Johanna Baxter MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 9 Jun 2026 · Water Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms McVey. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) on securing this important and timely debate on water safety. I also pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) for the work he has done. I also extend my condolences, on behalf of the people of Paisley and Renfrewshire South, to the families and friends of those who tragically lost their lives in water during the recent heatwave across the United Kingdom. Our thoughts are with them at this unimaginably difficult time. Every other minute, someone in the world drowns—those lives wasted, those deaths preventable. Our country is a nation defined by its relationship with water. We are an island nation whose history, prosperity and identity have been shaped by our seas, rivers and lochs. Our proud maritime heritage connected us to the world. Our waterways powered the textile industries, which transformed Paisley in my constituency, and our lochs and coastlines provide places of outstanding natural beauty. In my constituency, the stunning surroundings of the Lochwinnoch wetlands attract visitors and local residents alike. However, our connection to water must be accompanied by a respect for its dangers. Far too often, calm waters conceal serious risks. Cold water shock, strong currents and rapidly changing conditions can turn a day of enjoyment into tragedy in moments. Organisations such as the RNLI perform an invaluable service. I recently visited its headquarters and national training centre in Poole as part of the parliamentary knowledge scheme for frontline services. I was blown away by the breadth and depth of its work, and by the dangerous conditions in which it operates, often while coming to the help of our national Border Force. Its 7,900 lifeboat crew and shore crew volunteers, 451 lifeboats and hovercraft, most of which it designs itself, and 238 lifeboat stations create a ring of safety around the UK’s coasts. It operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, ready to answer the call to rescue and save lives. In 2024 alone, its work meant that 2,199 lives were saved, and 17,068 people were aided by RNLI lifeguards. I place on the record my sincere thanks to the thousands of volunteers who give their time and dedication to protecting others. We cannot simply rely on charities and volunteers to shoulder this responsibility alone. Dedicated as they are, they cannot be present at every riverbank, loch side and stretch of coastline, so prevention must be at the heart of our approach. That means embedding water safety into our national culture in the same way as we have embedded fire safety and road safety awareness. Young people should learn it from an early age, but true education requires local authorities and public bodies to actively support the practical, hands-on training needed to stay safe. Regrettably, too often we see obstacles in the way of this culture. In my own constituency, a local kayaking club, West Coast Paddlers, has repeatedly sought permission from a local arm’s length external organisation, OneRen, to use a local leisure centre pool to practise kayak rolls in a safe, controlled environment. Despite this training being commonplace and vital to prepare people for real-world conditions, its requests have been repeatedly denied over risk-averse concerns about minor damage that may be caused to the pool. If we are serious about embedding a culture of safety, we should be encouraging people to undertake training in a supervised environment before they enter open water. The cost of allowing access to a local pool is negligible compared with the tragic cost of inadequate preparation. I hope my hon. Friend the Minister will work with local authorities and the Scottish Government on the resources needed for a true UK-wide education programme and a national awareness campaign, so that we can all play our part in helping to save more lives.

• 8 Jun 2026 · Digital Safety: Children · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his response to the urgent question. I am very grateful that the Government are taking action on this vital issue, but we all know that the pace of change in technology is terrifying. Will he set out how the discussions with technology companies and online safety experts have focused on ensuring that device-level controls are not only effective and easy for families to use, but adaptable to emerging online risks?

• 2 Jun 2026 · Milburn Review: Interim Report · Hansard source

  More

  Too often, young people are written off as lacking ambition, when the reality is that they are lacking the opportunities for good work. More than 40% of young people not in education, employment or training have said that finding fulfilling work is their top priority. Despite that, in my area under the Scottish National party-run Renfrewshire council and the SNP-run Holyrood Government, employability services are being cut by 30%, failing too many of our young people. Can my hon. Friend set out what steps the Government are taking to work with the Scottish Government to protect vital employability services and ensure apprenticeship opportunities for young people in my area?

• 2 Jun 2026 · Armed Forces Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I begin by offering my deepest thoughts and prayers to the family, friends and colleagues of the British soldier who tragically died in Iraq on Sunday. The world we live in today is more perilous, volatile and unpredictable than at any point in our living memory. We saw that last night, when Russia fired more than 650 drones and 73 missiles into Ukraine, killing 13 people and injuring more than 100, including a little girl aged only 11. In this fragmented world, a strong, modern, highly capable military is not a luxury; if we are to secure Britain’s future, it is a necessity. National security must always come above all else. That is why I strongly welcome the decisive steps that this Labour Government continue to take to rebuild our defence after it was hollowed out by the Conservative party, and why I support the Bill and the Government amendments tabled to it. Week after week, this Labour Government are getting on with the job of investing in our defence. Just yesterday, the Government announced a vital new munitions deal, supporting 700 jobs in Belfast. Last week, the Government signed a joint missile programme with Poland and a new Swedish fighter jet deal to strengthen Ukraine and boost British jobs. We do those things not simply because those are security agreements and deals, but because it is the moral duty of this Government. Doing so also creates highly skilled jobs right across the United Kingdom, including for the people of my Paisley and Renfrewshire South constituency. The substance of the Bill begins the urgent work of undoing years of systemic damage. I will focus my comments on two areas where the legislation delivers the deepest, most vital changes: defence housing and justice for victims of abuse. First, I warmly welcome the armed forces covenant, for which the Royal British Legion has been calling for more than a decade, and which is finally being delivered in full by this Labour Government. In the words of the Royal British Legion, our armed forces covenant “will ensure the needs of the Armed Forces community are considered when making decisions”. It goes on to say that it welcomes our decision to fully implement the covenant in law. This matters immensely, because it delivers directly on our manifesto commitments to our armed services. The brave men and women who dedicate their lives to defending our country deserve far more than our gratitude. They deserve the peace of mind that while they are serving our country around the world, their families are safe in secure, high-quality homes. Instead, we inherited a shocking legacy. Between April 2022 and December 2023, service family accommodation fell into disrepair: more than 20,000 heating failures were reported in military homes, nearly 7,000 properties completely lost hot water and more than 1,100 families were forced out of their homes entirely due to severe maintenance issues. Is it any wonder, then, that the previous Government missed their military recruitment targets every single year that they were in office? If we cannot guarantee a soldier that their child will not grow up in a house without a working heating system, how can we expect them to stay in the ranks? That is why I welcome this Government’s commitment to a £9 billion investment in defence housing, the measures set out in the Bill to establish the Defence Housing Service, and the generational renewal of military housing, which will see nine in 10 military homes modernised or upgraded. The Royal British Legion has rightly welcomed the Defence Housing Service, calling it crucial to ensuring that armed forces personnel and their families are provided with the high-quality housing they deserve. The strategy will directly benefit our forces, including those living in the 43 service accommodation homes in my constituency. That is no less than our personnel and their families deserve. Secondly, I strongly welcome the Bill’s protections for victims of sexual harm and domestic abuse. Every single victim of sexual harm deserves justice, yet for too long, the experiences of too many victims have been ignored. The Bill will change that. By introducing a strict legal duty on commanding officers to report serious offences to civilian authorities and the service police, we are ensuring that there can be no scope for anyone to look the other way. We are ensuring that, when those heinous crimes have been committed, nobody can say, “I didn’t know.” The Bill will give the service police increased powers for their investigations and the service courts more powers to deal with perpetrators and improve the experience of victims. We are bringing our system into line with the civilian sector by introducing service domestic abuse protection orders and service stalking protection orders, and by strengthening sexual harm prevention orders and sexual risk orders. By doing that, we are ensuring that we protect victims and target predatory behaviour head-on, and ensuring that survivors get the unwavering support and justice that they deserve. The Bill proves that this Labour Government are cleaning up the legacy of neglect left by the Conservatives. We are getting on with the task of building a military fit for the future, and with restoring absolute dignity to our armed forces, and I commend the Bill to the Committee.

• 1 Jun 2026 · Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response · Hansard source

  More

  It is very clear that Peter Mandelson should never have been appointed as our ambassador, and I know that we will all have Epstein’s victims in mind today. It is right that the Prime Minister has called for the removal of peerages from disgraced peers. In view of the comments from the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart), can the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister confirm that the removal of peerages Bill, which appeared in the King’s Speech, will actually have teeth, and will enable us to radically reform the upper Chamber?

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  May I thank my hon. Friend for recognising and supporting hauliers and logistics companies, such as the Malcolm Group, the UK’s leading independent provider of third-party logistics services, which is based in my constituency and supports many hundreds of jobs across Paisley and Renfrewshire South? Those companies play such an important role in keeping our shelves stocked and our economies running. I echo the calls made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bathgate and Linlithgow (Kirsteen Sullivan) for us to go further in supporting greater welfare facilities for drivers. Will the Chief Secretary to the Treasury make some comment on the safety of logistics staff who, too often, man vehicles that are targeted by criminals?

• 21 May 2026 · Middle East: Economic Response · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest, as someone who worked for Unison immediately before coming to this place; its contribution to my campaign is included in my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I worked as a trade union official for more than 20 years, representing public sector workers. One issue that came up in pay negotiations year after year was mileage rates, particularly for frontline social care workers. As the cost of living and fuel prices rose, frozen mileage rates effectively imposed a stealth cut on workers who were already delivering vital public services. On behalf of those workers and the thousands of frontline workers across Scotland, may I warmly welcome the Chancellor’s decision and announcement today? Will she confirm that she has spoken with her counterparts in the new Scottish Government to ensure that the levers of power over which they have control are similarly focused on cutting the cost of living for my constituents?

• 13 May 2026 · Debate on the Address · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

• 28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source

  More

  Before I start, let me pay tribute to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein, because their views have been heard far too little in these debates. Let me address some of the quite patronising comments made to Back-Bench Labour MPs today. Nobody has asked me to speak today, and nobody has put any pressure on me. In fact, colleagues on the Government Benches know that I have my own mind and will express it as I see fit. At a moment of genuine challenge for families across the country, when households are concerned about rising prices, instability abroad and pressure on living standards, the Opposition have tabled a motion that is ultimately more concerned with political point scoring than practical solutions. That is deeply regrettable, because the British public expect and deserve better than Westminster at its most performative. They expect seriousness, and they rightly expect scrutiny where scrutiny is due, but they also expect Parliament to focus on the issues that shape their daily lives: the bills landing on their doormats, the cost of food in the supermarkets, the price of fuel at the pumps and the strength of the economy in uncertain times. Let me be absolutely clear: Peter Mandelson should never have been appointed as our ambassador. The Prime Minister has recognised that, and he has apologised for that. He did so properly, repeatedly, with transparency and accountability, and with respect to the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. That was the right course of action, and I would not have expected anything less from the Prime Minister, because I have known him for many years. I worked with him as he sought to rid our party of the stain of antisemitism, which has now infected others. I have seen him stand up to Putin when others have taken bribes from his allies. Given that the processes of transparency are in place and under way, it has to be asked: why are the Opposition parties working to ride roughshod over investigation processes that they all agreed to? We heard the answer earlier in the debate: it is for social media clicks and cheap headlines ahead of significant elections. The fact is that the Government have agreed to and are complying with the Humble Address to allow scrutiny of the Mandelson appointment in this place and to allow us to see the facts and the advice that was available to the Prime Minister at the time Mandelson was appointed. My right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) is chairing a Foreign Affairs Committee inquiry to which key figures involved in the Mandelson appointment have rightly been summoned, and the Prime Minister has come to this House repeatedly to answer questions about that appointment. As has been expressed by others, politically motivated use of the Privileges Committee procedures risks undermining those procedures. It is clear that the circumstances the Opposition hoped would come to light and might bring down a successful Labour Government have been nothing more than conspiracy. First, they said that the Prime Minister must have known that UK Security Vetting’s recommendation was to reject vetting for Peter Mandelson, yet Olly Robbins confirmed to the Select Committee last week that he had chosen not to share that crucial information with the Prime Minister. They were wrong. They said that the Prime Minister was wrong to say that due process was followed, yet Chris Wormald has confirmed in a letter to the Prime Minister that the process was followed. In his own words, he said: “The evidence I have reviewed leads me to conclude that appropriate processes were followed in both the appointment and withdrawal” of the former ambassador to Washington. Again, they were wrong. How could the Prime Minister have made any other assessment than that due process was followed, when that was spelled out to him in black and white by his own officials? Those are not rumours or talking points; they are facts, and facts matter in this place. Many good colleagues on the Government Benches and, indeed, some on the Opposition Benches know deep down that the No. 1 issue facing our constituents is the cost of living fallout from Trump’s war in Iran—a war that was egged on by parties on the Opposition Benches. We know that, because that is what voters have been telling every one of us when we have been out on the doors in the lead-up to the elections in May. They are worried about their bills, the prices at the pump and the prices in the supermarkets. While some in this House want to engage in political stunts, this very afternoon the Prime Minister is convening a committee on the response to the conflict in the middle east and on how we support the British economy, our services and, most importantly, our constituents. What is clear is that only one party is focused on the job of delivering for the British people, and it is the one that the country voted for in the last election. It is galling that the Conservative party, after 14 years of chaos, scandal and economic recklessness, now wants to lecture anyone else on standards in public life. It is the party that gave us partygate, revolving-door Prime Ministers, cronyism, collapsing public services and Liz Truss’s catastrophic experiment that sent mortgages soaring and punished working families for the Conservatives’ failures. Meanwhile, the Conservatives collude with the SNP—

• 28 Apr 2026 · Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Those are the issues we could have been debating today, but instead we are debating a political stunt. This Government are standing up for the British people, showing leadership in our support for Ukraine, bringing our national rail services back into public ownership and delivering our historic Employment Rights Act 2025, among many other things. When I vote this afternoon, I do so knowing full well that I was elected to serve on the priorities that matter to the people of Paisley and Renfrewshire South: their bills, their security and their welfare. I will vote to ensure that we have a Government who continue to focus on those priorities.

• 27 Apr 2026 · Animal Testing · Hansard source

  More

  Mo Meowlam!

• 27 Apr 2026 · Animal Testing · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my constituency neighbour and hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) on opening this important and timely debate. I declare an interest as the chair of the APPG on cats—I was interested in the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover)’s comments about conversations with them, which many will relate to. Fundamentally, we are a nation of animal lovers. More than 60% of UK households own a pet—or, in the case of cats, are owned by them. For millions of families across the country, our pets or other companion animals are not simply animals, but beloved members of our family. We care deeply about their welfare, and rightly so. That is why I welcome the Government’s commitment to act on the recommendations of the Competition and Markets Authority on veterinary services, which will help to reduce the costs of pet care at a time when many households are still feeling the strain of rising costs. Cost should never be a barrier to getting our beloved animals treated when they are sick. While we rightly focus on easing pressures on pet owners—something that is as much a welfare as a cost of living issue—we must also confront the wider question of how animals are treated in our society, particularly those hidden from public view in laboratories and testing facilities. At its heart, animal testing is a moral issue and an animal welfare issue, but it is also increasingly clear that it is a scientific and economic issue. I welcome the Government’s “Replacing animals in science” strategy, which delivers on our manifesto commitment. That strategy is backed by £75 million of funding to accelerate safe and effective alternative methods, including £30 million for the UK Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods. The strategy includes a target that aims “to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of dogs and non-human primates in dedicated pharmacokinetic studies for human medicines by at least 35% by 2030” and “to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of non human primates and dogs in dedicated cardiovascular safety studies by at least 50% by 2030.” The continued use of animals in experiments is not only inhumane, but often ineffective, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran eloquently outlined earlier. For example, dogs continue to be used in scientific testing despite clear biological differences between them and humans: they absorb drugs differently, their gastric pH levels differ from ours, their metabolic enzymes function differently and they have different cardiovascular systems, with higher heart rates and distinct electrical activity regulating their heartbeat. Those are not minor differences; they are fundamental biological distinctions that can make dogs poor predictors for how treatments will behave in humans. The consequences are plain to see. Developing a new medicine takes, on average, 14 years and costs more than £1 billion, yet more than 95% of drugs fail before reaching patients. That is not simply an inefficient system—it is evidence that elements of our drug development model are no longer fit for purpose. The continued reliance on animal testing is part of that problem. Behind the statistics is the ethical reality. Animals used in experiments are subject to invasive procedures, prolonged confinement and real distress, and are often left with lasting physical and physiological harm. The British public are fully aware of the scale of that harm, which is why they are demanding change. Indeed, more than seven in 10 Brits support a ban on animal testing, according to a YouGov poll from last year. “Change” is the slogan this Government were elected on, and change on this issue is eminently possible. Around the world, momentum is building towards modern alternatives—human-relevant technologies, advanced cell modelling and AI-driven methods—that are often more accurate, efficient and humane than animal experimentation. I urge the Government to move forward with Herbie’s law and to set a clear national pathway to phase out animal experiments over the next decade, working closely with scientists, researchers and industry to accelerate the transition to modern alternatives. This is not a choice between compassion and progress—we can achieve both. We can lead the world in pioneering better science; we can reduce unnecessary suffering; and we can build a future in which medical innovation is not dependent on outdated, inhumane practices. That would be a victory for science, for patients and, above all, for animals and their welfare.

• 23 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  A happy St George’s day to you, Mr Speaker. Global turbulence has driven up the cost of living for my constituents. Can the Minister set out how closening trading ties with our closest allies through the EU reset will help bring down prices for my constituents?

• 23 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Friday 8 May is a significant day: the country will celebrate the 100th birthday of our national treasure, Sir David Attenborough. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] He is an icon of broadcasting, a steadfast champion of the natural world, and an educator who has brought science and all corners of our world into the homes of millions of people. His contribution to our national life is without equal. He remains the only individual to have received BAFTA awards across black and white, colour, high definition, 3D and 4K broadcasting, and one of the very few people to have been knighted twice. On the off-chance that these are the last business questions before Sir David’s birthday, will the Leader of the House join me in wishing him a very happy birthday, and will he support a debate in Government time on the immense contribution that Sir David has made to our nation and on the merits of establishing a permanent public monument to honour it?

• 21 Apr 2026 · Russian Federation: Financial Pressure · Hansard source

  More

  The verified number of Ukrainian children stolen by Russia has increased—it now stands at 20,570. In part, that increase in the verified number is the result of the tracing mechanism supported by this Government, and we hope that work will continue. However, last month a report by the Yale Humanitarian Research Laboratory found that over the past two years the Russian state oil producers Rosneft and Gazprom have been implicated in the forcible deportation and re-education of at least 2,158 of those children. Will the Secretary of State review and fully investigate those findings and, where appropriate, consider the imposition of further sanctions?

• 20 Apr 2026 · Security Vetting · Hansard source

  More

  As we have heard, it is staggering that vital information on UKSV recommendations can be withheld from Ministers taking decisions. Can the Prime Minister assure the House that in the review he is commissioning, we examine whether there are any other instances in which UKSV recommends against granting DV status, during not just this Government but over the last 14 years? That has the potential to have very serious security implications.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Hatzola Ambulance Attack · Hansard source

  More

  This was an appalling antisemitic incident, targeting those providing urgent medical care. It was not just a criminal act but a direct attack on our shared values of respect and tolerance. Emergency service workers should never have to fear for their safety. Will the Minister outline what immediate steps are being taken to reassure the Jewish community across the whole United Kingdom?

• 19 Mar 2026 · International Development · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement and particularly welcome the increase in funding for the BBC World Service, which is so crucial in delivering accurate and trusted journalism in this age of misinformation and disinformation. I also welcome the prioritisation of countries affected by war and crisis, particularly Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine. Will she confirm that the support for Ukraine will cover the tracing, rescue, return and rehabilitation of the 19,951 Ukrainian children who have been forcibly deported by Russia?

• 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, like many others, I watched in horror as the Union Corner building in Glasgow succumbed to a devastating fire, having stood as an iconic landmark of Glasgow for over 175 years. Thanks are due to firefighters such as crew commander John Banach, from Johnstone in my constituency, who worked tirelessly to contain the blaze, safeguarding lives and preventing further catastrophic damage to Glasgow Central station and the many historic buildings around it. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to John and the crews at the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service for their remarkable and valiant efforts to contain this terrible incident?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Response to Humble Address · Hansard source

  More

  The Prime Minister rightly called for the removal of peerages from disgraced peers, so could the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister tell the House when we might expect further updates on the proposed legislation?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. Last week, the United Nations independent international commission of inquiry on Ukraine concluded that Russia has been committing crimes against humanity in the forcible deportation of Ukrainian children. Last night, the film “Mr Nobody Against Putin” won best documentary feature at the Oscars for exposing how Russia seeks to turn Ukrainian children into Russian soldiers. Will my right hon. Friend outline what further work he is undertaking with colleagues in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office to ensure that children are not used as weapons of war?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Digital ID: Public Consultation · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement and the clarification that participation in the scheme will not be compulsory to access public services. Will he say a little more about how he will persuade people that this tool will make their everyday lives easier? Will he also say what discussions he has had with the devolved Administrations to ensure the same opportunities apply across the UK, and explain how my constituents in Paisley and Renfrewshire South will participate in the people’s panel?

• 9 Mar 2026 · Unemployment: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  Last year, the SNP Government in Holyrood funded nearly 9,000 fewer apprenticeships than colleges and industry asked for, robbing thousands of Scots of opportunities and starving businesses of skilled workers. Meanwhile, youth unemployment in Scotland is rising; more than one in eight young people in Scotland are unemployed. Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the solutions to that problem is electing a new Government in Holyrood in May, under Anas Sarwar of the Labour party?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Spring Forecast · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement, and her commitment to growth in all parts of the United Kingdom. Could she set out in a little more detail what Barnett consequentials arise from her statement? Does she agree that it is increasingly important that, in May, we elect a Government who will spend that money wisely, which means electing a Labour Government in Holyrood, led by Anas Sarwar?

• 12 Feb 2026 · Lord Mandelson: Government Response to Humble Address Motion · Hansard source

  More

  Too often when women in particular raise concerns or sound the alarm about concerning behaviour, their concerns are dismissed or go unheard. Can the Minister set out what further actions this Government will take to ensure that victims and survivors of sexual abuse are heard by those in power?