David Baines MP: speeches 2026

15 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 10 Sept 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    In Wigan today, the funeral service is taking place for Sir Billy Boston. He was rugby league’s first knight, a trailblazer on and off the pitch, a leader, an inspiration to millions and a gentleman above all else. On what will be a sad day for his family, will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to Sir Billy one last time and sending condolences to his loved ones?

  • 14 Jul 2026 · Public Office (Accountability) Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I started my speech on Second Reading in November last year by saying: “This has been a long time coming.” —[ Official Report , 3 November 2025; Vol. 774, c. 681.] Even more time has passed since then, but thanks to the determination, strength and effort of many survivors and campaigners—some of whom are in the Gallery today—and of those on the Labour Benches, and to the support of a number of dedicated people in this place, we are here at last, with the finish line in sight again.

  • 14 Jul 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    Due to a long-running dispute with the building’s landlord, Billinge medical practice in my constituency has been given a deadline of September to vacate the premises. I have previously spoken to the Minister about this and I am grateful for the help he has given me so far, but the integrated care board has now decided to move the practice out of the village entirely, to Garswood. I am worried about the impact of that on patients for many reasons, not least the fact that the new location is not easily accessible by public transport. Does the Minister agree with me that places like Billinge deserve their own medical practice? Will he or his officials agree to meet me to discuss the way forward?

  • 27 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    Last week was Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Week. I recently met my constituent Rob Denholm to discuss the issues he has had with claiming the personal independence payment in the past—he compared the experience with being put on trial. Will the Minister assure me, Rob and all those suffering with MS that the review that the Government are now conducting will not just make the system more effective and efficient, but make it fairer and more humane?

  • 23 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    Happy St George’s day, Madam Deputy Speaker. Alan Clark and a team of volunteers from the CAMRA award-winning pub Haydock Reading Rooms recently completed the West Highland Way, raising thousands of pounds for Clatterbridge hospital and for Ryan Lawrenson, who at just 21 was recently diagnosed with osteosarcoma. Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Ryan and his family the very best? Does he also agree that Alan and the team’s voluntary work and community effort show the best of Haydock and the best of England?

  • 17 Mar 2026 · Youth Unemployment · Hansard source
    More

    Young people are often unfairly criticised, but it is worth remembering that the vast majority of them are in employment, education or training. Those who are not deserve our support, and to be provided with opportunity, not the condemnation and ignorance that was all they got from the Conservatives in government, and all we have heard from them today. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the number of young people not in employment, education or training is a scandal, and that it demands action? Will he set out how this new investment will support young people in St Helens North and across the country?

  • 16 Mar 2026 · Strait of Hormuz · Hansard source
    More

    The shadow Foreign Secretary said that this was “a moment for Britain to stand tall”, and I agree with her, which is why I was pleased to see the Prime Minister and this Government stand strong, instead of running blindly into another middle east war with no clear plan. Can the Minister assure me and the House that we will continue to act in the British national interest, and the interests of British nationals in the region?

  • 11 Feb 2026 · Local Government Finance · Hansard source
    More

    I was council leader at St Helens for five years before coming here in July 2024. I just want to say thank you to the Secretary of State and the Minister for Local Government, and the Ministers in post before them, for the engagement, because the relationship now is different from what it was before. The conversation we have had since the provisional settlement has been constructive—it has been good; it has been done in good spirit—and I am very grateful for the result that we have for St Helens. In 2010, St Helens got £127 million a year from the last Labour Government, but when the Conservative party opposite left office it was £13 million a year. Does the Secretary of State share my absolute shock at the brass neck of Conservative Members?

  • 9 Feb 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    On Friday, I visited St James primary school in Haydock in my constituency, where, after learning about the dangers of knife crime, year 6 children are campaigning to install bleed control kits in their community, in case the worst ever happens. Can the Minister please assure them and all my constituents that this Government are doing all they can to tackle knife crime, and will she join me in paying tribute to the children and staff of St James for their efforts?

  • 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech. He says no evidence was given for those arguments. That is because there is no evidence, and yet opponents of the policy continue to make the arguments. Does he agree that it is damaging, dangerous and insulting to children and to families that are working hard up and down the land to do the best they can?

  • 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source
    More

    This has been a very revealing debate in which Members on all sides of the House have made interesting points, but this matter has unfortunately become quite polarising. On one side of the debate, we have those who work with children and families and see the hugely damaging impact that the two-child limit has had. The Child Poverty Action Group says that “scrapping the two-child limit is the most cost-effective way to start to reduce child poverty”. Dame Rachel de Souza, the Children’s Commissioner, called removing the two-child limit “a vital first step towards lifting hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty quickly, with the potential to transform their lives.” I agree with Unicef, which said: “No child should be punished for the number of siblings they have.” Scrapping the two-child limit will lift around 2,500 children in St Helens North out of poverty. In this Parliament, we are on course to lift a record number of children—more than half a million nationally—out of poverty. Free breakfast clubs are opening in more primary schools, more than 5,000 families in St Helens North will benefit from extended free school meals later this year, and working families receive 30 hours of free childcare. Yes, that must all be paid for, and I am aware that it will be paid for by taxpayers, but politics and government are about choices. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately), said that we should look at the Conservatives’ record in government. The hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley (Dr Shastri-Hurst) said that government is about choices. Well, the country is well aware of the Conservatives’ record and the choices that they made, which is why they are sat on the Opposition Benches. This Labour Government are choosing to give all children the opportunity to thrive, and we will all benefit as a result. Every single penny spent in pursuit of that goal is money well spent, in my opinion as a taxpayer. On the other side of the debate, however, the Leader of the Opposition and others do not take a reasonable and reasoned position but use language that is at best insulting and at worst dangerous. In a single stroke, talk of the so-called “Benefits Street” alienates and denigrates the millions of Britons who receive benefits, many of whom work. They are our neighbours and friends; the people we see day in, day out around our communities. As my hon. Friends have said, most of the children who will be helped by the removal of the two-child limit are from households in which someone works—59% of the households affected by the two-child limit are in work. I agree with those who say that work should pay, which is why I support this Government’s measures to ensure exactly that—measures that are opposed by those who say that work should pay. Try to square that circle, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I cannot—good luck to them. All I ask is that those who talk in that way about “Benefits Street”, and who denigrate millions of people, including children, think about how those children —never mind their parents—might feel when they see those headlines. We can and should debate policy, but we gain nothing from making people feel worthless. We also hear a lot about “looking after our own.” I agree that we should look after our own and support the people who need help. That is what the Bill would do through investment in children and the wellbeing of future generations, for their sake and for our collective good. I have seen the impact of poverty on families and children throughout my working life, and I have tried my best to help them. I am sure that all Members, on both sides of the Chamber, have met many families who have struggled and dealt with sudden changes in circumstances, whether from ill health, bereavements, job losses or housing crises. For families with more than two children, the impact is even more acute. It saddens me—frankly, it staggers me—that some would choose to extend that pain tonight. Every child matters; every child counts; every child has a role to play in our country and its future. I will vote tonight for them.

  • 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for introducing the debate so comprehensively, and pay tribute to Ruth Lue-Quee and all those in the Public Gallery who have campaigned so hard to make it happen. Ruth says that right now in England, at the end of foundation stage, when they are just five years old, children hit “a policy cliff edge and practice becomes inconsistent.” She says we need “teacher-planned, curriculum-aligned play-based learning and continuous provision in the classroom. It’s how young children learn best, achieve best and build strong foundations.” I agree with Ruth. I speak as a dad of two young boys who I know for sure would have benefited hugely from continuous provision in key stage 1; as a former teacher, sure that I would have seen the benefits in my classroom; as the husband of a teaching assistant who knows that it would help the children she supports; and, first and foremost, as the MP for St Helens North, certain that this would help every child in my constituency and across the country. We all need to be clear what this campaign is and is not about. It is not about the early years, it is not about enrichment or extracurricular activity, and it most definitely is not about lowering standards in any way. It is about bringing England into line with the rest of the UK and closer to countries such as Finland and Singapore. It is about following the evidence. It is about doing what is best for all children, our schools and, as a result, society.

  • 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source
    More

    I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. I completely agree that there is a huge body of evidence behind the petition, which I will touch on later, and we need to follow the evidence, especially on something as important as our children’s education. Sir Ken Robinson, someone I am a big fan of, described play as “a fantastically serious activity”, and he was right. Some schools in England already have continuous provision throughout key stage 1, and they show that it works. People might wonder why we are asking for it to be statutory, if schools can already do it. The answer is that every single child in every single school should be given access to the best possible education. It should not be a postcode lottery. We also know that in high-pressure environments, which schools undoubtedly are, it is optional practice that gets squeezed first. Schools default to what feels safest for accountability and what feels familiar. Statutory expectation protects and encourages what works. Key stage 1 is what Ruth Lue-Quee calls the “missing middle”. The early years foundation stage is protected in policy and key stage 2 is SATs-driven, but key stage 1 has the least protection for children’s developmental needs, despite being a vital stage in every child’s life. There is a huge body of evidence showing that putting five-year-olds in more formal classroom settings and removing continuous provision from the equation is not in their best interests, so why do we do it? The good news is that we do not have to. The Government have an opportunity here, and the timing could not be better, with the curriculum and assessment review and the schools White Paper coming forward. I mentioned at the start that I am a dad and have two children. My youngest is nine today, and I am missing his birthday party at home. [Hon. Members: “Aw!”] I know. Part of me wishes I was there, but I am glad to be here to speak for him and his friends. I know that the change we are debating, with a different approach in key stage 1, would have massively benefited my son and his friends. It might be too late for them, but it is not for others. I have already raised this point with Ministers, and I will carry on making it. I would be grateful if the Minister would commit to further meetings and discussions both with her and with her colleagues. It is our job to figure out how we prepare children for the mid-21st century. We do not know what that will look like, but we can be sure that we will not prepare our children for that future by doing what we have done in the past. The Government have rightly said that we want to give every child the best possible start in life. Learning through play until the age of seven would help with that. I thank Ruth and all others who have supported the campaign; they have my support and they should have the support of everyone in this Chamber.

  • 15 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    Sue and Dave Cook from St Helens have been awarded MBEs for their services to fostering. They have helped to take care of children for over 20 years. In Sue’s words: “To be able to give back to these children from St Helens who need us—it is an honour. It is a privilege to have them in our home.” Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to Sue and Dave Cook and to foster carers everywhere? Will he also join me in encouraging anyone in St Helens North who wants to make a difference to a child’s life to get in touch with the council’s fostering team for more information?

  • 13 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    The Hillsborough law has been a long time coming. It has been a journey, and for the families of the victims and survivors, as well as those affected by lots of other tragedies and disasters over the years, it has been too long coming. Will the Leader of the House please assure me and my constituents that this change is about getting it right—I think everyone involved can agree that we need to do that—and not about watering it down in any way?

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