Bob Blackman MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Apr 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address · Hansard source

  More

  20. What recent progress he has made on implementing the Humble Address agreed on 4 February 2026.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address · Hansard source

  More

  Happy St George’s day, Mr Speaker. The Minister is working diligently to produce all those documents. Will he ensure that they are provided before Parliament is prorogued at the end of the Session?

• 23 Apr 2026 · Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak about an issue that goes to the very heart of the responsibilities we have as parliamentarians: namely, the duty to protect the most vulnerable people in our society from exploitation, neglect and harm. In 2016, I had the honour of being drawn in the private Members’ Bills ballot. I sat on the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee for some 14 years prior to the last general election, and at the time we were conducting an inquiry into homelessness in England. I was shocked by the treatment that single homeless people received from local authorities and the public sector in general, so I had the privilege of sponsoring the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017—it took 18 months to be enacted—to transform how we prevent and respond to homelessness in this country. It was built on the very simple but powerful principle that early intervention, dignity and support can change lives. To date, my Act has prevented 1.6 million people from becoming homeless. In 2022, the Committee undertook an inquiry, at the behest of several Birmingham MPs, into what can only be described as the wild west situation in supported housing in Birmingham. When we went there, we were shocked: we saw whole streets where rogue landlords had bought up three-bedroom houses, extended them to the side, to the rear and upwards, and converted them into eight single-room properties, with a small shared kitchen and bathroom. More shocking than that was the fact that these landlords were not providing any support whatsoever to the vulnerable people living in their properties. These houses could have housed someone who had been a drug addict next door to a drug pusher, and a lady fleeing domestic violence next door to someone convicted of domestic violence. There was no regulation at all. To be fair to it, Birmingham city council had introduced a voluntary scheme, but unfortunately the rogue landlords were the ones who would not register. Before I go on, it is very important that I pay tribute to the wonderful charities up and down the country that provide not only a home, but support for vulnerable people. Having been drawn in the private Members’ Bills ballot in 2022, I took the step of introducing what is now the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. This House and the other place took vital steps when they supported the Act. I worked with charities such as Crisis, and the Act was born out of necessity, with mounting evidence in too many cases that supported housing was failing the very people it was meant to help and that rogue landlords were getting away without proper regulation. I think it is fair to say that I have been patient, given that the Act was passed in 2023 and, in 2026, it still has not been brought into operation. I know that the Government have consulted on it, and I welcome the fact that they continue to commit to implementing it, as they set out in their recent response to the consultation, but the time for consultation and delay must now be over. We have to get on with this, because every single day, vulnerable people are being exploited by rogue landlords. The need for action is urgent and immediate, because while we continue to talk about the issue, rogue landlords continue to operate. While we delay, vulnerable people continue to suffer and public money continues to flow into the hands of those who exploit those in need, rather than support them. Supported housing should be one of the great strengths of our social system. It provides accommodation alongside care, support and supervision for people who are literally rebuilding their lives. Let us not forget that these people may have experienced homelessness, may have fled domestic abuse, or may be living with complex needs. The good charities assess those people’s needs just after providing a roof over their heads and supply a network of support; the rogue landlords pop along once a week and say, “Everyone all right? Yes? See you next week.” That is the extent of the support that these people receive. As Crisis has set out, when it is delivered well, supported housing can provide high-quality transitional homes that help people to move on from homelessness and rebuild their independence. Emmaus UK’s recent “Rebuilding Lives” report reinforces this, showing how good supported housing not only offers shelter, but provides purpose and opportunities for training and work, which are key ingredients in helping people to regain stability and confidence. When it works well, supported housing is transformative. It provides a pathway to independence and access to employment, it helps people to rebuild relationships and move on to settled homes, and it saves the public purse billions by reducing demand on health, criminal justice and emergency services. However, when it fails and rogue landlords take control, we have seen individuals punished for daring to get a job, because if they do so, they lose their housing benefit and the landlord cannot charge the earth in rent. Those rogue landlords refuse to provide even basic support and, as I have said, they sometimes house people literally next door to the very people they are fleeing. Over recent years, we have seen the rise of rogue operators in the exempt accommodation sector. Crisis has documented how those providers exploit gaps in regulation, particularly in non-commissioned accommodation, where oversight is at its weakest. They have entered the market not to deliver support, but to maximise profit. That is because exempt accommodation allows providers to charge higher rents through housing benefit, recognising that supporting vulnerable people comes with additional costs. The fundamental flaw, as Crisis has highlighted, is that there has been no consistent, enforceable mechanism to ensure that the support justifying those higher rents is delivered, and there is no single regulator responsible for overseeing that support. The result is that in some cases, we are rewarding exploitation. We have heard deeply troubling accounts from residents. Crisis has reported people being forced to share basic facilities with literally dozens of others, living in properties that are plagued by damp, mould and vermin, and experiencing intimidation and abuse—I have spoken to tenants who were abused and forced to move from one property to another. Some have even been forced back into homelessness to escape these conditions. Others have been charged additional fees for support that does not exist—charges that eat into their already limited incomes and push them further into poverty. Heaven help those vulnerable people if they dare to get a job, because the reduction in housing support means that, in most cases, the rogue landlord kicks them out. These findings are echoed in wider evidence from the sector, including the collapse of providers such as Prospect Housing, where residents were charged for inadequate or absent support. To be absolutely clear, this is not an isolated problem. While I remember visiting cities such as Birmingham where the issues with supported housing have been most prominent, Crisis and other organisations have identified similar patterns across London, the midlands, the south-east and beyond. Rogue providers are expanding, exploiting inconsistencies in oversight between local authorities and adapting their business models to stay one step ahead of enforcement. Local authorities are responsible for assessing eligibility for housing benefit and verifying that support is being provided, but as Crisis has highlighted, they face significant barriers of limited resources, inconsistent powers and legal constraints. There is also evidence that some councils struggle to proactively verify whether meaningful support is being delivered at all. Other regulators exist, but none has comprehensive responsibility for the support element of exempt accommodation. Guidance such as the national statement of expectations sets out a vision, but it is not legally enforceable. Voluntary standards exist in some areas, but compliance is optional. In short, the system has allowed far too many providers to slip through the cracks.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. Clearly, if people are living in tents or are homeless on the streets, they are not getting the support they need to rebuild their lives, which is the key. I introduced the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 to provide the framework we need to bring order, accountability and integrity to the sector. The Act enables the introduction of national supported housing standards—clear benchmarks for what good provision looks like, covering both accommodation and support. It establishes a licensing regime, empowering local authorities to approve, monitor and, where necessary, shut down providers that fail to meet the standards. The Act requires councils to develop local strategies, ensuring that supported housing provision is aligned with genuine local need, rather than driven by profit. That issue has been highlighted by Crisis and Emmaus UK research. Crucially, the Act allows for the linking of enhanced housing benefit to compliance, ensuring that public money supports only those providers that meet the required standards. The reality is that the system is costing the taxpayer a fortune, and it is going to rogue landlords. The Government’s recent response to the consultation provides much-needed further detail on how the measures will be implemented, and I welcome the commitment to a national licensing system, the introduction of national supported housing standards and the application of a fit and proper person test for those managing schemes. I hope that we can ensure that some of the weasel ways that some rogue landlords use to get around things can be corrected. These are supposed to be not-for-profit organisations, but often a person will buy a property and rent it to a registered charity, which then pays rent to the landlord. Although the charity is not making a profit, the owner of the property is making a fortune. I hope we can correct that particular area. I also welcome the decision, strongly supported by Crisis, to make eligibility for enhanced housing benefit contingent on a scheme holding a licence. That gives the system real teeth, removing the financial incentive that has driven rogue providers into the market, but I must express my concern about the timeline. The Government have indicated that implementation will begin in April 2027, four years after my Act received Royal Assent. I welcome the commitment, but we have pointed out that there must be no further delay, given the scale of harm that has already been caused since the Act was passed. During that time, the harms we sought to address have escalated. We must continue to ensure that these people do not continue their profit making. Every month of delay allows rogue landlords to operate unchecked. Every delay means more vulnerable people placed in unsafe conditions. Every delay represents a failure to deliver on the promise we made on a cross-party basis in this House. We must ask ourselves: how many more people will suffer before these powers are brought into force? We must also recognise that regulation alone is not enough. The problem in this sector has been exacerbated by years of under-investment in support services. Crisis has made it clear that the growth of poor-quality, non-commissioned provision is closely linked to the decline in funding for support and the absence of a dedicated national funding stream. Housing benefit can cover higher rents, but it cannot fund support services. That creates a perverse incentive, in that providers must house people with support needs to qualify for higher payments, but there is no dedicated funding to meet those needs. Some providers go to great lengths to bridge this gap, relying on charitable funding or volunteers. That has been highlighted by Emmaus, and its model demonstrates the value of meaningful activity, work and community. Others, however, pass the costs on to the residents, charging additional fees that push people further into poverty. If we are serious about making this system work, we must address that imbalance. The Treasury’s ongoing review of homelessness spending presents an opportunity to align funding with the new regulatory framework. As Crisis has argued, this must include a reset and an increase in funding for support services, including approaches such as Housing First and floating support. I urge the Government—they have not only a majority on their side, but support across the House on this issue—to really get on and do it. We must ensure that local authorities have the resources they need to implement licensing and enforcement, the new burdens placed on councils must be fully funded if the system is to succeed, and we must ensure that, as we tackle rogue provision, we do not inadvertently increase homelessness. The Government’s commitment to produce guidance on rehousing residents affected by scheme closures is welcome, but I would caution that guidance alone is not enough. Local authorities must be supported financially and strategically to prevent homelessness and to take a proactive, co-ordinated approach. We must also listen to those with lived experience. Evidence from residents, including the testimonies gathered by Emmaus, consistently shows that good supported housing is about more than accommodation. It is about meaningful support, opportunities for training, work and a sense of community and belonging. It is about rebuilding lives. We must ensure that these voices are at the heart of the new system shaping national standards, informing local strategies and holding providers to account. Ultimately, that is what this Act is about: it is about people—people who have already faced significant hardship and who deserve better from us. The Act represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reset the system, drive out rogue landlords, raise standards and ensure that supported housing truly supports those in need. We should just look at the success of my first Act—the Homelessness Reduction Act—which, I say again, has prevented 1.6 million people from being made homeless. That is why we must implement the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act, and we must do so with urgency. In closing, I ask the Government simply to bring forward the regulations and the guidance, ensure that the April 2027 timetable is met without further delay, provide the resources needed for effective implementation, and ensure that no further delays stand in the way of protecting vulnerable people. Let us honour the intent of this House, let us deliver on the promise we made in 2023, and let us never again allow vulnerable people to be treated as commodities in a broken system. The time for action is now. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for the response she has given thus far. I am not going to get into the politics of this, but local government reorganisation is going on, so could she say a little about what will happen to ensure that local government sets up in the right sort of way with the licensing scheme?

