Gareth Snell MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 9 Jul 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Given that we have celebrated the Leader of the House’s birthday, may I draw his attention to the upcoming birthday of H & E Smith in my constituency? It is one of the last standing embossed and glazed tile manufacturers, and anyone who travels on the underground in this country will see many of its work on display. As it is one of the last companies standing, keeping artisan skills and abilities alive is proving difficult. May we have a debate in Government time about how we keep skills alive in such long-standing, but reducing, traditional manufacturing industries, so that there is a future and another 100 years of companies such as the one in my constituency to celebrate?

• 9 Jul 2026 · British Industry Supercharger: Ceramics · Hansard source

  More

  There are many wonderful 10-minute rule Bills and private Members’ Bills that support the ceramics sector, and my hon. Friend’s back British bricks Bill is one of them. More to the point, it makes economic and environmental sense, rather than importing bricks from around the world. We have the capacity in the UK to manufacture enough bricks to meet the housing targets that the Government have rightly set. We can also then ensure that the bricks reflect the sorts of build that we want in those communities—Staffordshire blue bricks in Staffordshire, and the sorts of bricks that are proudly made in Hampshire for your constituency, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is an important part of who we are, and what places look like, that the materials that houses are built from reflect the materials available. The Minister will know that ceramics is now a huge part of our defence industry. The air filtration systems in nuclear submarines are made from a ceramic component that is serviced in Stoke-on-Trent. The ceramic coating necessary for small modular reactors, which will hopefully be made in Derby, is required because it can resist the heat that is generated at the speed at which they will revolve. The filtration systems for most metal products in this country go through a small ceramic piece—it looks like a fruit pastel—that filters out the impurities while withstanding the intense temperatures of molten metal. Without those small technical ceramics, the bigger manufacturing activities that we undertake in this country simply would not be possible, and that is before we get on to the advanced ceramic materials that are available for heat recovery and green technology advancements, and before we think about the biomedical implications. There are ceramic components that can now be used for hip and elbow replacements, which have much less likelihood of being rejected by the body because they are a natural compound and the bone grafting takes easier. There are countless opportunities for ceramics to play a real-world solution to the challenges we face. They are often hidden in plain sight; we just need to look for them. That is before we get to the beloved tableware and giftware that made my city so famous, and that we see across this place and in the tiles on our floors.

