Conservative and Unionist Party: a sourced timeline of public activity, with filters by source type and a sidebar of tracked totals

Conservative and Unionist Party

5,578 spoken contributions under 12 words (interjections such as “Will the hon. Member give way?”) are hidden. Show them

  1. ParliamentDame Karen Bradley

    Work-based Immigration

    The hon. Lady is an esteemed member of the Public Accounts Committee, and I note the comments she has made. In my previous incarnation as Minister for modern slavery, tied employment was always an area where there was concern about potential abuse by the existing employer; as she says, there is also the question of what happens to the individual if their employment ends, as their immigration status makes them more vulnerable to exploitation. We have not yet had a chance to go through all the evidence we have received. We are open to receiving evidence—the inquiry is open, and we would really appreciate having that evidence. We will then make decisions about who we will get in to give oral evidence. I have noted the hon. Lady’s comments.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentDame Harriett Baldwin

    Prostate Cancer Screening

    Will my hon. Friend thank the high number of my constituents who signed the petition, putting West Worcestershire at the top of list for the number of signers who brought it before Parliament? Will he also praise the work of the Graham Fulford Charitable Trust which, working with the Worcestershire Ambassadors, brings so many free prostate cancer screening opportunities to people in my constituency?

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentDame Harriett Baldwin

    Securing Scotland’s Future: Defence Skills and Jobs

    I thank the hon. Lady for her excellent report. Was she as shocked as I was to learn about the difficulty that defence firms in Scotland face in accessing basic banking services? Does she agree that the interpretation of ESG often does not recognise that, without strong defence, we would have no environment, society and governance in this country?

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentDame Harriett Baldwin

    Performance of Royal Mail

    Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker; I was not expecting to be called quite so early in the debate. I congratulate my Worcestershire colleague, the hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), on so ably setting out many of the problems that we also have in West Worcestershire. Having been a Member of Parliament there for many years, I have to highlight the fact that it has been only in the last year and a half that this has become a big issue in my postbag, if I can call it that—probably, by and large, in my email inbox. It has become the biggest issue that I hear about from my constituents, whether in Tenbury, Malvern, Pershore, Upton upon Severn or any of the villages in between. It is causing huge frustration to my constituents; the hon. Member has set out the issue, and many wish to speak in the debate, but I wanted to get that on the record. Whenever I write to Royal Mail about the issue, I never get a very convincing response. It often has to do with sickness in the sorting office or <span id="87" class="column-number" data-column-number="87"></span>something along those lines, and that does not seem like a compelling reason for things going so badly wrong in the last 18 months or so. I welcome this opportunity that the Backbench Business Committee has given us to get these concerns on the record. I look forward to hearing from the Minister about how she will deal both with Ofcom, the regulator, and with the company itself. Clearly, we must all aim to get a better service for our constituents. It is a service that has been running in this country for hundreds of years, and it has gone wrong only in the last year and a half.

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentDame Caroline Dinenage

    The Enterprise Act 2002 (Specification of Additional Section 58 Consideration) Order 2026

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I will speak briefly in my role as the Chair of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee. Telecoms is very new to our Committee’s remit, and indeed to that of the Secretary of State. I am very pleased to see her in her place today, and we look forward to scrutinising the Government’s work in this important area.<span id="6" class="column-number" data-column-number="6"></span> With that in mind, I have a few broad questions for the Secretary of State about the order. First, there are protections for vulnerable people and national infrastructure under previous legislation. I wonder if she could expand a little further on why she felt that they are insufficient for what she is seeking to achieve, in particular the protection of vulnerable customers. Secondly, what assessment has the Secretary of State made of how frequently this provision is likely to be used beyond the particular circumstances of TalkTalk? Does she assess that there are any other issues with the overall financial resilience of broadband providers and potential future use for this legislation? Further to that, will she consider publishing guidance setting out the circumstances in which this new provision might be applied? What evidence of a risk to continuity of service would she expect to see before she was to intervene? The continuity of telecoms services is obviously vital for consumers, but so are effective competition and opportunities to attract investment. Consumers rely on healthy competition to keep costs and bills down and to improve the quality of their broadband services, so how will the Secretary of State balance those objectives when assessing a merger? In particular, how does she assess the implications for competition of the BT-TalkTalk deal given that BT has a share of almost 40% of the broadband market alongside its ownership of Openreach? Without prejudicing the outcome of the investigation, does she think that the nexfibre-Netomnia deal raises similar questions about continuity of service and financial resilience, or does she see that there are important differences between the two cases? Can the Secretary of State tell us what mechanisms exist to protect consumers in cases where a provider fails and no buyer can be found? She mentioned that that might have been an issue in this case, so I wonder whether the Government have the powers and tools needed to maintain continuity of service in those circumstances, and whether this legislation will actually help to offer that. Finally, this process has been very fast. I understand that the CMA has now reported to the Secretary of State on BT and TalkTalk, but the pace of the process has been really unusual, with a very short window, in particular, for comments. Does she know on what basis the CMA decided on such a short window, and will she indicate when she expects to announce whether the matter will be referred for a more detailed investigation? I look forward to the Secretary of State’s answers today and to her ongoing engagement with the Select Committee on the resilience and competitiveness of the telecoms sector.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentDame Caroline Dinenage

    Civil Service Pensions

    I thank the Minister for updating the House. I have had so much casework on this, as she will know, with some really heartbreaking stories. The fact is that the backlog, including the growing number of cases over 100 days old, is just continuing to grow. One of those in the backlog is my constituent Ann, who had to leave work with a life-threatening pulmonary embolism and severe pneumonia, and five months later she is still waiting to receive her money. She will be very disappointed with what the Minister has said today. I think she is looking for some really hard facts on the timescales. When will this be sorted once and for all? Are there meaningful sanctions? When will we hear whether Capita can be prevented from bidding for other Government contracts? Could there be some clawback of all the money her Department is spending on trying to put this right? When will there be compensation for my constituents who have had to wait so long?

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentChris Philp

    Violence against Women and Girls

    Foreign nationals, including illegal immigrants, make up 23% of sex offenders. The Home Office knows that, and even hands out leaflets asking illegal immigrants nicely not to rape. That is why mothers in Piddington are now terrified that over 1,000 young male illegal immigrants are about to turn up. In order to protect women and girls, rather than allowing 95% of illegal immigrants to stay and accommodating them in Piddington or anywhere else, should the Government not leave the European convention on human rights and deport them?

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentChris Philp

    Topical Questions

    In a speech in March, which I thought was rather good, the Home Secretary said that failure to implement her proposed changes to indefinite leave to remain in full would be “an affront” to British citizens, and would cost hard-working taxpayers £10 billion for care workers alone. Given how strongly she clearly feels about her policy, will she confirm to the House that she will implement her own plans in full, or are the Housing Secretary and the Energy Secretary now in charge of immigration policy?

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentChris Philp

    Topical Questions

    The Home Secretary is clearly not standing by her own plans. Several times this year, the Home Secretary has used her power to prevent entry into the United Kingdom on the basis of individuals’ views, including people opposing mass migration. I recently asked her to prevent entry by Randa Abdel-Fattah, who planned talks around the anniversary of the 7 October massacre. Abdel-Fattah has glorified terrorism and said that massacre was “exhilarating”. Is it not shameful that the Home Secretary allowed this antisemitic supporter of terrorism into our country, where she likely radicalised our citizens?

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentBradley Thomas

    Performance of Royal Mail

    I thank the hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), my constituency neighbour, and the hon. Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), <span id="129" class="column-number" data-column-number="129"></span>who I know feels strongly and passionately about this issue. Indeed, we have spoken many times outside the Chamber about our mutual woes over the lack of performance on the part of Royal Mail. We are all aware of the importance of a reliable postal service. It keeps isolated and digitally excluded people connected, sustains relationships between loved ones during special times, and serves as the foundational communication network for vital public services such as the NHS. Hearing Members on both sides of the House speak about Royal Mail with such great concern, I was struck by the fact that it has become a topic that unites the House. Last week in Westminster Hall, Members heard about the array of problems that constituencies across the country are experiencing with Royal Mail. In my own constituency, residents of Bromsgrove and the villages are experiencing critical disruptions to their mail deliveries, the most prevalent being weeks of no post, only for them then to receive a bundle of outdated and expired letters. The problems range from missed NHS appointments and bank cards being reported lost to elusive household bills and overdue birthday cards. I think we also heard about a missed job opportunity as a result of postal delays. This is not just a matter of inconvenience; it is a matter of profound disruption that could and should have been avoided. Shockingly, in a survey that I conducted in my constituency, 87% of respondents believed that the service they were receiving was not reliable, and 96% believed that Royal Mail's postal delivery service needed improvement.

    Hansard source
  11. ParliamentBradley Thomas

    Performance of Royal Mail

    We have heard a great deal about nationalisation this evening, but I am pretty sure that my constituents believe the state should not be the actor that, in the first instance, provides the vast majority of services. The state does not have the best track record of providing everything. In this instance, it is incumbent on the Minister and the Government to ensure that Ofcom and Royal Mail are held to account, and that we see a tangible improvement programme. I know, as well as Members on both sides of the House, that people in north Worcestershire are experiencing comparable problems. Having made that further reference to my constituency neighbour the hon. Member for Redditch, I will cut across north Worcestershire to the other neighbouring constituency, that of my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier). People there are experiencing those problems as well—I know that, because I spoke to my hon. Friend today—resulting in financial losses for some of his constituents, and missed appointments as well. I understand that Royal Mail, along with many other businesses, will be facing pressing issues, including surging bill costs and increased bureaucratic red tape. May I ask the Minister whether the Government have discussed with Royal Mail specifically the impact of soaring bills and employment costs on the company’s ability to deliver services, and, in particular, challenges <span id="130" class="column-number" data-column-number="130"></span>relating to recruitment? It is clear, however, that, especially in recent years, the business has lost its way, and in the last 18 months that has become particularly acute. Royal Mail has a rich history. It is a 500-year-old institution, but it has failed to demonstrate an ability to adapt in recent years to society’s changing needs. Royal Mail will undoubtedly press that demand has changed. This evening we have heard many instances of parcels being prioritised over letters, which should not be the case. Over the last decade, we have seen technological advances that have undoubtedly had a significant impact on the way that people and businesses communicate, but the stats for Royal Mail are not in its favour. In 2024-25, first-class post hit a 77% service level against a 93% target, and second-class hit a 92.5% service level against a 98.5% target. That was enough for Ofcom to deem that Royal Mail was in breach of its obligations. In 2025-26, we saw 75.7% of first-class items delivered the next day—short of the 93% target—and 90.2% of second-class items delivered within three days, against a target of 98.5%.

    Hansard source
  12. ParliamentBradley Thomas

    Performance of Royal Mail

    What I recognise is that the problem is getting worse. As I have mentioned, it is incumbent on the Government to get a grip of the situation. I hope that the Government have heard loud and clear the concerns from Members across the House, regardless of political party, about what their constituents are facing, and that the Minister will address those concerns shortly.

    Hansard source
  13. ParliamentBradley Thomas

    Performance of Royal Mail

    That is a point I will touch on with regard to transparency levels. There have been seven stamp price rises in four years, with the price of a first-class stamp having doubled since 2022. It is clear that residents in my constituency, and those represented by Members from across the House, are paying a first-class price for a second-class service. If consumers are expected to pay higher prices for a service, they rightly expect such a service to deliver on its promises, yet residents face a much different reality from what Royal Mail claims. Its local performance target of 87% of first-class post being delivered the next working day was achieved in only 42 of the 118 postcode areas—a statistic that resonates with my constituents and those of many Members here today. Every industry has a level of standard that it is expected to meet, and Royal Mail should not be any different, but it is failing. It is time for accountability and material action in order to deliver tangible results. Alongside the stark statistics that have been quoted, the House will have heard me and other Members express strong discontent in Westminster Hall last week about <span id="131" class="column-number" data-column-number="131"></span>the report earlier this year that Royal Mail will deliver 219 million letters late. With NHS waiting lists already too long, we cannot afford for more appointments to be missed due to late letter delivery. With the cost of living already debilitating families across the country, they cannot afford missed payment charges due to delayed bill arrival. To be clear, and in common with Members from across the House, I do not believe that the fault lies with the hard-working posties who serve our communities. We are grateful for all that they do to keep us connected, but action must be taken by the highest levels of management to quickly address the real-life experiences that are depleting customer confidence. Management are failing and, speaking from my own personal experience, I am sick and tired of the platitudes that come from Royal Mail. I echo and share the concerns of Members from across the House. In Westminster Hall last week, the Minister shared that she has been frank in her meetings with the chief executive of Royal Mail and will continue to do so for as long as necessary. However, with Christmas, the busiest time of year for postal services, only 60 days away, it is time for immediate action, not more meetings and passing the blame back and forth. Something that needs to be focused on is transparency around local delivery data, as has been suggested in the Chamber this evening. Can the Minister outline the material steps the Government are taking, alongside Ofcom, to ensure an improved service is delivered as quickly as possible? Do they have confidence that Royal Mail’s improvement plan will deliver the needed changes promptly? At what point is the service so bad that the Government decide that further action is necessary? Expecting what you paid for is a basic standard, not an unreasonable demand. The public are tired of a failing service that continues to worsen, disrupting daily routines and tarnishing its former reputation for reliability. This is a matter of national importance about a national institution, and I believe all our constituents would like to know specifically how the Government are working with Royal Mail and Ofcom to take concrete steps to correct these issues to restore public confidence.

    Hansard source
  14. ParliamentBob Blackman

    Rough Sleeping and Good Growth Funds

    I welcome the ambition of the Minister—and the Prime Minister—and I hope that she will succeed. The visible signs of homelessness are people sleeping rough on our streets, but in any one day there are 300,000 people sofa surfing who may end up on the streets tomorrow. Anyone who is rough sleeping now will be suffering in their mental and physical health. They may be addicted to drink or drugs, or they may be on the streets because of gambling—every case is unique. As the Minister rightly says, it is not just about putting a roof over someone’s head; it is about building a network of support around them. There are two things that I would ask. First, we know what works. Housing First works—building a network of support around the person to enable them to rebuild their life. The second issue is those rogue landlords who will exploit vulnerable people. The Minister knows what is coming next. When can we get my Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 in place so that we can stop those rogue landlords exploiting people, and potentially taking much of the money that the Government are offering?

    Hansard source
  15. ParliamentBlake Stephenson

    Foreign National Offenders: Deportation

    There are 21,000 serious foreign criminals still in the UK. Today, a foreign criminal jailed for four years or more cannot use family or long residence exceptions to avoid deportation. Last week, the Government voted down our amendments in Committee to keep that rule and extend it to terrorists, making the Immigration and Asylum Bill softer on the worst offenders than current law. Will the Home Secretary admit that only leaving the ECHR will guarantee us that foreign criminals are deported?

    Hansard source
  16. ParliamentBen Obese-Jecty

    Prostate Cancer Screening

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I declare my interest as an officer of the APPG for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a subject close to my heart: we all know that it affects black men, middle-aged men and men with a family history of it, and I tick all those boxes. My father has prostate cancer and is undergoing treatment. I thank all the staff at Kingston hospital for their swift treatment of him, given he was under active surveillance. That is an important point: he got a PSA test, discovered that he had prostate cancer and as a result was placed on active surveillance because he was below the threshold required for treatment. When that active surveillance proved that he needed to be treated, staff were able to act quickly. That has, fundamentally, saved his life. He would not be eligible for the Transform trial, which will now include black men, until 2028. Who knows how far the cancer might have progressed by that point? I take my health quite seriously and get a PSA test annually. I got my last PSA test last month and thankfully all is okay for me, but regular testing means I can keep track of it and pay attention to it. It is obvious that we need to encourage more men to get themselves tested. There are a lot of middle-aged men in this Chamber and I suspect that not everybody has had a PSA test, or had one recently. In August, the Department of Health and Social Care withdrew the prostate cancer risk management programme after 24 years. PCRMP provided a dedicated framework for the informed choice model for PSA testing among asymptomatic men. New guidance removes references to men over 50 being considered to be at increased risk. Now that the guidance underpinning the framework has been withdrawn, will the Minister clarify how requests for testing for asymptomatic men will be handled in practice? I would be grateful if she would also clarify the Government’s official position, stated last week at Health parliamentary questions. I would also appreciate her confirmation that should men suspect that they have symptoms they can go to their GP and seek a PSA test for prostate cancer.

    Hansard source
  17. ParliamentAlison Griffiths

    Road Traffic Collision Reporting: Cats

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Vickers. I am grateful to you for chairing this debate. I know that many of my cat-loving constituents are deeply invested in this issue, with 363 of them having signed the petition. In common with many Members, I place on record my deep affection for my childhood cats: Scruff, Jasper, Ziggy and my personal favourite, Eartha Kitt. Before we delve into the proposal in the petition, we should acknowledge the importance of reporting an incident through the existing channels where there has been a collision between a vehicle and a cat. Although there may not be a mandatory legislative requirement, I hope that most drivers, in the event of a collision, would show the level of British decency to which my right hon. Friend the Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale) alluded. If our own pet were involved in a collision, we would expect to receive the same British decency. There are more than 11 million cats across the country, living in one in four households. We should always strive to protect these cherished pets. Indeed, many are a key part of their owners’ families. As my right hon. Friend the Member also said, they are not merely affectionate members of the family; they are world class at pest control, even if that can occasionally produce a messy result. The death of any cat is naturally devastating to its owners, and we should support them by ensuring that they are informed of a collision, either so that their cat can receive treatment or so that they can achieve closure. Each person who signed the petition will feel the importance of this issue deeply. Rule 286 of the highway code states clearly: “If you are involved in a collision which causes damage or injury to any other person, vehicle, animal or property, you MUST stop.” I would hope that that requirement is adhered to, making it possible for someone to establish whether their cat has been involved in a collision. Reuniting cats with their owners has been made easier by the previous Government’s decision to roll out microchipping in England, ensuring that cats can be more easily identified and their owners contacted. I am aware that DEFRA has been asked to commission a research project: first, to understand the operational challenges that prevent some cats from being reunited with their keepers after a road traffic collision, and secondly, to establish an evidence base to inform best practice for local authorities. The Government previously said that the project would report this year. I am sure that petitioners will be interested to hear from the Minister when its findings will be published and considered. I have outlined those measures because I think we can all agree with the sentiments expressed by the petition. It would be disingenuous, however, to consider the comments made by the Government and the previous Conservative Administration and not conclude that there <span id="46WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="46WH"></span>is currently no intention to bring forward legislation on this issue. That is not to dismiss the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) when he shared details of the provision announced in this Chamber in 2015 in response to the campaign for Harvey’s law. His note to me says that “pets killed on the road must be collected, identified where possible, and their owners notified by the Highways Agency (now called National Highways)”, so this provision exists already. As a newly elected MP in 2024, I was not present when this issue was addressed in the House previously. A petition that almost mirrored this one was put forward in 2022 and followed by a debate in this Chamber in 2023. During the debate, the then Roads Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden), said that the Government would look at the issue and that he would ask the Department to consider whether it would be appropriate to take further action. The Government subsequently indicated that they believed that a combination of microchipping and efforts by local authorities to reunite cats with their owners was the most effective way forward. However, we must note a difference between today’s debate and the one in 2023. Since the election, the Labour Government have presided over a reduction in police officer numbers. Requiring the police to deal with collisions involving cats would add to an increasingly challenging workload. Any further demands on police time must be even more carefully considered as a result. Although it would be simple to ask this Minister to show the same consideration as in 2023, the Government’s response to this petition suggests that the Department for Transport holds the same position as it did then. Furthermore, the Government’s road safety strategy does not mention animals or cats. Therefore, I will avoid reversing roles with the former shadow Minister by asking for the same things as Labour did in 2023, especially when the Government’s position appears to be clear. I will not step on the Minister’s prepared remarks by reiterating reasons given during the previous debate. Given the Department’s written petition response, I expect him to set them out again today. Instead, I ask the Minister whether anything beyond the measures that the Government have already outlined could be considered. That means going beyond best practice and considering how existing technologies could be utilised more effectively. That might include making things easier for those who need to access microchip database information. More broadly, are there ways of utilising technologies such as GPS collars to help identify more quickly a cat that has tragically been killed during a collision? If we are to consider ways of making things easier for owners, we should consider how information already provided by the private sector could be utilised where owners consent to it being used for this reason. As I said at the outset, we all share the sentiments set out in this petition. Cat owners are absolutely right to want their cat to be returned to them as quickly as possible. That is the least that all pet owners deserve. However, unless there has been a change of position, I am not clear on whether the Department for Transport believes that such a measure could be implemented effectively.<span id="47WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="47WH"></span>

    Hansard source
  18. ParliamentAlicia Kearns

    Small Boat Crossings: Removal of Arrivals

    Ministers tell us that small boat arrivals are vetted, so we need not worry, but Mohammed Yaseen—who, as we all know, joined al-Qaeda at 16, was convicted as a Daesh terrorist in Germany, and, a British court was told, was a danger to the British people—was put by the Home Office not in a detention centre ready to be deported to Iraq, where the Iraqi people deserve to see him face trial and justice, but instead in a hostel in Windsor. He was free to roam British streets during daylight hours, along with too many of the 95% not yet deported. He is now back in prison, thanks to the newspapers. How can we have any confidence in the Government, when they allow a convicted Daesh member to be released on to our streets while his deportation is pending, and will the Home Secretary today give the commitment that he will be held in detention until he is on a plane, and that his ticket has been ordered?

    Hansard source
  19. ParliamentAlicia Kearns

    Performance of Royal Mail

    A reliable post service is not a luxury; it is an essential public service. For our communities across Rutland, Stamford and the South Kesteven and Harborough villages, the consequences of poor service can be significant, and also unfair on the posties who face the brunt of those frustrations. In Carlby, some residents were left without post for 20 days in January, with many only receiving their post because they took the initiative to complain. One resident wrote her complaint on 26 January. The next day, a mammoth bundle of mail coincidentally arrived at her house, with some letters dating from 2 January—24 days late. In Ryhall, the village regularly goes without post for weeks at a time. It is not just an inconvenience; it is the norm. In Stamford, first-class post takes a minimum of four days to arrive, despite Royal Mail aiming to deliver the next working day. South Luffenham is no different. The Royal Mail comes once a week, or twice if locals are lucky. Indeed, I wrote to the residents of Cottesmore on 12 October and many received their letters only yesterday. One village resident has missed numerous medical appointments because letters arrive too late from the hospital—or she travels the 40 minutes to our local hospital to find out that the appointment has been cancelled. This is unacceptable. We are not asking for special treatment. In the last 18 months since the 2025 sale, something has happened that has broken Royal Mail. Residents have consistently been told they can only complain after seven days—a whole week of non-delivery. Again, the significant delays residents face every week are perfectly demonstrated by the fact that when I posted correspondence first class from my constituency office in Oakham, it took two weeks for the letters to arrive. To arrive where? In Oakham—some just one street away. I want to be clear that, as all Members in the Chamber have said, this is not an attack on our postal workers. Many work incredibly hard under considerable pressure in all weathers. We recognise the contribution they make, and we are grateful to them. I would like to turn briefly to a company called Enough, which uses the Royal Mail service to deliver its self-swab rape kits, despite having been publicly outed by me in this Chamber for sending SLAPPs—strategic lawsuits against public participation—to sexual assault survivors, rape charities and anyone who dares to speak out to question its motives or the claims on its kits. I have raised Enough’s use of Royal Mail services with <span id="103" class="column-number" data-column-number="103"></span>Royal Mail, because I believe its use of Royal Mail is not compliant with Royal Mail’s own guidance on the transportation of human specimens. First, a kit has to be sent by a qualified medical practitioner or requested by them. This is not the case. Secondly, the labelling on the packaging required is not currently in place. Thirdly, the packaging requirements are also not being met. Royal Mail is not taking the concerns I have raised with it seriously. The Minister knows very well the issues relating to Enough and has promised to look at how we regulate to deal with the fact that this company should not be in operation. It is important that Royal Mail comes back to me and that the Minister also raises this issue with Royal Mail. Rural communities cannot become an afterthought in the provision of essential services. Yes, distance and rural geography represent operational challenges, but they are not a permanent excuse for poor service. I am sure, Madam Deputy Speaker, that you have had the same issues in your very rural constituency. I urge the Government to take these concerns seriously and press Royal Mail for a clear and measurable improvement plan and improved powers for regulators. That plan must include: transparent local performance information that even I cannot get my hands on; an assessment of staffing and delivery arrangements; better communication with affected residents; and a straightforward process for reporting and resolving complaints. We are all very grateful to posties for what they do, but accountability means more than just acknowledging a problem. It means taking action and demonstrating results. The universal post service is an essential part of our national infrastructure. Its value is measured not by the number of letters delivered nationally, but by whether our communities can depend on it when they need it—and for too many, they cannot.

