Elsie Blundell MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Jun 2026 · Transport Infrastructure: North-west England · Hansard source

  More

  11. What fiscal steps she is taking to help develop transport infrastructure in the north-west.

• 23 Jun 2026 · Transport Infrastructure: North-west England · Hansard source

  More

  As the Chancellor will know, northern powerhouse has been spoken about since 2014, which is 12 years ago. If we are to get Northern Powerhouse Rail off the ground and delivered, we cannot let valuable land that could create tens of thousands of jobs and boost the northern economy be used as a cheap option. What recent conversations have there been with local leaders regarding the proposed underground station at Manchester Piccadilly?

• 10 Jun 2026 · Railways Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As I made clear on Second Reading, this crucial Bill is about undoing the immeasurable damage done to our rail network, to passenger confidence and to economic prosperity after decades of privatisation and woeful mismanagement. I will focus on rail devolution. I commend the Transport Committee on its incisive report on the topic, and I particularly thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for the amendments drafted in her name and her clear desire for us to get the most out of this legislation. I know how much is riding on the Bill for our regional mayors, strategic authorities and, most importantly, the passengers they serve. My appeal today is to ensure that the Bill supports the Government’s devolution journey. Transport planning is a crucial competence of our elected mayors, and where mayoral strategic authorities are truly emboldened, entire city regions, local transport networks and whole communities are strengthened as a result. We must do as much as possible to support connections that improve economic density and therefore boost growth. Our achievements in Greater Manchester are a testament to that, and the absorption of rail into the Bee Network is the critical next step in delivering on the priorities of local people. I welcome Government amendment 136, which will enable local bodies to enter into certain arrangements with the Secretary of State, but concerns remain that it may not reflect the full capabilities of our mayoral authorities. I would welcome any assurances from the Minister that this provision will not be narrower than existing provisions set out in the Railways Act 2005. Essentially, can the Minister confirm that the amendment supports meaningful partnership with our elected combined authority mayors? As the Bill stands, engagement between Great British Rail and our mayoral authorities could be predicated on good will among officials negotiating on their behalf, with little codified in the way of a formal, statutory partnership between the two. Mayoral strategic authorities and mayors themselves are now integral to the delivery of housing policy, urban planning and regional economic development. For them to do that role without much of a stake in local rail networks is to proceed with one arm tied behind their backs. Authorities need to be sufficiently empowered in relation to Great British Railways to get on and demonstrate that they deserve greater scope to plan transport alongside other policy areas—for example, by strategically aligning rail corridors and house building. Great British Rail cannot inhibit this kind of common-sense approach in the way that Network Rail sometimes has in the past. Great British Rail and our local rail networks must work in lockstep with spatial plans and the changes we see across our communities. That is the only way we can ensure benefits for peripheral towns as much as for the hearts of our city centres. We also need to think about the future. We can never say with certainty how committed a future Government may be to devolution, so the Bill must enshrine a robust partnership duty to ensure that mayoral authorities have a decisive role in commissioning services, shaping specifications and influencing fares and performance outcomes. We cannot simply rely on a duty to consult. Local transport plans are critical, too. As the Bill stands, Great British Rail should “have regard to” local transport plans—forward-looking, multi-year plans developed by local transport authorities, each with a statutory basis, that promote safe, integrated, reliable and sustainable local transport policy. Simply having regard to them could lead to rail policy being delivered entirely by Great British Rail in a silo and in isolation from wider place-based policy. I appreciate that we are planning a national rail network, but that work must not run roughshod over local economic and transport priorities. I therefore urge the Minister and the Government to consider revising the language in clause 16 from “have regard to” to “act in accordance with”. I know that, in their response to the Transport Committee’s report on this matter, the Government were clear in their view that the current language is sufficient, but I am keen to stress that this Bill is about not just the next few years but the next few decades. We need to set an irreversible course for sustained devolution, and doing so means GBR not just regarding the plans, but fully aligning with them. I would welcome the Minister’s remarks on that. I offer my full support to this crucial legislation, and I thank the Government for their continued engagement. Our regional leaders have an invaluable contribution to make in engaging with GBR; for that to be realised, we need to move beyond notions of consultation and towards equal and productive partnerships between mayoral strategic authorities and our rail network’s new guiding mind. That means making train travel and other forms of public transport better for passengers across the country, irrespective of where that may be, and ultimately driving economic growth. This ambition must be what guides us going forward, and that is how passengers nationwide will come to judge what we are doing here today.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Men’s Mental Health Care: North-west England · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the publication of the men’s health strategy, especially the measures in it designed to improve mental health outcomes. In a report that I recently sent to the ministerial team following an event I held with local charities and mental health service users, it became clear that the recommendations of the strategy need to be implemented quickly. What practical steps are being taken to implement those measures, especially in areas such as mine, where deprivation continues to affect the health of men and boys?

