Labour Party MP for Bolton North East since (elected). An MP continuously since .
Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions
Entries on this tracker
101
Each filed under the party they sat for that day
Register entries
1
As currently published
Declared while sitting for Labour
£4,126.79
1 of 1 entries state an amount
| Party | Office | Area | Period | Began | Ended | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | MP | Bolton North East | – 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 | 2. Donations and support | Labour Asians Society Ltd - £4,126.79 | £4,126.79 | Labour | Register record |
<Question HRSContentId="{5F8559A3-3858-4E1C-A93E-660E08FA6A03}">25. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{477AE679-9CD3-48EA-BD98-AC113147C9B8}">What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on increasing apprenticeship opportunities for young people. </QuestionText></Question>
Every year on A-level results day, I hold a youth drop-in event at Market Place in Bolton town centre to connect young people with the skills, opportunities and training that I benefited from myself. Every year, young people tell me that they would benefit from more apprenticeships. What further action is the Chancellor taking to work with employers, colleges and training providers to expand apprenticeship places and ensure that young people in constituencies like mine can access the skills and training needed for successful careers?
<Question HRSContentId="{E28432DF-E185-4743-AA1D-6B7D1058CD70}">12. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{A4CC7DF7-3BB4-41F6-B23A-9833258EBD5F}">What steps she is taking to improve rail services in Bolton North East constituency.</QuestionText> </Question>
When I worked in Manchester, my train from Hall i’ th’ Wood station was regularly delayed, cancelled or overcrowded thanks to Northern Rail’s two-carriage service at rush hour. Ten years on, commuters at both Hall i’ th’ Wood and Bromley Cross stations are still being failed by Northern Rail, and, with no Metrolink access, it is no wonder that Boltonians feel left behind. What are our Government doing to connect Bolton to the 21st century?
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is staggering that the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan), did not even mention amendment 67, tabled in his name, in his remarks?
I speak today as a victim of domestic abuse who has found going through the court system especially triggering and on behalf of constituents who have shared their harrowing experiences with me. One wrote to me and said that “the system still allows a father to weaponise the child, to throw accusations whilst protecting his position, while none of the issues I raised got any acknowledgement.” Another felt that “the process itself has repeatedly failed to meet the standards expected of our justice and child protection systems.” I start with new clause 6, on victim-led intensive case management, which I stress is an issue across all courts. Recent experience of the courts shows that special measures are still not being properly implemented. The lack of a common-sense approach to communication is still a problem in 2026, when great technological advances have been made. I commend the hon. Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) on her many amendments that seek to improve experiences for victims, such as new clauses 7 to 9 on judicial training. I stress that all members of the judiciary should always have access to training. In fact, they should have to hear at first hand from victim-survivors about their experiences as part of that training. It does not matter how many times somebody tells me that they understand what I am going through or acknowledge what I have been through—they really cannot unless they have lived it themselves or they know somebody who has. The phrase “trauma-informed” is incredibly powerful and crucial. Such training should always be trauma-informed. That brings me to new clause 13 and the duty to provide trauma-informed training, which needs to include looking at how we communicate what will happen in court with victims, as well as the impact those proceedings will have on victims. There are severe issues with diversity and representation across all levels of the judiciary. I would be interested to hear more about what our Government are doing to ensure better representation. New clause 16 is about remote participation. As someone who has recently been through that as a victim, I believe that we must include an assessment of the special measures involved and whether they are adequately communicated to victims. In my case, they were not. I recently experienced an online hearing in which I had my perpetrator staring at me the entire time. I was not <span id="278" class="column-number" data-column-number="278"></span>able to blur the background on my screen and I was not able to hide his face. The hearing was adjourned because the relevant documents did not reach the right parties on time, despite the fact that email exists and has done for some time.
I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. I agree that we should look for that to be the standard measure. I did ask for special measures, but when I turned up at court they were not implemented, so I had to walk past my perpetrator before going into the courtroom. That is what I experienced as a Member of Parliament. I dread to think—although I do know—what some of my constituents are experiencing. On new clause 24, I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) for ensuring that children’s voices and views are enshrined in the family courts. I know that representatives of Women’s Aid are here, as is the formidable Claire Throssell. I also commend my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) on her tireless efforts in making that happen; she is incredible. The pro-contact culture embedded in the court system puts too many children at unnecessary risk. I am really pleased to see that the Government are removing that. I am also pleased to see my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley (Josh Fenton-Glynn) addressing, in the form of amendment 22, the issue of post-separation abuse, which the courts have facilitated. I thank him for being a strong ally and for standing up for his constituents. He and I have both experienced a deluge of constituents contacting us about the abuse that they face and their experiences of the court system. It is always good to have his support. I am grateful that the Government are taking steps to go further for victims by introducing the victims helpline, addressing the issue of the automatic right to appeal so that victims are not retraumatised, and establishing specialist RASSO courts. However, I want to put on record my experiences as a victim and those of my constituents to ensure that the system truly supports all victims and ensures that they are genuinely heard and properly communicated with, that they know what their rights are and what is available to them, and that we are all shielded from further triggering and traumatic experiences involving our abusers. I am fed up of people and institutions telling me that they understand and then taking action that tells me they do not. I am fed up of being told that they are familiar with domestic abuse or coercive control and then telling me that it does not matter. I am fed up of feeling ignored and dismissed, and so are my constituents. Our justice system exists to protect victims, not to enable perpetrators. We should always remember that.<span id="279" class="column-number" data-column-number="279"></span> We still allow our perceptions about how good a person looks on paper to cloud our judgments. Perpetrators walk among us: they are police officers; they are teachers; they are fathers; they are mothers. They are here in every aspect of our daily lives, and we cannot judge somebody because of how good they look on paper and give them the benefit of the doubt because of that. We have to look at the facts, we have to ensure that victims are heard and, crucially, we need to make sure that their voices are put at the heart of every decision that we make and that they are properly and adequately supported at every single step of the way.
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this debate to the House and for mentioning the so-called experts. We know that accusations of so-called parental alienation are too often used against mothers who are trying to protect their children, but because so few family law cases are publicly available, we do not know the true extent of the problem. The campaigns led by Right to Equality, Women’s Aid and Hague Mothers are important, but does my hon. Friend agree that when a mother says, “My child is not safe,” the court should hear her and believe her rather than using the guise of parental alienation to dismiss her?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) for securing this debate. I feel it is my duty as someone sadly nearing the end of parenting a child in nursery to talk specifically about early years. When we talk about children developing essential skills, we often start too late. Learning does not begin when a child starts reception; it begins the very moment they are born, if not sooner. The skills they develop during the first months and years provide the foundation that children need to thrive in school. Nurseries, pre-schools and childcare providers play a crucial role in helping children build those skills, day by day, through care, routine support and encouragement. That is why Government support to help parents secure high-quality early years provision is so important. In Bolton North East, we are making progress on early years support. At the Valley community school, Government investment is helping refurbish old spaces, create a new play area and expand nursery provision. Our family hubs—Bright Meadows, Oxford Grove, Tonge and Oldhams—give families somewhere to get support without feeling judged. That progress matters, but it is not enough on its own. Across Bolton, more than a third of children are starting school without the essential skills that they need, making it harder to learn, communicate and build relationships from day one. For parents wanting to do their best for their children, the core question is whether early years support is accessible, affordable and workable in real life. I say that not just as the MP for Bolton North East, but as a single mum with a young son growing up in Bolton. I have often wondered whose idea it was to have school hours set from 8 am to 3 pm, working hours set from 9 am to 5 pm, and vital services operating within those hours. How on earth are parents supposed to make that work? One parent in my constituency told me that they had hoped the Government’s expansion of funded childcare from 15 to 30 hours would bring some relief—just that little bit of breathing space, enough to add one more nursery day so that grandparents did not have to keep <span id="121WH" class="column-number" data-column-number="121WH"></span>filling the gap, or flexible working requests did not have to keep being made. But once the provider’s charges for meals and consumables were added in, and because of the way the hours are structured, their bill barely changed and that extra day remained out of reach. Government support is meant to help families, not be lost in extra charges and inflexible arrangements. This is not about attacking providers. Many early years providers and staff in Bolton do extraordinary work every day, often under real pressure, but at the most crucial point in a child’s development, it is wrong that profit can be made from childcare while families are left fighting for consistent standards, transparency and fairness. As parents, we should not have to rely on guidance that, even when improved on paper, is still inconsistently applied and too weakly enforced. Nor should we have to choose between what we can afford and what our child deserves. Children cannot build essential skills in a system that does not fit around the realities of family life. Too often, it is still mums who are expected to make it fit. Of course parents make sacrifices every day to help their children develop those essential skills, but our early years model still assumes that someone is at home, usually mum, to bridge the gap between nursery hours and working hours—someone who can do the 3 pm pick-up, cover sick days and leave work the moment nursery calls. In reality, that often means reducing her hours, turning down that promotion, losing income and then being told she is lucky to have flexibility, if she even gets it in the first place. Too often, flexibility is just another word for women being expected to bend their lives further and further, being made to feel guilty every time they ask for an adjustment, or being told that they are putting their job at risk. It also completely disregards single parents. Parents who need flexible working are too often treated as a problem to be managed, rather than as people who hold families, workplaces and communities together—and then we wonder why birth rates are falling. We cannot keep making motherhood expensive, uncertain and career-damaging and then act surprised when more and more women feel the choice has already been made for them. My asks of the Minister are simple: strengthen enforcement so funded hours are genuinely free, transparent and usable; review whether funding rates reflect the real costs of high-quality provision; and put the essential skills that children need and the flexibility that families need at the heart of early years reform. Every child deserves the best start, and that has to be something families feel in the support they receive, in the childcare they can rely on and in the confidence their children carry through the school gate. Having children should not be an unmanageable financial burden. It should not be a choice with a cost attached to it. No one should have to give up their dream of having a family because society is not set up to support them or because it punishes them for doing so, and no parent should have to make the tough choice to say no to having more children simply because they cannot afford to. Finally, single parents should not fear having to shoulder the responsibility alone. Every parent deserves to be supported by a society that benefits from all of us having children. <em>[Interruption.]</em>
<Question HRSContentId="{51216352-8967-47DB-92B4-A08EFB6480EB}">T3. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{6D2CD6EB-3939-426D-A910-710C4ED2B301}"></QuestionText>Short waiting lists for cataract surgery are a success story, thanks in part to the partnership between the NHS and providers such as SpaMedica, headquartered in my constituency. However, ICB indicative activity plans could see waiting lists increase from weeks to over four months. How will cataract patients be protected while we maintain those all-important short waiting lists?</Question>
Held . Recorded result: Lab Gain. Majority 6,653. 43,359 votes cast from an electorate of 80,011. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kirith Entwistle | Labour | 16,166 | 37.3% |
| Adele Warren | Conservative | 9,513 | 21.9% |
| Trevor Jones | Reform UK | 9,428 | 21.7% |
| Hanif Alli | Green Party | 4,683 | 10.8% |
| Rebecca Forrest | Liberal Democrat | 1,507 | 3.5% |
| Syeda Kazmi | Workers Party of Britain | 1,463 | 3.4% |
| Kevin Allsop | Independent | 345 | 0.8% |
| John Partington | Independent | 254 | 0.6% |
| Seat | Dates |
|---|---|
| Bolton North EastElected 1 time | – present |
| Committee | Dates |
|---|---|
| Secure 16 to 19 Academies Bill | – present |
| Secure 16 to 19 Academies Bill | – |
| Data (Use and Access) Bill [HL] | – |
| Speaker's Advisory Committee on Works of Art | – present |
| Women and Equalities Committee | – |
| Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill | – |
| Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill: Programming sub committee | – |
| Modernisation Committee | – present |
X (formerly Twitter)
Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site
Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .