Official portrait of Luke Akehurst
UK Parliament, CC BY 3.0

Luke Akehurst

Labour Party MP for North Durham since (elected). An MP continuously since .

Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions

Entries on this tracker

204

Each filed under the party they sat for that day

Register entries

9

As currently published

Declared while sitting for Labour

£2,758

2 of 9 entries state an amount

Party affiliation

PartyOfficeAreaPeriodBeganEndedSource
LabourMPNorth Durham – presentelected—Party history

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.

DateCategoryEntryDeclared valueSitting forSource
3. Gifts, UK sourcesAurelo Group Limited - £500.00£500LabourRegister record
4. Visits outside the UKInternational visit to Estonia between 12 October 2025 and 15 October 2025ELNET UK£2,258LabourRegister record
8. MiscellaneousMember, British-American Parliamentary Group Executive Committee. This is an unpaid role.—LabourRegister record
date registered8. MiscellaneousTrustee, Friends of Labour Students. This is an unpaid role.—LabourRegister record
date registered8. MiscellaneousDirector, Labour to Win Ltd. This is an unpaid role.—LabourRegister record
date registered8. MiscellaneousDirector/Secretary, Labour First Ltd. This is an unpaid role.—LabourRegister record
date registered7. ShareholdingsShares in Labour to Win Ltd—LabourRegister record
date registered7. ShareholdingsShares in Labour First Ltd—LabourRegister record
8. MiscellaneousPLP Representative on Labour Party National Executive Committee.—LabourRegister record

Register on Parliament's site

Latest on this tracker 204

  1. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Illegal Off-road Bikes: North-east

    My hon. Friend is being very generous in giving way. I thank her for her tireless work on this issue. At a recent meeting that I convened on this issue at Beamish museum with stakeholders including the police, local authorities, emergency services and community groups, a key theme raised was the need for stronger enforcement powers. Will my hon. Friend join me in urging the Minister to extend to police community support officers, as well as police officers, the power to stop and seize these bikes and report road traffic offences? That would give them the tools they need to tackle this persistent antisocial behaviour.

    Hansard source
  2. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Support for Veterans

    12. What steps he is taking with the Secretary of State for Defence to support veterans who served in Operation Banner.

    Hansard source
  3. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Support for Veterans

    Veterans in my constituency were let down by the previous Government’s legacy Act, which offered nothing but false promises. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give to Operation Banner veterans in North Durham that they will not be subject to unnecessary repeat investigations and that the operational context of their deployment will be taken into account?

    Hansard source
  4. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Defence Co-operation: European Union

    Last year, the UK agreed a security and defence partnership with the EU as part of the Government’s commitment to strengthening European security, supporting economic growth and reinforcing NATO. Will the Minister set out what dialogue has happened since then to implement the partnership?

    Hansard source
  5. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    UK Coach Industry

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for bringing us here. I want to speak about Stanley Travel, a coach business based in my North Durham constituency. Established in 1961, Stanley Travel remains a family-owned and operated business. It operates more than 50 vehicles and employs 95 staff. From serving schools and colleges in my constituency to allowing tourists on a budget to get around the country, it provides constituents with a great deal of value, like other coach companies we have heard about today. Unfortunately, Stanley Travel and other coach businesses face severe pressures on their operations, so I want to raise four questions with the Minister. Rising fuel prices have substantially increased costs. Diesel prices have risen from £1.08 per litre in March to £1.59 per litre last week. That represents an additional £9,690 each week across Stanley Travel’s operation. Where transport contracts have already been agreed at fixed prices in advance, it is local family businesses that are forced to absorb that cost. Those challenges will only be compounded by future increases in fuel duty. We ought to recognise coaches as essential users of fuel, delivering education and community transport and lower-carbon group travel. Therefore, my first question is, will the Minister support an essential user fuel rebate for coach operators and urge the Treasury to cancel the proposed fuel duty increases? Driver and technician shortages make it harder for operators to maintain and expand services. Recruiting and training new staff requires lots of investment, while restrictions affecting younger coach drivers make it difficult, as we have heard, to recruit directly from schools and colleges. Stanley Travel tells me that it needs a clearer pathway into coach driving and engineering, supported by accessible training and apprenticeships. Will the Government support funded category D licence training, review driver apprenticeships and remove unnecessary barriers to younger people entering the sector? Too often, coaches are overlooked in transport and destination planning. Inadequate parking, unsuitable pick-up points and insufficient space for wheelchair boarding create practical difficulties for drivers and passengers. What steps will the Government take to ensure that councils and visitor destinations provide adequate coach parking, accessible boarding facilities and suitable driver rest areas? Finally, coaches already offer an efficient way of moving groups while reducing individual car journeys, but operators also want to invest in cleaner technology. However, vehicle costs, range and charging infrastructure must reflect the demands of long-distance and touring work. A clear, coach-specific road map to cleaner technology would give businesses greater confidence to plan investment, supported by practical infrastructure and appropriate financial assistance. Will the Government develop that road map with operators and provide funding support that recognises the coach sector’s needs? Currently, trading conditions for coach businesses such as Stanley Travel are exceptionally difficult. Supporting coaches protects local jobs, affordable travel and essential services while helping communities to access experiences and opportunities across the country. I hope the Minister can set out what the Government will do to address each of the concerns I have raised and to support companies such as Stanley Travel, which has delivered so much for my constituents over the last 65 years.

    Hansard source
  6. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I beg to move, That this House has considered police funding in the North East. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, MrI know that I will not be the only Member in the room who was deeply disturbed to see the scenes emerging out of Cleveland earlier this year. I pay tribute to PC Matthew Blades and PC Tom Clough.

    Hansard source
  7. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    My hon. Friend has anticipated the general thrust of my remarks. I join him in paying tribute to PCs Matthew Blades and Tom Clough, who lost their lives trying to protect the public. While the Labour Government were right to provide an additional £2 million for Cleveland police in response, it struck me that the challenges facing Cleveland are not unique in the north-east region. They are faced across the Durham, Cleveland and Northumbria police forces areas. Police numbers were cut in the years after 2010. Public safety has therefore deteriorated, and our constituents are paying the price. It terrifies me to think that communities like those I represent could ever face a breakdown in law and order of the kind that occurred temporarily in Cleveland. It drew me to ask the question: why was our region left so under-resourced that it became vulnerable to such pressures? Sadly, I can only conclude that the answer lies in an ideological choice by the Conservative party during the 14 years in which it was in government that places such as North Durham were not deserving of the necessary police resources, despite the severe social and economic challenges that our communities have faced following decades of deindustrialisation. Frankly, that decision should be regarded as nothing short of a national scandal. As I hope to demonstrate today, it has reduced safety, security and opportunity for the people of our region. The numbers paint a damning picture of how badly the last Conservative Government failed the north-east of England. Our three police forces all sit in the top four across England and Wales in terms of percentage reduction in police numbers between 2010 and 2024.

    Hansard source
  8. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    Obviously, I do not share the hon. Gentleman’s knowledge and expertise of the unique policing challenges in Northern Ireland, but I appreciate his support for north-east England in this debate and his points about community policing. I do not believe it is a coincidence that, over the same period, Durham, Cleveland and Northumbria recorded the three largest increases in crime, excluding fraud, of any police force areas in England and Wales. Today, County Durham still has 120 fewer police officers than in 2010, equating to 102 full-time roles and a decrease of 6.7%. Across the whole north-east, 578 officers have been lost since 2010, a fall of 7.8%. In stark contrast, the areas that saw the greatest increase in police numbers were Surrey, Cambridgeshire, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Norfolk and Thames Valley. If one were being cynical, one might point out that those are all areas that, on the whole, had Conservative MPs when the Conservative party was in government, and generally greater levels of prosperity and lower levels of policing demand than many of the communities represented in this room. Although officer numbers across the country sit 1.5% higher than in 2010, the regional disparity in which communities benefited from increased police numbers is clear and has grown. That prompts the question: why did successive Tory Governments deem those places to be most deserving of frontline police presence? Why did politicians in Westminster at that time decide that working-class families in North Durham were less deserving of police protection than people living in more prosperous areas with lower crime levels, where police officer numbers were increased? To compare the demand that different police forces face, we can look at the measure of police recorded crime per officer. In County Durham, there were 42 recorded crimes per officer in 2025-26, which is much higher than the national average of 36. If our county received the same funding per recorded crime as the national average, it would be £29 million a year better funded. Not only are policing numbers on the ground lower than 2010, but our area faces more incidents requiring police time. During July 2026, Durham Constabulary received more than 10,000 emergency 999 calls, an increase of 11% compared with the same month the previous year. Demand remained high throughout the summer, with crime-related incidents more than 14% above normal levels in August. Antisocial behaviour related to off-road bikes, e-bikes and scooters poses another challenge in policing in County Durham. My hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Lola McEvoy), who cannot be here, has been campaigning on this issue over the past year, as have many others in the room. I commend her for highlighting the support that police officers in our area need to tackle this issue blighting our communities. Just last week, she observed 70 illegal bikes and scooters being crushed after being confiscated by Durham Constabulary. Police chiefs in our area tell me that there were more than 1,000 more incidents each month over the summer than for the same period in 2025, representing two full days of additional demand each month. In particular, high levels of deprivation in our county translate into higher police demand related to mental health crises, drug or alcohol abuse and cases of missing children. In the Durham and Northumbria police force areas, officers face the especially challenging combination of high levels of deprivation and extremely rural areas. It takes more money to police rural areas, due to additional travel costs and the need to maintain smaller, less efficient police buildings. I hope the Minister will set out what consideration has been given to the additional needs of police forces in rural areas that also have high levels of deprivation, and how the Government are supporting them with the unique challenges that that combination poses. Although the Durham force has managed to maintain performance in responding to public requests for help, despite severe challenges, in other areas demand is affecting performance. According to the latest inspection, Durham had the highest rate of repeat domestic abuse incidents per thousand of the population of anywhere in England and Wales. Of 188 priority domestic abuse incidents, 118 did not meet the attendance target. That is shocking evidence of the scale of demand facing our police force and why it needs the resources to do more to protect vulnerable people and prevent abuse. Can the Minister please set out what assessment the Government have made of this particular problem and say how they will ensure that those experiencing domestic abuse in my constituency and across the region receive the same level of support as domestic abuse victims anywhere else in the country? My message to my North Durham constituents is this: I will not allow our area to be denied the support that it needs and deserves from the state. A Labour Government will always stand up for our area and I look forward to hearing the Minister set out how we are doing that later on in the debate. Having told Members what the numbers show, let me tell them what the impact is on typical constituents in North Durham. For a family in Stanley, it means worrying about their children being the victims of antisocial behaviour on their walk home from school. For a small business on Chester-le-Street Front Street, it means accepting that shoplifting is an inevitable cost of doing business. For a farmer near Lanchester, it means having no support to fend off perpetrators of agricultural crime who damage or steal their expensive machinery. For residents of Craghead, it means worrying that stretched police resources might prevent the prompt response and support they deserve when a crime occurs. The consequences of stretched policing resources were hammered home to me in Parliament just last month when I hosted a group of women and girls from the Just for Women Centre in Stanley and St Bede’s school in Lanchester. In our discussion, the group highlighted their public safety concerns, recalling that they no longer feel safe walking home at night. They were clear that rather than simply catching perpetrators when awful crimes happen, our priority should be to prevent harm in the first place. I firmly believe that visible neighbourhood policing has an important part to play in preventing violence against women and girls, and in helping women to feel safe in their communities. I would be grateful if the Minister could specifically reflect on the safety of women and girls in the north-east of England and update the House on efforts in our region to tackle the scourge of VAWG and on any assessment that the Government have made of the gendered impact of the previous policing cuts in our area. Of course, policing is not just about officers patrolling the streets in our neighbourhood; when the worst happens, it is also important to have enough officers in the response team to deal with the fallout. Too often, police shortages have meant that when major incidents occur, officers are pulled out of neighbourhood policing to respond, leaving our communities with a reduced police presence. In County Durham, such support for response teams from neighbourhood policing was provided on 129 occasions in August and 233 occasions in September. Will the Minister set out the Government’s thinking on the balance between neighbourhood policing and response teams, in particular explaining how she will ensure that when incidents occur, the towns and villages in my constituency and across our region are not stripped of their neighbourhood policing? I now come to the rallying cry of this debate. As MPs from across the north-east of England, we are here today to call for more resources from central Government to deal with the challenges that our communities face. What we need is recognition that, because of decisions by previous Tory Governments, we are starting from a lower baseline of officer numbers than we should be. That is why I am calling for Ministers to deliver additional police numbers to the north-east on top of what is already promised through the neighbourhood policing guarantee, to reverse the cuts to policing in our area that have compromised our safety since 2010. I welcome the Labour Government allowing Durham exceptional flexibility over our policing precept in order to prevent further avoidable cuts to our policing presence. I commend our police and crime commissioner, Joy Allen, for her consistent advocacy for policing across County Durham and Darlington, and for taking the difficult decision to propose a modest precept increase to ensure that residents are protected from crime and ASB. However, she has rightly pointed out that because our area has a low council tax base, the amount of money that we can raise locally to invest in policing is very limited. About 70% of County Durham properties are in council tax bands A and B, and I note that I am standing next to a proponent of council tax reform for those reasons, my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash). Although a 1% council tax increase generates £1.9 million in Surrey, the same change in County Durham would raise only £500,000. The safety of my constituents should not depend on the value of property in their postcode. In fact, it is areas such as ours that need investment most desperately. I know that the Police Federation, which represents 145,000 serving officers, has highlighted that reliance on council tax precepts risks a postcode lottery of funding. The Police Federation has called for a long-term funding settlement that takes that into account. Does the Minister think it is fair that local areas are expected to raise money for policing themselves when the areas that have the least ability to raise money are the same that, because of their levels of deprivation, need a police presence most? In making this case, I am optimistic about our Labour Government, who have already shown that they care about these issues and want to deliver a fairer settlement for the north-east. Nationally, the Labour Government have been robust in making the case for a visible police presence on our streets to improve public safety, backed by a neighbourhood policing guarantee to deliver a named police officer for every community. Police funding is increasing, and after the unrest in Middlesbrough the Government acted swiftly and firmly to deliver more funding for Cleveland’s police force. The Home Secretary is also committed to a wider review of the police funding formula to ensure fairness. Will the Minister confirm when that review will happen, whether it will consider incidents of crime and ASB and whether we will see a real cash increase in funding for our north-east police forces during this Parliament? As the Minister responds, I urge her not to lose sight of the fact that the north-east is still dealing with the consequences of years of disproportionate policing cuts. I hope she can outline what role that context plays in the Government’s thinking on the fairness of the current formulas, and how she is ensuring that this review properly takes into account the policing demand and lack of funding so clearly presented by our region. Our constituents are not asking for special treatment; they demand that they are afforded the same level of protection as people elsewhere in the country. The safety of a family in Stanley, Chester-le-Street, Annfield Plain, Sacriston, Pelton, South Moor or Craghead should matter to politicians just as much as that of a family anywhere else in the country. That is why the Government must ensure a fair funding settlement that accounts for the challenges facing our communities to ensure policing that the public can have confidence in. Today, we are sending a clear message: the Government must do more to ensure that policing in the north-east of England is adequately funded to deliver for our constituents.

    Hansard source
  9. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Police Funding: North-east England

    I am grateful to the Minister for her remarks and for getting to the crux of the matter, which is that the funding formula was ripped up under previous Governments. I am grateful to the shadow Ministers, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) and the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson), for at least understanding that the problem is low levels of funding in the north-east, but I regret that they were not able to bring themselves to explain that Conservative Governments, and a coalition Government including the Lib Dems, ripped up the funding formula. I am grateful to my hon. Friends on the Government Benches for the eloquent way in which they have expressed the extreme pressures that policing is under in the communities that they represent, and some of the tragic events that have happened partly due to that pressure. With that, I am conscious of the need to sit down before the turn of the hour. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered police funding in the North East.

    Hansard source
  10. ParliamentLuke Akehurst

    Representation of the People Bill

    Could the hon. Lady confirm to the House whether the Conservative party has ever published election leaflets in particular constituencies or wards in languages other than English? I have a vague memory of seeing Conservative party election literature in community languages during elections in various parts of the country, and my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) has memories of that as well.

    Hansard source

2024 General Election: North Durham

Held . Recorded result: Lab Hold. Majority 5,873. 41,565 votes cast from an electorate of 73,226. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.

CandidatePartyVotesShare
Luke AkehurstLabour16,56239.8%
Andrew HusbandReform UK10,68925.7%
George CarterConservative6,49215.6%
Craig MartinLiberal Democrat4,20810.1%
Sunny Moon-SchottGreen Party2,3665.7%
Chris BradburnWorkers Party of Britain9282.2%
Tom ChittendenSocial Democratic Party3200.8%

Election result on Parliament's site

Parliamentary career

Seats held

SeatDates
North DurhamElected 1 time – present

Committee memberships

CommitteeDates
Select Committee on the Armed Forces Bill – present
Administration Estimate Audit and Risk Assurance Committee – present
Finance Committee (Commons) – present
Armed Forces Commissioner Bill –

Elections contested without winning

ConstituencyDate
Castle Point
Aldershot

Career on Parliament's site

Published contact details

Parliamentary office

House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA

[email protected]

Constituency office

Constituency office

0191 371 8834

X (formerly Twitter)

twitter.com/lukeakehurst

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

Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .