Andrew George MP: speeches

Speeches

• 13 Apr 2026 · SEND Provision and Reform · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—in fact, I made a number of interventions in place of my speech. I wanted to respond to the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton), because she was making a very strong case about the need to ensure that these reforms are forced through. The three tests that the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford) introduced to this debate set the template, on which I hope the Minister will respond in due course. In my constituency and across Cornwall—it is good to see Members from Cornwall in the Chamber this evening—the issues that are causing the greatest concern relate to the large number of tribunals that take place in order for parents to ensure that their children get the decent education they desperately deserve.

• 13 Apr 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  First, I should like to associate myself with the remarks of the hon. Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) with regard to the Cornish Merlin helicopters from RNAS Culdrose in my constituency. The Prime Minister knows that he has the full support of the House when he says that he wants Lebanon included in the ceasefire, but surely he must accept that he could do a great deal more, first by ensuring that no UK arms components end up in the hands of the genocidal Netanyahu Government, and secondly by ensuring that there is absolutely no trade with the illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a very brief intervention, as I want to make sure that the Minister has ample time to respond to the many points that have been raised. I must congratulate the hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Julia Buckley) on securing this debate, and I thank her for telling us about her wonderful constituency. It is indeed a very attractive constituency, but I am afraid it is second best to mine in west Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly—we will no doubt have further debates about that. Nevertheless, I did not stand purely to make that competitive point. It is to an extent justified for west Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly to be engaged in all rail debates as the very first steam locomotive ran in Cornwall and the first steam rail service ran as a goods service from Angarrack to Hayle in west Cornwall, so we were there at the beginning of the story of rail and of rail services across the country. I am proud of the heritage that Cornwall has contributed to the United Kingdom in that respect. My constituency is at the end of the Paddington to Penzance line, and the primary point that I wish to get across to the Minister is that we should not be mesmerised by speed. The whole High Speed 2 debate has been about cutting a certain amount of time off rail journeys to certain destinations. However, in the case of services from Penzance to Paddington and back, journeys generally take five or five and a half hours, and we have a sleeper service that takes eight hours. The issue in our part of the country is not speed, but reliability, comfort and competitive pricing.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  I am enormously grateful to the hon. Member for making that point about vulnerability. At a number of points where the line is singled out—not just at Dawlish—a fire can have catastrophic consequences for the thousands of people seeking to travel on that day. One of my members of staff attempted to travel from Bristol down to the Lizard yesterday afternoon, and instead of that journey taking three hours it took over 11 hours. So often we hear those stories, especially about travelling to the far west of Cornwall—the further west we go, the more affected we are by those vulnerabilities. My message to the Minister is that if we are to invest in the future of rail, what we really want is reliability, comfort, low pricing and space for people’s luggage. I know that the business community in Plymouth has previously lobbied to say, “If only we could take half an hour off the journey, it would change the economic perception of the city,” but taking half an hour off a five-hour journey means nothing to people in the far west of Cornwall. We also want reliability on the services so that the toilets do not constantly break down and people do not have to sit in the vestibule.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  Indeed, I was going to come to that point. Busy Members of Parliament, or other people engaged in busy lives, sat on that train do not want those five hours to be dead time in the working day. Reliable wi-fi services can allow people to continue their working days with online meetings and communication as they travel. However, at present, on the vast majority of services the wi-fi is often interrupted and is very unreliable. In contrast to the many billions of pounds required to achieve the HS2 standards set by successive Governments for north-south connectivity, in many parts of the country it would cost significantly less—many millions of pounds—to achieve the kind of comfort, resilience, reliability, superfast wi-fi and competitive pricing that I have described to the Minister this evening.