Bobby Dean MP: speeches

Speeches

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

  More

  I agree wholeheartedly with the comments of the shadow Leader of the House about Jeffrey Epstein and his relationship to Peter Mandelson. I do not intend to repeat those words, but as the political discussion intensifies in the coming days, we must not forget the victims, who are at the centre of all this, and their bravery, not only in retelling their trauma but in risking taking on powerful men—possibly some of the most powerful and connected men on the planet—and all those who serve to protect and legitimise them in those behaviours. I feel a duty to raise some under-discussed issues, including Storm Chandra and its devasting impact on communities, particularly in south-west England, where flooding has damaged homes and a road has collapsed into the sea. It is difficult to know when these storms will hit, but we know that they are going to happen more frequently. That has put more intense scrutiny on the role of the Environment Agency, and I fear that it has been found to be lacking. Last year, the EA gave up on main rivers maintenance, saying that it could no longer afford to do it. That is just part of a pattern of the EA not being equipped any more to do its job. In my constituency, I can think of at least two major failures in the last couple of years. This time last year, there was a major diesel spill in my local river, the River Wandle. Some 4,000 litres were spilt, which were suspected to be from a nearby bus garage. The EA was sent to investigate, but one year on, we still do not have its report and nobody has been held to account. We also host an incinerator in my constituency. If regulated properly, an incinerator is better than landfill, but over the last 18 months there have been hundreds of emissions breaches, and the EA has failed to punish the operators sufficiently. In fact, the EA says that it is minded to approve an expansion in the capacity of the incinerator, despite strong opposition from me, the local authority and apparently the Government, who have stated publicly that they think we have reached capacity for incineration in England, yet still nothing can be done. When I challenged the EA on this matter, it said it feels that it does not have the legal grounds to object to the expansion. I ask the Government: what is going on? Can the Leader of the House organise a debate to ensure that we can hold the EA properly to account?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Transport in the South-East · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller), not only for securing this debate but for the clarity with which she articulated the case for transport improvements across different modes, including both infrastructure and operational improvements. I will focus on one particular infrastructure issue: CARS. Not the cars that the former Roads Minister is used to, but the Croydon area remodelling scheme—a train infrastructure project, as I am sure she will know. This is one of the most important commuter corridor projects not only in the south-east but in the whole country. It is a Network Rail-backed plan that is designed to add capacity, modernise a couple of key stations, improve track and signalling, and unclog the Croydon bottleneck, as was mentioned earlier. What does that mean? Well, it centres on the so-called Selhurst triangle, in which so many trains running through to the south of England get caught up. Its inefficient layout bungs up the whole line, particularly for those who rely on the Brighton main line, but it also has a knock-on effect on other lines because trains are not able to get to stations on time, operators cannot get their stock back, and so on. This small bottleneck, with a radius of a couple of miles, causes cancellations, reduces frequency and leads to poor punctuality and slower journey times right across the south-east of England. When we think of what the Government are trying to do with their growth plan, and particularly things such as Gatwick airport expansion, it makes no sense not to invest in a project like CARS. This needs to be put in context, because some of the infrastructure projects across the country that have been committed to cost tens of billions of pounds. We are talking hundreds of millions of pounds to get CARS off the ground and through phase 1, with a total lifetime project cost in the low billions. I know that will sound a lot to many people, but in the realm of infrastructure, this is really good value for money. CARS has been raised for years as a project that should be invested in, and the last debate in the House was an Adjournment debate secured by the hon. Member for Croydon East (Natasha Irons)—not to be confused with East Croydon station—in which she made an extremely strong case, just ahead of the spending review, but we saw nothing about it in that spending review. When I think of the opportunities that the scheme would unlock, I have to wonder why it has not been chosen. On its merits, it should be pursued. I think the Government have not invested in the project because, like the last Government, they have a strange aversion to investment in London and the south-east. I understand that there are deep regional inequalities in this country that need to be addressed, and we all recognise that there has been severe under-investment in other parts of the country. However, the political consensus in recent years has been to pit the regions against each other, and almost to neglect investment in the south-east and London at the expense of projects elsewhere—not because of the basis of those projects, but because it is politically convenient to do so. I think the Government need to look again at which projects can deliver maximum value, to ensure that we are not making the regions race against each other by selecting each project on its merits. I have already explained how investment in this small area around Croydon would provide benefits across the south-east of England, but we would be naive not to think that it would also create benefits right across the country. Where would the suppliers come from? The project would create jobs and business revenue for companies across the country, and that is only the direct effect. It does not include the indirect effects from improving the commuter experience into London—the capital city of this country—and the wider economic benefits that would be felt by all. It has been suggested to me that the second reason for the delay in investment in this project is to do with covid and how commuter patterns have changed. We are already starting to see a snapback to previous behaviours. If we look at passenger levels, they are almost back up to pre-covid levels, and the reduced frequency and reliability of services are stopping people going back into the workplace as often as they would like. I hear that from my wife, who goes in once a week at the moment. She wants to go in more to see her colleagues, but she does not because she cannot trust the train that she needs to catch, so there is a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation. If we really want to get people out of motor vehicles and using public transport more, we need to build those services so that people can use them. The benefits of the Croydon area remodelling scheme are clear: we would have faster, more reliable, higher-capacity rail services across one of the highest-growth regions in the country. There would also be a particular benefit to my constituency. The London borough of Sutton is one of the most poorly served by Transport for London. We do not have a single tube station or the London Overground service. We have a couple of tram stops, but they are in the far corner of the borough and do not really serve our residents. This project could unlock the potential of the London Overground and metro-like services that the rest of London benefits from. We are really excited by that prospect. I urge the Minister to look again at the true merits of the project, how many people would benefit from it and the potential for economic growth across the country. I look forward to her response.

• 2 Feb 2026 · R&D Defence Spending: Economic Impact · Hansard source

  More

  12. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of research and development defence spending on the economy.

• 2 Feb 2026 · R&D Defence Spending: Economic Impact · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister will know that investment in defence R&D has tremendous impacts on the UK economy, not only through jobs and crowding in private investment, but through the spill-over effects of new technologies helping Britain to prosper. Is it therefore not clear that if the Government were to issue defence hypothecated bonds, that would make a brilliant return for the British taxpayer too?

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

  More

  I associate myself with the comments made by the Leader of the House about Holocaust Memorial Day and the tributes he paid to the people we have lost. Last weekend, all the plotting and deceit finally reached a climax. I have to say that the man from the north who I wanted to win that battle did not quite make it. Still, Faraaz played a good game and I thought that Stephen and Rachel were worthy winners of “The Traitors”— [ Laughter. ] I thought that deserved more. Moving on, I think the whole House can agree that the world has become less safe. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the instability that Trump has brought to the NATO alliance has focused minds across Europe. We all know that we now need to find a way to increase defence spending as quickly as possible. This week, the Liberal Democrats put forward an idea about the possibility of issuing defence bonds. That would raise funds not only via the financial markets but allow ordinary Brits to take part. We could issue them on a fixed-term basis and hypothecate them specifically to capital spending on defence. We believe that that could help us achieve 3% of defence spending by 2030 and allow everybody to participate in the effort. Pension funds and investment portfolios allow people to select the style of portfolio that they would like. Sometimes people tick a box to say that they want to invest in environmental, social and governance measures. We believe that if there was a UK-focused portfolio, many people would choose to opt in. In fact, research suggests that Brits would be willing to see lower returns on their investment if they knew that their money was going to a good cause, and to British assets in particular. Could we have a debate in Government time on just how we can get to that 3% target as quickly as possible? We need to build cross-party consensus on that.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Ten years ago, this place introduced legislation preventing banks from applying tax deductions after paying compensation for wrongdoing. Now lenders are set to pay out billions of pounds in connection with the motor finance scandal, but they will be able to reduce their tax bills because most of those companies have channelled their money via subsidiaries. Does the Minister agree that that is not in keeping with the spirit of the law, and will the Government do something about it?

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

  More

  Before I begin, I have to pull the Leader of the House up, because he did not respond to one of the critical points that the shadow Leader of the House made. I, for one, would like to hear what the Leader of the House has to say about the feud in the Beckham family. St Helier hospital is older than the NHS itself, is sited in the heart of my constituency and is crumbling. It was placed within the new hospitals programme set up by the Conservative Government, but they totally failed to deliver on it. This Government put it on a new timetable, stretching out delivery over the coming decades. Last week, the National Audit Office published an assessment of how the Government have performed so far. There is some good news for the Government: the NAO said that they have put the programme on a firmer financial footing for the long term, but the NAO warns of potential further delays, particularly to those hospitals with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, which look set to miss their deadline in 2030. I have also heard that some of the phase 1 schemes have not kept pace with the programme and not drawn down on all the capital allocated to them. That could present an opportunity for other trusts perhaps to do smaller projects in the interim, such as the extension of the emergency department that my local NHS trust is asking for, or possibly even to move our scheme from phase 2 into phase 1, if the trust can prove that it is ready to go. It has been about a year since we have had a substantive update from the Government on the new hospitals programme. The National Audit Office report last week raises lots of questions, so will the Leader of the House ask the relevant Health Minister to come to the Dispatch Box to answer them?

• 21 Jan 2026 · Water White Paper · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome many of the measures in this White Paper. More regulation will help, but—let’s be honest—it does not get to the heart of the problem: the failure of the privatisation of the water industry. We need to be talking about ownership, but that is absent from the White Paper. I have heard the conversations in the Chamber today about nationalisation, and I agree with the Secretary of State. There would be some drawbacks to a model of nationalisation. It would put substantial liabilities on the book and would put sewerage infrastructure investment up against investment in schools and hospitals in every Budget. But there is another model, which the Liberal Democrats are putting forward: the co-operative or mutualisation model. Will the Secretary of State take that into serious consideration?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Business Rates: Retail, Hospitality and Leisure · Hansard source

  More

  As has been mentioned, in its manifesto Labour committed itself to reforming the business rates system, and the Red Book for the Budget referred to “permanently lower business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure”. That will have given business owners the impression that their bills would be lower. The Government’s get-out about the rates being low, when they knew that transitional reliefs were being phased out and rateable values were rising substantially, is not cutting it with businesses that made plans accordingly. Last week, we on the Treasury Committee heard from the Valuation Office Agency that the Government had known for more than a year about the size of the increase in rateable values, so why has this backlash taken them by surprise?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Proposed Chinese Embassy · Hansard source

  More

  I think this House has grown tired of the Government’s insistence on framing this as a mere planning application —as a quasi-judicial process about which national Government can do nothing. That is simply not the case. This is a test of this Government’s resolve to stand up to the threat that China poses to the UK. The Prime Minister clearly thinks that handing this gift over to the Chinese in Beijing will strengthen his hand in trade negotiations, but I believe that China will just smell weakness. I challenge the Government to reject the mega-embassy, cancel the visit, and not go back there until Jimmy Lai is back on these shores.

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

  More

  There are rumours circulating around Westminster of a Bobby about to join the Reform party. I just want to clarify that it is not me. I am staying put. I quite enjoy watching the numbers to the right of me dwindle. We talk a lot in this place about the Home Office, immigration and asylum. Mostly, we talk about people’s right to come here and the shameful asylum backlog. We talk much less about the people who are already here—the ones who have built their lives, held down jobs, paid taxes, raised a family and contributed. I think the story of immigration in this country is largely a positive one, and it is sad that that is not said enough in this place. If you have worked hard and played by the rules, you deserve to be treated with respect. Unfortunately, the Home Office is treating many visa holders seeking to settle here with disrespect. People who have lived here for years—sometimes over a decade—are being made to wait years, sometimes subject to indefinite service standards, for answers about their future in this country. Recently, the Home Office has even taken to lecturing people with the line that citizenship is a privilege and not a right, as if to say how dare they ask about remaining in a country they have contributed to for so long. Will the Leader of the House bring this to the attention of Home Office Ministers and urge them to review their service standards and treat these people with a bit more respect?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Prisons: Illegal Drugs · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Committee for its investigation into this important topic. The Chair spoke a bit about the shocking developments in the supply of drugs into prisons, but can he expand on the demand for drugs, and on the availability of rehabilitation services and other forms of support for addicts in prisons?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Another day, another U-turn. Have you ever seen a new Government so lacking in conviction? When they announced their plan for change, I do not think anybody in this place realised that it was a plan to change every single one of their policies. This is becoming a shambles. The Liberal Democrats lack no conviction on this issue—we have been opposed to ID cards for over 20 years. The Minister said repeatedly that digital ID will save people money, but this is a multibillion-pound project, and taxpayers’ money is being spent on it. Will he confirm how much has been spent on the scheme so far, and how much the Government intend to spend on it?

• 13 Jan 2026 · Chinese Embassy · Hansard source

  More

  I am exasperated by the Government’s response to this urgent question. They are treating this development as a mere wrinkle in a bureaucratic planning matter, which is simply not the case. If this embassy is granted, it will be one of the largest and most prestigious embassies held by any country in Europe, and that has huge diplomatic consequences. Will the Minister reassure us that it is not merely planning considerations that are being taken account, but those of national security and diplomatic importance as well?

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

  More

  I thank the Leader of the House for his statement. The whole House wants to get the Bill right, and if a delay is what is required, I think the House will support that. I am glad that the Government have had the humility to withdraw it from tomorrow’s business, even at this late stage, in order to get it right. However, it does seem extraordinary that it would be withdrawn at this very late stage, and it raises serious concerns about what kind of ongoing engagement there has been with key stakeholders up to this moment. Will he assure us that what needs to be worked out can be done meaningfully in less than a week? Will he also commit that the Government will deliver the Hillsborough law as previously promised, and not just a Hillsborough law in name only?

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

  More

  Happy new year to you, Mr Speaker, and everybody in the House. To respond briefly to something the shadow Deputy Leader of the House said: I sincerely hope that Arsenal do not win the league. Over Christmas, some people have had the unfortunate experience of finding themselves in their local hospital, and they will have been met by a packed emergency department and possibly treated in the corridor. New statistics from the Royal College of Emergency Medicine this week show that over 1.5 million people had to wait longer than 12 hours in emergency departments last year, with over 16,000 excess deaths as a result of those long waits. At my local hospital, St Helier, the situation is worse than the national average, with over 80%—the vast majority —of people remaining in the emergency department for longer than is deemed medically necessary. This is, of course, down to a multitude of reasons, including the inadequacy of social care, bed capacity in hospitals, which we know is worse in the UK than in comparable economies, and the condition of the estate. The many delays in the new hospital programme mean that my local hospital is having to close wards and do repairs and maintenance, which is exacerbating the problem. When corridor care first came up in my inbox, I was shocked by it. I understood how tragic the situation was and how undignified it was for patients and families, but I hoped it was a temporary, urgent measure that would resolve itself in time. That is not proving to be the case, so can the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State to make a statement on the matter of corridor care and how we can hasten its end immediately?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Human Rights Abuses: Magnitsky Sanctions · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is making an excellent contribution to the debate. The Treasury Committee heard evidence last year about the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. It appeared to me that it is far too small for the job that it has to do, especially compared with equivalents overseas in the US and Europe. Does he think that part of the solution is also funding OFSI properly, so it can be proactive in its monitoring of sanctions, and not only reactive?

• 8 Jan 2026 · High Street Gambling Reform · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is making a really powerful speech. We had representatives from the gambling industry in front of the Treasury Committee recently, and that revealed to me that such stories are not tragic by-products of an industry that is actually okay, but actually part of the business strategy of that industry. The gambling industry receives 60% of its profits from 5% of its customers. It needs people like the ones the hon. Member refers to, in the circumstances that they are in, in order to make the profits that it survives on. Does the hon. Member agree that it was a disgrace that the representatives in front of the Treasury Committee said that there is no evidence of social harm related to gambling?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Subsea Telecommunications Cables: Resilience and Crisis Preparedness · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Committee for its work. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the restrictions of international law, but could he explain what evidence the Committee took about the need for international co-operation? It seems evident to me that the nature of subsea cables means that international co-operation is required to protect them sufficiently. Are there any mechanisms with which the UK should be engaging better?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  May I associate myself with the comments made by the Leader of the House about the victims of the Bondi Beach attack? Antisemitism has no place in our society and I am glad that the House is united against hate. Mr Speaker, I join in the well wishes to you and to all the House staff at Christmas time. The Government have been engaging in another Christmas tradition this week: rushing out lots of statements in the final week before recess. I calculated that we are up to double the normal rate, with 13 and a half statements per day this week—I will let you decide what half a statement constitutes, Mr Speaker! We had the statement on local government finance yesterday, and it seemed that many Labour Back Benchers seemed to have had access to the figures for each local authority in advance, in a way that we had not. Our spokesperson, my hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), searched the internet for the figures in advance but could not find them, so will the Leader of the House ask the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness to clarify whether those figures were made available to Labour Back Benchers in advance? Moving on to more serious Christmas matters, the BBC reported this week that Father Christmas’s pay has flatlined this year. There is good news for the elves, as thanks to the national minimum wage increase, their pay is on the up. However, this wage compression is apparently demotivating for Father Christmas and some garden centres across the country are struggling to get him to turn up. As it happens, he is also upset about the Employment Rights Bill, because it has made it much more difficult for him to get the sack—ba-dum tish. [ Interruption. ] Oh, come on! Another important Christmas matter is the ongoing bitter dispute about Christmas films. The Liberal Democrat Chief Whip, my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain), insists that “Die Hard” is a Christmas movie; she even has a “Die Hard”-themed advent calendar in the Whips Office. It is of course set at Christmas time, but some say it is too violent to be a Christmas film, although in my experience violence is not absent from Christmas, usually. There has also been some controversy over “Love Actually”—it is of course set at Christmas time, but some people have been calling for it to be cancelled because of its dated romantic themes. I still like “Love Actually” and I encourage the Prime Minister to watch it this year; I would hope he might be inspired by Hugh Grant’s character’s courage. Finally, I would like to make the slightly controversial point that sometimes Christmas TV specials are better than Christmas films. I really enjoyed the “Gavin and Stacey” Christmas special last year and I am looking forward to “Amandaland” this year. All this demonstrates that there is a lot to be settled when it comes to the matter of Christmas films, so will the Leader of the House allow a debate in Government time on the matter of Christmas films?

• 17 Dec 2025 · INEOS Chemicals: Grangemouth · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister mentioned in his statement the £200 million for projects in Grangemouth from the National Wealth Fund. I would like to raise with him a concern that was raised in evidence to the Treasury Committee, which is that the National Wealth Fund has to operate on the riskier end of project proposals because it does not want to crowd out private investment, but that means necessarily that many projects will fail. The worry is that politicians will not be ready to defend projects that fail under the National Wealth Fund. Does the Minister agree with that assessment, and is he willing to accept that, given the risk profile of the National Wealth Fund, some projects will fail as part of the deal?

• 11 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister indicated to the House that the Liberal Democrats were against the national minimum wage in the ’90s. My own memories are hazy, but I am reliably informed that that was not the case, so I hope the Minister will correct the record.

• 11 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

• 11 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Speaker. As you probably know, south London is wonderful, but you may not know that it is one of the UK’s largest regional economies. Last week my local council, the London borough of Sutton, launched its economic growth plan, inviting businesses to take advantage of opportunities in the area. Will the Minister meet me and the local council leader to connect the business community with all the opportunities that exist in my borough?

• 11 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Before I begin, I join the tributes to Lance Corporal George Hooley. His tragic death reminds us of the courage of all our armed forces in their determination to protect our country. My inbox, like those of other Members, I am sure, has this week been full of correspondence from demoralised businesses, after they were hit by yet another tax rise. We have spoken a lot about the cost of living crisis, but we are now experiencing a cost-of-doing-business crisis, too. Nowhere is that felt more than in the hospitality and retail industries. We in this House are quick to talk about such businesses being the heart of our communities, but they have suffered a lot in recent years. They closed during the covid pandemic, have suffered the rise of the online competition, and were hit by employer national insurance rises last year—those industries were particularly hit by that change because they employ many of the low-paid and young first-jobbers in our economy. They were promised good news on business rates in the Budget, in the form of a fairer system and lower rates, but the revaluations, combined with the tapering of reliefs, have meant that many bills are set to rise. Businesses in my Carshalton and Wallington constituency, such as Wallington Cycles and the Sun pub in Carshalton, have sent me pretty desperate emails setting out their worries for the future. I have tried to reassure them about the transitional relief that the Government have put in place, which should offset some of the damage, but that is small comfort against the backdrop of so many rising costs. We talk about fairness, but Harrods’ bills are set to fall by over £1 million, while the bill of the average pub will go up by £1,400 every single year. The Government gave themselves powers to offer a discount of 20p in every £1, but so far they have offered discounts of just 5p. Will the Leader of the House ask the relevant Minister to make a statement to clear up all this confusion and reassure businesses that they will be supported in the coming years?