Dave Robertson MP: speeches

Speeches

• 5 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I think your crystal ball is working today.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you, Professor, for coming along. You said that when the Computer Misuse Act was written in 1990, not many people were doing cyber-security work. You attested that the criminalisation element was negative for a number of reasons. Obviously, since then, a private sector has grown up in this area. I am struggling to marry those two pieces of information together. Can you give us an impression of other jurisdictions and of international comparators where things may be different, and whether they have been able to get ahead of us in building a more thriving sector? Are we particularly lagging behind in the OECD? Are other countries ahead of us because they do not have the measures we do? Professor John Child: That is a good question. It is certainly fair to say that all jurisdictions are somewhat in flux about how to deal with cyber threats, which are mushrooming in ways people would not have expected—certainly not in 1990, but even many years after. The various international conventions—the OECD, the Budapest convention and so on—require regulation and criminalisation, but those are not nearly as wide as the blanket approach that was taken in this country. Some comparative civil law jurisdictions in the rest of Europe start from a slightly different place, in that they did not necessarily take the maximalist approach to criminalisation we did. In a number of jurisdictions, you do not have direct criminalisation of all activities, regardless of the intention of the actor, in the same way that we do. So we are starting from a slightly different position. Having said that, we do see a number of jurisdictions making positive strides in this direction, because they need to; indeed, we see that at European Union level as well, where directives are being created to target this area of concern. There are a few examples. We wrote a comparative report, incidentally, which is openly available. In terms of some highlights from that, there is a provision in French law, for example, where, despite mandatory prosecution being the general model within French criminal law, there is a carve-out relating to cyber-security and legitimate actors, where there is not the same requirement to prosecute. In the Netherlands, there was a scandal around hacking of keycards for public transport. That was done for responsible reasons, and there was a backlash in relation to prosecution there. There were measures taken in terms of prosecutorial discretion. Most recently, in Portugal, we saw a specific cyber-security defence created within the criminal law just last year. In the US, it varies between states. In a lot of states, you have quite an unhelpful debate between minimalist and maximalist positions, where they either want to have complete hack-back on the one hand or no action at all on the other, but you have a slightly more tolerant regime in terms of prosecution. So there are varying degrees, but certainly that is the direction of travel. For sensible, criminal law reasons that I would speak to, as well as the commercial benefits that come with a sector that is allowed to do its work properly, and the security benefits, that is certainly the direction of travel.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q That is a really helpful international comparator on where others are with the criminal law. Is there any correlation between that and the ability of people within those jurisdictions to act and work in this space? In the UK, we have seen a significant increase in the number of people working in this area since 1990. That is the real thing for me: whether we can prove that, internationally, there is a significant difference between jurisdictions that are minimalist or maximalist. If one of them is encouraging more people to work in this area, and therefore has a wider pool of talent, are they able to protect critical infrastructure better? Does that correlation exist? Professor John Child: Yes. As I understand it, it does. This is part of the reason, incidentally, why my organisation, which focuses very much on criminal law aspects, ended up doing some collaborative work with the CyberUp campaign. That is because, from the industry perspective, they can do that kind of business modelling in a way that we do not. Whereas we can make the case for sensible criminal law reform, they can talk about how that reform translates into both the security environment and the commercial environment. Their perspective on this is, first, that we can see that there is already outsourcing of these kinds of services, particularly to the US, Israel and other more permissive jurisdictions. That is simply because, if you are a cyber-security expert in one of those jurisdictions, you are freer to do the work companies would like you to do to make sure their systems are safe here. There are also the sectoral surveys and so on, and the predictions about what it is likely to do to the profession if you allow it to do these kinds of services in this jurisdiction. That is about the security benefits, but they are also talking about something like a 10% increase in the likely projection of what cyber-security looks like in this jurisdiction—personnel, GDP and so on.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you for coming in to talk to us this afternoon. The Bill includes a couple of backstop powers for the Government to compel information and things like that. Are those powers sufficient to guarantee national security? Chung Ching Kwong: I think that to a certain extent they will. For hackers or malicious actors aiming for financial gain with more traditional hacking methods, it will definitely do a job in protecting our national security. But the Bill currently views resilience through an IT lens. It is viewing this kind of regulatory framework as a market regulatory tool, instead of something designed to address threats posed by state-sponsored actors. It works for cyber-criminals, but it does not work for state actors such as China, which possess structural leverage over our infrastructure. As I said before, we have to understand that Chinese vendors are legally obliged to compromise once they are required to. The fine under the Bill is scary, but not as scary as having your existence threatened in China—whether you still have access to that market or you can still exist as a business there. It is not doing the job to address state-sponsored hackers, but it really does help when it comes to traditional hacking, such as phishing attempts, malware and those kinds of things.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I have a bit of a blended question. Earlier, Stuart, you said that some of the wording in the Bill says that only 11% of managed service providers are likely to be covered by the legislation, but in previous answers we have heard about skills shortages and where we will need to build those skills. Although I think we all want as many organisations covered as possible, where is the line? Do we currently have enough professionals working in this space to be able to deliver this level of compliance across 11% of MSPs? Given the number of people available for this very specialised work, is the 11% figure in the right ballpark, or do we need to make that wider or thinner to ensure compliance? It is very easy to write a piece of legislation, but if we do not have the professionals needed to deliver the level of compliance at the thresholds we are setting in this place, that raises other potential issues. Do you have a view about whether the 11% you mentioned is in the right ballpark for the number of professionals we have, or whether it needs to move either way? Stuart McKean: I am referring to the Government’s report on MSPs that was done a couple of years ago. There are some 12,500 MSPs in the UK. Of those that are in scope of the Bill, 11% are medium-sized and large, but they account for something like 85% of the revenue that MSPs generate in the UK. Proportionally, the larger and medium-sized organisations will have the skillsets needed to deliver the requirements set out in the Bill. As it comes down the supply chain, most managed service providers are suitably qualified to deliver, but they will not be in scope of the Bill. Certainly the critical national infrastructure will not be in that sort of space. We have a good industry, and I think most of the MSPs are in that space, but I would highlight that MSPs are generally IT companies, and cyber-security is not an IT problem. It is much bigger than IT. Although MSPs can be at one end, this goes back to a question that was asked before about why companies do not just do this anyway, and so be more secure. The reality is that they do not generally understand it; they do not understand the risk and they do not have the qualified people, and it goes on in a sort of vicious circle. A lot of those companies will just go, “Yeah, I’ve got an MSP. They deal with that.” It is an interesting challenge, but, to your question directly, I think medium-sized and large MSPs will not have an issue. Dr Sanjana Mehta: If I may weigh in on this, I just want to take a step back and comment on the state of the profession in the UK. I appreciate that we are having this discussion specifically in relation to the regulated entities, but there is a broader picture. Parts of the industry are not in scope, but they need to have the right skills as well. We are starting off on a good foundation. The work done by industry, academia and professional associations over the past few years has helped to grow the profession steadily. The report by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology mentions that the number of cyber-security professionals directly employed in the sector has increased by 11% over the past year. That said, there is more to be done. I urge the Government to think about the skills piece, not only in relation to the Bill but as a wider challenge. We are very proud of our 10,000-plus members in the UK, who work very hard day and night to secure their organisations despite all the challenges and pressures, but the Bill does give Government a pivotal opportunity to elevate the status of the profession and to professionalise the sector.

