Alan Mak MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Sept 2026 · 25th Anniversary of 9/11 · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise that point, and it is one that I will come to later in my speech. I was just saying to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that it is right that we stand shoulder to shoulder with our friends and colleagues from the United States, because although the attack took place on American soil, it was a global tragedy. Its victims came from across the world. Its grief crossed borders and its consequences shaped the quarter of a century that followed. The work of the 9/11 memorial and museum in New York is guided by three simple principles: to honour, to educate and to inspire. Those principles should also guide us in how we mark this anniversary in Britain: honouring those who are lost, educating those too young to remember and drawing inspiration from the courage shown in the face of terror. For those of us old enough to remember that day, the events are seared into our memory. We remember where we were when we heard the news. We remember watching the images from New York and struggling to understand what we were seeing. We remember the shock of the second plane striking the second tower when it became clear that this was not an accident, and we remember the towers falling, knowing that thousands of people were still trapped inside. But the passage of 25 years creates a new responsibility. Every child now at school was born after the attacks. Many young adults have no personal memory of 9/11. Indeed, one current Member of this House was not yet born when the attacks took place. In fact, across the United Kingdom, around 20 million people—close to three in 10—have been born since the attacks. For a growing number of our population, 9/11 is not a memory; it is something they encounter only in textbooks, in online videos or in brief references during foreign policy discussions. For them, it is history. That change is inevitable, but forgetting is not. We must ensure that future generations understand what happened, who was lost and why the attacks still matter. Young people should understand that al-Qaeda’s terrorism was driven by a murderous ideology. They should also understand the extraordinary courage shown in response.

• 11 Sept 2026 · 25th Anniversary of 9/11 · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman. We should use this opportunity of the 25th anniversary to look forward and to educate young people. As well as educating young people about al-Qaeda’s terrorism and its murderous ideology, there is an opportunity to teach them about the extraordinary courage shown in response to that ideology—from the firefighters climbing the stairs as others came down, to police officers, paramedics and office workers helping strangers to safety, and to the passengers and crew of United Airlines flight 93 whose resistance prevented many more deaths. 9/11 must never be reduced to footage of aircraft and collapsing buildings. The numbers “2977” were 2,977 individual lives—parents, children, husbands, wives, siblings, friends and colleagues, all of whom expected to return home that evening. That includes the 67 British victims, who were mentioned by me and the hon. Member for Strangford. 9/11 was an attack on the United States, but its grief crossed borders immediately. British families received the same unbearable phone calls, waited for the same news and experienced the same permanent empty place at family gatherings. I recognise those British families today. Their loss did not end when the cameras moved on. Anniversaries can bring public attention, but bereavement is lived privately day after day and year after year. Earlier this year, His Majesty the King and Her Majesty the Queen visited the memorial in New York. They laid flowers beside the south pool, met bereaved families, survivors and first responders, and left a message honouring those who lost their lives. They expressed Britain’s enduring solidarity with the American people, and their visit was a fitting expression of the special relationship between our countries and a reminder that Britain continues to share in this remembrance. That loss also reaches into my Havant constituency. My constituent Sally Taber lost her godson Oli Bennett in the attacks. Oli was 29 years old and a successful financial journalist. He was at the World Trade Centre on 9/11 to report on a conference. Sally told me that, when she saw the TV footage, she knew her godson had died. Oli’s family, his godmother and his school friends were determined that his life would be remembered not for the terrible way it ended, but for the values he had lived. They established the Oli Bennett Charitable Trust in his memory, offering grants to aspiring entrepreneurs. Over nearly 25 years, the trust has helped 169 young people begin their dream of starting a business. The trust is now drawing to a close, but its closure does not bring Oli’s legacy to an end. It leaves behind scores of young people who were given an opportunity because his family and friends responded to an act of destruction by helping others create something new. Sally’s story reminds us that an atrocity committed thousands of miles away can leave an absence in a home and a community right here in Britain. It also reminds us why names, photographs, voices and personal memories still matter. We must therefore continue to recognise that the human cost did not cease on 11 September. The destruction of the World Trade Centre released a vast toxic dust cloud, and more than 400,000 first responders, recovery workers, survivors, residents and others were exposed during the attacks and the nine-month recovery operation that followed, as the hon. Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) rightly said, and this House pays tribute to all of them. It is also right that this year, for the first time, the ceremony at ground zero will include a seventh moment of silence, dedicated to those who died from 9/11-related illnesses. This is an important recognition that the victims of 9/11 were not only those whose lives were taken on the day itself, but also those whose sacrifice shortened their life in the years afterwards. That brings me to the role of technology in remembrance. 9/11 was one of the first great tragedies of the digital age. Millions watched it unfold live on television, and much of what survives was recorded by ordinary people using the technology available to them at the time: voicemails, telephone calls, photographs, emails, webcam recordings and amateur video. They all captured fragments of individual experience. Today’s technology allows those fragments to be preserved, connected and shared on a scale that would once have been impossible. A pupil in the Havant constituency who has never visited New York can examine a digital timeline of the morning, study primary source material and hear directly from a survivor, a bereaved relative or a first responder. That work of preservation is increasingly urgent as people with first-hand memories of 9/11 grow older. The children who lost parents are now adults. Many of the firefighters, police officers, medics and recovery workers have passed away. We cannot assume that first-hand testimony will always be available, so we must record it while we can so that it remains accessible in the decades ahead. No institution has done more to provide that access than the National September 11 Memorial and Museum in New York. Built on the site of the World Trade Centre, it combines the physical power of place with the evidence needed to understand what happened. Its collections preserve objects, images, recordings and personal accounts, and its educational work helps teachers to introduce pupils to an event that took place before they were born. Anyone who has visited the memorial and museum, as I have had the privilege of doing with my wife, will understand the scale of its reach. It is not only an American place of remembrance. Around 97 million people have visited the memorial and nearly 28 million have entered the museum. Visitors have come from more than 170 countries, travelling to the place where history happened to pay their respects, understand the attacks and remember those who were murdered. I thank everyone at the memorial and museum for the care and the seriousness with which they have preserved this history, supported families and helped a generation understand the attacks. I also thank the survivors, relatives, first responders and witnesses who have entrusted the museum with their memories. Sharing those experiences can carry a considerable personal cost, but it gives future generations something that no summary can ever provide: a direct connection with another person’s experience. The museum’s work should prompt us to consider our responsibilities here in the United Kingdom. 9/11 is not a mandatory topic in England’s national curriculum and, while some schools do teach it, not every pupil will learn about it. I recognise that education policy does not fall within the Minister’s Department; nevertheless, 9/11 was an international event that profoundly shaped Britain’s relationship with our closest ally. I would therefore be grateful if she addressed three questions when responding. First, will she work with the Prime Minister and the Education Secretary to examine how 9/11 is taught in schools and how resources from the museum can be made more readily available to teachers and pupils? Secondly, will she ask the British embassy in Washington and the consulate general in New York to support closer educational and commemorative links between the museum, British cultural institutions and victims’ families? Thirdly, how can the Government support British families to preserve their memories so they are not lost? Today’s anniversary is an opportunity to reaffirm our faith in democracy and decency.

• 11 Sept 2026 · 25th Anniversary of 9/11 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for his apt intervention. I absolutely agree with him: the United Kingdom stands shoulder to shoulder with the United States of America, our strongest and longest-standing ally.

• 11 Sept 2026 · 25th Anniversary of 9/11 · Hansard source

  More

  Twenty-five years ago today, on a clear Tuesday morning, 19 terrorists hijacked four passenger planes. Two were flown into the twin towers of the World Trade Centre in New York. A third struck the Pentagon, and the fourth, United Airlines flight 93, crashed in a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after passengers and crew resisted their hijackers. In a period of less than two hours, the twin towers fell and 2,977 innocent people from more than 90 countries were murdered. Of those killed, 67 were British citizens, more than from any other country apart from the United States. Thousands more were injured, and many survivors, emergency workers and people who took part in the recovery operation have lived with the physical and psychological consequences ever since.

• 11 Sept 2026 · 25th Anniversary of 9/11 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his very positive intervention and for his work as an officer of the British-American Parliamentary Group. I am proud to serve on its executive. The Minister will have heard his request, which I certainly agree with. I agree that today’s anniversary is an opportunity to reaffirm our relationship with the United States and our wider faith in democracy and decency. The terrorists sought not only to murder innocent people on 9/11, but to destroy open societies, the relationships my hon. Friend talks about and the values that sustain them. They failed. The response to hatred was courage. The response to destruction was rescue and rebuilding. The response to human lives being lost is a determination to keep speaking their names. Remembrance is not passive. Instead, it requires active choices: to teach, to preserve and to tell the stories of individuals, rather than allowing them to disappear into history. Those who remember that morning must now pass on its story to those who do not. We owe it to the people who were murdered, including the 67 British victims; we owe it to families such as Sally’s, who have carried their loss for a quarter of a century; and we owe it to future generations, who must understand both the hatred displayed that day and the courage that came in response. Inscribed in the 9/11 museum’s memorial hall are words from Virgil’s “Aeneid” “No day shall erase you from the memory of time.” Inspired by Virgil’s poetry, we must ensure the victims of history’s deadliest terrorist attack are never lost to time. That is a responsibility carried by each generation, including ours, and it is one that we must always honour.

• 8 Sept 2026 · Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  This week, Arthur Laffer, economic adviser to three former US Presidents, said Britain is being taxed to death under this Labour Government, so will the Chancellor rule out tax rises in the Budget?

• 7 Sept 2026 · Dover and Portsmouth: Protests · Hansard source

  More

  No small boats arrived on Hayling island or in any other part of my constituency yesterday. Nevertheless, residents are concerned, and agree with me that anyone who enters the UK illegally should be deported within a week and banned from claiming asylum. Does the Minister also agree, and will she and the Home Secretary meet me, and other Members on both sides of the House, to explain the police and Home Office responses, and why Labour has lost control of our borders?

• 1 Sept 2026 · Face-to-Face Banking: Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  In response to some of the things that the hon. Lady is describing, the last Conservative Government legislated to protect access to cash, but I think we now all recognise the need to legislate for access to face-to-face banking. Will she join me in calling on the Minister to support my In-Person Banking Services Bill to deliver more banking hubs?

• 8 Jul 2026 · Maritime and Coastguard Agency · Hansard source

  More

  Hayling Island coastguard rescue team provide a vital service in my south-coast constituency. They fear that the MCA’s proposal will have a massively detrimental effect on local recruitment and retention, particularly from the island. How will the Minister ensure that CROs are properly consulted? Will he come to Hayling Island and meet the CROs who do this fantastic work?

• 23 Jun 2026 · Venture Capital Trust Income Tax Relief · Hansard source

  More

  9. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of reducing up-front venture capital trust income tax relief on VCT fundraising.

• 23 Jun 2026 · Venture Capital Trust Income Tax Relief · Hansard source

  More

  A recent industry survey revealed that 62% of VCT founders are scaling back growth plans, 45% are cutting headcounts, and 25% are leaving the country. Will the Government reverse the Chancellor’s plans to cut this relief, or will her legacy for Britain’s tech sector be lower growth, fewer jobs and lasting damage?

• 3 Jun 2026 · Seasonal Hospitality Businesses in Coastal Areas · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend and constituency neighbour knows that the last Conservative Government created the coastal communities fund, which supported Hayling Island in my Havant constituency. Under the current Administration, there is not a specific equivalent fund to support employment, hospitality or the business community. Will he join me in calling on the Government to create a specific fund to make sure places like Hayling Island are properly supported?

• 29 Apr 2026 · In-Person Banking Services · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about the delivery of in-person banking services; to require the Financial Conduct Authority to set standards for the provision of in-person banking services; and for connected purposes. In places such as Hayling Island and Emsworth in my constituency, if individuals cannot bank online or travel to the next town, they cannot bank at all. Across the country, this is not an isolated problem; it is the reality for millions of people. There are now nearly 50 constituencies —represented by Members on both sides of the House—without a single bank branch left, and over 90 more are down to their final branch. Since 2015, more than 6,600 bank branches have closed. That is around two thirds of the network we once had. In-person, face-to-face banking services have, in many places, simply disappeared. While online banking works for many, it does not work for everyone. The latest Financial Conduct Authority figures confirm that more than 3 million people in the UK do not use online banking. When it comes to older people in particular, Age UK reports that nearly four in 10 over-65s who have a bank account do not manage their money online, and three quarters still want to carry out at least some banking in person. Which?, the consumer rights organisation, makes the important point that when branches close, people do not just lose a building; they lose access to help when things go wrong. For older people, people with disabilities, small businesses handling cash and people in rural, suburban and coastal communities, it is not about convenience, but independence, practicality, dignity and fairness. I have so far outlined some of the challenges, but I should also state that significant progress has been made. It was the last Conservative Government who took action. Through the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023, we protected access to cash and supported the roll-out of banking hubs across the country. Today, those banking hubs are a Conservative success story. The trade body UK Finance reports that nearly nine in 10 customers would recommend using a hub. I recognise the vital role that banks have played in this transition. Many have worked together to support and fund the roll-out of banking hubs, and they continue to provide services in communities where branches are closed, such as through mobile banks and pop-ups. I pay tribute to the post office network and its staff, who play a vital role in providing access to cash and basic banking services in communities across the country represented by Members across this House. The introduction of banking hubs was the right approach. It was necessary, and it is already making a difference, but we now face the next challenge. Post offices and cash machines are an important part of the system and provide access to cash, but they were never designed to replace the full range of services provided by a bank branch. Now we must go further and protect access to face-to-face banking, because banking is not just about paying in or withdrawing money; it is about fixing a blocked card, resolving a failed payment, sorting out fraud, and getting advice and help when it matters most. There are 3 million fraud cases a year, and most begin online. When something goes wrong, having someone to help in a face-to-face context can be the difference between stopping the fraud early and someone losing their life savings. For those who are offline, it is not just a theoretical issue. A pensioner with a frozen account should not have to travel miles just to speak to a human being. A small business should not be left waiting on hold when it needs to pay its customers, suppliers or staff. A first-time buyer should not have to navigate the complex mortgage market from just an app. Those are just some of the gaps in the current system, and this Bill would address those gaps and more. The Bill would develop a model that is not only fair but sustainable, and that works for consumers, banks and the long-term future of our high streets and communities. It would shift the focus away from access to cash to access to wider in-person banking services, and it would ensure that banking hubs provide what people actually need: help to manage their money face-to-face when it matters most. I have seen this issue play out at first hand in my Havant constituency. Since 2015, we have lost more than 90% of our bank branches. Barclays, HSBC, NatWest, Halifax and Lloyds have all closed, leaving just one building society branch—Nationwide—in Havant town centre. I have worked with residents, Ministers and Link over several years to secure a new banking hub for our community, and it is due to open in the coming weeks. That progress shows that the model can work, but it also highlights its limitations, because under the current law, hubs are only delivered when access to cash is judged to be inadequate. If there is an ATM on the high street or a post office providing deposit and withdrawal services, a banking hub may not be deemed necessary, despite the lack of wider banking services in the area. In practice, that means that many people, including in places such as Emsworth and Hayling Island, cannot get basic banking services or basic banking problems resolved. They are still travelling miles, still struggling to speak to someone, and still left without the support that they need. This is not a failure of the idea; it is a gap in its design, which this Bill would resolve. It is worth being clear that the Bill is not about mandating a return to the old model of bank branches on every high street. Instead, it is about ensuring that the modern banking system that we have created works for everyone. In developing the Bill, I have engaged with a wide range of stakeholders including the Post Office, UK Finance, Which? and Age UK, all of which recognise the need to go further in ensuring access to in-person banking services outside traditional branches. In return, I have aimed to be equally pragmatic when drawing up the Bill and leading the campaign for more banking hubs. For example, I recognise that many people can rely solely on mobile or online banking and rarely have to step into a bank branch or a banking hub. I am also not wedded to a banking hub being a bricks-and-mortar building with fixed high costs. A hub could be a modular building, a pop-up, a mobile unit or located inside existing buildings such as a supermarket, a post office or a community centre. What is important is the ability to speak to someone face to face. The Bill is not about turning back the clock, resisting innovation or looking to the past. Instead, the Bill and my wider campaign are about the practical evolution of a system that is already working—a timely refinement to reflect how people actually use banking services today. In fact, the Bill is about making sure that progress works for everyone, because we cannot allow a two-tier system to emerge, with one for those who can navigate apps and algorithms and another for those who cannot. I welcome the constructive engagement that I have had with the Treasury and the City Minister on this issue. There is clear recognition on both sides of the House that more must be done to expand banking hubs. The Bill offers a practical, proportionate and sustainable way forward. Let us build on what works and fix what does not, and let us ensure that banking hubs deliver not just access to cash but access to banking, because no one should be locked out of managing their own money simply because they cannot do it online. I urge colleagues across the House to support the Bill, and I commend it to the House. Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Alan Mak, Sir Jeremy Hunt, John Glen, Joy Morrissey, Andrew Griffith, Claire Coutinho, Laura Trott, Jack Rankin, Nick Timothy, John Cooper, Neil O’Brien and Lewis Cocking present the Bill. Alan Mak accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a S econd time on Friday 8 May, and to be printed (Bill 442). Business of the House (Today) Ordered, That, at this day’s sitting, the Speaker shall not adjourn the House, if a Message from the Lords Commissioners is expected, until that Message has been received.— (Stephen Morgan.)

• 10 Feb 2026 · Oak Park Community Clinic · Hansard source

  More

  On behalf of Havant residents and NHS patients, I welcome this opportunity to raise urgently in Parliament the sudden and distressing removal of diagnostic services at Oak Park clinic in Havant. Oak Park is a vital community asset that has long played an important role in local healthcare provision, providing a range of services including therapies, out-patient clinics and diagnostic checks. For residents, the clinic represents local, familiar and accessible care, particularly for sick, elderly and vulnerable people who struggle to travel. Some of the services remain, but the loss of diagnostics is a huge concern for my constituents in Havant, Langstone, Bedhampton, Emsworth, Hayling Island, Leigh Park, Purbrook, Stakes and Widley. The withdrawal of diagnostic services at Oak Park took place suddenly, immediately before Christmas and came with no warning. In fact, there was no consultation with patients, local GPs, community groups or care providers. The local reaction to this removal of services has been both outrage and fear. This is the time of year when the NHS and its patients feel the most pressure; frankly, the timing of the withdrawal could not have been worse. My thoughts are also with the staff who provided diagnostic services at Oak Park, who, I understand, received only a month’s notice themselves that this work would be ending. I was not notified before or even immediately after the withdrawal of services by any of the local NHS bodies or service providers. In particular, I heard nothing from the Hampshire and Isle of Wight integrated care board, which commissions and oversees the services at Oak Park. In fact, the first contact I had from the ICB was yesterday morning, once this debate had been confirmed. I now look forward to learning from the ICB how it intends to replace the services lost at Oak Park. I welcome the commitment it gave me yesterday to provide what it calls “a strong neighbourhood model” for delivering diagnostics services to my constituency. I hope it delivers on that commitment, and I would welcome the Minister’s support in holding the ICB accountable for delivering it. The ICB has told me that the decision to end diagnostic services at Oak Park was taken by the NHS provider; that it was not an ICB decision. The general failure to communicate with people affected by the closure has caused widespread confusion, anger and fear. It is disappointing that, nearly two months on from the removal of diagnostic services at Oak Park, there is still no clear information in the public domain about the background behind the removal, no agreement about a way forward, and no news about whether temporary provision, for example through a mobile diagnostic unit, is feasible. The importance of diagnostic provision in Havant cannot be overstated. Havant War Memorial hospital closed in September 2011 and, at the time, local people were assured that replacement facilities would maintain accessible healthcare in the community. It was Oak Park Community Clinic that provided the reassurance that healthcare would indeed remain close to home. The message from residents, patients, GPs and the whole community is clear: diagnostic services must be restored locally by the NHS and the ICB to a central location in the Havant constituency—either at Oak Park or at another suitable site. In the meantime, there must be interim provision in the constituency—for example, via a mobile unit or temporary facilities. Local people deserve nothing less, and my campaign to get the Government, the ICB and the NHS to deliver will continue. As the Minister knows, diagnostics are the gateway to treatment. Oak Park offered X-ray, ultrasound and echocardiogram services. These are basic but vital services that inform clinicians quickly about the health of a patient, and allow them to decide what further tests or treatment are necessary. If these checks are delayed or unavailable, the consequences for patients can be appalling, slowing their access to treatment or even cutting it off altogether. The cumulative effect is to increase referrals into already pressured acute settings, such as the Queen Alexandra hospital in Portsmouth, and to undermine the cohesion of local NHS services. The alternative to the facilities at Oak Park is to divert my constituents to St Mary’s community health campus in Portsmouth. This is hugely inconvenient for them, because travel into Portsmouth from communities in the Havant constituency is difficult at the best of times. St Mary’s is located on Portsea Island in the city, and there are only three roads on and off the island. The road most likely to be used by people travelling from my constituency—the Eastern Road—has been closed in one direction for several weeks for sewer repair works. It will remain closed until next month at the earliest. Traffic disruption has been appalling for anybody travelling to Portsmouth on any route, and my constituents tell me that they have been affected when travelling to and from St Mary’s Setting aside the temporary issues caused by the closure of the Eastern Road, St Mary’s is, in any event, poorly served by public transport from any of the communities in the constituency: there is no direct bus link between my constituency and the campus; St Mary’s is more than a mile and a half from the nearest railway station; and there is no bus service from the railway station to the campus. Residents from Hayling Island in my constituency who have to go to St Mary’s instead of Oak Park face an especially arduous journey, consisting of a minimum of three bus journeys, taking at least an hour and a half in each direction. During peak periods, given the terrible traffic conditions in Portsmouth, this is likely to take much longer and risks appointments being missed. Madam Deputy Speaker, you will not be surprised to hear that I have been contacted by GP surgeries in my constituency expressing in the strongest terms their dismay at the Oak Park situation. The Elms Practice on Hayling Island has highlighted the length and difficulty of the journey to St Mary’s, as well as the additional cost of the longer journey, which many patients simply cannot absorb. The practice highlights the risk of missed appointments and diagnoses, particularly for patients with chronic conditions. The additional stress of the longer journey for patients with already limited mobility or who are living with disabilities is intolerable. I have heard similar concerns from the Homewell Curlew GP practice in Havant, close to the Oak Park site, whose patients now face much longer journeys. The problem was also raised with me last week in person by the manager of a care home in Havant. She told me that their patients are having to spend £50 or more on a round trip in a taxi to Portsmouth. This is an unacceptable state of affairs. This is not just an issue for my constituents; the additional burden of more patients arriving at St Mary’s will affect people living in neighbouring constituencies who would normally use St Mary’s for diagnostic checks. The loss of capacity at Oak Park is having a considerable regional impact, and it appears the sudden withdrawal of services is not an isolated example. My right hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes) cannot speak in this debate as she also serves as Deputy Speaker, but we have discussed the loss of phlebotomy services from Romsey hospital because of a decision by the ICB. I understand that my right hon. Friend’s constituents now have to travel to Southampton or even Lymington for appointments. My right hon. Friend has characteristically spoken up for her constituents very effectively, and I know that she will continue to do so. On wider NHS engagement, I have a good relationship with all my local NHS bodies, and I want to continue that constructive approach to improve patient outcomes. The loss of these services at Oak Park came shortly after I had a positive meeting with the new chair of Portsmouth hospitals university NHS trust, which manages Queen Alexandra hospital in Portsmouth—the general hospital that serves my constituency and people across much of south-east Hampshire. We had a good discussion about the importance of local provision of basic services. While the trust does not manage the Oak Park facility, when things go wrong with diagnosis, it is on Queen Alexandra hospital in Portsmouth that the burden mostly falls. I successfully lobbied the previous Conservative Government to secure funding for the new emergency department at Queen Alexandra hospital, which serves my constituency. However, it is already clear that even with a new emergency department, the hospital is facing capacity challenges. Anything that gets patients into the right care pathway the first time, at the earliest opportunity, helps to ease that pressure, and diagnostic services play a key part in that. The public see the NHS as a monolithic structure, and when things go wrong in one part, as has happened with Oak Park, constituents can find it confusing and disempowering. The NHS and the ICB must put that right. Following this debate, I hope that as well as securing the return of diagnostic facilities, we can have a broader conversation about wider health provision for my constituents. An urgent treatment centre in the constituency would further ease the pressure on both QA hospital and St Mary’s hospital. I have always been clear that empowering patients helps them to lead healthier, longer lives, whether that is through digital transformation or being able to access basic timely care locally and in a convenient way. For that reason, I successfully campaigned for the Emsworth Victoria Cottage hospital’s building to be retained by the NHS, so that it could become the new home for the Emsworth medical practice, which is now a superb resource for all its patients. We all lead busy lives, and proximity to high-quality local healthcare services is vital. I know that the GP practices on Hayling Island need better facilities, and I have been working with them, the ICB and other NHS bodies to bring that about. But first we have to fix the Oak Park issue and bring those diagnostic services back. In closing, I have three requests for the Minister. First, will he commit the NHS to restoring diagnostic services to a permanent setting as quickly as possible in the Havant constituency, whether at Oak Park or another site? Secondly, while the permanent restoration process continues, will he support the provision of temporary diagnostic services in the Havant constituency, for example through a mobile unit or at a temporary site? Thirdly, will he meet me to discuss how the ICB and NHS bodies can move quickly to restore these diagnostic services in Havant and learn lessons from the Oak Park situation? I want to thank the hard-working NHS staff who provide such fantastic support for my constituents all year round. I call on the Minister to ensure that my constituents have their access to local diagnostic services in the Havant constituency restored as quickly as possible.

• 4 Feb 2026 · AI: Impact on Employment · Hansard source

  More

  The Government’s failure to resolve the uncertainty around AI data mining and copyright is undermining the UK’s economic competitiveness. Will the Secretary of State accept that that failure is driving jobs in both AI and the creative industries abroad?

• 27 Jan 2026 · FTSE 100 Index · Hansard source

  More

  Just one pure technology company is now listed on the FTSE 100 and Budget measures, such as cutting venture capital trust tax relief, discourage companies from listing on the UK exchanges. Why are the Government driving away growth and investment?

• 13 Jan 2026 · Community Hospital Services · Hansard source

  More

  Vital services such as X-rays and scans have been removed from the Oak Park community clinic in my constituency without any prior warning or consultation from the ICB. Will the Secretary of State meet with me to discuss how we can restore those services locally so that my constituents do not have to travel to Portsmouth?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Budget cut the venture capital trusts tax relief that allowed investors to back Britain’s fastest-growing companies. How can the Chancellor claim to support our entrepreneurs when she is cutting off the funding that they rely on?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Life Sciences: Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  The patent box and full capital expensing are Conservative policies introduced to back the life sciences sector, and they are absolutely vital to the country’s future long-term prosperity. Will the Secretary of State commit to protecting these policies at the Budget from a Chancellor desperate to fix the public finances with short-term cuts and fixes?

• 4 Nov 2025 · Regional Economic Growth: Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  Pension providers play a key role in helping Britain’s tech start-ups turn into world-leading scale-ups, but around £3 trillion in pension funds sits idle. That money should be used to support our tech sector. Will the Minister commit to accelerating the Mansion House reforms successfully introduced by the last Conservative Government?

• 29 Oct 2025 · Independent Lifeboats: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. In my Havant constituency, we are fortunate to have both the Hayling Island RNLI lifeboat, funded by the RNLI, and the Hayling Island coastguard rescue team, funded through the Department for Transport. Together they do outstanding work in our community and around Hayling. Will my hon. Friend and the Minister join me in thanking the crews and support staff on Hayling Island? And will my hon. Friend explain why independent lifeboats should receive similar funding and support?

• 10 Sept 2025 · Technology Companies: Accountability · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Minister to his place. When it comes to holding tech companies accountable for using copyrighted material on their platforms without consent, the Government’s Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 let down our creative industries. The Department’s new working groups on AI and copyright include just one British tech firm, alongside a host of foreign tech competitors. Will his Government now give our tech sector and creative industries the proper voice they deserve?

• 25 Jun 2025 · Online Safety: Children · Hansard source

  More

  May I begin by congratulating the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) on her well- deserved honour in the King’s birthday honours? I hope the whole House will agree that it is a fitting and well-deserved honour for her expertise and service to the House. Protecting children online should be a top priority for every Government, and that is why the Conservatives passed the Online Safety Act to give this Government all the sweeping powers they need to act, but when the Minister was asked in Parliament why implementation under Labour was so slow, she said that implementation must be “as proofed against judicial review as possible.” —[ Official Report, 26 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 405WH.] Why is she more concerned about protecting herself and the Government than about protecting children?

• 25 Jun 2025 · Online Safety: Children · Hansard source

  More

  It was my party that passed the Online Safety Act; it is the Minister’s party that is failing our children. Ian Russell, who set up the Molly Rose Foundation following the tragic death of his daughter, says that Britain is now “going backwards” when it comes to protecting our children online. The Government are being timid when they should be bold. Their priorities are wrong, and legal caution is trumping children’s safety. Why is the Minister still defending this Government’s track record of total failure?

• 14 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Labour has cancelled Britain’s new national supercomputer at the University of Edinburgh, damaging our research capability and economic growth. That project was fully funded by the Conservatives, and the university says that it will be a disaster if the cancellation is not reversed, so will the Government reinstate that supercomputer, or will it be another victim of the Chancellor’s failed economic experiment?