Alex Ballinger MP: speeches

Speeches

• 20 Jan 2026 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will not be supporting Lords amendment 1, because it would require renegotiation. We already have a joint commission to deal with issues that arise, and international treaty law would provide routes to termination if we were in that sort of situation, so the amendment is not necessary at all. I will come back to this question later in my speech. If we refused to comply, others—international organisations and partners—would not ignore any provisional measures that were put in place, undermining the practical operation of the base. That is the same reason that negotiations were started under the last Government, and the treaty contains safeguards that are not decorative, but operationally vital. The UK will control installations and the electromagnetic spectrum; we will control a buffer zone of 24 nautical miles, within which nothing can be built without UK consent; and there will be a strict ban on any foreign military or security presence on the outer islands. Those are precisely the kinds of protections that make the base secure, usable and resilient against interference. As we are in the Chamber today to consider the Lords amendments, I will go through each in turn. Lords amendment 1 would require renegotiation so that the UK can stop payments if it cannot use the base. On the surface, as others have mentioned, this may sound prudent, but it is a recipe for uncertainty and delay at the very moment that we need clarity. The treaty already establishes a joint commission to deal with issues as they arise, and international treaty law provides routes to termination if an indispensable object for execution permanently disappears. The amendment adds risk, not security, undermining confidence in the treaty framework that we need to keep the base operational. Lords amendments 2 and 3 were rejected by Mr Speaker. Lords amendment 4 deals with the procedure for orders under clause 6 of the Bill. It is a Government amendment; responding to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, it provides appropriate parliamentary procedure. It strengthens scrutiny and is a sensible refinement to how the Bill operates, and this House should support it. Lords amendment 5, which deals with the publication of the total costs and methodology, is duplicative. The Government published full details of the financial arrangements on the day that the treaty was signed, including the relevant explanatory material. The methodology is clear: it uses the Office for Budget Responsibility’s inflation forecasts to calculate the average annual figures, and those figures have been verified by the Government Actuary’s Department. The House of Commons Library reached the same conclusion, and the Office for Statistics Regulation has welcomed this approach. The amendment is not about transparency; it is about rerunning an argument we have had time and again in this House, including through I do not know how many urgent questions. Lords amendment 6 deals with Commons votes to cease payments if Mauritius breaches the treaty. This would require additional parliamentary steps on anticipated expenditure.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise the 24-nautical mile exclusion zone that the Government negotiated in the treaty? It will prevent many of the things that he referred to.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 20 Jan 2026 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, I will continue. The strategic logic is straightforward. Diego Garcia’s location, infrastructure and operational utility are indispensable.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  In answer to the intervention by the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp), there is more than one veteran on the Labour Benches. I wonder what the veterans from the Conservative party who went through 11 rounds of negotiations under the previous Government were saying; they clearly supported this decision at that point, and there were clear reasons for doing so. This is not an exercise in process; it is about whether this House chooses to protect on firm, enforceable terms an overseas base that is fundamental to British security and our closest alliances. Diego Garcia is a critical asset for the UK and our allies. It supports counter-terrorism, monitors hostile state activity, and enables the rapid deployment of UK and US forces across regions that matter deeply to our national interest. Those opposing the Bill need to be clear about what they are opposing. They are opposing a treaty that secures the base for 99 years with full operational freedom, one that is backed by our allies and was negotiated substantially under the previous Government.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Sale of Fireworks · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 19 Jan 2026 · Sale of Fireworks · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for giving way. In my constituency, many people have written to me about the impact of fireworks on dogs. Two people in particular, Marianne and Rosleen, wrote about how excessive fireworks around fireworks night cause their dogs to tremble uncontrollably and run desperately away from their owners. Does he share my concern about the impact on animals, and does he agree with the petitioners that the Government must do more to regulate and control the amount of fireworks we see throughout the year?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Gambling Harms: Children and Young People · Hansard source

