Carla Lockhart MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. and learned Member is right; the policy is stifling growth. As I have said before, farmers want to advance and grow, and they want to spend money.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of agricultural property relief and business property relief on family farming in Northern Ireland. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I am very grateful for the opportunity to bring forward this debate on an issue that cuts right to the heart of rural Northern Ireland and indeed Britain. The proposed changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief will have devastating consequences for family farms across our nation. Agriculture is not just another sector in our economy; for Northern Ireland it is our very foundation. It sustains our rural communities, feeds over 10 million people annually, underpins our agrifood industry and provides work for tens of thousands of families. I make no apology for repeating a comment that I have made previously, and that my grandfather tells me every Sunday at the dinner table: if the farmer is not doing well in this country, no one is. In Northern Ireland we have over 26,000 farms. They form the backbone of our rural life—

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his comments, and I wholeheartedly agree. I urge the Treasury and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to pause, and engage in genuine consultation with the farming community. Sit with us and talk to us. They have refused every meeting request. We need a review that recognises the unique structures of Northern Ireland farming, made up of predominantly family-run farms and regional variations. Many suggestions have been made that are worth exploration, including in the latest Centre for the Analysis of Taxation report, as has been noted. I am not saying that it is a silver bullet, but we should sit down, talk about it and start to engage in the conversation. At its heart, this debate is about how we as a society value those who feed us. We speak often in this House about sustainability and food strategy, but sustainability begins with sustaining the people who produce our food. We cannot say we care about the environment and rural life on one hand and on the other make policies that threaten to strip families of the land they have cared for over generations. I say to the Exchequer Secretary, with the full force of rural Northern Ireland behind me: think again. Listen to the voices of those who know the land and who understand the realities of farming life. Do not create a policy that will devastate small family farms in pursuit of a marginal tax return. Agriculture is a national asset, not a target for revenue generation. The changes to agriculture property relief are not reform. They are an attack on our family farming. They form part of a wider Labour agenda that is anti-rural, anti-farmer and anti-common sense. That is how it is seen out in rural Britain, and it is somewhat similar to the direction of travel of our own Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister in Northern Ireland. While our producers face rising costs and red tape, Labour’s response is more tax and more barriers. Their net zero plans are driving good farmland out of production and into solar panels and their planning rules are choking rural life and pushing young families off the land. On national TV this week, the reality was laid bare. I can still see Charles Rees in my mind as he said “if something doesn’t change by next April I’d probably top myself.” If that does not send a shiver down every spine in this place today, we are not in touch with the public. I ask Labour to stop, halt, talk to us, engage, get it right. Do not go on this collision course. I urge the Government to scrap this farm tax and rethink.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his consistent voice on this issue. I will come to “Countryfile” later in my speech. The vast majority of our farms in Northern Ireland are family run, often handed down proudly through several generations. The farm is not just a business: it is a home, a heritage and a legacy. That is why any policy that affects how farms are passed on to the next generation goes to the very core of who we are as rural people. For many families, the dream is simple: to see the next generation take over, work the same land and continue the proud tradition of stewardship. The reality of that dream is now under threat like never before. Agricultural property relief has existed for a reason. It recognises that farming is asset-rich but cash-poor, or as we would say in Northern Ireland, “We are asset-rich but penny-poor.” A farm may be worth millions on paper, but that value is tied up in land, livestock, machinery, buildings and—most concerningly for many farmers—debt. Farmers spend money and they thrive in advancing. But for what—when they see what this Government are doing to them?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Member. According to an estimate from the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs in Northern Ireland, the policy will impact a third of all farms and three quarters of dairy farms. Think about that for a moment. Three quarters of our dairy farms—the heart of our agrifood export industry—could be hit by a tax change that would make succession financially impossible. The knock-on effects will be vast. Meat factories will face reduced throughput and rising costs, forcing scale-back and possibly relocation. Feed and supply companies will see demand collapse, threatening jobs and investment. It is not just farms that will be hit, and this is not a matter of large estates or wealthy landowners. The average Northern Ireland farm is about 40 hectares. Land values in some counties, including my own, are in excess of £30,000 per acre. It does not take much arithmetic to see that many modest family farms would easily surpass the £1 million threshold.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. It does not take much arithmetic to work out the facts of that scenario. In a recent joint letter to the Chancellor, signed by all MPs and peers from Northern Ireland, we set out a clear position: “Agriculture is not simply an economic sector; it is a way of life. The removal or restriction of Agricultural Property Relief will place an unfair and unsustainable burden on family farms, jeopardising their ability to pass on their farms to the next generation and threatening the future of family farming.” Those are not my words alone. They are the voices of rural Northern Ireland, speaking in unison in the House today.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Family Farming in Northern Ireland · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the Member for the stand he is taking and for encouraging the Minister in this way. We are not talking about millionaires; we are talking about hard-working family farmers who live modestly and work from dawn to dusk to feed us all. If these proposals proceed, we will inevitably see forced sales of land simply to pay the tax liability when a family member dies. That means the fragmentation of farms, the loss of viable holdings and the disappearance of many small-to-medium sized family farms. The Government talk about a fair and balanced approach, but what about the 80-year-old who has not got time to plan? Did my brother think my dad would pass away at age 66? Absolutely not. Does a family think they are going to lose a son or a daughter at age 40, 41 or 42? They do not. This will deter young farmers from taking on the responsibility of a business that leaves them saddled with debt before they have even begun. We cannot afford to drive the next generation away from farming. Once that chain of succession is broken, it is almost impossible to restore. This debate is not just about fairness for rural families: it is about food security, which is a matter of national importance. We have learned through recent global shocks—the pandemic, supply-chain disruption and now inflationary pressures—that domestic food production is essential. To undermine family farming through ill-judged taxation would be a profound mistake that this Government will rue. Certainly, rural MPs will rue it in the days and weeks to come. It would make us more dependent on imports and less resilient to crisis, while sending a terrible message to those who feed our nation. The policy is being advanced in the name of fairness, but there is nothing fair about it. Farming families have worked their land for generations, paid their taxes and cared for the countryside. They are not speculators; they are custodians. APR is not, as it is presented in public discourse, a loophole; it is a lifeline that allows farms to pass from parent to child without having to be broken apart. To impose a new tax burden at the point of bereavement is not reform; it is punishment for choosing to farm. Let us be clear: the yield from this policy—even in Treasury terms—would be marginal compared to the cost it would impose on rural communities and the wider economy. In short, it is bad economics and bad morality. Across Northern Ireland, opposition to this proposal is widespread and heartfelt. From the Ulster Farmers’ Union, who are here today, the National Sheep Association and the Dairy Council to the agrifood processors, the message is the same—this change must be reconsidered. At rallies and meetings across my constituency and beyond, farmers have told me they feel under siege, squeezed by rising costs, regulatory pressures and now this looming tax threat. They want the Government to work with them, and not against them, which is why I have described this policy as a “farm tax heist”. That is how it feels to those who have given their lives to feeding our people.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Organised Immigration Crime · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree that foreign nationals convicted of serious drug offences in Northern Ireland should be deported without delay? Will he ensure that his Department works with international partners and prioritises swift removal agreements to stop those involved in organised immigration and drug crime re-offending on our streets?

• 28 Oct 2025 · World Stroke Day · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is making a powerful speech. Family friend Hannah Garrity, who is now in her 20s, took her stroke at the age of eight. She was a little girl, who woke up one day and took a severe headache, and out of that, she had a very severe stroke. She is an inspiration. She is now teaching art in schools. She is a Sunday school teacher in her local church, and she gives so much back to society. Would the hon. Member agree that more research is needed, particularly in relation to strokes in young people and children, given the increase in the number of them who are taking strokes?

• 22 Oct 2025 · Inheritance Tax Relief: Agriculture Sector · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 21 Oct 2025 · Mandatory Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Digital IDs are nothing short of a direct attack on our freedoms and I am utterly opposed to them. The claim that they will help to tackle illegal immigration is utter nonsense. If the Government were serious about that, the Prime Minister would strengthen border security, crack down on smugglers and traffickers, and invest in real enforcement. Quite frankly, digital IDs will not stop a single boat and they will not stop the endless cycle of people illegally entering the UK, mostly of working age, who do not want to work and will not work. Digital IDs are not wanted by the people in my constituency of Upper Bann—they feel that it is “Big Brother is watching you” on steroids. At the end of the day, who pays for digital IDs but the ordinary people here in the United Kingdom? We have rejected digital IDs before and we will absolutely reject them again.

• 21 Oct 2025 · Rape Gangs: National Statutory Inquiry · Hansard source

  More

  Given that two of the victims have walked away from the inquiry, will the Minister clearly state how she will ensure that a fully independent inquiry can take place and that it prominently includes victims?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Rape Gangs: National Statutory Inquiry · Hansard source

  More

  There should be nothing more precious in the eyes of this Parliament than the protection of children, particularly those who suffered at the hands of these barbaric individuals. Many of us are parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents and this cuts very deep. I know that the Minister cares and is a caring person, but today we need decisive action. Given that one of the victims has walked away from the inquiry—

• 13 Oct 2025 · Bovine Tuberculosis Control and Badger Culling · Hansard source

  More

  I differ slightly in my view. We certainly do not want badgers to be culled unnecessarily, but the evidence shows that a sustained badger cull does reduce TB. Northern Ireland has not had a badger cull and our TB compensation costs are soaring to more than £100 million this year. Reports from Somerset and Gloucestershire show that the badger cull reduced TB rates by 50%. Does the hon. Lady agree that although vaccination is good in theory—I want to get that point across—we need a cull to control TB in the first instance? Certainly, no one wants to see a badger die from TB, because it is quite horrendous.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Windsor Framework: Internal Market Guarantee · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Member for giving way and for his engagement on this issue. I wrote to him at the beginning of the year, asking him to come to hear directly from businesses in Upper Bann. The offer was declined, but he kindly sent officials along. The impact was laid bare at the meeting with those officials last week by used agricultural machinery folks, by small retailers who are impacted by the parcels border, and by agrifood businesses. Each business around the table noted the diversion of trade. Today, we are alerting the Minister to the diversion of trade. What is he doing about it? There is anecdotal evidence from each of those businesses, but there is also evidence from the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency that the proportion of GB manufacturing selling to Northern Ireland has reduced from 20.1% to 12.9%. We need action, and we need it now.

• 9 Sept 2025 · Jaguar Land Rover Cyber-attack · Hansard source

  More

  indicated assent .

• 9 Sept 2025 · Jaguar Land Rover Cyber-attack · Hansard source

  More

  Cyber-security costs are rarely taken into account by any company, but for a company such as JLR, such costs should be easily absorbed because of its profit margins. SMEs do not have that luxury. Their profit margins will not necessarily cover the costs, and often they hold just as much personal and financial data. The Government should be coming alongside those businesses and assisting them to ensure that their security is industry-standard and that they are secure. Can the Minister give me an update on that?

• 22 Jul 2025 · UK Internal Market · Hansard source

  More

  The protocol and Windsor framework continue on a daily basis to fail the people of Northern Ireland. The failure is not anecdotal; it is measurable, documented and deeply felt. I say this with sincerity: it is a bureaucratic burden, a constitutional compromise, and for many of our people and businesses, an economic noose. The Secretary of State and the Government cannot continue to keep their heads in the sand, thinking that the problems that we highlight are all exaggerated and unimportant. Businesses, farmers, hauliers and animal health professionals are affected. Every sector is engaging more and more in highlighting the daily struggles associated with the framework and calling for help from the Government they pay their taxes to. The reality remains that Northern Ireland is subject to EU laws in more than 300 areas—laws that we have no democratic say over, no way of changing, and that are creating burdensome and costly checks that no other part of the UK endures. The Windsor framework was sold as a solution. It was never a solution. It was a glossed-up version of the protocol with a new name, but it was the same poison. It raised hope among businesses in Northern Ireland, but has delivered dismay, frustration and additional costly trading barriers. I have always been critical of the Government’s approach to Northern Ireland when it comes to Brexit, be it under the previous or the current Government. I never believed the spin and promises, because at every turn promises have been broken and there has been no desire to resolve even the most simple problems created by the Windsor framework. I commend the FSB for its courage in producing an exceptional report. Many so-called industry leaders are all too often caught up in the spin and do not actually reflect their membership’s concerns. Yet the FSB’s latest report lays bare the truth: 58% of businesses face moderate to significant challenges, and more than one third have stopped trading with GB altogether, rather than deal with the mountain of paperwork. This is not frictionless trade. It is not the “best of both worlds”. It is best only for the EU. Let me spell that out with real examples. A forestry business in my constituency urgently needed machine parts. They were delayed coming from Scotland via next-day delivery, leaving workers idle and costly machines unused. A children’s boutique was hit with a £205 duty and VAT invoice for delivery of goods from GB. We have also seen used agricultural machinery, visually clean and only road driven —immaculate—being turned away at our ports unless scrubbed to EU standards and accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate. One dealer has had to comply with four separate pieces of paperwork just to move a single tractor. Meanwhile, GB and Republic of Ireland dealers face none of that. An engineering firm supporting major Northern Ireland manufacturers said that its key selling point was rapid response. It is now impossible to say that, because of the delays and trade barriers. In addition, we now have the blow to animal health. From January 2026, the Government are prepared to implement EU law in full on veterinary medicines, shutting out GB-based suppliers unless they jump through impossible hoops. Pet shops, farmers and even charities are now in the firing line. This is death by a thousand cuts, and the Government are not even pretending to stop the bleeding. GB firms now say that it is easier to export to Japan than to Northern Ireland. The reality is that we have farmers who cannot move livestock; horticulturists who cannot bring in trees and seed potatoes; and families who no longer get parcels from GB retailers, because more than 90 major suppliers no longer deliver to Northern Ireland. There is every reason to act, the two main ones being that there are now economic implications, as per the FSB report, and there is clear diversion of trade. It is time for the Government to step up and act on behalf of the people of Northern Ireland and the businesses that are impacted.

• 22 Jul 2025 · Metachromatic Leukodystrophy Screening · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency, there is a little boy called Teddy, who was diagnosed with MLD—one of the most cruel and degenerative diseases, which is now treatable if diagnosed at birth. Teddy was diagnosed too late because there was no screening. He has lost his ability to walk and talk, and he even fights to smile—a battle that no child should ever have to face. The Minister knows that the treatment is now available, yet MLD has not been added to the simple heel-prick screening tests. Will she also agree to meet Teddy’s family when she meets the family mentioned by the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) to discuss this issue? It is too late for Teddy, but for so many other children it is not.

• 22 Jul 2025 · Gene Editing · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the right hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. No one should underestimate the importance of gene editing and its advancement. Does he agree that there is a problem in the devolved regions? Because of the EU law that is applicable to Northern Ireland, we will be behind the curve and could see England advance with gene editing while the rest of the devolved nations lag behind, because of Europe.

• 16 Jul 2025 · Credit Unions · Hansard source

  More

  It was good to hear the hon. Member for Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch (Katrina Murray) mention Northern Ireland. I, too, am a member of the credit union, and I have a savings account for my little boy as well. Does my hon. Friend agree that in Northern Ireland, where so many people bank with the credit union, the numbers could grow if the credit union were able to do more? The legislation in Northern Ireland is quite antiquated, and we are only able to bank with loans and savings. Does he agree that we should learn from what happens in GB and address it from there?

• 15 Jul 2025 · British Nationality (Irish Citizens) Act 2024 · Hansard source

  More

  The timeline that my hon. Friend has outlined certainly highlights the number of years that he has been in this place. However, the Act must strengthen and not complicate the process. Does he agree that, currently, the practical outworking of the Act is complicating the process, particularly on the financial side?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Trial by Jury: Proposed Restrictions · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister accept that changes to fundamental rights, such as trial by jury, in one part of the United Kingdom could create serious divergence across jurisdictions and raise questions about equal access to justice for citizens in Northern Ireland?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Neighbourhood Plans: Planning Decisions · Hansard source

  More

  Appropriate and adequate housing is key to the growth of any area. A lack of housing is a very real problem in Northern Ireland, particularly in my constituency. While we have a different planning system, our issues are the same. The hon. Member mentioned the lack of investment in water and sewerage infrastructure. Does he agree that, in the round of this planning discussion, we need to get the water services at the table to ensure that they are investing in areas so that the housing can be built when it is approved?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Member is right to bring his speech back to the vulnerable people who will be impacted. He will know the devastating impact of cancer on many families. One in two face the reality of a cancer diagnosis. Young Lives vs Cancer has said that, on average, the disease costs £700 a month and £6,000 in annual income. Does he agree that the Bill, by ensuring that those people do not get the high rate universal credit health element, will be devastating for many cancer patients right across the country?