Blair McDougall MP: speeches

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026

How these years work

Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.

Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.

96 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 2 Jul 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    Of course, we recognise that this has been not just a tough time for small businesses, but a tough decade for those running one. That is exactly why our small business strategy is improving access to markets for small businesses, improving access to finance for small businesses, and cutting the regulatory burden on small businesses. We will of course keep doing more to make it easier, simpler and more profitable to run one.

  • 2 Jul 2026 · Late Payment: Small Businesses · Hansard source
    More

    This Government are determined to tackle the scourge of late payments, which closes down the equivalent of 38 businesses every day. The Commercial Payments Bill was introduced to Parliament on 19 May and had its Second Reading in the House of Lords on 9 June. This legislation sets out stricter maximum payment terms, mandatory interest on late payments and stronger powers for the Small Business Commissioner to ensure that small businesses are paid on time. That will give the UK the strongest legal framework on late payments in the G7.

  • 2 Jul 2026 · Late Payment: Small Businesses · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend always fights hard for small businesses in his patch. This Bill will ensure that purchasers pay suppliers within 60 days and that mandatory interest is paid on late invoices. For too long, large businesses have used small businesses as a source of free credit. That will end under these plans. That will mean better cash flow for businesses in his constituency, more jobs, more economic growth and better high streets.

  • 2 Jul 2026 · Distillers · Hansard source
    More

    I absolutely wish the hon. Member’s constituents all the best. It is entrepreneurial spirit like that that drives the economy forward. I will give one example of the support: there is a big extension of UK export finance so that such businesses can find new markets, because the best way to become a more resilient business is for them to open up and diversify their markets. I will gladly put his constituents in touch with people at UK Export Finance to discuss that.

  • 2 Jul 2026 · Distillers · Hansard source
    More

    I thank my hon. Friend for raising this vital sector for island economies. Whisky exports were worth over £5.4 billion in 2025, supporting jobs and supply chains across Scotland. We are supporting distillers through UK Export Finance, DBT’s export support, trade promotion and direct engagement with the industry to help businesses, including small distilleries, to grow, invest and reach new markets.

  • 2 Jul 2026 · Distillers · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend knows that at this time of year, my heart is in Uist, and I wish I was there now sampling a gin cocktail from the Downpour distillery—my favourite of the nine distilleries he mentioned. We are determined to support energy-intensive industries such as his local distillers. The supercharger for British industry is being reviewed this year, and we are keen to hear from the whisky industry as we review that support. As he says, many distilleries are off-grid and heavily reliant on heating fuels, and are suffering from the Iran war. That is why we are considering the temporary suspension of tariffs on kerosene oil. The consultation on that ended a few days ago, and we will make a decision on it in due course.

  • 1 Jul 2026 · Draft Register of Overseas Entities (Protection and Trusts) and Limited Liability Partnerships (Application of Company Law) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source
    More

    I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Register of Overseas Entities (Protection and Trusts) and Limited Liability Partnerships (Application of Company Law) (Amendment) Regulations 2026. These regulations, which were laid in draft before this House on 1 June 2026, make targeted and technical amendments to strengthen the transparency and operation of the register of overseas entities, which I will refer to as the ROE or the register from here. They also correct a separate technical issue relating to limited liability partnerships, or LLPs. Hon. Members will be aware that the ROE was introduced in 2022 as part of the Government’s efforts to increase transparency in land ownership and combat economic crime. It is a public register maintained by Companies House that requires overseas entities that own or acquire land in the United Kingdom to disclose information about their beneficial owners or managing officers. The register plays an important role in shedding light on complex ownership structures and in supporting action against illicit activity. Information on the register has been used by law enforcement, journalists and other parties examining corruption, money laundering and assets held by sanctioned individuals. Appropriate safeguards are in place through a protection regime that includes the ability to apply to Companies House to have a home address removed from the register. As part of the application, individuals are required to provide supporting evidence to confirm that the address on the register is indeed their residential address. However, in most cases, the registrar is able to identify and verify that information internally. Furthermore, there is currently no requirement for applicants to provide a replacement correspondence address. This results in a gap in the information available on the public register.