• 9 Jul 2026 · British Industry Supercharger: Ceramics · Hansard source

  More

  I believe my hon. Friend is referring to the Copeland plate that he saw, which was made in the old Copeland factory not far from my current constituency office. Again, that demonstrates the soft power that we have in the export market. Mr Speaker himself commissions ceramic products from Stoke-on-Trent as part of the giftware he hands out when he receives dignitaries from around the world. I am proud that things made in Stoke-on-Trent find themselves gracing palaces around the world. The Minister will know, however, that it has been a tough time for ceramics. Ceramics is predominantly a gas-based industry, and the cost of gas power is almost three times what it was in 2019. In 2019, we were looking at about 40p per therm; today, it is 116p per therm. I genuinely appreciate that the Minister does not control the international wholesale gas price and, as I have on occasions disagreed with the Opposition, drilling will not necessarily bring down that price. However, it is nevertheless a fact that it costs three times as much today to fire a product, whether it be a brick or a plate, as it did in 2019. It has been estimated by the TUC and GMB through their “Save British ceramics” policy document that 78% of the heat capacity needed to meet the ceramics manufacturing base in this country could come from electrification. It is not impossible to electrify. However, the Minister will also know that electricity prices in this country are significantly higher than in our European counterparts. That is all before we get on to the issue of the illegal dumping in this country of products that are made using subsidised Russian gas through non-EU countries. We do have a genuine problem with the competitive nature of the products that we make based on the energy that they consume. That is where we have been talking to the Secretary of State and the Minister for Industry about the supercharger scheme. We were disappointed that ceramics in their entirety were not included in the British industrial competitiveness scheme. We welcome the fact that small technical ceramics have been included—that step has been genuinely welcomed across the sector. The pitch we want to continue to make today is for the rest of the sector to be considered for the supercharger scheme as part of the ongoing consideration that the Department is running. There is a perversity to the supercharger scheme. Industries that are part of it receive all the benefits of being in it, receiving discounts on some of the policy costs and some of the transmission costs; industries that are not in it not only do not receive those benefits, but actually pay towards those that are part of it. Being out of the scheme therefore means paying for the industries that are in it. We have the perverse nature of energy-intensive industries like ceramics subsidising the energy costs of energy-intensive industries such as steel, some of the chemical sector and some of the metal sector. That is not something the Government have done by design; it is just the way the system has developed over time, by trying to make it cost neutral to the Government and passing those costs on to higher energy users. That is unfair—it is. It means that the costs of the electricity that could be used in factories around Stoke-on-Trent and around the UK are higher because organisations that use as much energy as we do are getting a subsidy and a discount. That needs to be changed. The sector does want to move towards electrification. We really welcome the fact that part of the £120 million secured by the Secretary of State was for capital costs to allow factories to move towards heat recovery technology and towards electrification of processes, where possible. However, the challenge is that while the electrification process may be covered in some of the capital costs, the running costs of the electric process, compared with the gas process, means that the savings are marginal and, in some cases, it is more expensive. I know that the Secretary of State is working as quickly as he can, and I know that the Government say they are working at pace on trying to bring down those industrial electricity costs, but at the moment that is an impediment to realising some of the good work that we could do as a result of the investment that the Secretary of State has brought forward. I would just ask the Secretary of State to think about which of the SIC codes he would consider including in the supercharger scheme. Given that we have an ambition in this country to build 1.5 million houses, ensuring that every community has homes that my constituents and the constituents of my colleagues can move into must be part of that. If product code 23320—bricks and tiles in baked clay—could be included, that would benefit manufacturers in your constituency, Madam Deputy Speaker, and in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee). Manufacturers in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack), home to Ibstock, would also benefit from that. Given that we want to try to encourage house building, this seems like an absolute no-brainer. There are also issues around product code 23200, which are refractory products. As I have said, to make steel in this country, refractory-grade ceramics that can withstand the intense heat of that process are needed. At the moment, we are becoming dependent on potentially importing those sorts of ceramics into the UK in order to make steel. Given that we are putting a significant amount of money into being able to increase the production of steel in this country because of our sovereign capability demands, it makes absolute sense that we insulate the supply chain for that process, which includes refractory-grade ceramics. Again, including those manufacturers in the supercharger scheme would be a huge benefit to them and make us less dependent upon imports. Given the geopolitical instability that we face, being able to do this by ourselves in our own country makes absolute sense. On house building, every house needs some form of bathroom. If my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) were here, he would talk about Armitage Shanks and the famous sanitaryware that it makes. Product code 23420 is ceramics and sanitaryware. Before my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme tries to make a further intervention, I acknowledge that in his constituency, he has Silverdale Bathrooms, which makes sanitaryware. We should be supporting domestic manufacturers in this country to build the houses that we need. Without that support, we become dependent on imports. Finally, a product code that is close to my heart: 23410 —the ceramic household and ornamental object. I appreciate that including it in the scheme is a harder sell because of the strategic importance of those products to the country, but I say to the Secretary of State that one of the programmes that this Government have quite rightly introduced is Pride in Place, which is about saying to communities, “We know who you are, and we are proud of what you do.” When he visited Emma Bridgewater, he saw the pride on the faces of the workers who make the mugs, plates and tableware—and he had a go himself, and was very good. There is a sense of identity in having an industry reflected in a community, and it being supported and helped. While there may not be an immediate economic argument for the inclusion of tableware and giftware in the supercharger scheme, there is undoubtedly an argument about community identity and pride in place. This is about protecting jobs in communities like mine, which have lost so much over many years of de-industrialisation, while simultaneously saying to the thousands of workers who make the things that we eat off, give to our friends, and buy for weddings and birthdays, “We recognise the important social value of what you make and your contribution to the colour and joy of our lives.” I think that is a powerful argument that shows that ceramics should included in the supercharger. This is not a case of the sector simply asking for a handout. I think the Secretary of State would accept that the sector is doing what it can to decarbonise, and recognises that decarbonisation does not mean deindustrialisation. It recognises that it has to do more on heat recovery, and to ensure that it can sustain itself. The funding we have received has been an incredible benefit to the sector. The next step, to ensure that we go from surviving to thriving, is including the sector in the supercharger. I hope when the Secretary of State is able to make announcements about the review, which we hope is coming soon, he will lift the hearts of all the workers he met at Emma Bridgewater by saying, “You’re in the scheme, and we’ve got your back.”

