Al Pinkerton MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Jun 2025 · Outdoor Education · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend’s rich evocation of outdoor education reminds me to reflect on my own time doing things like the Duke of Edinburgh’s award. Although Surrey Heath might not have the soaring topographies of his constituency, what we do have is extraordinary outdoor education provision such as Briars Field forest school, which provides vital outdoor education, particularly for young children with special educational needs who otherwise could not access mainstream classrooms. Will my hon. Friend join me in paying tribute to those offerings that provide a genuine alternative to the classroom and profoundly change young people’s mental health?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Draft Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007 (Extension of Duration of Non-jury Trial Provisions) Order 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I start by joining the Minister in paying tribute to all those professionals in Northern Ireland who seek to bring safety, security and justice to all residents and inhabitants of Northern Ireland. The Liberal Democrats acknowledge with reluctance the need for these provisions to be extended further. In 2024, the number of shooting incidents declined to 17—roughly half the figure from the previous year—and that has to be considered a great advance, but I note with concern that have still been 70 discernible threats and attacks on journalists since 2019. I also note what the Minister said about the ongoing challenges of delivering justice in Northern Ireland. Indeed, as part of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, I recently heard evidence in Northern Ireland and here about some of the ongoing challenges of violence against journalists. Those incidents highlight the ongoing challenges to conducting jury trials in a very small number of sensitive cases in Northern Ireland. Given those circumstances, we fully accept that extending the provisions for a further two years is necessary. However, it is our sincere hope—I am sure that it is the sincere hope of everybody on the Committee—that this may just be the final time that the measures have to be extended. I am reassured to hear the Minister say that the Secretary of State is seeking to work towards the normalisation of the position. We support the draft order, but hope it is the final time that we must do so.

• 9 Jun 2025 · Support for High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  In 2025-26, Surrey Heath businesses will contribute more than £30 million in business rates to Surrey borough council, but because of central Government tariffing, only 2.5% of those business rates will be retained locally. There is a reasonable expectation that locally raised taxes should remain local, so with local government reorganisation on its way, could the Secretary of State and the Front Bench team reassure Surrey Heath businesses that they might have a chance of retaining more of those business rates that should be invested back into our high streets?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, particularly as it sounds as though he is coming to his conclusion, but I want to give him the best possible chance to talk about new clause 115. My constituency of Surrey Heath is made up of small villages divided by green-belt land and Ministry of Defence property. Without the protections afforded by new clause 115, I fear that the distinctiveness and sense of place of those villages will be gradually lost. Can he comment on how new clause 115 would protect the distinctiveness of place?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Business Rates Relief: High-street Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine; I believe this is our first time together in this situation, and I hope it is the first of many. I congratulate the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson) on securing this important debate. All of us in the Chamber today agree that high street businesses are at the heart of our communities. They not only offer goods and services, but provide valuable jobs, as the right hon. Gentleman mentioned. They support local families and create vibrant and connected town centres, yet they are under unprecedented threat. Across the country, businesses are being quietly but relentlessly squeezed out of our once-thriving town centres. My constituency of Surrey Heath is often perceived as affluent, but that perception has arguably bred a dangerous complacency. Recently, I hosted a meeting of local businesses—a cross-section of local business owners from the health sector to hospitality, retail and financial services. The message I received was absolutely clear: the current business rates system, and particularly the changes to business rates relief, is creating considerably anxiety and uncertainty. The scaling back of business rates relief is compounding the pressures that businesses already face: rising national insurance, increased wage costs and inflationary pressures. Removing or reducing relief schemes at this time risks an existential tipping point for many high street retailers, especially smaller, family-owned and not-for-profit businesses. In market towns such as Camberley in my constituency —and I am sure this is shared across all the constituencies represented today—the strains on the high street are already visible, with boarded-up shopfronts, dwindling footfall and declining confidence among business owners. As these local businesses close their doors, the risk is that residents will lose further faith in town centres and high streets and turn increasingly to online alternatives, accelerating the decline that I think all of us here wish to stem. While some exceptional businesses continue to thrive despite those challenges and headwinds, and they deserve recognition for that, many more are struggling under the cumulative weight of financial burdens, with reduced business rates relief tipping the balance from viable to vulnerable. Business rates are paid in good faith, with the expectation that they will support the local environment, funding clean streets, better infrastructure and stronger town centres, but the reality is very different. To use the example of my constituency, in 2025-26 businesses in Surrey Heath will contribute over £30 million in business rates, yet less than £1 million of that—only 2.5% of all the business rates levied—will be retained in the local area, as a result of the tariffs charged by central Government, leaving local high streets without the investment they desperately need. We need a reformed system that reflects the economic realities of all the regions of our country—not just the most deprived, but also those that may appear prosperous on paper but face deep-rooted structural challenges. I urge the Government to rethink not only their approach to business rates relief but the system of business rates altogether. It cannot be right that struggling local councils such as mine in Surrey Heath, which are teetering on the edge of section 114 notices, are expected to levy rates from local businesses, with local residents and business owners reasonably expecting that those funds will be used to enhance the local community and business environment, only for 97.5% of those funds to be spirited away by national Government. Even if we accept the need for some redistribution, surely that cannot be right, fair or just.

• 22 May 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base · Hansard source

  More

  This morning, I was at the High Court to listen to the judgment. I was with a very large group of Chagossians, who told me that they feel betrayed. They also feel that the United Kingdom is acting in exactly the same high-handed, colonial-like manner that led to their dislocation and displacement from the islands in the 1960s. Can those on the Government Front Bench assure us all that when this deal comes back to the House, we are not going to be asked to vote for a new round of colonial practice that will further disadvantage the Chagossians?

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  I will. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”]

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  We must also recognise that safe and legal routes are one mechanism that needs to be pursued —so too is international aid, which allows people to stay broadly in the regions from which they may otherwise be displaced. We often forget that Jordan has the highest number of refugees of any country in the world. We welcome this Government’s attempt to address the wreckage left by the previous Government, but let us be clear: any new immigration policy must come with a credible action plan for filling vital jobs without harming the economy. Let us start with a higher carer’s minimum wage. Right now, our social care sector is in crisis: there are simply not enough workers and millions of people are missing out on essential care. Instead of properly investing in the British workforce, the Conservatives chose the short-term fix: underpaid overseas workers propping up an underfunded system. With those workers being squeezed from all sides, many care homes are at breaking point, and families are being left to pick up the pieces. It is disappointing that Labour’s national insurance increases are only adding to the pressures in that sector. The Government’s recent immigration announcements look set to disproportionately hit the care sector. Let me be absolutely clear: the people who come to Britain to care for our elderly and disabled are not the problem. They are vital to this country and to the wellbeing of some of the most vulnerable people in our society, and they deserve our thanks and respect, not to be demonised by those who failed to pay British workers properly in the first place.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I was recently also in my local hospital where I had an extraordinary care experience from a multinational care team. I celebrate all those NHS workers who have come from overseas to serve us all. Finally, let me turn to one of our greatest national assets: our universities. As a recovering academic who spent more than 20 years in higher education, I have seen at first hand how international students enrich our campuses, strengthen our soft power and boost our economy.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  No, thank you. The hon. Gentleman’s party had nine years; I have less than nine minutes. Meanwhile, the legal migration rules became so convoluted that even seasoned immigration lawyers needed to phone a friend. Skilled workers were welcomed one week and penalised the next. International students were encouraged to come and then punished for having families. The only thing consistent in Conservative policy was chaos. All that was wrapped in a layer of chest-beating, slogan-touting nationalism. “Take back control,” they cried, as if chanting it loudly enough might somehow make it true. Yet control is not about standing on the shoreline like King Canute, barking orders at the tide. It is about building a system that actually works—one that treats people with dignity, balances compassion with pragmatism and delivers results instead of rhetoric. Instead, what did we get? An asylum system on its knees, trafficking gangs operating with near total impunity and, most tragically, lives lost in the channel. Just this Monday, 62 people were rescued after a small boat sank in the early hours. One person died; others were injured. That, of course, is not an anomaly. According to the BBC, over 12,500 have crossed the channel in small boats this year, and it is only May. The Labour response so far has, I would argue, been muted ambition, vague promises and nervous tiptoeing around the institutional wreckage, as if managerial competence alone might magic away a decade of Conservative failures. The Liberal Democrats are clear that these crossings must stop, but unlike the Conservatives we do not confuse cruelty with competence.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  The Conservatives want to talk about immigration today. I am delighted to start by talking about their record in government, though I should warn the House that calling it a record may be overly generous. A record, after all, implies coherence, consistency and competence. What we have witnessed instead is a decade of headline-chasing gimmicks, theatrical tough talk, performative cruelty and policy U-turns so dizzying they could give a weathervane whiplash. Let us start with the basics. As the shadow Home Secretary has already confessed, the Conservatives promised again and again to bring immigration down. That was in 2015, in 2017 and in 2019. Then they promised the same thing in 2024, when the British public in their infinite wisdom told the Conservatives to go back to their constituencies and prepare for a period of quiet reflection. Spoiler alert: they did not just miss those targets—they incinerated them. At the time of the last election, when the Conservatives wanted to stand on their record, net migration was the highest in British history. It was not just high, not just elevated, but record-breaking. What was their grand response? Rwanda. Yes, Rwanda: a deportation scheme that cost half a billion pounds and moved precisely zero people; a stunt so hollow that it made the policy vacuum look crowded; a triumph of symbolism over substance, if ever there was one. Throughout it all, we heard the same tired refrain from the Home Office lectern from which the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp), who opened today’s debate, used to speak: that immigration somehow threatens our identity. That came from a Government who relied utterly and shamelessly on migrant workers to prop up every sector that they spent a decade undermining—from the NHS to social care, higher education to farming. If hypocrisy were an export, the Tories would have been running a trade surplus.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  No. That is why my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) tabled an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill to allow asylum seekers waiting more than three months to work. That is humane, it is pragmatic, and it would help to grow the economy. The Conservatives failed to address that injustice for a decade, and Labour has also failed to grasp the nettle since. It is disappointing that both parties voted against that sensible policy, which would have ensured that those seeking asylum paid their own way.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  No, thank you—I will make progress. We believe that European co-operation is, as I have just indicated, the answer to the small boats crisis. Even the shadow Home Secretary agrees. We all heard him say that the UK’s withdrawal from the Dublin agreement, as part of Boris Johnson’s botched Brexit deal, meant that the UK “can’t any longer rely on sending people back to the place where they first claimed asylum”. Straight from the horse’s mouth! Let us talk about the backlog. At the end of 2024, about 91,000 asylum seekers were stuck in limbo; most had been waiting over six months just for an initial decision. And while they wait, they are banned from working, banned from rebuilding their lives and forced to depend entirely on the state. That becomes a source of resentment for local communities, whose discontent can be weaponised by the darker fringes of our political spectrum.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comment, and I will come on to make a point about the state of the finances of UK universities. Universities are magnets for global talent and they are the envy of the world, so why are this Government so determined to undermine that? The new immigration White Paper limits international graduates to spending just 18 months in the UK after their studies. This is a short-sighted, self-defeating policy that has already caused alarm in the sector. I have heard from university vice-chancellors who are warning of financial catastrophe and a collapse in international recruitment. The Russell Group has also been clear that international students drive local economies, fund research and help make Britain a science superpower. Higher education is the No. 1 export for 26 parliamentary constituencies and among the top three in 102 of them. We jeopardise that at our peril. As if that were not enough, there is now talk of a levy on international student fees, because apparently what our universities really need in the middle of a funding crisis and a challenging international recruitment environment is a brand new tax. This feels reckless, and we strongly encourage the Government to think again and to work with the university sector to flesh out those proposals in a way that works for both the country and the university sector. The Liberal Democrats will always stand for an immigration system that is fair, firm and forward looking, one that supports the economy, reflects our values and honours Britain’s proud tradition of offering sanctuary to those in need. The Conservatives today want to shine a light on immigration, but when we look at their record, we see a decade of chaos, cruelty and catastrophic incompetence. I congratulate them on their courageous decision.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  No, I will not. We believe in expanding safe and legal routes for refugees, including humanitarian travel permits offering vulnerable people a viable alternative to risking their life at sea.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  I give way to the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans).

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  No. We also believe that the real way to tackle the channel crisis is through stronger co-operation. That means working through Europol to dismantle trafficking networks, share intelligence, deliver joint enforcement and report progress back to Parliament every six months, as well as a statutory duty for the UK Border Security Commander to meet their Europol counterparts at least once every three months.

• 21 May 2025 · Immigration · Hansard source

  More

  We need safe and legal routes in order to allow people an alternative to putting their life at risk to cross the channel. That work needs to be done on a continental basis with our European partners.

• 21 May 2025 · Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  As we have just heard, since last we met in this place for Northern Ireland questions, we have had the announcement of the UK-EU SPS agreement. That comes as a great reassurance to many Northern Irish agrifood retailers, but the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and Industry has cautioned that key trade barriers remain, particularly around broader regulatory divergence across supply chains and ongoing customs issues under the Windsor framework. In the Secretary of State’s opinion, how will the latest arrangements ease east-west trade in practice? What specific customs reform does he intend to pursue to further cut red tape and unlock the full potential of dual-market access and latent economic growth in Northern Ireland?

• 20 May 2025 · Lifetime Mortgages: Support for Older People · Hansard source

  More

  An increasing number of pensioners are reaching the end of their mortgages with outstanding borrowing and finding themselves unable to meet later-life lending criteria, and this is likely to become even more prevalent in years to come as house price rises continue to outstrip earnings. What discussions is the Minister having with lenders and the mortgage industry about expanding those criteria and giving hard-working pensioners who might otherwise be forced to seek council support the opportunity to remain in their own homes?

• 29 Apr 2025 · Irish Republican Alleged Incitement · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for the tone and manner in which he has answered questions. I am cognisant of the ongoing legal action that may be pursued in this case, so to generalise the point a little, how are the Government ensuring that public funding mechanisms, such as the music export growth scheme, are not inadvertently supporting entities that propagate extremist rhetoric and incitement to violence? This is not just about the money; it is about the official imprimatur that schemes like that offer to the entities involved.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate. Terry, one of my constituents, worked for a large American multinational company. As a consequence of the Pensions Act 1995, he found his pre-1997 pension contributions decoupled from inflation. Because of the nature of inflation, his savings, which he now depends on, have been gradually eaten away and he finds himself in increasing levels of destitution. Will the Minister look at the issue with the seriousness that it requires? It cannot be right that pensioners in our country are suffering as a consequence of decisions made by multinational companies that remain hugely profitable. The issue has a particular geography because so many multinational companies were located in the south-east of England.

• 8 Apr 2025 · Blair Mayne: Posthumous Victoria Cross · Hansard source

  More

  I begin by simply acknowledging the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for tabling an early-day motion and securing today’s important debate. The hon. Gentleman has supported so many new starters in this House since we joined Parliament, so it is a pleasure to support him in his advocacy of this important cause today. As we have heard from Members across the House, with his courage and bravery, Robert Blair “Paddy” Mayne stands alongside the greatest soldiers of our reckoning, past or present, and the heroism that he demonstrated during the second world war is rightly celebrated. However, I want to take a moment to shine a light on a lesser-known but remarkable chapter of his life: the work he did with the Falkland Islands Dependencies Survey. This chapter reflects his unwavering dedication to service and duty, but it also holds a special resonance for me personally. As a recovering academic with a strong interest in the UK’s overseas territories, an observer of the 2013 Falklands referendum, and a former Shackleton scholar, I have had the privilege of visiting the Falkland Islands on numerous occasions, most recently in 2023. During those visits, I have seen for myself the pristine wilderness and unparalleled beauty of the island’s wildlife, but above all the unwavering strength of the people who call the Falklands home. In the aftermath of the second world war, one might have expected Robert Blair Mayne, having given so much in battles and skirmishes, to have sought the comfort of home, family and a well-earned rest, but that was not the direction he chose. Instead of stepping away from public service, he delayed his return to civilian life and joined the Falkland Islands Dependencies Survey, a precursor to what is now the British Antarctic Survey. The organisation, which began life as a naval operation in 1943 under the codename Operation Tabarin, had an important strategic purpose. While its official mission had been to monitor enemy shipping, its true goal was to counter Argentine and Chilean territorial claims in the Antarctic and assert British sovereignty by establishing manned bases in the region. When the war ended, the operation transitioned into the Falkland Islands Dependencies Survey. In late 1945, three former SAS members, including Lieutenant Colonel Blair Mayne, joined the expedition. Led by Naval Surgeon Commander Bingham, with Mayne appointed second in command, this was no ceremonial visit to the southern hemisphere. Blair Mayne fully embraced the challenges of the mission: he was active on board the ship, on the ground and on the ice, participating in the full scope of the expedition, leading dog teams, surveying wildlife and camping in some of the harshest, most isolated conditions imaginable. Mayne’s journals and photographs offer a rare glimpse into the lives and work of British explorers, surveyors and scientists in the southern hemisphere and Antarctica during the immediate post-war period, revealing not only the isolation of the vast icy landscapes, but the camaraderie he shared with his comrades—a recurrence of the same camaraderie he demonstrated during his active service in Europe and north Africa. It was only a recurring back injury, one sustained during his wartime service, that forced Mayne’s early return to the Falklands for medical treatment. Nothing could be done to ease the condition or the pain from which he suffered. From Port Stanley, Mayne was transported back to England and thence to Northern Ireland in the spring of 1946. The injury that cut short his Antarctic service would trouble him for the rest of his life. Still in his 30s and resettled in Northern Ireland, Mayne, a former British and Irish Lion, was said to live with such profound and chronic pain that he was unable even to spectate rugby matches from the terraces at Ravenhill. For 80 years, Mayne’s supporters have remained acutely aware of the injustice that denied the Victoria Cross to this extraordinary man and undisputed national hero. Blair Mayne’s legacy is not only of valour in battle, but of unparalleled leadership, courage and sacrifice under the severest of conditions. Colonel David Stirling, who himself knew something of courage and leadership, noted of Mayne that “he had a marvellous battle nostril. He could really sense precisely what he had to do in a situation. It wasn’t sheer courage, it was sheer technique.” Today’s debate is not about rewriting history; it concerns the righting of a historic wrong—one that was evident at the time of its making in 1945 and one that has become only clearer with the passage of time and the application of a clear-eyed historical lens. On the 80th anniversary of Mayne’s recommendation for the Victoria Cross and in the 70th anniversary year of Mayne’s untimely death in 1955, there could be no better or more appropriate moment for His Majesty’s Government to take up the cause and finally award Lieutenant Colonel Robert Blair Mayne the Victoria Cross—a recognition earned in 1945, which is now 80 years overdue, but we hope not for much longer.

• 8 Apr 2025 · EU Tariffs: United States and Northern Ireland Economy · Hansard source

  More

  As the Financial Times reported at the weekend—and as I think the Secretary of State has just confirmed—in the event of EU retaliatory tariffs, goods imported from the United States into Northern Ireland will by default be effectively forced down the red lane. That, of course, means additional customs checks, time and red tape and, in the event of their imposition, EU tariff rates for goods coming into Northern Ireland, irrespective of their ultimate destination. That risks a scenario where Northern Ireland importers are penalised more than almost any other businesses in either the UK or the EU, first at the border and then in administering the reclamation of those costs. Let us be clear: this chaotic situation is entirely the consequence of Donald Trump’s destructive trade war. What are the Government doing to ensure that President Trump and the US Administration are alert to the deeply destabilising effects of their tariffs policy on the Good Friday agreement and the prospect of peace in Northern Ireland? What active steps are the Government taking to mitigate the potential disruption to Northern Ireland businesses that are now unwittingly caught up in Donald Trump’s trade war?

• 2 Apr 2025 · Universities: Funding and Employment · Hansard source

  More

  As an academic in recovery, currently working as a visiting professor at Royal Holloway, University of London on Monday mornings before Parliament sits, what the hon. Lady is saying resonates with me very powerfully. Today, Royal Holloway announced a voluntary severance scheme. I remember that moment in 2016, after the Brexit referendum, when our international student numbers fell off a cliff. Britain cannot claim to be a genuine world leader in many things, but in our university sector we absolutely can. We have the second largest number of Nobel prizes of any country. Does the hon. Lady agree that, to paraphrase Joni Mitchell, we won’t know what we’ve lost until it’s gone?