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  We have had a good debate and I am pleased that the Backbench Business Committee has permitted us to have it. It is clear that although we have aired so many of the issues today, there are still matters to be resolved. The Minister has helpfully addressed the Government’s position on the points that I raised at the beginning of the debate. Some should be part of an ongoing dialogue with Members who have been affected by the significant changes in banking services over the last decade and are therefore conversant with the impact it is having on constituents. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (David Williams) strongly and articulately argued the case for improved services in his constituency. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) did the same. Their examples illustrate that much more work is needed to improve accessibility to banking services, particularly for the most vulnerable and the digitally excluded.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  I did.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the accessibility of banking services. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for permitting me the opportunity to raise the issues and concerns about access to banking services across the country and in our communities. These are nationwide concerns, and the issue vexes many MPs and constituents—certainly in my constituency, where a large number of banks have closed in the last decade. Many people, particularly the digitally excluded and the most vulnerable, have been left in extremely difficult circumstances. My relationship with banking is rather rudimentary, and I hope that those more engaged in debates on banking and financial services will tolerate my rudimentary dialogue on this issue; it is not one of my specialist subjects by any means, as I think will become apparent. Nevertheless, as a Member of Parliament, I have taken a very close interest in this issue, largely provoked by the closure in January this year of a bank in my constituency —in Penzance, west Cornwall. That has had a rather offensive impact on the town. I am also concerned about the rather high-handed manner in which this closure was carried out, without any consultation—simply an announcement that was then followed through. I was shocked by the impact and many resulting factors of the closure, as well as the dismissive attitude of the bank when it came to that impact on some of the most vulnerable, disabled and digitally excluded people in the community. I have had a nine-year sabbatical from this place; when I was here previously, I did not face these issues as there were not any bank closures. There have been significant closures since. I was surprised at the dialogue and the attitude of the high-street bank—in this case, Lloyds. I declare an interest in that I was a loyal Lloyds customer until last week; I had been for more than the last half century. I have been so dismayed by the attitude and approach of the bank to this closure that I have withdrawn all my custom and taken it elsewhere, and the bank knows it. The same applies to many in the Penzance area of my constituency. When it announced the closure, the bank promised the local community a community banker who would come for one day every fortnight into a public building to offer an alternative service to help those people who needed face-to-face banking. I have had the following information from a constituent who attended one of those sessions very recently; they have only just been set up. The hub, held in St John’s Hall, a local authority building in Penzance, consisted of one community banker, with equipment in a very large room; no cash or notes were available, only advice. There were 28 people queueing to see the community banker, waiting in a very public place in an echoey room; there is no confidentiality there. The first two people waiting were in the meeting room for one hour—20 people stayed; eight left because they could not wait any longer. This person’s wife arrived at 9 am and arrived back home just before 12 midday, having walked to and fro. It was a total shambles, which shows the disregard Lloyds has for people. The next time the community banker arrives, which is apparently now in three weeks’ time, the hub will be held upstairs, which is not good for older and disabled people. The nearby post office at St Clare could not dispense any cash during that time because the system was down, including the cashpoint outside the post office. Lloyds has recently stopped people from cashing cheques at post offices as well, so banking services that should be and have been provided to people have been withdrawn. According to Fair4All Finance, more than 20 million people across the UK are in “financially vulnerable circumstances”. One in 10 people has no savings, and 21% have less than £1,000 in savings—nearly a third of our population are in extremely financially vulnerable situations: just one or two pay packets away from homelessness. Nearly 2 million people have used an unlicensed lender or loan shark in the last year, and 4.5 million people in financial vulnerability prefer face-to-face banking with a person. The issue has grown in urgency in many parts of the country. Access to in-person banking should be an essential public service. Closures affect people’s financial security, local economies, small business survival, digital inclusion, and the independence and dignity of older and disabled people. The Minister will no doubt refer to the fact that banking hubs have replaced the banks, which have all been removed from towns, falling like a house of cards. However, having looked at the services available through hubs, I have to say that they are very limited in scope. I wonder about their sustainability in the longer run.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  At the end of the day, the issue is that the FCA and Link primarily undertake an assessment of access to cash, and not to the full range of banking services. The Minister says that adequate alternatives are in place. Of course, the banks will no doubt attempt to put some facade in place to satisfy that requirement—as she notes, I am unimpressed by the case in Penzance—but fundamentally, the test is access to cash, and that is insufficient. Surely that measure needs to be significantly widened.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  I want to make sure that the Minister understands that I was simply describing what the community banker working on behalf of Lloyds was providing. I was referring to the Lloyds replacement for the closed branch, not a banking hub.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  I do not know whether that is permitted or not, but I will if the Chair allows it.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  I do not wish to reopen the debate. I have no summed up a debate before so I was uncertain about the procedure; thank you, Mr Western, for your advice. I will not accept any further interventions and will bring my remarks to a close as soon as I can. The hon. Member for Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch (Katrina Murray) made a telling contribution talking about the impact the situation is having on customers seeking support from banks. Very often, the banks have designed centralised systems for the convenience of the banks themselves, rather than for the customers. They seem to be retreating behind the digital and electronic walls of the bank, and not making themselves available to offer advice to people who really want to be able to eyeball people and see them face to face to get those services. Fundamentally, my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) illustrated how what is going on epitomises the widening inequality in this country. A chief executive of a bank runs off with £17 million. The big banks are creaming it on the back of the massive tax advantage that they have in these circumstances. On the other hand, the poorest in our society have been pushed out from these banks, and it has been made significantly more difficult for them to get access to banking services and support. The issue epitomises the widening inequality in society and people’s digital exclusion. That is why I hope that a Labour Government, working with Liberal Democrats who share the same values, would address these issues, and not simply allow the banks to get away with what I consider to be blue murder. I am grateful to the Minister, and I hope that the conversation can continue. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the accessibility of banking services.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  I strongly agree with my hon. and gallant Friend. I will come to questions to the Minister in a moment; I believe that the Government need to look at the robustness and sustainability of those services. What has been put in the place of banks is rather flimsy in the longer term, and that represents a risk to the future of financial services, which are essential, particularly for the most vulnerable and digitally excluded in our society. It is worth reflecting that Members of Parliament using digital technologies perhaps do not entirely comprehend how difficult that is for some people. I am not one of the most IT-savvy people on the planet by any means, so I sympathise with those people to a certain extent. Even when someone gets on top of the electronic capacity required to use electronic services, the services often still contain degrees of linguistic ambiguity that leave even the most intelligent and educated among us rather confused. Unless someone can speak to a human being, that ambiguity remains and the inaccessibility of those services continues as well. It is not just the electronics, but the fact that someone cannot ask anyone who has designed the system what on earth they mean by the options available. I am surprised that the review of access to financial services has been reduced to an assessment of merely cash. That is what the regulations seem to say. My hon. and gallant Friend suggested that the Government need to look at this again, and I hope they will. The framework designed to protect communities from losing central banking services is far too narrowly focused. Current legislation and regulatory oversight look almost exclusively at access to cash, but needs to look at access to banking, banking advice, account advice and other services. Even Link’s formal assessments openly state that it does not consider access to more complex banking needs. It allows banks to close branches even when communities remain deeply dependent on face-to-face support, as we found in the case of Penzance, which I mentioned earlier. I ask the Minister to extend the regulatory framework, including the 2023 Act, which my hon. and gallant Friend has referred to already, so that it protects access to banking and not just cash; so that it strengthens and widens the FCA’s role to ensure that local impact, equality analysis and access to banking services more widely are mandatory considerations before closures are permitted to go ahead; so that it requires realistic travel assessments for rural and island communities; so that it improves standards and the roll-out of service standards for banking hubs; and so that it considers proportionate service obligations on banks, not least because these banks are, after all, too big to fail. In 2008, Lloyds was bailed out to the tune of more than £20 billion of taxpayers’ money. The bank says in its branding that it is “By Your Side”—but apparently only until it finds that to be unsuitable: an empty branding slogan, one is bound to observe. I hope the Minister looks at this issue. It is a matter not of consumer choice, but consumer displacement. Around 14% of adults in financially vulnerable communities in the UK—that is 2.8 million people—live in rural areas, and the rural nature and travel involved need to be considered, too.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Banking Services: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member makes a pertinent and relevant point. That is why these matters need to be taken into account; it cannot be purely about access to cash, which is all that Link currently needs to consider. As long as there is an ATM in some corner within a mile or two of someone’s community, that is deemed to be sufficient to justify any bank closing anywhere. However, it is not sufficient. Now that the Penzance branch has closed, of the 39 Lloyds branches in Cornwall and on the Isles of Scilly, only two are left in Cornwall. People on the Isles of Scilly have to travel by ferry, paying £220 for a return ticket to the mainland—as well as for an overnight stay and a two-hour bus ride to Truro and back—to get access to face-to-face banking. That is the reality my constituents face to get access to the services. Why are face-to-face transactions important? They are important for identity verification, resolution of fraud or scams, handling significant disputes or matters of banking interpretation, complex account queries, CHAPS and international payments, business cash deposits, and change-giving services. They are also important when there are bereavement or probate matters, as well as for community organisations, when counter-signatories are required, and for sports clubs and voluntary organisations. Those things are absolutely essential to the life of such organisations. I am conscious of time; although I could say a great deal more on this important issue, I want to make sure that other hon. Members have an opportunity. Since 2015, around 6,700 branches—68% of the whole banking network—have closed. That is significant, and the impact on our communities has been fundamental and wide-ranging. On the day in January this year that Lloyds decided to close its Penzance branch, the bank had been in the most iconic building in the centre of our town, Market House, for literally 100 years. It was still serving 33,000 customers. Twenty-nine per cent of those local customers used the branch exclusively, and more than 1,000 regular weekly users—around one in 20 of the town’s residents—relied on it. The local population is older than the average and, as I mentioned, there was no consultation on the closure. Banks are able simply to ignore those facts. Another pattern is that the banks will refer to the significant increase in people using apps, online banking, telephone banking and other alternatives to the face-to-face banking available on the high street. Often, that increase is a result of enforcement by the banks themselves; they fail to take into account that it results from their policy of making it difficult for people to use face-to-face services. Indeed, when customers go through the front door of branches that the banks are trying to close down, they are often met by someone who triages them out of the door again, to go and use an app or online service that they do not want to use. The banks are creating the circumstances in which they can justify closing branches. I hope that the Minister will consider strengthening the regulations, recognising the limitations that exist, and challenging the banks on the services they are providing, as well as the dismissive way in which they ignore the most vulnerable in society—the people who will be suffering the most. In towns such as Penzance, the impact on the viability of the town is significant. When high street banks have closed in other towns, footfall—the lifeblood of commerce in the centre of a market town—has been significantly depleted as a result. That is certainly one of the great fears in Penzance if the other bank branches fall like a house of cards after the closure of Lloyds. We are trying to stop that by demanding that the other banks demonstrate their loyalty to the town. One by one, we are getting them to commit their loyalty, but only for a limited period, up to 2030; we need to go way beyond that. I hope that my comments have helped to set the debate up for others to contribute, and I hope that the Minister is listening.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Isles of Scilly: Transport · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who leads me on to my next point. Although he says that we are all in the same boat—if you will pardon the pun, Madam Deputy Speaker—the fact is that we are not. Services in Scotland are very heavily subsidised, as I will explain. When we look for parity and comparability, the services offered for the Isles of Scilly and for Scottish islands are significantly different. Of course, the Isles of Scilly have the additional challenge of being some 40 miles off the coast. I do not know how many miles the Isle of Wight is off the coast—is it 1.5, 2 or 3 miles? It is certainly a very short journey. In addition, because of the numbers of passengers going in that direction, the costs are obviously significantly less than for those on the Isles of Scilly. The costs and prices for passenger transport, freight and indeed air transport for the Scottish islands are, in most cases, very heavily subsidised. I know that the UK Government are not responsible for the practices of the Scottish Government, but it was their responsibility prior to devolution, and indeed that is when the policy was established. The Minister may attempt to distance himself from something that is not the responsibility of the UK Government and hide behind that, but it was their responsibility originally, and that left a legacy that has given Scotland significant advantages. There is no equivalent of the £3 bus fare for the Isles of Scilly—it is a £120 return, as we have just heard. There is no subsidised air travel, either. The entire economy depends very much on tourism, and tourism depends on travel. In those circumstances, we hope that the Isles of Scilly will be treated fairly. There are very high freight costs, and the costs of getting food and other essential services to the islands are therefore very significant. My ask of the Minister is that he works with me, the council, transport providers and others to alleviate these pressures by finding an agreeable way to provide support to reduce these costs of living.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Isles of Scilly: Transport · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased that the hon. Member and his family have strong connections with the islands, but I caution him against describing them as the Scilly Isles—he will not be well received on the islands if he uses that particular nomenclature—but, certainly, if he continues to call them the Isles of Scilly, I am sure that he will be very well received. His offer of working with me and the islanders—the Scillonians—will also be well received, and I am very grateful to him for it. Transport Scotland, an agency of the Scottish Government, subsidises most routes to islands in the Hebrides through a contract with Caledonian MacBrayne —CalMac—which is owned by the Scottish Government. The islands are also served by several other routes, some of which are subsidised by local authorities, and a handful are served without subsidy by private operators. The Scottish Government have supported the sector since the 1960s. They have been obliged to tender for services since the late 1990s, to comply with state aid regulations. That has altered the ownership structures of what remains a state owned and operated set of services. Approximately 70% of CalMac’s revenues come from the Scottish Government. It is often said that for every pound paid by a ferry user, another £2 of public subsidy is required. By contrast, passenger services between the mainland and the Isles of Scilly have always been operated on a commercial basis, with the exception of during the covid pandemic, when, like all companies around the country, it was subsidised. Certainly, this was seen as a lifeline service by the Government. The Isles of Scilly Steamship Group, the primary operator of the transport services to the Isles of Scilly, operates Scillonian III, which is now in its 49th year and will be replaced next year by the Scillonian IV. Indeed, it was purchased in the 1960s with a Government loan of £1 million during the period when Harold Wilson, who was a resident of St Mary’s, was Prime Minister. That did help the company purchase that vessel at that time. As the Minister will know, Harold Wilson is buried on St Mary’s, and his love and affection for the islands are well known. The ISSG operates that important lifeline link to the Isles of Scilly, but only during the summer months; it cannot operate during the winter because of the inclement conditions. The ISSG offers concessionary fares for islanders through its “travel club”, as it calls it, which is a way of building and rewarding loyalty. However, it is seen by others that somehow this service is being subsidised by visitors to the islands. We do not want to get into a situation where we discourage visitors to the islands. However, it is worth pointing out—I checked this online today—that if we were to book a return fare on the ferry from Penzance to the Isles of Scilly, which is a three-hour journey, more or less, on a 40 mile trip, that would cost around £220. If we were to catch a ferry from Mallaig to Canna, approximately 30 miles in Scotland, that journey would cost £14.20. If we were to go from Kennacraig to Port Askaig—Isla—the two-hour journey would cost £18. The comparison is something on which we need to reflect. It is worth saying that most ferry services in England, such as the ferries to the Isle of Wight, are operated by private operators, just as they are on the Isles of Scilly, and receive no central Government grant or funding. There are other examples of publicly owned ferries in the UK, and between the UK and the Isle of Man. On Merseyside, Mersey Ferries is effectively owned by the local transport authority, Liverpool City Region combined authority. In 2018, the Government of the Isle of Man brought into public ownership the Isle of Man Steam Packet Company, which operates ferries between the Isle of Man, the UK and Ireland. The Isle of Man Government do not control the day-to-day running of the company’s ferries, but they do own a 100% stake in its parent company. I have referred already to inter-island transport and the costs and made comparisons with the subsidies available to local authorities and passengers elsewhere. As I say, there is not an equivalent to the £3 bus fare, nor is there free transport for older people. This means that islanders have a significantly increased cost of living. While the Isles of Scilly council is responsible for transport and the economic strategy as a member of the Isles of Scilly transport board, which also includes representatives of the transport providers and business groups, the council’s strategic economic plan—“Island Futures”—includes a core aim to “improve transport connectivity across the islands and to the mainland”. In relation to connectivity, the strategy aims to secure “resilient, year-round transport services to Cornwall and further afield”. It recognises that improving transport connectivity is a “major challenge”—that is an understatement—and aims to make the islands more self-sufficient and resilient to future changes, including in relation to transport connectivity and between the islands. There are other matters that complicate and worsen the situation for the Isles of Scilly. Its council is responsible for running the airport. It is a very small council, with a budget of £8.8 million, but it has to run a fully regulated airport, which is a lifeline service. I understand that its landing fees are due to increase 18% this year simply to meet the pure costs of the regulatory challenges. The transport operators are complaining about this, and understandably so—it is a great expense. When I was last in Parliament, the European geostationary navigation overlay service system—Europe’s satellite-based augmentation system that ensures safe use of the services—was in operation. One of the many so-called Brexit benefits is that we can no longer use the European safe satellite system. It has been withdrawn, so the services have become less resilient and more weather-dependent than they were just 10 years ago. So even where a system is in operation, it is struggling. The Minister will also know that the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company has expressed concern about the expansion of the emissions trading scheme. While we want to have cleaner atmospheres, the question is about the proportionate impact this scheme is likely to have. Initially, it will apply to vessels with a gross tonnage of over 5,000 from 1 June this year, and then to vessels with a gross tonnage of over 400 from 2028, which will add cost to the service. It would be helpful if the Minister talked to the steamship company, but I know that he is addressing this issue, which is very helpful—I do appreciate that. Help has been provided. As part of the previous Government’s levelling-up programme, £48.4 million was offered to create a new vessel. Indeed, when I was elected other subsidies were available, but unfortunately it was not always possible to get the operator of the service—the steamship company—to agree to use those funds in the way that they were offered. I know that the Minister has responded, in correspondence and in meetings, about how the English national concessionary travel scheme is supposed to operate, but we do not have buses between the off-islands and the main island, so it is absurd to attempt to apply mainland, landlocked transport policies to a maritime environment such as the Isles of Scilly. I urge him to look at that again. He goes on to tell me that the local authority can provide concessions, but the council of the Isles of Scilly is struggling to survive, let alone being able to provide additional concessions for its transport services. I hope that the Minister will look again at these matters. The recommended policies that we ask the Minister to consider are: extending the powers under the Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007 to classify inter-island boating as eligible public passenger transport; beginning a pilot scheme with the Isles of Scilly, perhaps during next winter; and seeing how we get on and evaluate it after a 12-month period. We could create an islands transport mechanism, equivalent to the Scottish air discount scheme or ferry support services, and establish a statutory footing for island-appropriate subsidy powers. We could provide emissions trading scheme transitional relief for lifeline routes and describe the service to the Isles of Scilly as such a route to prevent fare spikes when the ETS comes into force. We could also support harbour electrification for Penzance and St Mary’s. I am grateful to the Minister for responding to the issues that I have raised previously and I hope that he will take on board the issues that I have raised today. I am delighted to say that the chair of the council of the Isles of Scilly, Councillor Robert Francis, is in the Public Gallery watching this debate, and he will be as keen as I am to continue the conversation with the Minister after the debate, as it is desperately important that we address the very serious transport challenges that Scillonians face.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Isles of Scilly: Transport · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for that clarification; I am sure that it will be music to the ears of the steamship company. Going back to the point about Artemis, which is exciting—I congratulate the Government for investing in it—is there any indication of the timescale for any roll-out that might benefit the Isles of Scilly?

• 17 Mar 2026 · Isles of Scilly: Transport · Hansard source

  More

  To a certain extent, the Minister has implied the answer to this, but of course he is well aware that a bus cannot drive between the off-islands and St Mary’s—though there might be some inventive way in which someone could do such a thing. He must accept that if one is looking for parity between the Isles of Scilly and the mainland, one must recognise that we cannot have an open bus service. There are boats and launches that go between the islands—and yes, anyone can use them. Surely there must be a way of finding a parallel for the Isles of Scilly.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Isles of Scilly: Transport · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to have secured this debate, and I am sure the Minister is delighted that we have reached the Adjournment at a point when we have ample time to explore the important issues of transport to and between the Isles of Scilly. There is, frankly, a shocking injustice. Scillonian residents have been treated as second-class citizens when it comes to affordable transport, especially when compared to everywhere else in the United Kingdom. I hope the Minister will acknowledge that point, take it on board and consider working with me, the council of the Isles of Scilly and the residents to ensure islanders receive parity on public transport, which other parts of the country take for granted. Some places struggle with transport, particularly in rural areas, but the circumstances are very different in the Isles of Scilly. This is not the first time I have secured a debate of this kind. For example, I raised these issues in Westminster Hall on 8 January 2002—column 158, to help the Hansard Reporters—and on 15 January 2003, and on many other occasions since. I raised these issues outside the House even during my nine sabbatical years away because of the injustice. Some improvements have been made, but services have also gone backwards. One example comes from one of my constituents on one of the four off-islands. There are four inhabited off-islands in the Isles of Scilly—St Agnes, Bryher, Tresco and St Martin’s—and one main island, St Mary’s. To get over to the main island of St Mary’s, where all the services operate—the hospital, other medical services and the council—residents from the off-islands need to get across waters that are sometimes very tempestuous. This constituent says: “I broke my wrist…recently, and because there was no bone showing through my arm I had to wait 5 days to see medical personnel, have it x-rayed and put in plaster. I have had a medical procedure which involved 2 daily visits” from this off-island “to St Marys Health Centre but fortunately it was summer. If this was in the winter, I would had to have paid £240.00 just for the boating” to and fro each time—it is a £120 return trip—as residents have no alternative but to book what are known as “specials” to attend an X-ray appointment or medical appointment or to visit an elderly resident, friend or family member in St Mary’s hospital. “This again is £120.00 return. There has also been a cut back of transport funding for the under-five nursery services and clubs like the Brownies and so the list goes on and on, of all the problems that the residents of St Martins”— where this constituent lives— “are facing due to the lack of affordable boating.”

• 11 Mar 2026 · Royal Mail: Universal Service Obligation · Hansard source

  More

  On Monday, it was my privilege to visit the Helston sorting office, where I discovered staff burdened with remote, counterproductive micromanagement of their work and inadequate plans to deal with the inevitability of staff absences. I was distressed to hear them describe that they had been abused and threatened when undertaking their work on the frontline. Does the Minister agree that frontline workers should be praised and have management systems that empower them to resolve matters locally?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Extreme Climate and Weather Events: National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member mentioned Storm Goretti. She and I attended the online meeting on storm recovery with Ministers two days after the event. What troubled me in that meeting was the culture that exists among service providers, and indeed Government Departments, of always seeking to reassure Ministers that everything is under control and presenting a very different picture from the one that I was seeing on the ground in west Cornwall, where my constituency was the worst hit. Does she agree that, following Storm Goretti, we need to ensure that we genuinely learn lessons about what actually happened on the ground and how we can recover best and put the right resources in place to help communities in future?

• 26 Feb 2026 · Parthenon Sculptures · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the Minister for that response, and I should declare an interest as the chair of the British Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures over the last 20 years. The British Museum’s planned redevelopment will necessitate its board agreeing the relocation of many of its exhibits, including the Parthenon sculptures. In the light of that, it is suggested that the time is right for the museum, with the consent and constructive support of Government, to facilitate an exhibition of those sculptures in the Acropolis Museum in Athens where they can be displayed alongside other artefacts. Does the Minister agree that should such a project be agreed by the museum, it would enhance the reputation of the United Kingdom as it would be seen as a gracious act between two nations that are long-term international allies?

• 26 Feb 2026 · Parthenon Sculptures · Hansard source

  More

  8. What discussions she has had with her counterpart in the Hellenic Republic on the future management of the Parthenon sculptures.

• 25 Feb 2026 · Post Office Green Paper · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the statement, and I welcomed the opportunity to meet the Minister to discuss these issues. A lot of people are talking about either reopening post offices—indeed, the Post Office want to see them reopen—or avoiding closure, and he knows that it all comes down to remuneration. As he will have heard, a post office operator needs to sell at least 450 stamps every hour just to achieve the national minimum wage level of remuneration. That clearly is the reason why in Porthleven and Newlyn, where the Post Office want to reopen post offices, no one is interested in taking on those services. What can the Government do to ensure that the remuneration is sufficient to ensure that the network targets he has outlined can be achieved?

• 24 Feb 2026 · Gaza Healthcare System · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is making a magnificent contribution to the debate. The hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) talked about the imminent departure of aid agencies from Gaza, which has been forced by the Israeli regime. A lot of international aid workers have been into Gaza—one from Cornwall, Jim Henderson, was killed by the IDF in 2024. Does the hon. Lady accept that we need to open up Gaza to those aid workers and to get the IDF out?