Caroline Voaden MP: speeches

Speeches

• 29 Apr 2026 · Agriculture: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  Many farmers are relying on SFI, but it closed to new applications in March and is yet to reopen, and there is no clarity about the future budget. Delays in payments to those who have agreements have caused significant concern to many of my constituents who have faced cash-flow issues. Does my hon. Friend agree that greater clarity must be provided to farmers on the future offer across various environmental schemes, as well as a commitment to improve the efficiency of payments?

• 29 Apr 2026 · Agriculture: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I just wanted to make a brief intervention on the issue of entry into farming. Devon county council has several farms and it is very keen to use them as a way to get young people into farming, especially those who do not have a family farm of their own. It is quite worrying what might happen to those county farms if Devon county council is divided up in the local government reorganisation process. Is there is any way that they could be protected through the decimation of Devon, which might happen over the next year through LGR?

• 29 Apr 2026 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source

  More

  A quarter of female teachers have been subjected to misogynistic abuse in the classroom in the last year. They report feeling humiliated and violated, and we know that impressionable young boys are targeted on social media with algorithms that pump misogynistic content to them. Will the Minister push the Government to act as swiftly as possible in restricting access to social media for young boys, so that we can educate them on how to treat women and girls before the manosphere influencers get to them first?

• 27 Apr 2026 · Apprenticeships · Hansard source

  More

  Apprenticeships offer young people a great pathway into rewarding careers, so I very much welcome the Government’s ambition to create more of them, but a report published last week by the Social Security Advisory Committee highlighted the so-called apprenticeship penalty, whereby low-income families can lose up to £330 a week in child benefit and universal credit the moment a 16-year-old takes up an apprenticeship. What is the point of creating more apprenticeships if a cliff edge like this discourages young people from taking them up? Will the Minister commit to urgently fixing this penalty, so that no family are left worse off simply because their child chooses an apprenticeship over full-time education?

• 27 Apr 2026 · Animal Testing · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is being very generous with her time. Dogs have noticeable physiological differences from humans—different enzymes, different gastric pH—which leads to the vast majority of drugs that are tested on them failing to translate to humans. Does she agree, therefore, that the Government should commit to ending the use of dogs, specifically, in testing for human use and provide greater funding for alternatives that are coming through, such as organs on chips?

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Many people in my constituency are very nervous about how local government reorganisation will impact them, and they worry that it could lead to a top-down style of devolution, which entirely misses the point of making decisions locally. The Government’s backing down on Lords amendment 2 will provide some reassurance to rural and coastal communities, like those in my patch, that the governance of rural and coastal affairs will be meaningfully devolved to local leaders. Will my hon. Friend join me in celebrating the Government’s acceptance of the Liberal Democrats’ calls to add both rural and coastal affairs as competences required of a strategic mayoral authority following LGR?

• 22 Apr 2026 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 22 Apr 2026 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

• 15 Apr 2026 · Access to Work Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) for securing this debate and allowing me time to speak in it. The National Audit Office report published earlier this year tells a story of a scheme under serious strain. Applications have more than doubled, the number of applications waiting for a decision has almost trebled, and outstanding payment requests have more than quadrupled. The NAO is clear that the backlog will not fall significantly without policy change, yet the scheme has not been substantially updated since 1994. I want to give two examples from my constituency. The first is a self-employed artist—a young autistic person with selective mutism. She has been awarded support at £15.33 an hour, but the specialist support she needs costs between £25 and £40 an hour. Nobody will provide it at the awarded rate, so her family is stepping in unpaid. Her father can no longer work full time as a result. Not only does that have a knock-on effect on the family finances, but, if translated across the country, it would have a knock-effect on the economy. The second example is a local business that supports autistic and ADHD adults into work. Many of them are professionals, academics and business owners—people who are very capable and want to work, but who need nuanced, skilled support with communication, executive function and workplace relationships. This business is regulated, VAT-registered, employs staff and maintains proper safeguarding, but it cannot provide services at £15 an hour, so it has had to stop taking on new Access to Work clients. The worry is that when reputable, safeguarded providers that are working with very vulnerable people withdraw from the market, the gap will be filled by those without those protections. Those cases point to the same conclusion that the NAO reached: without real reform, this scheme will continue to fail the people it exists to serve. Rates must reflect the real cost of support. The comprehensive update the scheme has needed since 1994 cannot wait any longer.

• 15 Apr 2026 · Access to Work Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  Are the Government evaluating the difference between the cost of paying Access to Work at a higher rate, so that people can actually get the support they need, and the cost of them being on universal credit if they are unable to work?

• 15 Apr 2026 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I have spoken to lots of headteachers who are campaigning for a statutory ban on smartphones in schools. They say that if all the secondary schools in an area were to ban phones, children would not get smartphones at 11, when they transfer into year 7, and the age at which they would get a smartphone goes up to about 13 or 14. Parents would not be under pressure to buy a smartphone for their children when they are 10 or 11, so we would be gaining two or three really valuable years, when those children would not own a smartphone. Banning smartphones is not just about having an impact on school hours; it is about gaining that precious time so that children get phones when they are older. I beg the Minister to listen to that point.

• 15 Apr 2026 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I believe we are talking about two different things. On banning social media for under-16s, there is a complication there. We have seen what they have done in Australia, and what other countries are doing. We believe that our solution is the right one, because it is future-proof and would encompass every platform, every game and every piece of tech, but the issue of smartphones in schools is much, much simpler. We do not want phones in schools. We do not need phones in schools. We know that phones are in schools, and we need the Government to act on this; doing so would be simple, straightforward and quick. It could be done through this Bill, right now.

• 15 Apr 2026 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 13 Apr 2026 · SEND Provision and Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford) for introducing this debate. It is clear from the passionate contributions we have heard that the problems are widespread and the SEND system is completely broken. We have all heard the anguish of parents, and we have read the dreadful stories of desperate children who have lost their lives because of failures in this system. In that context, I welcome the Government’s recent White Paper as an important step in the right direction. We have to address the growing need and, as the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jen Craft) said so passionately, we cannot limit provision because there is too much need. The earlier we identify need and start addressing it, the better the outcomes will be for children, parents, families and society as a whole. We have had to wait for this White Paper, but putting the delays to one side, we are here now and the Liberal Democrats welcome the central focus on inclusion through improving support in mainstream settings. If children with SEND can attend a local school, they can stay connected with their friends and be part of their local community, and their family can engage better with their school. Inclusion bases are welcome, and they include the one being opened at King Edward VI community college in my constituency, with a focus on bringing children back into school after dropping out, following a difficult transition into year 7, and helping them to become part of the school community again. This model has good potential to succeed if properly resourced. However, many questions remain about funding, children’s rights and staffing. On funding, the £4 billion pledge to accompany the upcoming reforms, plus capital spending and the council debt write-off, are welcome, but we are worried that the Government are holding councils to ransom by tying this debt relief to restrictions on special school expansion. The Government must also provide clarity on where the new funding, including the council deficit write-off, is coming from. The Liberal Democrats are very concerned that other areas of the wider schools budget may be cut, even though there is nothing left to give. The Government have introduced some good policies but have failed to fully fund them, including breakfast clubs, the expansion of free school meals, even teacher pay rises, and, today, the healthy school standards. That will be more expensive, so will it be fully funded for schools?

• 13 Apr 2026 · SEND Provision and Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry, but I do not have enough time. Schools and local authorities are already at breaking point and are now being asked to deliver even more, including running two SEND systems in parallel during the transition period. On parental rights, parents have expressed deep concern about changes to the tribunal system. Removing power from SEND tribunals to direct a local authority to name a specific setting will give parents even less opportunity to choose a setting that suits their child. Given that currently 99% of tribunal cases are won by families against the local authority, how can we trust that local authorities will suddenly start getting it right under the new system? The Liberal Democrats are clear that stripping back parents’ ability to challenge the system is unacceptable. The anxiety of parents is understandable. Many are worried that their child will lose existing support or not receive the support they need under the new system. Will the Minister guarantee that legal rights will not be stripped away, that settled placements will not be disrupted, and that accountability, including meaningful routes of appeal, will remain strong and effective? It is absolutely vital that children and families remain at the heart of these reforms and retain the key rights that they have. On staffing, we welcome the Experts at Hand service to embed specialists such as speech and language therapists and educational psychologists into mainstream schools, but we need a credible workforce plan to see how the Government are going to recruit and train all the staff needed and encourage trained specialists back into the profession. I am concerned about the need for more learning support staff—the people who are absolutely crucial to delivering these reforms and ensuring that mainstream inclusion works effectively. Schools are being forced to cut learning support staff due to the financial pressures they are facing, but a SEND system focused on inclusion simply cannot be implemented without them, so I would like to hear further detail from the Minister about how the Government believe schools can deliver an inclusive approach for all children without funding more support staff. Away from budgets and staffing, there are other changes that we can make in the way that we run our schools that would make them accessible for all children. Curriculum reform is vital to inclusion. Learning how to express and process emotion through music, drama, creative arts, sport and outdoor play is vital not just for children’s mental health, but for their emotional development, and it simply must be given more space. We believe that the current direction of travel is the right one, but all these reforms must be fully funded, fully staffed and fully consulted upon with those who will be impacted most by the changes—the parents and the children with SEND who are so often not heard.

• 13 Apr 2026 · Local Housing Allowance Rates · Hansard source

  More

  Years of freezes to local housing allowance by successive Governments mean that it goes nowhere near covering the cost of social housing, let alone renting privately. In my constituency, the average rent for a three-bedroom home can be well over £1,100 a month, but a family of four will receive only £840 a month. Poor and temporary housing is a key driver of child poverty, so it is really important that we resolve that. Will the Minister commit to working with the Department for Work and Pensions to unfreeze local housing allowance so that we can lift children out of deep poverty?

• 13 Apr 2026 · Local Housing Allowance Rates · Hansard source

  More

  13. What assessment he has made with Cabinet colleagues of the adequacy of local housing allowance rates.

• 25 Mar 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q11. My constituent Susan suffered horrific, unimaginable, lifelong injury from a pelvic mesh implant. She lost her business, her marriage and her health, and lives in constant 24-hour pain. I would like to congratulate the new Minister for Public Health—the Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the hon. Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson)—on her appointment, after her tireless campaigning on this issue, which has clearly been recognised. However, more than two years after the Hughes report set out clear recommendations for redress, thousands of women such as Susan are still waiting for a Government response. Can the Prime Minister tell Susan and the thousands of other women like her how much longer they will have to wait?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Coastal Communities: Start Bay · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this evening a matter of profound importance to thousands of people across the country, including many of my constituents living and working near one of the most beautiful and vulnerable coastlines in England. That issue is coastal erosion—more specifically, what happens when human-built infrastructure such as roads and homes collapse and fall into the sea or are damaged beyond repair by the intensity of storms, waves, wind and tide. This is not just an infrastructure problem; it is a human one. The psychological toll of what is happening in these isolated shoreline communities and the threat of what might happen to others in the future should not be underestimated. To set the scene, Start bay is one of South Devon’s most stunning stretches of coastline—15 miles of cliffs and shingle beaches running from Warren Point near Dartmouth in the north to Start Point in the south, taking in the villages of Stoke Fleming, Strete, Torcross, Beesands and Hallsands. The Slapton Line—the narrow shingle bar that carries the A379 and separates the freshwater Slapton Ley from the open sea—is one of the most remarkable and fragile landforms in this country. The A379 is a vital link road between the towns of Dartmouth and Kingsbridge. Alongside it lies Slapton Ley, the largest natural freshwater lake in south-west England. It is a site of special scientific interest and a national nature reserve of enormous ecological importance, home to rare wildlife and a place of outstanding natural beauty that draws visitors from across the world. The area carries another layer of history that many across the world hold dear. In the autumn of 1943, the area was requisitioned by the British Government, and residents evacuated so that American forces could use the land to train for the D-day landings. Exercise Tiger cost the lives of nearly 800 American servicemen—a tragedy long kept secret—but the bond still runs deep, and many Americans come regularly to visit. Alongside that history is a long and ongoing battle with the sea. In 1917, the thriving fishing village of Hallsands nearby was almost entirely lost to the sea in a storm, not long after hundreds of thousands of tonnes of shingle were dredged from the bay to help build the dockyards in Plymouth. In recent years, the storms have come harder and more frequently. This winter brought a succession of severe weather events that battered the Start bay coastline with extraordinary force. Properties in Torcross suffered significant damage, and businesses that depend on the summer season found themselves counting the cost of repairs before the year had even begun. Then, on the night of 2 February, came the collapse of the A379 and a battering to homes behind the sea wall—windows smashed, roofs lifted, and water and shingle pouring into homes. Huge slabs of tarmac fell into the sea, and one section of the road collapsed entirely. A once-picturesque stretch of coastline looked like a bomb site. It was not a surprise to people who know this coast—the road has long been acknowledged as vulnerable—but the speed and scale of what happened shocked even those who had been warning about it for years. The alternative inland route is completely inadequate and needs an urgent upgrade. I have been contacted by hundreds of residents and businesses over the past seven weeks, and 40,000 people signed a petition, such is the concern. Locally, the impact on daily life has been severe. Travel times to work and school have increased substantially—journeys that once took just minutes now take far longer via inland diversion routes that were never designed to carry this volume of traffic. Bus routes have been cut or diverted; older residents and young people trying to get to school and college have found themselves effectively cut off; and everybody dreads the arrival of the caravans. Access for emergency services is a significant concern. Mr Starr of Torcross told me that his wife required urgent medical attention twice last year, and that “On both occasions the ambulance came across the A379 and therefore responded to the call within 30 minutes, before taking her to hospital. We are now living in fear that an ambulance will not be able to respond quickly enough.” For others, the partial closure of the A379 is a barrier to education, due to increased journey times and altered bus services. This is true for pupils as well as staff at local schools. For local businesses, the consequences have been equally serious: reduced footfall, cancelled bookings, and the sheer visual impact of a collapsed coastline on what should be a thriving tourism destination have cost businesses dearly at a time when many were already operating on very thin margins. The Torcross Boathouse café has suffered substantial damage and remains closed. Its owners, Katy and Rob, told me that “We won’t reopen for several months while the insurance is sorted out—it’s been a huge blow and our business has been devastated.” In the weeks after the A379 was breached, one local pub reported trade being down by 80%. Other businesses highlighted the impact on their staff of a longer commute and issues with receiving deliveries. Matt Darke, who farms land on either side of Slapton, tells me that travelling between sites is now taking an hour longer every day than it used to, and even the viability of a local health centre is now at risk, as patients are choosing to move their prescriptions elsewhere. Besides the damage to the A379, there has also been a serious impact on properties in the village of Torcross. The sea wall that protects the village has been left exposed by the recent loss of shingle along the beach, resulting in severe wave damage to homes and businesses and ongoing concerns about the stability of the buildings. Residents are scared and struggling to sleep due to the constant vibrations caused by the loss of shingle around the footings of the sea defences, which are an Environment Agency asset. The local EA team have been fantastic, working at pace to progress the case for an urgent project to install remedial rock armour in front of the sea wall, and while approval for that project is not guaranteed, the local team hope that the EA will find the funding to support Torcross. I look forward to receiving an update on this soon. However, there will still be the question of what could and should be done to prevent outflanking where the Environment Agency’s assets end. There is a huge cost to works such as these, and there is always a cost-benefit argument to be won, which is what we will all try to do for Torcross. What is never easy to factor into such an equation, though, is the cost of doing nothing. What does it really cost to leave a village to fall into the sea? What is the cost to people’s health and health services, to the wider community, and to the social fabric of a place like this when defences are not maintained? Places such as Torcross and Beesands are more than just houses—they are destinations. They are lifelines for people looking for an escape from the demands of daily life; with their beaches, pubs and cafés, they are a magnetic draw for anyone looking to slow down, breathe the air, watch the birds, swim in the sea, or simply walk along the beach. Who should pay when home owners lose everything that they have worked and saved for? These are not easy questions, which is why there is no clear answer, but the cost of prevention versus evacuation and loss must be part of this, and it is an issue with which the Government must grapple seriously. Time is not on our side, and that is abundantly clear in the village of Beesands, just down the coast. The erosion has accelerated rapidly in recent years. Where about 80 metres of village green previously separated houses from the sea, only 9 metres now remain in some areas, with the access road to the village also potentially at risk. Amid all the trauma for the residents of this special place, I must express my sincere gratitude to officers and councillors from South Hams district council and Devon county council, who have been outstanding throughout the crisis; but for them, gratitude is not enough. Those councils are absorbing the cost of emergency repairs, facing potential loss of council tax, business rates and car parking revenue, and doing all this while operating under significant financial pressure, with limited central Government support mechanisms on which to draw. What they need, and what local authorities and coastal communities across England need, is a genuine financial partnership with central Government when coastal emergencies strike. The Bellwin scheme is simply not fit for purpose when it comes to coastal flooding. As the coastal protection authority, South Hams district council has incurred huge costs since 2 February, including £100,000 for boulders to provide protection in the area that was worst affected. However, it has been informed that only expenditure within 30 days of the event is eligible for reimbursement under the Bellwin scheme. While I understand that the scheme is intended to support local authorities in respect of their emergency response, in the case of coastal emergencies it can easily take 30 days just to formulate and implement a plan. The current system asks councils to carry risks and costs that it is simply beyond their means to absorb, and that must change. I must also mention the flood recovery framework. The current situation is illogical. The framework provides central Government support in cases of severe flooding affecting large areas of England, but weather incidents with localised impacts, however devastating, do not qualify. In Start bay the community is in crisis, but the answer from the system is “Sorry, but not enough people were affected.” That cannot be right, and I urge the Government to reform the framework so that it can respond to severe but localised coastal incidents of exactly this kind. Let me now turn to the question of insurance, a common theme among my constituents. There is currently no specific insurance product for coastal erosion. Flood Re provides Government-backed cover for flood risk, but there is a clear and urgent gap when it comes to erosion. I therefore call on the Government to look seriously at implementing a Flood Re-style product for coastal erosion, and I note that a sobering report published last week by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee makes exactly that recommendation. While home owners in Torcross may be successful in securing insurance payouts to support repairs to their properties on this occasion, it is unclear whether they will be able to obtain new insurance in the future. I therefore ask the Government for an assurance that those who are affected by coastal erosion and coastal flooding—particularly those whose properties are in areas with coastal protection measures in place that are supposed to work—will be helped to gain access to affordable insurance in the future. It is also crucial for people buying homes near the coast to be given the full picture of the coastal erosion risk that they face during the conveyancing process—not just the risk to the property itself, but the risk to the surrounding access routes, utilities and insurance availability. Given the climate-induced threats that we now face, those risks must be included as material information in conveyancing. There is also a problem with the way in which the Government respond to crises of this kind. The community impacts of coastal erosion fall primarily to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, while the physical erosion challenges are overseen by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. That fragmentation has real human consequences, and it places an additional burden on local authorities, which find themselves navigating a confusing and fragmented central Government landscape at precisely the moment when they need clarity and support. I want DEFRA to set out clearly how it recognises the full range of the human impact of coastal erosion and incorporates it in policy development and funding decisions, with clear actions and a defined approach to community engagement. The EFRA Committee report calls for exactly that, and I endorse its call. Finally, one of the most troubling gaps of all is the complete absence of any national strategy for those who lose their homes to the sea. No one should face the loss of their home to the water and find that the state has nothing to offer them but a place on a housing waiting list for social homes that simply do not exist. The EFRA Committee has recommended that a long-term national strategy providing financial assistance and relocation support should be in place by no later than March 2027. I fully support that recommendation, and I urge the Government to commit to it. What are my asks? First, we need funding for the repair of the A379 Slapton line and for the improvement of our inland road network. Devon county council is currently working on a full business case for the Department for Transport, and I urge the Government to respond to the application swiftly. Secondly, we need funding for sea defences along the Start bay coastline. I ask the Government to commit that the Environment Agency will have what it needs to respond in an agile and timely manner to coastal emergencies such as this one. The process for accessing such funding is incredibly complicated, but speed is of the essence in a situation like this. Thirdly, we need meaningful, dedicated financial support for local authorities dealing with coastal emergencies, which have to cover the cost of emergency repairs and the potential loss of business rates revenue, car parking income and council tax. Councils are doing extraordinary work in extraordinarily difficult circumstances. They should not be left to carry the financial consequences of a national challenge on their own. Fourthly, we need urgent action on the flood recovery framework to ensure that localised weather incidents are treated just as seriously as national events. This is a big problem in a small place, and it needs a big solution. Fifthly, we need a national strategy for households displaced by coastal erosion to be in place by March 2027. Lastly, we need a commitment to provide Government-backed insurance for coastal erosion, and insurance policy premiums must be capped for people whose properties have been damaged by coastal flooding, including those in Torcross. I am very aware that not all those asks are the responsibility of MHCLG, but I hope the Minister will relay them to colleagues in other Departments. I will close by making a broader point, because although this debate is about Start bay, it is also about something much larger. Communities the length of England’s coastline are facing versions of what Start bay is facing right now. From the Holderness coast in Yorkshire, where land is disappearing into the North sea faster than almost anywhere else in Europe, to the eroding cliffs of Norfolk and Suffolk, coastal communities are watching the ground literally shift beneath their feet. Many of them are already among the most socially and economically vulnerable in the country, and many feel forgotten. According to the EFRA Committee’s report, over 10,000 properties are at risk from coastal erosion in the next 80 years, as are 183 km of roads and 6 km of railway. If local authorities are to be able to manage the impacts of coastal erosion, they must be supported by the Government to carry out long-term strategic planning. What this Government do in response to the crisis in Start bay will be noticed far beyond South Devon. It will send a signal about whether coastal communities can expect a national Government to treat their situation with the seriousness it deserves, or whether they will continue to be managed at the margins and left to local authorities and agencies that are doing their very best with nowhere near enough support. The sea does not respect administrative boundaries, departmental silos or funding formulae designed for a different kind of emergency. It requires a response that is strategic, sustained and genuinely cross-governmental. The EFRA Committee has provided a road map, and the communities of Start bay have provided the urgent human case. What is needed now is the political will to act. The people of Torcross, Beesands, Hallsands and the wider Start bay are not asking for the sea to be stopped; they are asking for a Government who see them, who invest in them and who work with them to find a way forward. They are proud and resilient communities that deserve a response equal to the challenge they face, and so do coastal communities the length and breadth of this country.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Coastal Communities: Start Bay · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister accept that in such a cost-benefit analysis, there is also a cost of doing nothing? Maybe she could advise me if this is already the case. The cost of moving an entire community, with all the social and economic impact that has, is possibly much more than the cost of improving defences so that that community can stay put.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Coastal Communities: Start Bay · Hansard source

  More

  Something that came out in conversations that I had today was the complication of Torcross having assets that are owned by the Environment Agency and other assets, such as the road, that are owned by the council. There might also be third-party assets, such as quayside walls and other infrastructure. The complication of managing all the different agencies involved, alongside the complication of the MHCLG, DEFRA and the Department for Transport all having to work together, might suggest that we are reaching the point where the Government need to think about an office for climate change events or something like that; I do not know what we would call it, but we need to bring all those things together and for there to be oversight, because it is incredibly complicated to navigate this patchwork landscape of responsibility.

• 10 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Every year, the UK loses £33.4 billion in tax revenue, as multinational corporations and the super-rich choose tax havens over tax payments. However, the UN tax convention has the potential to solve this problem, so will the Minister show leadership, not ambivalence, and commit to securing an ambitious UN tax convention in this Parliament?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Extreme Climate and Weather Events: National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is being very generous with her time. In my constituency, several homes along the seafront were very badly damaged by storms in February, and as they cannot be lived in, the residents have been evacuated. Seafront protection, which is a responsibility of the Environment Agency, is key—particularly if those people are to live in their houses again—but the Environment Agency tells me that there is no emergency funding, and it cannot suddenly shore up the sea defences. The work would have to go through the normal process of allocation, and it might take up to two years before money can be allocated to improve the coastal defences in front of the houses of Torcross. For the people who have been moved out of their homes, that is an absolute disaster. Does she agree that, as we encounter more extreme weather events, the Environment Agency must be more flexible and nimble, and should be able to access funding quicker in order to shore up defences?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Extreme Climate and Weather Events: National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  On the point about utility companies, we had a major gas outage in South Devon at the beginning of the year. We had a problem that is probably very familiar to MPs in Cornwall; the utility company could not trace who owned the second homes, because the homeowners were not there. As the utility company was working through an intermediary energy supplier, it did not have the data on who the customer was. That meant that the power was switched off for about three days, when it could have been switched off for only a few hours. Does the hon. Lady agree that that is a serious problem in areas like ours, where there is a large proportion of second homes?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Extreme Climate and Weather Events: National Resilience · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?