• 9 Jul 2026 · British Industry Supercharger: Ceramics · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with my hon. Friend, who has been pursuing that for a long time. The ceramics industry is a great example of where procurement rules could be geared more towards supporting domestic manufacturing, not least in bricks. If we are going to use Homes England money to subsidise, at cost to the British taxpayer, the building of the homes we need in this country, we should insist that the companies that build them are buying their bricks from British manufacturers. It is a circular economy, it is good for our environment, and bricks have a long-term life of over 150 years—much better than timber and cladding.

• 9 Jul 2026 · British Industry Supercharger: Ceramics · Hansard source

  More

  The sector is also important to my hon. Friends’ constituencies in other parts of Staffordshire. I will rehearse some of the figures, Madam Deputy Speaker. Of course, given that I am a proud MP who represents a brickworks, you will be aware that ceramics offer a multitude of benefits to our economy. The sector employs 20,000 people, generates around £2 billion for our economy, and is responsible for £600 million-worth of exports. One can walk around pretty much any part of the country and come across a ceramic product that is made in the UK, be it bricks, tiles, tableware, or steel that is made using refractory-grade ceramics. I say this often, but I will say it again: we cannot make steel in this country without ceramics, so everything that the sector does contributes towards the greater good of UK plc.

• 9 Jul 2026 · British Industry Supercharger: Ceramics · Hansard source

  More

  At the outset of this Adjournment debate on ceramics, I declare my interest as a member of the GMB trade union and chair of the all-party parliamentary group for ceramics, for which the secretariat is provided by Ceramics UK. I also want to place on the record the support that has recently been given to the sector under the stewardship of my right hon. Friend the Business Secretary. The £120 million that has been provided is a massive boost to a sector that had all but been forgotten and was worried that it was on a managed decline towards the end of a ceramics manufacturing base in the UK. We know that there is work to do with that money. The sector and the unions are coming together as we speak, and they are working with the Business Secretary’s officials to make sure that every penny of the money that he and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have been able to find for us goes towards protecting jobs, safeguarding manufacturing and making sure that the sector has a viable future, as it is so important to the constituency that I represent.

• 9 Jul 2026 · British Industry Supercharger: Ceramics · Hansard source

  More

  One last time.

• 7 Jul 2026 · Human Rights in Kashmir · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate that the Minister is standing in for the Minister for the Middle East, who is not in his place this afternoon. On bilateral working, the UK Government have settled positions on Somalia, Crimea and the conflict in Israel and Palestine, and we do not recognise northern Cyprus. There is a whole host of areas of disputed territory where we, as a Government, have taken a position and said what we believe the outcome should be. Why is this dispute any different? Why are the Government unable to say, “We believe that UN resolution 47, which we originally supported, should be in play”? Why do we have a different position on this from our position on all the other conflicts and disputed territories in the world?

• 7 Jul 2026 · Future of British Horseracing · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on her excellent speech. The point she raises is apt, and what she describes is currently happening. I am sure she will share my concerns and welcome comments from the Minister about how we can mitigate the unintended consequences the Government have unfortunately brought about—particularly the big betting companies reducing their sponsorship in the horseracing sector as a result of the recent changes to the tax regime. That was not intended, but it is happening and the impact is being felt right now.

• 6 Jul 2026 · Ceramics Industry · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way briefly on gas?

• 6 Jul 2026 · Ceramics Industry · Hansard source

  More

  Given that the Minister asked that he be informed of problems, the investigation process for calculating injury is incredibly arduous. In the last investigation, only two companies were able to take part in the process because of the bureaucratic and cost demands placed upon them. Simplifying the process for investigation would allow more companies to participate and provide evidence, which would make the TRA’s release more in line with what the sector and economy need.

• 6 Jul 2026 · Ceramics Industry · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) for participating in this debate. He demonstrates something that we have tried to make clear throughout our lobbying: this is not a Stoke-on-Trent issue. Yes, we are the spiritual home of the pottery industry, but there are ceramics manufacturers in most parts of this country making something beautiful out of dirt, essentially, and turning clay into art. The fact that he was able to share that story is very helpful in articulating the points we are trying to make. I congratulate Hayley for starting the petition. I declare my membership of the GMB and my chairmanship of the all-party parliamentary group for ceramics. I want to put on the record my thanks to Rob Flello from Ceramics UK as well as Sharon Yates and Chris Hoofe from the GMB for their sterling work in leading the campaign that has got us to this point. As was said by the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson), the industry employs 20,000 people. It is worth £2 billion to the economy, with £600 million-worth of exports. That makes it bigger than the fishing industry, yet the country’s emotive connection to it is not quite as great, so we still have work to do. I am grateful that my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) picked up on my Ceramics (Country of Origin Marking) Bill. I genuinely believe there is a market around the world for quality ware made in the UK. We know it from Portmeirion’s advancements. They tell me about markets they are looking at, potentially bringing work back to the UK. Some companies in Stoke-on-Trent talk about where they export, and the value of that export, because of that mark on the bottom that says “made in Stoke-on-Trent”. I hope the Minister can continue the constructive conversation that we have had so far to see how we get that Bill over the line in this Session. We are a city that looks at our history and we take it very seriously. I am proud to have the tile manufacturer H&E Smith in my constituency. It makes tiles for London Underground and is celebrating its 100th year. I have Emma Bridgewater, which makes incredibly well-known stoneware, and I have Portmeirion. I have Halcyon Days that makes giftware for the House of Lords shop. The city also gave this place Duchess China and, of course, Minton tiles are made about a mile from where I live. That is the history that we have contributed, but the sector has so much more to offer. We cannot make steel in this country without refractory grade ceramics. We cannot build houses in this country without the bricks. I say to the Minister, like my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), if we are to have Homes England subsidise the building of homes in this country, can we please mandate that it buys British bricks with that subsidy? It would be a huge benefit for taxpayers’ money to go into a British industry to protect British jobs using a British product. There are also advanced ceramics that we use for defence, for nuclear and for medical technologies, which are leading the way in which we treat people, the way we defend our country and the way that we do some of that green technology advancement. As the Minister and I have often discussed, decarbonisation should not mean de-industrialisation, and the ceramic sector is a clear example of where, if we get it right, we can show that it works for that proof of concept. Finally, I want to briefly talk about the carbon border adjustment mechanism. CBAM is an issue. We have to get that right. It potentially puts the ceramic sector at risk. We are in danger of carbon leakage, yet that is not recognised as part of the scheme. As my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth) mentioned, the dumping of Chinese ware is a problem. Will the Minister look at how the Trade Remedies Authority considers the calculations for injury? Will he also make sure that ceramics are included in the supercharger scheme, which we discussed on Thursday during the Adjournment debate, to protect those jobs for the future?

• 6 Jul 2026 · Ceramics Industry · Hansard source

  More

  We have heard a lot from the hon. Lady’s party about its cheap power plan. Is it her intention that gas drilled from the North sea would be specifically ringfenced and sold at a below-market price to sectors such as ceramics in Stoke-on-Trent and throughout the country, so that they can benefit, or would that gas still be sold to them via the international market?

• 6 Jul 2026 · Ceramics Industry · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way on that point?

• 6 Jul 2026 · Ceramics Industry · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman rightly points out the Indian trade deal. He is right about the environmental and economic impact, but there is also the social impact. Too many factories making those bricks over in India and Pakistan are using what we would consider modern slavery and indentured labour. Additionally, efficacy surely ought to be at the forefront of any decision that the Minister makes about how we build houses in this country.

• 2 Jul 2026 · Access to Further Education · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate that this is the responsibility of our noble Friend in the other place, but if the Minister’s officials could write with an answer, I would be grateful. It is reported that pension contributions in the college sector will likely drop by about 8% as a result of the funds doing very well. There is a rumour that some of the colleges’ dividend from having to pay less into pension funds will be clawed back mid-academic year as part of the Department’s negotiations. I appreciate that he cannot answer that now, but that would be incredibly damaging to colleges. Any way of mitigating it would be welcomed across the sector.

• 2 Jul 2026 · Access to Further Education · Hansard source

  More

  I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests; I am a governor at the City of Stoke-on-Trent sixth-form college and the Abbey Hill special college, and chair of the all-party parliamentary group on sixth-form education. I congratulate the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin) on securing this genuinely important debate, and my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) for rightly pointing out that the best college in the country is in my county. Where she was wrong is that it is actually 10 miles north, in my constituency, not hers, but that is a different matter. I will push the Minister on two or three things. First is the introduction of the V-levels. I am grateful that the Government recognised that the scrapping of BTECs would leave a gap in the market for young people who wanted to go to college to study qualifications. The first three V-levels are due to be rolled out in September 2027, but the qualification guidelines are not going to be released until spring 2027, meaning that many colleges will be unable to work out what they will have to teach to ensure that young people get the qualification. Those prospectuses are being printed now, and knowing what the guidelines are would be a big help. Is there any chance the Minister could bring forward that announcement? I know colleges would be grateful. There is also the issue of stand-alone sixth-form colleges, which fall between the cracks of FE and sixth-forms in multi-academy trusts when it comes to capital funding. They do not qualify for the school condition allocation fund, as those in MATs do, or the FE capital transformation fund. That is a genuine problem, because in the types of places that Members have mentioned, those stand-alone sixth-form colleges are a real engine for social mobility. They do not have the ability to borrow—it was taken away from them—and they are funded at 29% less than schools, so accessing capital becomes a real issue for the growing number of young people who want to go there. Finally, I will push the Minister on the transport infrastructure that makes colleges accessible. Can the Department for Transport think about colleges as somewhere that bus routes ought to run to? In too many place, young people cannot rely on parents to get them there. Buses unlock opportunity for education and progression.

• 2 Jul 2026 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source

  More

  Titanic Brewery, based in Stoke-on-Trent, makes a fabulous pint—I highly recommend the plum porter. However, the Minister will know that as an independent brewery, access to market is quite difficult because of the way that tied pubs insist that landlords buy their products. Could the Minister make an announcement before the summer recess on the access to market scheme, and in particular the guest beer arrangement that would allow 1,500 SMEs access to market? It would not cost the Government anything, and the Minister could find that lots of people raise a pint to her over the summer.

• 1 Jul 2026 · Packaging Manufacturers: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry to detain the House. I am not sure if a try has been scored yet, but I am sure somebody will find out—

• 1 Jul 2026 · Packaging Manufacturers: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  I will be brief, because I know something else is happening this evening that others want to engage in. I am not entirely sure what that is, but apparently it is quite popular. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) on securing this debate. I know about the glass industry and she has rehearsed some of the arguments in particular for producers of beer. I have had similar correspondence from various agencies about the perversity of a weight-based system that precludes the use of a product that is infinitely usable and moves manufacturers towards plastic and thinner aluminium products because it is cheaper. I am sure the Minister will comment on that. I want to talk about two things. I must first declare an interest as the vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on packaging in the circular economy, which is chaired excellently by my hon. Friend the Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore). I think it is quite clear that this is a good policy and a good system but that it has had some unintended consequences. We are trying to iron them out for the benefit of all. In my constituency I have one of Premier Foods’ Mr Kipling factories. It has done a considerable amount of work on reformulating its plastic from red trays so that it can be recycled. It has also looked at how it can use cardboard better. It has looked at the use of its plastic film, which is really important for the freshness of its products, but that is obviously a product that it is trying to phase out. The high cost of looking at using the newer systems, particularly those that are too small for registration, such as biodegradable or organic films, means that there is an incentive to stick with the plastic manufacturing, which is a challenge. I also wanted to touch briefly on the ceramics industry—of course, no debate in this place is complete without mention of ceramics. I say that in jest, but one of the things that the ceramics sector is dependent on, particularly the giftware sector, is people buying a product that is often shipped around the country. Most of those organisations will have a turnover that means that their products and packaging are registerable under the scheme. If I go online and buy a product from the European Union—something of appreciable aesthetics but of a much lower quality—and it is brought into the UK, there is a price differential, because of the cost of the packaging that it is shipped in. It becomes a disincentive for the UK purchaser to buy a British product. If companies are shipping certain products, such as ceramics or glass, they need to be absolutely certain that the packaging is sufficiently robust, due to the fragility of the product being shipped. There are not that many alternatives. I know that some in the sector have looked at cardboard, but cardboard is a move away from polystyrene, and polystyrene is cheaper by weight, so they stick with the product that is actually more damaging to the environment. Finally, because I know Members will want to go and watch association football—I believe that is what is on right now — there is also an issue for small innovative packaging firms that are looking at new material. I know that the Minister is scheduled to meet, or may have already met, an organisation from Staffordshire called WoolCool. They are using wool as a packaging product, and it is entirely reusable. People can use it in their garden, and the birds can take it away to make nests and so on. It can be used for all sorts of lovely things, even as a thermal insulator. It is completely reusable. However, the company is so small that it was rated “red” until recently, which means that no one really knows what is going on with the costings arrangements. They end up not knowing what costs they might be faced with later on and, therefore, they do not know what costs they have to build into their business models. WoolCool is a small business that is trying to do something really ethical, and it is of real value to the local economy in Staffordshire. It is also trying to move away from those much more damaging products, but it is currently not sure what to do. Can the Minister touch on how we will better engage with new manufacturers that are producing new materials such as wool? They have a real place in the future of our packaging industry and will create jobs in places such as Staffordshire. We need to ensure that they have an opportunity to grow and take away some of those damaging plastics, which is what we all want. I would be very grateful if the Minister could reflect on how we will make sure that the EPR weightings for those good, consumable products that we want the British public to buy, such as ceramics, are not disproportionately outpriced by foreign competitors because of our packaging rules in this country.

• 1 Jul 2026 · Packaging Manufacturers: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister mentioned the super-charger scheme and the impact for glass manufacturers. I know the super-charger scheme is not her Department, but it is only for frontier industries. Can she say whether or not glass bottle manufacturers that go into the hospitality sector benefit from that? My understanding was that they do not because they are not considered one of the glass fibres or the industrial glass needed for the frontier industries.

• 1 Jul 2026 · Packaging Manufacturers: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  I genuinely thank the Minister for being generous with her time. On the idea of a post-implementation review, is there a way of looking at the time that businesses have to spend interacting with the scheme? The Titanic brewery in Stoke-on-Trent—very good beer, by the way—has told me that it took three weeks of one employee’s time to complete the assessment for the first year’s fees. I am sure that that is not by design, but in the review, will the Department look at how to make interaction with the scheme easier for small businesses that do not have much capacity?

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  The other point that I want to raise—this is the small part of the hon. Member’s speech that I agree with—is that those places also tend to have people who are in indentured work or modern slavery, so there is a human impact as well as an economic one.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) on securing this debate. When he was talking about the enforcement of gaudy signs and the impact they have on communities, I could not help thinking about the old bank in Fenton: it has gone from being a glorious listed building in a conservation zone to being smeared with bright signs advertising all sorts of products—yet trade in there is surprisingly slow for somewhere that opens so often, so I fully endorse what he said about enforcement. In the brief time I have, I want to press the Minister on three points. One is access to cash. Stoke town is one of the four towns I have the pleasure of representing and it does not have a bank. It has been told that because there is a post office just under a mile away in three locations, the town has sufficient access to cash facilities. It does not. I hope the Minister will work with the Treasury to change the criteria so that it looks at the impact on towns rather than using as-the-crow-flies distances, because that simply does not work. The second point is travel links. Buses are incredibly important for ensuring that people can get to town centres and use their high streets, and so are trains. I am disappointed that Stoke city council abandoned the plan for the accessibility works at Longton train station; as my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) knows, that would have made access into that town much easier and allowed us to bring people to the south of the city using public transport. Finally, I would like to push the Minister on public toilets, which we have not touched on. One of the challenges with town centres and high streets is the closure over many years—predominantly under the Conservative Government, I hasten to add—of public loos. That means there is a “loo leash” for many people who cannot find public conveniences, so they feel that they cannot go out shopping. Will the Minister look at putting a duty on local authorities to provide public loos? That would be a small, but important, step towards making our high streets accessible again.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  As part of that densification process, I encourage the Minister to look at living accommodation in town centres and on our high streets. There are examples in Hanley, in Stoke-on-Trent, where new apartment blocks have driven footfall into the town centre while providing accommodation that meets the demands of local people. That model has worked incredibly well, and I hope the Government will consider it as part of the high street strategy.