• 9 Jun 2026 · Men’s Mental Health Care: North-west England · Hansard source

  More

  14. What steps he is taking to improve men’s mental health care provision in the north-west.

• 4 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Pupils at St Cuthbert’s school are currently without teachers and support staff during their GCSEs. This follows prolonged industrial action at the St Teresa academy trust, where staff are opposing a potentially damaging restructuring of the school. As far as academies are concerned, the Department for Education appears to have little power to ensure that trusts engage meaningfully with parents. May we have an urgent debate on the Department’s ability to intervene in academy trusts, especially where trusts’ decisions are harming children’s attainment?

• 21 May 2026 · Royal Mail Services: Greater Manchester · Hansard source

  More

  3. What recent discussions he has had with Royal Mail on the adequacy of its service levels in Greater Manchester.

• 21 May 2026 · Royal Mail Services: Greater Manchester · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, I held a meeting at the fantastic Burnside community centre in Langley with representatives from Royal Mail and constituents, including those who have had to deal with a substandard postal service resulting in crucial correspondence arriving weeks late, if at all. To many people in Heywood and Middleton North, that is a direct result of a national asset being sold off to a private company focused on profit rather than quality of service. If that level of service continues, what further options is the Secretary of State considering to hold Royal Mail to account, and where necessary will the Government step in and force the changes that my constituents need to see?

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome last week’s King’s Speech and the Bills in it, which aim to put the UK on a stronger path for the future. My constituents have been clear with me: if we are to build a future that is fairer, in which they are not just getting by, but thriving, we need to do politics differently. It is not good enough to suggest that someday in the distant future things might get a little bit better. That is not going to cut it any more. Today our focus is on energy security, an issue that underscores perhaps more than any other how we cannot carry on with business as usual. Looking across the north of England, we can see the consequences of deindustrialisation, the hollowing out of local economies and the impacts of austerity. It is abundantly clear that we need to view achieving energy security as an opportunity to right those historical wrongs. The inequalities they brought about have been eating away at communities and the values that once made them whole. Reframing energy security as a positive opportunity to reverse the fortunes of towns like mine is the only way to proceed. The poverty experienced by far too many in Heywood, Middleton and the other towns I represent will not be addressed unless we accept that we need to reindustrialise in a way that safeguards our energy security. I therefore express my full support for the provisions in the Government’s energy independence Bill, the next step in tackling the totally unmanageable bills for consumers and businesses and ending our overreliance on global energy markets. Challenges with the cost of energy are not a consideration only when it comes to how we heat our homes or power industry; as the sole Greater Manchester MP on the Transport Committee, I also want to consider how the cost of energy affects how we get from A to B. Giving local people the ability to reach employment and leisure opportunities both affordably and in a joined-up manner is something we have pioneered in Greater Manchester. We have made those arguments, taken on our detractors head-on and won, and we have done so through a vision-led approach and place-based delivery. The delivery of the largest light rail network in the country has completely transformed the prospects of tens of thousands of people in Greater Manchester. The tram is arriving in my constituency, with spades in the ground by 2028, and we are closing gaps in provision so that the whole of Greater Manchester can benefit, including Heywood and Middleton North. We are delivering through a responsive, integrated and affordable bus service that reaches all corners of the city region, having been taken back into public ownership. On rail, I also welcome the Government’s Northern Powerhouse Rail Bill, a clear reflection of our region’s ambition and a firm commitment from Government to decarbonisation and delivery across the north. In closing, I welcome the King’s Speech and what it could mean for my constituents in Heywood and Middleton North. That said, I want to be completely clear: the window that we have to demonstrate that there is another way is rapidly closing. The security my constituents deserve is not a pipe dream; it is entirely deliverable, and in my view—

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

  More

  The implications of this legislation will be significant for communities across the country. It is therefore crucial that we get it right. I pay tribute to Eamonn Boylan, who sadly passed away earlier this month—a pivotal figure for Greater Manchester’s devolution journey. During his time as chief executive of the combined authority, he understood that the more power we obtain, both regionally and locally, the more we can deliver. Eamonn certainly helped Greater Manchester to deliver, following the progress made by the likes of Sir Howard Bernstein and Sir Richard Leese. We in Greater Manchester have been at the forefront of progress in this area and we have been focused on one thing: making tangible improvements to the lives of those who elect us. This Labour Government must be radical in their approach to devolution, bringing power closer to people and not hoarding it in this place, and we must future-proof this Government’s achievements from those who would seek to undermine and unravel our progress. We need to ensure that the transfer of power to our communities is permanent. From adding culture as a devolved competence to strengthening restrictions on gambling premises, there is much to welcome in the amendments. Today I will cover the amendments related to private hire vehicles, both in terms of national standards and Lords amendments 55 to 62 on enforcement powers for drivers operating in other areas. I previously tabled an amendment on this matter, which I believe would have empowered mayoral strategic authorities to require private hire vehicle drivers to licence within their region. That would have brought licensing, enforcement and monitoring closer to home and forged stronger ties between drivers and the communities they serve. I acknowledge the efforts of Baroness Pidgeon, who sought, as I did, to phase out out-of-area operations. I welcome the steps that the Government, in the form of Lords amendments, have taken towards enabling licensing authorities to take enforcement action against a PHV licensed out of area and to temporarily suspend licences. I especially welcome the steps that these amendments take to improve information sharing between licensing authorities on the conduct of individual drivers. Although I support this step and the Government’s work on national standards, we must acknowledge that the system at large will still be characterised by out-of- area operations. I commend what the Government are seeking to do, but if we are to bring about better enforcement processes, we need to incentivise or perhaps mandate drivers to license locally and therefore disincentivise drivers from taking shortcuts to obtaining a licence hundreds of miles away from where they wish to operate.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Infected Blood Compensation Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the bravery of the constituents I have met who have endured decades of anguish as a result of this harrowing chapter in our country’s medical history. The Minister will know that there are those across the country with legitimate claims under this scheme, but because some NHS trusts are claiming that their loved ones’ medical records have been destroyed, those affected are still having to fight for recognition and compensation. Will he address how we can overcome this seemingly insurmountable obstacle and give my constituents the closure and compassion that they deserve?

• 14 Apr 2026 · Eating Disorders · Hansard source

  More

  12. What steps his Department is taking to improve support for people with eating disorders.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Eating Disorders · Hansard source

  More

  Too many people affected by eating disorders are not receiving the help they need—help often comes too late, with serious physical symptoms overlooked or misattributed. It is clear that those on the frontline must have the training they need to identify early warning signs. What further steps are being taken to ensure that people are supported before they reach crisis point, especially in areas such as mine, which were on the receiving end of significant cuts to public services under the Conservative party?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Bus Service Funding: Mayoral Strategic Authorities · Hansard source

  More

  As the Minister knows, since my election I have been campaigning for an express bus service from my constituency to Manchester city centre. Following key improvements to the network across Greater Manchester, a consultation that I did across my constituency shows that we still need the introduction of that express bus service. What conversations are taking place between the Department for Transport, the Treasury and our transport authorities specifically to prioritise closing gaps in bus provision and to ensure that there is sustained, long-term funding for buses to make that possible?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Bus Service Funding: Mayoral Strategic Authorities · Hansard source

  More

  11. What recent discussions she has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on funding for bus services in mayoral strategic authorities.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Transport Accessibility for Disabled People · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the chair of the Transport Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), for her leadership on this crucial issue, and for securing this debate on the important matter of transport accessibility for disabled people. Since being elected to this place, I have reiterated that transport is one of the most crucial drivers of opportunity. Reliable, suitable and adaptable public transport for all should be a right, not a privilege. I will begin by touching on the precarious landscape facing disabled users of public transport. In a report published by Transport for All, 56% of disabled people reported being “unhappy or extremely unhappy making journeys”. The Transport Committee’s report reinforced this; more than a third of disabled respondents asserted that they avoided making journeys more than once a week because they believed it would be too complicated. When things go wrong on journeys, it can feel as though disabled passengers and transport users stand entirely alone, without recourse or representation, and they are left with the burden of taking action against operators and transport authorities that fail in their duties. Looking at the rail network, we have all been on a train where it is apparent that there is no available space for wheelchair users in any of the carriages, and some operators are doing absolutely nothing to make the necessary improvements. We have also seen the appalling media reports of disabled passengers being left to alight from carriages with no support whatsoever. We need to seize every legislative opportunity to improve this dire landscape. Indeed, one of the crucial elements of the Railways Bill is the introduction of a passengers’ council. However, as the Bill stands after Committee, clause 36, on the general duties of the council, stipulates only that the council “must have particular regard to the interests and needs” of disabled passengers. The Bill needs to go further by enshrining the voices of disabled passengers on the council, and by giving the council a role as an enforcer, not just an adviser. This passenger watchdog will have a tangible impact on the experiences of disabled passengers only if we codify in legislation what we need to achieve. The Railways Bill represents a significant moment of reform for the rail system, and we must not miss the opportunity to embed strong, enforceable, long-term protections for disabled passengers. To achieve this, duties should be explicit and binding. I hope that the Minister can speak to this issue specifically when concluding the debate. As the Committee’s report highlights, and as my hon. Friend the Transport Committee Chair mentioned, pavement parking is another widespread problem, especially for people with mobility or visual restrictions. Constituents rightly tell me that this is an issue of safety. When people park their car in a way that leaves no space on the pavement, there is no way that the wellbeing of those who use wheelchairs, walking frames, guide dogs or canes can be assured. This selfish behaviour makes things difficult for disabled individuals and people pushing buggies alike. I understand that the Government, rather than imposing a blanket ban on pavement parking, as there is in London, first intend to introduce secondary legislation to ensure that local authorities can act against serious cases of obstruction caused by pavement parking. How does the Minister envisage this legislation being meaningfully enforced by local authorities? Will additional funding be provided to enable local authorities to act? I would welcome answers to those points from the Minister. I reiterate my thanks to the Chair of the Transport Committee, our Clerks and my colleagues for their work in producing this crucial report, and for their advocacy on this important issue. I wholly welcome the steps that are being taken to advance the rights and protections of disabled passengers, which include the Law Commission’s review of transport accessibility law—a direct result of one of our Committee’s recommendations —the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s publication of guiding principles for accessible transport, and an equalities impact assessment for the Railways Bill, which is something else the Committee has called for. That being said, I conclude by saying that however significant these reviews, principles and assessments are, we must ultimately ensure that they lead to effective enforcement, accountability and the empowerment of regulators to challenge the operational orthodoxy that has left disabled passengers denied the access that they deserve. With landmark changes coming to national and regional transport policy in the coming years, we must finally ensure that everyone is part of the journey, and that, in legislation and in practice, no one is left behind.

• 26 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The majority of businesses on our high streets add great value to our communities, but there are some where criminality takes place, and that is putting people off visiting their local town centres. Where premises are host to illegal activity, councils can issue closure orders prohibiting access, but those orders can only be made for a maximum of three months before dodgy businesses are allowed to open and operate again. Would the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time on how we can ensure that local authorities have additional means, set out in statute, to bear down on illicit activity that really harms our high streets?

• 19 Mar 2026 · Online Harms · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) for securing this crucial debate. Since my election, constituents in Heywood and Middleton North have repeatedly raised issues about online harms, especially as they see those who control the platforms seeking to shirk accountability at every turn. That is why we cannot discount the significance of the Online Safety Act. That critical piece of legislation—the first of its kind in putting a range of new duties on social media companies and search engines to mitigate the harms that those online can pose to our constituents—was a welcome step taken by the previous Government and implemented by this Labour Government. Perhaps to a greater extent than in any other area of policy, we must recognise that the frontiers of online media are constantly expanding, technology is evolving, and our daily life is increasingly determined by what takes place on phones, laptops and tablets. Though the Act was immensely welcome—it goes some way towards dealing with this complex set of challenges—we cannot wait another 20 years before we come to substantively revisit this topic. To underscore why constant adaptation to these threats is necessary, I would like to touch on three themes. First, there is the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation. The integrity of our democracy and the tone of our discourse through to our continued belief in facts, evidence and science are all on the line in the war being waged unrelentingly in these digital spaces, where online actors are determined to amplify falsehoods to erode a sense of public trust that has taken generations to foster. The meteoric rise of AI has made the challenge all the more pressing. People’s behaviour is being tracked on apps, and algorithms responding to them are driving misleading and sensationalist content into the most impressionable, vulnerable and isolated minds—so many of them are young people who are growing up unable to tell fact from fiction. We know that adults are also susceptible to such trends. This week—of all weeks, when we have seen a deeply concerning outbreak of meningitis in Canterbury and east Kent—we see misinformation and blatantly anti-science positioning rear its ugly head once again, as we saw in the covid-19 pandemic and have seen countless times since. It is a really obvious thing to say, but the onus is on us to speak with one voice as MPs on such a critical topic as public health and to confront those harmful narratives at their source. A great deal more thinking needs to be done in digital spaces when it comes to misinformation, whether medical or otherwise. That requires strengthened regulation and real intent between the Government, Ofcom and the platforms. I am pleased that the Online Safety Act has provisions to capture myths and disinformation where they are illegal or harmful to children, but we have much further to go in curtailing the weaponisation of online platforms to spread lies, conspiracies and harmful falsehoods to millions across the country. Secondly, I would like to speak about the protection of children. I have raised the issue of technology-assisted child sexual abuse on several occasions in this place. It needs to be tackled from both sides—the judicial and the digital—so I wholly welcome the Online Safety Act and the Government’s wider work in this area. From stopping companies like X, or AI tools like Grok, generating vile, sexualised images of children and non-consensual, intimate deepfakes to the commitment to ban nudification apps and to introduce a legal duty requiring tech platforms to remove non-consensual intimate images within 48 hours of being posted, it is clear that the Government stand firmly against those who would do our children harm. That being said, TACSA also has further dimensions that warrant serious consideration. It can take many forms, such as the distribution of child sexual abuse material, sexual harassment, exposure to sexually explicit materials and grooming, to name a few. Despite the prevalence and seriousness of these crimes, there is an over-reliance on non-custodial sentences across our judicial landscape, with magistrates courts dominating outcomes, and gaps in the unduly lenient sentencing scheme. Online or technology-assisted child sexual abuse has profound and lasting impacts on children for their whole lives, comparable to that of physical abuse. Digital regulation and our justice system must reflect the insidiousness and seriousness of such crimes, and I would welcome the Minister’s comments on that when he concludes the debate. Finally, I will briefly touch on how discourse in digital spaces is increasingly affecting our communities. Following the Manchester synagogue attack last year, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate identified a troubling rise in antisemitism online, where violence against the Jewish community was celebrated and further encouraged. We only need open X, Facebook or other platforms to see a disgraceful barrage of abuse levelled at our Muslim community too, with platforms giving previously fringe far-right voices the means to amplify their dangerous and divisive rhetoric to millions. The harm that these actors can inflict on the capacity of our communities to come together is being played out each and every day. All too often they can hide behind anonymous accounts, and real people—my constituents and people across the country—are having to face the consequences. I am proud to represent a diverse constituency, but I fear the power that those online have to direct actions and attitudes in real life. I hope that the Minister will touch on that pertinent topic. I welcome this Government’s efforts to curtail online harms. Indeed, I welcome the work of any Government in doing so. Things, however, are moving at a staggering rate. We therefore cannot view the Online Safety Act 2023 simply as a job well done; rather, we should see it as another rung on a growing ladder. To keep our constituents—especially children—and our communities safe, we need to ensure that our thinking is consistent with the expanding nature of these digital spaces. Ultimately, that means recognising that, for all their utility in connecting us with one another, these platforms also have a near unlimited capacity to do people harm. I truly fear the consequences of failing to recognise that.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Endometriosis: Workplace Rights · Hansard source

  More

  1. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help protect the rights of women with endometriosis in the workplace.

• 11 Mar 2026 · Endometriosis: Workplace Rights · Hansard source

  More

  Many women across the country living with endometriosis are forced to withstand immense challenges in the workplace, often culminating in them having to curtail their ambitions or leave employment entirely. That is because some workplaces are not putting in place proper protections to support working women, who frankly deserve better. What steps are therefore being taken, in consultation with the Department for Business and Trade, to ensure that our workplaces do not lose out on the immeasurable contribution that these brave women can make?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Spring Forecast · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Chancellor for her statement, and for the decisions she has taken to ensure the stability of our public finances so that we can improve our public services. As she will know, the number of individuals in the probation system is at an all-time high, with violent reoffending perpetuating the cycle of crime and leaving the public at risk. What steps will the Treasury take to drive down the number of staffing vacancies in the Probation Service, so that those in the service can work relentlessly to reduce reoffending and ensure the safety of the communities we represent?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Gaza: Support for Children · Hansard source

  More

  It is estimated that 40,000 children in Gaza have lost either one or both of their parents in the appalling war of recent years, leaving many as orphans without the love and protection that they need in one of the most dangerous places on the planet. As crisis engulfs the region once again and vital aid is still being blocked, what assurances can the Minister give that the UK will play a leading role in supporting those children in the long term, after all the horrors they have had to endure?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Gaza: Support for Children · Hansard source

  More

  9. What steps she is taking to support children in Gaza.

• 2 Mar 2026 · Speech and Language Therapy · Hansard source

  More

  As the Minister knows, the SEND system is not working for children, families or local councils, and it has not been for some time. Despite the record of the Conservatives, we cannot allow children in need of speech and language therapy to lose out. Will the Minister assure me that when it comes to speech and language therapy, the new “experts at hand” service will be utilised effectively, so that each local authority will be able to provide all children with the support they need?

• 2 Mar 2026 · Speech and Language Therapy · Hansard source

  More

  10. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that local authorities in financial difficulty can deliver effective speech and language therapy for children with SEND.