Jenny Riddell-Carpenter MP: speeches

Speeches

• 25 Feb 2026 · Energy Developers Levy · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the potential merits of a levy on energy developers. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. On the Suffolk coast, communities and nature are facing a stack of separate, fast-moving nationally significant infrastructure projects. Those are new generation, multiple offshore wind grid connecters, major transmission reinforcement, multi-purpose interconnectors and Europe’s largest energy project, Sizewell C. As we speak, we have six NSIPs being built or seeking consent in a small, 10-mile radius of my constituency of Suffolk Coastal. Each has been planned separately, but the impacts are felt cumulatively. I find it absurd that our planning system still examines proposals project by project, and developers are not required by law to co-ordinate. My community is expected to host multiple billion-pound schemes simultaneously, without any statutory tools or funding to force or enforce co-ordination between developers. I need to say that, since I have been raising the profile of this problem, Ofgem has been leading co-ordination meetings with those NSIPs, but Ofgem’s role is only to chair those meetings. There is no statutory obligation to make them happen, and they have come about only because of increased pressure about the need for better co-ordination. Some improvements have happened because of those meetings, and that is welcome, but we need to go much further. Co-ordination between NSIPs, when they operate in the same area, should be enshrined in law. That is precisely why I tabled new clause 33 to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which would have placed a legal duty on energy developers in the same area to share information, co-ordinate and co-operate on design and construction, and take responsible steps to reduce cumulative impacts. As I have said before, the failure we are experiencing in Suffolk Coastal is because the previous Conservative Government totally vacated the leadership space when it came to our country’s energy and biodiversity planning. Energy developers filled that void. The Conservative Government sat back and allowed developers to take the lead and introduce proposals for totally unsuitable landscapes, all because it was cheaper than developing on brownfield sites. We have been left with a series of unco-ordinated whack-a-mole projects on the Suffolk coast. There is no brownfield-first strategy, no shared corridor strategy, no binding requirement to co-ordinate construction schedules, no mechanism to prevent the same land being dug up twice and no requirement to look at, or assess, the cumulative impact on nature and the environment. It is not just me saying this. The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee report, “Gridlock or growth? Avoiding energy planning chaos”, highlighted the need for more strategic co-ordination in environmental impact assessments. It warned of “unnecessary costs and delays” from that “project-by-project approach”. The environmental impacts are assessed separately rather than cumulatively at habitat or seascape scale. In other words, communities in Suffolk Coastal are experiencing a national problem playing out locally, and that is exactly why I am calling for legislation to fix it. The Chair of the Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), agrees that it is completely crazy when construction is not co-ordinated. He sees the real need to apply that to not just energy companies but utilities digging up roads and pavements for repairs, or maintenance of gas, electricity and water, and construction projects. The Minister for Energy has previously acknowledged, publicly in debates and privately to me in meetings, that he agrees with me. He believes it is a source of deep regret that the previous Government did not do more to properly co-ordinate the huge build-out of new and important infrastructure. He has challenged me before that the statutory co-ordination I am seeking requires investment. That is a fair challenge. My response is a proposal to meet that challenge by setting out my proposed energy infrastructure co-ordination levy. In simple terms, that is a levy payable by energy NSIP applicants, designed to fund cumulative planning, shared mitigation and co-ordinated delivery in host communities. It would apply to all energy NSIPs across generation, transmission and interconnectors. The payment would be triggered in two stages: a small amount when the application is accepted for examination, and the main payment when the development consent order is granted. The levy would be calculated using a hybrid model reflecting real impact drivers: a base rate per gigawatt capacity; a base rate per kilometre of onshore cable; a base rate per substation or converter station; and a cap and a floor to ensure proportionality. That aligns cost with scale and disruption, not simply capital expenditure. Crucially, the funds will be ringfenced locally—that is really important.

• 25 Feb 2026 · Energy Developers Levy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Gentleman; I am sure that the Minister will address that issue, which has long been talked about. I was discussing the incredible profits that the energy developers are making. For me, this issue is about simple fairness: those creating the disruption and generating the return should fund the systems to manage the cumulative impact. More importantly—most importantly, perhaps—what I am suggesting would not lead to higher bills. Proper co-ordination would reduce bills: reduce the duplication, prevent redesign and avoid the need for repeated construction and legal conflict. Proper co-ordination saves money. This is not anti-growth, but smarter and inclusive growth. Suffolk Coastal must not become the unmanaged frontier of energy development. So many in my constituency are pro-net zero, pro-investment and pro-growth, but we are asking the Government to be pro-co-ordination. What we have now is a fragmented planning system and eroding trust in the energy transition that we all support. If we are serious about delivering clean energy power at pace, we must treat host communities as partners, not afterthoughts, in that transition. We must do more to bring communities with us. I am asking two things of the Minister today: first, a meeting with officials to examine this proposal; and secondly, a departmental feasibility study into the merits of an energy infrastructure co-ordination levy and how that could support both growth and nature recovery. The Government have already consulted on mandatory community benefits for low carbon energy infrastructure. The question now is whether we go further—by creating a clear levy model that funds meaningful co-ordination between clustered projects, such as those on the Suffolk coast; that builds local accountability and capacity; and that provides independent oversight, delivering tangible community and environmental mitigation. Communities such as mine are not asking for less ambition. We ask simply for better co-ordination when projects are approved. If we get this issue right, we can deliver the green revolution in a way that communities support, nature benefits from and the country can be proud of.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Workers in Suffolk Coastal have been let down badly after carrying out their jobs in good faith only to be denied wages that they earned. After multiple failures to be granted the money they earned, employees of the Orwell hotel in Felixstowe were forced to gain employment tribunal judgments confirming that the money is owed to them, yet many are still waiting to be paid. Will the Leader of the House ask the relevant Minister to engage with me urgently on this case and on the wider failure to ensure that employment tribunal awards are properly enforced?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  Is my hon. Friend aware that there does not need to be a certain number of incidents outside a school gate, or indeed on any road, in order for local councils to intervene? It is a myth that we need to bust.

• 4 Feb 2026 · Civil Service Pension Scheme: Administration · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 4 Feb 2026 · Civil Service Pension Scheme: Administration · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for introducing the debate and speaking so articulately. I will not repeat the many points made by colleagues from across the House; instead, I will use this chance—of two and a half minutes, now—to talk about my casework. I want to say to my constituents that I had a meeting with the Minister yesterday, and I was reassured by how seriously the Government are taking this issue, but I am disgusted by how Capita is handling it. I want to ensure that, in every single email that I send to Capita, I am referencing this debate and the case I am bringing forward. I have had about 10 correspondents, the first of whom is Kathleen Cassie. Again, I will be using these minutes in my correspondence with Capita. She took partial retirement in November. She has received no lump sum and no payments, and I have not had a response from Capita after chasing them. Maxine Fuller is planning for retirement. She has written four times, phoned twice and sent three messages on the portal. Surprisingly, she has had no response. As Members can imagine, the story continues. Chris Fryer—I should say that all these people are happy to be named in Parliament—retired a year ago, and has not received a single penny after spending his entire career working as an officer for the Border Force. He has contacted them, and the same story remains: he has had no response. That is a year of not being able to make mortgage payments and the like, payments he should be able to take for granted. It is a similar story with Lisa Andrews. She is a serving police officer who, after 37 years, applied for partial retirement on 1 December. She got cut off the portal, and she has not been able to have any correspondence with Capita. After chasing, but not hearing back, she received a lump sum, but she now awaits the monthly partial pension payment, and lo and behold—quelle surprise!—she did not receive it on 1 January. I have many more examples, some of whom do not want to be referenced. To cite one without naming them, they were on the phone yesterday and were at 183 in the queue, but they are terrified that if I name them in Parliament, they will be sent to the back of the queue and penalised further. About 10 constituents have reached out to me about that. They are terrified. They have spent many years serving this country through the civil service, dedicating their life to it, and they should be able to look forward to their retirement—either partial or full—but they have been let down by Capita. I look forward to the response of the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire (Mike Wood), on how the Conservatives agreed this contract with such a lack of scrutiny, because they have not been challenged enough about that today. However, I will leave it there, Ms Lewell, because my anger is rising.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Business Rates · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement, and I give my personal thanks to the Members on both sides of the House who have been advocating very strongly with him, including my hon. Friends the Members for Redditch (Chris Bloore), for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) and for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley). I also thank the businesses and, in particular, the pubs in my constituency: the Anchor at Walberswick, the Froize Inn, Deben Inns, and many, many more. I welcome today’s announcement, but we can do more and go further, including in the strategy, to look at lowering VAT for hospitality and lowering the alcohol duty, which could perhaps be offset by a higher alcohol duty in supermarkets.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Earlier this week, students in year 11 at Felixstowe school were told that they would not be able to continue their studies at the school beyond year 11 because it is not continuing with sixth-form provision. As Members can imagine, this has caused huge worry for parents and students at Felixstowe school. I have written to the Secretary of State about this matter and the worries I have about the withdrawal of sixth-form education from our town. Will the Leader of the House help to ensure that I secure the meeting quickly, as time is clearly of the essence?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  As chair of the Labour rural research group, I continually hear about the challenges facing rural communities, including access to education and transport infrastructure. Will the Minister set out the specific steps that the Cabinet Office is taking to ensure that rural voices and rural communities are meaningfully represented throughout Government decision making?

• 13 Jan 2026 · Storm Goretti · Hansard source

  More

  Suffolk Coastal is in the east of England, but we did not escape the storms by any stretch of the imagination. The coastal erosion at Thorpeness has really sped up and we now have homes facing the worst-case scenario. Indeed, last night a home was demolished, marking four homes that have succumbed to coastal erosion since October. Three have been as a consequence of the rapidly eroding shoreline, sped up by the storm. Will the Minister arrange to meet me to discuss a number of issues, including the coastal erosion assistance grant? The owner of one of the homes, who will not qualify for the grant, may pay £40,000 for the privilege of demolishing their own home. That feels incredibly unfair, and East Suffolk council is working to ensure that does not happen, but will the Minister meet to talk about that and what can be done to support my community and others affected?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend give way?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more. Some of the things we hear from the Conservatives are really dangerous. If we are to have sensible conversations about our renewable energy infrastructure, they need to focus on co-ordination. In my constituency, there are seven nationally significant infrastructure projects in a 10-mile radius, but there has never been any attempt to co-ordinate them. I tabled an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to make it a legal duty for NSIPs to be co-ordinated when they are being built at the same time in a small geographical area. It seems crazy that that has never been seriously considered. I will continue to work with the Government to see how we can bring such proposals forward. I would be keen on the introduction of an energy infrastructure levy in order to promote co-ordination. I urge the Government to go further on farming profitability. I was delighted about the changes to the thresholds, which many of my Back-Bench colleagues and I worked hard to secure, but there is more to do. Baroness Batters’ review addressed key issues, which I know the Government are taking seriously, and I am delighted about many of its recommendations and with the conversations that I have had about them. The Government have my commitment to continued work on those matters, on which I am delighted to support them.

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I am delighted to be the first ever Labour MP for Suffolk Coastal, an incredibly rural constituency. Many of our previous MPs were helicoptered in from cities to represent the constituency, so I am even more delighted to be able to stand in this House and say that I am the first ever MP for Suffolk Coastal to have been born and raised there. Back in 2004, when I was 17, the foxhunting debate was playing out. It has been incredibly interesting to hear so many Conservatives talk about Labour MPs not understanding rural issues or the foxhunting debate. I can tell the House that one reason I became a Labour member—let alone a Labour MP—was foxhunting. I remember how furious I was, aged 17, that Conservative Members were so angry about the foxhunting ban but did not care about lifting children out of poverty. I could not comprehend that world. That is what drove me to Labour. Those were my values, having grown up in a rural area. Now, I am incredibly proud to stand here representing a rural seat. I continue to stand on that ticket and I defend the Labour manifesto. We need to separate the issues of conservation and shooting from hunting, as they are separate. I will continue to have those conversations with this Labour Government. Some of—well, all of—the elements in the motion before us are beyond ridiculous, particularly the point about net zero targets and energy infrastructure. If approval is granted, Suffolk Coastal is set to host Sea Link and LionLink. Sizewell C has just been approved, and so many other schemes were approved or proposed not just under the Conservative Government, but under the Conservative-led county council. There are many energy infrastructure issues in my constituency that need to be considered, but they relate to co-ordination and cumulative impact.

• 5 Jan 2026 · Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief · Hansard source

  More

  Happy new year to you and the team, Mr Speaker. I start by thanking the Minister and his Department for working actively with rural colleagues and myself for the last 14 months. In the many conversations that we have had, both face to face and in wider correspondence, we have set out the huge number of issues that are well known to this House, but at the heart of this, and the reason that so many of us are concerned, is the lack of profitability in farming. Baroness Batters’ report will go a huge way towards addressing some of the systemic issues in farming, but does the Minister agree that we also need to tackle supermarkets and unfair practices and to address lots of the long-standing issues, and that the Treasury as a whole needs to continue to engage with rural MPs to make sure that we introduce further reforms to support farming profitability?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q13. The Prime Minister will know that special educational needs and disabilities provision is in crisis across the country, but it is in particular crisis in Suffolk, where the county council is in special measures for its failings. I am delighted that the Government have listened to one of my asks, which is to have a national conversation about SEND, so that parents, young people and their advocates can have their voices heard. Will the Prime Minister back my calls to ensure that we deliver funding for the former Seckford Education Trust school in Saxmundham, which closed its doors for the last time in 2024?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  This autumn Budget will make a real and material difference to families across the country, including thousands in my constituency. Cutting energy bills by £150, capping rail fares and freezing NHS prescription charges are exactly the measures that my constituents have been asking for. We are giving people the breathing space that they need as the Government continue to invest in long-term solutions to bring down the cost of living for good—in energy, transport, homes and the jobs of the future. The debate about farming inheritance has shone a spotlight on something deeply important, the fragility of farming profitability in Britain today. At the heart of my concern is a simple economic truth: you cannot tax a business that is not profitable. Even in good years, many farmers in my constituency struggle to break even. A typical 200-acre arable family farm, worth about £2 million, makes only about £27,000 in profit. Many family farms in Suffolk Coastal would not recognise even that figure. Farmers are not opposed to reform. They know that for far too long, agricultural property relief has been used as a loophole for the very wealthy to shelter their assets. So yes, closing that loophole is right, but we must do it in a way that protects working family farms, which simply cannot absorb a tax bill that they have no means to pay. Our farming sector is on its knees, worn down by Brexit, spiralling costs, unfair trade deals, and supermarket price wars that leave British farmers squeezed to breaking point. There are farmers in this country on universal credit, and farmers in Suffolk Coastal are doing two or three jobs just to put food on their tables. This is the human reality that APR reform must take into account. I support the spousal concession announced in the Budget, but we must go further. I am calling on the Government to commit themselves to a full review of the impact of these APR changes in 12 to 18 months. That review must look not only at how farms have funded these changes but at the wider impacts on food sustainability, the rural economy, land management and food standards. In the long term we must consider the role of supermarkets, whose combined pre-tax profits exceeded £5 billion last year, while some paid no corporation tax at all. Let me gently suggest that perhaps we have an opportunity to raise revenue here and protect our family farms. I support this Government and I support this Budget, but on APR we must keep listening, keep engaging, and ensure that in closing loopholes we do not inadvertently harm the very communities who feed our country.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the things this Labour Government could do is to bring forward a dedicated rural strategy, which would address many of the issues he is referring to and build a stronger, better rural Britain?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q11. Last week, Roman Osborne—a 10-year-old from my constituency—hand-delivered a letter to 10 Downing Street to tell the Prime Minister about an accident he had in February outside his primary school at Trimley St Martin, which left him spending three days in hospital and many more months recovering. Will the Prime Minister back my campaign #SaferAtTheGates, and will he call on Tory-led Suffolk county council to do the right thing by re-reviewing the road and putting the right safety measures in place outside Trimley St Martin and the other schools in my constituency?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that, while tackling Parkinson’s and highlighting the issue today is critical, we also have to make sure that we look at Parkinson’s with dementia and all the other challenges that come with such a complex set of health issues.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Mobile Phone Signal: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  In Suffolk Coastal, about three quarters of households have indoor service for voice calls, compared with the national average of over 90%. Across Woodbridge, Bawdsey and the peninsula, so many households rely on network coverage, but they have zero service. Will the Minister meet me to discuss this important issue, which affects not just my constituency but rural constituencies as a whole?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Mobile Phone Signal: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  12. What steps she is taking to improve mobile coverage in rural areas.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Road Safety (Schools) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about road safety measures near schools; and for connected purposes. Every parent knows that heart-stopping moment when they watch their child cross the road and just pray that drivers are paying attention. For too many families in my constituency, that silent prayer takes place daily, as they drop off their children at school and pick them up at the end of the day. Road traffic accidents are, tragically, the leading cause of death for children in the UK, and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents estimates that every single month 1,200 children are injured in traffic accidents that happen within 500 metres of the school gates. Those two statistics hit me hard when I first heard them, and I can imagine that they hit Members from across the House just as hard. I was first told by the parents about their worries over their children’s safety when dropping them off and collecting them after school, then by the schools, and finally by the children themselves. When I looked at the data, it was telling me the same story: 14% of child fatalities occur during the morning school run between 7 and 9 o’clock, and 23% happen after school between 3 and 5 o’clock. In February this year, 10-year-old Roman Osborne was hit by a van when leaving his primary school at pick-up, in Trimley St Martin. The driver was not speeding or driving recklessly; in fact, witnesses told me that he was travelling at about 20 mph. Luckily, Roman recovered, but the impact was so severe that he spent three days in hospital with a broken hip and many more months recovering. His parents told me that if he had not landed on his rucksack, which shielded him from a far more serious injury and potential head trauma, the outcome would have been tragic. Roman’s story reminds us that improving road safety around our schools is not simply about reducing speeds to 20 mph, though I dread to imagine how much worse it could have been if the driver had been going at 30 mph, 40 mph or faster. In truth, road safety is about making the environment around schools far safer, and by any means necessary. That means proper crossings, clear road markings, enforcing parking restrictions, visible signage and, yes, the presence of school-crossing patrols—our much-loved lollipop men and women. What frustrates me most is that many of those options are available to councils, but only if they choose to implement them. Following Roman’s accident, Suffolk county council told me that the road had been assessed, but that it did not meet the criteria for additional safety measures. Madam Deputy Speaker, you do not need me to tell you that that is not good enough. When a child is injured outside their own school, how can any system say that the criteria to make that road safer have not been met? It should not be at the discretion of any council to turn a blind eye. Bucklesham primary school in my constituency—those from the school are watching in the Gallery—knows this challenge all too well. The school sits on the junction of a 60 mph and a 30 mph road. It is an isolated rural school, with no footpaths or homes around it, and parents have no choice but to drive to school each and every day, while navigating awful conditions in the process. Parents and staff have been pleading for improvements for two decades. They have gathered petitions, met councillors, written letters and still, after 20 years, no permanent safety measures have been put in place. I presented a petition to the House in September with over 300 signatures, to highlight the road safety issues outside Bucklesham primary school. These stories and the many others I have heard since being elected are exactly why I have been campaigning relentlessly to improve road safety around our schools. I have taken that campaign to No. 10 Downing Street, and today I bring it formally to Parliament through this ten-minute rule Bill. The purpose of this Bill is simple: to make it a requirement, not an option, for local authorities to take proactive steps to improve safety around schools where there is evidence of potential risk. This Bill would place a duty on councils to work directly with schools and communities to assess road conditions, listen to local concerns and identify practical solutions. Those measures will of course differ from place to place, because a rural lane in Suffolk looks very different from an urban street in Manchester, but the principle must remain the same that every child, no matter where they live in this country, deserves to travel safely to school. As my Bill sets out, a package of local solutions might include more double yellow lines and enforced parking restrictions; improved signage and road markings; dedicated school crossings; more lollipop men and women; and reduced-speed zones during drop-off and pick-up hours. In short, schools should not have to campaign for safer roads, and neither should their pleas fall on deaf ears. They should be able to expect safer roads. Our children should be able to travel to and from school each day without fearing the roads outside their schools. Suffolk has one of the poorest road safety records of any rural county in England. Over the past 20 years, across Suffolk there have been 597 fatalities and 7,000 people have been seriously injured—7,500 lives lost or changed forever. In Suffolk Coastal alone, more than 1,000 people have been either killed or seriously injured on our roads. Tragically, 17 of them were children. These are our children on our roads, and this is our responsibility. The evidence shows that we can prevent many of these tragedies. The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology has found strong evidence that 20 mph speed limits and zones reduce casualties and fatalities. After Wales introduced a default 20 mph national speed limit on restricted roads, casualties fell by 24% between April and June last year compared with the same period the year before. Parents know this instinctively. Surveys show that 36% of parents feel that roads are too busy for their children to walk to school, and 43% say traffic is too fast even when there is a 20 mph limit. According to Brake, the road safety charity that I have worked with on my campaign and on this Bill, 78% of parents want a 20 mph limit near homes and schools and 85% want the Government to do more to make local roads safer. Yet the frameworks guiding local road safety decisions mean that too many councils are able to ignore local concerns, even when tragedy strikes. My Bill would end that absurdity and end the crisis at our school gates. It would also make transparency a duty: councils would be required to publish annual statements outlining what safety reviews have been conducted, what measures have been implemented and how they are working with schools and our communities to improve standards. The Government are due to publish a new road safety strategy early next year, the first in a decade. I welcome that, and many of the families and schools I speak to welcome it too, but that strategy must put road safety around our schools at the very top of the list. This Bill would make that possible by setting clear expectations for local authorities and giving schools a voice in shaping the solutions they need. The answer is painfully simple: we know what makes our roads safer—the measures are well understood and so often inexpensive—but we lack urgency and accountability. We should not accept that parents and schools have been campaigning for 20 years to make drop-off and pick-up safer, yet still have their school hugging a 60 mph road. We should not accept that a child is hit by a van and the road is assessed, yet it still fails to meet self-determined thresholds for intervention. We should never forget that it is in our gift to reduce the leading cause of death among children in this country, simply by improving road safety around our schools. This is not about politics. I am sure that every Member of this House has stood at a school gate and seen cars speeding too fast and too close, and I am sure every Member has heard the same plea from parents. Roman told me that all he wants is a pedestrian crossing at his school gate. This Bill would seek to give Roman that and to give every school the power to bring forward safety enhancements for their own school. This is a modest Bill, but it is practical, and most importantly it would save lives and help to tackle the biggest cause of death among children. With this Bill, we have the chance to make sure that campaigning is no longer necessary, because safety should be guaranteed by design, duty and law. Question put and agreed to. Ordered , That Jenny Riddell-Carpenter, Sarah Coombes, Terry Jermy, Ben Goldsborough, Sarah Dyke, Maya Ellis, Amanda Hack, Mr Richard Quigley, Samantha Niblett, Alison Hume, Steve Witherden and Jodie Gosling present the Bill. Jenny Riddell-Carpenter accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 28 November , and to be printed (Bill 327).

• 5 Nov 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  In the past 15 years, there have been 170 cases of matricide. In 2022, more women were killed by their sons than by strangers. Child-to-parent abuse is often linked to complex mental health issues, and earlier this year I met Laura and Ian who are doing all they can to support their son in his rehabilitation after serving time in prison. They are living in constant fear of physical harm from their son, who they love and adore. Will the Deputy Prime Minister support my request to meet the relevant Minister to discuss the effects of child-to-parent abuse?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  On 18 October, the post office in Leiston shut its counter for the final time. Will the Leader of the House do two things: will he join me in urging the Post Office to urgently secure alternative premises, and will he support me in my request to have a meeting with the relevant Minister to discuss this vital issue?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Tourism: Major Energy Infrastructure Projects · Hansard source

  More

  Suffolk Coastal is proud to be the tourism capital of Suffolk, but we also wear the badge of hosting possibly the highest number of nationally significant infrastructure projects within a small, 10-mile radius. Suffolk Coastal is home to Aldeburgh, Southwold, Woodbridge and Saxmundham, and every day I speak to businesses and constituents about the impact of the lack of co-ordination of these NSIPs in a very small geography. Investing in energy infrastructure and tourism do not need to be in conflict. Is the Minister having conversations with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero about how we can better co-ordinate? If she is not, will she?