Becky Gittins MP: speeches

Speeches

• 3 Jul 2025 · Children with Allergies: School Safeguarding · Hansard source

  More

  I was diagnosed with an anaphylactic peanut allergy at the age of seven. Much of the coverage around allergies centres on the devastating occasions when anaphylaxis and avoidable reactions result in tragic deaths. For most allergy sufferers, today’s debate feels much closer to our daily life and is therefore incredibly poignant. The impact of allergic diseases on the lives of children goes far beyond severe and occasional reactions; it impacts every part of their lives. I begin by endorsing the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore); I endorse much of the additional provision he has asked for. In my experience, having a food allergy has meant feeling different and isolated from my peers at school. I was often not able to be involved with school experiences or even rewards for getting my times tables or spelling right, if they were food-based. I also experienced a high degree of anxiety from my parents when other parents continually sent their children in with peanut butter sandwiches despite repeated warnings, the result of which was always that I, as a seven-year-old, needed to restrict myself further to keep myself safe. Having to take huge precautions when going on school and residential trips, which required me to challenge some cooking staff—adults—who were asking me to eat food that I knew to be unsafe. In a school setting, where good behaviour is often associated with deference towards teachers and other adults, that is very difficult for a child to navigate. On one occasion, a member of the catering staff at an outdoor pursuit residential centre called me a pain in the proverbial—her language was not so polite—for having allergies and refusing to eat unsafe food that was put in front of me. I was 10. As I got older, I became more resentful of my allergies, always having to carry a messenger bag with adrenalin auto-injectors when out with friends, not being able to eat at the fast food places and restaurants where my friends held birthday parties or went at the weekend, and never being able to sit with them for school dinners in the canteen. One thing that is often not discussed is that I, like many with allergies, know there are things I will never do and places I will never go, as their cuisine is unsuitable for my allergies and there is a lack of medical access while travelling. Like many allergy sufferers, I have suffered periods of anxiety when my allergies have either caused or become a vehicle for intensifying periods of poor mental health. The early physical symptoms of an anaphylactic reaction are remarkably similar to those of a panic attack: laboured breathing, potential loss of consciousness and what the medical profession call an impending sense of doom. For a child—indeed, throughout life—navigating the difference between anaphylaxis and anxiety can be incredibly difficult when their body is alerting them to threats: real threats that must not be ignored, in the case of allergy, or perceived threats, as often in cases of anxiety. That is an often under-appreciated part of what life is like for young people living with allergies. For allergy sufferers, a life of restriction, anxiety and fear is not just a one-off tragic story; it affects the everyday life of those children. I would love to be able to say that in the 23 years since I was diagnosed with an anaphylactic allergy, the outlook for children with allergies has become much better. In fact, the biggest change in that time is that the number of people with allergies has more than doubled, while the support and infrastructure for allergy sufferers has remained much the same. The rates are such that one in 13 children now has a food allergy, which equates to two children in every classroom. That is the real importance of this debate. Data shows that 20% of food allergic reactions, and approximately 30% of first-time anaphylactic reactions, like the one we heard about from my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham), occur at school. One in five food allergic reactions occurs outside the school building: on the playground, travelling to and from school, or on school field trips. Hospital admissions due to food-induced anaphylaxis tripled between 1998 and 2018, with the largest increase seen in children under 15, reflecting a growing incidence of severe allergic reactions. Astonishingly, it is estimated that half a million school days are lost to allergic disease each year. That has a massive impact on the educational attainment of a growing number of young people in our schools. That makes it all the more worrying that 69% of schools do not have in place the recommended safeguards of allergy policy plans, medication or training; that, despite being permitted to carry AAIs since 2017, almost half of all schools do not hold their own life-saving allergy medication; that two in five teachers feel unprepared to respond to a child experiencing an allergic reaction; and that, according to NASUWT research, 67% of teachers have had no formal allergy awareness training. Earlier this year, I was pleased to attend the launch of the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation’s allergy school module. Designed to address the lack of allergy training in schools, it is a comprehensive suite of free training resources designed to empower, include and protect children with food allergies. I have written to every school in my constituency about those fantastic resources. They have been available since January, and a module is coming later in the year for secondary school students. I regularly speak to schools in my constituency about allergy school, and I have been heartened by the work that many schools are doing to keep allergic pupils safe. Recently, I was heartened when asked, in an interview with young reporters from the Bodnant Bugle at Bodnant community school, about my work with allergy in this place. I also heard how informed pupils and staff are working together with the aim of keeping pupils feeling safe and, crucially, included in their school community. That is a huge stride, but we must do more. As a champion of the Natasha Allergy Research Foundation, and a proud member of the APPG on allergy, I am keen to support the progression of its allergy safety action plan. The following calls are most important. All nursery and school staff should be trained in allergy awareness, allergy management, and how to respond in a food allergy emergency, including the administration of medication. Lists and photos of children with food allergies should be available to all staff to ensure that they can be easily identified and their needs can be met throughout the school day. All schools and nurseries should have a specific allergy policy that includes an anaphylaxis plan. All schools and nurseries should have an individual healthcare plan for every child with a diagnosed allergy. Such plans should always include paediatric allergy action plans and an anaphylaxis risk assessment. All schools and nurseries should record and report all known instances of food allergic reactions and, crucially, near misses. That record keeping should be included in the evaluation criteria for Ofsted inspections. All schools should have an allergy-aware anti-bullying policy. Schools should ensure that their behaviour and anti-bullying policies include awareness of food allergy-related bullying. There should be milk alternatives for free school milk provision; allergy-friendly provision in breakfast clubs, of which we are so proud; requirements on schools to publish their catering information and the allergy assessments done by school catering staff and agencies; and provision for children who cannot safely eat school dinners, in recognition of the fact that parents of food-allergic children spend an average of 14.4% extra on their weekly food shop. Since I became an MP, I have met so many children who suffer through allergic disease and whose experiences of growing up with allergies are painfully similar to mine, although they are 20 years apart. I hope the work that we will discuss this afternoon ensures that allergic children have a much better, safer experience of school in the future.

