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

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

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

Labour Party

Sitting MPs
404
Entries, last 7 days
1,417
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Conservative and Unionist Party

Sitting MPs
118
Entries, last 7 days
573
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Liberal Democrats

Sitting MPs
71
Entries, last 7 days
342
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Reform UK

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
28
Members
270,000 CLAIMED

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Scottish National Party

Sitting MPs
8
Entries, last 7 days
15
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Green Party

Sitting MPs
5
Entries, last 7 days
27
Members
No claim recorded

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

Plaid Cymru

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

Latest entry 3 Nov 2026

All parties, latest first

Showing every spoken contribution, including 11,987 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

  1. ParliamentLabourPeter Swallow

    Young People and Work: Milburn Interim Report

    The Milburn review interim report was clear that in order for the support provided to be fit for young people to enter the workplace today, not only the welfare system but our health and our education systems need to be fundamentally rewired. Education has a critical role to play in preparing young people for the workforce and for life. What we hear again and again from employers is that young people, even in entry-level roles, have not been able to develop the skills that are essential in any workplace, and indeed for life—skills like communication, problem solving and critical thinking. This is not just about the NEET crisis we are facing today—painful though it is already for so many—or bringing down the welfare bill, although that is vital too; it is about taking the opportunity now to grasp the even greater NEET crisis that may be coming down the track as we face the reality of an economy being fundamentally reshaped by AI. It is clear that AI is the defining technology of our time. In just a few years we have seen it power breakthroughs in fields as wide-ranging and important as medical diagnostics and research, agriculture and mathematics. That is why it is so fundamental that young people develop the skills they need not only to use AI critically and thoughtfully, but also to exist in a world where things for which we have always relied on humans are increasingly being automated. I have long argued that an education system rich in the humanities must be at the heart of preparing young people for the age of AI, not just because of the content they would learn, but because of the skills the humanities would encourage them to develop. As part of its research into the future of the labour market, the National Foundation for Educational Research found that it was skills such as collaboration, communication, problem-solving and information literacy that will be most needed by employees in 2035. That is why it is so important that we develop an education system that provides young people with those skills.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLabourPeter Swallow

    Budget Resolutions

    The Secretary of State makes an important point about our relationship with the EU. He will be aware that Bracknell is home to lots of companies that work in cloud technologies. Is he alive to concerns around the EU’s proposed cloud and AI development Act, and will he ensure that we address those concerns robustly as part of our negotiations in the summit and thereafter? We do need to get that right.

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLabourPeter Swallow

    Budget Resolutions

    The hon. Lady is aware that winter is fast upon us, which is why the Government had to design a scheme that can be delivered quickly. Will she also recognise the £100 million of additional support being given to local authorities to target exactly those households to which she has referred, so we can ensure that every household that is struggling financially this winter is given a little bit of support?

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLabourPeter Swallow

    Budget Resolutions

    This is a Budget that puts community first. It is a Budget for families, who will benefit from support on energy costs over the cold winter, and for much-loved high street businesses, with cuts to business rates. With the announcement of a Thames Valley mayoral strategic authority, it is a Budget that delivers devolution, so that decisions that affect Bracknell Forest and our wider region can be taken in our region. I have heard from countless families across Bracknell Forest about the cost of living pressures that they face because of skyrocketing fuel and energy costs as a result of the war in Iran, so I strongly welcome the announcement of a new £2.6 billion energy bills breathing space scheme, which will provide £100 in direct support for over 30,000 families in Bracknell Forest, helping them to keep their homes warm this winter. I also welcome the extension of the 0% rate of VAT on electricity until July 2027, and the removal of gas standing charges so that people are charged only for what they use. I know that the prices we have seen at the pumps in recent months are a huge source of anxiety for many across Bracknell Forest. I am pleased that the Government have recognised the pressures on motorists that have been caused by increasing fuel prices, and have extended the 5p cut on fuel duty to July 2027. They have also frozen rates, and made permanent the more generous mileage rates for both employees and self-employed people who use their own vehicles for work. These measures will have a real impact on households across Bracknell Forest, especially over the coming winter months. Supporting households is an essential and extremely welcome priority in this Budget, but I also welcome the clear signals that this Government have given to local businesses. Wonderful local cafés, restaurants, pubs and shops drive our local economy, but I have heard from too many that are struggling in this challenging environment and that have been forced to consider raising prices or cutting staff. For that reason, I was delighted to see the Chancellor announce that he will increase the small business rates relief thresholds for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties, meaning that about 47% of all RHL properties in the south-east will pay no business rates at all.

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLabourPeter Swallow

    Budget Resolutions

    Absolutely, which is why I welcome the measure in this Budget. It means a direct tax cut for over 250 small businesses in Bracknell Forest, directly funded by increasing VAT compliance on those online marketplaces. It is right that the small businesses that thrive on Crowthorne High Street in my constituency, and across Bracknell and Sandhurst, do not face unfair competition from the big online marketplaces. That is a decision that this Government have rightly made in this Budget. This Government do not just talk about growth in every postcode, but recognise that our high streets are at the heart of achieving that growth. On that note, growth in every postcode means recognising the unique barriers holding back growth in every region of the UK. For the south-east, one of the biggest barriers to regional growth has been the slow progress of devolution. That is why I am delighted that this Budget also commits to a mayoral strategic authority for the Thames valley. Nobody knows the specific local and regional challenges we face better than our own local community, and no one is better placed to solve them. Devolution will bring more powers for Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Swindon, more funding for our region and a more joined-up approach on regional transport, skills and public services. This is not just about local business. In the south-east, we can proudly say that we are home to some of our most loved and most critical national businesses from Waitrose, which has its headquarters in my constituency, to our defence sector whose contribution to the economy is estimated to be £3.6 billion in 2025. We are also home to one of our greatest and most innovative British assets—our life sciences sector. So I welcome the opportunities that a more regional approach to our economy will create. This is a Budget that backs our region to do what it does best, which is to drive growth across the Thames valley and the whole of the UK. All these measures will strengthen our social fabric, boost our local economies and build resilient communities in these challenging times, but there is no community without security. As war continues to rage in Ukraine and the middle east, and as hostile actors swamp our information sphere and sow division in our society, we cannot afford to delay delivering the support we need for defence. That is why it is so important that the Chancellor has put forward a Budget that delivers fully on our commitment to fund the defence investment plan, and ensures we remain on track for the NATO target for defence spending to reach 3.5% of GDP by 2035. Alongside plans for a new multilateral defence mechanism and additional investment through the National Wealth Fund and the British Business Bank, this Budget treats our security with the gravity it deserves, after decades of underfunding by the Conservative party. The Budget is a clear demonstration that this Government have listened to the concerns of families and businesses in Bracknell Forest, and have decided to act on them. It meets the challenge of today with pragmatism and the promise of tomorrow with ambition. I know it will not solve all the challenges facing businesses and families in Bracknell Forest, but gosh, it is a darn good start.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLabourPeter Lamb

    Budget Resolutions

    The theme of today’s Budget debate is “fresh hope for the future”, so I would like to take the opportunity to review the pledges that I made to my constituents at the general election, how this Budget helps to deliver on them and, given that the Government have said we are at the start of the process, my fresh hopes for the future. But since Opposition Members are so interested in getting into a conversation, I will deal with them first. Last Wednesday, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer set out a Budget that is the best-received Labour Budget in 23 years. That has been indicated very clearly, because the public and the markets have accepted it as a fantastic development. You can hear the disappointment from Opposition Members. You can hear that they are desperate for their attack lines, which are not getting through, in order to get public attention back on them, but what have we actually heard? From the Opposition Front Bench we heard about £30 billion of unfunded tax cuts. That is what the Conservatives’ plan is so far. On their own figures, the figure is £30 billion so far, but that is exactly what happened with the Liz Truss mini-Budget. They have learned no lessons from exactly that economic situation in what they put to us today. I promised my constituents that we would have a thriving local economy and support for the town centre, and Crawley’s economy is thriving. Anyone looking at it would have to accept that. Our major employers in the area are expanding. Developments such as the Government-funded Crawley Innovation Centre are bringing forward the new generation of technologies that will generate further economic growth in this country. Business rate changes are making it easier for properties on the high street. Many of the reforms set out in the Budget are going to make things considerably easier for people. High street rental auctions will enable us to tackle people who own property but, for their own financial reasons, are not putting people in. My hope for the future is that we can get further rate reform, and start addressing the unfair practices in the delivery industry that are allowing that sector and online retailers to kill off many of our high street businesses. My second pledge is to have housing that delivers for local people. We have the first-time buyer scheme—“Your First Home”—and first-time buyer ISAs. We have planning reforms coming through. We have £432 million for ending rough sleeping. We have over £40 billion for the biggest investment in affordable housing in a generation. We have new towns, and greater rights for private tenants through the Renters’ Rights Act 2025. We are delivering for people on housing. My hope for the future is more funding for affordable housing, moving away from the current financial structures, direct delivery from the Government, an end to hope value and housing revenue account reform. I have said that I want a better future for Crawley’s children, and what do we have? We have paid maternity leave so that fathers can spend the first critical weeks with their children, and more fathers can set the tone for their relationship to develop. We have the expansion of 30 hours of free childcare and SEND reform coming forward. We have the return of Sure Start—I do not know why it has new branding—in our communities. We have an end to the two-child poverty trap, which Opposition Members begged us not to remove. We have the expansion of free school meals, and the fastest reduction in poverty of any first-term Government in this country’s history. My hope for the future is that we continue to work towards ending child poverty, with action on those not in employment, education or training, ensuring every SEND child gets the support they need and creating real social mobility. I pledged real action on crime and antisocial behaviour, and we have the neighbourhood policing guarantee, an end to the £200 threshold for shoplifting, and new offences, including respect orders to ban repeat offenders from public places. We have preventive departmental spending, so we can really put in place the action necessary to protect our communities. My hope for the future is that we take the gloves off the police, bring in judicial reform to make it easier to send criminals to jail, make better use of automated technology and make greater use of on-the-spot penalties. Lastly, on a better resourced NHS that is there when people need it, we have the NHS 10-year plan and national plans for diseases such as cancer, rapid action on waiting lists, new capital investment, a huge expansion of diagnostic equipment and record investment in our national health service. My hope for the future is that the service focuses on keeping people well, rather than addressing their needs only when they are sick, and that we move services back into every postcode, where possible. There should be no limits on the aspiration of this Government or those of our constituents for our country. We should look at the progress that has already been made on the ills that affect our society. This Budget is taking us another step closer to the future that we all seek, and I look forward to many more Budgets from my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLabourPaulette Hamilton

    Poundland

    Constituents in Birmingham Erdington appreciated having Poundland—we had three Poundland stores, but two have closed in the past year. What assessment has the Department made of the private equity acquisition model, whereby a £30 million shareholder loan is prioritised over a solvent sale?

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLabourPaul Davies

    Young People and Work: Milburn Interim Report

    I want to acknowledge the important role of the Milburn review and its interim report within the broader context of welfare reform. Social security is important in achieving social justice, but it is also a key part of a thriving and resilient economy, providing the necessary safeguards to help people in times of need and a route back to work for those that can. The Department for Work and Pensions spends roughly £25 on benefits for every £1 spent on employment support. In practice, that means that only around one in five NEETs receive meaningful employment support. That is simply not sustainable. I welcome the emphasis in Milburn’s interim report on strengthening employment support for young people, and I expect the final recommendations of the review to build on that with a clear national strategy. Such a national strategy is crucial, but what we do locally is equally important, hence the importance of partnering with local providers and career services. In my constituency I have been leading the Aspire project, in which I work with Kirklees college, C+K Careers and local businesses to identify young people who are NEET and pair them with mentors who can offer guidance, support and work experience. The aim is to help them gain confidence in themselves and provide pragmatic advice when it comes to accessing education and employment opportunities. That is a first step, but it is a big step for many of the young people in engaging with colleges and employers. Local and national need to be in lockstep when it comes to the issue of NEETs, so will the Minister please comment on how the Government can help achieve that?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLabourPatrick Hurley

    Young People and Work: Milburn Interim Report

    It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms McVey. The number of young people not in education, employment or training is one of the biggest challenges facing the country. Contrary to stereotype, though, in my experience most young people desperately want the opportunities that previous generations took for granted. The problem is that those opportunities simply are not there for too many of them. That is partly because we have spent so long over the past few years talking about the cost of welfare, but nowhere near enough time talking about the cost of failing to invest in our young people. I am pleased that the Milburn report will reportedly call for much more investment, because we cannot seriously expect to tackle the problem on the cheap. It is not just about how much we spend; it is about how we spend it. Earlier this year I led a debate in this Chamber on place-based employment support. I made an argument then that I wish to repeat today. The barriers facing a young person in my Southport constituency are not necessarily the same as those facing someone in London or Manchester, so localism matters. We need to give local areas the freedom and resources they need to bring together colleges, employers, jobcentres, health services and community organisations and design support around the people who need it. We need a system that aligns training and education with the types of jobs that might be on offer in the local area. There is no point in training young people for jobs that do not exist locally now, never mind in 10 or 15 years’ time. What we are debating today has to be part of a wider economic strategy that creates decent jobs in our towns and communities, not just in our big cities. My request of the Minister is simple: let us invest properly, trust local communities to deliver, and judge success not just by how much we cut the benefits bill, but by how many young people we help build decent, fulfilling working lives. Making the country a better place for the next generation should be what we are here in this place to do.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLabourPatrick Hurley

    Advanced Manufacturing

    <Question HRSContentId="{1D6EA380-A69B-4B55-91E2-CBCFEDFF7EA3}">T4. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{F2B78CF9-E036-4C02-A91A-44B12EC384A3}" /> Given the recent forecasts around GDP growth in the years to come, does the Chancellor agree that improving living standards requires us to focus on GDP per capita, rather than merely on headline figures? To help that focus, will he consider a review of the personal tax code, looking at the cliff edges and perverse incentives that discourage work and investment, as part of the Government’s commitment to keep growth on track?</Question>

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentLabourPatrick Hurley

    Budget Resolutions

    I welcome this Budget, and I congratulate the Chancellor on bringing it forward at a time of considerable economic uncertainty. There is much in it that deserves support and colleagues have spoken well over the past few days in that regard. I will use my contribution to make a broader argument, one that concentrates on the interaction between business and trade and prosperity for the country. The biggest economic challenge facing this country is the fact that we have become accustomed to an economy that does not grow quickly enough, does not invest enough, does not produce enough and does not deliver rising living standards for enough of our people. Worse than that, we have constructed an economic system that has learned to accommodate failure. Thanks to the long, dark years of Tory rule, this country has, in effect, institutionalised stagnation. For much of the past 80 years, people in this country could have reasonably expected to have been better off than their parents. Productivity increased, wages rose and living standards improved. However, since 2010 that has changed. The relationship has broken down, real earnings have barely grown by historical standards, productivity growth has been desperately weak and the prospect of building a better life has become increasingly remote for too many people. We need to change that. First, we need to be clear about what we mean by “growth”. Our overriding economic objective should be sustained growth in GDP per capita, driven by higher productivity and accompanied by rising real wages and improving living standards. We should judge our success not just by what happens in some sectors such as financial services, or any other, but by what happens in places such as my Southport constituency, Swindon, Wigan, Bristol or Birkenhead. Secondly, we need to rebuild our productive capacity in this country. For decades we have promoted consumption while allowing production to decline. We have become dependent on importing the things we need, exposed to volatile international energy markets and willing to see promising British innovations commercialised elsewhere. We need to change that, too. We should be ambitious about advanced manufacturing, clean energy, life sciences, digital technology—all those industries of the future. I would like to see us set ourselves a national mission to create 1 million additional jobs in production over the next decade. That requires an industrial strategy with some proper oomph behind it. That proper oomph should be patient capital, affordable industrial energy, skills provision designed around the needs of employers and public procurement that supports domestic productive capacity. It also requires a closer and more practical economic relationship with our European neighbours. The isolationist turn that this country has taken over the past decade needs to come to an end, and not just for the benefit of our country; it has harmed our trading partners and has benefited only those countries that want us to fail. We also need to reform the way we govern the economy itself. I strongly support fiscal responsibility, I believe in independent economic scrutiny, and I have no desire whatsoever to return to the economic recklessness that did such damage in 2022. We should also recognise that fiscal responsibility should be a means to an end, rather than the end itself. The purpose of sound public finances must be to enable a prosperous, productive and resilient population, but that is not what we have ended up with. Too much of our economic policy making is currently dominated by what happens over a relatively short period. Investment that costs money today but only delivers in 20 or 30 years’ time can appear less attractive, so we have become trapped in a vicious circle: weak growth reduces tax revenues; weak tax revenues constrain investment; insufficient investment weakens productivity; and weak productivity leads to weak growth. We need to break that circle, and the way to do that is to look at how our fiscal and monetary policies are implemented. I would encourage Ministers to review those policies to ensure that the future of this country is prosperous.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentLabourPatricia Ferguson

    Public Services and Economic Growth: Scotland

    <Question HRSContentId="{9CE9F8A1-3270-46A4-87F9-59ABC2F0D1AC}">5. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{0EE4F009-47FA-468A-BFD3-0D37A6390D19}">What fiscal steps he has taken to support public services in Scotland.</QuestionText></Question>

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentLabourPatricia Ferguson

    Public Services and Economic Growth: Scotland

    I thank the Minister for that answer. I very much welcome the extra investment coming to my home city of Glasgow, and I am sure Glasgow will make good use of it. Overall, I welcome the record funding that this Labour Government have delivered for Scotland. Does the Minister agree that the SNP Government should now drop the gimmicks, end the excuses and prioritise making Scotland’s public services fit for the future?

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentLabourOlivia Bailey

    Budget Resolutions

    I welcome the measures in the Budget that will give my constituents some much-needed breathing space as they look ahead to the winter. The £100 payment towards energy bills, the scrapping of gas standing charges and the extension of 0% VAT on electricity bills, will all make a difference to household budgets in my constituency at this pressured time. I also welcome measures to support small businesses, such as the fantastic Elysien that I visited last week, and our brilliant local pubs and brewers such as Renegade and Double-Barrelled. Today I wish to speak in my capacity as Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, and because those facing discrimination and disadvantage are often the most exposed to financial pressures, I must start by saying that measures in the Budget to support people with the cost of living are particularly welcome. I also welcome the funding to tackle misogyny announced in the Budget, and the Government’s ambition in that area. In the Committee’s inquiry into the manosphere we have heard alarming evidence about online misogyny fuelling harm, and we have been left in no doubt that if we are to meet the Government’s ambition to halve violence against women and girls in a decade, we must urgently focus our attention, and our resources, on prevention. Although £15 million over three years is a welcome start, compare that with the vast profits being generated by the platforms and industries through which misogyny and hate are amplified. We are being outmatched, and as misogyny continues to plague our society, we must rise to the challenge. The Budget also contained some welcome measures for parents and carers. I welcome the changes to the carer’s allowance to remove the cliff edge. We cannot keep telling carers—the majority of whom are women—that we want them to participate in the workforce while maintaining a system that penalises them for trying to do so. I note that the changes will not be in force until 2030-31, and I would welcome additional commitments from the Government to support carers in the meantime. I also welcome the paid paternity leave for self-employed fathers and other parents announced in the Budget as an important first step towards the wider parental leave reform that we need. It is regrettable, however, that that gap in the system will not be filled until 2029. The Women and Equalities Committee has been clear that we need a pathway towards six weeks of paid paternity leave, and a simpler, fairer, more gender-equal parental leave system. The 18 months of the Government’s parental leave review will soon be up, and we hope and expect to see that pathway laid out. One of the biggest barriers to equal participation in the workforce remains access to affordable childcare, so I was a little disappointed that childcare measures were not included in the Budget this year. It is a huge achievement of this Government that we have overseen a record expansion of funded childcare—something I was proud to work on as a Minister. Too many lower-income parents are unable to access the support that they need to re-enter work or work longer hours. The Government already fund around 80% of childcare delivered in this country. We have in effect already created a new public service, and it is time that we reformed our complex system to reflect that reality, and to make universal childcare a centrepiece of the Government’s 10-year plan. These are not peripheral issues but fundamental barriers to economic growth. According to the Women’s Budget Group, women’s equal participation in the workforce could be worth £113 billion to our economy, even before we consider the enormous figures that could be unlocked by improving employment opportunities for disabled people and other groups who face barriers to work. That brings me to my final point. If we truly want to tackle inequality, we must have a conversation in this place about the barriers that prevent people from working, from earning, and from securing a better life for themselves and their families, and that means a proper conversation about welfare reform. The current system is both fiscally unsustainable and deeply unfair to the people it traps in a cycle of inactivity, so I am looking forward to the final reports of the Milburn review and the Timms review, and to the Government’s setting out concrete proposals in this area. I am also clear that in that necessary conversation about welfare reform, we must also talk about the wider barriers to employment, support for carers, the role of parental leave and, above all, access to universal childcare.

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentLabourMs Julie Minns

    Advanced Manufacturing

    I welcome the Minister’s acknowledgement that diversifying Cumbria’s economy is key to our economic growth. Will he therefore support efforts to realise the potential of RAF Spadeadam as a future hub for rocket testing and innovation?

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentLabourMs Abena Oppong-Asare

    Budget Resolutions

    I welcome the Budget and its focus on giving families a bit of breathing space during this difficult period. Many people in my constituency welcome the £100 household energy payment this winter alongside the reforms to carer’s allowance and support for working families. As Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, I will focus my remarks on devolution, local government, our high streets, rough sleeping and housing delivery. I welcome the Government’s commitment to devolution and the publication of the fiscal devolution road map. However, we need greater clarity on how the proposals will work in practice. As powers are devolved, accountability, scrutiny and local capacity must keep pace. Devolution should not simply be about moving decision making out of Whitehall; it must deliver better outcomes for the communities it is intended to serve. The Committee will continue to scrutinise these reforms and how they are implemented on the ground. I also welcome the measures to support and revitalise our high streets, including expanded business rates relief and support for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses. High streets are more than economic activity; they are the heart of community life, providing places where people meet, work and access services. That is particularly relevant to the Committee, which is currently undertaking an inquiry into revitalising our high streets and town centres. We look forward to examining whether the Budget measures are delivering the long-term regeneration and economic resilience that our communities need. The Budget must also be judged on whether it addresses the long-term pressures facing local government. Councils continue to face significant pressures, including special educational needs and disabilities and rising demand for children’s services, adult social care and housing support. Previous Committee work has repeatedly highlighted concerns about the sustainability of local government finance and the growing gap between what councils are expected to deliver and the resources available to them. A sustainable funding settlement remains essential if councils are to plan for the long term, invest in prevention and deliver high-quality services for residents. Across local government, housing and devolution, the common challenge is delivery. Communities need to see the commitments translated into tangible improvements in their daily lives. I strongly welcome the significant investment to tackle rough sleeping and help people off our streets—I had the opportunity to attend the rough sleeping summit—but if we are serious about ending rough sleeping we must address its causes as well as its consequences. That means looking again at issues repeatedly highlighted by the Committee, including homelessness prevention, the five-week wait for universal credit and the continued freeze in the local housing allowance. Ahead of the Budget, I urged Ministers to reconsider the local housing allowance freeze. I am disappointed that it remains in place. Charities have warned that it could push hundreds of thousands more people into poverty or deeper hardship. If ending rough sleeping is truly a national priority, we must ensure that housing support keeps pace with the reality of rents and the pressures facing low-income households. The Budget rightly invests in support services, but lasting progress will require action on the structural factors that push people into homelessness in the first place. Finally, I welcome the additional investment in social and affordable housing, including the £1.5 billion top-up, which is expected to support 10,000 additional homes. However, it is still vital to consider whether these measures alone translate into homes being built at the pace and scale needed. The OBR has warned that housing delivery is likely to be slower than previously forecast, highlighting the challenges that remain. The question is not whether we have the ambition but whether we can remove the barriers that prevent homes from being built at the scale required. The Committee will continue to scrutinise what further action is needed to meet the Government’s house-building ambitions and more generally to ensure that more affordable homes are delivered. Overall, there is much in the Budget to welcome, from support with energy bills to investment in social housing and a renewed commitment to devolution. The Budget sets out an ambitious agenda, but that ambition must be met with delivery. My Committee will scrutinise how the commitments are implemented and whether they are delivering real change for the people and communities we represent.

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentLabourMrs Sharon Hodgson

    Advanced Manufacturing

    I am sure that the Chancellor is always open to new ways to save money. New modelling suggests that universal access to fracture liaison and prevention services could save £606 million over five years, with the investment paying for itself within two years. Will the Chancellor encourage the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that its promise of universal access to fracture liaison services by 2030 is backed by a funded delivery plan?

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentLabourMrs Elsie Blundell

    Budget Resolutions

    I welcome the opportunity to speak in today’s debate on fresh hope for the future, including for the businesses on our high streets and my constituents who rely on them. Last week’s Budget, delivered by a Labour Chancellor, was the Budget that people in my constituency need. They know that our high streets cannot become hubs for criminal activity while legitimate businesses are priced out and run down. They also know that our high streets cannot remain clusters of vape shops and gambling premises, and cannot continue to withstand these hits without serious ramifications for the future of our communities up and down this country. I am proud that this Labour Government are making the right choices by putting place over profiteering. Too many of the constituents and businesses that I represent feel that day in, day out, their finances are being stretched beyond what is palatable or fair. I understand that, the Prime Minister understands it, and it is clear from this Budget that the Chancellor understands it. My constituency of Heywood and Middleton North has so much potential, and its people are determined to see a sense of pride, vibrancy and purpose return to their neighbourhoods. I want to focus my remarks today on the high streets that have been eroded because of a sustained lack of investment, but that can prosper again and provide much-needed respite for responsible businesses, with power directed to leaders with the means to turn things around. That is what I heard from the Budget last week. The £1 billion package announced by this Chancellor will mean that businesses in Heywood and Middleton North will see their business rates frozen, reduced or cut to zero. The measure will apply to around 600 properties in my borough, and we are also taking more businesses out of paying business rates by increasing small business rate relief thresholds for retail, hospitality and leisure premises. Businesses that enrich our communities are getting the focus they deserve. The choice at the heart of this is how we differentiate between those businesses that strengthen our high streets and those that weaken them. For years now, my constituents have seen vape shops and similar premises pop up en masse and corrode the ties between local people and the high streets they once knew. That is why I fully support this Labour Chancellor in not extending business rate relief to those businesses, but instead throwing our full backing behind those who are building back our towns piece by piece. That measure sits alongside the steps announced by the Government earlier in the year. We are determined to revoke the outdated “aim to permit” rule in the Gambling Act 2005, which restricts councils’ ability to refuse new betting shops, even where there are strong local concerns. Additional planning permission will be required for vape shops to finally give local people and councils a say over where they open and to stop them from opening near schools. That is alongside a doubling of the maximum duration of closure orders for dodgy shops to give investigators more time to gather evidence and secure prosecutions. I have been calling for this for some time, because I have seen the scars that these illicit operations have left on high streets in Heywood and Middleton. It cannot be right that residents are forced to watch authorities scramble as these businesses skirt accountability and reopen weeks later. It is time that we sided with good businesses and made it clear that good practice is the only practice that will be tolerated. There is a moral argument that we must engage with and win. Residents, shoppers and businesses in Heywood and Middleton North are all completely justified in not wanting the continued proliferation of these shops. They want to see civic ties, family ties and social ties restored on our high streets, rather than ample profits for endless vendors that exploit working-class communities, run down public health and chip away at the communities they once knew. That has been made clear not only in the Budget, but in the publication of last week’s cross-Government strategy, “Hope on the High Street”, which includes £210 million to transform derelict buildings into the new anchors of our high streets. In closing, I want to put on record my thanks to the businesses, business leaders and workers who are the pillars holding up the high streets of Heywood and Middleton North. Each week, I visit businesses from Heywood market through to Middleton shopping centre, and they are making an immense difference to the towns I represent. Whether it is Tilly’s Tea Room or Pecado in Heywood, Waffle Co in Middleton, or Honey Café on Boarshaw, these are the businesses that we need to be supporting, and we should demonstrate to them that their contribution to our communities is recognised and valued. I am proud to stand here today and speak on their behalf, and I am proud to stand here as part of a Labour Government who are well and truly on their side.

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentLabourMr Toby Perkins

    Young People and Work: Milburn Interim Report

    Supported internships are an incredibly useful way of supporting young people who have an education, health and care plan along the pathway to work. They cost more and require significant investment, but are very cheap in comparison to seeing that young person living a life on benefits. Does my hon. Friend agree that we should be doing all we can to provide more supported internships, because that investment will make a long-term difference to getting people out of unemployment and into work?

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentLabourMr Jonathan Brash

    Poundland

    Like the Minister and Members across this House, my first priority is the staff of Poundland, including in the Hartlepool store at Middleton Grange shopping centre. Sadly, the same cannot be said for Gordon Brothers. Let us be clear that this organisation has form on this issue. Does the Minister not think it is time that we prevent these predatory capitalist vultures from making their profits off our people’s backs?

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentLabourMr Clive Betts

    Poundland

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) for asking the urgent question and for putting very relevant questions to the Minister. Everyone at work at the three Poundland stores in my constituency today will be worried that they will not be in a job tomorrow. It is good that the Minister is talking about how she can help people into jobs if Poundland shuts, and it is good that she is putting pressure on Gordon Brothers, but is she actively considering what proactive measures she can take to intervene and stop closures from happening if that pressure ultimately fails?

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentLabourMike Reader

    Highways (Financing) Bill (Third sitting)

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. Does the hon. Member understand how construction procurement works? National Highways would not have specified a particular fuel type; it would have specified an outcome, and the contractors appointed would have chosen how to meet that. That outcome was set out in the development consent order signed under his Government. Is he suggesting that the Government should interfere in the activities of contractors working on the lower Thames crossing? Given that fuel cost is less than 1% of the Bill cost, does he really think this is an issue we should be focusing on?

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentLabourMike Reader

    Highways (Financing) Bill (Third sitting)

    Is the hon. Member suggesting that we should go back and change the DCO to remove the climate targets? I decided after the evidence session to speak to some planning lawyers, and they told me that that would add at least five years to the delivery of this programme. Is he advocating for stalling the lower Thames crossing for another five years?

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentLabourMichelle Welsh

    Equality Act 2010 Guidance: Gynaecological Conditions

    I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq) on securing this debate. I speak as the chair of the APPG on PMOS and as a woman living with PMOS and endometriosis—I feel like I somehow won the cup when I got both of those. One in eight women in the UK suffer from PMOS, yet despite how common it is, it remains poorly understood, underdiagnosed and too often overlooked. The World Health Organisation estimates that up to 70% of women affected globally remain undiagnosed. Both of those figures are women waiting for answers. For me, diagnosis took over 18 years. During those years I developed an eating disorder—I became bulimic—experienced depression and lost confidence. I passed out in sixth form on so many occasions. I lost the feeling in my legs and when I went to the GP, he told me over and over again, “It’s all part and parcel of being a woman. Take some paracetamols.” I share that because we must understand what delayed diagnosis costs. It reaches into your relationship with your food, mental health, working life and sense of self. Failure to diagnose does not make the condition disappear; it leaves women managing its consequences without the explanation, treatment or support they deserve. PMOS affects more than fertility. It can affect metabolism, periods and mental health and it increases the risk of conditions including type 2 diabetes. Earlier diagnosis provides an opportunity to manage those risks and offer support sooner. Instead, women can spend years questioning themselves when the system should be asking the right questions. Those failures do not fall equally. The condition disproportionately affects women from south Asian and black backgrounds and those on lower incomes, yet access to diagnosis and support remains inconsistent. Without greater awareness, existing inequalities in health can translate into inequalities in employment, career progression and economic opportunity. I cannot tell hon. Members the amount of times I have had a sleepless night before an exam, a driving test or anything important, worried that I would be too ill to stand up and do it. A woman’s income, ethnicity or postcode should never determine whether she is heard or helped. We must tackle racism, language barriers and unequal access to care. For someone on an insecure contract, attending an appointment can mean losing wages, and asking for flexibility can feel like risking her job. The advice to seek support means little if that support is beyond her reach. I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to provide for early diagnosis, access to psychological support, targeted action on inequalities and clear workplace guidance. Changing the name of polycystic ovary syndrome to polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome must be matched by changing women’s experience. I cannot get those 18 years back, but we can stop another generation enduring the same wait, the same pain and the same anguish. Greater awareness of PMOS and endometriosis in the workplace can help to ensure that women are supported, valued and able to thrive at work, rather than being forced to choose between managing their health and progressing in their careers. No woman should have to lose her health, her confidence or her future before the system finally decides to believe her and act.

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentLabourMichelle Scrogham

    Budget Resolutions

    It is a pleasure to speak in the debate on “fresh hope for the future”, and that title could not be more timely. Across the world, we are living through a period of uncertainty unlike any that many of us have experienced in our lifetime. The challenges we face today are different from those faced by previous generations. Alongside the traditional military threats, we face cyber-attacks, threats to our critical national infrastructure, hostile state activity and economic instability across the globe. In a world like this, national security cannot be an afterthought. In my constituency, we have known that for generations; it is the backbone of the economy and our community. For many of us, defence runs in our blood and in our ancestry, but for too long, communities like mine were asked to believe Conservative promises. We were repeatedly told that defence was the highest priority, yet year after year, we saw programmes delayed, budgets squeezed, and our industry and economy hanging in the balance. That disrupted the lives of my constituents and undermined our national security. The Conservatives claim that they are the party of defence. They stand here today and make more promises that they cannot fulfil. By the time they had left office, the National Audit Office was warning of an “unaffordable equipment programme”. They were running up a bill of tens of billions of pounds that they could not pay. In Barrow, those failed promises have a cost. It impacts investment decisions, training and development opportunities, the supply chain industry and, most critically, confidence for working families that they can put food on the table. That is why this Budget matters. It builds on previous work from the Government to support our national security, and it moves us away from the short-term thinking that characterised the Conservative years. The full funding of the defence investment plan gives industry, workers and communities the confidence that this Government’s commitments are backed by resources, not just rhetoric. Fully funding the DIP sends a powerful message—one that my constituents are well aware of: by investing in defence, we support and empower our communities, our businesses and our national security. Through the defence investment plan, we will deliver stronger military capability, protect our at-sea nuclear deterrent through building up to 12 SSN-AUKUS submarines, and help supply chain businesses all over the country to reach their full potential. We are doing this partly through the innovative defence financing taskforce. For a long time, I have called for a financing and procurement system fit for the modern age. Too many small and medium-sized enterprises are held back by complicated bidding processes, timeline pressures and a risk-averse culture. This taskforce is the first step in addressing those issues. Like many of my colleagues, I firmly believe that it is a priority for us to reach 3% of GDP on defence spending. This is why I was glad to hear the Chancellor confirm last week that the details will be set out at next year’s spending review. This Government are prioritising investment in defence and ensuring that the path to 3% is built on sound financial planning, rather than soundbites. Hope does not only come in the form of long-term investment, though; it also comes through addressing issues that are smaller-scale but no less important. I want to thank the Government for listening on an issue that I recently raised with the Prime Minister. Just two weeks ago, we spoke in this Chamber about my constituent Ian, who requires access to a life-extending medicine. After the June announcement that the application of VAT would be reformed, the drug’s developer withdrew from the scheme through which the drug was provided. Ian was left with no remaining options. With nowhere left to turn, his family were left with an awful choice: find the money to fund the huge cost themselves or, even more unfairly, lose remaining time with their loved one. That is why I welcome the Government’s announcement on VAT and donated medicines. Creating an exemption for medicines is a practical and compassionate measure that will ensure that life-changing treatments can reach those who need them the most. For Ian, this Budget has provided something priceless: hope for his health, and hope that the Government are listening. That is what links this Budget together. Whether it is the apprentice in Barrow looking towards a skilled career in our defence industry, the local business planning to expand with confidence because of long-term investment, or a constituent gaining access to life-extending medication, this Budget is about creating the conditions for a better future. Barrow and Furness has always stepped up when our country has needed us. This Budget demonstrates that, in turn, this Government are stepping up for Barrow and Furness.

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, as always, Ms Jardine. I thank all hon. Members for coming to this debate. Obviously, many colleagues from across the House have raised concerns about projects in their constituencies. I understand entirely why, but given that those projects are subject to planning processes, I will say at the outset that I cannot comment on the positives or negatives, or the decisions through the NSIP—nationally significant infrastructure project—process, in relation to any of those particular applications. Those are rightly matters for the Secretary of State to make decisions on in due course. I will touch on the general points that the right hon. Member for Tatton (Esther McVey) made. First, we should recognise an area where I think we have common agreement: building infrastructure across our country is necessary but it should be done in sensible locations and take account of local impacts. I have said throughout that I find much of the nimby debate coming up in this a bit redundant, when we are actually trying to bring communities with us. But I have also said clearly that we need to build infrastructure as a country, and it is not possible to just build all of it “somewhere else”. Inevitably, in these debates, we often get back to the argument that people are in favour of the technology, but “just not anywhere near my constituency.” There has to be some common ground in the middle that recognises that we need to build infrastructure somewhere. Solar is particularly important because it tackles our energy security issues, and is also by far the cheapest electricity generation to deploy in the country at the moment. With affordability at the forefront of all our constituents’ minds, it is right and proper that we try to deploy as much solar as we possibly can.

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    I will come to several of those points. The right hon. Gentleman has always been more pragmatic than his party on many of these issues—I hope that does not do him a disservice—and I have always appreciated that. He is right that we want to try to find a place where we can build the infrastructure that we need but bring communities with us and not turn them away from the energy transition. That is really important. I want to share some statistics, because individual applications often paint a picture of a much greater use of land across the country than is actually the case. At the end of September 2024—the latest set of figures I have—the land devoted to solar farms covered an estimated 21,000 hectares, which is around 0.1% of the UK’s total land. Even in our most ambitious deployment scenarios in the clean power action plan, we expect to get to 0.4% of deployment and 0.6% of agricultural land in the country. I recognise that there are local impacts from all these projects—I speak as a Member of Parliament from an area very close to some of the biggest onshore wind farms built under the previous Government—and that land use is a challenge across communities, but this is nevertheless a very small proportion of land across the country overall. The right hon. Member’s second point was about supply chains, on which the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) rightly challenged us, and I will say two things. First, it was right that we accepted the amendment but also set up Great British Energy to not only be a leader in how we build supply chains, but to try to get a supply chain on solar panels here in the UK again and do due diligence on supply chains coming in from China. There is much more work to do and I do not pretend that the work is complete yet. Some initiatives, such as the solar stewardship initiative, need to go further to ensure that we get into the detail of supply chains. Secondly, when we left Government in 2010, three companies were building in solar supply chains in the UK and, when we came back, there were none. That comes back to a really important point about re-industrialisation: if we want supply chain security, a line of sight on things such as human rights, and to create good jobs across the country, we need to invest in manufacturing capability. We need to nurture it and not let it go to the wall, which is where we get to particular risks.

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    I give way first to the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson).

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    I give way to the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith).

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    I thank the right hon. Gentleman; he made similar points during the passage of the Great British Energy Bill. We continue to look at and review that across Government in relation to procurement and Government investment in these projects. We want to incentivise, as much as possible, supply chains to be here in the UK. I do not accept the point from the right hon. Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) that cost alone is the reason why we do not have supply chains here in the UK. We must use the mechanisms we have to encourage manufacturing in the UK. That is why such things as the clean industry bonus are about saying that, alongside contracts for difference to build renewable energy in the UK, companies can also get investment to make sure that manufacturing is here in the UK, too, and the jobs that go with it. We also need security at a time when supply chains are critical. No doubt this is a challenge and I accept that point, but there is more we can do. I want to come back to what the right hon. Member for Tatton said about net zero zealotry. I think there is quite a lot of anti-net zero zealotry in this debate. At the end of her speech, she said something that I completely agree with. I hope there is recognition that solar is part of an energy mix, not the entirety of it. We need a mix of technologies, but the quicker we can get off fossil fuels, the better it is for our energy security in a very uncertain world, as we are all experiencing, and in terms of bringing down bills. Solar is a crucial part of that, and although we absolutely want to see solar panels on as many rooftops as possible and to support innovative projects such as floating solar, we also recognise that ground-mounted solar plays a critical role in this. The right hon. Lady also made a number of points about food security, and of course, I absolutely agree with her. Food security is national security. We need to back British farmers and agriculture is really important in this country. I understand that it is important that we work to preserve the beauty and character of rural areas, but that is precisely what the planning system exists to do. It weighs up different impacts with opportunities, looks through specific projects and takes account of local views, all of which are considered in these processes. The planning system is also really clear that a number of projects in a particular area will have cumulative impacts on the nationally significant infrastructure project pipeline, and that is taken into account in these processes. Whether it is visual amenity, protected landscapes or the natural environment, all of these things are taken into account. As the right hon. Lady said, the planning system already steers developers to use brownfield sites wherever possible, and the development of agricultural land can take place only where it is absolutely necessary, and even then, lower-grade land should be used first.

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    I will give way briefly to the right hon. Lady, but I will then have to conclude.

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    It is not for me to litigate individual planning applications; that is what the planning system exists for. We have given very clear guidance on this, and we keep these things under review. At the moment, we already have a planning system that takes these things into consideration, and I will not open up the debate on individual projects. Indeed, the National Farmers’ Union has said that solar poses no threat to food security. I must also highlight the most glaring point in all this: clean energy is about us trying to get off fossil fuels, and although part of the reason for doing so is to reduce all our constituents’ exposure to the impacts on bills, the summer we have just lived through was a perfect example of climate change in action. It made the impact of not tackling the climate crisis on food security very clear and present for us. To exclude that from the debate misses the crucial point that climate change is far more likely to impact our food security in Britain than any infrastructure that we are building. I have already told the right hon. Lady that I agree that we should be building much more rooftop solar, and that is why the future homes standards encourage new houses to be built with solar installed. That is also why I am working to see whether we can get even more solar on warehouses, supermarkets, car parks and everywhere else we possibly can, which I am entirely open to, but ground-mounted solar will nevertheless remain important. I also want us to look much more at innovation in how we farm alongside solar farms. I have visited a number of solar farms where the two go alongside one another, such as where livestock grazing can go alongside solar deployment. There is also a lot of emerging science in agrivoltaics on developing new ways to make sure that we have arable farming alongside solar.

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentLabourMichael Shanks

    Solar Panels on Agricultural Land

    I am not making any guarantees here, and I have not pretended to do so. I am saying that there is much more opportunity to do these things side by side, and I have visited and seen some places where it is working, including places where there is a net gain in biodiversity from the deployment of solar panels. In this focus group on solar, we will clearly not have support from everyone who has spoken in the debate today, and I entirely understand that. As I have said in a number of debates—I hope fairly—we want to ensure that we bring communities with us on this as much as possible, and the planning system is important. The right hon. Member for Tatton also talked about community benefits, and it is really important that those are meaningful to communities. We will say more soon about our expectations on developers for community benefits. We want those to genuinely invest in the future of communities, rather than be tokenistic. It is important to say that they are not compensation regimes; they are about saying, “You’re hosting infrastructure on behalf of the country, and we thank you for that. Here is a community benefit.” Contrary to how it seems from my speech, I think there is much that we agree on. We want to preserve the character of the countryside across the country, but I also genuinely believe that we have to rapidly increase the amount of electricity that we can generate from clean sources. We have to ensure that we have renewables alongside nuclear and other technologies, and the planning system exists to balance that with continued food production and protecting communities. I am very open to looking at any further reforms that are necessary, but I think that the balance is understood at the moment. I hope we can continue this conversation in the manner in which we have had the debate today. Question put and agreed to.

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentLabourMatt Turmaine

    High Streets and Town Centres

    <Question HRSContentId="{5CFA1585-8518-40D2-B867-620C6A5264E1}">23. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{2DA2281C-C991-408B-92F4-6E84C4EFF508}">What fiscal steps he is taking to support high streets and town centres.</QuestionText></Question>

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentLabourMatt Turmaine

    High Streets and Town Centres

    I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. I welcome last week’s Budget and its efforts to create breathing space for people and businesses—[Interruption.] It does indeed. Watford has a popular high street. I have met local business owners post Budget, and they are keen to see the Government cut red tape and stimulate growth. Will my right hon. Friend outline some of the specific measures the Government are taking to help our high streets?

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentLabourMatt Turmaine

    Budget Resolutions

    The Budget introduced by the Government on Wednesday last week was billed as delivering “Breathing space for today” and “fresh hope” for tomorrow. Those are indeed noble sentiments from a Chancellor and Government determined to make things better for working people, even in these most difficult of times. War rages in the middle east and Ukraine, and none of us knows when the conflicts will end, or the scale of their impact on our country and economy. What the people of Watford know is that the cost of living crisis is still very real. Certainly, when I talk to residents in my constituency, I hear that the cost of day-to-day living is a tough challenge for many. Since the 2024 Labour landslide, Chancellors have tried to make things better for people, fixing the foundations of our economy and delivering growth in the toughest of times. I warmly welcome the Chancellor’s Budget; my right hon. Friend has managed to deliver something for most people, and for that, I and my fellow residents will be grateful. Britain has had the joint-highest growth in the G7 this year. That is brilliant news, but what matters to the great British public is feeling the effects of that growth in their pockets. To that end, the announcements from last week show that Watford wins with Labour. The £100 energy bill relief for those in council tax bands A to D will help my fellow residents; it is a real cash injection to help with energy bills, and 37,140 households in Watford will benefit from it. Further, the extension of the zero VAT rating on electricity bills through to the summer of next year will help people through the cold winter and spring months, which is welcome indeed. The Chancellor’s plan to abolish the standing charge on gas bills will deliver further financial help, as will the continued freeze on fuel duty. Watford residents are car users, so that will help them, just as the £2 cap on bus fares in January will help those who rely on public transport. Meanwhile, the first rail fare freeze in 30 years is already delivering for those on the train network. Businesses on the high street will welcome the small business rates relief threshold for retail, hospitality and leisure. That will help around half of those in the sector in our region of the country. Those who do not benefit from the exemption will see a real-terms freeze in business rates for ’27-28 and ’28-29, which is welcome, especially as things remain tight. In Watford, that will help 662 businesses and a further 373 in Hertsmere, which is where the Bushey part of my constituency is. The measures will bring vibrancy back to the high street. Under the new devolution arrangements, Hertfordshire, the county that my constituency is in, will become a mayoral strategic authority, and that will help unlock further the potential of the town and the county to deliver a brighter future, with more jobs and opportunities. Housing remains a challenge across the country, but in Watford, the cost of housing can be prohibitive; people who grew up in the area are sometimes forced out by high prices. That is why I welcome the Your First Home initiative. The help for first time buyers will really help people to make a home in Watford. After being elected to this place, I became involved in the campaign for better paternity rights organised by the Dad Shift, and I was particularly pleased to see the hard-working campaign achieve a victory, when the Chancellor granted paternity pay to self-employed dads. That is definitely another move that will help families welcoming a new member—of a very different variety—in Watford. Turning to the other end of the age spectrum, I welcome the end of the cliff edge for those delivering care. I have also full-throatedly supported the Government’s ambition to halve violence against women and girls, and I welcome the measures designed to help in that respect. In conclusion, this Budget was designed to provide breathing space for today and fresh hope for tomorrow. It delivers that for Watford and the wider community, and I wholeheartedly support it.

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentLabourMary Creagh

    Poundland

    Poundland is a proud west midlands business and its three stores in Coventry provide fantastic products at reasonable prices to my constituents. Its workers have been writing to me with concerns over their futures. Poundland’s 12,000 workers will be contributing tens of millions of pounds in tax and national insurance to the Exchequer each year. Is there not a case for this activist Government to stand behind any management buy-out, or buy-in from any bidder, and ensure that these workers continue to play their part in retail on our high streets, in the way that the Government have done through the nationalisation of British Steel and through the loan facility offered to Jaguar Land Rover last year?

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentLabourMartin Rhodes

    Budget Resolutions

    I draw the attention of the House to my interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for events. I welcome the Budget from the Chancellor and I particularly welcome his announcement that the UK Government will provide £6 million for the Scottish Event Campus in my constituency. That is a vote of confidence in the SEC, Glasgow and the events sector more generally; hope for the future, grounded in proven past and current success. The SEC plays an essential part in underpinning Glasgow and Scotland’s position as a global events and conference destination, and this funding recognises that. Today, the SEC generates more than £605 million in economic value, welcomes 2.5 million visitors a year and supports 5,300 jobs. The investment in this Budget will help to multiply that economic and social contribution, unlock private investment in the campus’s further development and create more jobs, while supporting the wider Glasgow, Scottish and UK economies. Given the SEC’s success in hosting COP26 and events for both of Glasgow’s Commonwealth games, this investment will help to secure Scotland’s position as an ideal location for future international conferences, exhibitions and live entertainment. It also helps to shape a city that treats the River Clyde as a cultural and economic asset. The success of the Riverside Museum and the Govan-Partick bridge is a testament to what can be achieved when the Clyde is recognised as an asset. This Labour Government continue to prove through investments like the local growth fund and this funding that they take seriously the task of making Glasgow city region a prosperous and attractive place to live and do business. I also welcome the Budget’s recognition that the central belt of Scotland, from the west coast to the east coast, is home to vital industries and world-leading research. Yesterday evening, I had the privilege of hosting the University of Glasgow here in Parliament to mark its 575th anniversary. It certainly has a long and successful track record, but it also has the research and innovation to drive economic growth now and in the future. I hope that this funding for the SEC will show how important the campus is to that wider regional picture. However, to ensure that the SEC remains competitive against our international rivals, we must continue to invest in the city’s skills and infrastructure for tomorrow. The up and coming visitor economy growth strategy must also deliver a more cohesive, cross-Government approach to supporting business events. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for events, I see at first hand how the events industry benefits the wider economy. VisitScotland estimates that the Scottish events industry brings £6.1 billion to the Scottish economy each year. Some of the biggest economic benefits from the events sector come not from one-off sporting or music events, but from business events such as conferences and trade shows. These events tend to last longer, so visitors spend more time at the destination, use more hotels and support more local restaurants, bars and cafés. Industry estimates indicate that UK conferences and meetings generated £22.5 billion for the national economy in 2025, up from £19.3 billion in 2024. I very much welcome the specific commitment in the Budget to invest in the Scottish Event Campus, both as a significant investment in this key project in Glasgow and as a clear indication from the Chancellor that this Government acknowledge the economic importance of the events sector across the UK. This is a Budget that is focused on the livelihoods of today and the economy of tomorrow.

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentLabourMarkus Campbell-Savours

    Train Services: Extreme Weather

    In Cumbria, we fully appreciate how disruptive bad weather can be, and we have quite a lot of experience of it, but we do not appreciate why bad weather in Scotland can mean that trains heading north on the west coast main line terminate in Preston, which is nearly an hour away from Penrith and even further away from Carlisle. Will the Minister commit to writing to Avanti and Network Rail to determine why that is and consider solutions that might get my constituents home a bit quicker?

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentLabourMarkus Campbell-Savours

    Advanced Manufacturing

    While the Government look to boost economic growth in Cumbria, businesses in the county are frustrated at losing staff to Sellafield and the wider nuclear sector, not just engineers and project managers, but business administrators, trades people, nurses and teachers. Will the Secretary of State consider a review of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s social impact duties under the Energy Act 2004, and its impact on the growth and diversity of the wider Cumbria economy?

    Hansard source