partytracker.uk

Showing every spoken contribution, including 11,997 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
Let me start with new clause 40, which seeks to clarify that social landlords can continue to grant fixed-term tenancies. Fixed-term tenancies will no longer be available within the assured tenancy framework once the relevant Renters’ Rights Act 2025 reforms take effect. I therefore understand that the proposal is aimed principally at ensuring that local housing authorities and other secure tenancy landlords can continue to grant fixed-term tenancies when appropriate. I want to be clear that the new clause is not needed. Nothing in the Bill prevents secure-tenancy landlords from granting fixed-term tenancies. As I have said, the Bill repeals uncommenced provisions in the Housing and Planning Act 2016, which would have required most new secure tenancies to be fixed-term tenancies. As we have just debated, those provisions were never brought into force and we are now removing them in order to provide clarity. Secure-tenancy landlords will still be able to offer fixed-term tenancies where they consider it appropriate to do so; as I have said, the Bill does not change that. The proposed measures risk repeating what is already the case in law for secure-tenancy landlords and would create confusion by suggesting that the Bill removes flexibility in this area when it does not. For those reasons, I ask the shadow Minister not to press new clause 40. New clause 58 would require local housing authorities to review lifetime secure tenancies every five years. I made it clear when speaking to clause 17 that the Government support the use of lifetime tenancies because they provide stability and security for households and help people to put down roots in their communities. That is precisely why we are repealing uncommenced provisions in the 2016 Act that would have phased out lifetime secure tenancies in favour of mandatory fixed-term tenancies. We expect local authorities and other social landlords to make the best and most effective use of their stock to meet housing need. However, we do not believe that a statutory requirement for local authorities to review every secure tenancy once every five years would be an appropriate way to support them in doing so, given the administrative burden that that would entail. We also believe that it would have detrimental impacts on tenants and communities. Those are some of the reasons why the previous Government did not commence the provisions they had legislated for in the 2016 Act.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I fear that the hon. Gentleman does misunderstand the Bill in a number of respects. First, we are not abolishing or phasing out the right to buy. As I have persistently made clear, we want to ensure that the right to buy is available for long-standing tenants who have lived in—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman can intervene once I have answered his first question. I refer to those tenants who have lived in and paid rent on their homes for many years. I have already made it clear in a previous debate that landlords can already consider the changing needs of tenants through a variety of methods, ranging from tenant surveys to direct engagement. They can already support tenants to downsize, to transfer or to mutually exchange their home if their circumstances change. The new clause would mandate, through primary legislation, a review of every secure tenancy once every five years. I simply put it to the hon. Gentleman—this picks up on the precise reason why the previous Conservative Government did not bring into force the provisions in their own 2016 Act—that that would entail huge administrative burdens for local authorities. We think, because we believe in the principle of secure tenancies in social housing—in terms of the benefits for tenants and for communities more widely—that we should not impose such a statutory review every five years. I am struggling to see how that is incompatible with trying to place the right-to-buy scheme on a fairer and more sustainable footing. The Government are reviewing how effectively social housing providers are using their stock. That work is considering issues such as under-occupation, overcrowding and how landlords are supporting tenant movement. We will set out findings from that review and the next steps in due course. We think social landlords can, in some instances, make better and more effective use of their stock. That does not necessarily require, as a means to support them to do so, a statutory requirement to review every secure tenancy every five years.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I am sorry to hear about that case; if my hon. Friend wants to write to me with further details, I am more than happy to look into it. I would make two points: local authorities are best placed to decide the types of social homes their communities need and to plan for them appropriately. Local authorities also have a statutory duty to promote adaptations for disabled people in all housing tenures, subject to a needs assessment, and the Government provide the disabled facilities grant to support them. I am happy to write to my hon. Friend with more details about the support that should be in place and the expectations that the Government have in respect of local authorities. If he wants to write to me, I am more than happy to come back to him on the particular points that might arise from the case he has mentioned. We cannot accept new clause 58 and I have already spoken to new clause 40, tabled by the shadow Minister. I ask the Committee to support Government amendments 75 to 77 and I commend clause 17 to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. Clause 17 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 3 Secure, introductory and demoted tenancies: uncommenced legislation etc Amendments made: 75, in schedule 3, page 41, line 1, after “143H” insert “of the Housing Act 1996”. This would clarify that this sub-paragraph amends the Housing Act 1996. Amendment 76, in schedule 3, page 42, line 5, after “143J” insert “of the Housing Act 1996”. This would clarify that this sub-paragraph amends the Housing Act 1996. Amendment 77, in schedule 3, page 42, line 23, leave out “to (10)” and insert “, (9) and (10)(c) and (d)”.—(Matthew Pennycook.) This would clarify that only sub-paragraph 10(c) and (d) are relevant to sub-paragraph (13). Sub-paragraph 10(a) and (b) concern introductory, rather than demoted, tenancies. Schedule 3, as amended, agreed to. Clause 18 Rents for high income social tenants Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
Clause 18 will repeal unimplemented provisions that would have required councils to charge higher rents to higher-income social tenants. We are now removing them to provide certainty and clean up the statute book. The provisions, as with others we have debated this afternoon, were never implemented. Once again, I note that the original provisions in the Housing and Planning Act 2016 received strong objections during the passage of that legislation. A mandatory pay-to-stay scheme would be difficult and costly to administer. Indeed, the previous Government, despite legislating for this policy, chose not to commence it on the explicit basis that the costs outweighed the benefits. Income alone is also not the only determinant of who is allocated social housing. Some households may have additional needs or circumstances which mean that social housing remains the only viable or appropriate option for them. That can be the case even where their income may be somewhat higher than others on the waiting list. Social housing is targeted at those who need it most, but some tenants’ incomes may rise over time. Our focus is on keeping rents affordable and supporting all social tenants, not penalising tenants for improving their circumstances. As we debated in the previous group, landlords can encourage tenants to move if their circumstances change. Where tenants want to move or downsize, we expect landlords to support them to do so through transfers or mutual exchanges, which helps people move to properties that are better suited to them, and helps to ensure that social housing is used in the fairest way possible. Where councils and private registered providers choose, they can run voluntary pay-to-stay schemes, which allows landlords to decide whether a scheme is suitable for their area. Councils can also consider an applicant’s income and financial circumstances when deciding whether they qualify for social housing and what priority they should receive. Households with higher incomes may be given less priority, or may not qualify at all. However, councils will also consider whether the household has other needs, as I have referenced, which can mean that social housing is still the right option for them. Repealing these measures provides a fairer and more workable approach. This change will help keep rents affordable for social tenants, especially those on lower and middle incomes, avoid disincentives to work and mean that tenants are not incentivised to reduce their working hours to avoid higher rent. I commend clause 18 to the Committee.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