• 2 Jul 2025 · EU Trade Agreement: Economic Impact · Hansard source

  More

  10. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the UK-EU trade agreement announced on 19 May 2025 on the economy in Northern Ireland.

• 2 Jul 2025 · EU Trade Agreement: Economic Impact · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to say that the proposed SPS agreement has been welcomed by the Welsh farming community, including those in my constituency of Clwyd East. That is alongside the Ulster Farmers Union, the Federation of Small Businesses, the CBI, the Horticultural Trades Association, supermarkets including Asda, M&S and Iceland, and many others. Does the Secretary of State agree with me and with them that an SPS agreement would bring huge benefits for Wales, Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK?

• 19 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Arts and culture are booming in north Wales, and I am delighted to say that next month, we will see both the formal reopening of Theatr Clwyd in Mold and also Llangollen International Musical Eisteddfod in my constituency of Clwyd East. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the contribution of both to our economy and our arts sector, and will she make time for a debate in this House about how we can further grow opportunities for the arts and culture sector?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. I forgot to say this earlier, Mr Speaker: a very happy birthday from me and my constituents.I commend the Secretary of State for seeing the need to reform our energy sector, given that people across north Wales are currently paying some of the highest energy bills in the country. Will he assure me that any proposed alternative to the current energy model will not put any one nation or region at a relative disadvantage?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Clean Power Industries: Jobs · Hansard source

  More

  The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s clean power action plan is accelerating the transition to renewable energy sources and creating quality jobs in areas like mine in north Wales. A major expansion at the port of Mostyn will create 300 new jobs, as it prepares to increase its support for the offshore wind farm sector. Does the Minister agree that this is not the time to hold back, and that we should invest in green energy to tackle climate change, secure our energy supply and provide skilled jobs for my constituents in Clwyd East?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Clean Power Industries: Jobs · Hansard source

  More

  5. What estimate he has made of the number of additional jobs in clean power industries since July 2024.

• 4 Jun 2025 · Town Centre Regeneration · Hansard source

  More

  9. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to regenerate town centres in Scotland.

• 4 Jun 2025 · Town Centre Regeneration · Hansard source

  More

  A proud industrial heritage, a strong community spirit and an overwhelming feeling of being let down and under-invested in by the previous Conservative Government unite towns in my constituency with those across Scotland, including those in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. In Wales, Labour’s transforming towns programme has invested in Holywell in my constituency. Will the Secretary of State join me in calling on the SNP to U-turn and finally back Labour’s plans to invest in Hamilton town centre?

• 20 May 2025 · Victims and Courts Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Antisocial behaviour is a huge issue in my constituency. I have seen its impact on many of my constituents; it blights the community and makes people fearful in their own home. I have felt my constituents’ real disappointment when it has been labelled low-level crime; that has affected how supported they feel. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we must absolutely ensure that antisocial behaviour is not dismissed as low-level crime, and that its victims are put at the forefront of our justice system?

• 12 May 2025 · Immigration System · Hansard source

  More

  Last year, the now Home Secretary visited the Betty Berkins café in my constituency to discuss the very matter of the massive increase in overseas recruitment while the investment in our domestic workforce was falling drastically, contributing to the quadrupling of the net migration figures between 2019 and 2023. Does she agree that the best way in which to address soaring migration specifically for work purposes is to train and upskill our domestic workforce properly through measures that already exist in our groundbreaking Employment Rights Bill? How will the measures proposed today contribute to that work, and to the achievement of the overall aim?

• 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East and the hon. Member for Weald of Kent for playing a respectful part in quite a heated discussion, which has done honour to Dolores and her family at an incredibly difficult time. It is really poignant that such case studies are discussed in these debates; they show what can happen on the limited and rare occasions that things go incredibly wrong with such systems. It is worthwhile that we have these discussions. I must say that I was disappointed by Opposition Members’ contributions in support of the new clause, however, because although they successfully focused on occasions where things have gone wrong, they were limited on detail. I was also disappointed by their inability to answer the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh. We need that detail, and we need to understand how that would be different from the tools in the Home Office’s arsenal during the 14 years of their Government.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to serve under your chairpersonship, Dr Murrison. Given that the hon. Gentleman’s concern is about children, we should recall the evidence session in which we heard the Children’s Commissioner’s concern that spending extended periods of time in asylum hotels leaves unaccompanied asylum-seeking children vulnerable to organised crime, notwithstanding the mix of ages in those hotels. Why does he still stand by the Illegal Migration Act and the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, when they are part of the reason why those children were in asylum hotels for so long?

• 13 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I will keep my comments brief. I read the new clauses from the hon. Member for Woking with interest. I understand the important point that has been raised—I think by hon. Members on both sides—about the importance of working internationally on this issue. I suppose my question to him would be: does he not think that an international outlook in tackling the issues that we have here, which is the sole purpose of the Bill, has already been exercised? In December last year, we agreed the Calais Group priority plan with our near neighbours and the joint action plan on migration with Germany. In November last year, we had the landmark security agreement with Iraq, and we also have a well-established relationship with our counterparts in France to work closely to prevent the dangerous crossings and reduce the risk to life at sea. We have talked a lot about cause and effect, and I can really see the intention behind the new clauses. However, I question their necessity, as well as some of the suggestions made about the intention of the Government, who have really shown a pragmatic outlook about how we deter those crossings.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I think that everyone should be on board with the national minimum wage and the living wage. I hope that we can encourage all Members of all parties to get on board. I am very pleased to hear that commitment and concern from the Reform party. It is unexpected, but I respect it. On Second Reading, I welcomed this legislation as a central tenet of this Government’s policy of putting working people at the heart of our economy and making work pay. I am delighted to see the Bill return to the Chamber, and I pay tribute to those who served on the Public Bill Committee. The Bill modernises the UK’s outdated employment laws, bringing in more than 30 much-needed and welcome reforms, including: day one rights of employment, banning exploitative zero-hours contracts, abolishing fire and rehire, establishing bereavement leave, increasing protections from sexual harassment, introducing equality menopause action plans, strengthening rights for pregnant workers and establishing the Fair Work Agency. I am pleased that, during the scrutiny process, the Government have tabled amendments to strengthen protections for low-paid workers, including those relating to statutory sick pay. In real terms, 1 million people on zero-hours contracts will benefit from the guaranteed hours policy. Nine million people who have been with their employer for less than two years will benefit from day-one rights relating to the unfair dismissal policy. Because of the Fair Work Agency, holiday pay rights will be enforced for the very first time. The measures before us strengthen the Fair Work Agency. New clause 57 will enable it to bring proceedings against a non-compliant employer in an employment tribunal, in place of the worker. New clause 58 enables the provision of legal advice or representation for those who have become a party to civil proceedings related to employment or trade union law. Although the vast majority of employers across the country, including hundreds in Clwyd East, will certainly obey the law, there are still those that sadly do not. A Citizens Advice report states that higher-paid workers are 50% more likely than lower-paid individuals to bring an employment tribunal claim, despite the fact that lower-paid individuals are more likely to have their rights violated. As Unison points out, leaving the burden of challenging workplace injustice to individual workers seeking redress at tribunal compounds inequalities of power in the UK labour market. The Low Pay Commission figures highlight key reasons to implement these important measures. We know, for instance, that 20% of workers were paid less than minimum wage in 2023, and that nearly 1 million workers did not get any holiday pay. The agency will bring together existing state enforcement functions, and will be a single place to which workers and employers can turn for help. I am pleased that the agency will aim to resolve issues upstream by supporting employers that want to comply. I understand from evidence gathered by the Bill Committee that there was considerable support for a single enforcement body in place of what is currently quite a fractured system. On accountability, the Bill requires an annual report on the Fair Work Agency’s enforcement actions, and will allow Parliament to monitor progress in protecting workers’ rights. I am encouraged to hear that, to produce its strategy, the Fair Work Agency will consult an advisory board made up of trade unions, businesses and independent experts. It is vital that we continue our collaborative approach in developing employment legislation and policy that is pro-business, pro-worker and, ultimately, pro-growth. I welcome the new clauses and the Bill as a whole. It is an important part of the Government’s strategy to move our economy forward, improve work security and ensure greater productivity.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is working incredibly hard to try to make a case for vested interests in relation to this Bill. Those vested interests are in the working people of this country. Nevertheless, I appreciate his efforts, and he certainly has earned his afternoon snack today. This precedes my time in this Chamber, and my hon. Friends may be able to help me, but was he as vociferous during the pandemic—a time of national crisis—when close relationships with senior Government figures secured contracts that produced no personal protective equipment when the country was in such desperate need?

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise in support of Government new clauses 57 and 58. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my proud trade union membership. I ask the Opposition to consider their comments today in what has proved to be a very ideologically driven debate on their part. I feel somewhat as if I have been transported back in time to a previous reforming Labour Government’s last upgrade to employment rights—the minimum wage debate. This afternoon’s fearmongering about productivity, growth and unemployment is reminiscent of it. We also have seen some crossover in the personnel who were part of the Conservative opposition. The then shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), said that the minimum wage would “negatively affect…not hundreds of thousands but millions of people.” —[ Official Report , 4 July 2017; Vol. 297, c. 526.]

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Given the hon. Gentleman’s comments about a small number of militant trade unionists taking industrial action if this Bill becomes law, it is worth noting that over the last 10 years, a small and militant group of Conservative party members have managed to choose successive Prime Ministers with fewer requirements than those applied to members of trade unions when they vote to take industrial action in their workplaces. Does he think that is fair?

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Some comments from Opposition Members today have made it very clear to the public what the Opposition think about people’s rights at work.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure, once again, to serve under your chairpersonship, Mr Stuart. I was disappointed but not surprised to hear that the official Opposition want to keep the Safety of Rwanda Act on the statue books. I was disappointed for a number of reasons, which I will set out shortly, but I was not surprised. I have seen the way in which the Tories continue to position and conduct themselves on immigration policy. It is clear to me that they simply refuse to learn the lessons of the last 12 months. The public saw right through their Rwanda plan. They could see it for exactly what it was: a gimmick that was both unworkable and unaffordable. Before today, I thought I would familiarise myself with the Report stage and the Third Reading of the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024. At the time, a good number of Committee members, including me, had yet to be elected, but reading the debates really brings home the sense of chaos that had engulfed the Conservative party at the time. The then shadow Home Secretary, now Home Secretary, summed it up: “What a farce…We have a Prime Minister with no grip, while the British taxpayer is continually forced to pay the price. Former Tory Cabinet Ministers and deputy chairs from all sides have been queueing up to tell us it is a bad Bill. They say it will not work, it will not protect our borders, it will not comply with international law and it is fatally flawed.” —[ Official Report , 17 January 2024; Vol. 743, c. 966.] A previous Attorney General, the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright), stated that “to arrogate to oneself the right to declare one’s own compliance with international law runs the risk of, first, other states finding comfort in our example and, secondly, undermining our own messages in other situations. That makes this not just bad law, but bad foreign policy.” —[ Official Report , 17 January 2024; Vol. 743, c. 855.] This is an example of utter chaos. The Law Society, in welcoming the repeal of the Rwanda Act, said in its evidence to this Committee that the Act “set a dangerous legal and constitutional precedent by legislating to overturn an evidence-based finding of fact by UK courts that Rwanda is an unsafe country to send asylum seekers to.” However, the measure made it on to the statute book. The Rwanda plan ran for two years and, as we know and have heard several times this morning, a grand total of four volunteers were sent to Rwanda at the not insubstantial cost of £700 million to the UK taxpayer—quite a remarkable feat. While hundreds of millions of taxpayer pounds were sent to Rwanda, the legislation’s effect was felt in the UK. As a result of the fantastical Rwanda plan, huge backlogs of asylum claims were building, with tens of thousands of people in hotels unable to leave because of the design of the Illegal Migration Act. We know that the use of hotels does not represent value for money and we are moving away from it. When it comes to the idea of the Rwanda policy being a deterrent, from its inception to the announcement it was to be scrapped, 84,000 people crossed the channel in small boats. It is always difficult to measure a deterrent’s effectiveness, but that is a pretty clear indicator that a deterrent it was not.

• 6 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Sorry, Mr Stuart. I am concerned that the hon. Gentleman’s proposal to exclude asylum seekers from prosecution opens up a situation in which someone who has come here as an asylum seeker, and then seeks to engage in illegal activity to assist more illegal channel crossings, would be exempt from prosecution. That would undermine a lot of what many of us are trying to do. My concern is not with the intention of the amendment, which is incredibly clear, but its application, which would go against a lot of the things we are aiming to achieve. When he moved his amendment 17, the hon. Member for Stockton West did not give a definition of an unseaworthy vessel. This is potentially another area where, despite the rhetoric—which I understand to be about appearing tougher on gangs and people who attempt to make and to assist illegal crossings—the Opposition may actually have introduced an amendment to dilute the Bill. The amendment ties criminality to the seaworthiness of a vessel. Members on both sides of the Committee have talked about the ability of these gangs: they are fast-paced and cunning, and they move with the times. The Committee heard from witnesses that the gangs regularly change tack to keep up with and get around legislation. That is why the measures we are taking are needed. There is no legal definition of a seaworthy vessel, only that, “A seaworthy vessel is a type of boat or ship that is strong enough to handle the normal stresses of being on the water, such as waves and wind. It is also capable of carrying cargo or passengers safely.” It is about not only the use of the ship, but the conditions. Amendment 17 proposes a reasonableness test for a vessel to be deemed unseaworthy. That could include things such as having safety equipment onboard, or having qualified crew—although we have perceptions about who the people smugglers are, it is reasonable to think that some of them could have a background on the sea, as fishermen or as people who have transported cargo, so their boats could potentially have safety equipment and a qualified crew onboard. Some of the things that could be used to deem a ship seaworthy include how many crew members there are on board, which—as we have discussed in this sitting—varies, as do the provisions on the boat, such as food, water and safety equipment, and the weather and sea conditions on the day of travel. I would welcome clarification from the hon. Member on his particular definition of seaworthiness. I understand the narrative of trying to appear tough on this issue, my grave concern and opposition to the amendment comes from the fact that it would dilute the opportunity to be tough on those criminal gangs.

• 6 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I just want to tease out what the hon. Gentleman has said. Does he accept that, if this amendment passed, gang members facilitating crossings on small boats would escape prosecution?

• 6 Mar 2025 · Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have some comments on the amendments. I will start with amendment 5, tabled by the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire. I have watched the first episode of “The Chief”, which I enjoyed and gave me some insights into the outlook—perhaps even the ambitions—of the hon. Gentleman, which were very much to my liking. Although I have enjoyed lots of the contributions you have made with such huge passion, and indeed compassion for the people you refer to, my concern is about the unintended consequences of your amendment.