• 21 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T8. Ministers will be aware that Ashab al-Yamin has claimed responsibility for the terrorist attacks across north-west London on Jewish synagogues, places of worship, businesses and homes. That is a group that takes its orders directly from Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. What action have Ministers taken to call in the diplomats from Iran and expel them, because they are instructing terrorist attacks on our citizens?

• 20 Apr 2026 · Antisemitic Attacks · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the police and the fire brigade for their prompt action in the early hours of Sunday morning. It was a reassurance patrol that spotted the firebombing of Kenton shul and prevented it from burning down completely, so that is welcome. Equally welcome is the extension of the section 60 notice, not just to Barnet but to Harrow and Brent—I think that has been announced while the Minister has been on his feet. We have to recognise that this is a series of terrorist attacks on the Jewish community. I have people contacting me saying, “Am I safe in my own home, let alone going to the synagogue?” That is a disgrace for this country and we have to take action immediately. Will he look not only at proscription of the IRGC but the immediate proscription of Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia, so that membership of that organisation is a criminal offence? Equally, will he make sure that the charities behind these people—the Dar Alhekma Trust and the Abrar Islamic Foundation, which I wrote to the Minister about a year ago—are also proscribed, as well as the 16 other Islamic charities that have been proscribed by the Arab states? The reality is that we have to take prompt and firm action to stop this terrorist activity now. What starts with the hate marches ends up with synagogues being burned and Jewish people feeling unsafe.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Bring back Middlesex, I say. On behalf of the Backbench Business Committee, I remind the Leader of the House that we await the promised motion to change the Standing Orders for the election of the Backbench Business Committee for the new Session. In addition to the business announced by the Leader of the House, next Thursday in the Chamber there will be Select Committee statements from the Environmental Audit Committee and the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee. Turning to the business in Westminster Hall. on Tuesday 21 April there will be a debate on the need for an independent national review body overseeing wheelchair provision. On Thursday 23 April there will be a debate on access to education and training for young adult carers, followed by a debate on gambling advertising. On Tuesday 28 April there will be a debate on Government support for park home owners. I managed to get a private Member’s Bill through this place, which became the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023. We are still awaiting the implementation of that Act, which means that vulnerable people are being exploited by rogue landlords. I understand that the Department has completed the consultation on the regulations to implement the Act, but it is likely that we will not see it implemented until 2027. Could the Leader of the House arrange for a statement in this place next week on what exactly the Government are doing to implement the Act, which has cross-party support? If there is no statement, Mr Speaker, may I urge you to allow me an Adjournment debate on the subject?

• 15 Apr 2026 · Strategic Defence Review: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  One of the challenges of tying defence expenditure to GDP is that the economy fluctuates. When Labour crashed the economy in 2008, defence spending in GDP terms went up. The reality is that as the economy fluctuates over the course of this Parliament and the next, there could be a challenge for actual defence spending. As the Minister looks at the defence investment plan, can he ensure that the level of expenditure continues to rise so that we actually get the investment in defence that we need?

• 14 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  It is welcome news that NHS England has reduced the faecal immunochemical test threshold from 120 micrograms to 80 micrograms, bringing England into line with Scotland and Wales. We now need investment in endoscopy and other related treatments to ensure that people suffering from bowel cancer are spotted early and given the ultimate chance of survival. Could Ministers look at further investment here to increase survival rates?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. Yesterday came the welcome news that Queensbury station, in my constituency, is one of five new stations that will be considered for step-free access. That makes almost the entire Jubilee line step-free, except for Stanmore station, which Transport for London classifies as step-free, even though my residents face 49 steps on the main staircase, 10 at the side and access via a very steep ramp from the car park, which even a Paralympian cannot manage. Could the Minister responding to this afternoon’s debate agree to a new legal definition of “step-free access”?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business for the two weeks after Easter. I note that yesterday the House rose early when the Government business finished. We could have had a three-hour debate in Backbench Business time if that had been made available. I also note that we are not being given any time in the week after Easter, other than half a day on the Monday when we come back. In Westminster Hall, the debates on Tuesday 14 April will be on hidden credit liabilities and the role of the Financial Conduct Authority. On Thursday 16 April, there will be a Select Committee statement from the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, followed by debates on the housing needs of young people and the NHS federated data platform. On Tuesday 21 April, there will be a debate on the merits of the independent national revision body on overseeing wheelchair provision. On Thursday 23 April, there will be a debate on access to education and training for young adult carers, followed by a debate on gambling advertising. I remind the House that Government Parliamentary Private Secretaries should not put in bids to the Backbench Business Committee. I am aware that the hon. Member for Dudley (Sonia Kumar) became a PPS after she submitted her bid, and I am grateful to her for arranging for someone else to take on her debate. In addition, may I urge the House to respond to the Modernisation Committee’s consultation on Backbench Business time and petitions? We had a lively debate on potholes in Transport questions. We have all had the dreadful experience of having a tyre go when driving over a pothole. The pothole is reported and the workforce from the council come round, pour some pitch into it and roll it, but then it rains and the pitch is washed away. In Harrow, we have a unique solution to that. We have a Pothole Pro—affectionately known as Pothole Pete—that recycles the surface and cements a layer to ensure that it cannot be removed. That means that it is far more efficient and effective. Will the Leader of the House commend this to councils up and down the country?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Grid Capacity: West London · Hansard source

  More

  The problem for the West London Alliance, which comprises six boroughs, is the lack of grid capacity, which means that new home developments and new projects providing business opportunities are frozen for a number of years, into the 2030s. Unless there is urgent action to provide more power to the grid, all those excellent projects will be frozen for far too long.

• 19 Mar 2026 · International Development · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the continued commitment to combating terrible diseases such as HIV, malaria and tuberculosis, but the Foreign Secretary has not mentioned polio. After many years of investment, we have almost got to the point of eradicating the disease. If that programme ceases, the risk is that polio will come back in a big way. In areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan the disease still seems to be rampant, and they are involved in a conflict, as she will know. Will she confirm that funding for the programme will continue, so that we can eradicate polio once and for all?

• 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just want to make sure that the record is corrected. Before I mentioned Peterborough temple, I sent an email out of courtesy to the office of the hon. Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) this morning to inform him that I was intending to raise it. I was also extremely cautious to talk only about things that are in the public domain, because there is an ongoing court case and I did not want to refer to any further details.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the Chamber business for next week. Could he give us early notice of whether we will get time after Easter, so that the Committee can allocate time accordingly? In addition, next Thursday there will be a statement from the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee on its report on coastal erosion. In Westminster Hall, next Tuesday there will be a debate on sudden unexplained death in childhood, and on Thursday 26 March there will be a debate on outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability, followed by a debate on the potential merits of mandatory body armour for prison officers. On Tuesday 14 April, when we come back, there will be a debate on hidden credit liabilities and the role of the Financial Conduct Authority. On Thursday 16 April, there will be a debate on the housing needs of young people, followed by a debate on the NHS federated data platform. I hope that the Leader of the House will bring forward the necessary changes to Standing Orders that he promised before we prorogue for the state opening of Parliament. In my position as chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for British Hindus, I have been in contact with Peterborough city council about the plight of the Bharat Hindu Samaj temple. This is the only Hindu temple in Peterborough. There are 11 mosques in the area, and I wish them Eid Mubarak as we approach the end of Ramadan. The council decided to sell the temple after the trustees of the temple agreed to match any other bid that came forward. They eventually offered £1.4 million. The councillors, however, chose another bid of £1.2 million. This was kept secret. Now the trustees have taken the case to court and, indeed, have got to a position whereby the judge has stayed the sale of the site. Could we have a statement from the Secretary of State next week on what action he will take to ensure that we preserve the opportunity for Hindus in Peterborough and across the country to celebrate their religion in proper fashion in peace and harmony?

• 19 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T2. In Harrow we have suffered two industrial-scale dumping incidents on land that is earmarked for much-needed housing development. It has cost thousands of pounds to clear up. The council has issued more than a thousand fines for people dumping their rubbish on the streets. I welcome the decision by the Secretary of State to introduce further measures. Will she outline what those measures are and when they will be introduced, so that we can end this scourge of fly-tipping?

• 17 Mar 2026 · Right to Protest · Hansard source

  More

  Clearly, the Home Secretary has the power to ban marches but no power to deal with static protests. This weekend we had the annual al-Quds hate demonstration, at which individuals regularly chanted antisemitic slogans, but the police could take no action. Will the Minister have discussions with the Home Secretary on what can be done to police and ban static demonstrations that will clearly lead to a contravention of the law? The big problem in London is that police are being sucked into the centre of the city and taken away from the boroughs where they should be doing their policing work.

• 16 Mar 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister admitted to this House that he knew about the relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Mandelson. From the documentation that has been released so far, it appears that the Prime Minister did not actually interview Peter Mandelson for the job or make a decision on that; it was left to staffers. Despite that, there are newsreels showing both the Prime Minister and Peter Mandelson in public places, obviously having convivial discussions. Will the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister confirm that the Prime Minister did not formally interview Peter Mandelson for the job—and if not, why not?

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

  More

  Posties in my constituency have reported to me that one of the most serious problems is staff absence. Staff go off sick because they have been overworked, and as a result, deliveries do not take place. The final straw for one of my constituents was when they received a Christmas card on 28 February that had been franked before Christmas. Clearly, there is a serious problem, not just in rural areas but in suburban areas. Will the Minister seek an urgent action plan from Royal Mail on getting this right? Otherwise we will be back here in a month’s time with the same problem.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business. I also thank you, Mr Speaker and the Deputy Speakers, for enabling yesterday’s estimates day debates to go smoothly given the circumstances. I note that the Leader of the House has not announced the business for Thursday 19 March. If we are given that date, there will be a debate on progress in tackling climate change, followed by a debate on online harms. Both are well-subscribed. In Westminster Hall next week, on Tuesday, there will be a debate on the import and sale of fur and fur-related products. On Thursday 12 March, there will be a debate on modernising marriage regulations, followed by a debate on Government support for carnivals. On Tuesday 17 March, there will be a debate on productivity and economic growth in the east midlands. On Thursday 19, there will be a debate on accessibility of banking services, and we await confirmation from the Liaison Committee on whether it will take up its option. On Tuesday 24 March, there will be a debate on sudden unexplained death in childhood. On Thursday 26th, there will be a debate on outcomes for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and craniocervical instability. As the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) mentioned, this week is Holi. My strong advice to anyone attending a Holi event is to wear old clothes because they will get covered in different types of paint and will probably have to be thrown away, rather than cleaning them afterwards. On Tuesday, we had the annual celebration of Holi on the old Harrow civic centre car park site. This event has been run for many years. It is a joyful occasion, and more than a thousand people attended. However, thugs from the Central mosque left the mosque and then decided to disrupt proceedings by pulling over the speakers and disconnecting the audio system. They were then chased away by stewards. That was bad enough. They then came back with 20 more thugs and attempted to attack the people celebrating. This is in Harrow where we have excellent community relations, and I hope this will not happen anywhere else or again. But the sad reality is community tensions are rising because of various different things across the world, and it is our responsibility as politicians to cool things down. Can we therefore have a statement next week on what will be done to cool community tensions and ensure that people can celebrate in peace and harmony, as they should be able to?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. The Foreign Secretary obviously faces real problems with the settlement she has received from the Chancellor, who is sitting next to her, but given that the last 20 years have led to the near eradication of polio and excellent work on malaria, will she prioritise those programmes to ensure we do not go backwards and once again release polio and malaria across the globe?

• 26 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I don’t think I have submitted a request for a UQ for a very long time, Mr Speaker.

• 26 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business for the next two weeks. May I make a plea to him—and to you, Mr Speaker—about the estimates day debates? We had seven excellent bids, from which we had to choose three, and time will be compressed in those debates. I hope that a very high bar for urgent questions will be implemented and that the Government will not put on statements on that particular day—

• 26 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I might do next week. The business in Westminster Hall on Tuesday will be a debate on strengthening community cohesion, which might be quite appropriate after today’s by-election. On Thursday 5 March, there will be a debate on the importance of local museums, followed by one on World Book Day. On Tuesday 10 March, there will be a debate on the import and sale of fur and fur-related products. On Thursday 12 March, the Liaison Committee has a debate on Northern Ireland, followed by a debate on Government support for carnivals. On Tuesday 17 March, there will be a debate on productivity and economic growth in the east midlands. Unfair service charges implemented by companies across the UK are frequently raised at business questions, but I think I have one that tops the lot. In my constituency, we have a development called Stanmore Place, which has a mixture of housing association-managed property and 798 private leased properties. It is managed by St Edward Homes, with a managing agent called Rendall & Rittner. Due to its incompetence, R&R has failed to deliver the costs of heating for the shared services for the past 10 years. It has now decided to re-invoice individuals, who have paid their bills, saying—generously—that it will not invoice them from 2015 to 2021, but that it will invoice them from 2021 to 2026. Ofgem is apparently changing the rules so that this will not be allowed in future; companies will be able to go back only 12 months, which is reasonable. However, Ofgem is not making the change until 2027, meaning that in this particular case, and across the UK, we have a wild west show in back billing. I know that the Government are looking at leasehold reform and service charges in particular. Could the Leader of the House therefore encourage Ministers to ensure that this practice is outlawed immediately?