Before I respond to new clause 42, I must address something that the shadow Minister keeps saying, which is that the Bill does not build any new social housing. I have made this incredibly clear, and I encourage him to go and talk to his local authority, although I am not sure its record on social housing is a particularly good one. Local authorities are very clear and have said to us in plain terms that the measures in the Bill will incentivise them to build more social homes. Of course, it is not the case that this piece of legislation is the only means by which we are building new social and affordable housing. We have a £39 billion social and affordable homes programme, which dwarfs anything that the previous Conservative Government allocated in this area, and there is additional funding to come on top of that. New clause 42 would require the Secretary of State to review income eligibility thresholds for social housing within two years of the Bill’s passage, and every five years thereafter, and to publish the findings and lay them before Parliament. Each review would consider trends over the previous five years in household earnings, regional housing costs, housing affordability and demand for social housing. I recognise the importance of considering income to ensure that social housing is targeted at those most in need. Indeed, it is a sad truth that the residualisation of social housing over many years—not least because of the engineered decline of it under previous Conservative Governments, with increased right-to-buy discounts explicitly targeted to ensure that more is sold—has meant that, in most cases, it has become targeted to those on very low incomes, but we do not believe that the new clause is necessary. Eligibility for social housing is considered through the allocations process, and there is no general national income eligibility threshold for social rented housing. As I have made clear, local authorities can take financial resources into account in determining qualification and relative priority under their allocation schemes, subject to statutory requirements, and private registered providers also operate their own lettings polices. This allows local and individual circumstances to be taken into account.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I thank my hon. Friend for the invitation to become ungracious in respect of Opposition Members. I remember the debates in that 2016 Bill Committee. Those were deeply ideological measures, but I think it says everything that Conservative Ministers decided they were impractical, unworkable, could not be implemented, and made it clear—[Interruption.] They did. I encourage Opposition Members to go and read the 2018 social housing Green Paper, in which Conservative Ministers made it very clear that huge administrative burdens would come from some of these measures, in addition to their detrimental impact on tenants and communities. What we are doing is going a step further, as I have said, and removing these measures, and the uncertainty they create, from the statute book. On the new clause, it is important to be clear that only a very small minority of social housing lettings are to high-income households. This is based on household income, not individual income, and in many cases could reflect two people each earning a modest salary, rather than a single person on what anyone would reasonably describe as a high income. Some households may have additional needs or circumstances that mean that social housing remains, as I have said, the only viable or appropriate option for them. That can be the case even when their income may be somewhat higher than that of others on the waiting list. Income should be considered alongside a household’s wider housing needs and circumstances, but we do not believe that this duty is necessary, or that it would be an appropriate use of resources for the Government to review every one of these independently set thresholds. In repealing the pay-to-stay provisions in the Housing and Planning Act 2016, councils and registered providers will still be able to operate voluntary pay-to-stay schemes for households earning over £60,000 if they wish to do so. That discretion is important and it remains, but there will be no mandatory national requirement. That approach will, as I have said, avoid disincentives for people to work or increase their earnings, and will support a more sensible system overall. I therefore ask that the new clause not be pressed, and I commend clause 18 to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. Clause 18 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 19 Health and safety lead: Parliamentary procedure Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
Clause 19 will make a minor technical amendment to the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008, section 320 of which sets out the parliamentary procedure that applies to regulations made under its provisions. Regulations made under sections 70, 72 and 126A are subject to the affirmative procedure, which means that a draft of the regulations must be laid before and approved by both Houses of Parliament before they can be made. However, the provision governing the negative procedure currently excludes only regulations made under sections 70 and 72; it does not also refer to section 126A. Clause 19 corrects that inconsistency and ensures that all regulations that section 320 specifies as being subject to the affirmative procedure are properly excluded from the negative procedure. The clause does not confer any new powers or reduce the level of parliamentary scrutiny; it simply ensures that the existing statutory provisions operate clearly and consistently. I commend the clause to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. Clause 19 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. New Clause 21 Management of local authority housing by TMOs “Schedule (Management of local authority housing by TMOs) makes provision about the management of local authority housing accommodation by tenant management organisations.”—(Matthew Pennycook.) This would introduce NS1 which provides for a revised and expanded legislative regime about the management of council housing by tenant management organisations. Brought up, and read the First time.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
The right to manage can be a powerful tool through which social housing residents can take greater control of the housing services that they receive, but it must operate within a clear, robust framework that protects residents and clarifies respective responsibilities. Taken together, these changes will update and strengthen the right to manage, making it easier for social housing tenants to exercise that right with confidence, while ensuring that appropriate safeguards are in place. These reforms have been informed by the findings of the review of the right to manage that was undertaken by the Government. Through the review, we heard clearly from stakeholders that the current right to manage framework has not kept pace with wider regulatory change. They highlighted the need for governance that is more proportionate and for greater clarity on roles, responsibilities and information sharing. We also heard from landlords and residents that the current routes for intervention if things go wrong can be slow and cumbersome. Within schedule 1, proposed new sections 27AD to 27AF of the Housing Act 1985 will enable a more proportionate approach to governance requirements. They will put in place lighter-touch requirements where residents take on more limited services, and stronger requirements where tenant management organisations assume more complex functions, including building safety responsibilities. Those provisions will also provide broader powers to strengthen the framework governing right to manage arrangements, helping to ensure that it keeps pace with wider regulatory requirements, including on the safety and decency of social homes and quality of services to tenants. These