Showing every spoken contribution, including 5,578 under 12 words. Hide short remarks

1. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Simon Hoare

   Air Traffic Control Disruption

   Against a backdrop of realism—things just go wrong, no matter how much money is invested in them, or how up to date they are—does it not seem slightly ludicrous that NATS has put all its eggs in one basket? There is no shadow, back-up or secondary scheme that can be used. If there was, it might not be as good as the main one, but it would minimise, or certainly attenuate, disruption. Is it in the Minister’s thinking to put the eggs in more baskets, rather than just relying on one particular bit of software?

   Hansard source
2. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Rebecca Smith

   Fathers and Positive Male Role Models

   It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. Like other Members before me, I congratulate the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) on securing this Backbench Business debate. I was pleased to support the application several months ago, and I am glad to be able to respond to it from the Front Bench today. We need to be honest about what the evidence tells us: good fathers make an overwhelmingly positive contribution to their children’s lives, yet around 2.5 million children in this country have no father figure at home, and by the age of 17, 47% of young people are no longer living with both parents at the same address. The relationship between a child and their father matters. For sons, a father can demonstrate how to be a man, how to behave around women and how to raise a family of their own one day. For daughters, a father can embody the positive attributes that she looks for in a man when she is older, making her less vulnerable to those who would exploit or mistreat her. Children with secure relationships with their fathers are less likely to experience depression, anxiety, low self-esteem or self-harm. I was fortunate to grow up with a strong father figure—my dad, Mike. I slightly disagree with the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) about Christmas eve. Since I was four years old, my dad and I have gone shopping together on Christmas eve to buy presents for my mum. He bought them; I, like a bit of a silly girl, went home and wrapped them for him—something I have to admit I still do at the age of 45. It is part of the story and bond I share with my dad, knowing that each Christmas eve, whether it includes lunch and, as we have got older, an alcoholic drink or two, we will go out together, do our shopping and then head home. My little sister never gets to do it, so it is definitely part of my relationship with my dad. Unfortunately, not everybody gets to have that experience. One UK study found that 14-year-old girls who did not have a close relationship with their father or a father figure were at significantly greater risk of mental health difficulties. Researchers also link secure father-daughter relationships with better educational and career outcomes, stronger social skills and better mental health. For sons, close relationships with fathers are associated with a reduced risk of antisocial and criminal behaviour, along with other risky behaviours. Those outcomes affect a child’s life long after they turn 18. When we look at the wider challenges facing boys and men, this topic becomes even harder to ignore. The “Missing Men” report tells us that in the final quarter of 2025, more than 450,000 young men aged 16 to 24 in England—nearly one in seven—were not in education, employment or training. At school just 61% of boys reached a good level of development by the age of five in 2024-25 compared with 75% of girls. Three quarters of children <span id="450WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="450WH"></span>in custody report having an absent father. We must stress that none of that means that an absent father automatically causes poor outcomes. There are many factors involved, but it should make us ask a straightforward question: are we doing enough to support fathers to be involved in their children’s lives? Too often, fathers seem to be an afterthought; that needs to change. We need to look at what happens when relationships break down. There is a widespread perception that family courts make it difficult for fathers to maintain a meaningful relationship with their children. There is a presumption that it will aways be the mother who takes custody of the children, with the father permitted to see them once a fortnight if he is fortunate enough. Meanwhile, that same child has easy access to content from harmful male online influencers, starting as soon as they get their first smartphone, if not before. We are replacing a positive male role model with an inherently negative one and then claiming to be shocked by the results. Where there are safeguarding concerns, the child’s welfare must come first, but where there is a safe, loving and willing father, the starting point should be meaningful involvement and as much contact as possible. The Government’s position, laid out in clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill, is to repeal the statutory presumption that a child’s welfare is generally furthered by the involvement of both parents. Existing law already allows courts to restrict unsafe contact; repealing the presumption without a suitable replacement, such as a child-centred parental relationship test, could lead to greater inconsistency and conflict. It may also weaken children’s relationships with safe parents. A child should have real men in their lives: fathers, grandfathers, teachers, coaches and mentors can show them what responsibility and good character look like. That brings me to the language we use. We need to ditch the worst excesses of identity politics when it comes to boys and men. For too long, the phrase “toxic masculinity” has been used in a way that blurs the distinction between masculinity and genuinely harmful behaviour. Let me be clear: violence, abuse, cruelty and misogyny are<strong> </strong>wrong, but masculinity is not. Masculinity should be an extremely positive force for good. There is nothing toxic about being strong, courageous, ambitious, competitive, protective or determined. When combined with responsibility, self-control and respect, they are the exact attributes that enable society to flourish. In Plymouth, where I am a MP, there is a great network call Man Culture, which puts those principles into practice. Man Culture organises workshops for men right across the city, tackling issues such as toxic masculinity and preventing male violence against women and girls. It seeks to address issues identified by the Plymouth Violence against Women and Girls Commission, which I chaired a few years ago. That work was a direct response to two tragedies in the city: the incel-inspired Keyham shooting, where five people and the shooter died, and the abduction from a bus stop and brutal murder of a young woman a few months later. The report also recommended working with young boys, because to challenge harmful behaviours, we need to have honest conversations, and those have to start young. We should teach boys how to use strength responsibly and not to be ashamed of having strength in the first place. We should teach boys how they can use their strength to build things rather than to tear things down. <span id="451WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="451WH"></span>The approach must be not to tell boys that masculinity is the problem, but to give them examples of men worth becoming. Fathers are some of the most important examples of that. A good father can show his son that strength does not mean aggression, confidence does not mean arrogance, and responsibility means keeping your word and looking after the people you love. Positive male role models are also needed beyond the home. As has been mentioned, only 14% of nursery and primary schoolteachers in England are men, and although I am proud that my brother is one such teacher, that figure is not high enough. We need men as teachers in early years and primary settings. The problems will not be solved by another strategy document alone. Prevention starts earlier, with families, fathers and communities, and with giving boys a sense of purpose, responsibility and belonging. I pay tribute to the men who volunteer in scouting and uniformed groups across my constituency; we should recognise and be grateful for such men. However, that is not enough. We need to do even more. Having this conversation does not mean turning the issue into a competition between men and women. It must be about supporting mothers and fathers who are working together to create something greater than the sum of their individual parts, ensuring that family services properly involve fathers, where they can safely contribute, and making sure that, where it is safe and appropriate, children can maintain meaningful relationships with both parents. This debate is not about pretending that fathers are the answer to every problem, but they are an important part of the answer whose absence makes everything else more difficult, and Government policy should recognise that. If we want stronger families, better outcomes for children and boys who grow into responsible men, we need to stop treating fathers as an optional extra. Fathers matter, masculinity matters and male role models matter; it is time that our politics treat them as such. As my hon. Friend the Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) mentioned, the former Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, asked the former Deputy Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), to take on a national summit on men and boys. My hon. Friend and I would be grateful to hear from the Minister what has happened since then. Is that summit still going ahead, and when will we hear more information about it?

   Hansard source
3. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Paul Holmes

   Air Traffic Control Disruption

   NATS falls within my constituency, in Swanwick. May I place on the record my thanks and dedication to the staff of NATS, who I have seen work day in, day out to make our skies safer, and to 78 Squadron Royal Air Force, who are based at the same site? I must ask the Minister to look seriously at the six-month timescale for the CAA review and to commit to full transparency, to ensure that the lessons learned are not held only in the Department for Transport but are shared more widely with Parliament. In the topsy-turvy world in which we live, I find myself in agreement with the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) in asking the Minister to look seriously with the management of NATS at ensuring that, after the third incident in as many years, the long-term investment plans are in place to make sure that this does not happen again and that the management of NATS cannot blame lack of investment for the systems failing.

   Hansard source
4. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Paul Holmes

   Social Housing Bill [Lords]

   I thank the hon. Lady for giving way, and it is good to see her in the Chamber. She mentioned her frustration, when she was council leader, at not being able to use 100% of right-to-buy receipts. Seeing as the last Conservative Government gave her the power to do that, why did she not?

   Hansard source
5. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Nigel Huddleston

   Business of the House

   As you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, I love to do everything I can to support our pubs and hospitality industry—and I do mean everything. I am pleased to represent an area of the country that has many fantastic pubs, many of which are participating in my current “Pub of the Year” competition, and voting is now open. Can we have a debate in Government time about the important role of our hospitality industry in our local communities? Can I invite the Leader of the House and you, Madam Deputy Speaker—in fact, everybody—to the winner of the competition, wherever it may be? I do not promise to pay for every pint, but we will see how it goes.

   Hansard source
6. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Technology and Innovation

   I call Emily Darlington—not here.

   Hansard source
7. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Topical Questions

   I call the shadow Secretary of State.

   Hansard source
8. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Topical Questions

   I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

   Hansard source
9. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

   Topical Questions

   Order. Before the Minister responds, that is the first “you” of the day and hopefully the last.

   Hansard source
10. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Air Traffic Control Disruption

    Before we come to the urgent question, I must say how disappointing it is that the Government were not forthcoming with a proactive ministerial statement on this matter. The disruption to aviation and the impact on many constituents has been considerable. I hope the Minister and the Treasury Front Bench will pass that message on to the Secretary of State.

    Hansard source
11. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Air Traffic Control Disruption

    I have noted the Minister’s proactive commitment to a ministerial statement.

    Hansard source
12. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Air Traffic Control Disruption

    Order. Mr Gemmell!

    Hansard source
13. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Air Traffic Control Disruption

    Well, that was very well done, then.

    Hansard source
14. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Air Traffic Control Disruption

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

    Hansard source
15. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Air Traffic Control Disruption

    Order. Do you need medical assistance, Sir Alec?

    Hansard source
16. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Business of the House

    I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

    Hansard source
17. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Business of the House

    I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.

    Hansard source
18. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Business of the House

    Order. We have many colleagues to get through. I can see that some Members are holding bits of paper with far too many sentences on them—cross them out and ask a question in one sentence. I call Sharon Hodgson.

    Hansard source
19. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Business of the House

    As a couple?

    Hansard source
20. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Ms Nusrat Ghani

    Business of the House

    I do not think I have ever been publicly invited and dismissed from a date in one sitting. I call Euan Stainbank.

    Hansard source
21. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Peter Bedford

    Arm’s Length Bodies Review

    <Question HRSContentId="{9CAB1AC7-FF77-49C8-8E4B-6D7056E0157E}">6. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{68C7B1A9-82F1-445D-BA90-ADB896E992F5}">What progress she has made on the review of arm’s length bodies. </QuestionText></Question>

    Hansard source
22. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Peter Bedford

    Arm’s Length Bodies Review

    There are actually over 400 quangos in existence, which spend over £390 billion a year—that is £1 in every £3 spent by the Government. Last year, Ministers promised a full review of those quangos; as an accountant, we would call that zero-based budgeting. Will the Minister tell the House how many of those bodies have been scrapped and how much has been saved?

    Hansard source
23. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Mark Francois

    Ukraine and Russia

    On behalf of the shadow Defence team, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome the new Defence Secretary—Labour’s third in three months—to his place and to thank him for advance sight of this important statement. On a personal note, we have a mutual friend in Labour councillor Gareth Barrett, who I know would be very proud to see his long-time friend standing at the Dispatch Box and representing the Ministry of Defence. It is over four years since Russia’s brutal and illegal full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but as the Ukrainians reminded me when I visited Kyiv in February, the Russo-Ukrainian war has actually been raging for 12 years, because Putin’s Russia illegally annexed Crimea and parts of the Donbas in 2014. That is longer than both the first and second world wars combined. I am sure that I speak for the whole House in paying tribute to the Ukrainians for their fierce and determined resistance. They are fighting for the values of freedom and democracy, which this House has represented for centuries, so when we say, “Slava Ukraini!”, we mean it. On my trip to Ukraine, the Speaker of the Rada said something that I will never forget: “When you go back to London, tell them we know the Russians better than anybody, and if we fall, you’re next.” My hon. Friend the Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson), who is joining our shadow Defence team, has just returned from Kyiv overnight. He reports how the Russians cynically suspended missile strikes on the capital while those on the American delegation were present, but resumed the strikes almost immediately after their departure. Tragically, a number of innocent civilians were murdered in Kyiv last night. On supporting Ukraine and brave President Zelensky, there has been absolute solidarity between ourselves and the Labour party. When I served in the Ministry of Defence following the 2014 invasion, we began training Ukrainian troops on Salisbury Plain via what was then known as Operation Orbital, and that continues today via Operation Interflex. Between them, they have trained over 50,000 Ukrainian troops on British soil. The House will no doubt recall the very powerful footage of columns of Russian tanks being destroyed in 60 seconds in highly co-ordinated anti-tank ambushes north of Kyiv in February 2022, which were carried out by Ukrainian troops using UK-manufactured NLAW anti-tank weapons. <span id="1236" class="column-number" data-column-number="1236"></span>Had it not been for that kit and the training that accompanied it, the Russians would likely be having lunch in Kyiv today. We all want to see a ceasefire in Ukraine but, as the Ukrainians themselves would tell us, not at any price. The Government’s policy is to participate in a “coalition of the willing” in order to help maintain a ceasefire—I hope the Secretary of State can confirm that again. However, were we to deploy the British Army into Ukraine, our troops would need to be adequately trained and equipped. A few moments ago, the Defence Secretary invited the House to hold him to account. Taking him at his word, I must press him on some extremely worrying reports—first published in <em>The Times</em> on 3 September, and amplified in the <em>Defence Eye</em> journal on Tuesday—that British Army training is being seriously curtailed in order to provide in-year efficiency savings— “cuts”, in pub English— at the Treasury’s behest. For the financial year 2026-27, the MOD has been given a ridiculous efficiency savings target of over £3 billion, with much of it to come from operational spending such as training exercises. The Army’s share of that is reportedly £1.2 billion. Given the seriousness of this situation, I wish to ask the Defence Secretary three very important questions. First, is it true that training in both the regular and the reserves is being materially constricted to save this money at the Treasury’s behest? Secondly, what actions is he as Defence Secretary, no doubt in consultation with the Chief of the General Staff, taking to push back against these pernicious in-year funding cuts imposed by the Treasury? What discussions has he had with the new Chancellor, who, ironically, resigned as Defence Secretary in June because Labour would not commit to spend 3% of GDP on defence by 2030? The Government cannot keep kicking this can down the road. Thirdly, in which year specifically will Labour now commit to spend 3% of GDP on defence, as the Conservatives are now pledged to do by 2030 at the latest? We will not deter the likes of Vladimir Putin by capping bus fares. In summary, we are four-square with the Ukrainians. We support the Government in supporting them, but they must support our troops, so what are they doing to train them?

    Hansard source
24. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Mark Francois

    Ukraine and Russia

    Speaking of foreign donations.

    Hansard source
25. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Mark Francois

    Social Housing Bill [Lords]

    On housing numbers, there is no Reform MP present this afternoon, but Reform-led Rochford district council has just published its regulation 19 local plan. During the May elections, Reform made a great thing of defending the green belt, and in the intervening period its councillors intimated to lots of local campaign groups that, when the plan came out, they would be all right. Yet we now find that nearly every single one of those green-belt sites has been recommended for development. Does my hon. Friend agree that if they do not really mean to defend the green belt—clearly they do not—they should never have said that?

    Hansard source
26. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Louie French

    Social Housing Bill [Lords]

    My hon. Friend will be aware that the Mayor of London has been in power for over 10 years, and that London’s housing starts have fallen through the floor. Over 300,000 Londoners are estimated to be on housing waiting lists, the majority of them in Labour boroughs. Does he find the rhetoric today somewhat confusing, given that even though the Government have cut Sadiq Khan’s affordable housing target by 22%, he continues to miss it?

    Hansard source
27. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Gagan Mohindra

    Civil Service Pension Scheme

    Despite dedicating their lives to public service through long careers in the civil service, many of my constituents have faced severe delays with their pension payments, causing them anxiety and financial hardship. How will the Minister ensure that her Department gives my constituents the support they need, that this crisis is resolved and, just as importantly, that it does not happen again?

    Hansard source
28. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Andrew Snowden

    Severe Weather Incidents

    Flooding during severe weather incidents is often predictable, because those same areas suffer from low-level regular flooding throughout the rest of the year. The issue affects multi-council areas, up and downstream, and covers multiple Government agencies. Bodies such as flooding boards that cover those areas are a great way of co-ordinating agencies and councils, but we do not have them across the whole UK. Would the Minister consider rolling out flood boards in every part of the UK?

    Hansard source
29. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Andrew Snowden

    Topical Questions

    <Question HRSContentId="{B07B1833-FB14-445C-9E6C-E96C6FBAC4F3}">T6. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{17940E1F-A261-4E37-9823-56BBCE5EE87F}"></QuestionText>Upon her appointment as First Secretary of State, it was widely reported in the press that the right hon. Lady’s responsibility for fraud in the Cabinet Office was removed from her. I wonder whether the First Secretary of State could outline why there was such speculation, and if she struggles with that, perhaps she can use the phone-a-friend option.</Question>

    Hansard source
30. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mr Andrew Snowden

    Business of the House

    On 17 June 2025, my constituent’s four-month-old puppy, Teddy, sustained a serious leg injury during an introductory puppy grooming appointment. Upon complaining to the staff, they dismissed it as just a bruise, but later veterinary imaging confirmed blunt force trauma, resulting in three fractures to the dog’s leg. Instead of addressing the complaint transparently, they ultimately offered partial compensation, but only if my constituent signed a broad confidentiality clause. I raised this matter with a Minister from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and received a response on 27 November 2025, but the response missed the nub of the issue that my constituent was raising. I also requested a meeting. I have since emailed and written to them on 12 January, 14 March, 16 April and 26 August, but have not even received a response from the DEFRA Minister. Will the Leader of the House use his good offices to seek a response?

    Hansard source
31. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    No. 10 North

    We have heard again what we have had in response to a number of written questions. The Minister either does not know or will not tell us how much No. 10 North will cost, how many people work there and how many of them actually turn up to work—it is almost as though this has not been properly thought through. Does the Minister understand why, with so little information and so little transparency, so many people feel that this is a gimmick rather than a strategy?

    Hansard source
32. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Mike Wood

    No. 10 North

    We would not have had to table so many written questions if Ministers had actually answered our first question, instead of expecting us to come up with precisely the right form of words to leave them with no way of getting out. Surely it cannot be right that it requires a freedom of information request to discover how much it costs for a replica door at No. 10 North, but the Minister refuses to answer legitimate parliamentary scrutiny. Will the Minister at least—if he does have this information, which the Department surely does—finally commit to publishing the total budget for No. 10 North, the number of staff and special advisers who are going to work there, and attendance statistics?

    Hansard source
33. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lewis Cocking

    Social Housing Bill [Lords]