  • 1 Jul 2026 · Draft Register of Overseas Entities (Protection and Trusts) and Limited Liability Partnerships (Application of Company Law) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source
    More

    I thank both Front Benchers for their constructive and helpful questions. They both eloquently set out why this matters. Turning to their specific questions, as of June, 29 applications had been received. Of those, nine were successful, 19 were rejected and one is currently being considered. With regards to worries about the abuse of trust in the service, we recognise the risks associated with trust structures, partly because their anonymity makes assets easier to hide. The Government also recognise the important role that law enforcement and the public can play in helping to mitigate those risks through greater transparency. Access to trust information is subject to a £55 fee per overseas entry. That creates a deterrent for the type of misuse that the shadow Minister was worried about. When the original draft instrument was laid, as was said before, the structures were in place in Companies House for the recording of that information. Hon. Members on all sides of the House will recognise—not least because of the huge volume of economic crime legislation that has been passed in this place—that there are very heavy burdens on Companies House, as was said by the hon. Member for Maidenhead, and many systems that must be in place. I cannot give a precise date at the moment, but Companies House is working at pace on that. On the question of looking backwards, the regulations do not have a retrospective impact. I would point to the review that is being undertaken by Dame Margaret Hodge, which looks at the wider issue of economic crime and our approach to transparency. Having responded to those questions, I commend the regulations to the Committee. Question put and agreed to .

  • 1 Jul 2026 · Draft Register of Overseas Entities (Protection and Trusts) and Limited Liability Partnerships (Application of Company Law) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source
    More

    Yes, I will come on to that. The hon. Gentleman will hopefully find reassurance shortly that that information will still be gathered. Part 2 of these regulations streamlines the application process; applicants will no longer be required to provide supporting evidence when applying to remove a home address that appears on the public ROE. This removes an unnecessary administrative burden for applicants. The regulations also introduce a requirement for applicants to provide a replacement service address to be displayed on the public register, except in very limited circumstances. Taken together, these changes bring the ROE protection regime more closely in line with the approach taken with UK companies. Part 3 of the regulations includes changes to the ROE’s trust disclosure service, which enables members of the public to apply to Companies House to access unpublished trust information held on the register. Under the current application process, individuals must provide their own details, as well as the overseas entity’s name and ID number. These details relating to the entity are publicly available on the register. However, applicants must also provide the name of the trust that they are requesting information on. The name of the trust is not publicly available on the register, and many applicants are therefore unlikely to have this information, which leads to rejected applications. In addition, where an application relates to trust information involving a person under the age of 18, the applicant must demonstrate a legitimate interest. This is demonstrated by evidencing that the applicant is investigating money laundering, tax evasion, terrorist financing or sanctions breaches. However, currently, when that is not demonstrated, all associated trust information is withheld, including information relating to adults, so those requirements can act as a barrier to accessing trust information and limit the effectiveness of the service. The instrument therefore makes two targeted changes to the trust disclosure service to improve public access while maintaining appropriate safeguards. First, it removes the requirement for all applicants to provide the name of the trust when requesting access to trust information. This addresses a key barrier for making a successful application. Secondly, the instrument makes a further change where trust information involves a person under the age of 18. Where legitimate interest is not demonstrated, the regulations enable Companies House to disclose trust information related to any individual over 18 years old. This ensures that access to information is not unnecessarily restricted because an individual under 18 years old is associated with the trust. Access to trust information relating to those aged under 18 will continue to require a legitimate interest. Together these changes improve the transparency of trust information on the register and enable more effective scrutiny while maintaining appropriate protection for minors. Finally, part 4 of the instrument makes a limited and technical correction to the LLP framework. The requirement to provide additional address information in certain circumstances was inadvertently introduced ahead of schedule. The instrument therefore removes the requirement for LLPs to provide additional address information. However, this requirement will be reinstated once appropriate systems are in place to collect the information for companies and LLPs, and work is ongoing to achieve that. In the meantime, other address information is available on the public register for all LLPs. Taken together, these measures improve the transparency and practical operation of the ROE while resolving a small but necessary technical issue relating to LLPs. I commend the draft regulations to the House.