are enabling powers that will allow us to update the right to manage regulations and guidance to govern management agreements, ballots of residents, regular reviews and information sharing. The powers will come into effect on Royal Assent, but we will consult on the detail before introducing the new regulations and guidance. Proposed new sections 27AG to 27AL will also require regular reviews of the management agreements, strengthen the requirements for residents to be balloted on continuation of TMO arrangements, and require better information sharing between TMOs and their landlords. They will also strengthen requirements on landlords to consult TMOs on policy changes affecting functions exercised under management agreements. Proposed new sections 27AM to 27AQ will create a targeted court-backed route for intervention in exceptional cases, including removal of board members where there is serious mismanagement of a TMO or a risk to residents’ safety. That route will be subject to judicial oversight, with the court required to be satisfied that urgent intervention is appropriate. That will help to address the concerns raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) about the ability of councils to act swiftly where serious failings are putting residents at risk. We know that many TMOs work hard to deliver good-quality housing services that respond to local priorities and are supported by tenants who give up their own time to serve on committees. These reforms will make the right to manage easier to exercise, clearer to operate and safer for residents. They will support resident empowerment while ensuring that landlords have the tools they need to meet their regulatory requirements and safeguard residents. Question put and agreed to. New clause 21 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill. New Clause 22 Duty of private registered provider to offer accommodation after local authority request “(1) After section 193C of the Housing Act 1996 insert— ‘193D Duty of private registered provider to offer accommodation after local authority request (1) This section applies where— (a) a local housing authority in England has a duty under section 193 to secure accommodation for an applicant, and (b) the authority has made a written request to a private registered provider of social housing to provide low cost rental accommodation in the authority’s district for the applicant. (2) The provider must make an offer of low cost rental accommodation in the authority’s district to the applicant within a reasonable period, unless the provider has a good reason not to. (3) If the provider considers that there is a good reason not to make an offer of low cost rental accommodation in the authority’s district, the provider must, as soon as reasonably practicable, give written notice of the reason to the local housing authority. (4) In deciding whether to make a request under subsection (1)(b), the local housing authority must have regard to— (a) the type and amount of low cost rental accommodation that the provider in question owns or manages in the authority’s district, and (b) the extent to which the provider is already providing accommodation in the authority’s district to persons who are homeless. (5) The local housing authority may by written notice require the provider to provide the information described in subsection (4)(a) or (b), unless it is not reasonably practicable to do so. (6) A notice under subsection (5) may require the information to be provided— (a) within a specified period; (b) in a specified manner or form. (7) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for the purposes of subsection (2) as to what constitutes— (a) a reasonable period; (b) a good reason. save-line2(8) “Low cost rental accommodation” has the same meaning as in the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 (see section 69) (9) An offer made under this section is not an offer of accommodation under Part 6 (allocation of housing).’”—(Matthew Pennycook.) Brought up, and read the First time.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. Many councils and housing associations already work closely together to secure settled homes for people facing homelessness. We are committed to building on the many examples of good practice and collaboration that exist, but informal agreements between councils and other providers do not always work. Private registered providers are less likely than councils to offer accommodation to homeless households. New clause 22 will give local housing authorities an additional tool to help them to discharge the main homelessness duty. Where a council owes a household the main homelessness duty, it will be able to ask a private registered provider with social housing in its area to offer social housing to that household. The provider must respond and offer suitable accommodation within a reasonable period unless it has good reason not to do so. We will consult councils, housing providers and other relevant providers before setting out in regulations what constitutes a reasonable period and a good reason, but, to give an example, a private registered provider would not be expected to offer accommodation if they do not have anything suitable available in a reasonable timeframe. The power includes important safeguards. Before making a referral, the council must take account of the type and amount of accommodation that the provider has locally, and the extent to which it is already housing homeless households. That will ensure that referrals are fair and proportionate and that they reflect local circumstances. The approach builds on established practice in Scotland and delivers a commitment in our national plan to end homelessness. I commend the new clause to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. New clause 22 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill. New Clause 23 Referral of homelessness cases to other local housing authorities “(1) Section 198 of the Housing Act 1996 (referral of case) is amended in accordance with subsections (2) and (3). (2) After subsection (4) insert— ‘(4ZA) The Secretary of State may by regulations specify circumstances in which— (a) the conditions for referral mentioned in subsection (2), (b) the conditions for referral mentioned in subsection (2ZA), or (c) the conditions for referral mentioned in subsection (4), are not met for the purposes of referral of a case by a local housing authority in England.’ (3) In subsection (7) after ‘order’, in the first two places it occurs, insert ‘or regulations’.”—(Matthew Pennycook.) This would allow the Secretary of State to make regulations specifying circumstances where a local housing authority in England cannot refer a person who is homeless to another local housing authority. Brought up, and read the First time.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
New clauses 23 and 24 will strengthen homelessness prevention and ensure that support reaches those who need it most, as quickly as possible. We owe a debt of gratitude to those who have served in our armed forces. They have given so much of their life in service to their country, and it is right that we support them to have a safe home on leaving active service. The number of former armed service personnel seeking homelessness support is thankfully relatively small, but the Government recognise that those who do so can face challenges, particularly if they seek to establish themselves in an area where they may have no existing local connections. The existing legislation permits a local housing authority to refer someone who is seeking housing support, but does not have any connections to their local area, to the area of another local housing authority where they do. New clause 23 provides a power for the Secretary of State to define in regulations where that should not apply. We propose to use that power to exempt our armed forces veterans from local connection referrals. That means that there will be no barriers or delays to veterans receiving homelessness assistance. They will be able to seek support from anywhere in the country, and the local authority will be required to provide assistance. This builds on the action that we took last year to exempt veterans from any local connection test that councils might apply to determine who qualifies for an allocation of social housing.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I very much welcome my hon. Friend’s support for this measure. I am more than happy to have an ongoing dialogue about the issue with her, as I do with so many others. It is absolutely right that we look to do everything possible to support our veterans. I turn to new clause 24. We know that homelessness rarely occurs without warning. Yet too often, people come to the attention of local housing authorities only when they have already reached crisis point. Many of them will have been in contact with different public services long before, but opportunities to identify risk, co-ordinate support and intervene early are often missed. People often face homelessness despite engaging with services that are well placed to help prevent it. The new clause addresses this challenge by introducing new duties on specified bodies to identify and act on a person’s homelessness or risk of homelessness. This supports the Government’s commitment to prevent and relieve homelessness at the earliest possible stage. The specified bodies will also be required to take meaningful action as part of the existing functions to address or relieve homelessness. The duty will replace and extend the existing duty to refer. It will mandate earlier engagement with local housing authorities, alongside notifying them if someone requires support. It also mandates continued engagement with the local authority to enable it to support an individual as effectively as possible, and will require specified bodies to consider other sources of support for the individual. Preventing homelessness should not be the responsibility of a single organisation. People at risk of homelessness often have multiple and overlapping needs, including poor health, unemployment, financial hardship or involvement with the justice system. No single service can address these issues effectively alone.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
I appreciate my hon. Friend’s points. We will set out the specified bodies in due course. I hear what he says about hospital trusts in particular. I think engagement is to take place on the precise scope of the specified bodies that we want to be caught by the new duty. On the point of principle—these are broad enabling powers—effective prevention depends on earlier identification, co-ordinated action and shared responsibility across services. Importantly, this is not about creating an entirely new system. Many services already undertake these activities to support homelessness prevention, whether by identifying vulnerabilities, signposting support, making referrals or working with partners to resolve housing issues. These new duties build on existing good practice and should drive a consistent national framework to support those who are most vulnerable. The Government intend to define in secondary legislation the bodies within scope and the actions required to comply with the duty, but my officials and I have heard the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip makes.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matthew Pennycook
Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)
If the hon. Member will allow me, I will write to him on that specific point; I do not have an answer to hand. I am more than happy to set out how these provisions might work where multiple local authorities are involved. I take his point on that. As I say, we intend to define in secondary legislation the bodies within scope and the actions required to comply with the duty. This will allow us to work closely with stakeholders to ensure that implementation is proportionate and effective and that it reflects the differing functions of individual services. Ultimately, the new clause is about ensuring that services work together to identify risks earlier and intervene before people reach crisis point. By creating a more joined-up approach to homelessness prevention, we can help more people to remain in their homes, shift the system away from crisis response and deliver our ambition on homelessness and rough sleeping, as the Prime Minister has rightly outlined. I commend the new clauses to the Committee. Question put and agreed to. New clause 23 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill. New Clause 24 Duties of specified bodies to collaborate and act on homelessness “(1) This section amends the Housing Act 1996. (2) After section 213AA insert— ‘213AB Specified bodies must identify actual or possible homelessness (1) A specified body must take reasonable steps to identify persons in England in relation to whom it exercises functions who it considers are or may be— (a) homeless, (b) threatened with homelessness, or (c) otherwise at risk of becoming homeless. (2) When a specified body becomes subject to that duty in relation to a particular person (taking into account any effect of regulations made under section 213AG(1)), the body must comply with the duty promptly. 213AC Specified bodies must act on actual or possible homelessness (1) A specified body must comply with the duty to notify the local housing authority (see section 213AD) in relation to a person (H) if the body identifies H as a person who the body considers is or may be— (a) homeless, or (b) threatened with homelessness. (2) But the specified body does not need to comply with the duty to notify if it is satisfied that— (a) H has already made an application for assistance, and (b) the application has not been disposed of. (3) A specified body must comply with the general duty to act (see section 213AE) in relation to a person (H) if the body identifies H as a person who the body considers is or may be— (a) homeless, (b) threatened with homelessness, or (c) otherwise at risk of becoming homeless. (4) A “relevant step”, in relation to H, means a step to— (a) prevent H becoming homeless, (b) reduce the risk of H becoming homeless, (c) relieve H’s homelessness, or (d) alleviate the effects of H’s homelessness. 213AD The duty to notify the local housing authority (1) The “duty to notify the local housing authority” in relation to H consists of the duties set out in this section. (2) The specified body must ask H— (a) whether H has made an application for assistance under this Part, and (b) if so, to which local housing authority the application was made. (3) If H has not made an application for assistance, the specified body must ask whether H agrees to the body notifying a local housing authority in England— (a) that the body considers that H is or may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, and (b) how H may be contacted by the local housing authority. (4) If H agrees to the specified body making the notification, the body must ask H— (a) whether H consents to the body sharing with the authority such information as is necessary to make the notification (including information provided by H and information already held by the body), and (b) to identify a local housing authority in England to which H would like the notification to be made. (5) If H agrees to the specified body making the notification and consents to the body sharing the information that is necessary to make the notification, the body must notify the local housing authority in England to which H would like the notification to be made. 213AE The general duty to act (1) The “general duty to act” in relation to H consists of the duties set out in this section. (2) The specified body must— (a) consider the question of what relevant steps could be taken by it or other persons, and (b) raise that question with such persons as the body considers appropriate, who must include any other persons that could take relevant steps. (3) After complying with subsection (2) the specified body— (a) must take any relevant steps which it concludes it can take, and (b) must provide to the persons with which it has raised that question reasonable assistance to assist or enable them to take relevant steps. (4) This section does not affect any right of the specified body, whether by virtue of a contract, enactment or other law, to seek to obtain vacant possession of any accommodation. (5) If a specified body must also comply with the duty to notify in relation to H, making the notification under section 213AD(5) does not satisfy the general duty to act in relation to H. (6) A reference in this section to a relevant step— (a) includes a relevant step that can be taken with the assistance of another person; (b) in relation to a specified body, only includes a relevant step that the body can reasonably take in the exercise of its functions; (c) in relation to a person who is not a specified body, only includes a relevant step that the person can reasonably take in the exercise of their functions or in carrying out their activities. 213AF Duty to engage with local housing authorities (1) This section applies where a local housing authority in England considers— (a) that a person is or may be homeless, threatened with homelessness or otherwise at risk of becoming homeless, and (b) that a specified body exercises functions in relation to that person. (2) The local housing authority may ask the specified body to engage with them for the purpose of assisting the authority with the discharge of their functions under this Part in relation to that person. (3) The specified body must engage with the local housing authority in such manner and to such extent as the body considers reasonable in the circumstances. 213AG Regulations and guidance (1) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision about how specified bodies can or must comply with— (a) the duty to identify homelessness, (b) the duty to notify the local housing authority, (c) the general duty to act, or (d) the duty to engage. (2) Regulations made under subsection (1) may, in particular, make provision about the following matters— (a) factors to be considered by a specified body when identifying whether a person is homeless, threatened by homelessness or otherwise at risk of becoming homeless; (b) what information is necessary to make a notification to a local housing authority in England; (c) what relevant steps by a specified body in the exercise of its functions are reasonable; (d) the process to be followed by a specified body when identifying which persons it is appropriate to raise the question in section 213AE(2)(b) with. (3) Regulations under subsection (1) may not be made unless a draft of the statutory instrument containing them (whether alone or with other provisions) has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament. (4) The Secretary of State may issue guidance to specified bodies in relation to any of the following duties— (a) the duty to identify homelessness; (b) the duty to notify the local housing authority; (c) the general duty to act; (d) the duty to engage. (5) Specified bodies must have regard to guidance issued to them under subsection (4). 213AH “Specified bodies” and other interpretation (1) In sections 213AB to 213AG and this section— “duty to engage” means the duty imposed by section 213AF for specified bodies to engage with local housing authorities; “duty to identify homelessness” means the duty imposed by section 213AB; “duty to notify the local housing authority” has the meaning given in section 213AD; “general duty to act” has the meaning given in section 213AE; “H” has the meaning given in section 213AC; “relevant step” has the meaning given in section 213AC; “specified body” means a body or other person that is— (a) specified in regulations, or (b) of a description specified in regulations. (2) Regulations made under this section may provide that a person is a specified body only in relation to a particular function exercised by that person. (3) If a provision under subsection (2) specifies a particular function of a specified body, any reference in sections 213AB to 213AG to the functions of a specified body has effect in relation that body only as a reference to that particular function. (4) In this section, “regulations’ means regulations made by the Secretary of State. (5) Regulations under this section may not be made unless a draft of the statutory instrument containing them (whether alone or with other provisions) has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, each House of Parliament.’ (3) Omit section 213B (duty of public authority to refer cases in England to local housing authority). (4) In section 218 (index of defined expression Part 7) insert in the table at the appropriate places— <TableWrapper Columns="1" Size="8"><table class="hansardTable"><tbody><tr><td>‘relevant steps</td><td>section 213AC(3)’;</td></tr><tr><td>‘specified body</td><td>section 213AB(2)’.”</td></tr></tbody></table></TableWrapper> —(Matthew Pennycook.) This would amend the Housing Act 1996 to introduce a duty for specified bodies to identify and act on homelessness. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. Ordered, That further consideration be now adjourned.—(Laurence Turner.)
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matt Western
Strengthening Community Resilience
I commend my right hon. Friend and the Government for starting this national conversation. Given the extreme heat during the summer, the storms that have ravaged our communities in recent days and the issues involving rogue states attacking our infrastructure, there was clearly a real need for that conversation to start. As my right hon. Friend will know, my Committee’s inquiry on societal resilience is under way. Along with, I am sure, all other Members, I welcomed what my right hon. Friend said about the three-year programme, but will he commit to giving the House regular updates on the roles of local resilience forums, individuals and businesses in ensuring wider societal resilience?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matt Rodda
Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill
I thank the Secretary of State for her drive and determination on this very important matter. Will she give the House a little more detail relating to that group of residents and, in particular, those who face issues with dangerous materials inside their property, such as wood, which have led to a potential fire safety problem?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Matt Rodda
Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill
Could I pay my own tribute to the whole Grenfell family? I think we all remember quite vividly the moment when we heard on the news about this absolutely and utterly appalling disaster. Our hearts go out to all those who were affected and their families, particularly at this time when so many people must be thinking about the anniversary next year as well. It was quite clear, as other hon. Members have said, that this was a complete and utter failure of regulation, and I am so pleased that the Bill is tackling that. As other Members have said, cladding is an issue around the whole country, and I will address some matters in my constituency, but first, I thank the Secretary of State and the ministerial team for their drive and ambition on this important matter after some years of what, sadly, can only be described as drift under the last Government. I wholeheartedly welcome the Bill, and in particular some of its key elements and points. It creates greater certainty, which is long overdue. It gives regulators the powers they need. It makes companies that made unsafe products contribute towards remediation—that is such an important point, as other Members have said. Most of all, it ensures that residents have a route to remediation, which is utterly important. I am conscious of time as some other Member wish to speak, so I would like to turn to Reading. There are serious concerns locally, like those we have heard from Members describing the situations in their own constituencies. Our town has grown and changed dramatically within my lifetime, from being a county town made up of Victorian terraces and many brick buildings to now having a large number of taller buildings, many of which are blocks of flats. Obviously, the recent crisis has a huge implication for our community and for other towns across the county of Berkshire. At the time of the Grenfell disaster, I remember receiving a briefing from the Royal Berkshire fire and rescue service, and I can only say that it had an utterly chilling effect on those who listened to it—on myself, local councillors and others. The situation they described was one of a service trying to cope with serious concerns and issues across a large English county. For example, as Members have described, they mentioned the problem of cladding on many buildings—a number of them below 11 metres—as well as related issues such as poor compartmentalisation. I remember them talking about blocks in Slough where builders had unwittingly drilled holes through walls that were meant to prevent fire. In Reading, some blocks had very serious problems with compartmentalisation. There were a whole series of issues with dangerous wooden cladding, dangerous wooden fittings in foyers or doors that were not fire-safe at all—and all of this existed in just one county. Fire and rescue service staff and local authority staff were enormously pressed to deal with it. I remember listening to the accounts of waking watches being set up and thinking how terrifying it must have been to live in one of the blocks that were affected, just after Grenfell, when people were very aware of the disaster and horror that had happened not far away, in London. Those people had to live through a waking watch every single night. They were not able to have a whole range of items, and they could not cook certain types of food because of the fire risks from frying and other common forms of cooking. This was a huge issue for our community, particularly in the town centre and nearby areas. Many building owners were extremely responsible and acted as quickly as they could, despite the supply problems, the lack of skilled tradespeople, problems with putting up scaffolding and the pandemic that followed. I pay tribute to a number of housing associations that acted very quickly. Luckily, all the council housing in Reading was not affected because it was not built using cladding; the council had taken a very robust approach to that. However, there were a number of problems with private blocks that were either rented or leasehold, and some of those issues have continued right up to the present day; there have been local media reports on ITV and the BBC that have highlighted some of the problems. Like other Members—indeed, my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) put it very well—I have constituents who bought flats in blocks with cladding and were then trapped in them. They were struggling to sleep, and they lived in complete stress. Sometimes, I think it is fair to say that they had moments of terror living in these flats where they clearly were at great risk. They could not get the work done, and they were facing huge financial costs, which has been a problem across the whole country. I am so pleased that the current Government have gripped this and want to tackle it and to introduce some reassurance and routes to remediation at a much greater pace. I would like to press the Minister on the point about flats under 11 metres, and I hope she will be able to respond to this when she winds up the debate. It is great to hear about the fund for flats under 11 metres—there will be a number of these in many medium-sized towns—but there are other non-cladding-based fire safety issues in exactly this type of block. That includes the issues I mentioned, such as dangerous wooden items in the foyer of a large block in Reading, and wooden balconies; in one case, a building had wooden balconies next to an underground car park, which was then discovered to be a huge fire risk. Some of these risks are in blocks under 11 metres, which may not be covered by the fund. Could the Minister elaborate on the nature of the fund, to provide further reassurance to residents? Could the Minister also look into the wider issue of fire safety in buildings under 11 metres? As will be the case in many constituencies, we have a significant number of older blocks that are under 11 metres and might date back to the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s. They may not have dangerous cladding, but there might be issues with fire safety doors, evacuation procedures and a whole series of things. Because of the large number of these flats, residents will be concerned about the capacity of local authorities or the fire service to investigate. If the Minister could provide more information on that point, it would be very reassuring to residents in Reading and other similar towns. I am conscious of time, so I will conclude by wholeheartedly welcoming the Bill. It is a huge step forward, and I really welcome the drive and thrust of activity from the Department on this matter. I am sure that the whole House will once again want to offer their thoughts to the families of the Grenfell community. I look forward to hearing more from the Minister.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Mary Creagh
Strengthening Community Resilience
Madam Deputy Speaker, you and I spent many hours in meetings managing the disastrous fallout from South East Water’s outages in Tunbridge Wells and its surroundings. I would like to put on record my thanks to you for your role—and to those around the House for their role—as a trusted message bearer to the people caught up in those outages. One of the lessons I took from that was the need for people at the start of their life or at the end of their life to be properly looked after. What can my right hon. and gallant Friend do to make sure that local authorities, water companies and energy companies are working with local nurseries and, critically, acute NHS services so that they know who has just left hospital, who is at the end of life and who is under five in order to put them proactively on the priority services register?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Martin Rhodes
Yorkhill Fire Station
Nearly 1,000 people have signed this petition online or by pen calling for Yorkhill fire station to be saved from closure by the Scottish Government. The local expertise of firefighters at neighbourhood stations such as Yorkhill ensures that response times are fast and public safety is prioritised. The loss of this vital local service raises concerns that public safety will be further put at risk, with longer response times after almost two decades of cuts to public services. The petition states: “The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to make representations to the Scottish Government regarding the importance of maintaining adequate fire and rescue provision for residents in Yorkhill and surrounding areas, and to raise concerns about the proposed closure of Yorkhill fire station.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Declares that the proposed closure of Yorkhill Fire Station by the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service risks weakening fire and emergency response capacity in Glasgow, increasing response times, and placing additional strain on neighbouring stations; and further declares that local residents rely on Yorkhill Fire Station as a vital part of community safety infrastructure and strongly oppose its closure. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to make representations to the Scottish Government regarding the importance of maintaining adequate fire and rescue provision for residents in Yorkhill and surrounding areas, and to raise concerns about the proposed closure of Yorkhill Fire Station. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003253]
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Markus Campbell-Savours
Electronic Monitoring of Offenders
One former Conservative Minister wrote a book that discussed the prison system’s failure to reform. Will the Minister confirm that she has looked at Rory Stewart’s book and his concerns that the Department lacked project management capabilities and support from the Treasury, and required a longer tenure for Prison Ministers? Would she recommend the book to the shadow Minister?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Markus Campbell-Savours
Strengthening Community Resilience
Echoing concerns raised by Members across the House, I ask the Minister to imagine an elderly constituent living alone in an isolated Lake district valley where copper phonelines have been replaced with fibre; a storm takes out the power to their router in the night, and by the time that they wake, the modest battery back-up has failed, as has the mobile mast. Does the Minister share my concerns that they would have no way to raise an alarm in an emergency, and agree that we need a new technological solution to protect the elderly?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Mark Sewards
Strengthening Community Resilience
I welcome the Minister’s statement. He will know very well that the “Protecting What Matters” strategy, which was announced to the House earlier this year, had some excellent proposals to strengthen community resilience. Will he update the House about progress on that strategy, and say exactly which proposals we have made progress on to date?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Luke Murphy
Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill
My hon. Friend is making a really strong speech about the need for this Bill. Does she agree that this action is long overdue? Residents in Crown Heights in my constituency have waited for years—far too long. They have been in financial uncertainty, and uncertainty about their safety, and they deserve a clear timeline of when their remediation works will be completed. Residents like those in Crown Heights will be served better in the future by action that will be delivered through this Bill.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Lloyd Hatton
Topical Questions
<Question HRSContentId="{0D916792-AF7F-40DB-A769-650C9FECB9DF}">T3. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{D55444A2-81FA-439C-9E1E-2CCD81F18FA9}"></QuestionText>Dirty money fuels crime on our streets and conflict overseas, so I welcome the Government’s continued commitment to hosting an illicit finance summit next year. Getting this right really matters for our national security. Will the Minister use the extra time ahead of the summit to work with civil society and our international partners to ensure that the summit finally delivers the tough action we need so that we can turn the tide on the scourge of dirty money?</Question>
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Linsey Farnsworth
Council Housing
It is a pleasure, Sir Jeremy, to serve under your chairmanship. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff) on securing this important debate. If we track the history of council housing in Amber Valley, we see a story that I fear will sound all too familiar to other Members from across the House. It is a story of decline, neglect and short-sighted political choices, the consequences of which are still being felt today. In 1985, there were more than 5,000 council houses in Amber Valley. By 2003, just one remained. Why was that? During the period between 1985 and 2003, a Conservative-led borough council sold off virtually the entire stock. Make no mistake—it was not because the need for affordable housing had disappeared nor did it represent some great act of financial prudence. To add insult to injury, it is estimated that those houses were sold off to private ownership for only a ninth of their market value. Assets that had been built up over generations, which were paid for by local people and intended to provide secure and affordable homes, were effectively given away. When Labour took control of the borough council in 2023, it inherited not only a shortage of council homes but the legacy of decades in which the council’s capacity to deliver new homes had been hollowed out. It was not just the housing stock that was gone. As a result, the first task facing the new Labour-led borough council was to rebuild the council’s ability to build homes. It had to restore confidence, capacity and the mechanisms to deliver, before bricks could be laid and properties acquired. Council officers have reskilled themselves admirably, and since 2023, 32 council houses have been acquired, with plans to deliver a further 33 in the pipeline. Those numbers sound modest, but they represent the hard work of rebuilding a housing programme from almost nothing. More importantly, the council is now in a position to look beyond individual acquisitions towards larger-scale regeneration and house building. After years of stagnation, Amber Valley has adopted a local plan for the first time in two decades. It includes proposals that could deliver up to 180 new council homes on land around Aldreds Lane, and the council is also working closely with the East Midlands Mayor, Claire Ward, to unlock brownfield sites for future development. There is real momentum now. A Labour-led council has begun rebuilding the stock it had lost. With that in mind, will the Minister outline what support the Government will provide to councils such as Amber Valley that have demonstrated the ambition and the capacity to deliver new council housing, and will he outline how the Government will help authorities to scale up those ambitions so that more families can access the homes that they need?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Lee Pitcher
SEND Provision: Rural Communities
The Isle of Axholme in my constituency is a big rural area. Many children have to travel long distances for EHCP assessments, but also to receive specialist support for special educational needs. At the Axholme school in Crowle, we have historically had a higher number of children with SEND than the national average. Of course, that is a concern, because I want to ensure that there is no postcode lottery when the SEND reforms are being made. Will the Minister absolutely and categorically reassure me that if someone lives in a rural community, they will get support equitable to that given anywhere else in the country?
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Lee Pitcher
Council Housing
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. Council housing saved my family’s life. Council housing gave me a life. Council housing meant that a once homeless lad got to be here to fight for everybody, to ensure that there is no homelessness in this country ever again. When we talk about council housing delivery, most people think about building from scratch, but there are other options. Buying and refurbing existing long-term empty houses and buildings means we can increase the housing stock at a lower cost and, crucially, we can do it faster. When we talk about housing, it is easy to think primarily about the housing market, the economic impacts, the cost of mortgages or rents, or the cost of living, but we are also talking about whether people have a permanent home or not. When we talk about homelessness, we often think first about rough sleeping. Yet homelessness takes many forms, and family homelessness cannot be overlooked. That is often not on the streets; it is whole families with children living on one mattress at a friend or relative’s house, as I did at 15 years old, or moving between a series of bed and breakfasts and other emergency—supposedly temporary—accommodation, which can last for years. Because it is not visible, and because we do not see the impact, we often do not treat it with the urgency it deserves. At the end of March this year, there were 177,530 children living in temporary accommodation in England. In Doncaster in 2025, we had more than 200 children living without a permanent roof over their heads. Perhaps even more concerning is that more than 22,000 families with children have been living in temporary accommodation for between two and five years. For some children, that could be the majority of their lives. There are 7,800 active households on the register in Doncaster right now. That insecurity of not having a place that is permanent can be devastating. It affects children’s education, their physical and mental health, their relationships and their opportunities later in life. A permanent home is about so much more than having somewhere to sleep; it is about having somewhere you belong. I can absolutely vouch for that, having had lived experience of it. There are more than 300,000 long-term empty homes across England. Acquiring long-term empty houses for social housing could deliver more than 8,000 additional social rented homes by June 2029, requiring 38% less Government grant per property than new build alternatives. That means more homes for the same level of investment, and families in them much more quickly. When we have families spending years in temporary accommodation, we cannot afford to overlook opportunities to deliver permanent homes much more quickly. It also makes sense financially: councils are spending billions each year on temporary accommodation, but investing in permanent housing can reduce our reliance on those arrangements. Ultimately, the success of our housing programmes must be measured not just by the number of homes delivered, but by the number of families who are able to leave homelessness behind and build secure, stable lives in the future. We need to deliver those homes, and we need to deliver them as fast as we possibly can.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Palestine and Gaza
Over three years, we have seen a devastating man-made humanitarian crisis unfold in Gaza. The UK is committed to improving humanitarian conditions in Palestine. We will provide £88 million in humanitarian and early recovery support this financial year to support the delivery of essential healthcare, clean water, sanitation and hygiene services. At the UN General Assembly last month, the UK, Jordan and Qatar co-hosted a meeting focused on driving action on humanitarian access and healthcare. We issued a call to action, urging the Government of Israel to allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded humanitarian access throughout Gaza.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Palestine and Gaza
First of all, I thank my hon. Friend for drawing attention to this incredibly important topic. Reports that hundreds of Palestinian children are being detained—as he says, many of them are being mistreated—in Israeli military detention are horrifying. Children’s rights must be upheld, in accordance with international law. Children must only be detained in line with internationally agreed juvenile justice standards, and we call for an end to military detention where it is incompatible with those principles. We continue to call on Israel to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross immediate unrestricted access to all detention facilities, and we raised this issue with Israeli authorities in September.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Palestine and Gaza
Gaza remains one of the deadliest places on earth to deliver aid. We have seen countless incidents involving humanitarian personnel over the past three years. The UK is a member of the Australia-led ministerial group that developed the declaration for the protection of humanitarian personnel, and lobbied other states to join. A total of 132 states have now signed the declaration, and just last month the Foreign Secretary met Australia and others at the UN General Assembly to maintain momentum and drive collective action to address this fundamental issue.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Palestine and Gaza
The hon. Lady speaks passionately and powerfully about the exact reasons why we have declared the situation a moral emergency. On average, four people have died every day since the ceasefire, over 300 of them children, as she rightly says. The civilians and children of Palestine will continue to be an enormous priority for our bilateral engagement with the Israeli Government, whoever the Israeli people pick, but the humanitarian situation could not be more severe. She can be assured that we will continue to press upon the Israeli Government, once elected, the need for unfettered access.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Palestine and Gaza
We held an event at UNGA on precisely this matter. Maternal, newborn and child health will continue to be a priority for the UK Government. As the hon. Lady will be aware, the UK has acted fast to try to get sick children to the UK for treatment; a cross-Government taskforce supported 50 critically ill and injured children and their immediate families in leaving Gaza and receiving specialist support in NHS hospitals. As I am sure she will agree, however, that action is no substitute for ensuring that people can access their healthcare rights in the country where they live and were born, and where we hope to provide them with safety and security through a two-state solution in the end.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
“No Choice But Childhood” Campaign
I begin by thanking the hon. Gentleman for his advocacy for children; pressure for children’s rights will always be welcome to me. I share UNICEF UK’s commitment to advancing the rights of children globally, and am personally committed to putting children’s rights at the heart of all the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s development work. I am proud that the UK Government are investing in essential services for children, as well as maternal and newborn health and nutrition, childhood vaccinations, foundational learning, ending child marriage, and supporting children’s care reform. I will continue to prioritise children’s needs and rights across our development portfolio, and look forward to working with the hon. Gentleman on that.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
“No Choice But Childhood” Campaign
As the hon. Member will appreciate, the money that we allocate for vaccination, and indeed the wider health portfolio, which was protected in our recent round of allocations, benefits children almost exclusively; the money that we spend on education also benefits children almost exclusively. There are other large parts of our portfolio, including humanitarian and climate action—I imagine that he shares our determination to achieve good outcomes in those areas—in which it is not possible or desirable to ringfence spending specifically for children, although children are outsized beneficiaries of that action. My job is to ensure that we get the maximum impact for every single pound of UK overseas development assistance. Some of it is specifically ringfenced for children, but much of it benefits their families and wider communities, too.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
“No Choice But Childhood” Campaign
I would always be delighted to meet my hon. Friend. I commend her, other women and Members from across this House for all that they have done to draw attention to the horrifying, unspeakable situation facing Afghan women and girls. She will appreciate that there are sensitivities around the use of specific language in the international system, and I would want to be mindful of the views of other partner countries on this; however, I would be delighted, substantively, to meet my hon. Friend to see what we can do to advance the cause of Afghan women and girls, which is close to both our hearts.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Topical Questions
As the hon. Member will appreciate, every time we enter into one of these negotiations across the whole of Government, our objective is to uphold the integrity and impact of our migration policies. The FCDO has responsibility for ensuring that our policy position is communicated forcefully bilaterally, and we will continue to do that. I have been in dialogue with the Eritrean ambassador to convey exactly the seriousness with which the Home Secretary, the Foreign Secretary and the wider British Government take this matter. There will be no resiling from the forcefulness with which we promote our policy that Eritrean returns are central to this Government, and we will pursue that until they are secured.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Topical Questions
We do not currently have plans to expand UK Aid Match beyond the Disasters Emergency Committee funding appeals, which, as my hon. Friend rightly said, are focused on crises that require a large-scale rapid response. She is right, however, that the British public continue to care deeply about equality and the human rights of those overseas. The FCDO formally supports that through our women’s rights organisations programme, our grassroots sexual and reproductive health and rights programme and our LGBT+ rights programme. I would be delighted to talk to her and, indeed, any other hon. Members across the House about what more we can do to give life to the British public’s impulse towards deep solidarity on questions of equality.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Topical Questions
My hon. Friend is right. Just yesterday, I attended an event in Parliament to mark the one-year anniversary of the fall of El Fasher. At that event, I heard testimony that I will never forget as long as I live. We heard about, and I spoke about, bloodshed so overwhelming that the ground was soaked with blood so deeply that it could be seen from space. That should be a matter of ongoing, daily outrage in our country. Last month, at UNGA, the Foreign Secretary and I met international partners to galvanise further action, including through an event focused on the devastating use of drones to terrorise civilians, alongside our UK-convened coalition for atrocity prevention. I am proud that just yesterday, the UK announced further sanctions against commanders suspected of involvement in the atrocities in Sudan.
Hansard source
27 Oct 2026ParliamentLabour Kirsty McNeill
Topical Questions
We remain gravely concerned about the continued detention of Tundu Lissu, and we will continue to raise his case through ministerial channels and the British high commission. We note the UN working group opinion that his detention is arbitrary, unlawful and lacking in sufficient legal basis. We await the 6 November verdict and underline its significance for Tanzania’s democratic freedoms and the rule of law. I also take this opportunity to say that the UK remains firmly opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances in every country.
Hansard source

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

All parties, latest first

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Social Housing Bill (Second sitting)

Strengthening Community Resilience

Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill

Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill

Strengthening Community Resilience

Yorkhill Fire Station

Electronic Monitoring of Offenders

Strengthening Community Resilience

Strengthening Community Resilience

Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill

Topical Questions

Council Housing

SEND Provision: Rural Communities

Council Housing

Palestine and Gaza

Palestine and Gaza

Palestine and Gaza

Palestine and Gaza

Palestine and Gaza

“No Choice But Childhood” Campaign

“No Choice But Childhood” Campaign

“No Choice But Childhood” Campaign

Topical Questions

Topical Questions

Topical Questions

Topical Questions