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

  More

  The Arthur Terry Learning Partnership runs 24 schools in the west midlands, including six in my constituency. It is currently trying to plug a £6 million gap in its finances that was caused by what it characterises as an accounting error. The National Education Union has taken nine days of strike action at Arthur Terry schools this month, with nine more planned for February. The Department for Education’s engagement with my office on this issue yesterday was excellent, but may I ask the Leader of the House to ensure that the relevant Minister meets me and other affected MPs as a matter of urgency to discuss the ongoing dispute?

• 29 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for Industry for his engagement with Ceramics UK this week, meeting the organisation and ceramics companies from across Staffordshire, Stoke-on-Trent, the west midlands and further afield. He will have heard from them about the importance of getting ceramics firms into the super- charger scheme. I was pleased to hear what he said about trying to extend eligibility, so could he give us an idea of when we might hear some positive news on that front?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Rail Infrastructure · Hansard source

  More

  8. What steps she is taking to providing funding for rail infrastructure.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Rail Infrastructure · Hansard source

  More

  People across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages are delighted that this Government have funded the midlands rail hub project, meaning a doubling of the number of trains from Lichfield to Birmingham every hour. Ministers could go even further, though, by investigating the reopening of the Derby-Burton-Lichfield line, including a stop in Alrewas for the National Memorial Arboretum. Despite warm words from my predecessor, no business case exists for that. Can the Minister confirm that this Labour Government are not done with investing in transport in the midlands, and will he look again at the Derby-Burton-Lichfield line?

• 26 Jan 2026 · Police Reform White Paper · Hansard source

  More

  In my part of the world, people who get in touch with me about crime raise four major issues: car crime, county lines, antisocial behaviour and retail crime. The first two are often caused by criminal networks that extend beyond Staffordshire, and into the west midlands and further beyond. Will the Home Secretary confirm that the reforms are aimed at ensuring there is a regional response to those cross-border crimes, allowing local police to focus on antisocial behaviour and retail crime?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend elucidates the problems that we face at Rugeley Trent Valley station. He is a doughty campaigner and it is a pleasure to work with him and to follow his lead. The issue affects not only his constituents but a number of mine as well. I want to go back to his remark that, “The next station is Lichfield Trent Valley.” Very few people in this room will have tried to do that journey, which is not simple. There is no direct road linking the two places. We have to go through Armitage in a circuitous route. Sometimes just looking at the distance between two stations is not sufficient; we have to look at travel times as well. The practicalities of being able to do that I feel are sometimes overlooked by the Access for All process. He was making an excellent point and I want to reinforce that.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  It is always great to see the Liberal Democrats finding a south-east MP to come and talk about transport in the midlands and north Wales. The hon. Member mentioned the well-overdue news that the Government will be following through on the rail improvement projects and building north to south, rather than south to north—as they always should have done. I wonder if he would like to reflect on the fact that the areas that returned massive Labour majorities are now seeing the investment from a Labour Government, so is he absolutely certain that he wants to claim that as a Liberal Democrat win?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  Hear, hear.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Lady drives at that point again, but what we are seeing is the difference between words from one side of this House and action from the other. We have seen that in large parts of my constituency over a number of years. However, I will now seek to make some progress rather than be sidetracked by the numerous failings of the previous Government. The midlands rail hub is a huge boost to travel across our region. It will increase rail capacity in Birmingham, leading to 300 trains passing in and out of the nation’s second city every single day. The benefits will be felt across the east midlands, the west midlands and beyond, with extra services from the midlands to Wales forming part of the project. For Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages in my constituency, the midlands rail hub will mean a doubling of the number of hourly trains on the cross-city line to Birmingham—the busiest commuter line in the country outside London. Services were slashed under the previous Government, and we need the midlands rail hub to get them back on a sustainable footing in the long term. The rail hub is an important investment, but it cannot be the end of the story for the midlands. For far too long, there has been far too little investment in transport in our region and neighbouring regions. I am very aware that I am sitting next to an MP from the east midlands. London and the south-east enjoy a fantastic turn-up-and-go service that we in the midlands can only dream of. We are now seeing investment in the north with Northern Powerhouse Rail, and it is right that we have that rebalancing, but we cannot overlook the bit in between. In my area, the next step is clear: the midlands rail hub. Following that, we need to look to reopen the Lichfield-Burton-Derby line—the South Staffordshire line—for passenger services. This existing train line already carries passengers; it just does not have stops. It is a diversion route that trains have to use, so drivers have maintained route knowledge. Previous scoping work for the project suggested it could deliver, at a minimum, a £7 million boost to our area’s economy. The route would halve public transport journey times from Lichfield to Burton and cut journey times from Sutton Coldfield and Lichfield to Derby and Nottingham by up to a third. It would mean easier travel for work and leisure, and crucially, it would mean easy access from my constituency to the University of Derby. It would also take pressure off the heavily congested A38, which runs parallel to the railway. Reopening this line would open up the possibility of a new station in the village of Alrewas to serve the National Memorial Arboretum, which is a fantastic facility that I advise everybody to visit. Unfortunately, that is very difficult on public transport. Our national centre for remembrance is shockingly underserved, and not only by train links. The only bus option from Tamworth is currently being rerouted on a miles-long detour because Chetwynd bridge, which crosses the River Tame next to the arboretum, is closed to heavy vehicles due to maintenance problems. Despite support for the project from my predecessor, the Conservatives never funded the business case for the South Staffordshire line. I want to see action on Chetwynd bridge and that business case coming forward, so that we can really start to drive improvement in rail connectivity not only within regions but between regions from the west midlands to the east midlands. The South Staffordshire line is a fantastic place to start on that.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to take part in this debate with you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. I thank those who have already spoken. I am here to talk about rail. I would love to talk about buses, but I do not think I will have time. Specifically, I would like to address the midlands rail hub, which the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) has already spoken about. The project was conceived under the previous Conservative Government, and I do not shy away from that. Unfortunately, it then sat on a shelf gathering dust, and there was no real movement on it until after the election, when this Labour Government came in.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Member and I have both done some work on Chester Road—a place where one of my constituents lost their life a number of years ago. Is the right hon. Member able to update us on any conversations she has had with Walsall council about that area? I, and my constituents, would greatly appreciate that.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Lady mentions the Network North money. It was a mythical project last seen leaving London, carried by Dick Whittington riding Shergar. The money simply did not exist. This Labour Government found the money for the project in the Budget, but it is not only the money. The alliance for delivery has already been appointed, and things are moving at pace. I very much hope to see spades in the ground this year, moving the project ahead, so that we can all start to benefit as soon as possible.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Transport Connectivity: Midlands and North Wales · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, because it is you, Wendy.

• 14 Jan 2026 · Northern Powerhouse Rail · Hansard source

  More

  For 17 long years, constituents across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages have had to deal with the complete failure of HS2 Ltd while Ministers were asleep at the wheel. The chaotic Conservative cancellation of the scheme did nothing to alleviate those problems and instead replaced them with uncertainty on uncertainty on uncertainty. Unfortunately, all today’s statement does is confirm that that uncertainty will continue for at least another two decades. Can the Secretary of State confirm to me that HS2 Ltd, which is so hated by my constituents, will have absolutely no part in any rail infrastructure project north of Handsacre, that she will urgently ensure that me and other Staffordshire MPs have an opportunity to meet the Rail Minister, and that we can commit to the quick completion of the Handsacre to Manchester leg of HS2, with a view to releasing as much safeguarded land as possible as quickly as possible, so that constituents across my constituency, Staffordshire and further north do not have to continue to deal with the problems they have faced for so long?

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

  More

  My constituent Lisa has a severe condition that affects her nerves. She cannot stand, feed herself or use the bathroom unaided, she has a tracheotomy to help her breathe and, without the aid of a wheelchair, she can only leave her house for hospital appointments. In 2024 she was referred to AJM, a company contracted by the NHS in Staffordshire to provide wheelchairs. It took almost a year, and the intervention of my office, even to get her an appointment to be measured for a wheelchair by AJM. She was then told that it would be at least a year more before she gets the wheelchair that she needs. She has finally been given a wheelchair but it is not the correct one, and there is some uncertainty about whether she will ever get the care she needs. Will the Leader of the House ask the Government to publish a written statement on how our new wheelchair quality framework will ensure providers such as AJM are held to much higher standards than Lisa has experienced?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Passenger Rail Services · Hansard source

  More

  People across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages are looking forward to seeing the number of trains from Lichfield city to Birmingham double as a result of the midlands rail hub project, which this Government are pressing ahead with, after it sat on a shelf under the previous lot for far too long. I am really eager to see those additional trains delivered as quickly as possible, including a later evening service to Lichfield, which we are currently missing. Can the Minister confirm that bringing the line back into public ownership under Great British Railways will help us to drive these changes faster?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Passenger Rail Services · Hansard source

  More

  9. What steps she is taking to improve passenger rail services.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for his kind words and his campaigning on this issue. As I am sure he well knows, Rugeley Trent Valley train station serves a very rural area—the footprint of the station is mainly in my constituency—but it also provides access to the west coast main line for his constituents. It is not accessible by a bus service. Does he agree that we should be extending bus travel, so that people can get to a train station by bus and get all the access and opportunities that come with that, rather than having what we do at the minute, which is a legacy of Conservative failure?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  People would be forgiven, when reading the motion put forward by the Opposition today, for thinking that all was rosy in the countryside before the election in 2024, but in Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages—a countryside seat that is 85% rural—people know that that was not the case. They know just how important it is that Government take the concerns of rural communities seriously. They also know that despite more than three decades of representation by a Conservative MP, successive Conservative Governments have treated them with disdain. There is perhaps no better example of the disdain that the Conservatives showed for communities like mine than the story of High Speed 2: Conservative Ministers asleep at the wheel while HS2 Ltd treated landowners in areas like mine like they were a completely and utterly ignorable sideshow. It has gone on for decades. I have spoken to farmers in my patch who have been dealing with HS2 for 17 years and still have not had final payments made to them. Delay after delay, disruption after disruption—it is an absolute disgrace. Years of roadworks have caused massive inconvenience, farmers cannot farm their land despite it not being built on and business planning has been put on hold for years. The Conservatives say they care about our agricultural communities, but what did they do when our farmers suffered under that project? Things got so bad at HS2 under the Tories that this Government had to bring in a new chair and a new CEO to clean up the mess that was left. In fact, Mark Wild, the new chief executive, has experience of cleaning up Conservative messes—we only have to look at Crossrail. Beyond that, there are further transport issues that affect farmers and rural constituents in my patch. Chetwynd bridge is a fantastic example. It is a bridge that crosses from my patch into that of my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett). It is the largest cast iron bridge left in the country. It is grade II listed. It is a wonderful piece of architecture. It is incredibly useful and very pretty. Unfortunately, Britain’s largest surviving cast iron bridge has been neglected for decades. Deterioration in the structure was first spotted in the ’70s, but Staffordshire county council does not have a plan for how to fix it. It knows that it will cost £27 million, but it does not know how to fund it. The council did not speak to me before the spending review and, in fact, waited until Reform UK was in control to get in touch, after which spending review decisions had been made. I am working hard to try to find that £27 million to replace the bridge, and I will be meeting the relevant Minister next week. These are real-world examples of where Conservative MPs, Governments and councils did not do the work. They said all the right things—they were quite happy to go out there and dance and make their statements—but they did not do the work. They did not go out there to actually defend communities like mine, and I will take absolutely no lessons from them.

• 6 Jan 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My right hon. Friend is right to mention the impact on supply chains. In the west midlands, we recently had the cyber-attack on Jaguar Land Rover. That had a significant impact not just on that company, but on the supply chain, which has its roots right through the west midlands. That essential part of our economy was brought to a grinding halt by a cyber-attack. Will he confirm that this Bill will help prevent such instances from happening in the future?