Parliament's party history for this member: Labour ( – present).
Register of interests
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.
Like many other MPs, I am still being contacted by constituents about their civil service pensions and the unacceptable delays. It is deeply concerning that my constituent Julie, who retired from the civil service in February, had her pension finalised only in September, and these delays are causing huge distress and financial hardship. If we are going to pay compensation, should <span id="43" class="column-number" data-column-number="43"></span>it not be paid by Capita, not from any pension pot, and will that be done without having to navigate any lengthy or tiresome claims process?
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the legacy of the Jarrow Crusade on the 90th anniversary.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. The Jarrow crusade is now rightly remembered as a pivotal moment in UK history, not just in my brilliant constituency of Jarrow and Gateshead East but across the UK. Jarrow is a town with a proud history of people organising together to stand up to injustice and demand something better—one that refuses to accept that poverty, exploitation and inequality are simply the natural order of things.
On 5 October 1936, 200 unemployed men left Jarrow to begin a near-300-mile journey to London. Their petition represented the hopes of a community devastated by industrial decline and mass unemployment. They demonstrated the strength, solidarity and determination of the people of Jarrow. Ninety years later, their story is still relevant and needs to be heard.
Standing with the marchers’ descendants in front of No. 10 this week, with the original petition box that they carried all that way, was extremely moving. The Prime Minister bringing the descendants into No. 10 for a cup of tea and a discussion, and listening to their memories and our history, helped to right the historic wrong by giving the families the welcome that the marchers should have received back in 1936. I place on record my thanks to the Prime Minister and his team for the time they spent with us all and for helping to host the events this month. Listening to memories and stories of those crusaders from their children has been moving and inspiring.
It is a real honour to lead this debate today. Our history must be remembered and celebrated for the benefit of a new generation, but it must also be used to move forward, to learn from and to build a better world, because while some progress has been made, there is still a lot to do. Those marchers in 1936 were demanding the right to work, the dignity of providing for their families and the opportunity to build a future for their community. They were fighting against health inequality, poverty and a lack of housing. Ninety years later, many of those challenges remain.
In my constituency, 39% of children still live in food poverty, too many people are still in insecure work, and the north-east is still being left behind. Across South Tyneside, the number of people aged 18 to 21 claiming unemployment benefits is 61% higher than the national average. Local weekly earnings remain below the national average. Almost a century on from the march, generations are still growing up in and around Jarrow unable to find suitable work and with high levels of inequality and poverty.
Since becoming Jarrow’s MP in 2019, I have had to confront what those circumstances mean for the people I represent. We know all too well the lasting consequences that the loss of industry can have on a community. After the closure of the shipyards, skilled workers were <span id="490WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="490WH"></span>left without jobs, families faced poverty and uncertainty, and the businesses and communities that depended on the shipyards suffered too. The loss of industry was not confined to the factory gates; it reached into people’s homes, affected children’s prospects, undermined the confidence of an entire town and shifted our identity. We see similar challenges playing out now. These commemorative events and today’s debate are about remembering those who bravely marched to demand better, but they are also about looking to the future and embracing the potential of the north-east, because the challenges that faced working-class communities then continue to face them.
We must appreciate the progress we have made and recognise what remains to be done. Thanks to this Labour Government, good steps have already been taken to deliver for our community, and I welcome them. Our landmark Employment Rights Act 2025 means that workers can feel more secure, valued and stable, with stronger rights to dignified, unionised work that pays well. Access to decent work that pays fairly and provides security is intrinsic to ensuring that no community like ours is left behind.
Similarly, thanks to the Pride in Place programme, I have secured £20 million for our community. Priorities for the investment include creating opportunities for young people, rebuilding our town centre and strengthening community organisations. Strengthening community organisations matters, because investment alone does not change communities; giving communities a voice in what that change looks like does.
For too many families in Jarrow, being in work does not provide the financial security that they deserve. Parents are working hard, but their wages are still insufficient to provide the opportunities that they want for their children. Too many young people are struggling to find secure, well-paid employment that would allow them to build a future in the communities where they grew up. Those are the same fundamental challenges that the Jarrow crusaders marched to confront 90 years ago, and they are why we cannot afford to be complacent about the progress we have made.
Although we can and should celebrate the progress that the Government have made, and the welcome new steps of our Prime Minister, it is clear that we still need more investment in the north-east to create well-paid and secure jobs and to give local people more of a say in decisions that affect their lives. That includes bringing shipbuilding back to the Tyne, with more jobs, more apprenticeships and more investment. We must build on the industrial heritage of the north-east, which has a history of skilled, hard-working people that continues to define my constituency to this day and will do so long into the future.
