Labour Party MP for Stoke-on-Trent South since (elected). An MP continuously since .
Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions
Entries on this tracker
229
Each filed under the party they sat for that day
Register entries
2
As currently published
Declared while sitting for Labour
£0
0 of 2 entries state an amount
| Party | Office | Area | Period | Began | Ended | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | MP | Stoke-on-Trent South | – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| date registered | 8. Miscellaneous | Honorary Senior Research Fellow at Keele University. This is an unpaid role. | — | Labour | Register record |
| date registered | 8. Miscellaneous | Director of Women Leading in AI. This is an unpaid role. | — | Labour | Register record |
<Question HRSContentId="{B25C0F4F-47C4-4191-A756-B2BDD91BF34F}">6. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{2E413C7B-76FD-4CC4-A4C5-51DFF763FF1A}">What discussions he has had with European partners on defence and security. </QuestionText></Question>
The attack on the then British Prime Minister’s home last year was linked to Russian-backed proxies attempting to undermine our democracy, and it concerns me deeply that our nation has become so anaesthetised by online disinformation that we collectively shrugged and carried on doomscrolling. I commend the creation of a national centre for information defence to counter cognitive warfare, but given the continued threat of Russian cognitive warfare, may I ask the Foreign <span id="160" class="column-number" data-column-number="160"></span>Secretary how we can co-operate with European partners to counter disinformation, shut down the networks and hold technology companies to account?
I have constituents who are foster parents of children with extremely complex needs. It is a laudable but very challenging vocation. Placements often fail because the foster parents do not get the wraparound support and respite that they need. Such breakdowns can be even more challenging if the children are from out of area and then end up getting moved again. Does my hon. Friend agree that all councils must provide the correct support and respite for our foster parents?
This year I have convened a taskforce in Stoke-on-Trent with key service providers and people with lived experience to tackle the issue of homelessness for those who experience substance misuse. A particular challenge is enabling them to receive mental health treatment concurrently with drug and alcohol treatment. Does the Minister agree that it is absolutely vital for those providing mental health support to work concurrently with all other service providers to provide a sustainable pathway to recovery for this vulnerable group, and will she take me up on my offer, visit my constituency, and perhaps attend a taskforce meeting?
My constituency covers city and rural areas, and the villages I represent have the greatest problem with getting regular deliveries, and elderly constituents there who cannot rely on email are really struggling. Villages like Tean, Swynnerton, Oulton and Fulford must get the support they need, and it is interesting that you are experiencing the same issues in Staffordshire.
I rise to present this petition for a pedestrian crossing across the A34 at Tittensor village. Tittensor residents have been campaigning for a crossing for over 30 years, led by the indefatigable Josie Windsor. The A34 dual carriageway cuts directly through the village, separating bus stops that take people to school, doctors’ appointments and the shops. My constituents cannot safely cross from one side to the other due to heavy and speeding traffic. Sadly, an elderly gentleman was knocked over recently. Staffordshire county council’s own assessment confirms that pedestrians experience delays waiting for safe gaps to cross. Indeed, the council has finally agreed to the crossing in principle but, as yet, has not allocated funds. This petition, signed by over 100 constituents, requests “that the House of Commons urge the Government to compel Staffordshire county council to deliver a crossing” to improve pedestrian safety. My constituents cannot be left waiting for another 30 years to see their crossing delivered. Following is the full text of the petition: <em>[The petition of residents of the constituency of Stoke-on-Trent South in Staffordshire,</em> <em>Declares that a crossing should be added on the A34 in Tittensor to improve road safety and pedestrian access to services and public transport.</em> <em>The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to compel Staffordshire County Council to deliver a crossing in Tittensor.</em> <em>And the petitioners remain, etc.]</em> [P003249]
I represent the neighbouring constituency, and of course I have to mention ceramics. Since 2018, employment in traditional ceramics has fallen by 37% in Staffordshire. Advanced and traditional ceramics companies need skilled workers, but local employers are struggling to attract new talent. Stoke-on-Trent college has proposed a national ceramics and advanced materials technical <span id="141" class="column-number" data-column-number="141"></span>college, which would create a national centre for technical education offering apprenticeships, industry placements and workforce development in traditional and advanced ceramics. Will my hon. Friend join me in recognising the value of the proposal in boosting local ceramics employment by providing the specialist skills required and creating clear pathways from education to high-value careers?
