Helen Maguire MP: speeches

Speeches

• 26 Jun 2025 · Armed Forces Day · Hansard source

  More

  It is an absolute privilege to speak in today’s debate on Armed Forces Day—a day on which we recognise and celebrate the bravery, dedication and sacrifice of those who serve and have served in our armed forces. We honour and thank them. Earlier this week I was proud to attend the armed forces flag-raising ceremony in Epsom. Such events are held in communities across the country, and their meaning runs deep. They are a visible reminder of something that should never be taken for granted: the courage of the men and women who step up to defend our freedoms, often at great personal cost. This week is personal for me, because I served in the British Army as part of the Royal Military Police, who vital operational work was quite rightly highlighted by the hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). My journey began with the desire to lead, travel and make a difference. I joined Sandhurst, which was gruelling and inspiring in equal measure. As one of the few women there at the time, I trained in boots that were not designed for me, but I emerged with unbreakable friendships forged in resilience. I was first deployed to Bosnia as part of NATO’s peacekeeping mission. Later, I served in Iraq with 1 Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment during Operation Telic 4, helping to retrain the Iraqi police force in a dangerous and volatile area. We operated under constant threat. A year before my arrival, six of my Royal Military Police colleagues were killed in Majar al-Kabir. I still remember the fear of that first night in Maysan, travelling in a blacked-out bus and unsure of what lay ahead; the fear of the unknown and of not making it home is one that many serving personnel still face today. We carried out our mission with professionalism and camaraderie—British troops working shoulder to shoulder with brave interpreters, local allies and international partners—but I saw at first hand how overstretched and under-equipped our troops often were compared with our allies. We got on with the job, but we should not have to make do. Armed Forces Day is not just about parades and flypasts; it marks a time for action. Our service personnel deserve more than warm words. They deserve a fair deal. That is why I am calling for a fair deal commission to overhaul the conditions facing service personnel, veterans and their families. From housing to pay and from diversity to transition support, our service personnel deserve reform. Unfortunately, too many military families still live in substandard accommodation, too many veterans struggle with poor mental health and inadequate support, and too many LGBT+ veterans are still waiting for proper justice and compensation. We were pleased to see the Government accept the Etherton report’s recommendations, but speed is of the essence because many of those affected are elderly or seriously ill. Women in the armed forces still face unacceptable levels of harassment and misogyny, as the Atherton report revealed. We must do better, and we will push for full implementation of those recommendations. When it comes to troop numbers, the reality is stark: our armed forces are overstretched and under-resourced. We are calling for a new bonus scheme to help to bring into and keep more new recruits in the British Army, and the expansion of the current rejoining scheme to attract former soldiers to re-enlist. I left the Army earlier than I planned. Like many servicewomen, I was forced to choose between motherhood and military service. There was no support, no nursery and no flexible career path. Those are the real barriers that drive people out of uniform, and the military lose many experienced people. We must change that. If we want to recruit and retain the best, we need to support families. The Liberal Democrats would create a one-stop shop for military families to access housing, education, healthcare and career support. I am proud of my constituency’s military history. Langley Vale was once a world war one training camp for more than 8,000 soldiers, and it is now a place of reflection. Our local Royal Engineers, the 135 Geographic Squadron, recently celebrated 75 years of proud service, marching with bayonets fixed through Ewell. In this volatile and uncertain time, let us honour the legacy of our service personnel not just in ceremony, but in policy. Let us make Armed Forces Day a starting point for serious change.

• 24 Jun 2025 · Department for Education · Hansard source

  More

  Councils are being asked to deliver SEND services without sufficient funding, to which my hon. Friend has alluded, and that creates a postcode lottery for families, with children waiting months to receive support. Does she agree that we urgently need SEND funding reform, including removing the £6,000 school contribution to end the postcode lottery, so that we can deliver the support that children need?

• 17 Jun 2025 · NHS Buildings: Maintenance Backlogs · Hansard source

  More

  While I welcome the recent announcement of £12 million of extra funding for Epsom and St Helier university hospitals NHS trust, it is quite frankly a drop in the ocean in comparison with the scale of need, because the current backlog at the trust costs £150 million. Patients and staff deserve safe and modern facilities, not patchwork repairs. I therefore ask the Secretary of State to meet with me and visit Epsom and St Helier hospitals to see at first hand the scale of the challenge and how we can accelerate progress.

• 28 Apr 2025 · SEND Support · Hansard source

  More

  I often hear accounts of constituents waiting over two years for education, health and care plan assessments from Surrey county council. When those assessments finally come, they are frequently carried out remotely, with assessors never actually meeting the child. Headteachers report that these delayed and inaccurate assessments result in inadequate funding, leaving schools under-resourced and simply unable to meet the children’s needs. Families in Surrey deserve assessments that are timely, thorough and centred around the child. What reassurances can the Minister offer families in Surrey that the broken system will be fixed, and when?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Hospitals · Hansard source

  More

  The crisis in our NHS and the scandal of crumbling hospitals are a daily reality for my constituents and all communities served by the Epsom and St Helier university hospitals NHS trust. We have allowed our healthcare infrastructure to decay to a point where it hinders the delivery of care. These are not minor cosmetic issues; many of our hospital buildings predate the NHS and are riddled with damp, mould and leaking roofs. Yet we expect our dedicated doctors, nurses and support staff to deliver world-class treatment under those appalling conditions. The consequences run far deeper than peeling paint: patient safety is jeopardised, staff morale is crushed, and the basic functioning of our hospitals is compromised. Staff are stretched to their limits, struggling to provide the care that our communities deserve in facilities that are simply not fit for purpose. They deal with the consequences of decades of under-investment, where patching up failing infrastructure has become the norm—a short-sighted and ultimately more costly approach. The impact of the ageing estate on elective recovery has meant that since April 2024, more than 600 operations have had to be cancelled. The lifts break down and cannot be fixed simply because they do not make the parts any more. Over the past five years, over £60 million has been spent on improving the Epsom and St Helier estate just to keep it operational. At St Helier, 46% of repairs are identified as high risk. The human cost of this crumbling infrastructure is evident. Patients are forced to endure unacceptable waiting times, often in undignified conditions. A&E waiting times at the Epsom and St Helier trust are among the worst in London, with over a third of patients waiting more than 12 hours for a bed.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Hospitals · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry to hear that story. It is just one among a catalogue of incidents that we hear of on a regular basis. This past winter, more than 2,000 patients waited over half a day just to be seen. The delays not only cause distress and anxiety but can have serious and long-term consequences for patient outcomes. The Epsom and St Helier university hospitals NHS trust has worked diligently, developing detailed plans for a new specialist emergency care hospital alongside the modernisation of Epsom and St Helier hospitals. This state-of-the-art facility would be a beacon of hope, improving outcomes for our sickest patients and consolidating acute services in a way that strengthens staffing and keeps care local. But that promise has been left to wither. The Health Secretary’s latest announcement pushes the start of construction of the new specialist emergency care hospital to 2032 at the earliest, adding to decades of false promises that have let my constituents down time and again. That is why, this Friday, I will be abseiling 125 feet down St Helier hospital to raise funds for the Epsom and St Helier Hospitals charity and shine a spotlight on the urgent need for investment in our hospitals. The funds raised will provide extra support to our hospitals, over and above what the NHS can currently deliver. Charity can only fill so many gaps; it cannot substitute for the Government action that our hospitals desperately require. The Government should reverse the delay to the new hospital programme and urgently deliver the new hospitals that patients have long been promised. They must prioritise the construction of the specialist emergency care hospital and fund the long-overdue repairs at St Helier. My constituents deserve nothing less than modern, safe and high-quality healthcare.

• 2 Apr 2025 · School-based Nursery Capital Grants · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Government’s announcement today, but not every parent needs a full childcare place; many just need somewhere to go with their child, especially in the early months, as parenting can be an isolating and overwhelming experience. What are the Government doing to support community-based options such as one o’clock clubs and the Sure Start centres, which provide vital spaces for parents and children alike?

• 1 Apr 2025 · Relationship Education in Schools · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that intervention; it is absolutely key to understand both, and to understand what the signs of an unhealthy relationship could be. We need to stop treating violence against women and girls as something that can be addressed only after the fact—after a woman has been assaulted, coerced, or has lost her life. We need to act before it happens, and that starts with education and empowering our young people with the knowledge of what a healthy relationship is. The recent Netflix series, “Adolescence”, has brought national attention to the dangers facing young people today. It follows a 13-year-old boy accused of murdering a female classmate, sparking difficult but necessary conversations about online misogyny and extremist online communities. Teachers and parents are struggling to keep up with the ever-evolving nature of those threats. Teachers need greater support to tackle these issues in schools. Too often, they are simply ill-equipped and unprepared to teach relationships, sex and health education. Fifty per cent of pupils reported that power imbalances and pornography were not covered in their lessons, and 56% said that what a healthy relationship looks like was not covered either. Surely that should be absolutely key. Incels, the red pill and the manosphere are relatively new terms, but the attitudes that they promote are not new. It is sexism and male chauvinism repackaged for the digital age, amplified and spread faster than ever before. That is why we must ensure that our education system evolves to counteract this harmful narrative before it takes root in young minds. The Centre for Social Justice’s latest report, “Lost Boys”, highlights that boys in the UK are struggling in education, more likely to take their own lives, less likely to find stable employment and more susceptible to being drawn into crime. It also notes the increasing appeal of right-wing and regressive ideologies among young men. We must address the core challenges that our young men face and understand how misogyny is evolving, educating parents, teachers and, most importantly, young people themselves—we need to support them. A whole-school approach is essential in addressing these issues effectively. This approach encourages schools to review their existing procedures and culture, to ensure that they model respectful relationships and gender equality practices across the entire school community. By embedding those values into the fabric of the school environment, we create a culture that actively challenges harmful stereotypes and promotes positive, healthy relationships. Yet last year, we saw the RSHE review become unnecessarily politicised and hijacked by sensationalist headlines and anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric, serving only to fuel division. We cannot afford to play politics with the health, safety and wellbeing of our children. The focus of any review of RSHE should be on how we can equip young people with the knowledge and tools that they need to navigate the modern world safely. It should address the urgent need to tackle the rise of online misogyny, the increasing prevalence of violence against women and girls, and the damaging impact of pornography and exploitative media on young people’s perceptions of relationships. I recently heard from a young constituent, Maddie, who is here today. She was deeply affected by the loss of a teacher in our community and wrote to me expressing her frustration that while the conversation on violence against women and girls often focuses on policing and reporting, prevention is often overlooked. She told me how her cousin, a newly qualified teacher, was asked to deliver RSHE lessons despite feeling completely unprepared to do so. She is right to be frustrated. Young people overwhelmingly support strong education on relationships, with 87% saying that there should be more teaching about relationships, abuse and sexual health. We owe it to them to listen. RSHE is often an afterthought, added in as an extra and delivered by teachers who are not specifically trained for it. Many are simply given a sheet of paper to read from and do not know how to answer the follow-up questions. That is why I am calling for urgent reforms to RSHE, including: updating the outdated 2019 guidance to reflect the realities of young people’s lives today; extending RSHE up to key stage 5 so that it reaches 16 to 18-year-olds; making RSHE a key component of initial teacher training, ensuring that new teachers are properly equipped to deliver it; and investing in training for school leaders, teachers and governors to understand the online spaces that young people navigate today. We cannot afford to wait until another young woman becomes a statistic. We must act now to equip the next generation with the knowledge and resilience that they need to build safe, healthy relationships. Teaching children about harmful gender stereotypes, consent, respect and healthy peer relationships from the earliest stages is key to preventing violence against women and girls. I urge the Government to prioritise prevention, invest in education and listen to the voices of our young people who are asking us for change. The time for action is now.

• 1 Apr 2025 · Relationship Education in Schools · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered relationship education in schools. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship again today, Sir Jeremy. Sadly, the relationship education that our young people currently receive does not address the realities of what it means to be a young person today. If we fail to urgently adapt and strengthen our approach to relationship education, we will fail to counter the inappropriate and often misogynistic ideas that our young people are exposed to, and we will therefore fail to protect women and girls from the violence that these ideas spur. Prevention starts with education and the creation of a space for our young people to have conversations about relationships. As a mother of three teenagers—two boys and a girl—I have spent many years having open and honest conversations with them about relationships. I have done my best to ensure that they understand what a healthy relationship looks like and how to treat others with respect. However, as every parent knows, children do not always see their parents as the ultimate source of wisdom; they look to their peers, the internet and the world around them. That is why relationship education in schools is so vital. If we get it right, relationship education creates a safe space where young people can discuss these ideas openly with their peers, guided by teachers who are knowledgeable about the challenges that young people face. The statistics paint a worrying picture: 41% of teachers have seen aggressive misogyny in classrooms, 51% have witnessed pupils advocating sexual violence, and only 43% of students feel personally represented and included by relationships and sex education. Young people are turning elsewhere to learn: 22% say online sources are their main source of information, while 15% say their primary source is pornography. The charity Let Me Know found that 60% of the young people polled did not know the signs of a healthy or unhealthy relationship. Those are shocking figures, which underline the urgency of getting this right.

• 1 Apr 2025 · Relationship Education in Schools · Hansard source

  More

  It is vital that we start to address what is going on with social media, as we have been calling for. The social media tech giants have to take on that responsibility. One in four women and one in six men will experience domestic abuse in their lifetime, and domestic abuse starts young: those aged 16 to 19 are the most likely to experience it. We need to focus on prevention to stop this at the root. Sadly, my Epsom and Ewell constituency has felt the devastating reality of violence against women and girls far too acutely in recent years, and the impact on families, friends, students and entire school communities has been profound. Let us be clear, however, that violence against women and girls extends beyond my community; it is a national epidemic. In January, the National Audit Office reported that one in 12 women are victims of gender-based violence each year. Despite the increasing political attention, sexual assault rates among women aged 16 to 59 rose from 3.4% in 2009-10 to 4.3% in 2023-24. A key issue is that prevention has been an afterthought rather than a priority. That must change.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Free School Meals · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes a point about those who are eligible. Schoolchildren in my constituency are complaining about bus services in Epsom and Ewell. They cannot get on to some of the buses, which means they are incredibly late for school. That is one of the reasons why they miss the breakfast option. While I welcome the introduction of free breakfast clubs, does the hon. Gentleman agree that free hot lunches are key to helping those who need them most? Those who are not there for breakfast also cannot get lunch. However, if they had a free hot lunch, even if they are late to school, they would still be able to have a hot meal.

• 17 Mar 2025 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  In Surrey alone, spending on private special educational needs schools has risen from £48 million in 2018-19 to £74 million in 2021-22. These schools are often backed by private equity firms, and they are charging local authorities extortionate fees—on average double those in the state sector. They are draining public funds, but councils have no choice but to place children in these schools due to a lack of state provision. Does my hon. Friend agree that extending the profit cap to independent schools is essential to protect public finances and ensure fairer funding for children with special educational needs?

• 25 Feb 2025 · Maternity Services · Hansard source

  More

  I will be very brief. La Retraite sixth form in London has a T-level qualification in health with midwifery, linked up with Guy’s and St Thomas’, and it is proving successful. Will the Minister consider working with the Secretary of State for Education to look at rolling that out throughout the country? It is proving really successful in getting new midwives into the system.

• 25 Feb 2025 · SEND Education Support · Hansard source

  More

  On the point about access, does the hon. Member agree that it is really important that children are able to get to school in the first place? Private providers of SEND transport have reported that the increase in national insurance contributions will greatly impact their ability to get children to school, because they will have to run at a loss and might have to relinquish some of the contracts. That will put local authorities at risk of not meeting their statutory duties to ensure that children with SEN can access that transport.

• 28 Jan 2025 · Defence Procurement: Small and Medium-sized Enterprises · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate the hon. Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland) on securing this important debate. SMEs are the backbone of the UK economy and a vital part of our defence industry. They bring agility, innovation and high-quality jobs to communities across the country. Yet despite their immense potential, SMEs face significant barriers to fully contributing to our national defence procurement. There is a real and long-standing problem across the MOD’s defence procurement system: it is beset by inefficiencies, including delays, overspends and rigid processes. Liberal Democrats believe it is time for a fresh, ambitious approach to tackle those challenges. Our plan focuses on flexibility, accountability and long-term strategy. We would replace the current rigid system of defence reviews with a more flexible system of continuous reviews of security threats and evolution of defence plans. That would enable procurement to evolve in response to emerging security threats and rapidly advancing technologies. Further, we would integrate defence procurement into a comprehensive industrial strategy. That would ensure a reliable pipeline of equipment procurement, safeguard jobs and skills, and promote UK-based businesses. Collaboration with NATO and European partners is key to developing cutting-edge technologies and ensuring interoperability. For the areas of defence where we wish to maintain our sovereign capabilities, we must achieve that through greater collaboration with domestic SMEs. The survival of SMEs, such as small technology businesses, is dependent on their ability to develop and deploy innovative products at extraordinary speed. They are configured for agility, fast-paced decision making and recruitment of high-value talent. By contrast, Government organisations, including the MOD, operate within more complex mandates and constrained budgets. It is neither realistic nor efficient for the Government to attempt to replicate the private sector’s pace of innovation. The MOD must improve its procurement processes to leverage the agility of SMEs.

• 22 Jan 2025 · Education, Health and Care Plans · Hansard source

  More

  This crisis is failing children, exhausting parents and overwhelming schools, not least in my constituency of Epsom and Ewell. Over the past six years, Surrey county council’s timeliness in issuing EHCPs within 20 weeks has plummeted from 57% in 2017 to 16.2% in 2023. An excessive focus on meeting deadlines appears also to have undermined the quality of the EHCPs. Decisions are increasingly being appealed, and parents in Surrey won 98.3% of appeals last year. Local headteachers have highlighted to me that EHCPs often do not accurately reflect the children’s needs, leading to inappropriate placements. The children often become dysregulated and disruptive, which affects staff wellbeing and the learning environment for other pupils. The headteachers also reported that some assessments are being conducted remotely; how can a child’s needs be accurately captured through an online assessment? Parents are increasingly asking headteachers to exclude their children, believing that that might be the only way to secure appropriate care. That is a devastating indictment of the system. The system is failing at every single stage, leaving children and families in absolute crisis. Without urgent reform, we risk failing a generation of children. Every child deserves a chance to succeed, and it is our responsibility to ensure that no child is left behind.

• 15 Jan 2025 · UK Submarine Fleet · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the second time today, Dr Murrison. I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) on securing this debate. I am disappointed that we did not somehow co-ordinate so that today the music that so often blares out on a Wednesday afternoon was “Yellow Submarine”. That song tells of the adventures of a submariner and reminds us to thank all those who serve as submariners in such confined conditions. It is so important that we recognise them, because the UK submarine fleet is critical to national security, economic development and defence of the rules-based international order. As we have heard, the Royal Navy’s submarine fleet comprises nine vessels: five Astute-class nuclear-powered attack submarines and four Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines. The fleet plays a central role in the UK’s defence strategy, providing a continuous at-sea deterrent and contributing to global security through intelligence, surveillance and undersea warfare capabilities, but the submarine fleet faces significant challenges. Issues such as manpower shortages, delays in maintenance and ageing infrastructure risk undermining the fleet’s operational readiness, and extended maintenance periods have raised concern about the Royal Navy’s ability to meet its current commitments as well as new obligations, such as deployments to Australia under the AUKUS agreement. The UK submarine industry is critical not only for national defence but as a significant driver of economic growth and skills development. His Majesty’s Naval Base, Clyde, known as Faslane and home to the UK’s entire submarine fleet, has received over £1.8 billion in infrastructure investments since 2015, supporting over 6,000 military and civilian jobs, and making it one of Scotland’s largest employers. In addition, the construction of next-generation Dreadnought-class sub-surface ballistic nuclear submarines and the AUKUS submarine programme is projected to create more than 20,000 jobs across the UK, including, as has been mentioned, 17,000 new roles at Rolls-Royce in Derby. These projects foster expertise in engineering, nuclear propulsion and advanced manufacturing, ensuring that the UK remains at the forefront of global submarine technology. It is essential that we continue to invest in training and apprenticeships to attract young people to this critical sector. Our young people need to develop the skills necessary to carry out these critical projects. Maintaining the UK’s nuclear deterrent is a cornerstone of our national security policy. For over 50 years, the continuous at-sea deterrent has been an unbroken line of defence against nuclear threats. Although I believe that the end goal should be multilateral disarmament, the reality is that the global security environment, which includes threats from state and non-state actors, makes it imperative to retain a robust deterrent. The AUKUS trilateral security agreement with Australia and the United States marks a significant step forward in international defence co-operation. As part of this partnership, the UK will provide Australia with nuclear-powered conventionally armed submarines based on our next-generation SSN-AUKUS design.

• 8 Jan 2025 · Playgrounds · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Lewell-Buck. I congratulate the hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) on securing this important debate. This issue matters personally to me as a mother of three children—two boys and a girl. I have watched each of them grow through unstructured play. Indeed, we chose to live near a park because I recognise the importance of parks and outdoor play. I want to ensure that every child across the country, and future generations of children, have the same opportunities to play as my children have had. As the former chair of a charity that ran the local recreation ground, I know the importance of spaces like playgrounds as hubs for the community. As policymakers, we often focus on the physical education of our children, but playgrounds are about so much more than exercise. They are where children learn to navigate risk, build relationships and develop the resilience that will serve them for life. However, according to the 2024 green space index, 2.3 million children in Britain under the age of nine, which is nearly one third, live more than a 10-minute walk from their nearest playground. That is a stark indicator of a growing play crisis in our country. Playgrounds are vital spaces where children explore their world and themselves. Through play, they develop social skills, creativity and cognitive abilities. They learn to assess and embrace risk, make decisions and form friendships. Playgrounds are incubators for resilience, teaching children the skills to thrive in a challenging world. As a former scout leader who led teams on hikes up mountains, I have seen how giving children the chance to push themselves through outdoor physical challenges really builds their self-esteem. They climb up a mountain and are scared at the top, but then they realise how successful they have been in their achievement and how brilliant the experience has been. Playgrounds offer the chance for young people to challenge themselves—to climb higher, to swing faster and to jump that little bit further. Despite the clear benefits of playgrounds for our youth, local authority budgets for playgrounds have declined drastically, with a 14% fall in annual park funding in England between 2009 and 2020. Nearly 800 playgrounds have been lost since 2013 and some councils now warn that they may need to remove or repurpose play areas simply to save money. It is shocking that, compared with the 1970s, children now spend 50% less time in unstructured outdoor play, and the 2020 British children’s play survey revealed that children aged five to 11 spend just over three hours a day playing, mostly at home or in the garden rather than in nature and community spaces. During this period of playground decline, social media and smartphones have become increasingly pervasive, replacing active play, exploration and in-person socialising with passive scrolling, socialising through their phones and being less physically active. I was a physical trainer for over 15 years and I am passionate about encouraging everyone to be more active. As a parent, I volunteered at my local primary school to support it in setting up its running club, and I saw at first hand the positive impact that physical activity has on young people. They were excited to be outside and loved focusing their energy on something other than the stress of homework. When they returned to class, they then felt calm and able to focus, which is also a benefit for teachers. The public health implications of the decline in safe public spaces to play are profound. Over half of children fail to meet the recommended daily activity levels and 37% of 10 and 11-year-olds in England are now overweight or obese. The mental health impact is equally concerning, with nearly one in five children having a probable mental health condition. The reduction in access to unstructured outdoor play, alongside the rise in children’s access to the digital world, has reshaped childhood, leading to isolation and inactivity. Every child has the right to play—to feel energised and free—yet the opportunities for that freedom are shrinking. Without urgent action, generations of children will grow up deprived of the spaces that are so essential for their development and wellbeing. I urge this Government to prioritise access to play spaces in planning and funding decisions. Decades of under-investment and poor planning must be reversed. Play is not just a part of childhood; it is the foundation for healthy, happy and resilient adults.