I put it on the record how pleased I was to hear the Chancellor mention Jarrow and the crusade in one of his speeches, and how pleased I am that he met apprentices from Balaena. Will the Minister commit to pushing for more shipbuilding and other investment in the north-east and to tackling youth unemployment and poverty with good, highly skilled, well-paid jobs and education opportunities for our communities? I also ask him what further steps the Government are taking to ensure that communities such as Jarrow are at the heart of plans for industrial growth and that the jobs and opportunities created by that investment benefit local people. As we <span id="491WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="491WH"></span>mark 90 years since the Jarrow crusade, will he join me in recognising not only the extraordinary determination of those who marched then, but the importance of continuing the fight for decent jobs, dignity at work and opportunities for working-class communities today?
It has been wonderful to bring the hope that the Prime Minister has been speaking about back to the north, particularly the north-east, and to share our history with a new generation. The greatest lesson of the Jarrow crusade is what ordinary people can achieve when they organise, work together and stand up for one another. By the centenary in 2036, I want us to be able to celebrate real progress in tackling poverty and creating opportunities for every child in Jarrow, and I hope the Minister joins me in that commitment.
I thank the Minister for his detailed response; it will mean a lot to the descendants of the marchers and members of our community who may be watching this debate. I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for his engagement and support, and all those who came along to my exhibition on the Jarrow crusade earlier this week.
As I leave this debate, I reflect on the legacy left behind by the brave men who marched for better. To the descendants of those who marched, to those watching at home and to the people of Jarrow, this debate belongs to you. Your voices matter today as much as those voices did in 1936. The greatest tribute we can pay to the Jarrow crusaders is not simply commemorating their march, but continuing their fight for decent work, dignity, solidarity and a fairer future, for our community and every community.
<em>Question put and agreed to.</em>
<em>Resolved,</em>
That this House has considered the legacy of the Jarrow Crusade on the 90th anniversary.
If I may begin on a personal note, just three weeks ago I had a second operation on my back, and I wish to put on record my sincere thanks to the staff who cared for me, from the clinicians who treated me to everyone involved in my care and recovery. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.]
Too often our access to healthcare depends on our postcode. That postcode lottery is stark in a number of areas, but nowhere more so than with IVF. As chair of the APPG on fertility, I have raised this issue repeatedly with Ministers. I again invite Ministers to attend our fertility roundtable tomorrow and to commit to ensuring that every ICB follows, at the very least, the NICE guidelines on access to IVF and fertility treatment.
We must strengthen the role of voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations in neighbourhood health planning and NHS commissioning. Voluntary organisations understand the barriers to care for hard-to-reach communities and often have trusted relationships with communities that statutory services struggle to reach. We see that particularly clearly in HIV and AIDS provision. Voluntary organisations have been fundamental to the UK’s response for decades, through prevention, testing, peer support, tackling stigma and supporting people living with HIV. I am extremely grateful to the National AIDS Trust for working with me on the new clauses, and I thank Ministers for their constructive engagement. Members of the LGBT+ community must have trust in healthcare providers, and community groups bridge that gap when needed.
New clauses 142 and 143 would actively harm vitally needed healthcare. The provision in new clause 142 has already been rejected in Committee, and we see it for what it is: an opportunity to attack some of the most vulnerable in our society. Access to much-needed healthcare <span id="984" class="column-number" data-column-number="984"></span>has already been paused in the UK, and if access to treatment for gender dysphoria is now to be dependent upon additional research, the pathways trial must go ahead without further delay.
The provisions in new clause 143 were also rejected in Committee and are another attempt to vilify. The amendment fails to recognise the framework already in place to ensure that single-sex services are provided where they meet the requirements of the Equality Act. Neither the code nor the Supreme Court judgment mandate the provision of single-sex facilities. Providers must still consider whether the service falls within an exception within the Equality Act, whether single-sex provision is proportionate, what the impact might be on trans people, and what mitigation might be necessary.
I welcome the 10-year health plan. We have made great strides in repairing the damage done to our NHS—
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West (Naz Shah) for her brilliant opening contribution to the debate on the Gracious Speech.
I acknowledge that this Government have delivered—from renters’ rights and ending no-fault evictions to the new deal for workers, education, Great British Railways, bringing NHS waiting lists down, lifting children out of poverty, and work on violence against women and girls. All that good work deserves to be talked about and celebrated, but it must also be acknowledged that people need more. They are desperate for change following decades of neglect. Unfortunately, the measures in the King’s Speech, although they are in the main welcome, are not the bold moves that we need. We need a Government who will tackle extreme wealth inequality in the UK and deliver for communities, and we need to go back to giving people hope.
We need to ensure that our Government have received the message from the local elections last week: people are unhappy with the direction we have taken and, as it stands, we do not have the trust of our communities. It was devastating to see the two councils from my constituency, South Tyneside council and Gateshead council, which Labour have held for 50 years, fall to Reform. We let those communities down, and we need to deal with that.
We must build on the things that we have delivered, such as the new deal for workers, instead of focusing on divisive commitments such as the digital ID scheme and the removal of jury trials—two things I remain opposed <span id="197" class="column-number" data-column-number="197"></span>to. When we move away from our Labour values, we let the country down, let our communities down and, scarily, leave a gap for the far right to move into and exploit people’s fears, desperations and legitimate need for jobs, housing and security.
Housing, security and jobs are particularly needed in the north-east. My constituency of Jarrow and Gateshead East is commemorating the 90th anniversary of the Jarrow crusade—the march for jobs—yet my residents are facing the same problems as those marchers. For decades, successive Governments have neglected the north-east, and the north-east made its feelings clear last week.
We need a Government who take action to improve our communities. The Labour party is the party of the people and the party of workers, and that is the Government we need to see now—a Government who deliver for people and who deliver change that communities can see. We need actions, not words. We need to drastically redistribute the wealth, so that it is invested in communities. We need to rebuild trust locally and nationally, with bold and ambitious policies and action.
There are some highlights in the Gracious Speech, including the Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill, the Hillsborough law, legislation to clean up the water industry, the nationalisation of steel, the £45 billion to deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail, the legislation to support small businesses and stop late payments, and the licensing for private hires—all subjects that I have spoken about many times in this place and at events in Parliament. But we need to do much more than this tinkering at the edges. We need to legislate to bring water back into public ownership. We need to stop the scandal of water company bonuses. It is an absolute disgrace that they are profiting from the pollution they are dumping into our waters.
It is also welcome to see proposals around education for all, but we must ensure that any reforms to special educational needs and disabilities do not push children into a one-size-fits-all approach. The SEND consultation ends next week, and we must listen to the views that are submitted. The consultation responses need to be read thoroughly, not filtered by AI. We must have a genuine consultation and ensure that the reforms do not harm SEND children with the most complex needs.
Around 1.7 million children are now identified as having special educational needs. I know that MPs are all being inundated with correspondence from constituents, and many of us have held our own consultation meetings. In my constituency, I have 5% more children with SEND than the national average, and the same issues have been raised in every one of my local consultations. My constituents are worried about their loss of legal rights and their children being forced into mainstream schooling.
Sense, the national disability charity, has said that while inclusive mainstream education should be strengthened, that must not come at the expense of specialist provision. Disabled children with complex needs must continue to have access to specialist settings where those are the most appropriate environments for them to thrive. I completely agree with Sense, and it is evident that many families are struggling to find adequate provision. I have held drop-ins in Parliament with people from across the political <span id="198" class="column-number" data-column-number="198"></span>spectrum, and I want to thank Rory Bremner and Nick Ferrari for coming into Parliament to meet young people and their families and to listen to their stories.
The last Government described the SEND system as broken, and of course they did a lot of the breaking with their destruction of local government budgets, but the system has been neglected for decades. It is in desperate need of reform and investment. We can and must get this right to ensure that the most vulnerable are protected.
To that end, while I welcome the Gracious Speech, I will be bringing forward a simple amendment highlighting the difference that the right placement makes to a child with complex needs and the costs to families, life outcomes and the state when we get that placement wrong. We must ensure that those children with the most complex needs who cannot be placed into mainstream schools do not lose out with these reforms. I have written to the Secretary of State on this issue and would be happy to meet at any time to discuss it.
I have an autism diagnosis, as do some of my family. It is something those close to me are aware of, but is something I have not spoken about publicly before. I know the impact it has when you are failed in school. This matters personally and politically to me and is something I care deeply about.
I am hugely pleased to see in the Gracious Speech a commitment to bring forward a draft Bill banning abusive conversion practices. While it has appeared in many a Gracious Speech, I firmly believe that the Minister will bring forward a fully trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices as soon as possible.
Yes, setting out a timeline would be most helpful. I recognise the work of the Minister for Equalities, my hon. Friend the Member for Reading West and Mid Berkshire (Olivia Bailey), and the time she has taken to speak to me over the last few months and even this morning, and she has committed to setting out a clear timeline as soon as possible.
In every meeting I have had with the Minister on this issue, I have been impressed by her determination to finally deliver this legislation and by her understanding of the harm caused by continued delay. My one concern on the delay, which I have already raised, is that this is the only legislation in the King’s Speech where the promise is for a draft Bill rather than a Bill. We absolutely need to get this right, but we must not give people an excuse to delay and frustrate this vitally needed legislation.
Earlier this year, I was proud to deliver a report at the Council of Europe calling on member states to ban conversion practices. I will continue to work with the Minister to take both the spirit and framework details of that report into consideration as the legislation is developed. Although I am happy with that particular commitment, we need bold, new, ambitious policies that people will feel in their pockets. People need to see change in their communities. People need action, not another year of delays and U-turns. Labour needs to do <span id="199" class="column-number" data-column-number="199"></span>what it was elected to do: govern in the interests of workers and our communities and deal with the obscene levels of wealth inequality in the UK.
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for securing this important debate.
The debate is timely, as I have recently been working on a case for my constituent Melissa, who has come to Parliament today to hear the debate. When I posted on social media about Melissa’s case, with her permission, it caught a wave of people in similar situations. I have now been contacted by more than 700 individuals, all with similar horror stories about the level of debt they have on plan 2.
Melissa left university with a debt of £37,000 and has been paying off her loan every month since 2022, yet despite four years of payments, the amount she owes has increased by tens of thousands, to £60,000. Melissa’s case is by no means the worst example that I have received. Another constituent, Lucy, left university with nearly £28,000 to pay back, and her debt now stands at a huge £54,000. Chloe—one of our brightest science, technology, engineering and maths students—attended Newcastle University to study physics, and then went straight into full-time employment, starting to pay off her student loans immediately. Despite that, the amount she owes has increased by £14,000.
Education is a right, not a privilege. It is not okay that we are pricing people out of education. Quite frankly, the amount of interest being charged every year is a scandal and a rip-off. What will the Government do to help to eliminate student debt? Considering the thresholds is all very well, but I think we should just abolish tuition fees altogether, to boost social mobility and benefit society.<span id="144WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="144WH"></span>
It is a huge honour to co-lead this debate with my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham East (Nadia Whittome). We share many things, not least our proud queer identities and a deep commitment to equality, so I am pleased to have worked together to mark LGBT+ History Month.
After years of progress, it feels to many of us as though we are going backwards on many of the rights that LGBTQ+ people have fought hard for and gained. Rights that were hard won are now being treated as optional. Protections that people fought for—often at great personal cost—are being chipped away, one argument, <span id="974" class="column-number" data-column-number="974"></span>one dog whistle, one headline at a time. For our trans siblings in particular, this feels like a dark and dangerous time. That is why LGBT+ History Month matters. Our history shows us the patterns—progress, backlash, progress again—and now we face another backlash. That backlash is never without harm; it comes at significant human cost.
I share my hon. Friend’s concerns about the far right and others.
While we celebrate the trailblazers—the organisers, artists and campaigners; the nurses and carers who held hands in hospital wards when families would not visit; the friends who became family; the people who marched when it was dangerous; and the people who stood up when they were told to sit down—we also learn from their courage. We also remember that our history includes Pride marches and community groups, as well as trade union solidarity and working-class organising. One of the strongest lessons in our LGBT+ history is this: when working people stand together, we win change that reaches far beyond the workplace.
I declare an interest: I am a proud member of Unite the union. I take this opportunity to mention that, as well as LGBT History Month, this is Heart Unions Week. Trade unions are always at the heart of the fight for equality. They push employers to have policies on discrimination at work, and decades ago they brought about trans-inclusive policies. At a time when division is being weaponised, that lesson of solidarity is more important than ever.
In my beautiful Jarrow and Gateshead East constituency, I am proud of the work done by Out North East, particularly Drew Dalton and Peter Darrant, and their fantastic community work with youth groups and older LGBT people. Just last week, they opened new, bigger premises for the One Centre, the first LGBT media and business centre in the UK—and it is in my constituency. The location is a brand new LGBTQ+ inclusive space, and its facilities are incredible. When I visited, I was honoured and moved to realise that I was featured on the icons wall, alongside Bowie, and that there was a room named after me and another after the wonderful Lord Cashman from the other place. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
I am proud to have led the debate at the Council of Europe, and I am pleased to say that my report on banning conversion practices passed with support from across the political spectrum and across Europe. The report contains a framework for legislation that each of the 46 countries is expected to adopt in its own Parliament. Our Government should now adopt that framework, because conversion practices do not just happen in theory; they happen to real people, in real life. They happen under the guise of “therapy”, “guidance”, “deliverance” or “counselling”. Their message is always <span id="975" class="column-number" data-column-number="975"></span>the same: “You are broken. You are wrong. And you need to be fixed.” Well, I am here to say that I am a lesbian, and nothing about me needs to be fixed, thank you.
I am afraid that, instead of learning from the stigma and prejudice of the past, here we are marginalising, discriminating, preventing vital lifesaving healthcare and support, and excluding trans and non-binary people from sport, spaces and society. There is not a shred of doubt in my mind that future MPs, Ministers and possibly Prime Ministers will stand where we are right now to dish out the kind of apologies, compensation and retribution for the wrongs of yesterday that we see happening all too often today. Why do we not save ourselves, and, most importantly, the trans community, by stepping up for them right now, instead of capitulating to a small band of very loud and well-funded bigots? Let us not make today’s discrimination tomorrow’s inquiry, public apology and compensation scheme—that is exactly where we are heading.
Let me finish with a celebration of our history. We are here today in the gayest Parliament in the world—12% of this Chamber is LGBT—and I am delighted to be serving queer joy in Parliament for all Members to hear. To the homophobes who are still just about clinging on to their prejudices, I say: I have some queer joy for you, too. It is 2026; we are still here, we have always been here, we are out and proud, and there are more of us than ever before, so just get over it already.
I am here to reaffirm my commitment to fighting for equality. As the new chair of the APPG on fertility, I will continue to fight for IVF for all. As the chair of the APPG on women’s football, I was pleased to be at the launch of the Premier League’s new “With Pride” campaign. It is great to see the rainbow flag flying across every football ground in the premier league. Football is a great unifier, and the north-east is renowned for being a hotbed of football. Perhaps that is why I loved it so much when I moved there back in 1989, and why I have never left. Football transcends borders and brings together people from diverse backgrounds. It is for everyone, so my message to the Football Association is this: let the dolls play football!
I thank the Minister for her support, for the many productive conversations that we have had, and for her work to introduce a ban on conversion practices and make LGBT hate crime an aggravated offence.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for initiating this debate. I have been inundated with emails from constituents in Jarrow and Gateshead East regarding their civil service pensions and the unacceptable delays that people are facing. This is not just a delay on paperwork, but something that is causing huge detriment to the lives of many people in my constituency and across the UK. This issue could have been avoided. Indeed, I and others, including the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee, the National Audit Office and <span id="143WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="143WH"></span>the trade union PCS, all raised concerns ahead of the transfer to Capita. Unfortunately, we are now seeing those concerns play out.
On 12 January I wrote to Ministers, highlighting this and asking a number of questions. I received a response just yesterday, ahead of this debate, but it did not answer all the questions, and directed me to tell constituents to email Capita, complaining about its system. Of course they had already done that, and I contacted Capita on behalf of constituents, but I have not had a response. Of course I am not surprised, as my constituents have been ignored and have been waiting for months.
The response that I have received from the Minister says, “I hope constituents feel reassured,” but I can tell you, Ms Lewell, that they do not. It does not reassure my constituent Christine, who is 65 and retired on 2 December, but has not received her pension or a lump sum. Every time she contacts Capita, she is told that she will receive it in 10 days, yet it still has not arrived, leaving her without money for months, including over Christmas. It does not reassure my constituent Pauline, who retired back in July and has still not received anything. She is repeatedly being told that her case is with the finalisation team. It does not reassure my constituent Jackie, who took early retirement to care for her grandson and help her son, and should have started receiving payments in August but has received nothing, or Christopher, who is 60 and lives on his own, with no savings and no other income. He has now been three months without a pension payment. Another constituent, Carol, is 70 and does not know when she will get any money or even how much her monthly payment should be.
None of my constituents, or many others who have been waiting for months, are reassured. These are real people, who have been waiting for months, so I ask these questions. Will the Minister instruct Capita to prioritise the people who have been without money for months, rather than continuing to process the volunteer exit scheme? Will the Minister commit to a compensation scheme covering these delays that does not force my constituents to apply through the scheme’s own laborious internal process?