Andrew Snowden MP: speeches

Speeches

• 8 Jan 2026 · Road Safety Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her time in discussing these issues. As a former police and crime commissioner who funded a dedicated roads policing unit, this issue is close to my heart. I wish to make two points about drink and drug-driving. First, I fear that reducing the alcohol limit for England and Wales is potentially a red herring policy that will distract from focusing on where the real harm and damage comes: from those who ignore the drink-drive limit no matter what it is. Secondly, I thank the Minister for the focus on drug-driving. This year, after their Christmas operations, police forces will be reporting more drug than drink detections for the first time. It is good that that is being detected, but it is scratching the surface of the problem and we must focus in on those who take drugs and drive cars. I would welcome any further details from the Minister on the specifics so that we can start doing that as soon as possible and get those people off our roads.

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

  More

  Twelve out of the 15 constituencies in Lancashire benefited from the Pride in Place scheme, I believe, but people may not be surprised to learn that Fylde, the only Conservative constituency in Lancashire, was not on the list. We will not let that deter us, however, because we have pride in our place and ambitions for it, whether that be the pier link, the Island site in St Annes, the public realm improvements we want to make in Lytham and Poulton, or reopening the derelict Kirkham baths. Can we have a statement from the Government about how those areas that have been left behind and are not in the Pride in Place scheme can attract investment to continue to improve their towns and villages?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Earlier, one of the Ministers dodged a very straightforward but important question, so will the Secretary of State now set the record straight? Do the Government have any plans that would change the scope, funding or timelines for Northern Powerhouse Rail—yes or no?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. From Fylde to Chorley, a very warm Lancastrian merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker. I went out to meet some of the farmers who came down for the latest protest this week, and having listened to the answers from Front Benchers today, I wanted to clear up a little confusion. They are aware that those farmers do not keep coming down to thank them, are they not?

• 17 Dec 2025 · Points of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In a written answer on 9 December 2025 to a parliamentary question that I had submitted, the Treasury stated explicitly that it had not opened any new inquiries into child benefit eligibility in the context of the serious errors in a trial of data sharing between the Home Office and the Treasury. However, I have recently seen correspondence between the press team at His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and journalists that directly contradicts the answer given through the Table Office, with HMRC’s press office stating that the programme was not paused and that therefore new inquiries were continuing. As both things cannot be true at the same time, can you give me advice and guidance, Madam Deputy Speaker, on how the official record can be urgently set straight?

• 17 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q9. As the ghost of Christmas past scoops up the Prime Minister from his slumber in No. 10 this year, I wonder what he will show him on Christmas Eve. Maybe it will be the devastated family farmer putting up the “For Sale” sign in the yard, or the children hugging each other as their independent school closes, or any of the 100,000 hospitality workers who have lost their jobs, or the millions of families who are trying to work out how they will pay their tax bills to fund the ever growing welfare state. Is it any wonder that the ghost of Christmas future has given up on this Prime Minister, and all that is left is for him to get his bag of coal from Santa and his P45 from his own MPs?

• 16 Dec 2025 · Open Prisons: Rehabilitation Placements · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with what the Minister just said, but through the early release programme, and given the “third, third, third” model that the Government want to introduce to split sentencing in custody, prisons such as Kirkham in my constituency in Lancashire are seeing a much higher turnover among their open prison population; prisoners are increasingly serving shorter sentences and in such prisons for much shorter periods. They are effectively becoming cat C prisons but without the walls, the security or the resources. We are concerned about the knock-on effect that that will have on the ability to run rehabilitation programmes, which are designed for significant amounts of time at the end of prisoners’ sentences. What additional resources will the Government put in place to support rehabilitation programmes in open prisons?