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing the debate. I am incredibly proud to represent Stoke-on-Trent South, which includes part of the city of Stoke-on-Trent—a city with a proud heritage in craftship and industry. Stoke is the birthplace of the Lunar Society, a group of amazing, innovative thinkers, including the great innovator, Josiah Wedgwood. The Lunar Society helped fuel the industrial revolution, and manufacturing is embedded within Stoke-on-Trent and its people. With the Government’s reindustrialisation agenda, now is the time to invest in creative and advanced manufacturing skills so that our young people can secure highly paid specialist jobs. That is why I want first to mention the excellent myFuture initiative, which was raised with me by Stoke-on-Trent sixth form and the Potteries Educational Trust, and is delivered in partnership with Keele University, the University of Staffordshire, the Careers & Enterprise Company and local SMEs. The initiative is delivering an employer-led skills framework for ages 10 to 19—indeed, up to 25—to over 63,000 students. It delivers a co-designed curriculum experience for 14 to 19-year-olds, with employer-linked career gateways helping teachers to embed employer engagement activities into study and address local skills gaps. MyFuture is seeking support from the Department for Education to become a funded pathfinder project. Will the Minister work with DFE colleagues to support the proposal where gateways align with manufacturing? Of course, I could not speak in a debate on manufacturing without mentioning ceramics. From iconic tableware manufacturers such as 1882 and Duchess China in my constituency, to advanced ceramics firms such as Mantec, ceramics have shaped our local identity. While ceramics are best known for the products we all love, such as mugs and tableware, advanced ceramics are the hidden backbone of modern manufacturing. They are essential components in the supply chain for high-tech industries, including defence, electronics, nuclear energy, construction and aerospace engineering. Across the UK, the sector contributes more than £2 billion annually, employs approximately 20,000 people and supports thousands more jobs through the related supply chains. We are incredibly lucky that north Staffordshire is the hotbed of this activity. However, businesses repeatedly tell me that skills shortages are having a significant impact. Experienced workers are retiring, taking decades of specialist knowledge with them, and too few young people are entering the industry. Valuable heritage skills are being lost entirely as employers struggle to attract and retain trainees. Recently, I spoke to an amazing entrepreneur whose business using our creamware is going from strength to strength, but she is concerned for the future, as the person she depends on <span id="303WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="303WH"></span>will soon be retiring. She risks losing his skills and we risk losing her business overseas if we do not fix our skills pipeline. This is an increasing problem, and it is time we truly focused on backing British products. There is a need to train an estimated 200 to 400 operatives per year in Stoke-on-Trent and Newcastle in traditional ceramics alone. In advanced ceramics, emerging technologies such as ceramic matrix composites do not yet have recognised apprenticeship or qualification routes. Specialist technical manufacturing knowledge is being lost, with no national masterplan to replace the capability. I was delighted to see the launch of the craft technician apprenticeship earlier this year, led by Emma Bridgewater in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) and supported by Ceramics UK, Skills England and Creative Alliance. Such initiatives are exactly what the sector needs to help the next generation of skilled workers. I also welcome the Government’s £120 million investment to support energy efficiency and decarbonisation in the ceramics industry. Although that funding is important, I would welcome the Minister’s assurance that future funding will consider skills. At the heart of our reindustrialisation plans sits manufacturing in all its forms. It is the bedrock of our national economy, growth and resilience. We must invest in our future, our people and our skills.
From pelvic mesh to diethylstilbestrol, women have been harmed by a health system that has not and still does not listen to them, as starkly illustrated in Mumsnet’s recent report, “Medical Misogyny: A Lifetime of Failure”. Does the Minister agree that tackling medical misogyny must be at the heart of how we rebuild the NHS?
I welcome the Bill’s ambition to strengthen support for babies, parents and carers during pregnancy and the earliest years of life. Parents love their babies and want them to be happy and healthy, and Governments must support them in that important role. I acknowledge that the simplicity of the Bill is part of its beauty. I understand that there is a little resistance to adding amendments and creating Christmas tree legislation, but I worry that in fear of creating such legislation we risk—apologies for the pun—throwing the baby out with the bathwater if we do not make explicit in the Bill amendments on inequalities that will be difficult to change in future. To put it starkly, we have to be honest that it would be very hard, politically, to argue for the removal of provision on inequalities from the babies Bill. It is important to build that into the Bill. I strongly support amendment 1, which would require the Secretary of State to consider the wellbeing of babies and their parents, and inequalities in their outcomes, when assessing need and reporting on infant support services. The amendment speaks to why we are all here: to improve babies and parents lives. We need to understand whether families are doing well, where outcomes are falling short and where further action is needed. We cannot just look at national statistics. An improvement in the national average can conceal the fact that some babies are being left further behind. We need to be able to look at the outliers. Across the country, there are stark and persistent inequalities. A baby’s chance of surviving pregnancy, birth and their first years of life, and of growing up healthy and developing well, are affected by factors including family income, ethnicity, disability and where they live. The amendment would ensure that future Secretaries of State pay attention to those differences when making decisions in what they do and where they target action and resources. On Second Reading I talked about Stoke-on-Trent’s persistently high infant mortality rate. The number of babies in Stoke-on-Trent who die before their first birthday is almost twice the national rate. We frequently top that saddest of all charts. If national Government do not pay attention to those local differences and inequalities, they will miss opportunities to improve and save babies lives. Behind every statistic is a real baby whose life has been lost. <em>[</em><em>Interruption.</em><em>]</em> It is a hard one, this one. I will never forget little Chloe Wilshaw, or her brave mum Ashley, who I talked about on Second Reading. These are the babies and families I think of when we talk about the need to do better. I am very grateful that, following that debate, not only has the Minister agreed to meet Ashley, but so has the maternity commissioner, to really bring about change. I am very grateful to the right hon. Member for New Forest West for enabling that opportunity.
Held . Recorded result: Lab Gain. Majority 627. 40,942 votes cast from an electorate of 70,002. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Allison Gardner | Labour | 14,221 | 34.7% |
| Jack Brereton | Conservative | 13,594 | 33.2% |
| Michael Baily | Reform UK | 8,851 | 21.6% |
| Alec Sandiford | Liberal Democrat | 1,577 | 3.9% |
| Asif Mehmood | Independent | 1,372 | 3.4% |
| Peggy Wiseman | Green Party | 1,207 | 2.9% |
| Carla Parrish | Independent | 120 | 0.3% |
| Seat | Dates |
|---|---|
| Stoke-on-Trent SouthElected 1 time | – present |
| Committee | Dates |
|---|---|
| Health and Social Care Committee | – present |
| Infants, Parents and Carers Bill | – present |
| Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill | – present |
| Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [HL] | – |
| Science and Technology Committee (Commons) | – present |
Website
X (formerly Twitter)
Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site
Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .