Helen Grant MP: speeches

24 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 4 Jun 2026 · Jury Trials · Hansard source
    More

    Given the Justice Minister’s conflicting remarks in the Courts and Tribunals Bill Committee, and given the Solicitor General’s responsibility for upholding the rule of law, will she confirm whether a decision that a defendant on trial will face a judge, sitting alone, will be subject to judicial review?

  • 4 Jun 2026 · Jury Trials · Hansard source
    More

    Sir Brian Leveson recommended removing the right to elect a jury trial in cases involving offences that carry a maximum sentence of up to two years. Cases would be heard by a judge, sitting alongside two magistrates, in a Crown court bench division. The Government’s proposals go much further. They seek to remove the right to jury trial for offences carrying a maximum sentence of up to three years. Cases would be heard by a judge sitting alone. Why have the Government departed from Sir Brian’s recommendations in two important respects, both of which make serious inroads into the right to be heard by a jury?

  • 3 Jun 2026 · South East Water: Disruption of Supply · Hansard source
    More

    South East Water has openly and publicly admitted that it cannot supply drinking water for all the future homes that are planned for Kent. What is the Minister’s response to that specific concern, and is she having conversations with her colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government?

  • 19 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill · Hansard source
    More

    On Second Reading of the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Minister for Courts and Legal Services, told the House that “politics is about choices”, so let us be clear about the choices that this Government have made. They chose to bring forward a Bill with no consultation, no manifesto mandate, no Green Paper, no White Paper and no robust modelling. They chose to go further than Sir Brian Leveson had recommended. They chose to remove the right to trial by jury for offences carrying up to three years in prison—sentences that will cost defendants their jobs, their homes and their families. And they chose to do all this in five days of Committee scrutiny. What does the Minister think about the choices that her Government have made? What will she tell the victims of miscarriages of justice and the thousands of legal professionals who oppose the measures?

  • 19 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the right hon. and learned Lady for what she said about the Hudgell case and the child cruelty register. It has been an amazing campaign, led by Paula Hudgell and her little boy, and I am pleased that we were able to get cross-party support to change the law and hopefully look after children and save lives. It is unfortunate that the right hon. and learned Lady just will not answer the very straightforward questions that I am asking. Jo Hamilton OBE was a victim of the Post Office Horizon scandal. She made it clear that, under Government proposals, none of the wrongly convicted 900 sub-postmasters would have had the right to a jury trial. Just this weekend, there was a further revelation, this time involving the Prime Minister. In a report, he had previously concluded that scrapping jury trials led to unreliable convictions in Northern Ireland in the 1990s. Will the Solicitor General explain how removing this vital safeguard makes the justice system more fair, not less?

  • 5 Feb 2026 · Jury Trials · Hansard source
    More

    There is a fundamental contradiction at the heart of Government. The Minister for Courts and Legal Services says that she would scrap jury trials even if there was not a crisis in the courts. The Lord Chancellor says that he is open to a conversation about alternatives and wants the backlog to come down. Which is it? Is it about the backlog, in which case what alternatives to scrapping jury trials are actually being considered, or is this just an unworkable attack on our civil liberties wrapped up in ideology?

  • 5 Feb 2026 · Jury Trials · Hansard source
    More

    That was a very disappointing answer. There is another contradiction too, this time on retro- spectivity. The Courts Minister says that cases already committed for trial at Crown court could be pushed back to swift courts. The Lord Chancellor suggests that the changes would only apply to new cases. That is not a minor discrepancy; it is about people’s lives. The Government cannot champion legal certainty on the one hand and flirt with retrospective decision making on the other. It is absurd. Which version are we meant to believe: the Lord Chancellor’s or the Minister’s?

  • 4 Feb 2026 · Armed Conflict: Children · Hansard source
    More

    I congratulate the hon. Member on securing the debate. As she has just mentioned education, does she agree that education for children in very difficult settings can provide them with a lifeline and a place where they can feel safe, make friends and build up their self-confidence and self-esteem, while at the same time, giving them a sense of hope and aspiration for the future? For those reasons, does she agree that it is important that the Government continue to fund education in those settings and to fund education research into what works best in trying to help and educate our children in very difficult conflict zones?

  • 12 Jan 2026 · Water Supplies: East Grinstead · Hansard source
    More

    I have no confidence whatsoever in South East Water. I have worked with it now for nearly 15 years. When things go wrong, and they often do in Kent and Sussex, its communication methods are absolutely atrocious: too little, too late and often very confusing. Often, all someone wants is to know when they can put the kettle back on or get in the shower. Yesterday, the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), who has worked extremely hard with the Minister on this matter, instructed that MPs be given two-hourly direct updates. That has not happened. She also instructed that a water station should be opened in Loose in my constituency, where over 2,000 people have been without water. That has also not happened. South East Water is not fit for purpose. Its leadership team is inadequate. It is out of its depth. I hope the Minister agrees that serious changes must be made, including the removal of the CEO, David Hinton.

  • 18 Dec 2025 · Jury Trials · Hansard source
    More

    Thank you, Mr Speaker. May I wish you and your brilliant team a very happy Christmas? The 2017 Lammy review looked at prejudice in the criminal justice system. Our now Justice Secretary said: “Juries are a success story of our justice system… juries are representative of local populations—and must deliberate as a group, leaving no hiding place for bias or discrimination”, and “This debate and deliberation acts as a filter for prejudice”. In 2020, he said, “Criminal trials without juries are a bad idea. You don’t fix the backlog with trials that are widely perceived as unfair.” What advice has the Minister given on how to avoid the discriminatory outcomes that the Justice Secretary warned about?

  • 18 Dec 2025 · Jury Trials · Hansard source
    More

    I am not too sure that answered my question; I shall have another go. This month, the Minister’s colleague, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull East (Karl Turner), wrote: “The erosion of jury trials not only risks undermining a fundamental right, but importantly, will not reduce the backlog by anything like enough”. He went on: “If this ever comes to the House of Commons, I will rebel and vote against it…The House and the public will not stand for the erosion of a fundamental right”. It would seem from X that at least 38 of his colleagues take a similar view. Is the Solicitor General, who is charged with upholding the rule of law, also concerned about the Justice Secretary’s proposals?

  • 19 Nov 2025 · Suicide: Reducing the Stigma · Hansard source
    More

    I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing this important debate. Over the past 10 years in England and Wales, one student has died every four days as a result of suicide. Ben West, a young man from my former constituency, set up a project called Walk to Talk when he was 17 and still at school. He did this following the death to suicide of his 15-year-old brother Sam. Does the hon. Lady agree that talking and asking questions directly about suicide can help to remove the stigma around it and save lives?

  • 13 Nov 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source
    More

    The campaign to introduce a child cruelty register has been led tirelessly by Paula Hudgell, the adoptive mother of 11-year-old Tony Hudgell. Sadly, Paula has now been diagnosed with terminal cancer. Tony was just 41 days old when his birth parents abused him so badly that he had to have both his legs amputated. Tony will live with the consequences of those injuries for the rest of his life. Will the Solicitor General agree to work, and at speed, with her colleagues in the Ministry of Justice? They seem keen to support Paula’s campaign, hopefully with an amendment to the Sentencing Bill in the House of Lords. We must take this opportunity to close this dangerous safeguarding gap so that all our children and families can be protected from repeat abusers.

  • 13 Nov 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source
    More

    I also welcome the right hon. Lady to her place. She is the third Solicitor General I have sat opposite in the past 12 months, and I look forward to working with her constructively where we can and to having healthy debate in this Chamber in the weeks and months to come. I associate myself with the right hon. Lady’s remarks on the sad passing of Baroness Newlove. I had the honour of working with her when I was the Victims Minister. She was a great champion of victims and she will be sadly missed. Violence against women and girls is a scourge. It wrecks families and ruins lives. One of the most sickening aspects of it is cruelty to and abuse of children. There is currently no national mechanism to track down and monitor serious child cruelty offenders after service of their sentences. The Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), said this of the Sentencing Bill on Report: “A problem in the system has been identified, and we are determined to fix it. It simply cannot be right that some horrific child abusers can have access to children—to live with children or work with children—at the end of their sentences without any system of monitoring or notification”. —[ Official Report , 29 October 2025; Vol. 774, c. 409.] The Minister went on to welcome the offer of cross-party talks and promised to work “at speed” to establish a child cruelty register. Can the Solicitor General please update the House on what concrete steps have been taken since then?

  • 29 Oct 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I hear what the Minister has to say. Will he bring forward a Government amendment to introduce a child cruelty register when the Bill moves to the House of Lords?

  • 29 Oct 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I wish to speak to new clause 20, regarding the introduction of a child cruelty register. Tony and Paula Hudgell are my constituents, and I have had the honour of getting to know both of them—especially Paula, Tony’s adoptive mum—extremely well. One special aspect of our job as MPs is getting to meet incredible people doing incredible things, often behind the public gaze, but in a decade and a half as a Member—I am showing my age now—I have personally never come across such a courageous, driven and united mother-and-son team. That is what they are: a team, especially given Tony’s young age of 11. New clause 20 would introduce a child cruelty register, described so eloquently and passionately by the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Dr Mullan), who is also a great champion of victims. It underlines what our job is really about: changing and improving the lives of our constituents, keeping them safe and protecting the most vulnerable. When Tony was just a little baby—41 days old—his birth parents, Jody Simpson and Anthony Smith, abused him so badly that he had to have both his legs amputated. Tony will have to live with the consequences of his injuries for the rest of his life. Smith and Simpson were sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by a judge at Maidstone Crown court—at the time, the maximum that the judge could give. They served eight years, and were released quite recently. They will be managed and monitored by police and probation for the remaining two years of their sentences, but after that, there is nothing—zero. There will be no management, no monitoring, and no reporting requirements if they change their names, start a new family, move county or have more children, and their case details will be archived, leaving a terrible and dangerous gap in our child protection system.

  • 14 Oct 2025 · Child Risk Disclosure Scheme · Hansard source
    More

    I congratulate the hon, Lady on bringing forward this important debate and on speaking powerfully on behalf of her constituents. My heart goes out to Gemma, Rachael and the entire family. My constituent, 11-year-old Tony Hudgell, was just 41 days old when his birth parents abused him so badly that he had both of his legs amputated. Tony will have to live with the consequences of that abuse for the rest of his life. His birth parents have served eight years of a 10-year sentence and have now been released. They will be managed and monitored by police and probation for the remaining two years of their sentence, but after that there will be absolutely nothing—no supervision, monitoring, managing, or reporting of changes in circumstances. The case details will be archived. Does the hon. Lady agree that that is another terrible gap in the system, and that we urgently need a child cruelty register, so that those who remain a risk to children—vulnerable little innocent children and babies—will continue to be monitored and managed?

  • 4 Sept 2025 · People Smuggling · Hansard source
    More

    Figures are going up and up and up, and the Solicitor General knows that. Can she confirm who these adjudicators will be—it would be lovely if she would answer the question—and will existing first-tier tribunal judges of the immigration and asylum chamber be eligible to apply?

  • 4 Sept 2025 · People Smuggling · Hansard source
    More

    I completely disagree with what the Solicitor General has said about the previous Government’s record in this area, and it is a bit rich in view of her Government’s record over the past 12 months. Reports reveal that Ministers will soon replace immigration judges with professionally trained adjudicators. We are told that is to tackle the 51,000 case appeal backlog, which will of course involve cases of people smugglers. Can she please confirm how long it will take to put that in place and whether it will require primary legislation?

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Blue Badge Eligibility · Hansard source
    More

    I thank all hon. Members from both sides of the House who have spoken so meaningfully and passionately on this matter today. In particular, I must mention the hon. Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tristan Osborne), who is working with closely with me and the Kent Messenger on this matter. I know that the shadow Transport Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), will be meeting the Transport Secretary. I hope the Minister, who was listening carefully today, will also speak to the Transport Secretary about what she has heard from all hon. Members today. I am glad she said that she will reconsider certain matters, and I hope that she might agree to have a meeting with me and some other colleagues so we can go into more detail than we have in the hour allowed.

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Blue Badge Eligibility · Hansard source
    More

    I think that was a nod. We can and must do better. As I said in my speech, and I am repeating it again, we need a fairer and faster approach, which recognises that at the centre of these faceless applications are highly vulnerable people who deserve care, dignity and respect. Finally, I pay tribute to the courageous Dr Susan Michaelis, who died of lobular breast cancer last week. Susan, with her husband Tristan, was a great campaigner for cancer patients, and she would have been so happy to see this cross-party campaign debated so sensitively today. May she rest in peace. Let us all keep working together to make a difference. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered blue badge eligibility for cancer patients and people with life-altering illnesses.

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Blue Badge Eligibility · Hansard source
    More

    I beg to move, That this House has considered blue badge eligibility for cancer patients and people with life-altering illnesses. The issue that brings us here today was brought to my attention by Elli Hodgson, a local journalist with the Kent Messenger newspaper. Her paper recognised that cancer patients and others with life-altering conditions were being denied the vital accessibility afforded by the current blue badge scheme, because they do not fall within the eligibility criteria—namely, having an enduring and substantial disability, typically defined as likely to last at least three years. Cancer treatment such as surgery and radio and chemotherapy can have significant side effects, including extreme fatigue, pain and mobility restrictions. Mental health can also be undermined by the fact that patients are often in a personal battle with life and death. Sometimes those impediments might not last for three years, but they can still reduce access to essential services during treatment and recovery. In many situations, the effects of the disease and treatment last longer than three years. Indeed, under the Equality Act 2010, the Government rightly recognise cancer as a disability from the point of diagnosis for the remainder of a person’s life.

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Blue Badge Eligibility · Hansard source
    More

    As usual, the hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. I agree with him that certain illnesses should have an automatic entitlement, because at the end of the day we should be making it easier for people who are going through hell, rather than harder and more complicated. It is not just the three-year rule that is out of step for people with shorter-term conditions. Blue badge applications take 12 to 15 weeks to be processed, which is far too long in terms of cancer timelines, and rejected applicants cannot reapply for six months. Again, that is incompatible with cancer treatments, where debilitating physical effects can quickly arise. So today I speak on behalf of the many thousands of cancer patients and people with life-altering conditions whose lives could be made so much easier if they had access to a fairer blue badge system. The issue came to the Kent Messenger ’s attention through the experience of an employee, a lady called Sandy Burr, who is with us in the Public Gallery today. Sandy was diagnosed with skin cancer in 2024. She applied for a blue badge when she found out that her toe needed to be amputated. Not long after the operation, she was rushed back into hospital with breathing difficulties. Doctors found blood clots in her lungs, causing embolisms. She is now undergoing immunotherapy, which has additional debilitating side effects. All those issues further impact how far Sandy can walk with her crutches. Sandy’s blue badge application has been refused by Kent county council, and she told me that the rejection felt like a kick in the teeth. She said that her mindset was focused on being brave and trying to stay alive, and she did not feel she had any extra fight in her to deal with the rejection or to appeal. Another lady, Bev Evans, also shared her story with me and the Kent Messenger. Bev fell downstairs and broke her neck in 2020. She now suffers permanent injury and has extreme mobility issues. She, too, has been rejected for a blue badge by Kent county council on two separate occasions. No reasonable explanation was given. Applications are made online, and in Bev’s case the computer just said no, because it thought she might get better within three years. It did not say why it thought that. Bev cannot walk without crutches and has no realistic prospect of a full recovery.

  • 16 Jul 2025 · Blue Badge Eligibility · Hansard source
    More

    No, and the hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. We can, and must, do better in these important processes. Following strong public reaction to the stories about Sandy and Bev, the KM approached me, because I am a local Kent MP and because I am a recent cancer survivor. In 2023, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. Later that year, I underwent the first of three surgical operations to remove the cancer and reconstruct my body. The first eight-hour operation was extremely invasive; I could hardly move, let alone walk, for several weeks. By the time I was able to walk, it was in a hunched fashion, due to the nature of the surgery. Extreme tiredness was also a significant factor for many months post surgery, while my body used much of its energy to mend me from the inside. During all that time, I was very lucky to have the support of my family to access the goods and services I needed, but not everyone is so fortunate. On 19 March this year, I wrote to the Secretary of State for Transport explaining the position. I requested that the eligibility criteria for a blue badge be broadened to include cancer patients and those with life-altering conditions, with the badge issued for a shorter term and with more frequent reviews, or that a separate but similar badge scheme be introduced for those with cancer and other life-altering conditions. Disappointingly, when the Minister responded on 9 April, she confirmed that the Government want only one class of blue badge and that there is no plan to legislate to change the current system, but that local authorities have powers to promote locally determined parking concessions in their respective areas. Accordingly, on 19 June this year, I am proud to say that all 18 Kent MPs and the shadow Transport Secretary signed a letter to the leader of Kent county council, with further correspondence going to the leader of Medway council. We asked both leaders to consider the introduction of a locally determined concessionary scheme for residents with short-term impairments. We await full responses, but the leader of Medway council has offered a meeting, and we hope perhaps to see him next week. We still believe that there is a strong case for a national scheme, which would require only secondary legislation. I hope that the Minister, having heard all our representations today, will reconsider the position. A national scheme would avoid an inevitably unfair postcode lottery situation, with different local authorities having different local policies on the matter. We need a fairer and faster approach to blue badge eligibility, which recognises that at the centre of these faceless application processes are highly vulnerable people who deserve care, dignity and respect. I am grateful to all my Kent colleagues, and to the Kent Messenger newspaper for bringing the issue to our attention and helping to drive this important campaign forward. I am also grateful, of course, to Sandy, Bev and others who have bravely shared their stories.

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