    It is a pleasure to speak opposite the new Minister, with whom I very much enjoyed working on the Housing, Communities <span id="1297" class="column-number" data-column-number="1297"></span>and Local Government Committee. Now that she is on the Government Front Bench, I suppose it is left to me to ask the tough questions. The Government have said that the Bill has been designed to encourage social housing providers to invest in the building of new socially rented homes. They want to encourage councils to build by restricting right to buy. That is the wrong approach. Yes, waiting lists for councils homes are far too high, but making it harder for tenants to get on in life and escape the clutches of the public sector is not the right solution. Instead, Ministers should look at what their policies are doing. Despite their promises, Labour is going backwards on house building. As our reasoned amendment states, last year there were “12,810 fewer net additional dwellings delivered in England compared to the previous year”. Why are the Government not pledging to take on the developers, who are sitting on thousands of unbuilt planning applications? The Institute for Public Policy Research—Labour’s favourite think-tank—has found that 1.4 million homes have been left unbuilt since 2007, despite planning permission being granted. The figure of 1.4 million homes sounds rather close to the Government’s challenging target of 1.5 million new homes. People are fed up with the eyesores in their neighbourhood—levelled ground left abandoned, surrounded by hoardings. I can show the Minister many examples in my Broxbourne constituency, and I am sure that hon. Members from right across the House can do the same. Taking on the land-banking developers would have widespread public support, but this Government only seem interested in making it easier to build on the green belt. We are still waiting for them to reveal what action they are taking to speed up building following the consultations held more than 12 months ago, so there is clearly no urgency. The Government should also consider who should be eligible for the help of a social home. People who come to this country and wish to live here should not rely on the generosity of taxpayers. Making Britain your home should be earned by working hard and integrating; it should not come with a free ride on the benefits system. That is why the Conservative party will end social housing tenancies for foreign nationals. Ensuring that only UK nationals can access social housing would free up 230,000 homes for British families. That change would make an immediate and significant difference to those stuck on council house waiting lists, but the Government would prefer that they sit around waiting for the Bill. Sadly, this Government, and especially their Back Benchers, are blinded by their ideological dislike of right to buy. It is clearly—<em>[</em><em>Interruption.</em><em>]</em> A number of Members have asked where Conservative Members were today. As I said in a Westminster Hall debate, Members of Parliament have a lot to deal with. When we do surgeries in our constituencies and people say, “When I turn on the TV, I see hardly anyone in the Chamber,” we all explain why that is. I suspect there will be times when all hon. Members cannot make it to important debates that their constituents want them to attend.<span id="1298" class="column-number" data-column-number="1298"></span> It is clearly the view of Labour Members that if we had no right to buy, social housing waiting lists would disappear, but where do they think the 2 million families that have utilised the scheme would be without it? Well, I can tell them: they would probably be in the same home, but it would be subsidised by the taxpayer rather than privately owned. Abolishing right to buy is not the silver bullet that they think it is. The Government are placing huge burdens on social housing providers to help Ministers meet their own net zero targets. The cost of complying with new energy regulations is causing significant pressure, and getting 713,000 homes up to minimum energy efficiency standards is estimated to cost £4.5 billion. The Chartered Institute of Housing told the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee that housing associations do not want to buy properties with gas boilers because they know that it will cost them more money to strip them out and make properties energy efficient. That is pushing up council house waiting lists. The National Housing Federation is clear about what that means: spending billions to comply with net zero regulations will make it harder to build new homes. Ministers already know this, as they reduced energy efficiency targets for social housing in January on the basis that providers could not build new homes because of the financial burden of upgrading their existing stock. If Ministers want councils to be incentivised to build, entirely getting rid of those expensive regulations would be a good place to start. What is positive in the Bill is the review of the shared ownership scheme, and I hope the Minister, when she gets to her feet, can confirm that the Government intend to keep that review in the Bill. This obligation was added by the Government only due to the diligent work of the Conservative team in the other place. I have lived in a shared ownership property, and I know that—as for other forms of ownership, such as leasehold—reforms are desperately needed to fix the many problems residents face. The Opposition agree that the provisions to protect victims of domestic violence are needed, but a separate legislative measure would have been the right way to bring those forward. I gently say to the many hon. Members who have made impassioned speeches that, when I was a council leader, I had a number of meetings with housing providers and housing associations, and not once in the hundreds of hours of meetings I had with social housing providers did they say to me that they could not build new social homes in Broxbourne, or in fact across the country, because of the right to buy. It was never mentioned as a reason why housing associations are not building social homes.

    Hansard source
34. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Lewis Cocking

    Social Housing Bill [Lords]

    The hon. Member has intervened on me quite a lot, and we have had quite a ding-dong in this Chamber. I say gently to him that when I speak to <span id="1299" class="column-number" data-column-number="1299"></span>housing providers, they tell me that one of the reasons why they cannot build new social homes is the Government’s increase to employer national insurance contributions, which means that they spend more money on taxes, rather than on building new social homes. In summary, this Bill is the wrong approach, and it is fundamentally built on the wrong beliefs. It will not build a single new social home, but it will deny many families the opportunity of ever owning a home of their own. The Conservative party will always be on the side of aspiration and opportunity, and that is why we will vote for our reasoned amendment.

    Hansard source
35. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·John Lamont

    No. 10 North

    <Question HRSContentId="{6DDCD091-9AE7-42D7-BE21-D62F2E047E38}">12. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{5201A2D9-BB15-4319-A759-630809DDECDA}">What estimate she has made of the cost of setting up No. 10 North.</QuestionText> </Question>

    Hansard source
36. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·John Lamont

    No. 10 North

    I thank the Minister for that answer, but of course for my constituents it is not No. 10 North, but “No. 10 Midlands”. According to a freedom of information request, tens of thousands of pounds have <span id="1179" class="column-number" data-column-number="1179"></span>already been spent setting up No. 10 North, including £10,500 on branding, £1,700 on crockery and nearly £1,000 moving a replica Downing Street door. Does he think that this represents good value for money, and will he commit to publish annually the full cost of running No. 10 North, including staffing, travel and security?

    Hansard source
37. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·John Lamont

    Business of the House

    Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business of the House?

    Hansard source
38. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·John Lamont

    Business of the House

    I am grateful to the Leader of the House for outlining the business and, of course, the recess dates. It is always good to look forward to the next recess. Tomorrow marks the 25th anniversary of the appalling terrorist attacks on the United States. We remember the thousands of innocent people who went to work that morning, boarded aircraft or reported for duty in the emergency services, and never returned home. We remember their families and all those whose lives were changed forever. Earlier this year, I had the privilege of visiting the 9/11 Memorial in New York. Standing where the Twin Towers once stood, it is an incredibly moving experience and a powerful reminder of both the terrible events of that day and the courage and resilience that followed them. A quarter of a century on, we should never forget the victims, nor should we ever waver in our determination to confront terrorism and defend the freedoms and values that those responsible sought to attack. I turn now to matters closer to home. The Leader of the House has announced that the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill will be rushed through the House over a couple of days in October, with no separate Report stage. That is very little time to consider such a complex Bill, particularly as the Government are reported to be preparing to table over 100 amendments. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the Government amendments are tabled before the House rises on Tuesday, and will he explain why the Government are not providing a separate Report stage? There seems to be growing chatter on the Government Benches about an early general election, with some Labour Members apparently wondering whether the new Prime Minister might even go to the country before Christmas. The Leader of the House is of course a man right at the heart of Government decision making and will know better than most what is being discussed in Downing Street. So for the benefit of increasingly nervous Labour Back Benchers, can he give the House a simple assurance today: will this Parliament run its full course, or will the new Prime Minister already be running away from difficult decisions? Turning to Scotland, last week the SNP Government published their latest programme for government. After nearly two decades in power, Scotland was promised renewal. Instead, as Russell Findlay put it, we got more “meddling” and “gimmicks”—more centralisation, more bureaucracy and yet more attempts to distract from the SNP’s dire record in office. This was on full display when the PISA school results were published recently, showing that Scotland’s once world-class education system is now considered to be just average. Of particular concern to my constituents is the extraordinary proposal by the SNP Government to abolish Scotland’s 14 territorial health boards and replace them with just two. This means the abolition of NHS Borders as we know it. People in my constituency in the Scottish Borders have already experienced the consequences of SNP centralisation with Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. They do not want vital healthcare decisions taken further away from the communities those services exist to serve. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to the hard-working <span id="1204" class="column-number" data-column-number="1204"></span>staff NHS Borders, and call on an increasingly centralising SNP Government not to forget rural and remote communities in Scotland? Finally, farming is the backbone of communities across the Borders and across rural Britain. Despite the enormous concern expressed by farmers and farming businesses, Labour’s family farm tax is now in force. Ahead of the Budget next month, will the Leader of the House convey a very simple message to the Chancellor: listen to our farmers, recognise the damage this tax is doing to confidence and succession planning, and finally do the right thing—scrap the family farm tax?

    Hansard source
39. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Joe Robertson

    Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

    I recently met my constituent Stan, whose father died as a result of contaminated blood. Like many families, he is facing an endless delay through poor administration of the scheme. It feels as though a scandal within a scandal is unfolding as mistakes are made and further stress is caused to families. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that the scheme is administered properly and mistakes are cut out, and would she consider meeting me to explore the issues raised by my constituent’s case?

    Hansard source
40. 10 Sep 2026·Parliament·Greg Smith

    No. 10 North

    <Question HRSContentId="{FAF6A79C-4FFC-45FC-A6EF-6CAE5D793FC1}">17. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{DA5879C1-C8CC-4C6A-ADC7-CCB8B2F01E93}">What estimate she has made of the cost of setting up No. 10 North.</QuestionText> </Question>

    Hansard source