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
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 3 Nov 2026
Showing every spoken contribution, including 11,997 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
My experience with Staffordshire county council is that funding has been allocated to it to deliver employment programmes, which is great, and we have the DWP jobs hubs as well, but they will not talk to each other, so there is real disengagement. If the Minister could push Staffordshire county council to have conversations with partners, it would really help the rest of us trying to do this work.
Today’s announcement is a hugely important step forward, as is having a Prime Minister who has put ending rough sleeping at front and centre of the political agenda. As a patron of Doncaster Housing for Young People, I see the difference that wraparound support makes to people who are vulnerable to homelessness. Will the Government ensure that we measure success not just by the number of people helped off the streets, but by how many people are able to rebuild their lives and remain in secure accommodation for the longer term?
<Question HRSContentId="{F512E45E-7F1C-4C44-8B06-01C8C33B8D35}">T6. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{7DE88FAF-BCB4-46B3-8759-58618C3C02E3}"></QuestionText>I spoke to one of my constituents, originally from Zimbabwe, about the Government’s proposed immigration reforms. She works two jobs caring for elderly residents while also raising her two kids as a single mum. She does not yet have indefinite leave to remain, and she said to me:“I am a hardworking person but day in, day out I live with anxiety due to not knowing what our future holds.”Can the Minister reassure me that we will do right by people such as my constituent who are working hard, contributing to society, and building their lives and futures here?</Question>
<Question HRSContentId="{E2342978-4CF8-4F7A-98F2-DF32C2BA62D9}">4. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{6A498DC0-5429-41CA-8120-408D60BDCC33}">What steps she is taking to help reduce levels of abuse experienced by retail workers. </QuestionText></Question>
In 2021 my colleague Daniel Johnson MSP introduced landmark protections for Scottish shop workers, following a campaign by USDAW and the Co-operative party, but legislation is not enough. Community policing has declined in Scotland, and my constituents in Winchburgh, Armadale and Bathgate report rising retail crime and abuse of shop workers. Ahead of legislation commencing in England, what discussions has the Minister had with the Scottish Government to learn from Scotland’s experience, and what investment has she made in frontline policing to protect shop workers and communities?
I thank the Minister for her update. I appreciate the focus on complex cases—Members across the House are dealing with many of them—but can I ask that she also looks at the paid-for fast-track services? I have a constituent who paid almost £700 for a pension valuation in order to finalise his divorce. It was expected within 10 working days, but it took nine months; the wait cost him several times the original amount. Does the Minister agree that that is entirely unacceptable? What action will she take to ensure that Capita refunds any payments taken for so-called fast-track services that are nothing of the kind?
I thank the Minister for her statement, and indeed this Government for their willingness to grasp the nettle in order to end rough sleeping and homelessness. I am grateful that she mentioned temporary accommodation and the wider impact, particularly on children, of not having somewhere to permanently call home. The number of children living in temporary accommodation in Scotland has risen by 22% since 2022, despite the Scottish Government declaring a housing emergency in 2024. What conversations has she had with the Scottish Government about how, if both Governments are to be successful in meeting their goals of ending child poverty, they are tackling the number of families languishing in temporary accommodation?
I thank my hon. Friend for her statement and her leadership in this wide-ranging inquiry. Our Committee heard from defence companies and, as my hon. Friend mentioned, they spoke of debanking. They also spoke about sites being vandalised resulting in significant costs. They talked about careers fairs being disrupted and sometimes forced to close due to direct action by protesters. Not only does this present barriers to recruitment but it undermines investment in a key sector. Does she agree that this further underlines the need for a national conversation about defence, security and the ever-evolving threats facing our country? Does she also agree that elected representatives and Governments should engage in such a conversation in a responsible way that is fully cognisant of the geopolitical realities that we face?
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair today, Mr Vickers. I congratulate the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) on leading today’s important and popular debate. I am particularly grateful to all 190,000 people who signed the petition, including more than 400 of my own Stevenage constituents. For many in my constituency, cats are really important. Many residents love their cats, and all of us—whether we have our own cat or not—had a very special cat in our daily routine: Nala, the Stevenage station cat. Anyone passing through the station will likely remember her perched on the ticket barriers, greeting commuters and keeping a watchful eye on the daily rush. She became a familiar face, bringing a little warmth to thousands of journeys and earning a special place in our town’s heart. Tragically, Nala passed away last year. How much her loss was felt by our community was proven by the overwhelming support given to fund a statue that will be installed outside the station to ensure that her memory lives on. Nala’s story reminds us that cats are not simply pets; they are companions, familiar faces and much-loved members of our families and communities. When they are injured on our roads, we have a responsibility to do what we can to help them. I have heard powerful stories in the debate today, and I have also heard from several of my own constituents who feared the worst while <span id="39WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="39WH"></span>being denied the certainty that would allow them to grieve. They were left not knowing the fate of their feline friends. That is the result of a simple but stark discrepancy in the law that bestows an obligation on drivers to report collisions involving dogs but not cats. To grieving owners, that distinction is deeply difficult to understand. A cat injured on the road cannot call for help, and it cannot tell a passing driver where it lives or how much pain it is in. It depends on someone stopping, showing compassion and seeking help. For a driver, that may mean a few minutes out of their day, but for an injured cat, it could mean the difference between life and death. For the family waiting at home, it could mean the difference between heartbreak and bringing their beloved pet home. I am grateful to welcome my constituents Fern, Anthony and Leo Doyle to the Gallery today. They have experienced the devastating consequences of the current law. Their cat, Buddy, disappeared in November 2024, after climbing out of a bedroom window. For nearly a year, their family searched relentlessly, distributing more than 1,000 leaflets and contacting vets, councils, rescue centres and local Facebook groups. Nearly 11 months later, they finally learned the truth—Buddy had been struck by a vehicle and the driver had left without seeking help. Fern has spoken about the thought that, had the driver stopped, Buddy might have survived and returned home. Explaining his death to Leo was one of the hardest conversations she has ever faced. As Fern said: “They are never ‘just a cat’. They had a soul. They were part of a family. They were deeply loved.” That cuts right the heart of the debate. The loss of a pet is painful enough without the added anguish of wondering whether someone could have helped, or whether a beloved companion suffered alone. Of course, we must get the law right. There are concerns that extending the Road Traffic Act could unfairly expose owners to criminal or civil liability following a collision with a cat. Those concerns deserve proper consideration. However, we have also heard about alternatives. Where there is a will, there is a way, and we have a duty in this place to find that way. We have heard about amending other legislation, such as section 4 of the Animal Welfare Act, which could require drivers to remain with an injured cat and contact the appropriate authorities, or putting the highway code provisions into statute. Whatever we do, the focus must always be on preventing unnecessary suffering. There may be different ways to achieve these aims. I urge the Minister to work with campaigners and animal welfare organisations to find a practical solution. We should also encourage the devolved Governments to follow England’s lead on compulsory cat microchipping. We cannot prevent every collision, but we can expect drivers to stop, where it is safe, check on an injured cat and seek help. Finally, I return to the Doyle family. No change in the law can undo their loss, but we can act to prevent other families from enduring the same uncertainty, and we can give injured cats a better chance of survival. Every cat is important to someone. Our laws should reflect that and ensure that when a cat is hurt on our roads, compassion and responsibility come before simply driving away.<span id="40WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="40WH"></span>
I thank my hon. Friend for this statement. Like everybody else, I have cases that I have contacted the Minister about, but today I want to raise something else—something that has been consistent across all the cases that my office has dealt with on a regular basis, which is how my constituents are being treated when they call the Capita helpline. My constituents describe being laughed at and being told that, regardless of what happens in this House, it will be up to Capita to decide when they actually get their pensions. These individuals—people who have served this country well for many years—are getting increasingly desperate, as they have often had no income for up to a year. Nobody should be treated without dignity or respect by anybody acting in the name of this Government. I ask my hon. Friend to engage with her officials to ensure that the message that this is completely unacceptable is driven through to Capita.
Like many other MPs, I am still being contacted by constituents about their civil service pensions and the unacceptable delays. It is deeply concerning that my constituent Julie, who retired from the civil service in February, had her pension finalised only in September, and these delays are causing huge distress and financial hardship. If we are going to pay compensation, should <span id="43" class="column-number" data-column-number="43"></span>it not be paid by Capita, not from any pension pot, and will that be done without having to navigate any lengthy or tiresome claims process?
I congratulate my hon. Friends the Members for Redditch (Chris Bloore) and for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) on securing and leading this important debate and for their tireless campaigning on this issue on behalf of their constituents. I also thank all right hon. and hon. Members for their contributions. Even if, as the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne) suggested, it may at times have been a therapy session, Members have raised extremely important concerns on behalf of their constituents about the quality of service. We discussed this issue at length last week, and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas), referenced it as an issue that has united the House, and I think we have heard such reflections from all Members across the Chamber. Royal Mail is one of our great national institutions. For generations, it has connected people and communities across our country. It is a lifeline for some of our more <span id="132" class="column-number" data-column-number="132"></span>vulnerable members of society, our elderly included. For many people, their postie is a regular and friendly face. The public’s affection for Royal Mail is enduring, but patience with its poor service is not. We should not assume that the post matters only to the older generations, because it does not. Citizens Advice research published last week shows that younger adults are using postal services more frequently than older people—to apply for jobs, manage their finances, send letters to healthcare providers for appointments and access Government services. Post is not just part of our history, even though we have heard some very interesting reflections and historical stories. It is still part of people’s everyday lives, which is why it is so important to ensure that we secure a reliable service for the future. Behind that service are our posties, and I too want to put on record my thanks to postal workers up and down the country for everything they do. My grandad proudly served his community as a postie, and I know that many other Members have a personal connection to their postie or a postie. As I did last week, I would like to thank and pay tribute to all the postal workers who work so hard to deliver for their communities, and go above and beyond. I know that, for many of my constituents, they may be the only person they speak to and interact with that day, and the incredible work posties do should not be underestimated. We are all clear that the service failures Members have described are not the result of their postie or of postal workers across the country. Our affection for this national institution, however, must not mean accepting poor performance. I absolutely share the strong concerns expressed today and last week by Members across the House. I will be very clear again: Royal Mail’s performance has been unacceptable for far too long, and it needs urgently to restore service standards to levels that we all expect in our villages, towns and cities. The Prime Minister was similarly clear at this Dispatch Box last week, as was the Secretary of State at the Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee last Tuesday. I hope Royal Mail will be listening to this debate, and will hear the clear message that Parliament is sending. We have heard about the serious consequences associated with late deliveries. Late letters—whether they contain a greeting card for a loved one, important medical correspondence, including hospital appointments, or financial information—are deeply frustrating, but they can also lead to serious consequences. I thank Members for sharing the terrible stories of the real-life impact that they can have, as well the impact on colleagues in this House when carrying out their responsibilities and duties as constituency MPs, for example, sending letters about coffee mornings and surgeries. Hon. Members have raised the vital impact of high-quality and timely postal services on our democracy. We have made clear to Royal Mail the importance of the successful and timely delivery of election-related mail for returning officers and election readiness and performance, and I reassure Members that we will continue to do so.
