Labour Party MP for St Helens North since (elected). An MP continuously since .
Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions
Entries on this tracker
68
Each filed under the party they sat for that day
Register entries
3
As currently published
Declared while sitting for Labour
£723.20
3 of 3 entries state an amount
| Party | Office | Area | Period | Began | Ended | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | MP | St Helens North | – present | elected | — | Party history |
Parliament's party history for this member: Labour ( – present).
Every entry the member has in the Register of Members' Financial Interests, as Parliament currently publishes it. The wording and values are the member's own declarations; nothing here has been assessed by this site.
Totals add only the entries that declare an amount received: payments for work, donations, gifts, and funded visits (register categories 1.1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). Ongoing employment is listed but not added, because its figure is a rate rather than a sum received. Each entry is dated by when the benefit happened, not when it was registered, and placed under the party the member sat for on that date. A member who changed party therefore has a separate total for each.
| Date | Category | Entry | Declared value | Sitting for | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3. Gifts, UK sources | Rugby League Commercial - £250.00 | £250 | Labour | Register record | |
| 3. Gifts, UK sources | Community Integrated Care - £323.20 | £323.20 | Labour | Register record | |
| 3. Gifts, UK sources | Rugby League Commercial - £150.00 | £150 | Labour | Register record |
In Wigan today, the funeral service is taking place for Sir Billy Boston. He was rugby league’s first knight, a trailblazer on and off the pitch, a leader, an inspiration to millions and a gentleman above all else. On what will be a sad day for his family, will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to Sir Billy one last time and sending condolences to his loved ones?
Due to a long-running dispute with the building’s landlord, Billinge medical practice in my constituency has been given a deadline of September to vacate the premises. I have previously spoken to the Minister about this and I am grateful for the help he has given me so far, but the integrated care board has now decided to move the practice out of the village entirely, to Garswood. I am worried about the impact of that on patients for many reasons, not least the fact that the new location is not easily accessible by public transport. Does the Minister agree with me that places like Billinge deserve their own medical practice? Will he or his officials agree to meet me to discuss the way forward?
I started my speech on Second Reading in November last year by saying: “This has been a long time coming.”—[Official Report, 3 November 2025; Vol. 774, c. 681.] Even more time has passed since then, but thanks to the determination, strength and effort of many survivors and campaigners—some of whom are in the Gallery today—and of those on the Labour Benches, and to the support of a number of dedicated people in this place, we are here at last, with the finish line in sight again.
Last week was Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Week. I recently met my constituent Rob Denholm to discuss the issues he has had with claiming the personal independence payment in the past—he compared the experience with being put on trial. Will the Minister assure me, Rob and all those suffering with MS that the review that the Government are now conducting will not just make the system more effective and efficient, but make it fairer and more humane?
Happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. Alan Clark and a team of volunteers from the CAMRA award-winning pub Haydock Reading Rooms recently completed the West Highland Way, raising thousands of pounds for Clatterbridge hospital and for Ryan Lawrenson, who at just 21 was recently diagnosed with osteosarcoma. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Ryan and his family the very best? Does he also agree that Alan and the team’s voluntary work and community effort show the best of Haydock and the best of England?
Young people are often unfairly criticised, but it is worth remembering that the vast majority of them are in employment, education or training. Those who are not deserve our support, and to be provided with opportunity, not the condemnation and ignorance that was all they got from the Conservatives in government, and all we have heard from them today. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the number of young people not in employment, education or training is a scandal, and that it demands action? Will he set out how this new investment will support young people in St Helens North and across the country?
The shadow Foreign Secretary said that this was “a moment for Britain to stand tall”, and I agree with her, which is why I was pleased to see the Prime Minister and this Government stand strong, instead of running blindly into another middle east war with no clear plan. Can the Minister assure me and the House that we will continue to act in the British national interest, and the interests of British nationals in the region?
I was council leader at St Helens for five years before coming here in July 2024. I just want to say thank you to the Secretary of State and the Minister for Local Government, and the Ministers in post before them, for the engagement, because the relationship now is different from what it was before. The conversation we have had since the provisional settlement has been constructive—it has been good; it has been done in good spirit—and I am very grateful for the result that we have for St Helens. In 2010, St Helens got £127 million a year from the last Labour Government, but when the Conservative party opposite left office it was £13 million a year. Does the Secretary of State share my absolute shock at the brass neck of Conservative Members?
On Friday, I visited St James primary school in Haydock in my constituency, where, after learning about the dangers of knife crime, year 6 children are campaigning to install bleed control kits in their community, in case the worst ever happens. Can the Minister please assure them and all my constituents that this Government are doing all they can to tackle knife crime, and will she join me in paying tribute to the children and staff of St James for their efforts?
This has been a very revealing debate in which Members on all sides of the House have made interesting points, but this matter has unfortunately become quite polarising. On one side of the debate, we have those who work with children and families and see the hugely damaging impact that the two-child limit has had. The Child Poverty Action Group says that “scrapping the two-child limit is the most cost-effective way to start to reduce child poverty”. Dame Rachel de Souza, the Children’s Commissioner, called removing the two-child limit “a vital first step towards lifting hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty quickly, with the potential to transform their lives.” I agree with Unicef, which said: “No child should be punished for the number of siblings they have.” Scrapping the two-child limit will lift around 2,500 children in St Helens North out of poverty. In this Parliament, we are on course to lift a record number of children—more than half a million nationally—out of poverty. Free breakfast clubs are opening in more primary schools, more than 5,000 families in St Helens North will benefit from extended free school meals later this year, and working families receive 30 hours of free childcare. Yes, that must all be paid for, and I am aware that it will be paid for by taxpayers, but politics and government are about choices. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately), said that we should look at the Conservatives’ record in government. The hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley (Dr Shastri-Hurst) said that government is about choices. Well, the country is well aware of the Conservatives’ record and the choices that they made, which is why they are sat on the Opposition Benches. This Labour Government are choosing to give all children the opportunity to thrive, and we will all benefit as a result. Every single penny spent in pursuit of that goal is money well spent, in my opinion as a taxpayer. On the other side of the debate, however, the Leader of the Opposition and others do not take a reasonable and reasoned position but use language that is at best insulting and at worst dangerous. In a single stroke, talk of the so-called “Benefits Street” alienates and denigrates the millions of Britons who receive benefits, many of whom work. They are our neighbours and friends; the people we see day in, day out around our communities. As my hon. Friends have said, most of the children who will be helped by the removal of the two-child limit are from households in which someone works—59% of the households affected by the two-child limit are in work. I agree with those who say that work should pay, which is why I support this Government’s measures to ensure exactly that—measures that are opposed by those who say that work should pay. Try to square that circle, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I cannot—good luck to them. All I ask is that those who talk in that way about “Benefits Street”, and who denigrate millions of people, including children, think about how those children —never mind their parents—might feel when they see those headlines. We can and should debate policy, but we gain nothing from making people feel worthless. We also hear a lot about “looking after our own.” I agree that we should look after our own and support the people who need help. That is what the Bill would do through investment in children and the wellbeing of future generations, for their sake and for our collective good. I have seen the impact of poverty on families and children throughout my working life, and I have tried my best to help them. I am sure that all Members, on both sides of the Chamber, have met many families who have struggled and dealt with sudden changes in circumstances, whether from ill health, bereavements, job losses or housing crises. For families with more than two children, the impact is even more acute. It saddens me—frankly, it staggers me—that some would choose to extend that pain tonight. Every child matters; every child counts; every child has a role to play in our country and its future. I will vote tonight for them.
Held . Recorded result: Lab Hold. Majority 12,169. 40,474 votes cast from an electorate of 75,483. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| David Baines | Labour | 21,284 | 52.6% |
| Malcolm Webster | Reform UK | 9,115 | 22.5% |
| Jayne Rear | Conservative | 4,507 | 11.1% |
| Daniel Thomas | Green Party | 3,495 | 8.6% |
| Pat Moloney | Liberal Democrat | 1,799 | 4.4% |
| Joe Greenhalgh | English Constitution Party | 274 | 0.7% |
| Seat | Dates |
|---|---|
| St Helens NorthElected 1 time | – present |
| Committee | Dates |
|---|---|
| Work and Pensions Committee | – |
| Procedure Committee | – |
| Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill | – |
| Petitions Committee | – |
Website
Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site
Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .