the year 2019-20 to just 221 in 2024-25. Since 2010, the proportion of the NHS budget spent on dentistry has more than halved. At best, NHS dentistry only ever covered about half the population. Cornwall is rural and coastal, and like many such areas in the south-west, we face real challenges in attracting and keeping dental professionals. Two years ago, more dental nurses left the workforce than joined it in every NHS region. In the south-west, for every nurse who joined, two left. Every dental practice in Cornwall reports recruitment difficulties for all staff, and morale among NHS dentists is at a low, with more than six in 10 in England saying that they are thinking of leaving NHS dentistry. We need to make the NHS a place in which dental staff choose to build a career, and the golden hello scheme is a start. Cornwall and Isles of Scilly ICB has invested £188,000 in 11 posts across the area. It is also crucial that we train more dentists. I recently visited the Peninsula dental school at Treliske in Truro, which is part of the University of Plymouth. Fourth-year dental students train in Truro and offer free dental care. They provide essential treatment and community outreach to more than 30 local groups. That is exactly the type of model that we need. The school wants to expand its intake from 58 students to 72 students per year to meet demand and bring the region in line with the national average. If we train more dentists in Cornwall, we stand a better chance of keeping them there. The Government are expanding dental school places, with 50 extra dentists, which is brilliant, but I ask them to include Peninsula in the next wave. There is a recognition that the current contract is flawed. It is based on UDAs, which effectively cap how many patients a dentist can see. If dentists exceed the cap, they are not paid for it; if they under-deliver, money is clawed back. In Cornwall, only around two thirds of UDAs are delivered, which sometimes leads to millions of pounds being clawed back. That money could be used to treat patients. The money has historically been paid monthly in advance to practices, but unused money has not been repaid in some cases until the end of the year, which has made it hard to divert it to other uses. Cornwall’s ICB has introduced an incentive scheme to encourage practices to hit a certain percentage of their target, so that less money needs to be returned. The Government have introduced reforms to the contract from April ’26. There will be a level of urgent care that is at an improved rate, and there will be a new care pathway for higher-needs patients and more clinically complex cases. Let me talk about some of the schemes already in place to tackle the acute dental need in Cornwall. Since July last year, there has been a dental van, run with Smile Together, which delivers care for our veterans, the fishing community and patients who have been waiting for urgent treatment. The Government’s scheme for brushing in schools has already reached up to three quarters of the schools in Cornwall, and up to six new dental practices are due to open in Cornwall soon, through the clawed-back funding. This will not fix everything overnight, but there is positive reform. I will ensure that these changes are felt in Cornwall, because everyone deserves access to dentistry where it is needed.

    Hansard source
12. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Jacob Collier

    Defence Investment Plan

    The Government have led with a NATO-first approach in the SDR and have worked to strengthen the alliance. At the 2025 Hague summit, the alliance committed to spending 3.5% of GDP on defence by 2035. Can the Minister say what conversations he has had with NATO partners on the DIP, so that we can all work towards that increased spending goal?

    Hansard source
13. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Murray

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    Madam Deputy Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to this debate, which clearly is about whether we revive this Bill, not the internals of the Bill itself. I thank the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) for sponsoring the Bill and for his speech. I also acknowledge the work of the Bill Committee in scrutinising the Bill in the last Session, and ensuring it is proportionate and meets the aims of the hall, which has included making sure that the hall’s new ticket income declaration policy is sufficiently robust. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston), raised a whole host of interesting questions about whether we should still take primary legislation through this House for institutions set up over 160 years ago. I would be more than happy to discuss that with him. I would have thought he was more interested in reviving the Conservative party than in reviving this Bill, but we could discuss his point about such institutions. I acknowledge the contribution of my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry). She is not alone; the Charity Commission itself and several commentators, many of whom she mentioned, have long expressed the view that there is a strong conflict of interest in the majority of the hall’s trustees being seat holders, because they are sometimes acting in their own financial interests instead of the charity’s best interests, which is against the rules and regulations of the Charity Commission.[Official Report, 18 June 2026; Vol. 787, c. 6WC.] (Correction) The Bill drew strong opposition in the other place for not tackling this conflict of interest, and it is disappointing that it has not tackled it—for all the reasons that have been raised this evening. The Charity Commission maintains its concerns that the Bill does not fully address the hall’s long-standing conflict of interest, especially the make-up of the board of trustees, despite the new declaration policy. The hall’s position is that it is willing to discuss concerns about other matters with interested parties, but that these should not obstruct the passage of the Bill. Perhaps what the shadow Minister has said about primary legislation should be part of this discussion. I understand that the Bill will come back to this place on Report and Third Reading, and I encourage Members, if they have concerns, to table amendments on Report. I am not alone in raising this criticism. Baroness Twycross, who spoke on behalf of the Government in the other place, has expressed the same disappointment, as did my predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda and Ogmore (Chris Bryant). There are few institutions that hold as distinctive a place in British public life as the Royal Albert Hall, and it is fitting to be discussing the Bill in Parliament now, given that the Proms start next month; I am sure many hon. Members, myself included, are looking forward to this time-honoured event in the British cultural calendar. However, this motion is only about reviving the Bill, and the provisions of the Royal Albert Hall Bill are not considered contrary to public policy. I would point my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury to our draft ticket tout ban Bill, which was announced in the King’s Speech, which will deal with some practices of selling tickets at an extortionate price.

    Hansard source
14. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Murray

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    That is indeed the case. The promoters can bring back a Bill and, in the same way, the promoters can withdraw this Bill at any point. This is a private Bill, and the Government always take a neutral position on such Bills, notwithstanding amendments from Members in this House or from those in the other place. We will therefore not be supporting or opposing the Bill’s revival; that is a matter for the House. Question put.

    Hansard source
15. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Ian Lavery

    Social Media Ban for Under-16s

    I have had the absolute privilege of consulting the young people in my constituency in every secondary school in Bedlington, Ashington and Blyth. There was not one who believed an outright was the appropriate action to take. They all had negative issues with social media, but they all said that the social media and tech companies should take more responsibility and be more accountable for what is being seen on their platforms. Will my right hon. Friend say what avenues there have been for young people to feed into the consultation? Can she give me a guarantee, so I can tell those young people who I have discussed this with, that their voices—they are the ones being impacted—are being listened to?

    Hansard source
16. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Helena Dollimore

    Brain Cancer

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. It is great to see Members in the Chamber in such great numbers. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) for her determination in this area. Through her sheer force of nature, she has raised the funds to start these trials that are now ongoing in memory of Margaret, who we all miss dearly. That is testament to her sheer determination to put this situation right. We are all behind her. Unfortunately, the experience described by so many Members today—such as that of Margaret, of my cousin Ewan and of so many of our constituents, where fit, healthy individuals are told that there are no further treatments available for them and there is nothing to try or test—is too common across the country. It is what so many of our constituents are told. I want to press the Minister on some points. As a Government, we have announced more training places in recent weeks. To the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), there are just 40 neuro-oncologists with a specialism in brain cancer around the country. Are we allocating some of those training places specifically to solve this problem of the pipeline of doctors coming through? There are just 15 trials going on for brain cancer, compared with 54 for pancreatic cancer. What measures is the NHS taking to inform patients of the trials available to them? Members are in the Chamber today in great numbers, which sends a clear message to the pharmaceutical industry that we want more emphasis on trials in this area. We will not stand for their inaction any longer. For too long, they have put brain cancer in the “too difficult” box. By showing up in these numbers today, we are showing that the market is failing patients and that they must act. The Government must also use all levers at their disposal to act on this.

    Hansard source
17. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Helena Dollimore

    Brain Cancer

    As the hon. Gentleman describes, there is a postcode lottery in the treatment that people can access. In Hastings, a patient has to do a four-hour round trip to Brighton hospital to receive their basic treatment. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we must address this postcode lottery in brain cancer treatment?

    Hansard source
18. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Helen Hayes

    Tenant and Resident Management Organisations: Regulation

    14. What steps his Department is taking to improve the regulation of tenant and resident management organisations.

    Hansard source
19. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Helen Hayes

    Tenant and Resident Management Organisations: Regulation

    Residents on the Loughborough estate in my constituency have suffered years of appalling service from their resident management organisation, the Loughborough Estate Management Board. It has a failing repair service; dangerous chemicals were being stored in the community centre; there were allegations of threats and harassment; and more than £350,000 of its funding was spent on overseas trips and gifts. Eighteen months ago, residents voted overwhelmingly in favour of not renewing the board’s mandate, yet it is still operating, and there appears to be no straightforward mechanism that the local council can use to close down this failing organisation. Will the Minister work with me to bring this scandalous situation to an end, and to ensure that the Loughborough estate’s residents receive the housing services that they pay for and deserve?

    Hansard source
20. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Helen Hayes

    Social Media Ban for Under-16s

    I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and warmly welcome the decisive action that she has set out. She has agreed with the evidence-based conclusions of the Education Committee: that social media harms currently outweigh the benefits for children, that technology companies cannot be trusted to regulate themselves, and that we need to reset completely the relationship that children have with the online world. Our evidence demonstrated that a ban is not enough, and that when young people start using social media—hopefully post-16—it should be free from the most harmful, addictive features. The tech sector is constantly innovating and evolving. Can the Secretary of State say whether and how the list of banned applications will be reviewed so that it keeps pace with the innovation in the tech sector and does not become out of date?

    Hansard source
21. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Gurinder Singh Josan

    Defence Investment Plan

    At the beginning of the month, I attended the NATO Parliamentary Assembly spring session in Lithuania with representatives of NATO and other allies, including Ukraine. As you will be aware, Mr Speaker, the Labour party has a strong tradition, going back to Ernest Bevin, of maintaining a strong and effective defence for our nation both within NATO and independently. After 14 failed Tory years, and considering that other NATO countries are well ahead of us in the proportion of GDP they are spending on defence, what will the Minister do to ensure our armed forces receive the transformation they require to face modern-day threats, with an industrial sector to provide support, so that we do not betray Labour’s strong defence tradition?

    Hansard source
22. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Florence Eshalomi

    Leasehold Reform

    I thank the Minister for allowing my Committee to have a really good look at the draft Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill before it was laid before the House. I also thank my Committee colleagues and our specialist Clerk, Jack Edwards. I was pleased to read in The Times that the Government may be willing to accept our recommendation of the implementation of a £250 cap on ground rents by late 2027. Can the Minister confirm that? Will he also update the House on when the Bill will finally be introduced? As he has heard from Members on both sides of the House, this continues to be a pressing issue for many leaseholders. People continue to be ripped off. The earlier the Bill is put before us, the sooner we can bring this leasehold nightmare to an end.

    Hansard source
23. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Florence Eshalomi

    Defence Investment Plan

    I thank the Minister for coming to the House to reply to the UQ. It is truly shocking that our armed services have been forced to live in disgraceful, appalling conditions for many years. The Minister is aware that the defence housing strategy was launched last year, and I thank him for giving me a briefing on that. Part of it uses funding from the strategic defence review. Can the Minister confirm that the funding is still secured? We are seeing concerns about the overall defence investment plan.

    Hansard source
24. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Florence Eshalomi

    Social Media Ban for Under-16s

    I welcome the announcement from the Secretary of State. It is right that we highlight the dangers that our children are exposed to. It is not about saying that social media is unsafe—I defy any parent or carer in the Chamber not to know the lyrics to “CoComelon” on YouTube. Social media has its place and works for some people. Equally, I raise the dangers of collecting children’s personal data and exposing them to the threat of leaks and hacks. My email, and my staffer’s email, were hacked recently. All of that personal information in the wrong hands could cause a lot of problems, so is that something that the Government will look at as they roll out the plan?

    Hansard source
25. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Fleur Anderson

    Russian Shadow Fleet

    I join all hon. Members and the Secretary of State in paying tribute to the Royal Marines, as we are proud to host the Royal Marine reserves in my constituency. I welcome the Secretary of State to his place, and his assurance that we have not missed a beat in our support for Ukraine. I have been to Ukraine with many hon. Members present, and we know how much last night’s bombing of Kyiv will have frightening the people of Ukraine. We remain steadfast in our support, although our deeds are more important than any words we can say. I urge the Secretary of State and his Cabinet colleagues to maintain this posture, to keep up the action and to exploit future opportunities to continue to degrade Putin’s war machine, so that the illegal war in Ukraine will come to an end?

    Hansard source
26. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Feryal Clark

    Social Media Ban for Under-16s

    I welcome the Secretary of State’s actions to protect children from online harm, especially the harms-based approach she is taking. I have heard evidence from educational digital content creators, whose resources are a lifeline for young people. Will she commit to look at exemptions to ensure that teens over 13 do not lose access to long-form educational resources?

    Hansard source
27. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Thornberry

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    If anyone had asked me three years ago, “How does the Albert Hall work?” I would have said that it was publicly owned, and that it put on events and collected the ticket money, and the money was spent on enabling people to continue to use the Albert Hall. However, it is not a bit like that. The Albert Hall is a charity, but it is also a business. It is both things at once. It is a charity to the extent that it was bailed out by the Government during covid, but it is a business in that a fifth of the seats were bought by people who, I am sure, were assisting in getting the Albert Hall built at a time when there was not sufficient funding for the construction to be completed. So some people bought seats, and they bought them at £100 each. A box of ten would cost £1,000, and a box of five would be £500. In 2017, someone who went to Harrods Estates would be able to buy a box for £2.5 million. In 2023, Kay & Co were selling a box for £3 million. A row of four stalls seats was advertised recently at £600,000. I laugh when the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) says that we should be grateful for the assistance of the people who now own these boxes and these seats for giving us a couple of thousand pounds a year to help with the ongoing costs of the Royal Albert Hall, because I think he is getting things out of proportion.

    Hansard source
28. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Thornberry

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    I have heard the hon. Gentleman make some good points in the past, but he has not made one tonight. If you lend some money to a business that is about to go under, you are bailing it out. Yes, it may pay you back later, but, really, we are talking about what colour angel is dancing on top of a pin.

    Hansard source
29. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Thornberry

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    I will give way once more, but then I must make some progress.

    Hansard source
30. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Thornberry

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    The right hon. Gentleman has told us how many seats are owned privately. Let us suppose that £2 million were to be divvied up among them, bearing in mind that it is possible to buy a box for £2.5 million or £3 million, or to buy six seats for £600,000. As I have said, we need to get this into proportion. Not only do these people own the seats; the reason they own them and they are worth so much money is that they can sell them, and they can sell them on the black market, and they can sell them for whatever price they want. I hear the right hon. Gentleman saying that sometimes those seats do not go for a lot of money, but tell that to Ed Sheeran. The seats for his performances were being sold at £6,000 a night, and he complained, as did a large number of other artists who have appeared at the Royal Albert Hall. It is bad enough for there to be a black market for ticket touts, but tickets being sold by the people who own the seats in the Royal Albert Hall takes that to a new level—and it goes further. Not only do those people own the seats and trade them among themselves, and sell them for large amounts of money; according to the constitution of the Royal Albert Hall, they are the people who need to run the Royal Albert Hall. So there we are: it is a charity when it comes to getting public money as a bail-out, but when it comes to anything else, it is somehow a business. I do not understand how it cannot be an obvious and manifest conflict of interest for people who benefit from the Royal Albert Hall to be running the Royal Albert Hall, and for it still to remain a charity, and I am not alone. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman knows the views of Victoria Prentis, who was Attorney General in 2024. She is now in the other place, and is a very sound woman. She has said: “It is widely acknowledged that the constitution of the Corporation of the Hall of Arts and Sciences”— that is, the Royal Albert Hall— “gives rise to a potential conflict between the private interests of seat-holding trustees and the Corporation’s charitable objects. This potential conflict is of significant concern to the Charity Commission and many well-informed observers.” So that is what the problem is. When I was shadow Attorney General, representatives of the Royal Albert Hall came to see me. I hope that I am not disclosing any confidences, but I made it perfectly clear to them that if they were going to bring any legislation before this place and ask us to spend our time looking at legislation relating to the Royal Albert Hall, we needed to sort this out. We could put this into legislation. The Royal Albert Hall cannot change unless we put it into legislation, because that is the way in which the Royal Albert Hall was originally put together. We must sort out the governance, and we must sort out the fact that these people are selling their seats on the black market. They are selling them to ticket touts. Those seats should only be sold through the ticket office, as they are at the Royal Opera House and at theatres. Why should these people have the benefit of being able to sell their these seats on the black market? It is undermining everything. If members of the public thought that such a beloved institution as the Royal Albert Hall had such a racket going on, they would be outraged, as I was when I first heard about it. I told the representatives of the Royal Albert Hall, when they came to see me three years ago, that unless they brought in those changes in legislation, I would object, and I am just keeping to my word. Let us look back at the history. Originally, the legislation was going to be about the fact that extra seats were put into the boxes, contrary to the rules. The owners thought, “We are going to get into trouble here”. They wanted to bring in legislation to allow boxes of 12 instead of boxes of 10, because boxes of 10 were within the rules and they were putting 12 seats in them, and making that much more profit as a result. They then thought, “Oh, we cannot do that”, so they wanted to introduce legislation. They then pulled that bit of the legislation, but not before it was advertised online that there were going to be 12-seat boxes. Someone was going to make a lot of money out of this. They then ditched that bit but have kept this other bit, which makes a technical point: seat owners are restricted from selling seats for every and any event. For example, people will be glad to hear that no one is making a profit from the Remembrance Sunday commemoration at the Royal Albert Hall. Those seats are sold properly through the box office, and none of this nonsense is allowed on that night. There was a limited number, which the owners then agreed that they would increase, and a small number of people challenged that in court. I appreciate that that may be uncomfortable for some people, but I do not see why Members of this House should spend their time promoting legislation that simply looks after the interests of a small number of people who already make a great deal of money out of owning seats in the Royal Albert Hall. It seems to me that we should be demanding that the Royal Albert Hall change its governance processes, stop the way in which it sells tickets, and get on and deal with itself in a way that is 21st century and not anything else. Why it is appropriate that whereas the rest of the tickets for a charity event are sold for the sake of the charity, such as the Teenage Cancer Trust, trustees on the board of the Royal Albert Hall—a so-called charity—can sell the tickets to line their own pockets? We have a charity event run by a charity, yet those running that so-called charity are allowed to make a profit out of it. It is scandalous, and it should be stopped. I know that Conservative Members will say that it is the trustees’ right and that they should be allowed to do what they like with private property. Well, they can go ahead and sell their seats to make a bunch of profit for themselves, if that is what they want to do, but I do not see why Parliament’s time should be used to help facilitate that. If the trustees of a charity are supposed to be running it, why are they thinking about how they can generate the most money and the most profit for themselves? It is quite obvious that there is a conflict of interest at the centre of all this, and it is not an appropriate use of this House. At this stage, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson) for all the work that she has done in this area over the years. She has exposed some really shocking examples of ticket abuse, including by one of the hall’s vice-presidents, who offered tickets for the publicly funded BBC Proms for up to 10 times what the hall thought they were worth. It is the most outrageous profiteering that has led to this Bill being amended in the House of Lords. Peers did not ask for that much in the House of Lords—it was pretty tame, frankly—but the amendment said that trustees should use the ticket return scheme that the hall runs, not sell their tickets in backroom deals while the hall gets a pittance and has to beg the public for bailouts. To have that amendment struck out and replaced by a commitment that the trustees will be transparent about their profiteering, rather than cease it, is disappointing and inappropriate, to say the least. I also note that although family members are included in that commitment, other individuals are not, making it still perfectly above board for a trustee to give their tickets to friends and associates, who can in turn go ahead and sell them instead. I know the corporation is desperate to get this Bill through so that it can protect itself against legal challenge, but I want us to stop and think about who it really benefits. Who benefits from striking out the amendments? Not the public—that is for sure. Publishing some information on some of the profits of some of the sales on a website once a year just does not cut it. The truth is, what the trustees have here is a magic money tree, and they do not want to give it up. The corporation said that the amendment passed in the Lords was “unnecessarily restrictive and financially punitive”, but one might say that charging £6,000 to see Ed Sheeran is also pretty restrictive and is not something that he appreciates, as he has made clear. I urge my colleagues to reject this Bill as it currently stands and to instead secure some much-needed reform to the board of trustees, which seems to have forgotten who it is meant to serve.

    Hansard source
31. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Thornberry

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    Is my hon. Friend aware that the House of Lords has struggled with this? Part of the problem is that the long title of the Bill is so restrictive that very little can be added to ensure that the governance of the Royal Albert Hall is sorted out.

    Hansard source
32. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Thornberry

    Royal Albert Hall Bill [Lords]: Revival

    I do not know whether the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) is aware that I have given the Albert Hall’s representatives several dates to meet me, but they have not been in touch.

    Hansard source
33. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Emily Darlington

    Social Media Ban for Under-16s

    The Secretary of State and I do not necessarily agree on the effectiveness of a ban, but we absolutely agree on companion chatbots. The entire business model of companion chatbots is to keep us and our children online for as long as possible, using grooming language, grooming behaviour and sometimes sexual circumstances to data-mine us and, more importantly, our children. Can the Secretary of State make it clear at the Dispatch Box that we will not tolerate these types of business models exploiting us and our children?

    Hansard source
34. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Sam Rushworth

    NHS Dentistry

    I broadly agree with the hon. Gentleman’s list of demands. I wonder whether he could offer advice, based on the Liberal Democrats’ five years in government, on lessons learned about the NHS contract and its reform.

    Hansard source
35. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Sam Rushworth

    NHS Dentistry

    The hon. Member is making an excellent point, and I suspect that the ICB in that situation is finding that its budget is overstretched. On that basis, and in the spirit of not being partisan, would she welcome the investment that this Government are putting into the NHS, which the Liberal Democrats oppose?

    Hansard source
36. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Sam Rushworth

    NHS Dentistry

    It is now 9.20 pm, and I have waited all day to be able to say what I am going to say—in three minutes. I cannot give the speech that I wanted to give, but I had to come to speak up on behalf of my constituents, particularly the patients at the West Auckland dental practice who have just been told that they can no longer have NHS dentistry. Let me take the House back to three years ago, when two dental practices closed in our area, one in Shildon and one in Bishop Auckland. A year later, a month before the general election, another practice sent letters to parents saying that because of “the way in which the NHS contract is funded and managed…and a national shortage… We have…come to the realisation that we are unable to offer…NHS patients the level of care they deserve, and…will no longer be able to provide NHS dental services to child patients from 1st October 2024.” That was the situation that this Government inherited: an underfunded service, a broken contract—the reasons in 2006 for introducing it were sound at the time, but it was broken and needed reform—and the off-rolling of patients. Some things have gone well, and the Government have made progress. It was right to focus on using the underspend for emergency appointments, because people were pulling their own teeth out in the most extreme cases. However, appointments have not always been easy to come by, and often require people to travel across the county. Toothbrushing in schools is massively welcomed by dentists, but less so by teachers. I would be grateful if the Minister could tell us what can be done to increase the take-up of that programme. The increase in the number of places in dental training schools is welcome, as is progress on the new contract, but many dentists are telling me that the care pathways pay less by the hour, and they are not sure whether they will see the value in them. We must be honest: the number of people with access to NHS primary care, as opposed to emergency appointments, has barely increased in two years.

    Hansard source
37. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Sam Rushworth

    NHS Dentistry

    I would like to see that change, and I urge the Minister not to delay the consultation on new proposals on the contract. However, in addition to bringing about reform, we need to return funding levels to where they were in 2010. I recently met dentists from across Durham, including one of the chief negotiators for the British Dental Association. They had warm words to say about the Minister, who they felt was sincere and serious in tackling the problem, but they felt that the resources were simply not enough, and that—as has already been pointed out this evening—£1.5 billion a year is enough to fix NHS dentistry so that everyone in the country could have an NHS dentist. That is the equivalent of a 0.3% increase in national insurance, or £3 per month per taxpayer. It is not a large sum in the grand scheme of things, compared to what could be saved if there were not so many people facing dental emergencies. I want to press for cross-party support on this issue. It is all very well everyone coming here and saying that we need to reform the contract—and we do—but we must face the fact that we need to fund NHS dentistry properly, and it is worth the investment to do so. It is intolerable to keep hearing from the Opposition Benches opposition to the investment that we are putting into the national health service. A moment ago we heard a call for some of that £29 billion to be spent on dentistry, so I say, “Support the £29 billion, and yes, let us fund NHS dentistry.”

    Hansard source
38. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Sam Rushworth

    NHS Dentistry

    Does my hon. Friend agree that this is a massive cost of living pressure for people who cannot afford a dentist, and that it would probably be worth our putting in the investment to ensure everyone can have an NHS dentist?

    Hansard source
39. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Rupa Huq

    State Pensioners: Personal Allowance

    Will Members please bob if they wish to speak? Okay—not the most popular debate. It usually goes back and forth, but by process of elimination, I call Alison Griffiths.

    Hansard source
40. 15 Jun 2026·Parliament·Labour·Dr Rupa Huq

    State Pensioners: Personal Allowance

    Order. It is at my discretion whether I allow you to speak, Sir John, as you were not here at the start of John Lamont’s speech. Theoretically, I could be mean and say no, but I will be nice.

    Hansard source