  • 4 Jun 2026 · High Street Businesses: Government Support · Hansard source
    More

    One of the hallmarks of our efforts through Pride in Place and other measures is recognition that there is not really a one-size-fits-all solution. In my constituency, we do not have one central high street; we probably have about a dozen separate ones, which sounds similar to the hon. Gentleman’s constituency. It is clear from what everyone has said during the debate that high streets are facing real pressures, from changing consumer habits to crime and increasing costs. There is not a single quick fix—there is no one-size-fits-all solution. It will take determined effort and real strategy from the Government. A key part of that is our small business strategy, which was launched just short of a year ago and aims to cut red tape, cut costs and make things just a little easier in challenging times. We will build on the strategy later this year as we bring forward a cross-Government high streets strategy that aims to support the businesses that we have been talking about today and equip local authorities with the tools that they need to drive long-term regeneration. We are working really closely on that with businesses, representative organisations and, indeed, Members from across the House. We have already started taking significant action through, for example, our high streets innovation partnerships—a £301 million package that aims to help local areas to reinvent and reimagine high streets, to make them more attractive places to live and put more services into them. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) mentioned a Woolworths that had been replaced by businesses of lower value over the years. There is a challenge for all of us within our areas, working with local authorities and health authorities, to make sure that we locate more services in our areas and drive more footfall to them. I will give an example of that type of action. I also oversee the Post Office, and as well as the Government making the decision to keep the Post Office network open at its current level, there are really exciting plans under way from the Post Office to create a new community hub model for post offices in towns across the UK. That will offer a place for commercial services and public services to be delivered, and enhance the role that post offices have as an anchor in the high streets. I will turn quickly to some of the issues raised by hon. Members and outline the areas that the Government are focusing on within each of them. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) raised the issue of payment providers. That issue was raised with me by Kadir’s, a chip shop in Barrhead in my constituency. The payment services regulator recently carried out two market reviews in this area to look at those cost increases and is currently looking at what action to take as a result. Many hon. Members rightly raised the impact of business rates on high street businesses. They say that all of heaven rejoices more over one sinner who repents, so I welcome the acknowledgment by the shadow Minister that we inherited a system that was, frankly, a mess. It was chaotic; it kept changing. It did not give people any sense of stability. For high streets, we have to ensure that our business rates system is fair, stable and responsive to the changing economic situation that hon. Members have described. That is why, in the face of the cost of the first revaluation since the pandemic, we have put in the £4.3 billion support package. The hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) asked when we will take on the big online giants—the warehouses—and start to shift some of the burden on to them and away from high street businesses. That is exactly what we did with those lower multipliers. That was paid for by putting the burden on to the big warehouses. We are working in that area. Rather than tinkering, we are doing that big structural change. Let me turn to jobs, and particularly youth unemployment and the link to high streets. My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) said that he was a Saturday boy. I was a Saturday boy as well in Beveridge’s fishmongers in Giffnock. It taught me everything about how to talk to people. It gave me confidence. Every time someone came into the shop, I had to re-find my confidence—remake myself. I do not think that I would be where I am now had I not had that experience. Some Members raised national insurance contributions in that context. Businesses still have those reliefs for under-21s and for apprentices under 25. It is worth about £2.5 billion. In terms of national insurance, there is relief there for employing young people, but I absolutely take the point. Obviously, the Milburn review is working on the much bigger issue of the number of young people not getting that opportunity.

  • 4 Jun 2026 · High Street Businesses: Government Support · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) on securing this important and passionate debate, and I thank him for his own thoughtful and passionate contribution. It was interesting to hear so many hon. Members name different local businesses in their areas without necessarily explaining what those businesses did—I am intrigued what Serendipity in Horwich or the Uniform Monkeys do. I would be remiss if I did not abuse my position by naming some of my favourites in my own constituency, including Bica in Netherlee; Wheataly in Clarkstown, which does the best Italian food in Glasgow; The Pad in Neilston; and Valentini’s ice cream in Giffnock. What is encouraging about this debate is that it has placed the role of high streets in its proper context. Yes, they are full of businesses, which are about a bottom line, but as was said by the hon. Members for Woking (Mr Forster) and for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) and my hon. Friend the Member for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff), this is about more than just soulless economics; it is about how we feel about where we live. It is essential that we understand that. We must also place high streets in the wider economic context. They are not only the engines of very local economies but a barometer for how the wider economy feels. We have to recognise that the reason why so many of our town and city centres sometimes feel so down at heel is that before we lost the shops on those high streets, we lost the industry at the edges of towns. It is important to put this debate in the context of the Government’s wider efforts to reindustrialise the country, to create good work and a sense of economic pride and purpose in places. I disagree with the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith): yes, to tackle the insecure work and low incomes that left people without the money to spend in the neighbourhoods where our high streets are—

  • 4 Jun 2026 · High Street Businesses: Government Support · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend will know from talking to Alan Milburn that he is very much of the view that this is not something the Government can do alone; it will need to be done in partnership with industry and, as my hon. Friend says, with retailers in particular. Nothing in recent years has made people angrier than either experiencing retail crime or seeing videos and images of it on social media, in which shop workers are treated appallingly. Despite that, there are encouraging signs that our efforts to tackle retail crime are beginning to bite. Shop theft has started to fall, following really sharp increases under the previous Government. At the heart of that effort was the revitalisation of neighbourhood policing with 13,000 additional personnel being delivered, 3,100 of whom are already in place. My hon. Friends the Members for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) and for Bolton West spoke, rightly, with some anger at how organised crime—as they correctly named it—has impacted the way that our high streets feel. We are seeing legitimate, independent and valued businesses having to compete with businesses that are not real, and that is simply unfair. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West was right to talk about his campaign and efforts, along with other Members, to deliver the high streets organised crime unit to bring about the system-wide response that he described—bringing together HMRC and local authorities, and working with Companies House, the Insolvency Service and the organisations that I oversee. As part of that, my officials have joined the Home Office in engaging with the Dutch Government to learn the lessons from their approach with the Bibob Act, highlighted by my hon. Friend, with a view to exploring whether a similar approach could be taken here. The Home Office will shortly launch a consultation on strengthening closure orders, with stronger powers for local authorities being considered as part of our work on the high street strategy. Importantly, this is all backed by funding for the organisations that we rely on to do this. This is about fairness, but it is also about the way people feel about where they live. It is one of those issues on which our constituents have been ahead of us; they have noticed that there is something wrong on the high street, and we need to deal with it. Finally on the point about that sense of where we live, many hon. Members referred to Pride in Place, and the nearly £6 billion invested to support hundreds of places around the country. This is not a one-size-fits-all approach and it is not directed from Whitehall; it is communities shaping for themselves how they want their high streets and local areas to be reimagined. Alongside that, hon. Members mentioned the perennial problem of empty properties. They are one of the most visible challenges facing our high streets. High street rental auctions are now beginning to bite, not just in terms of the number that have gone through the whole process; the very ability of local authorities to have that conversation is letting them engage with landlords, changing the nature of that relationship and changing things on the high streets. This week, we announced £10 million of funding to support the expansion of high street rental auctions to help councils to identify opportunities, deepen engagement with landlords and get properties ready for use. That is a practical and important step forward. Finally, hon. Members raised the issue of banking hubs and the loss of banking facilities in local areas. In Barrhead, a large industrial town in my constituency, we recently lost our last bank, so I get the frustration, particularly with the process of deciding whether an area gets a banking hub or not. As hon. Members will know, the Government commissioned an independent review into access to banking services. Alongside that, we are supporting the roll-out of 350 banking hubs, 235 of which are already open. That is alongside the work that we are doing to make sure that the Post Office network is sustained, invested in and able to provide the banking services that people rely on. I thank again the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage for securing the debate. As I have said in this room before, we sometimes talk about high streets as being an important part of the community, but for me, as many hon. Members from all parties have made clear today, they are not just a part of the community but where community happens. They are where people get services, meet their friends and have fun, and where those who are otherwise socially isolated find companionship and community. That is why we have to do far more to support them, to ensure that all the places that we represent thrive and have a sense of pride.

  • 18 Mar 2026 · Social Enterprises and Community Ownership · Hansard source
    More

    I certainly will, Sir John. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. It is also a privilege to respond to a debate with so many passionate and proud speeches on behalf of local community enterprises and charities. I am glad to have the opportunity to congratulate Leigh Spinners on all of its success so far, to thank the Rebuild Site in Carlisle, to raise a glass to the Black Bull in Gartmore, the Fleece Inn in the Cotswolds and the Brewers Arms in Worcestershire, to tell Cosham Community Kettle to put the kettle on for me at some point when I visit, and to highlight the Low Port Centre in Linlithgow, the Oxleathers in Stafford, the Central Football Foundation in Grangemouth, and so many others that make our communities what they are. I will also abuse my position as Minister to talk about Social Blend in my constituency. It is a remarkable social enterprise that provides not just fantastic coffee and food, but employment and a sense of purpose to adults and young people with additional needs and disabilities. I recommend a visit to anyone. What underpins this, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) intimated, is a belief that everyone has something to offer. In the words, perhaps, of Robert Owen, “There are good hearts to serve men in palaces as in cottages.” The Government are passionate about the social enterprise sector and its contribution to society. An estimated 347,000 social enterprises are helping to meet some of the toughest challenges in our society. When Governments and markets fail, and when others walk away, social enterprises step in and fulfil the needs of our communities. To support such organisations to deliver their invaluable work, and to help them to grow and to introduce even more innovation and services, the Government have introduced several measures over the past few months. The Prime Minister wants the Government to work differently by putting partnership with civil society at the heart of everything we do. The civil society covenant embodies the ambition to recognise the value of civil society, and for every part of Government to partner and collaborate with civil society at every level, as hon. Members have asked for. At the civil society summit in July 2025, the Prime Minister said that he would give civil society “a home at the heart of government” and the newly established Civil Society Council will meet quarterly in Downing Street and be supported by a dedicated team in No. 10. The purpose of the Civil Society Council is to work in partnership with Government at the highest level to drive and oversee the implementation of the covenant, helping Government and civil society, including social enterprises, to design and deliver policies and services in genuine partnership. DCMS is taking the lead on the local implementation of the covenant through the launch of the £11.6 million local covenant partnerships fund. Hon. Members asked for more support, and the fund will support local government, public service providers and civil society organisations to work collaboratively to tackle local policy priorities and better meet the needs of communities. In recognition of the need to diversify and unlock more income for the sector, the Government are delivering several strands of work that focus on ensuring that all organisations, including some of the smallest charities, are able to continue delivering impact and, where possible, to grow their operations. Last summer, DCMS published the Government’s first-ever dormant assets strategy, which sets out our ambition to boost the reach and impact of the scheme. The strategy sets out how we will ensure the continued good governance of the scheme and, crucially, illustrates how the next £440 million tranche of funding will be distributed. That includes £132 million to benefit young people and £87 million for social investment. Part of that money will go towards providing small, flexible and affordable loans—the access to finance that hon. Members mentioned—to grassroots organisations. My hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) spoke with evangelical zeal about the better futures fund, based on his deep experience in this area. We announced that £500 million fund in July 2025, and it is the world’s largest outcomes fund. It will support up to 200,000 children and their families over the next 10 years, and it will bring together Government, local communities, charities, social enterprises and philanthropists to give children a brighter future. More broadly, I want to celebrate the remarkable growth of the impact economy, with recent reports estimating that it contributes a staggering £420 billion to the UK’s GVA, amounting to 15% of our GDP. The impact economy is a diverse system of purposeful organisations and capital, with the shared aim of delivering a strong economy in which everyone benefits. Social enterprises have a unique and powerful ability to innovate and to scale solutions to the big challenges that we face as a country, and the Office for the Impact Economy will continue to support closer collaboration between these organisations and Government. I come to the second best thing to come out of Rochdale: the co-operative sector. [ Interruption. ] Someone just said “Lisa Stansfield”, which I think is unfair. We have an ambitious manifesto commitment to double the size of the co-operative sector, because we see co-operatives and mutuals as the key engines of inclusive and community-focused economic activity. Several hon. Members mentioned the need to increase the support and advice for co-operatives in order to meet that commitment. I work with members of our business hub network around the country, and they often tell me that as many as one in four people coming through their doors is looking for advice on co-operatives and community interest companies.

  • 18 Mar 2026 · Royal Mail: Performance · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I thank the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East (David Reed) for securing today’s important debate. He spoke about falling confidence in Royal Mail. I think the debate has shown that there is growing anger about failures of service. My hon. Friends the Members for Worcester (Tom Collins), for Hartlepool (Mr Brash) and for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) and others spoke about how, when raising those concerns on behalf of constituents, they heard a completely different version of events in response. That has added to the sense of the frustration, particularly when hon. Members are so connected to their local posties, who understand what is happening on the ground. I join others in paying tribute to our hard-working posties across the country. The hon. Members for Yeovil (Adam Dance) and for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore), my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) and others rightly said that any criticism of Royal Mail service is not a criticism of the posties themselves. The Government remain absolutely committed to the universal postal service, which is an essential part of our economic infrastructure. It can and should be delivered. Hon. Members have raised concerns about the impact of service failures on the work of democracy. They have talked about bank cards not arriving and the isolation that causes. The hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) spoke about the human impact of missed hospital appointments, and there are also consequences for legal hearings and business deals. I confirm to my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) that I am also not getting love letters through the post—

  • 18 Mar 2026 · Royal Mail: Performance · Hansard source
    More

    I will happily look at that. It is another example of a service that is simply not good enough. As was mentioned, I recently met Royal Mail’s chief executive to press these issues directly. He was left in no doubt about the level of anger and concern across the House, and he was clear that the service is not where he wants it to be. He gave me a firm commitment that he will work towards restoring confidence in the service. Where service has fallen short locally, whether due to staffing pressures, which the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) mentioned, operational challenges or external disruption, customers need to see sustained and structural improvement, not just short-term fixes. I understand that the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East has met Royal Mail to discuss these issues. I have been advised that there are currently three vacancies in the Exmouth office, and I expect that Royal Mail will fill them to ensure there is an improvement in service locally. Across the country, our constituents deserve visible improvements in reliability, and that expectation underpins every discussion that I and other Ministers have with Royal Mail. That is why, before the takeover of Royal Mail, we secured significant commitments from the new owners of the business, including a commitment to prevent dividend payments until quality of service improves. As many hon. Members said, service improvement is also intimately linked to workers’ terms and conditions and the reform of Royal Mail’s operation. It is critical that the Royal Mail workers are on board with the operational changes, and that their experience informs that work. The Government continue to engage with EP Group on that; that is why my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State convened a joint meeting with the owners of EP Group and the CWU last month to help to unblock the outstanding issues. That engagement continues. Hon. Members also referred to my detailed discussion with Ofcom last week about its expectations of Royal Mail and the steps it is taking to protect consumers. I highlighted hon. Members’ significant concerns about the delivery performance and the negative real-world impact that that is having on our constituents. It is fair to say that Ofcom has heard the strength of concerns, particularly those expressed in the Chamber last week. One outcome of that meeting is that Ofcom is clear, as it has been for some time, that Royal Mail is required to publish a detailed improvement plan that results in significant and continuous progress, and that it expects that one should appear within days of an agreement with the union. Where failures continue, Ofcom will not hesitate to act again, and last year’s £21 million fine was a clear signal. We are in a context where, as has been said, the performance of many other parcel providers makes Royal Mail’s performance look positively glowing, and Ofcom is also looking at that wider context. None of us is blind to the wider context and the structural pressures. Letter volumes have halved over the past decade. As hon. Members have said, to ensure that the USO is sustainable, Ofcom has made changes to Royal Mail’s obligations. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald) made clear, those changes and reforms cannot be imposed from the top down. Royal Mail must work constructively with its workforce and unions to ensure that operational changes translate into better services for customers across the country—a point also made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds), and my hon. Friends the Members for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) and for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker). There is wisdom in every sorting office; staff there understand how the business works. We have taken a close interest in the negotiations, the new operating model and workers’ conditions. I mentioned that the Secretary of State recently met with EP Group and the CWU; a further meeting is scheduled for tomorrow. I am hopeful that Royal Mail’s owners and the union will work together in the interests of Royal Mail’s employees, its customers and the business. Several hon. Members raised concerns about the impact on postal votes. We have sought strong reassurances from Royal Mail on that issue. There have been meetings with the chief executive of the Electoral Commission to discuss plans for the upcoming elections, and a similar meeting is taking place in Scotland with Ministers there. My hon. Friend the Minister for Building Safety, Fire and Democracy is having a further meeting with Royal Mail to discuss postal votes, and we are leaving Royal Mail in no doubt about our expectations in that space.

  • 18 Mar 2026 · Royal Mail: Performance · Hansard source
    More

    Our focus at the moment is on getting the business on to a sustainable footing. That is about the negotiations on the very terms and conditions that my hon. Friend raises. As I mentioned, Ofcom has put on notice those other parcel providers. That is primarily about the poor quality of service that we see from many of them, but when we talk to Royal Mail and the union—as I am sure my hon. Friend has done—they will point out that sense of better employers being undermined by those working practices. He has been a constant campaigner in that respect. I thank all hon. Members for their contributions to today’s debate. I reassure them that the specific localised issues that they have raised will be covered in ongoing engagement with Royal Mail and Ofcom, along with the bigger structural conversation with the union and owners. I close by again paying tribute to the posties who do an extraordinary job across the country, and stress again that none of the criticisms today are laid at their door.

  • 12 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    Our small business strategy sets out the range of measures we are taking to support small businesses. That includes an increase of £4 billion in the finance available to businesses, so that they can invest to take advantage of those opportunities. We will also bring forward the strongest proposals on late payments, to improve cash flow to small businesses, as well as cutting red tape, so that they can take advantage of the opportunities the hon. Member describes.

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

    I will certainly talk to the regulator later today in those terms, and will ask that question. As I say, the business is regulated through Ofcom, but where the Government have power, we are taking it; for example, there is our insistence on putting in the company’s deed of undertaking that money cannot be stripped out of the company until service improves.

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

    I will certainly raise my hon. Friend’s concerns about important medical post with Ofcom. Royal Mail is part of the critical national infrastructure and can reach every part of the country, and its ability to deliver such things is a business opportunity, and it needs to get that right.

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

    My hon. Friend’s constituents absolutely deserve better, and posties deserve dignity at work, given the essential job they do for our society and our economy. That is exactly why we are convening meetings between management and unions to make sure that those talks progress.

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

    This is a Government who are improving the working conditions, standards and rights of workers across the economy. My hon. Friend makes the important point that there is wisdom and experience within the workforce. The talks that are going on at the moment are about bringing that together with the ambition and responsibilities of the management, which is why we are taking the actions we are.

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

    I pay tribute to Timmy and thank him for his years of service. It is exactly because this service is full of people like him who are passionate about their jobs that we need to ensure that Royal Mail’s quality of service is reformed and improved.

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

    The question of equalising pay and conditions is a matter for those talks. That is why, through the Secretary of State, we are bringing together the owner and the trade unions to have those discussions. I also pay tribute to Dean and Aaron, who can now say that they have had their names mentioned at the Dispatch Box.

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

    Our focus is on ensuring that the talks that are under way are productive, and that they end with measures that will get the delivery service improved and the business on to a sustainable footing. As I have mentioned, we have an undertaking that the owners are not allowed to take value out of the company until service standards improve.

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

    I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to posties in Stockport and Greater Manchester. Like posties all across the country, they go the extra mile in incredibly difficult circumstances. As I mentioned, we are bringing together unions and management for talks, to make sure that we get to a resolution and progress the future of the business. We are also pressing Ofcom on the enforcement action that it can take to progress the improvement plan that Royal Mail has committed to producing.

Explore activity by topic or department

Contributions by debate topic

4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.

View as listCommunities and local government: 18Communities and local government18Culture, media and sport: 6Culture, media and sport6Defence and foreign affairs: 7Defence and foreign affairs7Democracy and constitution: 24Democracy and constitution24Economy and business: 96Economy and business96Education and skills: 9Education and skills9Environment and energy: 10Environment and energy10Health and care: 9Health and care9Housing and planning: 3Housing and planning3Justice and policing: 12Justice and policing12Social security and pensions: 9Social security and pensions9Transport: 4Transport4Unclassified: 59Unclassified59
What this shows and doesn't show
4 Jul 2025–3 Jul 2026. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained. Published records do not measure effort or effectiveness. Methodology.
Department or topicPublished records
Communities and local government18
Culture, media and sport6
Defence and foreign affairs7
Democracy and constitution24
Economy and business96
Education and skills9
Environment and energy10
Health and care9
Housing and planning3
Justice and policing12
Social security and pensions9
Transport4
Unclassified59

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →