James MacCleary MP: speeches

Speeches

• 12 Feb 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) for securing this debate. The situation in the middle east is one of the greatest humanitarian crises of our time. Gaza is in ruins and tens of thousands are dead—including, tragically, many children. Meanwhile, Israeli families are still mourning the loved ones lost to Hamas’s brutal attack on 7 October, and many hostages remain in captivity. Across the region, civilians are paying the price for political failure and international inaction, and now with United States President Donald Trump’s reckless Gaza plan, the current fragile truce is ever more endangered. We cannot ignore the deepening humanitarian catastrophe. Hospitals should never be battlegrounds, nor should their doctors be detained—doctors and nurses must be allowed to do their jobs in safety. Aid must be allowed into Gaza at scale, and those responsible for blocking that aid should face real consequences. Let us not equivocate: the obstruction of humanitarian aid is a breach of the Geneva convention and constitutes a war crime. Then there is the issue of illegal settlements and settler violence in the west bank. Not only is the expansion of settlements illegal under international law, but it is a direct obstacle to peace. The UK must be willing to act, including by ending trade with illegal settlements, as specified in the International Court of Justice opinion, and by holding to account those inciting violence. The immediate priorities must be a lasting ceasefire; the return of hostages, including the release of prisoners such as Dr Abu Safiya; and urgent humanitarian relief. Beyond that, there must be a real political effort—one that does not just manage the crisis but ends it. That means real pressure on all sides to make sure the current ceasefire lasts, to respect international law, and to finally deliver a solution in which both Palestinian and Israeli people can live in peace and safety.

• 5 Feb 2025 · English Devolution and Local Government · Hansard source

  More

  I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. As the Member of Parliament for Lewes, I put on record my outrage and the outrage of many local people who have written to me about the cancellation of elections in East Sussex in May. As a county councillor, I was present in the chamber last month when we debated the matter, and every single non-Conservative member, including Labour members, voted against it, so to suggest that this has widespread support in East Sussex is just not true. What is the Secretary of State’s justification for giving a Conservative administration that has lost its overall majority and hangs on by the chair’s casting vote a mandate to negotiate a generation-defining deal on behalf of the residents of East Sussex against their will?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Overseas Territories: Tax Transparency · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) on securing this timely discussion; it is a pleasure to take part in it. New research from the Tax Justice Network reveals something that should shame us all: the world’s three biggest corporate tax havens—the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda—are all British overseas territories. Those havens cost the world an estimated $84 billion in lost corporate tax revenue every year. That is money that could be spent on hospitals, schools and infrastructure. What is more, thanks to financial secrecy, we still do not know the full scale of the problem. The UK Government cannot shrug off responsibility. British overseas territories are subject to UK law in key areas, as has been outlined by others, and in 2018 Parliament passed legislation requiring them to implement public registers of company ownership—a crucial step in tackling financial crime. However, successive Governments have failed to enforce that. This new Government must finally act and ensure that overseas territories meet the same transparency standards as the UK. We must go further. Labour should back global efforts such as the UN tax convention to crack down on tax avoidance. We need a fairer tax system that works for everyone, not just the super-rich. That means reversing Conservative tax cuts for big banks, raising the digital services tax on tech giants and closing capital gains loopholes exploited by the wealthiest. A 4% tax on FTSE 100 share buy-backs would also encourage real investment in jobs and growth. The British Virgin Islands case is a warning. Just last month, a jury in Florida convicted the former BVI Premier of drug trafficking and money laundering while in office. If the public register of company ownership had been in place as promised, that corruption would have been far harder to conceal. The Government assured Parliament that all overseas territories would have those registers by the end of last year. Where are they? Do the Government recognise their responsibility to tackle financial crime? Then there is the issue of Russian assets. Transparency International UK has identified over £830 million-worth of UK-linked property belonging to individuals close to Putin and/or accused of corruption. While £7 billion in Russian assets has been frozen in the overseas territories, we must ask: what is being done to prevent Russian oligarchs from hiding their money there, and when will we start seizing those funds and using them for Ukraine’s reconstruction? For too long, Britain has been the laundromat for dirty money. Under both Labour and Conservative Governments, our country has allowed autocrats and oligarchs to buy up property, infrastructure and influence. We have seen vital assets sold off to companies with links to the Chinese Communist party. That has made some people in Britain very rich, but it has come at a huge cost to our security, our economy and our sovereignty. The Liberal Democrats will put an end to that. We will close the loopholes in economic crime legislation, strengthen the register of beneficial ownership and give agencies such as the National Crime Agency and the Serious Fraud Office the resources they need to go after economic criminals. The scale of tax avoidance is staggering. The OECD estimates that global profit shifting costs between $100 billion and $240 billion a year. The Tax Justice Network puts the figure even higher, at $348 billion annually. Where does 23% of that profit shifting happen? Through the UK, its Crown dependencies and the overseas territories: the so-called network of British tax havens. The UK must be a leader in international tax reform. The Liberal Democrats have long called for an end to non-dom status, and we remain committed to the UN sustainable development goals. It is time that we worked with our international partners to clamp down on corporate tax avoidance and raise the global minimum corporation tax to 21%. Fair taxation is not just about economics; it is about justice. Let us ensure that everyone from the biggest corporation to the wealthiest elite pays their fair share.

• 5 Feb 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q5. I know that the Prime Minister will share my deep concern that families in my constituency, particularly those with disabled children, face agonising waits for essential adaptations to council housing. In my inbox, I have cases where delays have left people unable to use the bathroom or even access a kitchen to simply make a cup of tea. Will the Prime Minister meet me to discuss how we can make sure that councils have the funding they urgently need to build and retrofit homes, to ensure that all children have the start in life they deserve?

• 23 Jan 2025 · International Day of Education · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I echo others in thanking the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for securing this valuable debate. Tomorrow, on the United Nations International Day of Education, we must turn our attention to a fundamental truth: education is the foundation of opportunity, equality and progress. This year’s theme could not be more relevant as we grapple with the rapid changes reshaping our world. Sustainable development goal 4 is a bold commitment to deliver quality education for all, yet with just five years left until 2030, we are worryingly off-track. Across the globe, nearly half of primary schools cannot cater for children with disabilities, and more than 20% lack basic sanitation for girls. Those are stark reminders that millions of young people are being denied their right to learn. Conflict has only made matters worse. In Ukraine, more than 7,000 schools are out of action, and millions of children have seen their education upended. And it is not just Ukraine: as my hon. Friend the Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) said, Sudan has suffered greatly, as have other places, including Syria and Gaza. Education is often a casualty of war, and the future of too many children hangs in the balance. Closer to home, although there have been some improvements in the global rankings, our own education system faces significant challenges. Teacher shortages, overstretched special educational needs and disabilities funding, and falling programme for international student assessment scores paint a picture of a system that is struggling to meet the needs of today’s pupils. Meanwhile, on the international stage, the UK Government’s decision to slash bilateral aid for education from £757 million in 2017 to just £336 million last year is deeply shameful. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments on what the Government aim to do to address those massive cutbacks, which have affected global education so much. Education is not just about classrooms and textbooks; it is also a catalyst for progress, prosperity and peace. For the Liberal Democrats, that is non-negotiable. We would reverse the aid cuts, commit 15% of our development budget to education and prioritise support for women and girls. We would also create a UK sustainable development goal tsar to ensure real accountability for delivering SDG4 at home and abroad. Let us not forget that education transforms lives. It is the great leveller, opening doors to opportunity and hope. As we mark the International Day of Education, let us commit to ensuring that every child, wherever they are, has the chance to learn and thrive.

• 15 Jan 2025 · Youth Mobility Scheme (EU Countries) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require the Secretary of State to enter into negotiations with countries which are members of the European Union for the purpose of extending the Youth Mobility Scheme to applicants from those countries on a reciprocal basis; and for connected purposes. The immense damage caused by the Conservatives’ botched Brexit deal is clear for all to see. Few thought that young people would be able to go for two years to live and work all the way over in Japan, but not be able to hop across the channel to do the same in France. I am not sure that anyone voted for that kind of increased bureaucracy back in 2016. This Bill gives us the chance to send a different message to a generation of young people who have been denied the opportunities that so many of us in this Chamber took for granted when we were growing up. If we wanted to take a job or to study in an EU country, we could just go and do so. Opportunity and hope for the future have rarely been in such short supply in this country, and this is how we can provide some of both. What I am proposing is a pragmatic, defined scheme that will once again allow young people across the UK to be able to spend time with our nearest neighbours without having to navigate a tangle of Brexit red tape. It is a youth mobility scheme with the EU that would open up opportunities for British young people to learn new skills, languages and cultures and bring all of that back with them to benefit our economy and our society. This would not be the UK’s only reciprocal youth mobility scheme. We have such arrangements in place already with Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Canada. They are familiar and tried and tested, allowing those aged 18 to 30 to live, work and study in the countries involved for a set period. The Government have made much of their so-called missions. Mission No. 1, we are told, is economic growth, yet any proposal that might involve our European neighbours and contribute to boosting growth is dismissed. The UK is facing acute labour shortages, particularly in key sectors such as hospitality. These are exactly the kinds of jobs that young people visiting the UK for a few years might take on, whether while studying, immersing themselves in our culture or improving their grasp of our language. The situation suggests that this is a Government who are not serious about making the practical, hard-headed choices that would greatly benefit the UK economy and labour market in the long term, stimulating growth and improving the lives of British people. The Government also talk up their reset with the EU, which, so far at least, seems to involve little more than warm words and a continuation of the previous Government’s attitude of seeing closer co-operation with the EU as a threat, rather than as a considerable opportunity to make Britain more secure and prosperous. Indeed, the Government have stuck so closely to the Conservative party’s script—or is it Reform UK’s script?—that Ministers have even mischaracterised, repeatedly in fact, a youth mobility scheme with the EU as a return to freedom of movement. That is categorically not what is being proposed here. Any scheme would be time limited and involve a restricted cohort of eligible people. I truly hope that the Government will seriously reconsider their short-sighted and self-defeating position on the issue. A number of hon. Members from across the House have rightly asked Ministers directly for an explanation of their refusal to explore such a scheme, yet no one has given a response that makes any sense. Meanwhile, the Government have tied themselves up in unnecessary red lines on Europe that do nothing to boost growth or support British businesses and young people. Even that cannot be used as an excuse, as this proposal does not breach any of those red lines. The situation is having a real impact on young people growing up in this country today. Let me share Alex’s story. A bright and ambitious 25-year-old from Taunton, Alex left university last year with the aim of working in a German fintech start-up. He had planned to move to Germany for a few years, then return home with a better understanding of the German language, and with the knowledge and skills to launch his own start-up here in the UK, but the hurdles proved insurmountable. He told me: “I didn’t want to move there forever, I just wanted a year, maybe two, to earn invaluable experience, polish my language skills and get to know German culture.” With no simple mobility arrangement in place between the UK and the EU, Alex ended up shelving his plans. Not only did Alex lose out, our economy lost out too. The Government’s failure to act risks closing the world to a whole generation of Alexes across the UK. It is also holding back British growth and prosperity. Let us take the UK’s £82.5 billion tourism sector as an example. It has been grappling with the impact of the last Government’s failure to address youth mobility with the EU. ABTA, a trade body representing the sector, reported a 69% drop in UK nationals working in European tourism roles in the five years after the EU referendum. Businesses that once offered transformative opportunities to young Britons now face rising costs and critical staffing shortages. I have heard from one UK-based tourism company that once employed more than 400 young Britons a year. Mobility restrictions have forced it to drastically scale back its operations, undermining years of competitive advantage, and slashing training and employment opportunities for young UK workers. European Pubs, which runs bars and restaurants in France, previously relied on UK staff for most seasonal roles. Today, only 50% of its workforce is British. A youth mobility scheme, which recent polling shows is backed by a clear majority of British voters, could ease labour shortages, provide essential career pathways and help to safeguard our tourism sector’s future vitality. Meanwhile, our small and medium-sized businesses are really struggling, especially in sectors where staff shortages have become acute. Sectors from hospitality to the arts, entertainment and retail are desperately short of staff. With the UK’s ageing population, that is unlikely to improve in the future. A youth mobility scheme would offer British businesses an excellent opportunity to address staffing shortages by welcoming young people from EU countries for a limited period, bringing fresh talent and energy to our workforce. With the threat of tariffs from the incoming President of the United States, it has never been more important for our Government to break down barriers to opportunity elsewhere. When speaking with counterparts in Brussels in my capacity as the Liberal Democrat Europe spokesperson, I have been struck by a clear message. After years of attempts to cherry-pick, the UK now needs to show that it is once again a trusted and reliable partner. By taking the lead on a youth mobility scheme, we have an opportunity to build that trust with our European allies that would allow us to explore our other priorities. Britain’s ability to strike new deals on defence, agriculture and trade would falter if we sent the signal that we are unwilling to move on a pragmatic, mutually beneficial scheme like this one. A carefully designed youth mobility scheme would give the British people control. It would ensure that participants could come here only under a clearly defined category and a tightly controlled time limit, while also signalling that we value cultural exchange, business growth and an ongoing partnership with our nearest neighbours. Let us be honest: we cannot afford to keep letting down young people like Alex, nor can we keep small businesses in limbo, forcing them to cope with staff shortages, when a scheme like this could do so much to help. Young people in this country already face unprecedented challenges: a housing crisis, low salary growth, a rising cost of living and high taxes on income. The very least the Government could do is to remove barriers preventing young people in the UK from living and working in the rest of Europe. It saddens me that the Government have so far ruled out such a scheme. I call on the Government to give the young people of this country a proper explanation. Many of them have put their faith in the Labour party to reverse the damage done by the previous Government but remain disappointed and frustrated. The Bill calls for a solution that would restore vital opportunities for our young people who have been left high and dry by the Conservatives’ botched Brexit deal. By embracing a well structured and controlled youth mobility scheme, we would send the powerful message that this country is serious about supporting our young people and backing British business with the labour force it needs to grow. This is a moment to bring opportunity and renewed good will back into the heart of UK-EU relations—a real reset. The issue will not go away and, as a Liberal Democrat, I am proud to have sponsors from the Green party, SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Alliance party of Northern Ireland. Many on the Labour and Conservative Benches know that a youth mobility scheme with the EU is the right thing to do. It is time to rebuild our relationship with Europe and set our young people free. I commend this Bill to the House. Question put and agreed to. Ordered , That James MacCleary, Tom Gordon, Siân Berry, Caroline Voaden, Stephen Gethins, Sorcha Eastwood, Sarah Olney, Liz Saville Roberts, Mr Joshua Reynolds, Richard Foord, Helen Maguire and Liz Jarvis present the Bill. James MacCleary accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 2 5 July 2025, and to be printed (Bill 160).

• 6 Jan 2025 · Frozen Russian Assets: Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. It is as if I had given him a copy of my speech; I was about to come on to that. Stopping the Russian assault on Ukraine is part of a wider struggle for the future of democracy and liberty, in Europe and around the world. Russian ruler Vladimir Putin has made this war an existential one, staking the future of his regime on it. We must be in no doubt that current and wannabe dictators are watching closely to see how European powers respond to Russia’s challenge. Any wavering in our support for Ukraine could easily be interpreted as a green light to others to launch grabs for coveted territory. In short, the basis of the liberal world order is at stake, and Britain has a duty to protect that order, which we did so much to create. With the looming return of Donald Trump to the White House, the stakes for Europe could not be higher. The future of US support for Ukraine is uncertain, and Europe must be prepared to step up. This is a wake-up call for the UK; we must lead within Europe and ensure that brave Ukrainians receive the robust support that they need from us. Beyond repurposing Russian assets, we must also address the systemic failures that have allowed dirty money to flood into our economy. The UK has long been a destination of choice for Russian wealth, much of it funnelled through loopholes in economic crime legislation. It is time to properly resource the National Crime Agency, close these loopholes, and make it clear that kleptocrats are no longer welcome here. Members who, like me, are students of Russian and east European history will be familiar with the word Holodomor. There have been lots of references to history and the lessons that we should take from it. For those who are not familiar with the word, we would simply call it the Ukrainian famine. In 1932 and 1933, uncounted millions of Ukrainians starved to death as a direct result of policies prosecuted by another dictator in the Kremlin, Joseph Stalin. I genuinely hope that those in this Chamber in the future will not look back on us and say that we could have done more to stop another great crime against the Ukrainian people. The Liberal Democrats have been clear that this is about more than military aid; it is about holding Russia accountable and strengthening Ukraine’s defences. Ukraine’s fight is our fight; by taking action now, the UK can reaffirm that aggression will never be rewarded, that Europe will always stand firm in defence of freedom, and that Britain remains at the heart of the continent’s security and values.