• 11 Dec 2024 · Explosive Ordnance Disposal Community · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for the explosive ordnance disposal community. I am delighted to have secured my first Westminster Hall debate. It is an honour to speak under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd, and I welcome the Minister to his place. The United Kingdom’s capacity in explosive weapons disposal and victim assistance requires the utmost Government support, particularly at a time of extreme geopolitical unrest. Two weeks ago in Parliament, I met specialists from our explosive ordnance disposal community, the military, the police, the commercial sector, academia and related non-governmental organisations. Among other things, we discussed the United Kingdom’s enviable global reputation for expertise in search and disposal and victim assistance. As well as a global reputation, we have global reach: impacted countries around the world turn to the UK to provide search-and-disposal assistance, policy advice and training. We also have a vibrant EOD equipment production and export sector. Our humanitarian mine action delivery, through the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s global mine action programme, sees our major charities working on almost every continent. With a budget of £14.8 million for 2023-24, the programme is the UK’s main vehicle for tackling the threat posed by landmines, cluster munitions and other explosive remnants of war. We have all seen the photographs of Princess Diana in a minefield in Angola, but there is so much more that the United Kingdom does to make the world safe from explosive weapons, including within our own borders. At our meeting, we agreed that the UK certainly has the capability, but our capacity to cope with the major conflicts that are currently happening and those that are in danger of flaring up may well be stretched. These conflicts will result in an overwhelming need for explosive weapons disposal expertise once any form of peace is allowed to descend. Explosive weapons are being used in modern conflicts to an extent that we have not seen for generations. The number of people killed and injured by explosive weapons is mind-numbingly high. In the past three years, there has been a 70% increase in civilian casualties, with the conflicts in Ukraine and the middle east as the major cause. Ukraine now has more amputees than the UK has military personnel. In 1999, the anti-personnel mine ban convention, also known as the Ottawa convention or the mine ban treaty, came into force. The UK was one of its first signatories. It was soon followed by the convention on cluster munitions in 2010. Neither Russia nor the United States signed either convention; Ukraine did. The USA is now offering Ukraine the use of anti-personnel landmines—weapons that Russia has been using since day one of the conflict. Aggressors throughout history have never let the rules of war or international probation interrupt a good night’s sleep, while those countries that hold the rule of law dear are forced to fight with one hand tied behind their back. We are not in any position to stop Ukraine using landmines or cluster munitions, but we can help it to clear up the mess once the hostilities are over. Landmines are not a new weapon, but technological advances have made them increasingly sophisticated and dangerous. The sheer variety of weapons being used in Ukraine—from cold war-era landmines to airdropped Russian munitions, which are now triggered seismically by recognising approaching footsteps—poses a huge challenge to those sent to clear them. Many new smart weapons are battery-powered, and the claim is that once the battery goes flat, the weapon is no longer a threat, but there is still a piece of explosive material stuck in the ground and it still needs to be cleared. It will take decades to make the land safe again. The task of search and clearance will be vast, but the UK is in a strong position to play a leading role in helping Ukraine to clear the explosive threats. Since my meeting in Parliament with the professionals, I have had an online briefing with a British EOD specialist based in Ukraine. I asked him what his particular concerns were and where he felt the UK could make a difference. His first response was about the lack of trained personnel required to address the magnitude of contamination in Ukraine. Some 150,000 sq km of land is considered at risk and in need of survey before clearance can take place. Even with the likelihood of 75% to 80% of that area not being physically contaminated, it would take at least 10,000 de-miners working all year round for 10 years to make the land safe, at a conservative estimate. Currently, we think that there may be 2,000 de-miners in Ukraine. That led us on to discussing the availability of suitable equipment. The EOD specialist’s major concern is the lack of co-ordination among equipment donor countries and companies. The operators know that equipment is available, even in-country, but they do not know exactly what or where. That leads to a lack of clarity on what is still required and what specific training needs to be on offer. There are land clearance machines from various countries, including Armtrac machines from the UK, but they can be used only in very particular terrains, and there are a multitude of different terrains to be cleared. The lack of donor co-ordination is not unique to Ukraine. It is an issue on which the UK is in a good position to lead at a diplomatic level in donor co-ordination meetings at the UN. Also of concern to the operators, and not unique to Ukraine, is the issue of export, import and control licensing. De-mining equipment is being supplied to Ukraine, but the licences to use it are not being issued by the Ukrainian authorities. Our de-miner said: “I can guarantee that there is equipment in a warehouse somewhere that should be in the field. Equipment like this will be collecting dust because of the lack of licensing and suitable training.” There is a role for the UK to negotiate an easing of restrictions with Ukrainians. I asked about the role of emerging technology in survey and clearance work. Our de-miner’s response was that technology was a useful additional role, but nothing could provide a perfect solution for every context. Total assured clearance can only really be achieved by suitably trained human operatives on the ground. I might add at this point that a number of UK academic institutions are at the forefront of research into highly sophisticated de-mining technologies, such as drone-mounted ground-penetrating radar, chemical signature analysis and ground anomaly analysis. If we are to improve the pace and scale of de-mining operations, we must ensure that research into de-mining technology receives support. On assistance to the appalling number of victims of exploding weapons, we discussed the possible role for de-mining operators to take on injured former combatants and retrain them as de-miners or equipment technicians. This would give the veterans a sense of purpose in the continuing defence of their country. The Revive campaign here in the UK is working to co-ordinate a PhD programme with Imperial College and the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy to investigate the link between blast injury and self-identity in civilians and the military. The results of that research will inform our approach to victim assistance in many other conflicts and contexts around the world. As a final point about UK specialists operating in complex environments, our de-miner said that the role of the UK insurance industry was vital to allowing them to operate in areas such as Ukraine or the middle east. Our UK regulatory framework on insurance companies ensures that specialist policies for de-mining activities are considered fit for purpose. Returning to our theme of the UK’s capability and capacity, explosive weapon clearance is not just about saving lives and land release. Our EOD activity can be a tool for peace building, economic development and reconstruction in post-conflict countries. It can be a powerful diplomatic tool. At a time when there is a seismic shift in geopolitical power, the UK needs a suite of effective and impactful diplomatic tools. Our EOD specialism is one such tool. The UK Government are rightly focused on bringing the conflicts to an end. We are supplying much-needed equipment and materials to Ukraine, and our defence industries are heavily supported by our trade and export Departments. But are we overlooking our post-conflict services? How much consideration is there in Whitehall for the EOD task? When conflicts are over, there is a need to return the land to its previous use—in the case of Ukraine, often agricultural use. This brings jobs, enables individuals to support their families, and supports the local economy and global food security. I have mentioned that the rise in victim numbers was huge. Victims, both physically and psychologically, are scarred for life. At the meeting two weeks ago, I had the privilege of speaking to three victims of explosive weapons: one who was a refugee from Ukraine and two who had taken their children to a pop concert in Manchester. They had similar stories, although from very different contexts. When an explosive weapon is cleared, a threat has been removed, a life has been saved and a job has been well done, but for a victim of an explosive weapon, their whole life has been changed. What we hear from victims is that there is plenty of support and medical attention at the time of impact, but over time they become forgotten. Hard-stretched local health services and charities are left to care for them—not just civilian but military victims. I have already referred to the psychological trauma associated with an injury in Ukraine and the research into the impact on self-identity. One of the voices at my meeting was that of a leading surgeon at the Centre for Blast Injury Studies at Imperial College, a UK institution leading the field of research into understanding the impact of blast on the human body and developing the tools to protect the body from blast and the prosthetics for those who fall victim. It is only relatively recently that, through Centre for Blast Injury Studies research, we have started to learn about the differences in the impact on male and female bodies. For de-miners, the one traditional size of protective gear does not fit the female physique. Last year, the centre produced a field manual on paediatric blast injury, which was quickly translated into Ukrainian and Arabic. That document tragically highlights the fact that children are increasingly becoming the victims of explosive weapons. We are privileged in this country to have some of the best facilities for dealing with the physical and psychological impacts of blast, but do we have the resources and political will to provide the lifelong support that many victims require? How much consideration is given in Whitehall to long-term victim assistance, both globally and domestically? Clearing the millions of explosive remnants of war will take a huge effort and will cost billions of pounds, and supporting the victims needs the same level of attention. I began this debate by saying how positively we are seen in the world for our explosive ordnance disposal capability. I related a story from a de-miner in Ukraine, I explained the importance of long-term victim assistance, and I have asked two questions of the Minister. I am currently drawing together a new all-party parliamentary group on explosive weapons and their impact. I hope that this debate will be the first of many conversations with the Minister and his colleagues on the issues that I have raised today.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Sarah, a very similar question, because I know that you mentioned enabling families to thrive in communities of their choice. How do you feel the commissioner could work to support families to achieve that? Sarah Clewes: It is about just being mindful that not all naval families live around the base port areas. You would expect that some do, and that is absolutely fine, but others choose to live wherever their support network or employment is. Actually, dispersed families are much more common than you would perhaps think, because there is that assumption that everyone lives in service family accommodation around a base port area, but they absolutely do not. It is about trying to reach those people who are very happy and thriving in their community of choice, who may not need any support from the Navy. Actually, when they do, hopefully they have a life-changing event or do not know about the free swimming and sailing that is available to them. It is about spreading the net really wide and saying, “If you ever need that support, we are here for you, in whatever guise that may be.” Welfare is absolutely not our part of ship, but it is about actually giving that little nugget of information to take away a little bit of pain. They may be juggling a very successful career and childcare while their partner or spouse is at sea or—worse still—under the water for six months, with absolutely no contact or very limited contact. When appreciating service life, it is all very well to think that we know what it means, but we really have to understand what it means across a huge range of issues, and family dynamics are huge. We really need to be mindful of who we are talking about when we talk about families, and let’s not just pigeonhole folk and think we know. Therefore, it is important that the commissioner does what we do on a daily basis. They have to ask, “What does that look like for naval families? VAT on school fees, what does that look like for naval families? Have you given them the information they need to make those informed choices or will they have to half-guess and hope that a hardship fund will become available so that they can get through Christmas?” It could be really impactful, and like Colette, I am absolutely interested to see how this could develop.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I will start from the left and go to the Army first. It is nice to meet you, Collette, and thank you for coming. I want to understand what challenges you see with families getting the support they need, and how you think the commissioner will help to address those challenges in their role. Collette Musgrave: The challenges that we see with families getting the support they need can be articulated as both internal and external. Internal services and processes are the ones that Defence offers to families in order to maintain service family life, and then there are those provided by what one might characterise as external agencies—whether that is local authorities, the NHS, educational provision or whatever. The nature of the challenge can be different depending on with whom families are seeking to engage. The challenges within the internal system can be largely about not being able to access the right information, not being given the right information when asking for it, consistency of the information and guidance that is given, and consistency of the provision. As we have spoken about, Army families in particular are very mobile, and what they are provided with in one location might be very different to what they are provided with in another, both in extent and quality of provision. We would really like to see the Armed Forces Commissioner do something on that in their role. As the Army Families Federation, we absolutely welcome the introduction of an Armed Forces Commissioner with, as the Secretary of State said, a laser-like focus on the serving experience, which is often lost when talking about the armed forces community—those who are actually serving at the moment. We believe the Armed Forces Commissioner can play a key role in looking at the consistency of provision of both policy and processes within defence. Many of the concerns that come to us are a result of mixed information and mixed messages, and families not being able to access the provision that is there because they simply do not know how to access it or are being blocked in some way. Externally, the issue is subtly different. There is not an unwillingness from the general UK population to support service personnel and their families. What there is sometimes is a lack of knowledge and understanding. In many of the large organisations that they are interfacing with, whether that is the NHS, a local authority or the Department for Work and Pensions, there is often a lack of understanding of the unique circumstances of service personnel and their families. It is difficult sometimes for those families in particular, who are to an extent slightly outside society—I am not articulating that well, because that is not what I want to say, particularly as a former service family and veteran myself. Often with housing, as well as sometimes healthcare and education—particularly if they are overseas or move back from overseas—their interfaces with external statutory authorities are not always straightforward and can vary hugely as they move around the country. Your experience in Scotland might be very different to your experience in England. Their ability to interface effectively with those services can sometimes be compromised. Many of these organisations have signed up to the armed forces covenant. The people at the top are very happy to sign up to the armed forces covenant and say, “Yes, we made a great commitment.” The people on the frontline, who are actually dealing with our service personnel and their families, are often not so well-informed and do not necessarily fully understand some of the additional or different provision that has been made under the terms of the armed forces covenant. Those are the big handfuls, and to finally answer your question, those two key areas are where the Armed Forces Commissioner could help.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Armed Forces Commissioner Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q What do you think the commissioner could do in advance to support personnel as they are serving, to help prevent some of the issues that we then see in veterans? Is there anything in the Bill that will help with that? Angela Kitching: Some of the issues that Ted has raised about discharge are massively important throughout somebody’s career. How somebody leaves the armed forces is crucial to their ongoing experience in life. In terms of what people raised during our focus group sessions, housing issues are key. Good transition around housing makes a huge difference. Healthcare and education access for family members is a hugely important issue. If you look at the families continuous attitudes survey and the armed forces continuous attitudes survey, the two main opinion-based surveys, issues around family and the extent to which family have access to outside services are key concerns of serving personnel. I understand that those issues will not directly be in the purview of the commissioner but, as part of building relationships, decent healthcare access at discharge, support for family members in accessing local services, and housing are the three things that I would really focus on.

• 25 Nov 2024 · Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  There is an independent school in my constituency, Kingswood House school, which has around 50% of its pupils with special educational needs. Many of those pupils do not have an education, health and care plan. Does my hon. Friend agree that schools providing support to so many SEN children should retain their charitable rate relief?

• 10 Oct 2024 · Mental Health Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd, as I speak for the first time in Westminster Hall. I thank the hon. Member for Ashford (Sojan Joseph) for securing this important and timely debate on World Mental Health Day, and for speaking so well. Mental health can affect any of us at any time, young or old. Unfortunately, too many people simply do not get the support they need and some go on to take their own life. Speaking personally, husbands of two friends of mine, a friend’s brother and a friend have taken their life, destroying families who are left behind figuring out how to cope. Since becoming the MP for Epsom and Ewell, I have been shocked by the lack of mental health support, but also amazed at the ingenuity of local residents to provide it in its absence. I had the pleasure of meeting Charley Moore the other day—a Surrey female firefighter and founder of an all-female support group in Epsom and Ewell called Grow and Glow. She had a mental health crisis last year and found it very difficult to access support. She found many mental health groups for men, but she could not find any specifically for women, so she set one up. I was also proud to meet two mental health charities the other day that were recognised at the BBC Surrey and Sussex Make a Difference Awards last week in my constituency. One was We Power On, which is a men’s mental health “walk and talk” support group set up by Chris Waller after he and his friend reconnected during lockdown and discovered that they were both struggling with their mental health. He won the bravery award. He takes people out at the weekend, walking on the lovely Epsom downs and sharing their experiences. The other charity, Joe’s Buddy Line, was set up by Ivan Lyons, who won the community award and is one of my constituents. Ivan’s son was an award-winning radio producer on Capital Radio. Sadly, in 2020, Joe took his own life. Through Joe’s Buddy Line, Joe’s family advocate for mental health to be treated equally and with the same seriousness as physical health. The charity provides mental health support, advice and resources for schools. It is encouraging schools to put a mental health policy in place in every single school, giving teachers the support that they need to support the young people of today. The charity has highlighted to me that currently it is not a statutory requirement for a school to have a mental health policy. Such a policy would foster a whole-school approach, so today I am calling for a statutory requirement for all schools to have a specific mental health policy. Too many people are simply suffering and too many lives are being lost, yet some of that is preventable. Early intervention and prevention are absolutely key. First, to ensure that our young people get the support they need before they reach crisis point, we need to equip them with the tools they need to build resilience to cope with modern life. We must ensure that no one feels alone in their mental health journey, and we need to normalise conversations about how we are feeling mentally. I am absolutely proud that in my constituency, individuals such as Ivan, Chris and Charley are taking the initiative to champion mental health support for everyone and fill in the gaps that they have identified in the services. Let us not forget—

• 8 Oct 2024 · Independent Schools: VAT and Business Rates Exemptions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises a good point, and I was glad to hear that Labour is giving consideration to cases in which independent school provision has been specified in education, health and care plans. However, as has already been raised, many children have special educational needs and do not require an EHCP; that means that many children with SEN are currently being educated in independent schools as there is insufficient support in the state school system. As such, the families are having to bear the fee increase. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government must ensure that those vulnerable children are not disadvantaged by this policy?