I will be raising this issue with Royal Mail, and I will touch on my interactions with the chief executive later in my speech.
Colleagues have raised numerous concerns about missed mail in the Chamber and outside, and I will always raise that issue with Royal Mail. Where I need to push for transparency, I will do so. I will come shortly to what I have pushed the chief executive on. With Christmas approaching, improvements clearly cannot wait. This is Royal Mail’s busiest period. Families and businesses that we have heard about are relying on timely deliveries. I welcome the commitment from Royal Mail to recruit 22,000 staff to help deliver this Christmas, and I will be seeking reassurances that it is doing everything it can to meet the demand. As colleagues know, the Government do not run the delivery operations of independent businesses such as Royal Mail, but that does not mean that we are a passive observer. I have challenged Royal Mail’s leadership on performance, and I have been frank with them, as has the Prime Minister, that the pace of improvement needs to urgently increase.
I thank my right hon. Friend for the work that his Committee has done on this issue for his constituents and people across the country. I am aware that his Select Committee has written to Ofcom—I thank him for raising the issue again today—to seek further information about its plans to improve services. I met Ofcom last week, and I will continue to work closely with it. I will pragmatically consider any requests for additional powers, as we heard from the Secretary of State, where those are needed to support improved outcomes for constituents and customers across the country. We will be pragmatic about any requests, and I am meeting with Ofcom again soon to hear further. In the meantime, I expect Ofcom to use the full range of tools at its disposal to secure a more reliable service for users. My right hon. Friend knows that I will continue to hold Ofcom and other regulators to account. On that point, in my recent meeting with Ofcom, I raised colleagues’ concerns about data on Royal Mail’s performance masking <span id="134" class="column-number" data-column-number="134"></span>serious local issues. I have also stressed that the review over the coming months must take into consideration the wider challenges and the staffing, resources and workforce changes. I will continue to raise the concerns, including those that lots of colleagues have mentioned. I am grateful to those who took the time to meet Ofcom directly the week before last to reflect constituents’ concerns, particularly parcel prioritisation, which we have talked about. I have heard about that at length from colleagues. Ofcom has confirmed that it is considering the role of the alleged prioritisation of parcels over letters as part of its ongoing investigation into Royal Mail’s performance in 2025 and 2026. I expect Ofcom will publish its findings in the coming weeks. Ofcom will be in no doubt about Members’ concerns following the meeting it had with them directly, today’s debate, the Westminster Hall debate and the concerns expressed by the Select Committee. I thank all colleagues for continuing to engage with myself and Ofcom on what they want to see and what they expect to improve. On improvement, while there were some encouraging signs in the first quarter of this financial year with the roll out of the delivery model, that is only the start. Reflections clearly vary across the country on the impact of the roll-out, given what colleagues have said, and Royal Mail needs to turn this into sustained improvement that our constituents can rely on. That is why it is critical that any issues with the model between the workforce and management are resolved urgently. I welcome the positive announcement by Royal Mail and CWU earlier today, which demonstrates a shared commitment to improving service performance, supporting the workforce and ensuring that the company is well prepared to meet customer demand over the Christmas period. That includes restarting the roll-out of the new USO delivery model, albeit over a slower timescale to account for the Christmas peak period. To ensure that our constituents get the service that they deserve, it is critical that this engagement continues. The Secretary of State and I will be meeting with both Royal Mail and CWU next week to seek updates on progress. I know that postal workers have valuable insights on operations and thoughts about how things can be improved, and I am grateful for colleagues raising the reflections of the posties they have interacted with and met. It is important that they are also on board with any changes. Hon. Members know that improving working conditions and standards for workers across the economy is important to me and this Government. The postal sector needs to work for consumers, businesses and workers. I am aware of concerns about the treatment and status of workers across the postal sector. The current employment status framework can leave very vulnerable workers without core and basic employment protections and rights. Last week, along with some colleagues who are in the Chamber, I attended an interesting discussion on work and employment in UK parcel delivery with Sheffield University management school. That discussion aligns with the Government’s recently published consultation on proposals for targeted reforms on employment status, which will seek to address many issues—particularly around bogus self-employment—that colleagues have raised today; we discussed those issues at the roundtable, too.<span id="135" class="column-number" data-column-number="135"></span> I will move on to Royal Mail’s communication with colleagues. While local operational issues are for Royal Mail’s management to explain and address, I know that many hon. Members—as has been raised in this debate and beyond—are dissatisfied with the level of engagement that they have had with the company’s leadership. It is crucial that Royal Mail meets with Members of this House, listens to their concerns and sets out clearly what it is doing to put things right. That is the least that our constituents deserve. I know that Royal Mail’s chief executive will now be meeting a number of hon. Members in Parliament next month, and I will continue to reflect Parliament’s concerns in my engagements with him—in particular, detailed information on local data and assessments of what is happening at constituency level. In my first engagement with the chief executive, I said that I would take seriously every complaint that is raised directly to Members via their constituents. As a constituency MP, I can share in the reflections and frustrations that colleagues have raised; when we receive those complaints, it is important that we have as much information as possible available to us—and early on. I would like to see that in a more proactive form from Royal Mail. In addition to engaging constructively with Parliament, it is important that Royal Mail also listens to the concerns and suggestions of its workforce, who work so hard to deliver post across the nation. I welcome engagement, whether through formal or informal channels that are currently in place, such as the Q&A sessions that Royal Mail has introduced, or more directly from staff to senior leadership, but I urge Royal Mail to also to continue to listen to its workforce through their recognised unions and reps. The expertise and first-hand experience of the workforce