Edward Morello

Party affiliation

Parliament's party history for this member: Liberal Democrat (4 Jul 2024 – present).

Register of interests

Register on Parliament's site

Latest on this tracker 412

1. 3 Nov 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Train Services: Extreme Weather

   In the south-west, we share a lot of those problems. The Salisbury-to-Exeter line runs a reduced service over the summer as a result of “soil moisture deficit”—a catchy term that means the ground is too dry and too hard, and the trains cannot run over it. That is not a new problem: we had a reduced service last year and the year before. Proper planning for what is now our everyday experience of climate change is vital. I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman agrees with me that the Railways Bill, currently in the other place, is an opportunity to ensure that our infrastructure is resilient for the future and is also taking account of our climate targets.

   Hansard source
2. 27 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Draft Renewables Obligation and Electricity Capacity (Amendment) (British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme Excluded Electricity) Regulations 2026

   The Liberal Democrats also support this statutory instrument. It is exactly the kind of relief for energy-intensive industries that we have been calling for, as these industries face some of the highest industrial electricity costs in the world. We must support manufacturing businesses to be more internationally competitive and to drive investment and economic growth across the UK. However, the Liberal Democrats believe this support must not stop with large manufacturers. Hospitality businesses and other SMEs like those in West Dorset face the same high electricity costs but receive no equivalent relief, despite making up 99% of businesses in the UK. The Government must extend meaningful support to those outside the BICS-eligible sectors. We also need faster action to reduce the link between electricity and gas prices. New solar power is 11% cheaper than the cheapest fossil fuel and onshore wind is 39% cheaper, yet our electricity pricing system still leaves British consumers facing the fourth highest energy prices globally. The Government have promised to look at decoupling electricity prices from gas, but the work needs to move faster so that households and businesses, not just energy-intensive industries, can benefit from cheaper renewable energy. The British industrial competitiveness scheme is a positive step, but we ask the Government to go further.

   Hansard source
3. 27 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Domestic Farming and Food Supply

   The hon. Lady is making an excellent speech and raises many points that go far beyond Northern Ireland. She is talking about the need to improve farms and combat climate change, but how are farmers supposed to engage seriously in this process? My farmers in West Dorset are unable to apply for the sustainable farming incentive because the window is closing so quickly and it is not properly funded. That is leaving them drastically under-budget for the financial year ahead and wondering why they are continuing to meet all the demands being made by the Government when they are not getting a fair settlement.

   Hansard source
4. 26 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Prostate Cancer Screening

   As somebody who has the BRCA2 genetic abnormality, I will be eligible for the extra screening that the hon. Gentleman outlined. Unfortunately, too many men are delayed in getting screened, especially in rural and deprived areas, and the delays result in prostate cancer being identified far later. <span id="3WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="3WH"></span>Although I am grateful to the Government for including me in the screening, does the hon. Gentleman agree that more must be done to inform men of the need for regular screening to avoid it being caught so late?

   Hansard source
5. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Engagements

   <Question HRSContentId="{CDE9EA27-C1B7-4019-947A-8E682ACF8D78}">Q10.   <QuestionText HRSContentId="{890C9E28-03A9-4E31-9AA2-6552321E9100}"></QuestionText>The Prime Minister has said that he wants growth in every postcode, but current devolution plans mean that West Dorset risks being left behind as other regions gain devolved powers in investment. A Wessex mayor could unlock £460 million in additional annual funding and generate as much as £16 billion of additional economic output over the next 30 years. Will the Prime Minister commit to a mayor of Wessex by 2028?</Question>

   Hansard source
6. 21 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Support for Farmers

   I had hoped to share some of the many, many stories about my farmers’ experience with the SFI, as they have written to me in the days and weeks following the closure of the window. <span id="1225" class="column-number" data-column-number="1225"></span>However, in the interests of time, I shall try to be constructive and just talk to the action that is vitally needed. Many farmers raised concerns about technical problems within the application system itself. One farmer, who has experience in software as well as farming, reported that some options appeared without the base options needed to support them. They raised concerns about the process for measuring hedgerows, arguing that the time and cost involved could outweigh the value of the payment. If DEFRA already holds land parcel information and uses satellite imagery to monitor land, it should explain why relevant information cannot be provided to farmers in advance, where appropriate. The Government have said that the overall SFI26 budget has increased by £290 million, but that does not answer the question of whether enough money is available to meet demand. We need a clear account of how the funding has been allocated, including by farm type, farm size and region. There are also concerns that the options and payments available do not adequately reflect the needs of livestock farmers compared with arable farmers. The Government should publish the evidence and assess the impact on food production. Farmers whose existing agreements are expiring need to know when they can apply for replacement agreements and what support will be available in the meantime. Without clarity, environmental work already under way risks being stopped, not because farmers do not want to continue to do it, but because they cannot afford to do it. My asks to the Government are as follows. First, they must publish a full account of the technical problems experienced during the application window and explain what remedial action will be taken. Secondly, they must make additional funding available for eligible farmers who were locked out when the budget was exhausted, rather than leaving them to absorb the financial consequences of a process that failed them. Thirdly, they must review the first come, first served system, and consider alternatives, including allocating funding more fairly when they know that demand exceeds the available budget. Finally, the Government must properly fund the roll-out of the environmental land management schemes, including the SFI, with an additional £1 billion a year that we believe is needed to give farmers the sustainable and stable basis for planning and investment. My farmers in West Dorset are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for a system that works, funding they can rely on and a fair opportunity to apply. I hope that Ministers will listen to farmers today before they are staring at empty plates tomorrow.

   Hansard source
7. 20 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Sporting Events Bill [HL] (Second sitting)

   I beg to move amendment 20, in clause 17, page 11, line 27, at end insert— <em>“17A Rural event impact assessments</em> (1) Before making regulations under section 2(2) which apply the transport provisions to a sporting event, the Secretary of State must ensure that a rural event impact assessment has been carried out where the event is to take place wholly or partly in a rural area. (2) For the purposes of this section, an event is to be treated as taking place in a rural area where the Secretary of State considers that— (a) the event takes place in an area in which there are limited alternative routes for road users; (b) the closure, restriction or diversion of roads in connection with the event is likely to result in materially longer journeys for persons living, working or carrying on a business in the area; or (c) such other criteria as may be specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State are met. (3) A rural event impact assessment must assess the likely effect of the sporting event, including any proposed traffic restrictions, road closures or diversions, on— (a) the availability of alternative routes; (b) the length and accessibility of alternative routes; (c) access for carers; (d) persons who require access to employment and who may suffer financial loss as a result of being unable to arrive at their place of employment; (e) local businesses, including small and micro-businesses; (f) residents and persons who ordinarily travel through or within the affected area; and (g) such other matters as the Secretary of State considers appropriate. (4) The assessment must identify and consider measures for mitigating any adverse effects identified under subsection (3), including measures designed to— (a) maintain reasonable access for residents and businesses, (b) prioritise access for carers and persons providing essential care, (c) minimise disruption to persons travelling to or from employment, (d) minimise disruption to small and micro-businesses, (e) take account of the absence or limited availability of alternative routes in rural areas, or (f) provide reasonable access for emergency and essential services. (5) The Secretary of State must not make regulations under section 2(2) applying the transport provisions to a sporting event to which this section applies unless the rural event impact assessment has been considered and determined to be acceptable by an independent person or body appointed or designated by the Secretary of State. <span id="61" class="column-number" data-column-number="61"></span> (6) The person or body appointed or designated under subsection (5) must be independent of the sporting event organiser. (7) Before an assessment is determined to be acceptable under subsection (5), the independent person or body must have regard to representations from— (a) each local authority whose area is likely to be materially affected by the event, (b) any mayor of a combined authority or other directly elected mayor whose area is likely to be materially affected by the event, where the Secretary of State considers that consultation with that mayor is appropriate, and (c) such other persons or bodies as may be specified by regulations made by the Secretary of State. (8) The Secretary of State may by regulations prescribe criteria for determining— (a) which local authorities and mayors are to be consulted for the purposes of subsection (7), (b) the matters to be considered by an independent person or body in determining whether an assessment is acceptable, (c) the form and content of a rural event impact assessment, and (d) the measures which may be regarded as appropriate mitigation measures for the purposes of subsection (4). (9) Where a local authority or other relevant public authority has already put in place measures which address the matters required to be considered under this section, the rural event impact assessment may take those measures into account and need not require equivalent measures to be put in place again, provided that the independent person or body is satisfied that those measures are adequate having regard to the likely impact of the event. (10) Where a sporting event is recurring, the Secretary of State may by regulations provide for a rural event impact assessment to cover more than one occurrence of the event, provided that the assessment is reviewed where there is a material change in— (a) the scale or nature of the event, (b) the proposed traffic restrictions, road closures or diversions, (c) the affected road network, or (d) the circumstances of the affected communities. (11) Regulations under this section— (a) shall be made by statutory instrument, and (b) may not be made unless a draft has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament.” <em>This amendment would require a rural event impact assessment before transport regulations apply to sporting events in rural areas likely to cause significant disruption due to limited alternative routes. The assessment would consider impacts on residents, carers, workers, small businesses and essential services, with mitigation measures approved by an independent person or body.</em> It is wonderful to have an opportunity to say something other than “abstain”. Amendment 20 would require a rural event impact assessment before transport restrictions are put in place for a major sporting event. While this might seem niche, it is a direct result of something that recently happened in Dorset. Road closures for sporting events can cause disruption anywhere, but in rural areas the consequence can be very serious. There is often no alternative route, and a diversion that may add 20 minutes in a city can add hours in the countryside. I have received several examples from constituents who struggled with road closures during a recent sporting event in Dorset. In one case, <span id="62" class="column-number" data-column-number="62"></span>carers were repeatedly given conflicting instructions about how to reach a vulnerable resident. Despite assurances that they would be allowed through, they were stopped and diverted several times. As a result, my constituent’s father was left in bed in his own faeces for several hours. This amendment would simply require organisers and the Government to consider those impacts before transport restrictions are imposed. It would look at access for carers and emergency services, and the effect on local businesses and workers, ensure that arrangements for access to affected areas are effective, and allow essential carers and emergency services to reach those they support, whether realistic alternatives exist or not. It should also require independent scrutiny and consultation with affected local authorities. This is not about preventing events from happening—far from it. Major sporting events bring real benefits to rural areas. It is about ensuring that proper planning prevents unnecessary disruption. I hope that the Government will support the amendment.

   Hansard source
8. 20 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Sporting Events Bill [HL] (Second sitting)

   I am grateful to the Minister for her comments and for her commitment to write to her colleagues in the Department for Transport. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. <em>Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.</em> <em>Question proposed, </em>That clause 17 stand part of the Bill.

   Hansard source
9. 20 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

   Sporting Events Bill [HL] (Second sitting)

   I beg to move amendment 18, in clause 25, page 19, line 27, at end insert— “(2A) In the case of a sporting event that is a one-off sporting event of significant international or national interest, the power under subsection (1) may be exercised for the purpose of securing community benefit in areas hosting the sporting event. (2B) Community benefit under subsection (2A) may include— (a) the repair of potholes and other defects in roads; (b) the repair, maintenance or improvement of pavements and footways; and (c) the renewal, repair or improvement of road markings. (2C) The provision made under subsection (2A) must, so far as reasonably practicable, be directed towards improvements which provide a lasting benefit to the community and remain available for use after the sporting event has ended. (2D) In determining the amount and conditions of financial assistance under subsection (2A), the appropriate national authority must engage with affected local authorities including on the condition of roads, pavements, footways and road markings in areas materially affected by the hosting of the sporting event. (2E) In this section ‘one-off sporting event’ means a sporting event which is held in the United Kingdom on a non-recurring basis, including the Olympic Games, Paralympic Games, Commonwealth Games, Rugby World Cup or FIFA World Cup.” <em>This amendment would enable Government financial assistance for major one-off sporting events to support improvements to potholes, pavements, footways and road markings in communities hosting the event.</em>

   Hansard source
10. 20 Oct 2026·Parliament·Edward Morello

    Sporting Events Bill [HL] (Second sitting)

    These amendments are about ensuring lasting benefits for communities hosting major sporting events. Events such as the London 2012 Olympics have shown the potential for sporting events to bring investment and improve local infrastructure. We should ensure that communities hosting future events have the same opportunity. Amendment 18 would allow the use of Government funding to improve local roads, repair potholes, maintain pavements and renew road markings in areas affected by major sporting events. Amendment 19 focuses on mobile phone coverage and capacity. Large events put enormous pressure on local networks, leaving residents and businesses struggling to get signal when demand increases. The amendments would ensure that public and private investment in major sporting events benefits the wider area, not just the venue itself. Better roads and more reliable mobile coverage can improve daily life, support local businesses and help communities to prepare to host future events.

    Hansard source

2024 General Election: West Dorset

Election result on Parliament's site

Parliamentary career

Career on Parliament's site

Published contact details

Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site