Labour Party MP for Shrewsbury since (elected). An MP continuously since .
Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions
Entries on this tracker
89
Each filed under the party they sat for that day
Register entries
3
As currently published
Declared while sitting for Labour
£0
0 of 3 entries state an amount
| Party | Office | Area | Period | Began | Ended | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | MP | Shrewsbury | – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8. Miscellaneous | Elected onto the Executive board of the Labour Rural Research Group (LRRG), a group within the Parliamentary Labour Party.N/a | — | Labour | Register record | |
| 8. Miscellaneous | I was elected as an officer of the Labour Rural Research Group (LRRG), a formally constituted group within the Labour Party focused on rural policy development and advocacy. This is an unpaid role. I contribute to the strategic direction of policy discussions. | — | Labour | Register record | |
| date registered | 6. Land and property | Property in Hamburg | — | Labour | Register record |
My hon. Friend is being generous. This is such an important debate. I have a constituent who had exactly that problem—they received delayed post for scans and cancer treatment plans. That is unacceptable and distressing. Does he agree that this is the worst type of post to be delayed?
Water privatisation and climate change have left us with the twin resilience challenges of water scarcity and flooding. To reduce demand on our drinking water supply, is the Cabinet Office looking at the Drinking Water Inspectorate’s landmark report from March, which sets out a governance framework for rainwater harvesting? Could we look at installing rainwater collection for toilet flushing in our publicly owned buildings? We could cut our costs, increase our resilience and make steps towards sustainability.
Does the Minister agree that much progress has been made in regard to rainwater harvesting, not just by MHCLG but by the Minister’s Department—not least the landmark report, published this March, by the Drinking Water Inspectorate? The report exactly explored a potential governance framework that sets out standards for non-potable water in domestic settings, and talks about accreditation and standards, to ensure that these systems, when we are ready to bring them in, are safe and will be properly maintained.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on the securing the first of two stimulating Westminster Hall debates. On the really important topic of national standards, I want to discuss a new species of bus stop—the famous floating bus stop. For the uninitiated, floating bus stops are small alighting platforms in between lines of traffic and cycle lanes. Members may already be able to guess the issue I am going to raise. In my constituency of Shrewsbury, we had a new floating bus stop installed outside our railway stations as part of our gyratory road system. Due to an error, the width of the pavement was less than the minimum 1.5 metre standard requirement. There has been a 12-month campaign, with protest, public outcry and a petition. The council will now be removing the bus stop because we have had congestion chaos in the town centre and it has blocked access to our important railway station. What should have been a transport interchange—the important road between our bus station and our railway station—has in fact become congested by losing a line of traffic and having a <span id="364WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="364WH"></span>floating bus stop that was too complicated and confusing for people to understand, all because we did not have a simple, single standard. In terms of lessons learned, we need to make sure that Shrewsbury’s story is fed into the ongoing assessment. It exposes a wider issue. Floating bus stops improve cyclist safety, but they transfer the interaction from bus and cyclist to pedestrian and cyclist. For blind and partially sighted passengers, it is quite a serious concern. The Department for Transport’s guidance recognises the difficulty in detecting a passing cyclist, but the Royal National Institute of Blind People’s research found that 59% of users with sight loss had stopped using bus stops and 55% had changed routes to ensure they felt safe on the road. The case for a single standard is strong, as long as we ensure accessibility, address geometry and are careful about the relationship between pedestrians and cyclists. I hope that, as the DFT looks at the guidance at the start of next year, it will bring forward the lessons learned from Shrewsbury. We need people to access not just our buses, but trains and, of course, our beautiful town centre.
Will the hon. Lady give way?
<Question HRSContentId="{D75BF524-CDF6-4806-BC5F-AE115F5EF457}">Q12. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{2EA1EC63-58A0-49B2-BAB1-F78E5A838EEB}"></QuestionText>Watching the Prime Minister secure his legacy this week, with the NATO summit and the Hillsborough law, I wondered if he wanted to make it a hat-trick, and support Shrewsbury college’s bid for a new construction skills centre? As the main post-16 provider in the county, our outstanding college trains over 10,000 young people and adults, providing both A-levels and vocational qualifications, but this year’s applications are up by 15% and our buildings are full to capacity. In a rural area like Shrewsbury, with limited alternatives, hundreds of people could end up becoming not in employment, education, or training. Will the Prime Minister support the college’s third attempt to secure capital funds and meet the growing need, so that we can open the construction skills centre in September?</Question>
In Shrewsbury, we regularly suffer flooding along the River Severn and Rea brook, so I really welcome today’s announcement. The measures proposed reflect the common-sense and long-term solutions that my colleagues and I set out in the Environmental Audit Committee’s report on flooding resilience. We gave feedback from residents and businesses that insurance is not just unaffordable but, in some places, impossible to get. We requested that funding be prioritised for prevention, preparedness, mitigation and adaptation, rather than simply paid out each time floods hit, so it is so welcome to hear today that the long-term approach is that we will have flood performance certificates and Build Back Better, which will provide extra money not just to repair people’s homes post flooding, but to make them resilient against future floods. That is a much more effective use of public money, and provides longer-term support. It is great news for my residents, but what advice can I give to a business that has the same postcode and the same flood risk as others, but which is being quoted £40,000 for flood insurance?