• 16 Dec 2025 · Open Prisons: Rehabilitation Placements · Hansard source

  More

  12. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of short placements in open prisons on the effectiveness of rehabilitation programmes.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Kashmir: Self-determination · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I know this is a matter in which the hon. Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain) has long taken an interest, as have many hon. Members here today. I thank him for securing this debate. Although we might not agree on the way forward to finding a resolution, it is undeniable that he spoke with passion and clear personal conviction. I thank him for his contribution, even though he might not thank me for mine. However, I have some questions for the Minister that he will be happy with, even if we might be looking for different answers. I also thank the hon. Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) for his contribution, which provided a clear and concise history and a reminder of the complex and confrontational timeline of events. It was helpful context and brought some balance to the debate. I note the work of my colleagues, the hon. Members for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) and for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams). As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Sri Lanka, I know that being an officer of a country-related APPG is no small task. The hon. Members’ commitment to this area deserves recognition. The position of His Majesty’s loyal Opposition on Kashmir remains as it did when we were in government. It has been the long-standing position of the United Kingdom that it must be for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution on Kashmir. It is not appropriate for the UK to prescribe solutions. We are respectful of the governance of those two Commonwealth countries and are very conscious of history. Of course, we have a strong interest in regional stability and peace, so it is right that all British Governments engage to encourage both India and Pakistan into dialogue to find a lasting diplomatic solution. Clearly, we never want to see inflamed tensions continue between the two. Can the Minister confirm that this remains the UK Government’s position? What recent diplomatic efforts have the Government made on that front? This has been a very difficult year in the region with the murderous, violent terrorism that took place in April, which is sadly part of a long-standing pattern of attacks on civilians and visitors to the region and minority communities. The House will be well aware of the consequences that this act of terrorism subsequently triggered across the border region. I know this period has also been hard for the diaspora communities, particularly those in the UK. That all underscores the importance of tackling terrorism and fostering peace and stability. Can the Minister update the House on what practical steps the Government have taken on the security front since the spring? How will they continue to try to ease tensions between India and Pakistan? It would be helpful to know what recent discussions the Minister has had to this end with counterparts from our key allies. What measures are the Government taking to prevent scenarios that could cause tensions to escalate among communities in the UK? The House will be well aware of the economic challenges in the region, including those particular to Pakistan. What steps are the Government taking to encourage steps to address the economic pressures in Kashmir, including reforms to ensure sustainable growth? Can the Minister set out the Government’s position on official development assistance in Kashmir? Can he also tell us what assessment he has made of the level of investment by China in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, what the investment pipeline looks like, and China’s long-term perspective and goals when it comes to the region? This issue is for India and Pakistan. It is not for the House or this Government to prescribe actions to either of those Governments. What should motivate us all is a peaceful vision where Kashmiris enjoy stability and prosperity.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Cyber-attacks: Global Response · Hansard source

  More

  The whole House and country should rightly be concerned about cyber-attacks, from malign cyber-activity directed at MPs and the Electorate Commission, to Chinese companies linked to global malicious cyber-campaigns. When will this Government stand up to China and address this threat? When will they send a strong message to the Chinese Communist party by blocking its super-embassy application and finally placing China on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme?

• 20 Nov 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The 1 to 7 December is Crohn’s and Colitis Awareness Week, which is run by Crohn’s & Colitis UK to raise awareness and generate conversations about what it is like to live with the condition. Many Members in this House will know people—and they will certainly have constituents—who suffer with this condition but never talk about it, because of the stigma around talking about things relating to our bowels. Most people dismiss it as an irritable bowel or something to do with diarrhoea, when in fact it is crippling internal ulcers that generate internal bleeding and blood clots. I have watched my brave wife battle this condition for over 10 years, including two life-changing surgeries, the last of which required nine hours in theatre. This disease is crippling and debilitating, and awareness of it is still, sadly, very low. Would the Leader of the House be willing to work across Government to look at how we in this House and the Government can work with Crohn’s & Colitis UK on its awareness week, so that we can all play our role in raising awareness of what this condition really is?

• 20 Nov 2025 · Separation Centres: Terrorist Offenders · Hansard source

  More

  Hashem Abedi was in a separation centre at HMP Frankland when he attacked three prison officers with hot cooking oil. Under these rulings and interventions by European courts, determining the human rights of convicted and violent terrorists, does the Minister really think that it would be appropriate for this individual to be given access to a kitchen?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  That is the nub of the argument about why this debate is about sovereign capability. While there will be balance—I will come on to the difference in capabilities between the aircraft, as raised by the hon. Member for Swindon North (Will Stone)—this is about maintaining a sovereign capability that, once gone, would take a generation to bring back. This goes beyond jobs. To maintain and develop our sovereign capability, the RAF needs to be investing in, using and supporting the development of Typhoon. The RAF needs to be fully bought into its development: working with BAE systems on future orders, defining new requirements and capabilities, and enabling the development of future generations of the aircraft—a role only the RAF can truly play. The 6,000 jobs at the Warton site make up a workforce who, if lost, take our sovereign capability with them. The only way to secure the site to allow the time to secure multiple export orders was to place the order for the RAF as part of the strategic defence review. This also made sense because it would have boosted the export campaign itself—it is a pretty hard sell to make when we are not even buying it ourselves. Someone I spoke to about the export campaign said that one of the first questions they always get asked is, “Are you buying it yourselves?” What kind of message does it send to say, “Please buy our fighters while we go to buy somebody else’s”? To go back to the need to bridge the period between now and Tempest coming live, it is important to note that Tempest will not replace Typhoon. The point is simply that the site is secured by the order book for the new aircraft going live. We will still need the more agile fighter jet category that Typhoon occupies, as the different aircraft will perform differing air combat roles. As one person from the military described it to me: “Tempest is the big, bad aircraft that has the tech and payload to blast into the battlefield and establish air superiority. The role of future generations of Typhoon is to then clear up, run smaller missions and maintain that air superiority.” That makes it even more critical that the RAF and the Government remain bought into the continued development of Typhoon. They must place regular new orders, in addition to carrying out refurbishment, as we will need that sovereign capability for generations to come alongside Tempest. If we continue to erode the skills base, with investment and innovation in favour of paying for America to develop and maintain its own sovereign capability instead, ours will wither as a result of the UK’s short sightedness. That is why I have been like a dog with a bone about this issue since getting elected. It has been obvious over the past few years that the decision about the order of the 25 Typhoon jets would fall on whoever was in power when the next big defence review was conducted. To address the hon. Member for Swindon North’s intervention, I had hoped that the review would take a holistic look at what placing an order would mean, not just for the RAF’s specifications and requirements but for maintaining our sovereign capability—a phrase I am deliberately using over and over again. We should count ourselves incredibly lucky as a country that we are more secure for being able to produce our own fighter jets. We should do everything at every opportunity to invest in and continue to develop and improve that capability. Instead, the order has been sent across the Atlantic, with a vote of confidence in and a significant investment cheque for another country’s sovereign capability over our own. Even if there were certain requirements, and the RAF had been led to believe that the F-35 had advantages, the investment could and should have been made in the Typhoon programme, through BAE Systems, as part of the continued development of that aircraft. That is how it is supposed to work when we make our own aircraft. But I suspect that there may have been more to it than just that. Members may be surprised to know that this is by far and away not the first time I have discussed Typhoon and Tempest in Parliament. The ebb and flow of questions and answers on this subject between me and Ministers runs through Hansard over the last 18 months. Let us take a little trip down memory lane and look at some of the timeline. We start on 7 November 2024, with a written parliamentary question to the Ministry of Defence. I simply asked whether the Department had a budget for new Typhoons in 2025-26. The then Minister for Defence Procurement, the right hon. Member for Liverpool Garston (Maria Eagle), replied: “Budget allocations for 2025-26 will be set in the usual way and informed by the findings of the Strategic Defence Review.” In a follow-up written question on 15 November 2024, I asked what steps the Department was therefore taking, given that the production line was already falling empty, to ensure that skilled workers in the defence sector were maintained. I received what can be described only as a public sector word salad of an answer, talking about partnership working and future procurement strategies, while the assembly line emptied. On 28 November, starting to get frustrated, I asked a question in business questions. I gave the long timeline of written and oral questions I had asked, trying to get answers and certainty, only to be brushed off by Minister after Minister. I was promised a meeting with the Secretary of State for Defence to discuss the Typhoon order—it never happened. On 6 January 2025, in defence questions, I asked: “Christmas came early for the UK defence industry when Spain placed an order for 25 Eurofighters on 20 December, and Italy followed suit on the 24th. But there is still nothing from the UK Government on the 25 Typhoon jets that are needed for the RAF. Will the Minister spread some festive cheer into the new year, and give us an update on where the Government are with placing that order for 25 Typhoon fighter jets—a delayed Christmas present for the UK defence industry and the RAF?” The Minister for Defence Procurement replied: “I recognise the hon. Gentleman’s point. It is certainly true that exports are important”— critically— “in addition to production for our own use.” There was then a general comment about the strategic defence review, and the Minister finished by saying: “The rest of our spend on such matters is part of the SDR. Once that is completed, there will be conclusions”— slightly obvious. She went on: “It might not be a Christmas present—I do not know when his birthday is—but a present some time later.” —[ Official Report , 6 January 2025; Vol. 759, c. 586.] “Yes,” I thought, “there it is: a hint on the Floor of the House that the order for Typhoon is coming.” It was said in the strongest possible terms without saying, “Yes, we are about to buy them. Please, just wait.”

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is giving a good speech in defence of jobs in his constituency. On the point about previous years—I touched on this in my speech—it became obvious that the next big defence review would have to be the point where the crunch decision was made on this. I echo the point—it was probably remiss of me to miss this out in my opening remarks—that placing that order and then potentially releasing it is a very good way of not only potentially boosting the export campaign, but covering the two to three-year critical gap that we have now that the assembly line will be empty. I thank the hon. Member for making that point.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Typhoon fighter sovereign capability. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I requested this debate as an opportunity to have the time and space for a more in-depth discussion about securing the future of our sovereign capability in air combat, with the most pressing element being the production of Typhoon fighters at the BAE Systems Warton site in my constituency. The skilled workforce and cutting-edge technology that make Warton the world-leading facility that it is have taken decades and billions of pounds of investment to develop and maintain. As I go around my constituency, I meet families who now have three generations working at the site and dedicating their careers to it. When we combine the number of jobs provided to local people with all those who have moved to Fylde to work in the critical defence sector, it is easy to understand why it is such an emotive subject. Their service, ingenuity, skill and determination over generations of workers has built a truly impressive sovereign capability.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  Forgive me; the hon. Lady will gather from my accent that I will have a slight Lancashire bias in this debate. However, it is obvious from the stats that BAE Systems produces on economic impact and jobs that the supply chain—all those who contribute to the production of Typhoons—is spread across the country. It is a nationwide effort to maintain this sovereign capability. Very few countries in the world can boast the ability to fully assemble their own world-class fighter jets. In an ever-more unpredictable, hostile and dangerous world, we are reminded of why having such assets and abilities is so important. Before I go any further, I would like to take this opportunity to place on the record again my thanks on behalf of Fylde, Lancashire and the whole country for all the work that has gone into securing the Turkey Typhoon order, which is one of a number of potential deals that has been in the making for several years. Indeed, my hon. Friend the Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) recalled to me the standing weekly meetings that were held in the Ministry of Defence during his time as the Minister for Defence Procurement, to keep the pressure on and the momentum going to secure export orders. His and others’ work was critical in overcoming our German partners’ objections to exporting Typhoon to certain countries, and the recent deal would not have been possible without that significant amount of work. The new Government clearly picked up the mantle with vigour and determination to get the deal over the line. There is plenty of glory and praise to go around for everyone. It is a major boost that has been warmly welcomed in Fylde and Lancashire, but we all know from the history of the Eurofighter programme, and Tornado before it, that export orders alone cannot sustain it. While everyone involved in the deal should take time to pat themselves on the back, there is significantly more work to be done before anyone can rest easy that this sovereign capability is secured into the next generation. To put this into sharp context, we are now the only partner in the Eurofighter programme that is not purchasing Eurofighter. Not only that, but the Government have made an active decision to purchase 25 American F-35s instead of British Typhoons. Along with many people right across Lancashire, local businesses and the unions, I am utterly perplexed and concerned by that decision.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  They do provide slightly different roles, but they have the same general one in air combat. Many people say that in aerial combat Typhoon will get the highest the quickest, and according to many pilots and those involved, that is one of the most important factors. I will address the difference in capabilities between the two aircraft later in my speech. I thank the hon. Member for his enthusiasm this early on a Wednesday morning. As I was saying, the Government’s decision has brought me into an alliance that, as a Conservative MP, I never thought I would be in: campaigning hand in glove with and on the same side as trade unions. I must say that they have put their passion and their all into standing up for the workforce that they represent in Lancashire, and I know they are watching today. Although an element of the F-35 is built by BAE in Lancashire, it is a drop in the ocean compared with what an order for 25 Typhoons would have meant for jobs and investment. The order book for F-35s is already extensive, so ironically the UK’s order will not have a noticeable impact on job security in Lancashire. In the meantime, the final Typhoons have already rolled through the assembly line at Warton. It is pretty much out of work, which is a terrifying prospect for the workforce, supply chain and community. Even with the order from Turkey, there will still be a two to three-year period when the assembly line at Warton will be sat empty, waiting. The skills on the line—not just to assemble a modern fighter jet but to certify and test its readiness for combat in simulations and live flights—are such a crucial part of our sovereign capability. To maintain the whole-cycle workforce, from production to assembly and testing, there would need to be getting on for around 100 Typhoon orders between now and the Tempest going live. That puts the need for an RAF order into perspective.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is making an excellent point. I have no objection to us having an element of F-35 within the RAF. It is important to have blended capability. The key point is that Typhoon as a platform could be developed and adapted to perform some of the roles that F-35s do. They are largely in the same frame of aircraft, in the sense that they both occupy the lighter fighter range, compared with what Tempest will be. If we are going to have Typhoon as a sister to Tempest in the future, using investment opportunities now to build, develop and change the Typhoon platform to have different variants of it would be a good way of maintaining sovereign capability.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Typhoon Fighter Sovereign Capability · Hansard source

  More

  Possibly. From January 2025 onwards, the sector press started reporting on the need for and the likelihood of a Typhoon order being placed. Then, on 2 June, the strategic defence review was published, and there was the shock announcement that the Government would not purchase Typhoon, as expected, and would purchase F-35. The question that I and so many others have is simple: what happened? I am sure the former Minister for Defence Procurement is a politician of such experience and integrity that she would not have given strong indications of a potential Typhoon order simply to get out of an awkward parliamentary question from a lowly Back Bencher such as myself, and neither would the Government would want to see expectations around a Typhoon order build in the media if they had no intention of placing one. One big thing brewing throughout that period was that the US President made it clear that if NATO allies wanted to include defence infrastructure in their 5% target, they needed to buy US military kit. If countries wanted better trade deals in the tariff wars then—you guessed it—they had better buy more hardware from the US. To conclude, I have the following concise, separate and clear questions that I and my constituents would like to be answered. First, given that the specification, lead time and price of both aircraft did not change between the Government hinting they were ordering Typhoon and their then going in the opposite direction with an order for F-35s, what changed? Secondly, have the Government ruled out placing any new Typhoon orders in this Parliament? Thirdly, given that the Turkey order will not fill the order pipeline gap, and the urgency of the situation outlined by the shadow Minister, what financial support will the Government provide to maintain the Warton site this financial year and next? Fourthly, will the Government please clearly state that they accept the principle that the lighter sister fighter aircraft to Tempest should remain a sovereign capability and, therefore, will be Typhoon? I will be grateful if the Minister would answer those questions in turn when he responds; I shall count how many answers we get. I want to finish by paying tribute to the workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire, in both Warton and Samlesbury. It is good to see cross-party representation here from MPs in Lancashire who also have dependent workforces and jobs. There is such pride in our community for the world-leading technology produced at Warton. I am so proud to see how the workforce have held it together, kept going and remained hopeful—even as the assembly line emptied—that the orders would come to keep the site going and their jobs secured. The workers I have spoken to celebrated the fact that Turkey has done its bit for Lancashire and Fylde by ordering new Typhoons; they are now waiting for their own Government to do their bit and place the order.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I thank the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for securing this debate. Given that he represents the constituency I was born and raised in, I follow his contributions in Parliament more than he probably realises. His contribution today was as knowledgeable and constructive as everybody has come to expect. I will comment on two points from his contribution. The first point is around the high street shops that we all see being used as a front for moving money, criminal gangs or hiding assets. When I was the Lancashire police and crime commissioner, that was a huge concern not only for the local communities, because of the damage it does to their high streets, but for the police in terms of being able to actually shut down different elements of organised crime gangs. The second point, which is linked to that, is the cryptocurrency element and finding out how the money—the cash—that has been generated in the UK by organised crime gangs disappears. I have sat in the room with the economic crime units of the Lancashire constabulary, looking at the cryptocurrency maps, and I could see where the dead ends suddenly appeared. I also thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) for his long-standing work in this area and his articulation of how there has been a cross-party effort for a considerable time, particularly from the 2016 G8 onwards. It is always daunting to respond from the Dispatch Box with such an esteemed and experienced colleague sitting behind me. We recognise that financial services are integral to the economies, employment and prosperity of many of our British overseas territories and Crown dependencies, as has been outlined today. The sector underpins livelihoods, sustains local public services and contributes significantly to overall trade within our shared British family, and we want to see it thrive. From Gibraltar to Bermuda, those jurisdictions have been world-class financial centres. They attract investment, foster innovation and connect our economies to global markets. That success should be celebrated and, of course, accompanied by sound regulation and transparency to ensure that success can continue. Registers of beneficial ownership have been one of the most powerful tools in our fight against economic crime. They have enabled law enforcement here in the UK and in our overseas territories to track and expose those who seek to abuse our financial systems for criminal gain. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, those registers have been vital in tracing hidden assets, enforcing sanctions and going after dirty money, but there is clearly much more work to do on successfully and fully implementing them across all the overseas territories. Gibraltar already leads with a fully public register of beneficial ownership; the Cayman Islands and the Turks and Caicos Islands have now published legitimate interest registers; and others are due to follow in the next year or two. However, as has been recognised by my right hon. Friend and others, there is a significant delay. The Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022, the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 and the new illicit finance campaign announced in 2024 all point to one shared goal—a clean, competitive and transparent financial system across the British family. There can be no place for dirty money, either at home or in British territories overseas. The British family stand united against illicit finance. Together, we can ensure that our financial centres remain engines of good growth, rooted in trust and respected across the world. We want the financial services of our overseas territories and Crown dependencies not merely to survive but to flourish. However, they must be anchored in openness, accountability and the shared values that define our global reputation. I look forward to hearing the Minister answer the questions that have been posed by hon. Members, particularly on the Government’s approach to the countering illicit finance summit. At what point will the Government push harder for further measures?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Property Service Charges · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure that many Members have attended meetings with groups of residents who, in trying to resolve issues that are causing them so much anxiety, are at their wits’ end. We have an example in Fylde that is actually pre the management company. An estate has been developed, but it flooded during the construction and twice since, and now the estate company is desperate to get it into a management company, and to transfer all the flood risk liability to that company. Does my hon. Friend agree that kind of thing will just cause further problems down the line?

• 29 Oct 2025 · UK-Türkiye Typhoon Export Deal · Hansard source

  More

  Ever since I was elected, it has been a critical part of my work to push to secure Typhoon orders at the Warton site because of the impact those orders would have not only on jobs across Fylde and Lancashire, but on our sovereign capability to build our own military aircraft. I massively welcome this announcement and the work that has been done by Ministers on the Front Bench and former Ministers on the Opposition Benches. I was touched that the Minister invited me to join him on his visit to BAE Systems last week, although the Prime Minister did not invite me to the announcement in my own constituency yesterday—perhaps he has been taking my questions at PMQs too personally. The deal is welcome, but it means that we are now the only major partner in the Eurofighter project that is not ordering the aircraft that we are trying to sell to other countries. We are trying to sell aircraft abroad that we are not buying ourselves. I am sure it would be a great aid to future export deals—for getting that extra 20 further down the line and for looking at Saudi and other places where we are trying to sell them—and equally, it would continue to boost our sovereign capability in military aircraft and maintain jobs across our country if we placed that order for more Typhoons for the RAF. I would happily heap praise on the Minister if he did so.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Stamp Duty Land Tax · Hansard source

  More

  While we are on the subject of paying for things and ownership of land—trying to find the funds to abolish a tax and allow our citizens to purchase their own home—one obvious solution would be to not give away territory that we already own and pay £36 billion over the lifetime of the deal to do so. One way of paying for this policy that my hon. Friend might suggest to Labour Members is to avoid paying to give away our own land, taking money off our citizens who want to buy their own land.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Stamp Duty Land Tax · Hansard source

  More

  Going back to what a former fantastic, great Prime Minister did—and comparing it with the policy on stamp duty—we know that it was hated by Labour Members, because it took away the choking role of the state and freed people up to have that aspiration and that social mobility. It proved that allowing people to buy their own homes and removing the state from their lives created social mobility in the same way that removing that tax and allowing people the aspiration to smash those ceilings is important. Labour Members hate it because it would reduce the size of the state, the dependency on the state and the hold that they have over people’s lives.