must help to shape improvements. Some Members also raised the idea of linking any further price increases to improvements in quality of service. I understand the frustration when people see prices rise but do not see the improvement in services that they rightly expect. Every pound matters to our constituents who are still struggling, and our constituents need to see the value as well as the reliability. Considerations around pricing regulations are a regulatory matter for Ofcom, which is considering this very issue as part of its consultation on pricing and affordability, which was launched on 16 October and will close on 27 November. Our priority for Royal Mail has been scrutiny of the takeover and securing important undertakings to support the financial sustainability of the company and the long-term provision of the universal service obligations. Colleagues have given careful consideration as to where the Government can continue to play our part—some in quite significant detail—and I am grateful for all the contributions this evening. I commit to continuing to engage with all colleagues in the Chamber on the progress of the quality of service with Royal Mail. Colleagues know that, alongside the Secretary of State, I am meeting with the leadership next week, and we will always be happy to update colleagues following those discussions. Royal Mail’s performance has not been good enough. Our constituents know it, the Government know it, the House knows it and Royal Mail knows it, so we will continue to engage with Ofcom, and Royal Mail, its owners and its workforce. But people do not want <span id="136" class="column-number" data-column-number="136"></span>excuses—they want their post delivered on time. Ultimately, that is the only test that matters. It is a test that Royal Mail must pass, and it is the test that this Government will continue to hold it to. I will conclude by once again thanking our incredible posties across the country. This is not a reflection on them, their hard work, and their service to our constituents and our communities. We are committed to bringing all parties to the table to resolve the issues that we have discussed today, because Royal Mail is a national institution that we want to protect long into the future and an essential public service that our constituents rely on. I thank all colleagues for bringing their voices and those of their constituents to the Chamber today—I hope that they have been heard loud and clear. I look forward to working with all colleagues going forwards.
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Vickers. I congratulate the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) on opening the debate and setting out the various issues that have led to us considering the petition. We have heard a great many contributions. We heard from the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon); from my hon. Friends the Members for Carlisle (Ms Minns), for Wolverhampton North East (Sureena Brackenridge), for Stirling and Strathallan (Chris Kane), for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles), for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), for Dartford (Jim Dickson), for Stevenage (Kevin Bonavia), for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) and for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes); from the right hon. Members for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) and for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale); and from the hon. Members for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade), for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), for Yeovil (Adam Dance) and for Leicester South (Shockat Adam). That indicates the widespread interest in this matter across the nation. I welcome the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Alison Griffiths), to her place. We have worked together on a Select Committee, and I hope that, in her new role, we can continue the constructive relationship we enjoyed on the Committee. The strength of feeling is clear. As we have heard, 189,000 people signed the petition, many because they know at first hand the distress caused when a cat is struck on the road and the family is not given any answers. A number of Members spoke with great personal knowledge and sincerity about their own situations. The hon. Member for Newton Abbot spoke about his sad experiences and about the sense of unfairness that people feel about the different treatment, which I will come to. He also rightly pointed out that the RSPCA questions whether the resources are in place to deal with what the petitioners ask for. My hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth had a cat who lived for 20 years, which is an incredible achievement; he obviously looked after it very well. Both he and the right hon. Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich spoke clearly and passionately about the question of decency. It really is a question of decency: any decent person who hit an animal on the road would not just leave it there in pain, and would try to do something about it. It is fair to say that there are practical considerations about how easy it would be to put on a statutory footing what I think everyone in this Chamber would instinctively feel is the right thing to do. The right hon. Member for South Holland and the Deepings talked about his time in office and the statutory guidance issued then. He is no longer here, but I am sure he will read <em>Hansard </em>in the morning. That guidance remains active across the strategic road network, and there is a requirement on National Highways operators to collect, log and scan deceased domestic pets, including cats, and to make a proactive attempt to contact the owners. The microchip registration <span id="48WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="48WH"></span>system that we now have in place will hopefully mean that, in most cases, owners are contacted when one of those sad incidents occurs. We heard a number of other excellent contributions. My hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood gave us a long list of the cats in her family. It sounds like Fanny is a local celebrity in the constituency—I am sure she will appear on some leaflets in the not-too-distant future. My hon. Friend spoke movingly about the depth of the bond between cats and their owners, which all Members have spoken about with a great deal of sincerity, and made an important point about needing clarity on who a driver should report a collision to. I understand that officials from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will be meeting representatives from CatsMatter to discuss that issue further, because although we may not be able to change the law in this Chamber, we can certainly pick up some of the practical measures that can be taken to make this difficult situation easier. We heard an excellent speech from my hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge, who is clearly an active campaigner in this area. She made it clear that she is a cat lover as well, and she is, of course, the most appropriately named Member of us all. She recognised that there is a difference between cats and dogs and talked about some of the alternative measures and solutions we can consider, which I will come to. She also asked about other jurisdictions, which a couple of other Members mentioned. Most of those countries were self-contained and small, but I will ask officials to look at how the laws have operated in different countries. My hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West gave an excellent speech, giving us a little insight into his cat issues. I join him in his praise of the PDSA, which does excellent work. My hon. Friend the Member for Stevenage spoke with great sincerity about his constituents Fern, Anthony and Leo and their sad experience of trying to find Buddy for almost a year. His comment that cats are never just pets is a statement that all Members who have spoken would recognise. My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South has made it clear to me on many occasions that she is very much a cat lover. She also declared her work on the APPG, which I commend. She acknowledges that there are concerns with the proposals, particularly from Cats Protection. She also made a point, which I will come to, about how it is quite problematic to have an equivalence, for the reasons she outlined. I agree that that does not mean nothing can be done. We will certainly look at what can be done.
I am sure we can find a way of publishing it. I have sprung that on my officials this evening, so I do not know exactly what form it will take, but at the very least I can commit to writing to Members who have taken part in the debate to advise on what we find from that review. As I say, I am not familiar with the other jurisdictions, and it may be that the laws and <span id="49WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="49WH"></span>requirements are different—we know that the demography and topography of those countries is different—but it is fair for us to consider that. As Members have pointed out, the current position is that although drivers are not required to report every animal death on the road, they should, where it is safe and practicable, try to identify the owner of a domestic animal and let them know what has happened. A number of Members spoke about wanting to make that mandatory, and I understand why, but we have to have legislation that is both workable and safe. As several Members acknowledged, cats are mostly smaller than dogs, and a driver may not actually realise that a collision has occurred—that is probably more relevant given the propensity for larger vehicles nowadays. When the nights are drawing in, if it is a rural road with high-speed traffic, it is actually quite dangerous to ask people to leave their vehicle to search for a cat. That could create more danger and injury. There are also practical difficulties—we must consider locating the animal, arranging identification and ensuring that any reporting system can be enforced consistently. I recognise the concern that owners should have the best possible chance of knowing what has happened to their pet when cats are found by the roadside. As Members have said, any decent human being would want that to happen and would try to do their best. One of my family’s cats, Ruby, was returned to us by a good-natured neighbour who had discovered her on the roadside after she was run over. It was a very sad time but, thinking of my children’s perspective, I would rather things happened in that way than for them to discover Ruby on the roadside on the walk to school the next morning. I applaud the public spiritedness of the individual who returned Ruby to us that night. That shows that such gestures, difficult though they are, really do go a long way to providing some comfort to people who in a distressed situation, and that is the purpose behind the public campaign known as Gizmo’s Legacy, which calls for local authorities to scan microchips so that owners can be identified and informed. We support the principle that local authorities should have effective processes in place in such circumstances, and we want to encourage councils to be as helpful as they can be in those situations. As Members have acknowledged, that is why DEFRA has commissioned research into how its processes affect the reunification of owners with cats and dogs that are found dead by the roadside, with the aim of identifying both best practice and barriers. When the findings are published, they will support the development of best practice guidance for local authorities, so that more owners can be notified, where possible. The hon. Member for Yeovil asked when the research would be published. It is fair to say that the research project is still being reviewed, but it will be published as soon as the process has concluded. I doubt very much that he was told to go away, but I assure him that both his comments and those of other Members about their desire to see that report will be transmitted to DEFRA after the debate. Microchipping it is clearly one of the things that makes the research much more valuable than it might have been a few years ago. As the Opposition spokesperson pointed out, since June 2024 it has been compulsory for <span id="50WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="50WH"></span>all cats over the age of 20 weeks to be microchipped and registered on a compliant database, unless they are exempt or free-living. Microchipping supports responsible pet ownership and gives owners a better chance of being reunited with their pets if they are lost or have strayed. I have personal experience of lost cats. A few years ago, one of our cats, Trixie, went on a six-week holiday to Chester. We were very grateful to the public-spirited individual who brought her back. Trixie has never told us what she was up to for those six weeks, or how she managed to get to Chester in the first place. I think most Members recognise that cats have quite a secretive nature. DEFRA is working with the pet-microchipping sector to make the regime more effective, including by improving the accuracy and accessibility of records, and by strengthening the oversight of microchip databases. I am pleased to report that, from the end of last month and following close work with DEFRA, the Association of Microchip Database Operators has launched a single point of search for microchip databases. This was introduced to make it faster and easier for vets and local authorities to access microchip records. We will continue to support the roll-out of cat microchipping as part of the wider work to help owners to identify and recover their pets. As Members recognised, and as Cats Protection has acknowledged, there could be numerous unintended consequences if we were to make stopping and reporting compulsory. Instead, our priority is to prevent collisions in the first place by making roads safer for everyone. That broader approach should reduce the number of cats that are killed or injured. A number of reasons have been put forward as to why cats and dogs are classified differently. Clearly, the origins of the distinction are historic, but there are still pertinent differences today, and the effective right to roam is something that makes it very difficult for us to put dogs and cats on an equivalent legislative footing. Making reporting mandatory would create a new criminal offence that would be difficult to enforce. On balance, then, we believe that the existing distinction should remain. We will continue to engage with advocates in this area. We will look at the emerging research and do what we can to encourage responsible actions from the wider public. On that note, Mr Vickers, I will give the hon. Member for Newton Abbot an opportunity to respond to the debate.
My hon. Friend is being generous. This is such an important debate. I have a constituent who had exactly that problem—they received delayed post for scans and cancer treatment plans. That is unacceptable and distressing. Does he agree that this is the worst type of post to be delayed?
I call the shadow Minister.
I call the Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Order. I want to get in as many Members as I can on this statement, so can we have shorter questions and shorter answers, please?
We come to the Select Committee statement on behalf of the Home Affairs Committee. Dame Karen Bradley will speak for up to 10 minutes, during which no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of the statement, Members may ask questions on the subject of the statement. Those should be brief questions, not full speeches.
We come to the Select Committee statement on behalf of the Scottish Affairs Committee. Patricia Ferguson will speak for up to 10 minutes, during which time no interventions may be taken. At the conclusion of the statement, Members may ask questions on the subject of the statement. These should be brief questions, not speeches.
Order. Members may wish to be aware that I will let the Select Committee statement overrun slightly to get everybody in. Please can we keep questions and answers concise?
I call Chris Bloore, who may speak for up to 15 minutes.
I call Dame Harriett Baldwin.
I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Redditch (Chris Bloore) and for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) for their steadfast work on this issue. Ahead of today’s debate, my team and I spoke to Zoe from Hednesford—not by letter, of course, because it would probably still be on its way. Zoe told me that her parents rely on post for important correspondence such as, as we have heard from many hon. Members, hospital appointments, particularly for their daughter Emily, yet they often go weeks on end with nothing at all. Emily was diagnosed with a very long list of long-term health conditions. Because of the lack of post, Emily missed extremely important medical appointments on many occasions. As we know, missed appointments are a big drain on NHS resources, from GPs right through to hospitals. There has also been a direct financial consequence for Zoe’s parents, who received a parking fine that would have been £60 if paid within 14 days. However, because the correspondence was not received, they were unaware of the deadline so ended up having to pay the full £100. Zoe’s sister Emily has, very sadly, passed away since her family first got in touch with me, and I want to place on record my condolences to Zoe and her whole family. Sadly, stories like theirs are not unusual in Cannock Chase. I have heard from constituents who have missed court information and jury duty and have had Christmas cards arriving in January. My constituent, Julian, told me that he had to collect his post from the sorting office in Rugeley after receiving nothing whatever in July, and found 16 letters waiting for him. I hear time and again from my constituents, particularly in Rugeley and Brereton—WS15 in Royal Mail-speak—that they are getting a month’s-worth of letters shoved through their door in one go. So to get emails from Royal Mail’s public affairs team like the one we had this morning that my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield referred to, telling us that things are going swimmingly in most of the country is, frankly, galling. I invite them to come to Cannock Chase and speak to the people I represent if they want to really find out how the service is doing.
I know that the Rugeley sorting office does not cover your constituency, Madam Deputy Speaker, or my hon. Friend’s constituency, but the story she tells about the particular difficulties of the service experienced by her rural constituents is echoed in my constituency. <span id="123" class="column-number" data-column-number="123"></span>On Saturday, I held a coffee morning in Prospect Village, quite an isolated rural village, and I heard exactly the same concerns, so I am completely with her on that. A constituent of mine—I will keep them anonymous because I do not want to put them in a difficult position—has shared with me some of the things that are happening to postal workers locally. I am told that overtime is rarely permitted, meaning that when a postie cannot finish their round, some of the post inevitably has to go back to the sorting office, where it builds up. Some workers are now doing what two postal workers would previously have done, with tracked parcels and first-class post taking priority. That inevitably raises questions about what is realistically expected of staff, and what happens to the letters that have to be left behind. I am told that new recruits are being sent out alone very quickly, moved between unfamiliar rounds and put under pressure to meet targets, sometimes facing managerial meetings when they fall short. That is a considerable ask for someone who is still learning the job. In the past, new posties would spend months learning alongside experienced colleagues before being expected to manage a round independently. Many new starters leave within a short time, and I am told that the way some staff are spoken to by managers is completely unacceptable, with conversations that should be about helping people to improve instead leaving them feeling belittled or intimidated. I have heard stories of multiple managers waiting for posties to finish their rounds, only to tell them that they are too slow, even after they have faced wind and rain, or got held up by uncontrollable things like roadworks or livestock on country lanes. Knowing a round takes time. Knowing that community, spotting when members of the public might need help and taking pride in getting the job done are all part of what made our postal service the envy of the world, and worthy of its royal moniker. What particularly struck me was my constituent’s description of postal workers as a tight-knit group who continue to look out for one another and pull together. That sense of solidarity is clearly still there, but it is being strained to breaking point by the pressure from management that workers describe and by the uncertainty around hours and rounds. I am also told that trade union reps are struggling to keep up with the number of staff seeking their help, such are the difficulties in many sorting offices. Fixing the issues Royal Mail faces is far from straight forward. A lot needs to change, but that change has to work for the people delivering the post and those waiting for it at home. Given what all of us in this House are hearing, it falls to us to ask whether we are even on the right track. The consensus tonight is a resounding no. Royal Mail execs should meet with us here in Parliament, explain what is going wrong and set out what they will do to put it right. Our constituents deserve more than apologies and hollow promises. They deserve a reliable service and we need to see meaningful action, right now, to make that happen.
My hon. Friend is, as always, making a fantastic speech and banging the drum for our great county. Does he agree that if we are serious about creating and filling the jobs he is talking about in Staffordshire, we have to give our colleges the capacity to train the workforce that we need? I welcome the recent investment in South Staffordshire college, including Cannock college, but will he join me in calling for further investment in our training facilities in Staffordshire, so that local young people can access skilled jobs in construction, engineering and all those growing industries?
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the unenviable task of following my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Dr Prinsley). When I talk to my constituents, they regularly tell me that Royal Mail is failing them, and I know that the Minister, my constituency neighbour, will have heard the same complaints. The issue comes up in surgeries and when we knock on doors, and when letters eventually arrive at my constituency office, it comes up in them too. In a world where we expect things to improve, our postal service is going backwards. That creates anxiety, as people miss bills and NHS appointments, and it pushes people further apart when a postcard from a loved one is lost or a birthday message arrives late. I know that the Minister shares the frustration and is working hard to turn things around. She understands, as I do, that places such as Calderdale often feel the consequences of those failures first. Over the last decade, people in towns and villages such as ours have seen the steady erosion of services that they once took for granted. We have seen that with our buses, banking, department stores and high streets, and people increasingly see it in Royal Mail. Calder Valley does not have a single urban centre; it is a network of towns and villages that stretches from Todmorden and Hebden Bridge through Mytholmroyd, Elland, Ryburn and Brighouse and all the way to Rastrick. When organisations start cutting costs, communities such as ours are among the first to feel the consequences, and it is communities such as ours that often feel the most isolated. My older constituents are more likely to rely on the postal service; it is how many of them hear from their hospitals, the DWP, their bank and the local council. While the digitisation of public services has <span id="125" class="column-number" data-column-number="125"></span>brought a huge benefit, it cannot come at the expense of those who cannot get online. They are some of the most vulnerable people in our society and the most likely to be affected when post does not arrive on time. A missed hospital appointment, an unpaid bill and interrupted energy supplies can have serious consequences through no fault of their own. What happened to Royal Mail is the story of a failed ideological experiment. For years, we were told that privatisation and market discipline would drive up standards and drive down costs. Instead, my constituents have watched services deteriorate while accountability has become harder to find. There is no real market; my constituents cannot shop around for someone else to deliver their appointment letter or switch providers because their pension statement arrived two weeks late. Like the water industry, it is a service that people depend on but have no choice over. That is why it is so frustrating. This is not just another company; Royal Mail is part of the fabric of this country. Its origins can be traced back to the 16th century. It maintains our iconic red post boxes and the local postmen, who we all value, but in recent years Royal Mail has been treated like a commercial asset, rather than a public service. The Opposition spent years picking through some of our most valued institutions in the hope of making a quick buck, with an ideological trust in the market without properly considering the long-term consequences. My constituents are looking for evidence that things are changing. Life is stressful enough, and we should not have to worry about whether an important letter will show up on time. I welcome the determination that the Minister has shown in holding Royal Mail to account and tackling the legacy that we have inherited, but the truth is that for far too many people in Calder Valley, things are still not good enough.
I wonder whether that 96% of the hon. Gentleman’s constituents would agree with me that perhaps his party’s privatisation of Royal Mail was a mistake in the first place. Perhaps he would like to apologise for that.
I am grateful to the Policing Minister for her answer to my written question on the Police Federation’s accounts, which have not been published since 2023. In that answer, she made reference to the police reform White Paper, saying that the “Government stands ready” to act. As she knows, seven senior officials from the Police Federation have been arrested since then, so I do not think it is going in the right direction—it is going in the wrong direction. It is time to act, is it not?
The right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) says that people should be held accountable for their actions, but let us remember that the Conservatives allocated this contract to Capita, knowing that it was a recidivist, continually breaking contracts that had been outsourced. It is totally unacceptable that a woman living in Upton in my constituency who gave 40 years of her life to public service has been left with no response from Capita for over 300 days since we contacted them. Since then, she was diagnosed with cancer. We can imagine the problems that people affected by this issue face in any event; pile on the problems that she has with illness, and we can imagine the personal anguish. Has the Minister been able to establish whether Capita is in breach of contract? Finally, let me say this: bring it back in house.
I am the chair of the Public and Commercial Services Union parliamentary group. I think we all appreciate that my hon. Friend has inherited a scandal, and I thank her for the access that she has given to the unions and for working with them closely. In her statement, she mentioned the independent audit report. Will the Grant Thornton report be published and, if so, when? The trade unions are willing to work with the Minister on bringing this service in-house—first the front operations, then eventually the computer systems—in a gradual but, I hope, fast way. Let me ask her this. The Government went ahead and outsourced to Capita the payment of salaries in three Government Departments under the Synergy contact. If there is any delay in wage payments at all, will that contract be brought in-house immediately?
<Question HRSContentId="{5186224A-8593-4909-A81F-3113DE5FAF26}">6. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{CFD873E1-683F-4F0D-B6A6-A19EFF3C61C4}">What progress her Department has made on reducing levels of knife crime. </QuestionText></Question>
I am concerned about young people and knife crime in my home city of Glasgow. Victim Support Scotland has asked the Scottish Government to carry out a comprehensive review of why young people become involved in knife crime and how effective Scottish programmes are at preventing it. This is backed by my constituent, Neil McCrimmon, and his family. Their beloved son Kory was stabbed to death, and the family has campaigned with great courage against knife crime. I fully support Victim Support Scotland’s call for a comprehensive review. Will the Home Secretary confirm that she would support the Scottish Government, were they to carry out such a review?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for opening this debate. I agree with him that the Members contributing to this debate have in their heart concern for the protection, welfare and wellbeing of cats. I also thank the 383 people across Paisley and Renfrewshire South who signed the petition. I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on cats. I also declare an interest as the proud servant of two cats, Clement Cattlee and Mo Meowlam. <em>[</em><em>Laughter.</em><em>]</em> That always gets a chuckle in the House. As someone who loves cats very deeply, this issue hits close to home. I have spent many an evening sat up wondering where Clem has got to—she is the one that wanders—and have on more than one occasion sent my husband out in his dressing gown to find her. Like every animal lover in this place, the thought of any pet being hurt or lost in a road traffic accident is truly heartbreaking. I know the agonising distress that families face when a beloved companion goes missing and hold immense sympathy for the heartfelt intentions behind the motion we are debating. Under the current Road Traffic Act, drivers must report collisions involving dogs and livestock, but not cats, even though the highway code rightly encourages drivers to report animal accidents and contact owners wherever possible. It is entirely understandable that so many compassionate people want to close that gap, especially given the disparity in treatment between cats and dogs, which are predominantly the pets we have in households across the country. There is a complexity to those legislative changes. I am conscious that the country’s leading cat charity, Cats Protection, warned that introducing them could have various unintended consequences, including the imposition of criminal and civil liability on the owners of cats involved in collisions, which could inadvertently harm the very animals we are all trying to protect. The owners of animals currently covered by the Act have a legal duty to keep them under control or properly contained. If they cause an accident, their owners can face criminal liability and insurance claims. As cat owners, we know that cats are different from dogs. They are uniquely independent. They are curious creatures and their instinct is to roam, explore and experience the outdoors, which is so fundamental to who they are—certainly, trying to control Clem would be a very difficult task indeed. The current law recognises that cats have a right to roam and cannot realistically be controlled in the same way as dogs or livestock, so bringing cats into a framework designed for dogs and livestock risks creating new legal responsibilities around containment, control and liability for cat owners. That could push cat owners to keep their cats indoors, preventing them from performing the natural behaviours that they need to perform to live happy, healthy lives. The Cats Protection charity estimates that 3% of UK cats are involved in road traffic accidents, and behind that figure is a deeply personal, painful loss for the families of those pets. However, we must ensure that our response <span id="41WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="41WH"></span>does not create a broader harm for the millions of happy, free-roaming cats across the country. That does not mean that something cannot be done—it can and it must—but we must channel our shared compassion into solutions that truly work. As we have heard, microchipping is the most reliable way to reunite pets with their families. That is now legally mandated in England, and I urge our devolved Administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to follow suit so that every pet across the UK has that vital safeguard. On scanning, highways bodies across England and Scotland already collect and scan cat road victims and notify their owners. Cats Protection has published a scanning guide for local authorities, and I urge local authorities across the country to ensure that they have sight of that and are utilising it. Going back to my previous point, however, that is effective in ensuring that families receive the closure they so desperately seek only when a cat has a microchip. On drivers, we are a nation of animal lovers, so stopping to help an injured animal should not be too much to ask of any decent, moral person. A driver who hits a cat should take them to a vet for emergency treatment, where they can also be scanned for a microchip—that is the quickest way to identify the owner. Increasing driver education so that motorists know how to act quickly and who to contact will save lives, bringing injured pets to emergency care when every minute counts. I share the deep empathy and true love for these wonderful animals that has brought us all to this Chamber. That must also mean that we protect them by preserving who they are, including their roaming instincts. Every loss on our roads is a tragedy, but taking away a cat’s freedom to roam would be a quiet tragedy experienced by many millions more.
The Government have consulted on our proposals for a reformed earned settlement scheme. We received more than 200,000 responses, which are being reviewed and analysed. The Government’s response will be announced in due course.
We are currently consulting on proposals for earned settlement, but I would be happy to hear more about the situation facing the hon. Member’s constituent.