• 6 Jan 2025 · Frozen Russian Assets: Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I start by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) for securing this valuable and important debate. Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine is not just an assault on one nation. It is a direct challenge to the values that unite Europe: democracy, sovereignty, and the rule of law. Europe must respond with strength and unity, and the UK has a unique role to play in leading the charge. Russia’s malign influence extends far beyond Ukraine. From interference in democratic elections across Europe to spreading disinformation, the Kremlin has shown its commitment to undermining the democratic values that bind our continent. This is not just Ukraine’s fight; it is a fight for the integrity of all our democracies. Our defence sector is among the largest in Europe, and our international influence remains significant. When I meet European colleagues, one message is clear: they want the UK to lead. This is a moment for the UK to step up and demonstrate the leadership that has long defined our place in Europe—even though we are, for now, outside the European Union. Seizing frozen Russian assets and repurposing them is one of the most effective ways to support Ukraine. These funds are not just financial resources; they are symbols of aggression that must become instruments of justice. Putin’s grasp on power depends on corruption and control; by seizing and repurposing these assets, we can weaken his grip. Our allies have shown the way. Canada amended its Special Economic Measures Act to allow the seizure of Russian assets for grave breaches of international peace, and the United States passed the REPO—Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians—Act to transfer Russian sovereign assets directly to Ukraine. These steps provide clear and workable models for the UK and Europe to adopt.

• 19 Dec 2024 · Service Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  The Liberal Democrats fully support the findings of the report and we hope it will mark the beginning of a much better and fairer deal for armed forces personnel. For too long, they have been failed by successive Governments. Does the Chair agree that this is a long-overdue change, welcomed by our party and across the House? Our service personnel, who at times put their lives on the line for this country, should at the very least expect to have a warm, safe and secure place to call home. Does he also agree that the backlog and repairs to the basic services he has highlighted are unacceptable and should not be allowed to recur in future?

• 19 Dec 2024 · Syria · Hansard source

  More

  The fall of Assad marks a turning point in Syria’s history, one that brings renewed hope for millions who have suffered under his brutal rule. It also represents a serious setback for the global ambitions of the regimes in Moscow and Tehran. As we reflect on this momentous day, however, we must remain vigilant. It is not enough to see the end of a cruel despot who unleashed chemical weapons on his own people; true justice requires that he be held to account for his crimes, ensuring that such atrocities never reoccur. In these early days of transition, every effort must be channelled into securing an orderly and peaceful transfer of power. We welcome the signs of engagement with groups on the ground, including those who have had contact with HTS, and we urge all parties to commit themselves to a stable path forward; but this cannot be a mere change of flags or faces. The new leadership must work tirelessly to safeguard the dignity and rights of every community, ensuring that religious and ethnic minorities are not just tolerated but actively protected. Equally vital is the reconstruction of Syria’s infrastructure: investment in roads, schools, hospitals and electricity grids is essential. Restoring those lifelines of society will help to rebuild trust and lay the groundwork for a thriving, inclusive economy that reaches every corner of the country. The international community stands ready to support these initiatives, but we must see clear evidence of genuine commitment to positive, meaningful change. The Minister mentioned the £61 million of UK aid, which is very welcome. Can she give us the details of how it will specifically support Syrians who are returning to their home country? May I also ask what the Government are doing to work alongside key regional players to ensure that whatever comes next upholds the values of democracy and freedom?

• 19 Dec 2024 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you— [ Interruption. ] Sorry, I was just trying not to step on the right hon. Jennie. It is absolutely right that we give our brave Ukrainian allies the support that they need to resist Putin’s war machine. I am proud of how our country has stood shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine in defence of freedom and democracy, yet with the looming threat of a Trump presidency, America’s ongoing commitment to Ukraine looks increasingly uncertain. It should serve as a wake-up call to us all. If the United States pulls back its support, Europe must step up. The Liberal Democrats want to see the UK take a lead within Europe. That must begin with concrete action, such as seizing frozen Russian assets to bolster Ukraine’s defences, as I and others spoke about in this House just yesterday, and reversing damaging Conservative cuts to our armed forces. Those steps will strengthen Ukraine’s hand and Britain’s security. Robust financial and humanitarian assistance is also vital. Just a few weeks ago, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs, Defence and Home Office spokespeople met a delegation of Ukrainian MPs, who stressed the urgent need for ongoing tangible support. Their message was clear: Europe’s role has never been more important. The Liberal Democrats stand firmly behind these measures. The impending Trump presidency puts the safety of Ukraine and Europe in doubt. Does the Minister agree that it is time for the UK to take a lead within Europe on defence and security, and will he commit to working with his European counterparts to make sure that Ukraine is supported fully? The Minister also mentioned Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s energy network. Can he outline what work the Government are doing to support Ukraine in getting electricity generators and solar panels installed across the country to keep it functioning?

• 18 Dec 2024 · Financial Assistance to Ukraine Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to speak in support of the Bill and to highlight the importance of our unwavering commitment to Ukraine. I thank the Chief Secretary to the Treasury for his detailed response to the points raised in my new clause, which I really appreciate. When I addressed this House a few weeks ago, I expressed my desire for measures that would go further, particularly to empower the Government to seize Russian state assets frozen in the UK and use them to help rebuild Ukraine—an issue many hon. Members touched on in the Committee of the whole House. It remains, in my view and that of the Liberal Democrats, a critical step that must be taken. While procedural constraints have made such an amendment impossible within the scope of the Bill, the importance of ensuring accountability and justice cannot be overstated. The repurposing of frozen Russian assets is not just a financial issue; it is about ensuring that those who have enabled the Kremlin’s actions face tangible consequences. The UK has an opportunity to lead by example in demonstrating that aggression will not go unpunished. The Bill, by enabling the UK to participate in the G7’s ERA loans programme, provides vital financial support to Ukraine at a critical time in its fight for freedom. Beyond financial measures, we must continue to stand resolutely with our Ukrainian allies in other ways. That includes providing advanced military aid, bolstering Ukraine’s defences, and working closely with NATO and the EU to co-ordinate our collective response to Russian aggression. The UK must lead by example, showing that our commitment to Ukraine is unshakeable even in the face of uncertainty about the future of US support. Ukraine’s fight is not just for its own sovereignty, but for the principles of freedom and democracy that we all hold dear. With winter looming and the conflict showing no sign of abating, the UK must be a steadfast partner, ensuring that Ukraine has the resources, support and international backing it needs to endure and prevail. The Bill is a welcome step forward, but it cannot be the final word. Let us seize the moment to demonstrate moral leadership and resolve. Let us ensure that Ukraine’s struggle for freedom remains our shared cause, paving the way for a future of peace and resilience. Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed. Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [ Lords ] (Programme) (No. 2) Ordered, That the Order of 22 October 2024 (Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] (Programme)) be varied as follows: (1) Paragraphs (4) and (5) of the Order shall be omitted. (2) Proceedings on Consideration shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after the commencement of proceedings on the Motion for this Order. (3) Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion two hours after the commencement of proceedings on the Motion for this Order.—( Stephen Doughty. )

• 18 Dec 2024 · Financial Assistance to Ukraine Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) for outlining some of the things in the new clause we have tabled. I want to outline in some detail what is in new clause 1 and what we hope to achieve with it, and hopefully the Minister will be able to respond and outline some of his thoughts around reporting in particular. New clause 1 would impose a reporting requirement on the Secretary of State to keep Parliament informed about three critical aspects of our support to Ukraine under the scheme. The reports would detail the monetary support provided to Ukraine, including the amounts disbursed and how that fits into the broader multilateral agreement. That ensures transparency and allows Members and the public to understand the precise scale of our financial commitment. The reports would also provide clarity regarding our share of the principal loan amount and any interest accrued. Such information is vital for proper scrutiny and public trust, ensuring that funds allocated are achieving their intended purpose. Finally, and most importantly, the reports would shed light on any extraordinary profits arising from immobilised Russian sovereign assets under the scheme. While we cannot legislate here to seize those assets directly, the provision ensures that the question does not simply fade away. By requiring regular reports, we maintain focus on the issue and keep pressure on the Government to engage with our G7 partners. If, at some future point, there is an opportunity to use Russian state assets more directly for Ukraine’s recovery, Parliament will be fully informed and ready to act. The reports must highlight any discussions the UK Government have had with other G7 countries about future steps, including expanding the range of assets considered or using them in new ways. That ensures ongoing diplomatic transparency and accountability. Parliament will know if the Government are pushing for more ambitious measures internationally or if they are hesitating while others lead. In practice, the first report would appear within six months of the Bill’s passage, with subsequent reports every six months until one year after the relevant international arrangements cease to operate. The structured timeline guarantees sustained oversight, rather than just a one-off glance. Given the complexity and duration of the challenges Ukraine faces, such ongoing engagement is critical. It sets a framework for continued scrutiny, encourages more ambitious future action and underscores that, despite the Bill’s limited scope, our resolve to hold Russia accountable remains unwavering. Through those measures, we would ensure that Parliament remains fully informed and ready to stand by our Ukrainian allies when the opportunity to take bolder steps arises.

• 17 Dec 2024 · National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I have to start by disappointing the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Dan Tomlinson), in that I rise to support the amendments tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for St Albans (Daisy Cooper). I will speak about my deep concerns about the proposed national insurance changes because of the real-world impact they will have businesses, GP surgeries, community organisations and vital care services in my constituency of Lewes. While I recognise the fiscal pressures, which have been mentioned by a lot of Members, I ask that we fully consider how these changes will affect those working tirelessly to keep our communities vibrant, secure and healthy. GP surgeries are the frontline of the NHS. A local GP practice in my constituency has been in touch with me just today to describe its shock at discovering that it will be paying at least £60,000 more a year under these changes. GP practices provide vital healthcare services to our local population and in doing so are under ever-increasing pressures. Yet under the new proposals, GP practices are treated as if they are private businesses capable of absorbing significant cost increases. The reality is, of course, quite different. Every additional £1 spent on national insurance is £1 that is not spent on patient care, staffing or critical medical equipment. For practices already operating under immense strain, this extra burden could be the tipping point that pushes them towards unsustainable financial territory. When cutbacks occur, it is our communities that will lose vital healthcare access, and the NHS, which is already stretched, will be left struggling even more. We must also acknowledge that our social care providers, including hospices such as St Peter and St James hospice, which looks after my constituents so well—I visited it recently—are caught between rising wages, fixed local authority fees and higher national insurance. They cannot pass on these costs without threatening their very viability. If care providers close or scale back, the most vulnerable in our community will suffer, and so will our healthcare system as hospital stays lengthen and A&E attendances rise. In other words, it will drive up costs for the NHS, making the system less efficient and less humane. It is particularly galling that NHS employers are set to be compensated for the changes while there is no equivalent commitment for the social care sector. Separating social care reform from NHS support will not only hurt vulnerable people today, but make it impossible to achieve strategic priorities for the health service tomorrow. We must also consider community organisations. Take the Sussex Community Development Association in my constituency. It is a local organisation that reinvests every penny of surplus into essential services such as youth work, emergency food provision and childcare for deprived communities in my constituency. It is already contending with increased wage costs, and it now faces an estimated additional £70,000 per year due to the national insurance rise. Because of its size, it does not qualify for allowances that might soften the blow. This facility was invested in to deliver Sure Start services under a previous Labour Government, and it is now considering cuts to essential services thanks to this one. It now faces a desperate scramble for funding at a time when its services have never been more crucial. The rise, coupled with the increases to the national living wage and the minimum wage, will hit the early education and childcare sector particularly hard. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for childcare and early education, I must make the Committee aware of how dire the situation is. An average nursery will face additional staffing costs of nearly £40,000 a year due to the increases. That is because staffing costs account for 75% of nurseries’ running costs, compared with just 30% for the average restaurant. If Government funding rates do not cover the gap, parents will face higher fees, potentially leaving them to reduce their working hours or to leave the workforce altogether. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that private nurseries delivering Government-funded hours may not be eligible for employment allowance. That means that they may not receive the intended financial support from the Government. The sector is already facing recruitment challenges, with 29,000 new staff needed by September 2025 to deliver the promised 30 hours of funded childcare. The national insurance changes could lead to recruitment freezes, reduced staff training and even nursery closures. That is the precise opposite of what this Government claim they want to see for working parents and carers. That would have a detrimental effect on families and the economy, hindering economic growth, and it could seriously impact the Government’s commendable aim of having half a million more children hitting early learning goals by 2030. Finally, let us not forget that even successful local businesses are feeling the strain. Rathfinny, a renowned Sussex wine producer in my constituency that has invested in our local economy and environment, faces a significantly higher national insurance bill. It may be forced to slow its growth, reduce investment or even curb local employment opportunities, undermining the prosperity that benefits us all. This Government talk about economic growth, as Government Members have done today, but this tax increase will inhibit the ability of many British businesses to expand and flourish. If introduced without nuance, these national insurance changes risk delivering a series of damaging shocks to my community and places across the country. I urge the Government and the Minister to reconsider, to review the thresholds, to consider exemptions for sectors that cannot pass on costs and to ensure that our GP practices, childcare providers, community organisations and valued local employers are not left shouldering burdens they cannot bear. I implore the Government to recognise the unintended consequences and to commit to measures that will preserve local jobs, sustain our community services and uphold the quality of care we offer our vulnerable citizens. I hope that the Government will do more to ensure that this tax increase does not harm the very communities and services we have pledged to serve and protect.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Rural Cycling Infrastructure · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. Please accept my apologies, because I am likely to have to leave before the conclusion of the debate as I am hosting an event elsewhere on the estate. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) on securing this debate. It is a privilege to speak on a matter that is of great relevance to communities like those in my Lewes constituency. While cycling is often associated with urban transport solutions, it holds untapped potential to transform rural areas, if we address the challenges that prevent it from being a viable option for many. Two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of attending the Cycle Lewes annual general meeting. That dedicated group has been advocating for safer, more accessible cycling in Lewes and surrounding villages since 1998. Their work, from installing new cycle racks to critiquing transport plans that prioritise cars over active travel, is a testament to the power of local campaigning. However, as was made clear at the AGM, piecemeal progress cannot overcome the systemic barriers to cycling that rural communities face.

• 10 Dec 2024 · Rural Cycling Infrastructure · Hansard source

  More

  Not being the Minister, I do not know, but I am sure that he will respond accordingly, and I hope that the answer will be yes, because that would be a fantastic thing to do. I know that county councils and other authorities have really struggled to find the funding for active travel undertakings across the country. We have certainly seen that in East Sussex, as the hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) has in his area. Cycling is more than a recreational activity. It is an essential mode of transport that can improve public health, reduce carbon emissions and ease the financial burden of transport for households. Nationally, cycling directly contributes an estimated £5.4 billion annually to the economy, including £4.1 billion from reduced mortality, air pollution, and congestion. Every pound invested in walking and cycling infrastructure generates more than £5 in benefits. Cycling also promotes land-use efficiency, requiring far less space than roads or car parks—a critical consideration for creating greener, more liveable communities. For predominantly rural areas like mine, that represents an opportunity to create healthier, greener and more connected communities. Without serious investment, rural residents will continue to face unsafe roads, insufficient cycling facilities and limited transport options. In communities like mine, the reality is stark. Public transport options are patchy and many depend on cars for short journeys. Safe and accessible cycling infrastructure could provide an alternative that is not only affordable, but sustainable. Where we have dedicated cycle routes, such as the outstanding separated cycling routes alongside the A27 between Lewes and Polegate in my constituency, they are often unconnected to any ongoing routes, which limits the number of people that can use them. Better road maintenance is required. We need to create conditions in which cycling is a realistic option for commuting, shopping and even leisure—not just for the young, pale and male but for everybody. Inclusivity must be central to our approach. Whether it is for children cycling to school, older residents using e-bikes or families making short trips, cycling infrastructure should cater to a diverse range of needs. It is about ensuring that everybody can benefit from the independence, affordability and health benefits that cycling offers. The Liberal Democrats have been clear in our commitment to reverse funding cuts and in pushing for a nationwide active travel strategy. In rural areas, that includes prioritising safe cycling routes, linking active travel to public transport and ensuring that local councils have the resources to tackle potholes and maintain pavements and cycleways, as well as to invest in active travel infrastructure. I urge the Government to recognise that cycling is not just a solution for urban areas, but a vital tool for rural communities. By investing in cycling infrastructure, we can reduce transport poverty, improve public health and build a greener future for areas like Sussex. Let us not miss this opportunity to make cycling safe, accessible and inclusive for all.

• 26 Nov 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. The EU has been very clear that it would welcome a new youth mobility scheme with the UK. As the Minister knows, that would not be a return to freedom of movement and could be agreed separately from the trade and co-operation agreement that the UK signed when we left the UK. Can the Minister tell me, this House and the young people of this country why the Government will not sit down with European allies to agree a new youth mobility scheme?

• 26 Nov 2024 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate about a Bill that seeks to change the way in which our society approaches smoking and vaping particularly for future generations. I have never smoked in my life, and I would not wish my children or anyone else’s to pick up the habit. Smoking is undeniably dangerous, highly addictive, and a significant burden on public health. The Government data is stark: smoking causes 80,000 deaths in England every year and costs the NHS and the economy billions. At the same time, however, I firmly believe in individual choice. It is not the role of the state to dictate every aspect of a person’s lifestyle. Like alcohol, smoking is harmful. Some Members have made the argument that the justification for banning smoking is that the practice also harms others. I ask those Members why we do not also ban the consumption of alcohol, which places a massive burden on the NHS as well as contributing to violent crime, including—with yesterday’s White Ribbon Day in mind—domestic violence. Should we not also look at gambling, which is also highly addictive and destroys families all over the country? Instead, we educate people and provide support for those who wish to quit. I believe that is the balance that liberalism stands for—freedom with responsibility. The Bill takes a much-needed step forward on vaping. We know that vaping is increasingly marketed in ways that appeal to children, from brightly coloured packaging to sweet, toy-like flavours. That is unacceptable. The Liberal Democrats have long called for tougher regulation of vapes, and I welcome the provisions to ban advertising, restrict packaging and flavours and enforce age restrictions. These are sensible measures that will protect young people without penalising adults who use vaping as a tool to quit smoking.

• 26 Nov 2024 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. Indeed, my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) has already raised the issue of spiced vapes in a debate in this House. I think there are a lot of safety concerns relating to vaping, and hopefully this Bill can start to address some of those issues. As a party, we earlier supported the Government’s move to ban single-use vapes on environmental grounds. Vaping has a role in smoking cessation, but as the hon. Gentleman has pointed out, it has to be regulated to prevent harm to children. On smoking, however, the Bill ventures into more contentious territory, in my view. The proposal to ban the sale of tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 is somewhat problematic. While I appreciate the ambition behind creating a smokefree generation, I worry about the long-term implications of this measure. For one, history teaches us that outright bans often lead to unintended consequences. As we have seen with other prohibitions, a black market can emerge, making it harder to regulate the quality and safety of tobacco products. Then there is the question of principle: should the state prevent grown, consenting adults from engaging in legal activities? I believe we must tread carefully when legislating against personal freedoms, even when those freedoms carry risk. A more effective approach would be to invest in public health measures, such as smoking-cessation programmes, early cancer detection and better treatment facilities. The Bill also grants the Secretary of State sweeping powers to declare any public space smokefree. While I support protecting children in playgrounds, schools and hospitals, these powers go far beyond that, removing the requirement that a space must pose a significant risk of smoke exposure to be designated as smokefree. This raises concerns about potential overreach, which is understandably creating concern in the hospitality and night-time industry sectors. I urge the Government to clarify this issue when the Bill is in Committee. Smoking rates in this country are already declining, particularly among young people. In 2021, just 1% of school pupils reported smoking regularly, compared with 30% in 1996. That trend is encouraging, suggesting that education and public health initiatives are working, so while I share the Government’s goal of reducing smoking and vaping rates, I believe this Bill goes beyond what is necessary or proportionate. We should focus on supporting people to make better choices, not remove those choices altogether. There is much to welcome and commend in the Bill, and I congratulate the Secretary of State and the Government on bringing it forward. I hope the Government will consider refining their approach in Committee in some of the areas I have raised, balancing public health priorities with the liberal principle of individual freedom.

• 26 Nov 2024 · EU Security and Defence Co-operation · Hansard source

  More

  6. What recent discussions he has had with his EU counterparts on security and defence co-operation.

• 26 Nov 2024 · EU Security and Defence Co-operation · Hansard source

  More

  President-elect Trump’s confirmation of tariffs on Canada, one of the US’s closest allies, raises serious concerns about his willingness to honour the US-UK special relationship. If that is the future of US relations with its closest partners, does the Minister agree that closer co-operation with the EU on defence and trade is now urgently needed, including access to the European customs union and the defence pact with the EU, going beyond the recent agreement with Germany?

• 20 Nov 2024 · Financial Assistance to Ukraine Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday, Ukraine entered its 1,000th day since the start of Russia’s illegal and unprovoked invasion, and it is about to enter its toughest winter yet. This Bill represents a significant and welcome step in providing much-needed financial support to Ukraine as it continues its courageous resistance. It will deliver tangible assistance during this critical phase of the conflict, providing a vital lifeline to our Ukrainian allies. Before the war, my partner and I had the good fortune to travel in Ukraine, visiting both Kyiv and Odesa. We visited modern cities similar to any other in Europe, so the sight of ordinary Ukrainian families being forced, at the start of the Russian attack, to shelter in the Kyiv underground stations that we had both so recently used for sightseeing in that beautiful city was both shocking and moving for us. It also brought home why the UK’s unwavering support for Ukraine is so essential, not just for the brave people of that nation but for all of us. If liberal democratic nations do not stand together against tyranny and aggression, the tyrants will feel no constraint and the citizens of other European nations, including potentially the UK, might find that they are the ones forced into underground stations looking for shelter. The Liberal Democrats support this Bill and its intent, but we are disappointed that it has taken so long to come to the House. My noble Friend Lord Purvis of Tweed raised this issue back in January, some 10 months ago, but now the Bill is finally here, we are pleased to see that it demonstrates a commitment to ensuring that those responsible for Ukraine’s devastation—Russia and its oligarch elites—should, at the very least, contribute financially to Ukraine’s recovery. However, we believe the Bill does not go far enough. The UK should consider seizing all frozen Russian assets, not just their profits, and redirect them to aid Ukraine. With around £22 billion-worth of such assets currently held in the UK alone, the Government are missing a significant opportunity to amplify their support. Distinguished international lawyers have made a strong case for this step. Although some economists have expressed concern about repercussions in the financial markets, we believe that, given the very specific circumstances of this conflict, the justification and the benefits far outweigh those concerns. Such action would provide an immediate and substantial financial boost to President Zelensky’s forces and Ukraine’s reconstruction efforts, while sending a clear message to the Kremlin that aggression against sovereign nations will have severe and lasting consequences. We therefore also back the calls for a special tribunal to prosecute those responsible for Russia’s war of aggression and to ensure accountability for the heinous crimes committed. The Liberal Democrats have consistently called for the UK to lead by example in supporting Ukraine, extending it beyond financial assistance to include military, diplomatic and humanitarian measures. The provision of advanced weaponry, including longer-range precision arms, is critical to Ukraine’s success. We must also bolster British arms and ammunition supplies, work closely with our allies to replenish stockpiles, and maintain Ukraine’s defensive capabilities. It is essential that we co-ordinate effectively with NATO and the European Union to maximize collective impact, which is why I urge the Government to be bolder in their efforts to rebuild our relationship with the EU, including by deepening our security and military co-operation. We urge the Government to build an international consensus for the proscription of the Wagner Group, whose activities represent a grave threat to international security. The UK must also take a strong stance against Russia’s continuing human rights violations and support anti-war activists within Russia, many of whom face persecution for their bravery. Offering asylum to such individuals and raising their cases in international forums is not only a moral imperative but a strategic means of undermining the Kremlin’s control. It is vital to recognise that supporting Ukraine financially and militarily should not come at the expense of other nations in need. Restoring the 0.7% gross national income target for international development spending is a crucial step towards ensuring that humanitarian aid to Ukraine does not result in the neglect of our wider global responsibilities. The Government’s failure to meet this target undermines Britain’s reputation as a global leader in development and humanitarian support. The Liberal Democrats also urge the Government to take robust action to close the loopholes in economic crime legislation that have allowed Putin’s allies to funnel dirty money through the UK for far too long. A Financial Times investigation published yesterday revealed that companies in British overseas territories exported $134 million-worth of goods to Russia in 2024, potentially breaching UK sanctions aimed at restricting access to military and high-tech supplies. I call on the Minister to give an undertaking that the Government will look to address these violations and close these loopholes. The National Crime Agency must be properly resourced to tackle economic crime effectively, and Magnitsky sanctions should be used to target relatives and associates who attempt to evade existing measures. This is about far more than financial probity; it is about standing up for the rule of law and ensuring that our financial system cannot be used to bankroll aggression. This Bill comes at a moment of uncertainty. The possibility of diminished US support for Ukraine, following the recent election and the imminent return of Donald Trump to the presidency, is deeply concerning. Should the United States falter in its support, Europe must step up. This should serve as a wake-up call for the UK Government to lead in Europe by seizing frozen Russian assets, reversing damaging cuts to our armed forces and strengthening co-operation with both NATO and the European Union on security and foreign policy. With a hard winter ahead, time is of the essence. The UK must not waver in its commitment to Ukraine. This is about more than financial assistance; it is about justice, accountability and the preservation of international law. This Bill is a vital step forward, but it must not be the final word. We must demonstrate bold leadership by acting decisively to ensure that Ukraine not only survives but prevails, and that the principles of sovereignty, freedom and democracy endure. Let this Bill be the beginning of a renewed and united effort to support Ukraine. By seizing frozen Russian assets, providing advanced military support and working closely with our allies, we can help Ukraine to secure a lasting victory and ensure a future of peace, stability and justice for Europe and beyond. Let us rise to this challenge for Ukraine, for Europe and for the values we hold dear.

• 4 Nov 2024 · Childcare Availability · Hansard source

  More

  With Government data showing that 70,000 more early years places need to be created by next year, and with an overhaul of outdated business rates promised, will the Secretary of State commit to removing unfair business rates from nurseries and pre-schools, which will now be mostly delivering Government-funded childcare?

• 4 Nov 2024 · Childcare Availability · Hansard source

  More

  1. What steps she is taking to increase the availability of high-quality childcare. [R]

• 4 Nov 2024 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. When I visit nurseries in my constituency of Lewes, many raise serious concerns about special educational needs and disabilities provision in the early years. Will Ministers commit to an urgent review of SEND in early years to take account of funding shortfalls and staffing challenges, and to address families’ concerns about insufficient places due to growing demand?