    Hansard source
  20. ParliamentVictoria Atkins

    Topical Questions

    The Conservative DEFRA team met more than 100 farmers in Berkshire this week, ahead of the Budget, to continue our two-year campaign against the family farm tax and the family business tax. One farmer told us: “I’m sat with a ticking time bomb and it’s unsurvivable for me. I would have to sell the farm to pay the bill.” That is despite the Government’s humiliating partial U-turn. With six days to go before the Budget, can the Secretary of State explain why this Labour Government are putting families through that?

    Hansard source
  21. ParliamentVictoria Atkins

    Topical Questions

    I can tell the Secretary of State now that I am not on the side of this Government. While Labour was complaining about black labradors and pubs at its party conference, the Conservatives were listening to rural business owners. They are being squeezed at every turn; the cost of energy, water, heating oil, petrol and diesel, as well as food prices, and the amount of red tape and taxes, are all up under this Government. The Secretary of State may have heard of two of them: Jeremy Clarkson and Cheerful Charlie—in fact, the Secretary of State has stood up Cheerful Charlie three times. They asked a question at our party conference that I hear in market towns and villages across the country under this Government: why would anyone start a business in this country right now?

    Hansard source
  22. ParliamentTom Tugendhat

    Saudi Arabia: RAF Support

    <em>(Urgent Question:)</em> To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the deployment of RAF Typhoon aircraft to defend Saudi Arabia, and the extension of air-to-air refuelling support for the Saudi air operations, including those against Houthi targets in Yemen.

    Hansard source
  23. ParliamentTom Tugendhat

    Saudi Arabia: RAF Support

    Thank you for granting this UQ, Mr Speaker. I am sorry that it was necessary, as there is a long-standing convention in this place that shadow Ministers—and, in fact, spokespeople from other parties—are briefed on a Privy Council basis in order to understand what is going on before there are military deployments overseas, but that seems to have fallen out of practice. Those of us—including my friend, the hon. and gallant Minister sitting across the Dispatch Box from me—who <span id="1282" class="column-number" data-column-number="1282"></span>have served in uniform and have briefed members of the Opposition should remember that we may find ourselves on the opposite Benches in a few years’ time, and it is good to get back into these habits. I will just say briefly why this is so important, and why I am asking this question and not my hon. Friend the Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), sitting beside me. This is a political decision and a political judgment. This is not purely a military deployment; it is a judgment on how to use the defensive arm of His Majesty’s Government and where it should go. It is a question that the Foreign Office is best placed to co-ordinate. The reality is that what we are getting is a parcelled-off process, and not a strategy for success. Where is, for example, the action in the United Nations? Where are the sanctions on the Houthis, who should be designated as a terrorist group? Where are the co-ordinating actions with others in the region? We have the state visit of the Sultan of Oman—one of Britain’s most important regional partners—but where are the voices co-ordinating our actions around not just Yemen, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, but the whole of the Arabian peninsula in response to Iran’s hostility? We have seen the regime in Tehran killing hundreds of thousands—perhaps even millions—of Sunni Muslims over the past half century since the poisonous creed of Khomeinism infected Tehran. This recent incident is not an isolated one; it is part of a pattern of violence. We have seen it pushing up energy prices in the United Kingdom, leaving us with our energy low and our storage short as winter approaches. Although the Jackdaw decision is the right one, it is a bit late, and it will not make a huge difference this winter, making Rosebank all the more urgent. Let me just ask a few direct questions. First, what actions have the Minister or his Cabinet colleagues taken to co-ordinate actions with allies in the region? Secondly, what support has been given to the defence of Cyprus, given Iran’s proxy Hezbollah’s attack on our bases recently? Thirdly, what plans are there to designate the Houthis as a terrorist organisation? Fourthly, what actions are planned at the UN to call out Iranian aggression, alongside its Russian and Chinese neighbours? Fifthly—<em>[</em><em>Interruption.</em><em>]</em> Last one, Mr Speaker. Fifthly, will the Secretary of State commit to giving briefings before deployments? Finally, will the Secretary of State confirm that despite his predecessor saying—

    Hansard source
  24. ParliamentTom Tugendhat

    Saudi Arabia: RAF Support

    On a point of order, Mr Speaker. May I seek your guidance and advice on ensuring that the Government inform this House before military operations, and that they do not have to be dragged here with your indulgence for an urgent question when there is a clear need for this House to be able to debate the actions of His Majesty’s Government in order to support our forces? We all support our forces. I respect the Minister’s service and I am sure that he respects all those on the Opposition Benches as well.

    Hansard source
  25. ParliamentSir John Whittingdale

    Wine Production

    <Question HRSContentId="{90BED1BD-7BB0-442B-BBA3-5D2F176E511F}">8. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{832EAB88-9507-4650-AD42-199268DCECB5}">What steps her Department is taking to support the wine production industry.</QuestionText> </Question>

    Hansard source
  26. ParliamentSir John Whittingdale

    Wine Production

    Is the Minister aware that Essex is now a centre of English wine production, with producers such as Danbury Ridge, Missing Gate, New Hall, Crouch Valley and Crouch Ridge all producing in my constituency? A number of them also offer vineyard tours, which are an important source of revenue. Will he support WineGB’s campaign for a wine tourism relief, to reduce the excise duty on cellar-door sales?

    Hansard source
  27. ParliamentSir John Whittingdale

    Topical Questions

    <Question HRSContentId="{B9A98BCF-DEBD-4F74-B0EE-1BF265F570DE}">T3. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{86F3C411-97B4-41AC-A8B1-8C1F2884257D}"></QuestionText>As well as producing extremely fine wines, Maldon produces excellent oysters—I would be delighted to welcome any members of the ministerial team to visit. Will the Department do more to promote the shellfish industry? In particular, will it look to introduce a specific aquaculture qualification to try to attract more apprentices into the industry?</Question>

    Hansard source
  28. ParliamentSir John Whittingdale

    Saudi Arabia: RAF Support

    I support the deployment of British forces in support of our Saudi Arabian allies, but, as has become clear, the distinction between “offensive” and “defensive” support is pretty fuzzy at best. Can the Minister say what assessment has been made of the possible increased threat to British nationals in the region, both civilian and military, and what is being done to meet that threat?

    Hansard source
  29. ParliamentSir Jeremy Wright

    Local Government Reorganisation

    The Local Government Boundary Commission paused boundary reviews in areas affected by local government reorganisation proposals in February of last year, so the Government’s recent review of those proposals has not had any immediate practical impact. The commission will return to those boundary reviews when the reorganisation proposals are resolved.

    Hansard source
  30. ParliamentSir Jeremy Wright

    Local Government Reorganisation

    I will write to my hon. Friend if there is anything to add to what I am about to say, but as he will appreciate, the delay will have a practical impact because all those waiting for such a review will have to wait rather longer. The boundary review can only review proposals for change when a new authority is legally established, which has not yet happened.

    Hansard source
  31. ParliamentSir Jeremy Hunt

    Topical Questions

    Thank you for squeezing me in, Mr Speaker. On 7 September, Natural England submitted the legal orders for a 30.5% expansion of the Surrey Hills national landscape, which would transform biodiversity and nature protection in my area. The decision is now on the Secretary of State’s desk. When will she make that decision, and would she like to come to Surrey Hills to announce it and try out some of our fantastic local pubs?

    Hansard source
  32. ParliamentSir Iain Duncan Smith

    Saudi Arabia: RAF Support

    I say to the Minister—I do not mean this personally—that I do not know what has happened to the Government. When they deploy British servicemen and women abroad, they should make a statement to the House, no matter what time of the day or night it is. In 1999, when Prime Minister Tony Blair deployed RAF aircraft to Montenegro, I remember the then Deputy Prime Minister coming to the Dispatch Box at about 9 pm. He knew his responsibilities. The Government have failed on this quite explicitly. Why are the Government misusing the word “defence” endlessly now, not wanting to talk about what they have to do? How do we defend against a ballistic missile once it is launched unless we attack the site that is launching it? This is nonsense. At the end of the day, we need to be honest with the British public. I am not against deployment to defend by offensive action, but surely that is more logical than pretending that personnel are there only to defend.

    Hansard source
  33. ParliamentSir Geoffrey Cox

    NHS Maternity Services

    I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this debate and on his indefatigable efforts on behalf of Barnstaple hospital; as he knows, although it is in his constituency, it also serves thousands of people in Torridge, which I have the honour to represent. Does he agree that the question the Minister needs to answer today is what the Government are going to do to ensure that isolated rural maternity services are resilient and can withstand the departure of a single consultant and prevent hundreds of mothers having to make a trek—in this case of 60 miles to Exeter, as the hon. Gentleman knows very well—to give birth. We need a policy that looks closely at how isolated rural maternity units can have built-in resilience, and trusts must have a duty to ensure it.

    Hansard source
  34. ParliamentSir Desmond Swayne

    Equitable Life Policyholders: Compensation

    On the issue of stalwart supporters, the hon. Member for Leeds North East (Fabian Hamilton) has been a magnificent supporter. I have come along to these debates for several years, and what I am looking for is at least some prospect of a result, because we have done this year in, year out. I have affected constituents, and I still support them, but what we need from the Minister is at least some sign that we are not flogging a dead horse.

    Hansard source
  35. ParliamentSir Christopher Chope

    Equitable Life Policyholders: Compensation

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this debate. Does he agree that one of the fundamental <span id="471WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="471WH"></span>issues is who regulates the regulators? When the regulators failed in this case, ultimately the ombudsman tried to regulate the regulators, but the regulators were too stubborn to accept the ombudsman’s recommendations. So who is going to regulate the regulators?

    Hansard source
  36. ParliamentSir Christopher Chope

    Equitable Life Policyholders: Compensation

    Let us put the issue in context. The headline today is that we now have £3 trillion of national debt, which represents an increase of £1 trillion over the last six years. That debt has accumulated largely because of Treasury neglect and bad policy. The Treasury continues to talk about having low interest rates and an inflation target of 2%, but as we now know, it consistently allows inflation to be above 2%, with the most recent figure being 3.5%. That erodes the value of people’s pensions. Under successive Governments, the Treasury has behaved appallingly on the Equitable Life pensioners. I congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds North East (Fabian Hamilton) on securing this debate and introducing it so well. He asked four pertinent questions—nice, easy, simple questions—and I hope that the Minister will answer each of them affirmatively in his response. My interest in this subject goes back many years, not only because my constituents were badly affected by the collapse of Equitable Life, but because I was a shadow Treasury Minister when the Treasury set up Lord Penrose’s inquiry into the scandal. That inquiry is another example of the Treasury delaying the process to try to kick the can down the road. Although the inquiry was initiated in 2001 and Lord Penrose reported to the relevant Treasury Minister at the time, Ruth Kelly, in December 2003, it was three or four months before the Treasury deigned to publish his report, and another four years after that before the publication of the ombudsman’s report. In setting up the inquiry, the Treasury deliberately prevented Penrose from finding issues of maladministration. The Treasury has been complicit in denying the victims of regulatory failure the compensation to which they should have been, and still are, entitled. Successive Governments are responsible for allowing this appalling saga to continue. Today, the Minister has the opportunity to change that and restore public confidence in the Government, the blob and the way in which such things are administered. Earlier I asked the question: who regulates the regulators? If a regulator is in place and that regulator falls down on his responsibilities, people expect that there will be some redress, but that does not seem to be accepted at the highest levels in Government, so I hope that that can change. This issue is not going to go away. That is a tribute to the persistence of parliamentary colleagues, the EMAG campaigners and our constituents, who are behind all this and who are saying, “What has happened to this extra money? Why can’t we have it paid out to us?” I said at the beginning that in the context of where we are with the national debt, this is very small beer, but it is not the money so much as the principle that is important, and I think that the principle is overridingly in favour of paying out what is due to these people, who were victims of Government maladministration.

    Hansard source
  37. ParliamentSir Christopher Chope

    Places of Worship Renewal Fund: Second Application Round

    The right hon. Gentleman will know that the places of worship scheme is massively oversubscribed. If people can have VAT allowances against repairs to historic places of worship in Scotland, why can we not have them in England? Would that not be a much more direct way to help with the cost of repairs for historic churches, and will he ensure that such a provision is included in the Budget?

    Hansard source
  38. ParliamentSir Ashley Fox

    Fly-tipping

    Waste crime and fly-tipping affect rural communities across Somerset. While I welcome the action that the Government are taking, does the Minister agree that the very substantial increases that we have seen in landfill tax enable rogue waste operators to undercut legitimate businesses? Does she accept that those substantial tax increases are fuelling waste crime, and will she join me in asking the Chancellor to cut those taxes?

    Hansard source
  39. ParliamentRobbie Moore

    UK-EU Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement

    The EU summit is to take place in just 28 days’ time, but the Farming Minister cannot answer key questions, not just from us but from our farming community. We still have no confirmation that the precision breeding Act—widely recognised as a huge success—will be 100% protected. We have no reassurance that our current freedom to innovate in gene editing and bovine TB vaccine development will be a red line, and we have no acknowledgment that the alignment with the EU on plant protection products could slash £810 million from farming incomes in the first year alone. What guarantees can the Farming Minister give our farmers right now that this Labour Government will not sell them out to the EU, just like they sold out our British fishermen last May when they previously negotiated with Brussels?

    Hansard source
  40. ParliamentRobbie Moore

    Business of the House

    Skipton Road in Ilkley is being dug up yet again—I think for the fourth time this year—by Yorkshire Water. The biggest frustration for many of those who pass by is that there is seemingly no one ever undertaking the works when the traffic lights are on red. Can we have a debate in Government time that puts pressure on the highways departments at local authorities, such as Bradford council, to ensure that they sign off the works with a proper plan in place to cause as little disruption as possible to visitors, residents and local businesses whose trade is impacted, and that when utility companies do undertake the works, they do so around the clock?

    Hansard source