Charlotte Cane MP: speeches 2025

78 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 4 Dec 2025 · Acquired Brain Injury Action Plan · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I congratulate the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) on securing this debate and thank him for his hard work as chair of the APPG. I want to pay tribute to Brainkind Fen House in my constituency of Ely and East Cambridgeshire for its incredible work to support people with acquired brain injuries. It provides a safe and secure space for patients, with rehabilitation and support so that people can thrive after brain injury. In preparing for this debate, it shared with me the story of my constituent Florence, which I want to share today. Florence gave birth to twins, which should have been a very special time in her life. Unfortunately, just two weeks later, she suffered a stroke resulting in a brain injury. Her ability to speak became severely impaired. She found it difficult to walk or use her hands. Let us imagine being a new mother and suddenly finding that our body will not let us care for our babies. Florence went to Brainkind Fen House and after just five months of rehabilitation with its clinicians, she regained the use of her hands so she can now change and bathe her babies. Her speech recovered and she is able to walk again. I cannot do her story justice on my own, so I will quote her directly: “I felt helpless. My whole world had crumbled. But Brainkind offered so much support. They made me realise I’m not alone. The staff rallied round, organising donations of toys and clothes for my children so we could spend time together. Then, as I began to recover, they took me shopping so I could buy things for my children for the first time.” Florence’s story is a special one, showing us the vital role that specialists play in ensuring that an acquired brain injury is not the end, and that there can be light at the end of the tunnel. I was also privileged to meet an individual at an event at Parliament this week; the event was on a different subject, but she wanted to talk about acquired brain injuries because, at the age of 16, her brother suffered an injury and was almost a completely different person afterwards—something we have heard from others. Two things she said stood out. She said it was almost as though he had gone through a “factory reset,” and she had to mourn the brother she once knew and bond with the brother she now had, because they were two different people. She said, “His smile is different”. Everyone she spoke to did not notice any difference, but she did. His facial muscles moved differently, and as someone who had known him all his life, she could spot that when others could not. That story shows the pain these injuries can cause to a person’s loved ones. In this case, it caused a sense of grief; her brother had not passed away, but the brother she knew was gone, and she now had someone else to bond with. Brainkind Fen House gives strong support to brain-damaged people and a range of therapies to help them recover. There are strict criteria for continued NHS funding after the first few months, which means that small improvements are not always sufficient to secure funding for ongoing rehabilitation. The person is then moved into long-term care, with little, if any, further support. I have another case in which the person was responding to rehab, but the funding was coming to an end. After significant advocacy from their parents and the staff at Fen House, the funding was extended. That person is now waiting for a suitable flat, and his parents are fighting for a care package to support him in independent living. People should not have to fight for this support, and it should not need an MP’s intervention. We need a clearer, fairer process to ensure that people get the rehab support they need, and then the appropriate housing and care support as they move back into the community. I ask the Government to publish the acquired brain injury action plan as soon as possible, and to include in it the right for those who have suffered to have access to a named GP. That must go hand in hand with better social care for disabled people and free personal care. The stories I have shared highlight that more needs to be done, not only to help patients but to understand the impact on their friends and family. I hope this debate highlights the need for urgent action, so we can do more to support patients and their loved ones.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Ely: Railway Upgrade · Hansard source
    More

    I agree. One of the big advantages of the scheme would be twice as many trains on that route. That would be a huge benefit to everyone along the route. This is a truly national project, with national benefits. Since coming to office, the Government have been very keen to stress their growth credentials and they continue to search for a silver bullet to grow the economy quickly. Ely junction is not a magic bullet, but it can certainly help the Government on their quest. As I said, the scheme has a £4.89 cost to benefit ratio, returning £4.89 in benefits for every £1 invested. But that does not even reflect the full picture and the growth opportunities centred on Cambridge, Peterborough and, as we have heard, the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor, so the real economic impact is likely to be significantly higher. Let me give some examples. The Rail Freight Group says that the rail route through Ely is underperforming due to its capacity limitations, and that the upgrade would be an essential first step to achieving a positive outcome for the UK economy. Freightliner says that the junction is one of the principal bottlenecks restricting growth of rail freight volumes from Felixstowe, and that the wider economic benefits will be felt as far as Scotland, the midlands, Wales and the north of England. As I said, this is a truly national project, with national benefits. England’s Economic Heartland has spoken to the freight industry, which has said that there is significant unmet demand for increased levels of rail freight. Maritime Transport said that it has identified a strong demand from both importers and exporters, which see the environmental benefits in their supply chains using rail over road. The Eastern Powerhouse, chambers of commerce and the east of England all-party parliamentary group have all backed the scheme too. The rail industry, rail operators, the maritime sector, the freight sector, local government and elected parliamentarians are all backing the scheme—a remarkably strong show of support. We also have hundreds of commuters waiting at stations for trains delayed by faults around Ely junction. At a time when the Government need to do more to encourage people to use public transport, approving the Ely junction upgrade would stimulate an extra 277,000 rail passenger journeys per year. Network Rail estimates that the proposals would see the doubling of passenger services on the Ely-to-King’s Lynn and Ipswich-to-Peterborough routes. The logic is simple: if we deliver more rail services, passengers will have not only more choice, but more opportunities to travel by rail. A higher-quality, higher-frequency passenger rail service can only encourage more passengers to choose public transport over car journeys, which benefits commuters and the environment. In previous written questions, I have asked the Department to name a specific sum that it would cost to provide Network Rail with the funding needed to undertake detailed planning for the Ely junction upgrade, but I have not yet received an answer. Can the Minister provide the sum today? Stakeholders are very frustrated that we have to wait until the next spending review in the eternal hope that the scheme will finally be progressed. My constituents have been waiting for 25 years for this project. They, and businesses, have gone through reviews, reports, summaries and investigations, and countless proposals have been produced. The business case has been made. We know the arguments and the benefits. We also know the financial situation that the Government find themselves in. What my constituents, businesses, and the rail, freight and maritime sectors need is clarity and a clear route forward. Will the Minister commit to asking the Rail Minister for a meeting with Network Rail and me to agree how we can deliver the Ely junction upgrade? At least then we could all be on the same platform, going in the same direction. I am sure that, deep down, the Government support the scheme; I am confident that they understand its merits. But the Minister needs to understand that the scheme has been in varying states of limbo for 25 years now. The Minister has heard in this debate the support for the scheme from across the House, which shows how important the scheme is to our region. It is time to set Ely junction on track to fulfil the potential we all know it has, and to deliver economic growth for Ely and East Cambridgeshire—and for all the UK.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Ely: Railway Upgrade · Hansard source
    More

    I absolutely agree. This gives us a real opportunity to sort out quite a lot of network issues in Cambridgeshire. I would be delighted if we could resolve them all; that would make a significant difference to rail in the area. The scheme would support sustainable, long-term economic growth. The upgraded junction would increase resilience in our transport network. There is currently a single lead junction, which means that a failure in that section has the effect of practically stopping all rail traffic. Without the upgrade, if there is a failure, the other Peterborough track keeps working for a while, but the other lines, including Ely’s, quickly fill up with stuck trains. Ely station is beautiful and the staff are great, but it is still frustrating to see the notices of delayed and cancelled trains building up as we wait for our own delayed train. Progressing the upgrade would allow us to strengthen the resilience of this network and mitigate the risk of any future bottlenecks. The environmental benefit of the Ely junction upgrade is clear. Through upgrading rail freight capacity and increasing the number of journeys possible, we can take tens of thousands of freight journeys off the road and put them on to rail. Fewer lorry journeys mean not only less congestion, but fewer road accidents. Provisional figures for the first six months of this year show that there were 4,116 road casualties who were occupants of lorries—almost one accident involving a lorry every hour—and I am sad to say that 42 of those were fatal. Taking these lorries off the road can only improve safety, given the clear danger to their drivers and other road users.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Ely: Railway Upgrade · Hansard source
    More

    I draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a district councillor for East Cambridgeshire. The outline business case for the Ely area capacity enhancement scheme shows that for every £1 invested, there will be a return of £4.89—so you may wonder, Madam Deputy Speaker, why we need a half-hour debate on what is so obviously a great scheme. Yet successive Governments have failed to deliver the scheme. There have been feasibility studies, consultations and task groups aplenty; funding was even promised just in time for the 2024 election, but we could all see at the time that the many promised schemes totalled far more than the money available, so I was not surprised when the incoming Labour Government acknowledged that the outgoing Conservative Government had not put funding in place for the project. The sum of £500 million is a lot of money to find, but it would deliver almost a quarter of a billion pounds in return, so I hope that the Government will commit to the funding soon. The outline business case was submitted in March 2022, after which progress was held at a red signal, where it remains to this day. I was disappointed that the Ely junction project was not one of the projects progressed in the spending review, but I have been heartened by the Department of Transport’s responses to my written questions, in which Ministers recognise the undeniable benefits of the scheme. The Ely area capacity enhancement scheme would upgrade the railway to allow more trains to run through Ely, to improve connectivity and reliability for passenger services and to meet the demand for more rail freight between the port of Felixstowe, the west midlands and the north.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Ely: Railway Upgrade · Hansard source
    More

    I agree that Haughley junction is also very important to making the scheme deliver its full potential. Fewer lorries will also help to protect the crumbling roads in my constituency, which struggle with the wear and tear placed by heavy goods vehicles travelling along them every day. That could save considerable expense in road maintenance and extend the life of those roads. The project is estimated to take 98,000 lorry journeys off the road every single year, and to cut car journeys by 376,000. When that is added to the capacity for more passenger rail services, it is estimated to reduce carbon emissions by 1.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over 60 years, and reduce congestion on our roads by 5.6 million hours every year. In the context of the urgent need to protect our environment and planet, that is a substantial impact. England’s Economic Heartland and Transport East co-produced the “Keeping Trade on Track” document, estimating the upgrade would result in an extra six freight trains per day to and from the port of Felixstowe—the equivalent of over 450 lorries, stretching over six miles every single day. For people who know the area, that is the distance on the A14 from the Quy junction to the east of Cambridge to the M11 junction to the west of Cambridge. I have to say that some mornings it feels like all 450 of them are on that stretch of road in front of me. On that basis alone, the scheme has strong grounds for approval, but the name of the scheme does not give the full context to show just how important it is not only to Ely, but to the whole UK. If approved, it allows for an additional 2,900 extra freight services operating to and from Felixstowe port every year. Those freight services do not stop in Cambridgeshire. Some 70% of containers go from Felixstowe to the midlands, the north of England and Scotland—and, of course, the other way, too. And that is not all. Expanding capacity through the Ely junction upgrade will free up much needed capacity elsewhere. Currently, freight trains from Felixstowe use the great eastern main line and north London line to access routes to the north and midlands, using the growing Thames ports. If Ely junction is approved, the demand for Felixstowe freight trains to use the north London line would be reduced and those would then be available to the London ports. Ely is mentioned in the strategies of Transport for London, Transport for the North and Midlands Connect, showing the benefit the scheme can have for those areas. Transport for the North said that its region will benefit by having access to a rail freight terminal that could result in extra freight trains from the south-east to the north. Transport East has told me it is keen to see improvements, as the project would benefit Norfolk, Suffolk and Greater Essex. England’s Economic Heartland chairs the Ely taskforce, a group of local authorities, industry groups and rail operators, all of whom are desperate to have a clear pathway to the upgrade finally being progressed.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Ely: Railway Upgrade · Hansard source
    More

    It is wonderful that East West Rail is coming, but my constituents need to be able to get to it in Cambridge, which is why we need the upgrade at Ely junction.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as an East Cambridgeshire district councillor. I congratulate the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner) on securing this important debate and on his excellent speech. I thank all hon. Members for their strong contributions to the debate. It is good to see cross-party recognition that the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor will play a critical role in the years ahead in growing the UK economy. To achieve that growth sustainably, we need it to go hand in hand with investment in housing and vital infrastructure. First and foremost, we need a land-use framework in place. The consultation closed in April, but there has still not been a Government response. We cannot plan for housing and the infrastructure needed without that framework, because it is that framework that will ensure we have allocated enough land to nature and to all our needs. Will the Minister tell us when the land-use framework will be published? The Liberal Democrats believe that growth without corresponding investment in local infrastructure risks leaving communities behind.

  • 3 Dec 2025 · Oxford to Cambridge Growth Corridor · Hansard source
    More

    I agree that we need to have the wider transport network, and I will touch on that later in my remarks. Local communities must have a genuine voice in infrastructure decisions that affect them. As we have heard, big projects like East West Rail benefit them in some way, but what would really help communities like Bicester, Cottenham and Milton is investment in proper local bus routes and road upgrades, which would provide an obvious benefit and improvement in people’s everyday lives. As my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) said, connecting people to each other and to work, education and leisure is vital. At the same time as we are going for growth between Oxford and Cambridge, there needs to be investment to ensure that we have good water supplies; waste water and sewage are managed so our rivers are clean; people can get to see a GP; electricity grid capacity is increased; and people can easily access more active travel and public transport options. My hon. Friend the Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) was right to highlight the need for GPs, schools and shops to grow as our communities grow. The Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for the rail project along the A40 corridor to Witney and Carterton, for electrification from Didcot to Oxford and along the whole of East West Rail, and for the redevelopment of Oxford station to be finally completed, along with other important rail improvements. We know that rail is the key to growth, and that it can bring opportunities if we invest in it properly. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) for supporting my calls for the Ely junction upgrade but, in this speech, I am going to make a different request for rail investment. I would like East West Rail to extend at least to Newmarket, allowing for more frequent, reliable trains through Dullingham into Cambridge and beyond. I welcome plans for a Cambridge east station, and ask that the current Waterbeach station is kept open. Between the new station in north Waterbeach, the current Waterbeach station, Cambridge North, Cambridge, the soon to be completed Cambridge south and the proposed Cambridge east, we have the makings of a metro-style transport network that could help reduce congestion and improve air quality in Cambridge. When undertaking such significant rail projects, it is vital that we ensure that they actually deliver tangible benefits for the communities they serve. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) told us, the London Road level crossing in Bicester is due to be closed by East West Rail. While the project will indeed have wide benefits, we should do something to support the local community and ensure that that infrastructure benefits them. For example, the Government could commit to a motorised underpass to keep the town connected, and I hope the Minister will do so today. Recent research revealed that Brexit is costing taxpayers £90 billion a year in lost tax revenue. Let us think how much of that we could invest in the ambitious businesses in the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor if we joined the single market. The hon. Member for Cambridge talked about the knowledge clusters, which would be so much stronger with Europe-wide participation. Since being elected, I have had the pleasure of visiting many exciting and dynamic companies in Ely and East Cambridgeshire, including Xampla, Pragmatic, Hologic UK, the Royal Society of Chemistry and Cambridge Future Tech, all of which want to see the full potential of the Oxford-Cambridge corridor unlocked for new investors and for businesses to join that thriving ecosystem. I am proud to be an MP for such a dynamic, innovative and flourishing region. I am fascinated every time I visit one of those local businesses, and I am struck by their ambition not just for themselves but for our region and our country. They need the Government to follow through on their ambition, and work with them and local communities to deliver a sustainable Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor.

  • 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source
    More

    I actually think we need both. Lifting the two-child benefit cap is really important. I was also disappointed that there was no help for farmers in the Budget. The Chancellor is maintaining the inheritance tax, which will destroy many family farms in Ely and East Cambridgeshire and across the country. The Government have abolished the fruit and veg aid scheme from this month, removing much-needed support with the capital costs of increasing productivity and accelerating innovation. The Chancellor increases farmers’ costs, the Home Office restricts their seasonal workforce and the Department for Business and Trade signs trade deals that allow unfair competition, but the Chancellor did not give even a small gesture of help to farmers in this Budget. I visited Christmas fairs this weekend in churches that need hundreds of thousands of pounds’ worth of repairs. People told me of their worries about the listed places of worship grant scheme, which is currently funded only to March 2026. That grant covers the VAT costs of repairs, meaning that fundraisers only have to raise the cost of those repairs, not the additional cost of VAT. I hope the Chancellor will confirm sufficient funding for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport for that scheme to be continued and increased back to previous levels. We know that we are struggling to provide good-quality social care. This impacts too many elderly, disabled and vulnerable people who are not getting the support they need. It also impacts kinship carers, many of whom are disgracefully hounded to repay so-called overpayments of carer’s allowance, yet this Budget does not invest in social care. I met publicans in Ely and East Cambridgeshire last week who were very disappointed that there was no cut in VAT for hospitality businesses in the Budget. As their costs go up, for staff, supplies, fuel, duty—you name it, their costs go up—they have to increase their prices, and then they have to add 20% VAT to those increases, so a meal costed at £25 will have another £5 of VAT added to it. Reducing the rate of VAT would reduce those businesses’ prices and encourage more customers. These are all matters that people in Ely and East Cambridgeshire have asked me to raise in this debate in just the few days since the Budget. They are things that make businesses and individuals struggle with inflation and the cost of living, and the Budget has not addressed them. The Chancellor told us of the difficult choices she had to make in this Budget, but it did not tackle the main problem, which she herself has identified: our relationship with Europe. If she negotiated a new customs union with Europe, as well as a youth mobility scheme to create new opportunities for our young people, she could fill the £90 billion-a-year black hole left by the Conservatives’ catastrophic Brexit deal. People are going to have to pay higher taxes for less public services because the Chancellor and this Government will not cure that £90 billion Brexit black hole.

  • 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source
    More

    I, too, welcome the Chancellor’s decision to remove the two-child benefit cap. I was proud to stand on that policy from the Lib Dem manifesto, because it will lift at least 350,000 children out of poverty. It will go a long way to helping families with the cost of living, but it is no good if the Chancellor gives with one hand and takes away with the other. My local councillors are still waiting to hear how the new crisis and resilience fund will work and how much funding they will receive. It will replace the household support fund, from which they currently pay for the school holiday food vouchers. The new scheme should be in place from April 2026, so the councils are now finalising their budgets for that financial year without knowing if they have the funding needed to continue with the vouchers. I hope the Chancellor will soon confirm to councils that the funding will be provided and increased in line with demand.

  • 17 Nov 2025 · Asylum Policy · Hansard source
    More

    I agree that the asylum system is broken, and I welcome the commitment to safe and legal routes for people to seek asylum, but there is much in these measures that I think is cruel, impractical and will not work. One example is making people have reviews every two-and-a-half years for 20 years. It is cruel because those people are not going to be able to get a sense of security and safety, and it is counterproductive because they will struggle to get good-quality, secure and high-paid jobs and contribute to our society. It will not work. We know that the Home Office cannot cope with what it currently has to do. My casework is full of people whose papers get lost when they are trying for immigration status. The digital right-to-work system does not work properly, and we have a backlog of asylum claims. How is the Home Secretary going to make this work?

  • 13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I also have a chalk stream in my constituency, the River Snail. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important that we give these chalk streams statutory protection through measures such as those set out in Lords amendment 38, rather than relying on national planning frameworks that can be changed without referring back to this place?

  • 11 Nov 2025 · Support for Dyslexic Pupils · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) and the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Juliet Campbell) on securing this debate. I thank them for their excellent speeches, and I echo their calls for a national dyslexia strategy. Within six weeks of starting primary school, pupils are tested on their literacy, communication and maths ability, and they are pushed to meet the expected standard in phonics by the end of year 1. Those who fail are pushed in year 2 and re-tested at the end of that year. This pressure, and thoughtless comments by staff or pupils, can make a dyslexic child feel stupid or thick because they struggle to read and write, but they are not; they are different. My constituent Neil contacted me earlier this year about improving SEND provision, giving the example of his dyslexic 15-year-old daughter, Lucy. He told me that Lucy will leave school with, “low self-esteem and low expectations, because the world will judge her based on her grades. She will assume that there are just things that are not within her capability.” That is shocking. Our education system must do better than that. If a child is not diagnosed at an early stage, support is not put in place and students struggle further—albeit we know from Lucy’s experience that even pupils who have been diagnosed with dyslexia do not always get the support they need. They then go on to sit their exams, often remaining undiagnosed, and as we have heard, only one in five dyslexic pupils achieves grade 5 or above in English and maths. As they move into sixth form, they are then further impeded in their sixth form studies because they have to resit English and/or maths. Neil told me this morning that Lucy is sitting two mock exams today, and that she was extremely distressed at the mere thought of going through such a stressful process. I am sure colleagues will join me in wishing Lucy the best of luck today, and in all her exams. Does the Minister agree that more should be done to give dyslexic pupils a fair chance in the assessment process? Will she update us on the steps the Government will take to improve reasonable adjustments for pupils in exams? If we make early diagnosis the norm, we will not only give children more support in the classroom but boost their educational attainment. Teachers too need support to be able to spot the signs of dyslexia from an early stage, and to support dyslexic pupils in their classroom. Neil told me that his wife spends a lot of time emailing Lucy’s teachers to give them constructive feedback on how a dyslexic student learns. No parent should be expected to bear that additional burden, nor should teachers for that matter. What will the Government do to support teachers and better equip them to support dyslexic pupils? I discovered that the Government do not publish data on levels of dyslexia among school-age children, so we do not actually know the full scale of the problem. Will the Minister commit today to exploring this option further? We have heard that many dyslexic people lead successful lives—famously, Richard Branson, Jamie Oliver and Zoë Wanamaker, to name but three—but too many do not. Somewhere between three and five in 10 prisoners have dyslexia, compared with one in 10 in the population as a whole. We see from the many entrepreneurs and brilliant artists that dyslexic people have valuable skills to share. We need an education system that identifies dyslexic pupils early and supports their learning, so that they all have the chance to succeed in life.

  • 5 Nov 2025 · Bronze-age Heritage: Cambridgeshire · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the hon. Member for securing this debate. I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as an affiliate member of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. Cambridgeshire Scouts’ Archaeology Squad in my constituency gives children a chance to get involved in archaeology and holds an archaeology day at Ely Museum. Does he agree that getting young people involved in archaeology in that way is vital for its future?

  • 4 Nov 2025 · Official Development Assistance Reductions · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) on securing this debate and on his excellent speech. As we have heard today, Britain’s aid budget supports international development in countries facing extreme poverty and conflict. We can see it every night on our television screens—in Gaza and Sudan, to name but two places. The aid budget also helps people in developing countries to address the impact of climate change. We have recently seen the devastating damage wreaked by Hurricane Melissa. Communities will need our help to rebuild their roads and housing and get clean water back again. Those are the sorts of things that our aid budget funds. I am proud that in coalition the Liberal Democrats increased the aid budget to 0.7% of GNI. It is shocking that the Conservatives very quickly reduced it to 0.5%, and I cannot believe that Labour is now planning to reduce it further to just 0.3%. By 2027, as we have heard, that will be £6 billion less than it would have been even at 0.5%. That means £6 billion less for maternity care, vaccination programmes, food aid, education, clean water, flood protection and more. People at the sharp end of the climate crisis and in extreme poverty will die because of the cuts. We should not shy away from that. At 0.3%, ODA stands at the lowest proportion of gross national income since 1999. That represents an abdication of our moral responsibility on the global stage. Of course, we have to strengthen our national security and defence in uncertain times, but not at the cost of withdrawing support from some of the poorest communities around the world. Does the Minister accept that not only is proper investment in ODA critical to tackling poverty, but it can help prevent conflict abroad? Strengthening national security and stability and addressing poverty and development abroad is not a binary choice: they are intertwined; they are essential for each other. The Government’s decision represents a further retreat into insular attitudes when we need to be doing what we can to tackle poverty and security threats abroad as well as here at home. For decades, international aid has been vital in growing our nation’s stature through soft power and building a hard-won reputation for supporting the poorest countries in the world. In opposition, the Labour party agreed with us, so it is regrettable that it abandoned those values upon entering government. I hope that the Government will take the contributions to this debate in the spirit that they are intended. We want the UK to be seen as the gold standard for promoting international development, just like the Labour party said in opposition. This cut is a risk to international security and plays into the hands of Russia and China, so I hope that the Minister will reflect on the message of this debate and explore alternative ways of meeting defence spending commitments, rather than this ill-thought-out cut. In the long term, will the Government consider increasing taxation on social media giants and tech firms to fund defence and increase official development assistance back to 0.7% of GNI? We live in dangerous times, and we are not alone in that. Now is the time to step up on the global stage, not step back.

  • 3 Nov 2025 · Women in the Armed Forces: Defence Committee Recommendations · Hansard source
    More

    15. Whether he is taking steps to implement the outstanding recommendations of the Defence Committee’s report entitled “Protecting those who protect us: Women in the Armed Forces from Recruitment to Civilian Life”, published on 25 July 2021.

  • 3 Nov 2025 · Women in the Armed Forces: Defence Committee Recommendations · Hansard source
    More

    Our servicewomen urgently need investment in female-specific tactical equipment, particularly bras and body armour. What steps is the Minister taking to provide funding for research, development and implementation of kit for the female anatomy and to ensure that fitting services and task-appropriate provision are standard across the forces?

  • 29 Oct 2025 · International Baccalaureate: Funding in State Schools · Hansard source
    More

    I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate. Students in my constituency are served by Impington Village college for the IB. They are deeply unhappy that the college received a letter from the Department announcing the change with no warning or consultation. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government decision has caused an unacceptable amount of stress for pupils, parents and staff, and that how the Government are acting is the complete opposite—

  • 16 Oct 2025 · Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill · Hansard source
    More

    The Venerable Bede first wrote of the “Isle of Eels” back in the 8th century. He explained that the Isle of Ely is known as such because it was surrounded by water, with an abundance of eels, but these eels do not spend their whole life in Ely or, indeed, in the UK. The biological story behind eels is a quite remarkable one. They breed in the Sargasso sea, which, as we have heard, is so important to many other species as well, and they drift across the ocean for two or three years as tiny and fragile eels. They adapt to freshwater and mature in rivers—sometimes growing up to 1 metre in length—before swimming all the way back to the Sargasso sea to reproduce once more before dying. These eels face many dangers in their life cycle, including the impact of climate change on ocean currents, pollution and poaching. European eels are considered a critically endangered species, so it is imperative that we take action to protect them now. At a local level, the creation of eel passes—not, as it might sound, a passport, but ladders or passages—has been welcome action to allow them to get from the sea into freshwater habitats and back again. However, much more needs to be done to protect them and other endangered species on a global scale, so it is really good that the Government have proposed this Bill. Ely holds an annual eel festival, which not only recognises our history but celebrates biodiversity and nature. The festival celebrates our heritage and is always tinged with concern about the decline in the eel population, but also with a determination to see eels return to our rivers in abundance. They are not anywhere near as common in the River Great Ouse as they once were, owing to all the factors I mentioned, but the good news is that in 2022, over 74,000 eels were recorded as making the 3,000-mile journey from the Sargasso sea to Cambridgeshire. Measures like banning bottom trawling in marine protected areas would be a good way to protect endangered species like eels and others, as would the provision of greater resources for international environmental co-operation. I hope the Government will take on board calls for a ban on bottom trawling in marine protected areas. We cannot possibly have the moral authority to call for such a ban on the global stage when we have not done it in our own waters. Like our eels, all wildlife depends on our oceans, as indeed do we as the human race. The speech from the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) was shocking and depressing. For a party that once hugged a husky to now be questioning its support for our oceans is shameful. Twenty-five centuries ago, Aristotle questioned where eels came from, but if we do not take urgent action to protect them and other marine wildlife, we will not be asking where they came from; we will be asking where they have all gone. I therefore welcome this Bill and the international co-operation of which it is a part. Let us get it through the House as quickly as possible, so that we can sign the treaty and make sure that it delivers what we all hope it will deliver.

  • 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the petitioners and my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for leading this important debate. We all know from our inboxes that the system is not working and that change is necessary. It is incumbent on all of us to fix the situation for the sake of children and their families. According to data from the House of Commons Library, the total percentage of pupils in Ely and East Cambridgeshire’s mainstream schools with EHCPs is 4%, which is higher than the regional and national averages, at 3.4% and 3.3% respectively. That means that specialist units and schools in Ely and East Cambridgeshire face a difficult task, as they have more pupils with EHCPs to accommodate than the national average. The council has plans for more specialist schools, but it is still waiting for Government clearance to build them, so I would be grateful if the Minister could say when it can expect to get that clearance. The wide distances across the constituency create a further challenge in transporting pupils to and from schools. In 2023-24, Cambridgeshire county council spent over £25 million just on school taxis. That is linked to the rising demand for the service, and the rising cost of fuel. I take this opportunity to thank the specialist schools in my constituency, including Spring Meadow infant school, Highfield Ely and Highfield Littleport academies, the Centre School Cottenham, and Cambridge Regional College for the tremendous work that they do every day to support SEND learners and help them fulfil their potential. I urge the Government to ensure that their voices are heard in any change process. My constituents are worried about potential changes in the SEND system, so I hope that the Minister’s response will provide clarity to pupils, parents and councils that the changes will not lead to cuts or reduced support for SEND pupils. To put it bluntly, parents should not have to fight for their children’s rights. The Government must ensure high-quality, well-funded education for all pupils with special educational needs.

  • 10 Sept 2025 · Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source
    More

    I rise to speak in support of new clause 2, which was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) and has cross-party support. I really hope that that cross-party support holds up in the vote. As we have heard, disability does not stop at peak times. I represent a rural constituency and our buses are very infrequent, so having a time restriction on a bus pass is even more serious. As a member of the all-party parliamentary group on classics, I enjoy a good tale about mythological creatures such as centaurs and the minotaur, but unfortunately for some of my constituents, seeing a bus is almost as likely as seeing one of them. Remarkably, there are no Sunday bus services at all in most of my constituency. We have one of the greatest cathedrals in the world, but many of my residents cannot get to it for Sunday worship. Some of my villages have no buses at all, and the likes of Coveney and Wardy Hill have one bus per week. Others have bus services every two hours—those services are probably some of the best. If we restrict disabled people to using their passes after 9.30, they cannot catch the 9.20 bus and have to wait for the 11.20, so effectively they cannot do anything anywhere else in the morning. That cannot be right. We have to remove that restriction. The current situation is not sustainable or acceptable. For rural communities, the situation is so dire that the recent risk of the 9 bus route between Littleport and Cambridge being halted meant that communities faced being unable to get to work or college. Constituents referred to this service as a lifeline for them, and they were right. To have a situation in 2025 where the ending of a single bus route makes entire communities a transport black hole is dreadful. It is just not acceptable. Had residents been properly consulted, I am certain the proposal would have been comprehensively rejected, which is why I support new clause 32 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) to require consultation before any discussions on the alteration or withdrawal of a local bus service. I know the new clause has not been selected, but I hope the Minister will consider it. The Government’s decision to increase the bus fare cap hit my constituents hard, because many of them have to get more than one bus to complete their journey. I ask both for the cap to be brought back to £2 and for it to be a cap on the journey, not the fare for each bus someone catches. It should not be too much to ask for a basic, functional and affordable transport service for rural communities. Pensioners should not have to miss medical appointments because there is only one bus per hour, students should not have to worry about missing classes, disabled people should not have to miss anything in the morning, and people should not have to move from their home village for the sake of getting to work on time. This Bill is positive, but the Government need to do a lot more to improve transport services in rural communities such as mine. It would be a start if we allowed the disabled members of those communities to catch buses at any time.

  • 10 Sept 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source
    More

    Sunnica solar farm, which runs through my constituency, was given permission by this Government, and there are more solar farm applications in the pipeline. My constituents are concerned that these applications are being made without a land use framework, which would have provided reassurance that the competing demands for land are balanced effectively. Will the Prime Minister commit to giving the land use framework statutory weight to ensure that land is used strategically to get the best out of it for new clean, renewable energy that genuinely benefits communities and for farmers, nature, water and housing?

  • 9 Sept 2025 · Neurodivergent People: Employment · Hansard source
    More

    I do agree and will speak about that. Local businesses have described employing people with learning disabilities to me as like a game of bureaucratic hopscotch. They can see the end goal but they need to hop from square to square, assessment to assessment, with a lack of resources to dedicate to training staff. Sadly, that is borne out in the data. Under 30% of people with severe or specific learning difficulties were in employment in 2023-24, compared with more than 82% of non-disabled people. Those figures are bad enough in isolation, but just 65% of employees with severe or specific learning difficulties remain in employment for at least a year.

  • 9 Sept 2025 · Neurodivergent People: Employment · Hansard source
    More

    Absolutely. It needs to be much faster in doing the assessments and delivering the payments. One of Mona’s staff experienced a traumatic event that made it difficult to manage work without more regular therapy, so they applied to Access to Work. They were told that they could not be supported because they were already accessing one monthly therapy session, albeit they are paying for that privately and they cannot afford to pay for any more. They face the prospect of having to cancel their vital therapy to apply on the basis that they might get help, and in their own words: “The message seem to be stop getting the help you need, wait months for a decision, and then maybe we’ll support you.” Another local business, Red2Green, said the payments are so slow that it is difficult for small organisations to claim the money back, and it gives them huge cashflow problems. I have talked to individuals who have withdrawn from doing this work because they cannot afford to wait over three months before they get paid. Red2Green also told me that some neurodivergent people cannot make phone calls or advocate for themselves, but under the Access to Work scheme, it has to be them who applies, not the employer.

  • 9 Sept 2025 · Neurodivergent People: Employment · Hansard source
    More

    We have heard there is a problem with young people being assessed in school; we cannot then cut off the backstop of being assessed in adulthood. Can the Minister update us on the Buckland review’s recommendations and when they intend to publish the conclusions of their expert panel on employment prospects for neurodivergent people? Local businesses have told me that neurodivergent employees find the jobcentre system difficult to navigate, stressful and triggering. What will the Department do to adequately train jobcentre staff in appropriately supporting them? Finally, many people do not disclose their neurodivergence or learning disability for fear of discrimination. Will the Government commit to reviewing the guidelines on disclosure and whether they adequately consider neurodivergent conditions? Neurodivergent people have so much to offer our businesses, our communities and our economy. We just need to do what my local businesses do: go above and beyond to make this the gold standard. If the Government support businesses to do that, we could unlock a sizeable community full of untapped potential and enthusiasm, which can only be a benefit to our country.

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