  More

  It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Kevin McKenna) for delivering an excellent speech that covered many of the issues on which many of us in the all-party parliamentary group on gambling reform have been campaigning. I also thank him for organising this debate, as it is really important to focus on young people. Like many in this room, I am a member of that all-party parliamentary group, and we are particularly concerned about the harms that gambling causes to people across the board. I put on record my thanks to the Government for listening to our campaign on gambling taxation, through which we have raised additional money from the most harmful forms of gambling: addictive online slots and casinos. We are protecting people by incentivising gambling companies not to work in those areas. As my hon. Friend the Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey mentioned, the scale of gambling harm in the country is enormous. He talked about how 2.7% of the population suffers from gambling harm, but I find the figure among young people most striking: it is 10.2% for those under the age of 25. Some 70,000 children under the age of 18 face serious gambling harms, including addiction, debt and mental health problems. We are certainly priming people in the next generation to get into even more trouble when they reach the legal age at which they are able to gamble properly. I want to talk about gambling advertising in particular. The all-party group recently had an inquiry on the subject, on the back of which we have written to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the gambling Minister. I want to highlight some of the things that we pulled out from that inquiry, particularly the effect that gambling advertising has on children and young people. Whether it is through social media, sport or even gaming, we are particularly concerned about the way in which such advertising normalises gambling among people under 18. People of that age, who are not even legally able to participate in gambling, are being bombarded by adverts across the board. There is loads of research on this issue, and a lot of it points to the fact that many gambling adverts target boys rather than girls, and they are much more likely to receive them. The University of Liverpool highlighted a really high incidence of new cases of problem gambling particularly among boys and young men between the ages of 17 and 20. In fact, 57% of boys under the age of 18 have seen gambling adverts at sport events in the last year. The University of Bristol found that, in just the opening weekend of the premier league alone, there were 27,000 gambling adverts or inducements. Football is of course a family sport, and lots of people of all ages go. We have to ask ourselves: do we think it is acceptable that children—whether they are going with their parents, going alone or watching it on television—are subject to so many gambling adverts? We have talked about the voluntary industry measures that have been put in place, including the front-of-shirt ban that is planned to be introduced later this year. Obviously, that is a step in the right direction, but it is just a drop in the ocean compared with the number of gambling adverts that we see in a typical football match. Social media is also an enormous problem—53% of boys have seen gambling adverts on social media. Of course, we are debating whether people under 16 should even be able to access social media, but one of the reasons against it is the amount of harmful content to which they are exposed, and gambling adverts are one such example. Particularly concerning is the fact that 31% of children who have been exposed to gambling adverts have seen them through influencers. These people are not typically talking about doing paid adverts or showing themselves as gambling advertisers; they are simply influencers talking about the ways in which people can access gambling products online. There is a real problem in the self-regulation of content marketing. The Advertising Standards Authority has a Committee of Advertising Practice code of practice that requires gambling marketing communications to be clearly identifiable as such, but again and again, we are not seeing that followed. In fact, 74% of gambling ads on social media were found not to follow that basic rule, which is seriously concerning. As we have spoken about, gaming is a real challenge—37% of young people who use games have been exposed to gambling-related marketing. Games are designed with the same psychological elements that we might see in gambling, as they target dopamine and encourage people to take that chance of an opportunity to win. Having elements of gambling and actual gambling in computer games means that we are priming children to get involved in dangerous types of gambling in future. Influencers on platforms like Twitch are using opportunities to promote gambling and talking about it, which is very concerning. Recent research by the academic Leon Xiao, who has provided advice to DCMS, found that 26% of games offered loot boxes that are illegal under current interpretations of gambling law. There is a real lack of enforcement and a lot of people are operating in this grey area, providing things that, under many interpretations of the law, are not legal. I have not even talked about the opportunities available to children to access the unregulated gambling market or to use crypto, or the many other dangerous types of gambling. It is clear from talking to the many MPs engaged on this issue that the public are tired of this. Some 74% of people polled think that there are too many gambling adverts in sports and that under-18s should not be exposed to gambling advertising at all. That is a position that many of us can agree with. It seems completely reasonable considering the scale of harm that we are seeing. A lot of the current situation stems from the fact that the Gambling Act was established in 2005 and we have not had primary legislation since then, while the world has changed completely. Many Members have talked about digitisation and smart phones, and how 24/7 online casinos have made things more difficult. We need to change the Act, but the Government could do a lot of things right now that would not require primary legislation, including effective regulation on advertising, marketing and sponsorship. That can already be done by the Gambling Commission and the Advertising Standards Authority. Many other European countries, including the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Spain and Belgium, have much stronger advertising restrictions than the UK. I urge the Minister to look at what lessons we might learn from other countries. I also ask him about the Betting and Gaming Council’s report on gambling advertising, which I understand was commissioned by the Government and informs their policy at the moment. Does he agree that asking the BGC to mark its own homework in that way is problematic? Will the Government commit to publishing the findings from that report so that we can all see what advice the Government are getting from the sector? The evidence is clear. The public are tired of gambling adverts—that much is obvious. I urge the Government to heed the report of the all-party parliamentary group on gambling reform, which will include proposals on limiting the most harmful forms of advertising, particularly as it affects young people. I will not pre-empt the report, which will be coming soon, but it will include lots of sensible steps that we can take on restrictions. It is important that we do not let outdated regulations allow more children to slip through the net and be primed for gambling harm in the future.

• 15 Jan 2026 · Gambling Advertising · Hansard source

  More

  This week FIFA announced a four-year partnership so that gambling platforms can stream world cup games on UK websites for the first time. Football fans are already heavily exposed to gambling advertising, and the Government have confirmed that there is clear evidence linking gambling advertising to harm. As the Premier League has agreed to remove gambling adverts from the front of shirts this year, does the Minister share my concern that the livestreaming of world cup games on gambling sites is a step in the wrong direction and can perpetuate further gambling harm?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Gambling Advertising · Hansard source

  More

  5. What assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of trends in the level of spending on gambling advertising.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with my hon. Friend—I am also concerned about the black market in online gambling—and I welcome the extra money that the Chancellor has introduced for the Gambling Commission, which has powers including blocking ISPs and blocking payments, among other things, to crack down on unregulated gambling. Does my hon. Friend share my concern about unregulated online gambling companies advertising in the UK, including in the premier league? Does he agree that the Government should be doing something about that so that we can better support the regulated sector?

• 13 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I want to speak in support of clauses 83 and 84 on gambling taxation. I of course strongly welcome these steps on remote gaming duty, which cover online slots, online casino games and other high-risk remote gambling products. Ahead of the Budget last year, I was one of more than 100 Labour MPs, alongside Gordon Brown, who wrote to the Chancellor calling for a different approach to gambling taxation and one that recognises the reality of the modern gaming industry. We highlighted how taxing the social ills caused by online gambling could pay for the abolition of the two-child benefit cap, and I strongly welcome the action the Chancellor has taken to lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty on the back of these changes. For us, fairness was not just about asking those with the broadest shoulders to contribute more, but about ensuring those whose business models generate the most harm make a proper contribution to the cost of that harm. That is why clause 83 is so important, as it targets the most addictive and dangerous forms of gambling: online slots and casinos. As a country, we are experiencing record levels of harm caused by gambling. The Gambling Commission’s figures tell us that 2.5% of adults, which is more than 1 million people, are suffering from serious gambling harm. There are many types of gambling harm—debt, family break-up, crime and, at the most severe end, suicide—so it is extremely worrying that the Royal College of Psychiatrists has seen a threefold increase in the number of those referred for gambling treatment since gambling moved online during the pandemic. In my own area, the Dudley-based Gordon Moody charity, which provides gambling treatment centres all over the west midlands, has seen a large increase in referrals, most worryingly among younger people involved in online gambling. This is not a coincidence, because online slots and casinos are designed to be high speed, continuous, psychologically manipulative and, for many, overwhelmingly addictive. So the Chancellor’s decision to increase remote gaming duty targeted at these most harmful forms of gambling is absolutely the right thing to do. It sends a clear message that the tax system must reflect the level of harm caused. There is another reason why this change—as well as clause 84, which increases general betting duty—is the right thing to do: many online gambling operators, particularly large global operators, have spent years offshoring their profits, booking revenues overseas, minimising their UK tax liabilities and contributing very little in meaningful employment or investment in our communities. In one example, at the end of last year the online operator Sky Bet moved its headquarters to Malta specifically to avoid UK corporation tax, cutting its contribution to the Treasury by tens of millions of pounds. In another example, an unnamed online bookmaker was investigated by the Gambling Commission for illegally directing customers to offshore-based platforms —indeed, to the black market itself—to avoid paying UK tax and to avoid UK regulations. Increasing these online duties means that it will be harder for unscrupulous operators to avoid tax by moving operations offshore. Online gambling in the UK will be taxed fairly in the UK. Raising remote gambling duty to 40% and general betting duty to 25% for remote bets also puts us on a footing much closer to that of other European jurisdictions and many states in the United States. Until the Budget, the UK was behind the curve in taxing these highly harmful online products. For us, the Chancellor’s move is a matter not just of revenue, but of fairness, responsibility and aligning our tax system with the reality of modern online gambling. However, taxation is only one element of harm reduction. Raising duty alone will not of course prevent gambling addiction, stop children being exposed to online gambling advertising and ensure that families receive the support they need when a loved one falls into crisis. If we are to tackle these harms, we need a public health approach. That means proper funding for treatment, and I welcome the steps already taken under the statutory levy. However, it also means serious investment in prevention, community education and early intervention, and a modern regulatory framework that puts people, not profits, first and is fully independent of the gambling industry. I want to highlight another pressing issue for the Minister, which is the continued prevalence of the B3 gaming machines on physical premises. These high-intensity machines, so often located in areas with higher deprivation, continue to cause significant harm, yet they remain under-regulated and undertaxed relative to the risks they pose. If we are to take harm seriously, B3 machines should be included in the next phase of gambling tax reform. Finally, the most recent gambling Act was introduced more than 20 years ago, in a completely different era: before the smartphone, before the explosion of data-driven behavioural targeting, and before 24/7 online casinos in your pocket. A new Act is clearly needed. Our laws have not kept pace with technology, they have not kept pace with the scale or sophistication of online gambling operators, and they have not kept pace with the reality of the harm we now see every day in communities across the country. I welcome the measures in the Bill, but I urge the Government to move quickly to update advertising rules, strengthen affordability checks, protect children and vulnerable people, and ensure that tax policy, regulation and public health strategy on gambling are all aligned. The measures on remote gaming duty and general betting duty are excellent steps in the right direction. They acknowledge the reality of harm, strengthen fairness in our tax system and take us closer to a modern framework that puts the wellbeing of the public first.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the proposal to harmonise gambling taxes, which the horseracing industry was most opposed to, was first proposed by his Government? It is something that they were proposing; we have just inherited it.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The point that I was trying to make was not at all that people who work in the gambling industry are not involved in meaningful employment. The online sector represents less than 10% of jobs yet makes enormous profits, so in fact, if online companies are taxed more, gambling companies are incentivised to put more people in the land-based gambling sector, which could increase employment and would be good for people in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

• 8 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I want to pay tribute to Colin Brookes, the president of Halesowen Town FC, who passed away at the end of last year doing what he loved most: watching his beloved Yeltz. After playing as a professional footballer and serving as a police officer, Colin dedicated 25 years of his life to Halesowen Town FC. He led the club through the ups and downs that all non-league clubs face. Colin was a champion not just of football, but of Halesowen and the surrounding communities. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to Colin Brookes and celebrating the impact of the good people who, like him, keep our non-league clubs alive and contribute so much to our communities?

• 8 Jan 2026 · High Street Gambling Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for giving way; she is delivering an excellent speech, and I support her campaign to end the aim to permit. Another issue I have heard lots of people concerned about is the 80:20 rule, which requires gambling shops to have only 20% of their machines to be the higher stake, more dangerous and addictive machines. There is a rumour or a consultation out that the rule might be liberalised. Does she agree that the liberalisation of that rule, at a time when gambling regulation is not fit for purpose, would be completely unacceptable?

• 7 Jan 2026 · UK Town of Culture · Hansard source

  More

  I join my hon. Friend in celebrating Max Stokes and his wonderful achievements in Redditch. My hon. Friend knows Halesowen well, because he has campaigned there for many years, so I hope that he will be an advocate for my town throughout the competition. When I ask the Minister to recognise Halesowen’s cultural claim, I am not simply asking for a prize; I am making a practical argument. The town of culture award can help towns such as Halesowen in at least four concrete ways. First, it can boost our local economy, bringing in visitors to spend money in our shops, cafés and venues, supporting jobs that are rooted in a place. Secondly, it can strengthen skills and pathways for young people, particularly in the creative industries, events, heritage, digital media and community enterprise. Those sectors are growing and towns such as Halesowen should not be left to watch them grow from the sidelines. Thirdly, it can drive investment in local assets—our parks, halls, libraries and heritage sites—that towns rely on for civic life, but that often struggle to receive sustained funding. Finally and perhaps most importantly, the award can restore confidence. A community that feels seen and valued tends to act like it. Pride is not merely an ambition—it is a catalyst that changes what a town believes is possible. In that spirit, I will put on the record what Halesowen can offer this competition. We can offer the story of a town that helped to build the country through skilled work, honest labour, technical ability and enterprise. We can offer landscape and heritage that connects people to the long thread of English history, and not as nostalgia but as stewardship. We can offer a living and modern cultural identity, and music, sport and community traditions that are rooted in place but outward-looking. We can also offer a model of community cohesion that is quietly impressive—diverse, practical and neighbourly. I would want our programme to reflect those truths. I would want it to celebrate the makers and their skills to revitalise green spaces and heritage sites, to open doors for young people into culture and creative work, and to showcase the everyday institutions and individuals—community groups, faith organisations and volunteers—that keep our town strong. Halesowen has the story, the assets and the people. With the right support, we can turn that into a bid that does justice not only to our town, but to the wider Black Country. If we are serious about culture at the heart of renewal, we should start with the towns that have never lost their sense of community, even when the national spotlight has looked elsewhere. Halesowen is one of those towns. It has earned its place in the national story and I hope that, through this competition, it will be given a platform to tell that story with the confidence it deserves.

• 7 Jan 2026 · UK Town of Culture · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the UK Town of Culture competition. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I want to begin by saying why the UK town of culture competition matters to towns like Halesowen. At its best, culture is not a luxury for places that are already well off; it is the glue that keeps communities together when the economy is changing around them. It is the thing that turns a high street into a meeting place, a park into a shared memory, and local history into a source of confidence for the next generation. The town of culture award is not just a title for the tourist brochures; it can be a lever for investment, volunteering, skills and pride, and for the practical business of renewal, as well as the poetry. It is right that the competition has arrived when it has, because anyone who has spent time in the Black Country will know that we have quietly been a centre of British culture for years. London may have the west end, but the Black Country was the birthplace of British rock music, with Led Zeppelin and Slade hailing from our part of the world. The capital may have art galleries, but we have the Black Country Living Museum to preserve the history of glass making, chain making and real industrial crafts. Through the Hawne Halesowen townswomen’s guild we have probably the best yarn bombers in the history of the world. We are not short on culture, but we have been short on other people noticing it. That is why I am proud to speak today about Halesowen, a town that deserves to be understood. Halesowen sits at a remarkable junction: a market town with the industrial inheritance of the Black Country and the green breathing space of the surrounding countryside. It is a place where in the same afternoon people can feel the legacy of making and the comfort of landscape. That combination is not accidental: it is the outcome of centuries of people working the land, working the forge, and creating a community that knows what it means to pull together. When we speak about the Black Country, we speak rightly about manufacturing, and Halesowen has that story in its bones. In and around Halesowen, families built livelihoods through skilled trades and hard physical work done in small workshops and backyards, with a pride in workmanship that still shapes our local character today. It is tempting to describe that as history and move on, but that would miss the point. The value of that heritage is not simply that it happened, but what it tells us about the people of Halesowen today. It is a town where practical intelligence is still prized, where people understand the dignity of work, and where small and medium-sized businesses do not need lectures on resilience, because they have been living it for decades. If Halesowen is a town that makes, it is also a town that imagines. One of the great cultural treasures of the constituency is the Leasowes, a historic landscape that was shaped by the poet William Shenstone. The Leasowes is not merely a park; it represents an idea—an early expression of the English landscape tradition where beauty, nature and the rhythms of rural life were brought together in a way that influenced English gardens far beyond our town. Its remarkable beauty drew two former US Presidents to visit: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. I issue an open invitation to the sitting US President to follow in their footsteps—it is a much nicer place than Greenland. Within the Leasowes is a place that is exactly what the town of culture competition should be about: the Leasowes walled garden. It is hard to think of a more fitting symbol of what we are discussing. The walled garden is Halesowen at its best: respectful of the past, practical in the present and quietly ambitious for the future. It is not just a historical feature; it is a demonstration of civic pride in action. The walled garden has been brought back from ruin through the determined efforts of the Halesowen Abbey Trust and a remarkable team of volunteers who have given their time, skill and patience to restore a piece of heritage for public benefit. That work has received national recognition: just last month, the Leasowes walled garden was listed as grade II by Historic England, recognising both its historic significance and its architectural interest. Halesowen has not only landscape but cultural reach through literature. It is the birthplace of Francis Brett Young, whose writing helped to put our region in the frame. Culture is not only what happens in big cities; it is also the patient recording of lives and places that feel to the people who live there like the centre of the world. Halesowen is also the world centre of music. I mentioned Led Zeppelin earlier. Robert Plant grew up in Hayley Green and went on to become one of the defining voices in British rock; indeed, he was voted the best lead singer of all time by Rolling Stone magazine. And no town is complete without sport. Halesowen Town football club is not merely a team but an institution. It is one of the places where community life is renewed weekly, through familiar rituals: the talk on the terraces, the work of the volunteers behind the scenes and the intergenerational bonds that non-league football clubs uniquely sustain. That brings me to someone who deserves to be named in this debate—Colin Brookes, the long-standing chairman of Halesowen Town FC, who passed away at the end of last year. Colin was a towering figure at the club, and he is remembered by many as the embodiment of its spirit and in many ways the town’s spirit, too. Colin guided Halesowen Town through many challenges, always remained close to the club and—fittingly—passed away while watching his beloved Yeltz. However, the truth is that Halesowen’s culture is not only what I can list in a speech; it is also the daily life of the town. It is what happens in community centres, churches, schools, parks, cafés and small businesses; it is the volunteers who turn up in the cold to help run a youth club; and it is the sense that the town is more than a collection of streets. That matters profoundly when we talk about a town of culture, because the competition should not be about parachuting in a programme of events, and leaving behind a banner and a few glossy photographs. Instead, it should be about enabling a town to tell the truth about itself: what it has been, what it is now and what it wants to become. In Halesowen, one of the truths that we can express with confidence is that ours is a welcoming town. For generations, people have come to Halesowen to work, to build families, to contribute and to become part of the place. That is not a recent trend—it is part of the Black Country story. We have communities who have shaped the local economy and culture over time, bringing traditions and different languages, food and faiths, that have widened the town’s horizons. That diversity is not a weakness to be managed, but a strength to be celebrated. It is seen in the way that communities support one another. It is also seen in the celebration of the Black Country Multicultural Day in the town centre, or at the Halesowen/Dudley Yemeni community association, which offers language classes and youth activities. Culture, after all, is a shared language that allows people of different backgrounds to recognise themselves in a common home.

• 7 Jan 2026 · UK Town of Culture · Hansard source

  More

  I will just say that it has been an absolute pleasure to hear all the pitches from various Members about the many beautiful, interesting and historical towns in their areas; indeed, it feels like I now have my bank holiday weekend plans for the next 20 years all sorted out. I look forward to visiting many of those places, although I also heard mention of a couple of cities—Truro and Bradford—sneak into our discussion. I think that cities have their own competition, so please allow us to compete among ourselves. I thank the Minister for laying out so clearly the reasons for the competition. We are, of course, still keen to hear details; indeed, we are chomping at the bit to hear them, as we are to get our applications in. I say to those towns that are ultimately not successful in the competition that just going through this process is positive—it has been for the community groups in my area, and I am sure that that is the case across the country. I say a big “thank you” to DCMS. We await both the competition process and the celebration of Halesowen that is surely coming soon.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Ukraine and Wider Operational Update · Hansard source

  More

  Unlike the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice), I am very concerned that the leader of Reform UK has gone on television today to reject sending British troops to Ukraine to help secure a sustainable peace—

• 7 Jan 2026 · Ukraine and Wider Operational Update · Hansard source

  More

  That is exactly what he said. Does the Secretary of State agree that the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) should be ashamed, because we owe so much to the Ukrainian people who have fought so hard to secure democracy in Europe, and that this shows for real how much closer the leader of Reform is to Putin’s priorities than to the priorities of the UK?

• 5 Jan 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Armed Forces Recruitment and Retention · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister has been too modest; he mentioned the September figures for the increase in recruitment, but the December figures were released just a couple of days ago, and they show a 20% increase in recruitment to the armed forces over the last year. Some 2,170 additional personnel were recruited in the year before. Despite the accusations from the Conservatives, might that be because of the two above-inflation pay rises that this Government have granted our personnel? Might it be because of the £9 billion increase for armed forces housing, after it was left in a decrepit state by the last Government? Might it be because of the 2.6% of GDP that we are investing in the military? That figure was never reached in the 14 years of the last Conservative Government.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Railways Bill · Hansard source

  More

  In our part of the country, in Halesowen and the Black Country, we have a long history of building trains and railways. Indeed, in Stourbridge—just one stop down the line—Foster, Rastrick & Co. built the Stourbridge Lion, the very first steam locomotive to be exported to the Americas in 1829. However, since the closure of passenger services at Halesowen train station in 1927, my constituents have had to travel to Cradley Heath, Old Hill or Rowley Regis to get on to the Birmingham-Worcester line that runs through Snow Hill. Sadly, the performance of that line is very poor—only 70% of West Midlands trains are on time, and 7% of them are cancelled. This means that my constituents are getting earlier trains so that they can ensure they catch their connection and get to their meetings on time. Frustratingly, that train route no longer goes into Birmingham New Street, so if my constituents need to travel to other parts of the country and make connections elsewhere, they have to walk for 10 minutes through the middle of Birmingham, from Moor Street to New Street. In that context, I welcome the Bill, which puts Great British Railways on a statutory footing as the guiding mind of the system, giving us a single body that will be responsible for managing infrastructure, planning services and overseeing passenger operations. I also welcome the fact that franchising was abolished in November and that West Midlands trains will be brought back into public ownership in February 2026. Public ownership of Great British Railways gives us a chance to simplify objectives: run the trains on time, with enough seats and at a fair price. I also want to highlight the midlands rail hub, which is a programme of improvements that will deliver real benefits for the people of Halesowen. Midlands Connect estimates that the scheme will deliver 300 extra trains a day in and out of Birmingham, with 20 million extra seats a year, providing many shorter and faster journeys on the Birmingham-Worcester line that my constituency runs on. It will mean more trains from Kidderminster and Worcester running through Stourbridge and past Rowley and Cradley Heath to Birmingham; more capacity at Moor Street, easing the pressure that ripples back down the line; and an opportunity for trains to run direct from my constituency into Birmingham New Street, so that people will be able to make their onward journeys up into the rest of the country. The Black Country helped give our country and the world the railways, and my constituents are not asking for anything extravagant in return. They want a service that runs on time, with enough carriages, under a system in which someone is clearly in charge and accountable. They want the benefits of the midlands rail hub and rail nationalisation to deliver fewer cancellations, shorter journey times and a decent chance of getting a seat. If we get this right, not only will we honour our railways’ past, but we will finally give our constituents the modern railway they deserve.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Ajax Armoured Vehicle · Hansard source

  More

  The Ajax vehicle was ordered in 2014, and was due to be delivered in 2017. It has now been delivered eight years late, in a state of service that is completely unusable by our personnel. This is a catastrophic failure by MOD procurement. As we increase spending as we respond to the war in Ukraine, how is the Minister ensuring that MOD procurement is fit for purpose, so that we do not have another disaster like this?

• 4 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, I had the privilege of meeting a number of schools during UK Parliament Week, including Tenterfields academy, the Impact independent school and Leasowes high school in my constituency. I had some fantastic questions and really intelligent insights into democracy from those students. Leasowes high school had the opportunity to visit Parliament earlier this year, but I hear from other schools in my constituency that, despite the excellent service provided, it is very oversubscribed. Does the Leader of the House agree that the UK Parliament Week team do excellent work? Can he do anything to allow more spaces to open up so that more children can experience that learning about democracy?