The hon. Gentleman is being generous in giving way. Does he join me in congratulating Barnsley market, a local market that is leading the way by bringing health services into the town centre, which is driving up footfall and has led to a thriving community? We will be leading a delegation from the all-party parliamentary group on local markets next week, so we can all learn from that example and hopefully feed into the high street strategy.
I thank the Ministers both here and in the other place for their hard work and engagement on this important Bill. I will focus my comments in favour of new clause 16. Great British Railways cannot come soon enough for my constituency of Shrewsbury. Under privatisation, our geography has penalised us, as we sit on the edge of everyone’s maps between regional operators serving either Wales or Birmingham, leaving us under-invested and underserved. As Members may recall—I have mentioned it quite a few times—Shropshire remains the only county without a direct train to London. The value of such a direct service is not just the obvious economic boost for jobs, education and tourism, or the improved accessibility of avoiding step-heavy connections, but the important investment in infrastructure that inter-city services could unlock at our station. We need more frequent and reliable regional services, with much more capacity to cope with the vast demand for services for a county town of 70,000 residents. For example, our local university campus closed last year, and students now have to travel beyond Shrewsbury to access education, training and employment. For these reasons, I am pleased to put my name in support of five amendments, including new clause 16, which calls for the reopening of services to underserved areas. This new clause calls for GBR to establish a department for the purpose of identifying areas underserved and unserved by railway services, and to assess passenger and community needs for adding services, routes or stations where they are missing. It is crucial that the full opportunities of this new integrated, nationalised railway <span id="386" class="column-number" data-column-number="386"></span>are felt across the whole country by improving service levels in underserved and often rural areas such as Shropshire, not just adding increased frequency for already well-served cities. Just last month, Madam Deputy Speaker, you will recall that I stood in this very place to present a petition signed by over 10,000 fare-paying passengers asking this Government to recognise the demand for a direct train service at Shrewsbury and to approve extra routes to London. As we stand together on the cusp of nationalising our rail system, we must ensure that the mantra of “people before profit” becomes a reality in places such as Shrewsbury. Where investment has been lacking, let us take this opportunity to rebuild; where services have withered away, let us deliver for our communities; and where towns have been left behind, let us reconnect them. In short, let us show in deeds, not words, how Great British Railways will deliver more services for more places such as Shrewsbury.
Shropshire is the only county in England without a direct train service connecting it to London. I stand here today alongside my neighbours from Wrexham, Ruabon, Wolverhampton, South Shropshire, The Wrekin and Nuneaton, who share my request to reinstate the line that connects six underserved towns back to the capital. In total, over 10,000 people have signed the petitions, with 1,436 having done so on paper and 8,741 having signed a similar one online, demonstrating the strong public demand for the service—those are 10,000 fare paying passengers asking for a train. The petition states: “The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to support the proposal for a Wrexham, Shropshire and Midlands Railway by encouraging the Office of Rail and Road and Network Rail to work constructively with the operator to enable the establishment of new direct services between London and North Wales, Shropshire and the Midlands.” <em>Following is the full text of the petition:</em> <em>[The petition of residents of England and Wales,</em> <em>Declares that the Wrexham, Shropshire and Midlands Railway has submitted proposals to restore direct rail services between Wrexham, Shropshire, the Midlands and London, which would offer significant economic, social and environmental benefits for the communities along the route; further declares that the establishment of these new direct services would improve transport links, access to health services, and strengthen regional economies across North Wales, Shropshire and the Midlands.</em><span id="667" class="column-number" data-column-number="667"></span> <em>The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to support the proposal for a Wrexham, Shropshire and Midlands Railway by encouraging the Office of Rail and Road and Network Rail to work constructively with the operator to enable the establishment of new direct services between London and North Wales, Shropshire and the Midlands.</em> <em>And the petitioners remain, etc.]</em> [P003201]
Held . Recorded result: Lab Gain. Majority 11,355. 51,560 votes cast from an electorate of 76,599. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Julia Buckley | Labour | 22,932 | 44.5% |
| Daniel Kawczynski | Conservative | 11,577 | 22.5% |
| Victor Applegate | Reform UK | 7,524 | 14.6% |
| Alex Wagner | Liberal Democrat | 6,722 | 13.0% |
| Julian Dean | Green Party | 2,387 | 4.6% |
| Chris Bovill | English Democrats | 241 | 0.5% |
| James Gollins | Independent | 177 | 0.3% |
| Seat | Dates |
|---|---|
| ShrewsburyElected 1 time | – present |
| Committee | Dates |
|---|---|
| Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill | – |
| Environmental Audit Committee | – present |
| Constituency | Date |
|---|---|
| Shrewsbury and Atcham | |
| Ludlow |
Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site
Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .