Claire Young MP: speeches

Speeches

• 4 Sept 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  During recess, at an event to promote the new Avon and Somerset victim service, concerns were raised with me about the delay in publishing a new hate crime action plan for England and Wales to replace the one that expired in 2020. Will the Leader of the House tell us when a new plan will be published? If not, will she agree to raise that with the Minister for Policing and Crime Prevention as a matter of urgency?

• 1 Sept 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  I know that the hundreds of constituents who have contacted me calling for action to end the heartbreaking suffering in Gaza will welcome the Foreign Secretary’s recommitment to recognising Palestine. However, if, as he says, recognition is rooted in the principle of a two-state solution, why is granting it being used as a tool to change Israel’s course, rather than taking other actions such as sanctioning Prime Minister Netanyahu?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Extending the Ukraine Permission Extension Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. He is making an important point. I have heard from a number of Ukrainians—particularly those from the east of the country—who cannot return home, as their home towns have been destroyed. They are looking for a more permanent solution than the temporary solution that we have. They have integrated well into British society. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government should look at a permanent solution for people in that situation?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Independent Water Commission · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency last year there were 2,036 sewage spills, lasting for a total of 28,360 hours. However, contrary to the Secretary of State’s earlier assertion, we do not know the volume of that dumping because it is not monitored. What steps are the Government taking to impose targets to reduce both the duration and the volume of individual spills?

• 14 Jul 2025 · Future of the Post Office · Hansard source

  More

  In rural areas such as my Thornbury and Yate constituency, it can be difficult to travel to post offices in towns because of the lack of buses. If the Government are considering relaxing the distance and access criteria for post office provision, will they take that issue into account in setting new criteria?

• 10 Jul 2025 · Energy Planning · Hansard source

  More

  The report highlights an ambiguity about what is said centrally by the Government and what is expected from industry. Separately from this report, the Select Committee has heard evidence on tidal range power generation from the Severn and, during visits, about innovative approaches. Does the Chair of the Select Committee share my concern that the confusion caused by that ambiguity could lead to the UK missing out on opportunities to be a world leader in alternative types of generation, and does he agree the situation must be clarified?

• 10 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  On Monday, I spoke to a constituent who works at the Jessie May charity, which provides hospice-at-home care for children and young people in my constituency and beyond. It is currently fundraising to meet running costs of £300,000—costs that cannot in any way be helped by the capital funding for hospices announced by the Government. It is to be commended on having managed to raise more than £183,000 so far, but that is clearly not a sustainable way of providing such vital healthcare. Will the Leader of the House ask the relevant Minister to make a statement on how hospice care can be funded sustainably?

• 7 Jul 2025 · Fossil Fuel Advertising and Sponsorship · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I thank everyone who signed this petition for securing this debate. RepRisk’s 2024 report identified 1,841 incidents of misleading communication globally in the past year; 56% of those cases involved environmental issues, and nearly a third of companies flagged for misleading communications were repeat offenders, with the oil and gas industry accounting for the most incidents. In 2024, the UN Secretary General said, “Many in the fossil fuel industry have shamelessly greenwashed, even as they have sought to delay climate action—with lobbying, legal threats, and massive ad campaigns.” A report from the New Weather Institute, an environmental think-tank, entitled “Dirty Money: How Fossil Fuel Sponsors are Polluting Sport”, analysed more than 200 sponsorship deals, and found that sport is increasingly one of the areas that oil and gas companies are using to greenwash their reputation. Football had more than 50 partnerships with fossil fuel companies, followed by motorsports, rugby and golf. Saudi Arabia’s national oil company, Aramco, was the biggest fossil fuel sponsor of sport, paying almost £1 billion across 10 active sponsorships. It has signed a partnership with FIFA, in a four-year deal that will include major tournaments such as the world cup 2026 and the women’s world cup 2027. The hon. Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury) made an interesting point about how that sort of sponsorship would fit in to the definition of advertising, if we were to promote a ban. I ask hon. Members to imagine the impact that that advertising will have on people’s perception of companies and their efforts. Some 50 or 60 years ago, tobacco companies had a huge role in sponsorship promotion; that role was eroded over the years and eventually removed altogether. We must ensure that companies cannot simply use vast sums of money to buy themselves a better reputation, without actually combating the key cause of the concern—in this case, the huge environmental and ecological damage to our planet. It was interesting that in his opening speech, the hon. Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) mentioned concerns from the fossil fuel companies that a ban would somehow prevent them from promoting their green initiatives. I note that a Greenpeace report, “The Dirty Dozen: the climate greenwashing of 12 European oil companies”, found that six global fossil fuel companies and six European oil and gas companies produced only 0.3% of their energy from renewable sources in 2022, despite commitments to net zero 2050 targets. There will of course be pushback from within the industry itself; we saw that with the tobacco industry, yet we now take the restrictions and warnings for granted. We must ensure that the extra rules and regulations that govern how fossil fuel companies can act are stringent and well enforced. At the very least, we must toughen up both the Competition and Markets Authority and the Advertising Standards Authority codes to ensure that, where sponsorship does take place, it is contingent upon rules and obligations for those companies to do more than just slapping their names on billboards and football shirts. Sadly, however, thus far we have seen a severe lack of leadership from the Government. Instead of announcing new measures to tighten up the rules, they have once again sought to pass the buck solely on to the regulators, ignoring the fact that political direction and decision making is vital to underpin the work. As we heard in the opening speech, the ASA believes that it is for Parliament to legislate, not for the regulator to take action. I would appreciate it if the Minister would give some clarity on exactly what this Government want to see changed, and not just what they expect the ASA and CMA to look at. Ultimately, what matters is that we actually cut emissions, which means providing British industry with the support it needs to do that. That includes setting out a clear and stable road map to net zero, expanding the market for climate-friendly products and, importantly, ensuring that the emissions associated with products are communicated honestly and transparently to consumers. That goes way beyond advertising to making information easily accessible, so that people can understand the carbon emissions of the products they buy and can make informed choices. To conclude, we want to see action taken in this area. We are calling on the Government to secure investments to ensure that the transition away from oil and gas is a green and just one. We want the Minister to give clarity on exactly what he wants to see change.

• 30 Jun 2025 · Welfare Reform · Hansard source

  More

  In her statement, the Secretary of State recognised that existing claimants “rely on the income from PIP for so many different aspects of their lives.” One aspect, for many, is work. Why does she think that new claimants will not have the same need and what “aspects of their lives” does she think they should curtail?

• 25 Jun 2025 · GP Funding: South-west England · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a strong case for Three Shires medical practice, which has three surgeries in my constituency. Does he agree that if any of the surgeries were to close, it would be a disaster for patients because of the poor public transport links? Does he agree more generally that it is more expensive to deliver GP services in rural areas because we cannot centralise to save money without dramatically reducing patient access?

• 24 Jun 2025 · Department for Education · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with what my hon. Friend says. Schools are disincentivised from taking action on special educational needs if they know that they have to fund the first £6,000. Finally, I highlight the pressure of free school meals and breakfast clubs. Although the extension of that provision is of course welcome, the funding does not recognise that schools are already having to subsidise school meals due to rising costs, and those subsidies will now increase. Schools in my area tell me that they declined to join the breakfast club pilot due to the lack of funding. One school I spoke to was expecting 67p per child for non-pupil premium children and 88p for pupil premium children. That non-pupil premium price represents less than 15% of the break-even cost for their current breakfast club. Yet again, these schools would have to subsidise at the expense of other activities. Behind the headline numbers are schools in crisis, especially in constituencies such as mine where they have been routinely underfunded for years. I hope the Minister can provide reassurance for my constituents that the headline figures will translate into fair funding for South Gloucestershire.

• 24 Jun 2025 · Department for Education · Hansard source

  More

  As we know, not all local education authorities are created equal. For those like South Gloucestershire, where schools are among the lowest funded in the country, the average rise quoted will not make up for years of underfunding. As I recently raised in this House, it is reported that two thirds of South Gloucestershire schools will be in the red next year, which is having a massive impact on children and young people in my constituency. I shall set out some of the pressures that are making that situation worse and ask the Minister how the spending review will help to tackle them. The first is the underfunding of staff costs. The Government are not fully funding the 4% pay-rise for teachers and are expecting schools to find a quarter of the amount from efficiencies within their budgets. Coupled with the underfunded national insurance reimbursement, this is placing a massive pressure on budgets. Can the Minister explain what these efficiencies would look like. I can tell her what things already look like in our schools before these cuts. In my local schools, clubs, trips and activities have been axed. Qualified teaching assistants have been replaced by cheaper apprentices. Class sizes have been breached and staff shared across year groups, or even across several schools. Each school will be asked to cough up tens of thousands of pounds that they simply do not have, and this will disproportionately hit small rural schools where the staff budget makes up a high proportion of the total. SEND pose challenges nationwide, but areas such as South Gloucestershire where school funding is lowest and where schools have struggled with a huge high-needs deficit, are hit particularly hard. The spending review says in relation to SEND that the Government will “set out further details on supporting local authorities as we transition to a reformed system as part of the upcoming local government funding reform consultation.” There is, however, no reference to the legacy safety valve agreements. The two-year extension of the statutory override is a temporary relief and does not solve the underlying problem. Schools and local authorities need to be able to plan ahead, so what assurances can the Minister give authorities such as South Gloucestershire whose safety valve agreements are coming to an end, and when will those authorities have certainty about the future funding arrangements?

• 19 Jun 2025 · UK Infrastructure: 10-year Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  As one of my constituency neighbours, the Chief Secretary will be aware of our local infrastructure needs, such as upgrading junctions 16 and 17 on the M5, fixing the original Severn bridge and upgrading Westerleigh rail junction. The West of England has often been overlooked in the past, so how will he ensure that the funding is distributed fairly and for the benefit of all regions?

• 19 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  It was reported yesterday that two thirds of south Gloucestershire schools will be in the red next year, which will have a massive impact on our children’s learning. As I have said to Ministers, under the current school funding formula, south Gloucestershire schools are the second lowest funded in the country. Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State to make a statement to the House on how she will fix this funding unfairness?

• 19 Jun 2025 · Warm Home Discount · Hansard source

  More

  We welcome investment in warm homes following a winter in which millions of households were living in fuel poverty. The crisis was exacerbated by the Government’s cut to winter fuel payments— and we welcome the U-turn on that, too. The former Conservative Government’s stop-starts on home insulation policies left thousands of vulnerable people in damp, cold and unsafe homes, with lower energy-efficiency standards and higher bills during an energy crisis. Given that homes in this country are among the oldest and least energy-efficient in Europe, will the Government commit to an ambitious 10-year plan for home insulation, for which the Liberal Democrats have long called? Will they ensure that households on lower incomes will be eligible for free insulation as part of that plan? And, following the Government accepting the campaign of my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for solar panels to be mandated for all new homes, will they now look to introduce a full zero carbon standard for all new homes and solar for car parks, as put forward by the Liberal Democrats in amendments to the Planning and Infra- structure Bill?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Hydrogen-powered Aviation · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) for securing this debate, which is particularly important for the west of England. Hydrogen-powered flights have real potential to cut carbon emissions in a notoriously difficult to decarbonise industry, while still allowing people to enjoy flying around the world, as the aircraft would emit only water vapour. The industry needs support now, however, which means thinking about the technology, infrastructure and regulation. Airbus, where many of my constituents work, is aiming for hydrogen-powered airliners by 2035. Its studies suggest that UK hydrogen aviation could support up to 110,000 jobs in this country, and we absolutely have the potential to show global leadership. When I discussed the ZEROe project on a visit to Airbus last year, it was trying to decide between hydrogen combustion and hydrogen fuel cells. It has now plumped for the latter, although it does not rule out direct combustion in the future. It and other manufacturers are working in collaboration with academia, and there is some excellent knowledge in this area in our local universities. We need to back investment in research, development and manufacturing infrastructure. Other companies such as GKN, which has a base in my constituency, are also looking at hydrogen. The west of England has a long history of innovation in aviation, going back to the days of Sir George White; it has many things that co-ordinate to make it a place to invest. For example, just outside my constituency, we have the Bristol and Bath science park, and we have the national composites centre. Hydrogen molecules are very small, so containing it is a challenge, but that is where the national composites centre’s expertise can help. In the science park, the institute for advanced automotive propulsion systems is also looking at hydrogen. Obviously, it is no good having hydrogen-fuelled aeroplanes if we do not have the hydrogen, so we need large-scale investment in green hydrogen. It is all very well having zero emissions on our flights, but if the electricity is being generated from non-low carbon power in the first place, there will still be associated emissions. As the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee has heard a number of times in its inquiries, it is really important that the Government make a decision about the future use of hydrogen. Given that we will only ever be able to produce a finite amount of green hydrogen, I think we need to prioritise it for industries where there are no realistic alternatives, including aviation. We need to be thinking about how we produce that energy, and again our area has something to offer the country, because we have the potential for new nuclear at Oldbury and we have the River Severn, where there was a recent commission on tidal power. We therefore have the means of producing green energy. We have expertise in all those areas, with excellent nuclear specialism in our local universities, the aviation expertise to develop its use in aviation, and the facilities that I described in the Bristol and Bath science park to help to tackle some of the problems associated with deploying the technology. On infrastructure, we obviously need to think about not just how we are producing that energy, but how we are delivering it to airports and how we are storing it. Again, that comes back to the question about the future of the gas grid in this country—will it be repurposed for hydrogen at some point? Regulation and having the right regulatory environment are important. People are very aware that hydrogen is highly flammable, but we can make it safe by putting the right protocols in place. Our 2024 manifesto set out taxation reform that would help to redirect people away from frequent high carbon flights. It is important that we give people a means of judging the carbon emissions from their flights. Many companies will be looking at their own net zero aims, and it is important that people understand the implications of their choices when flying. Hydrogen-powered aviation has the potential to cut transport emissions and boost our economy through new jobs. The west of England is particularly well placed to support the industry. It is time to make sure that the regulatory environment is right and that limited public money is invested effectively.

• 12 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The Government’s decision to cut personal independence payments by changing the eligibility criteria is a double whammy for carers, who risk losing their carer’s allowance if the person they care for no longer qualifies for PIP. Given that it is Carers Week, will the Leader of the House raise this issue with the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and make time for a debate so that we can discuss the far-reaching impact of these changes?

• 12 Jun 2025 · Covid: Fifth Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  Thousands of self-employed people and business owners were excluded from Government support because of the arbitrary eligibility criteria. They paid their taxes but were left unsupported during the crisis. Does the hon. Member agree that it is disappointing that those people are still struggling five years on?

• 12 Jun 2025 · SEND Funding · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. South Gloucestershire is in an even worse position, and I am sure all the authorities in the f40 group would agree. Yesterday, I raised with the Prime Minister one of the impacts that lack of support for SEND has on families. He did not take up my request for a meeting, but I hope he will consider meeting me to discuss this aspect of the issue, and meeting charities that represent parents who are in this situation. Of course, the lack of support for children with special educational needs has many other impacts; I simply do not have time to go into all of them today. We need overall SEND funding to reflect the level of need. We need more funding during the transition to greater inclusion, to reflect the fact that we will be supporting people with a high level of need, as well as funding early intervention. We need a national body for SEND to end the postcode lottery, and to fund the very high-need cases that cost over £25,000 a year, and schools need funding to be distributed in a way that reflects their needs, not some overall and potentially flawed perception by their local authority.

• 12 Jun 2025 · SEND Funding · Hansard source

  More

  That is one approach, but we need to ensure that it does not take away from the high-needs approach. The point is that we have to fund both early intervention and the high-level needs that have resulted from the lack of early intervention. The previous Government declined to fund an additional 200 special school placements when they signed the safety-valve agreement. When I met the Minister for School Standards, she did so too, saying that the focus is on providing places in the mainstream. Increased inclusion is a sound ongoing policy, but pupils cannot make the switch overnight. We need a fairer distribution of capital funding as well as revenue funding. Another issue with SEND funding is the notional £6,000. To give one example, a headteacher locally told me that more than 60% of their allocation goes on the high number of children with EHCPs they have on roll, leaving less than 40% to support all the other children on the record of need. School funding does not recognise that there can be great disparities between communities and schools, even in the same local authority area. Some acquire a reputation for being good at supporting those with additional needs and suffer financial consequences, and some communities in an authority have greater need than others. The formula for distributing SEND funding and more general schools funding does not reflect that, and it means that schools in different parts of the country with similar cohorts are treated very differently.

• 12 Jun 2025 · SEND Funding · Hansard source

  More

  Schools in my constituency are among the lowest-funded in the country, and there is a lack of resource for early intervention work before children get to the point of needing SEND support or an EHCP, which means that more children will need a higher level of intervention later. It is a vicious circle. The lack of money to act early means that more money must be transferred from the schools block to the high-needs block, reducing still further the funding for early intervention. South Gloucestershire is one of the local authorities that entered into a safety-valve agreement with the previous Government. It faces a cliff edge when that agreement ends next April, and as yet there is no certainty about what comes next. A great deal of work has been done by the council and schools working in SEND clusters, but the deficit has continued to increase. The agreement was signed pre-covid—we all know about the impact that the pandemic had on demand for additional support—and as a result the targets in the agreement are completely unachievable. Safety-valve agreements have not worked. Will the Government write off those historical deficits and find a new fairer funding formula? I support the Government’s focus on inclusion, early intervention and preventive support to make that possible for more children. However, we need to recognise that there are children and young people already in the system who did not get that support, and schools need the funding to support them now. One of the reasons for the historical deficit in south Gloucestershire is the lack of specialist places locally, which has resulted in high numbers of expensive out-of-area placements. Those are bad for children, who would be better off being educated in their local community, so that they did not face excessive travel or need a residential place, and they are bad for the school budget.

• 11 Jun 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q9. I have spoken to parents of children with special educational needs and disabilities who are not getting the support they need in school, but if, as a result, their child is out of school, they are left facing prosecution, fines or even prison time. Punishing parents for the failings of a broken system is outrageous, so will the Prime Minister end this by backing Lords amendment 349A to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, and will he meet me to discuss this further?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Nuclear Power: Investment · Hansard source

  More

  Happy birthday, Mr Speaker. Oldbury in my constituency is one of the sites under consideration for SMRs, and I have been told many times that it has many factors going for it, including GB Nuclear’s ownership of it, the nuclear expertise in higher education locally, its existing nuclear history and the potential for co-ordination with the Berkeley site. Given that the old nuclear power station has already been decommissioned, the local community wants to know what the future looks like. Will the Secretary of State confirm that Oldbury is still in the running and will he give a timeline for the decision?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. In the light of some worrying small-site applications on previously undeveloped green-belt land in my constituency, and of concerns from the Campaign to Protect Rural England, will the Minister undertake to monitor and assess the initial impact of the new grey-belt provisions and look at refining the wording, to avoid salami-slicing of the green belt?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Net zero standards cut bills as well as carbon emissions, so does my hon. Friend share my incredulity that a Government who have been forced to U-turn on winter fuel payments are refusing to back new clause 2, which would cut bills for people of all ages?