Josh Newbury MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Jun 2025 · British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I am proud to have supported the BCSSS campaign since long before I became an MP, and I have continued to support it. I pay tribute to the campaigners in my constituency, including ex-miner Tony Jones, who gave me a badge that I wear with pride. I am grateful to the Minister for her engagement with BCSSS trustees and us as coalfield MPs. However, many of my constituents are often elderly, in poor health and desperate for a resolution. Given that the investment reserve is already held within the scheme and its return would not require any new public spending, will the Minister continue to work hard to ensure that these deferred pensions are rightly returned as quickly as possible to their rightful owners?

• 9 Jun 2025 · Non-stun Slaughter of Animals · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I welcome the opportunity to debate this subject, so I, too, thank the petition author, Mr Osborne, and the signatories for enabling us to do that. I declare that I am personally against non-stun slaughter. I am not religious, and I would never knowingly buy products from animals that had not been stunned before slaughter. Some 301 of my constituents signed this petition to ban the non-stun slaughter of animals. That is the second highest number of signatories from any constituency across the UK, so it is clear that people in Cannock Chase feel very strongly about this topic. I appreciate that many of my constituents will have signed the petition to voice their concerns about animal welfare—a topic that I am always keen to discuss. I hope that across the House, we can balance that valid question with respect for those for whom non-stun slaughter is part of religious observance. I affirm that animal welfare is, and must remain, a core concern in the UK. We are rightly proud of our high standards, and it is incumbent on all of us to ensure that our animals are treated with dignity and suffer as little as possible in life and death. Just last week, I was in this room for a debate on animal welfare in farming, discussing low-welfare farming practices, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed), who is no longer in his place. I am glad to be in another debate with the Minister so soon. Although the religious aspect of slaughter methods might make headlines, I have brought my passion for animal welfare to this House long before today, and I will continue to do so long after this debate is over. As representatives of the British people, parliamentarians must recognise that both the Jewish and Muslim faiths have deeply rooted religious practices around slaughter—kosher and halal—which are grounded in principles of respect, discipline and faithfulness to scripture. In preparation for the debate, I spoke at length with a friend of mine who is a practising Muslim. He told me that in the Koran, cruelty towards animals is considered to be a sin. There are also several rules around Islamic slaughter, as other hon. Members have said. Animals must be well treated before being killed and they must not see other animals being killed. The knife must not be sharpened in the animal’s presence, and the blade must be free of blemishes so that it will not tear the wound. The demonstration of life protocol is an industry-led initiative that provides assurance to Muslim communities that stunning is compatible with halal slaughter requirements while protecting the welfare of the animals involved. Because of that, already a significant proportion of halal meat comes from animals that were stunned before slaughter, as has been said. Last year, that was 88% of halal meat. There is widespread agreement in the Muslim community in Britain that stunning is compatible with halal slaughter principles as set out in the Koran. As has been pointed out, stunning is deemed incompatible with Jewish requirements, so exemptions for non-stun slaughter are particularly used for the production of kosher meat. This debate is an opportunity for us to reflect on whether, as raised by the Chair of the Petitions Committee, the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), the law should evolve once again. The British Veterinary Association shared a briefing note with Members about changing labelling requirements so that meat from animals that have not been stunned prior to death is clearly labelled, so that consumers can make informed choices. As the Minister knows, I am keenly interested in improving labelling for consumers, particularly welfare labelling, which would give a far broader perspective on welfare than simply “stun” or “non-stun”. I appreciate that we could end up crowding food packets with way too much information, but as part of the Department’s ongoing review of food labelling, I ask the Minister to consider the BVA’s proposals; perhaps he could comment on that. The BVA also shared ideas on introducing a non-stun permit system to ensure that the number of animals slaughtered without prior stunning does not exceed demand. I imagine that others across the House will focus on those suggestions, so in the interests of timekeeping I will not dive any further into them, but I want to place them on the record as I feel that they are important for us to consider. Through the National Farmers Union food and farming fellowship scheme, I recently had the opportunity to visit a beef farm owned by ABP Food Group in my home county of Staffordshire. We met abattoir managers who talked to us about how the industry is continuing to innovate and push for higher welfare standards during slaughter. For example, they are introducing new forms of lighting, which mimic the way that light falls in barns, to ensure that animals are as relaxed as possible. Although there are lingering examples of outdated and bad practices, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton South and Walkden (Yasmin Qureshi) rightly highlighted, I hope that innovations in modern abattoirs will ensure that they are consigned to history. We also discussed non-stun slaughter at Bromstead farm. Contrary to what people might think, there are ways to minimise the suffering of animals being slaughtered without prior stunning. Many of the stunning methods that have been described in this debate are instantaneous, so I do not believe that it is correct to say that they always cause excruciating pain to animals. Scientific evidence continues to develop, and discussions in faith communities about how animal welfare can be improved are growing. Examples of improvements include shortening transport times or increasing transparency in abattoirs. That brings me to the importance of the role of small and local abattoirs. They must be part of this conversation. Small abattoirs offer something that larger industrial systems often cannot: shorter journey times for animals, more human handling and the possibility for community oversight. The long-term plight of abattoirs is not spoken about in this House frequently. In the 1970s, around 2,500 abattoirs were operating in the UK, but today that number has fallen to just 200. That collapse in capacity has left many farmers with no choice but to send their animals long distances for slaughter, which increases the animals’ stress and undermines efforts to maintain short, local supply chains from farm to fork. I know that is a concern for some religious communities. The Food Standards Agency has been consulting on increasing fees and removing a discount scheme on the inspections. Concern has grown in the industry about the future of the current discount, which represents up to 90% of charges for some abattoirs, according to the Association of Independent Meat Suppliers, which states that 45% of small and medium-sized abattoirs could close without this discount. Our commitment to farming and our record £5 billion investment into the agricultural sector needs to support small local abattoirs. They are essential not just for animal welfare but for rural economies, food security and diversity in our food system. If we are serious about welfare and about balancing our values and standards with religious traditions, we should support a system that allows more ethical, more local and more transparent slaughter. That includes investing in small abattoirs, supporting training for specialist staff, and encouraging respectful dialogue between religious and non-religious groups, vets, farmers and regulators. Our task is to hold all those principles together with seriousness and sensitivity.

• 5 Jun 2025 · Free School Meals · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the announcement, which will help more than 4,000 working-class children in my community. The Minister rightly emphasised that the expansion of free school meals is both pro-learning and anti-poverty, and we know that the appalling cost of living crisis, which the previous Government left behind, means that so many children are coming into school hungry and not in the best position to learn. Will he set out what else the Government are doing to tackle the poverty that is holding back so many children?

• 5 Jun 2025 · Police Presence on High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Erdington (Paulette Hamilton) for securing this important debate. I remember campaigning alongside her in her by-election, and this issue being raised by constituents, who, in her, are now fortunate to have such a steadfast advocate. Over the past decade, too many of our town centres and high streets have been gripped by antisocial behaviour, theft and shoplifting. It was often dismissed by the previous Government as merely low-level crime, but there is nothing low-level about the impact these crimes have on the communities left to deal with the consequences, often alone. My constituency of Cannock Chase is home to people who care deeply about their community, but too many of them now tell me they feel unsafe on our high streets. When people no longer feel safe where they live, work or shop, we risk losing more than just footfall: we risk losing our sense of identity altogether. People are not asking for the world; they are asking for the basics: to feel safe walking home, to be secure at work, and to let their children go out with their friends without fear. A recurring issue is shoplifting, especially in Cannock town centre. In the two years prior to the general election, shoplifting rose by more than 60%, leaving retail workers feeling frightened and unprotected. Cannock’s shoplifting rate currently stands at nearly three times the national average. Shopkeepers and store managers have told my team that they feel intimidated when large groups of young people gather and go into shops all at once. Some talked about how helpless they felt in the face of shoplifting, which has got to the point where it is actually endangering the future of their business. The British Retail Consortium’s 2023-24 annual crime survey laid bare the scale of the crisis. Retail workers endured 124 incidents of violence or abuse every single day, yet only 32% of those incidents were reported, and only 10% led to police attendance. That is simply unacceptable. I welcome the measures in the new Crime and Policing Bill, including the long overdue creation of a stand-alone offence of assaulting a retail worker. I particularly pay tribute to USDAW and the Co-operative party, of which I am a member, for their long years of unwavering campaigning for this vital change to the law. In Hednesford, two young men recently stopped me to raise their concerns about gangs loitering in town centres and parks. They told me how intimidating it felt to walk past all of these groups. Between September 2023 and 2024, there were 587 recorded incidents of antisocial behaviour across my constituency. These are not just statistics—they are the lived experiences of people who have been driven away from our high streets. We will never be able to rebuild our communities when people feel that way. Recognising the scale of the problem, a new public spaces protection order has come into force, and I commend the Government for taking steps through the Crime and Policing Bill, including targeted provisions to restore safety and confidence in our communities. But let me be clear: these are more than just headlines. In February, a group of teenagers were robbed in Cannock town centre. One of them—a 15-year-old boy—had his phone, watch, bank card and coat taken. Three of his friends also had their phones stolen. No young person should have to go through that. Earlier this year, I had the pleasure of welcoming pupils from Kingsmead school into Parliament. They did not just bring enthusiasm—sadly, they also brought concerns. Many of them shared their worries about a rise in phone thefts by people riding e-scooters. This is not unique to Cannock; it is happening in town centres across the country. Elderly residents have told me how frightening it is to be approached by fast-moving, illegally ridden scooters, especially when they cannot move out of the way in time. Crimes like this may seem minor on paper, but their cumulative effect is devastating. They create an atmosphere where people feel unsafe, uncared for and overlooked. Cuts to neighbourhood policing have taken a heavy toll. Trust in the police has plummeted. We hear time and again that when something goes wrong, people feel that nobody will come. I welcome the steps the Government are taking, and I will continue pushing for safer high streets for my constituents, because they have the right to feel secure where they live, work and shop. Our message is clear: we need visible policing and real opportunity for young people, to draw them into jobs, not gangs. This is not just about being tough on crime; it is about being strong on community, on prevention and on justice.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Animal Welfare in Farming · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for Waveney Valley (Adrian Ramsay) for enabling us to speak on this important topic. I will start by sharing how valuable it was to spend a day of last week’s recess at Staffordshire’s county show. As always, I came away full of admiration for our farming community. I am a little biased, but Staffordshire is a shining example of some of the best of British farming, and everybody at the show seemed to agree. That is not just in terms of productivity and innovation but in the deep care many of our farmers have for animal welfare. That brings me to the complex and often uncomfortable balance we are trying to strike in this debate between raising animal welfare standards and the environmental, financial and logistical realities of making that happen. When we talk about moving away from practices such as caged systems—a move that, for the record, I absolutely support—we are also talking about the need for more barn space, more land use and more infrastructure, all of which mean higher running costs for farmers and sometimes greater greenhouse gas emissions. To be clear, those are not reasons for rejecting higher animal welfare standards, but they are reasons to approach the issue with farmers in mind. That must be our starting point, because farmers are not charities and, more than ever, they have to look at the bottom line, which all too often is dwindling. Let us be frank: supermarkets will always demand higher welfare, but they are not always willing to pay more for it. That is disingenuous to consumers and squeezes producers even further, pitting welfare against farm viability. An area where we could make a real difference is animal welfare labelling, which is being looked at by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, of which I am a member; I am glad that the Committee’s Chair is present. For the average shopper, labelling is a minefield. Information on nutrition and the country of origin has been simplified in the past decade, but in the animal welfare space we have statutory minimum standards and the “Red Tractor”, “RSPCA Assured”, EU organic and Soil Association organic labels, all representing different standards. Consumers need to understand what labelling means in practical terms and how to interpret it when they shop. That will not be easy, but I believe that is a challenge that we can and should take on. However, in doing so, we must make sure producers have a say, alongside consumers and animal welfare organisations, so that they can realise the benefits of clearer labelling too. The lack of coherent and clear information on welfare on the shelf is a concern for farmers who are producing to higher standards because they do not have a clear way of differentiating their products for consumers. They therefore do not reap the rewards from the quality of their goods that should incentivise higher welfare standards. Research indicates that the current systems of farm assurance, regardless of the label, are not working as best as they could for farmers, consumers and, most importantly, animals.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Animal Welfare in Farming · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I think that that is a perfect example of where stronger, more consistent animal welfare labelling would give consumers that kind of information. In other countries, such as Germany, systems take that into account, and consumers should have access to that information. On farm assurance, for example, the campaign group Animal Rising has uncovered failings in “RSPCA Assured” farms and abattoirs. We also have to ensure that fairness for the farming sector is paramount. I raised that in Select Committee sessions and it has been raised today, but it bears repeating: we cannot ask our farmers to invest in higher standards and then leave them exposed to undercutting by imports. We are all in favour of better welfare. In fact, a 2022 poll revealed that 71% of the British public want the Government to pass more laws to improve animal welfare, but we cannot hold our farmers to a gold standard while turning a blind eye to imports that are produced to far lower standards. Trade deals without adequate safeguards will negatively impact the UK’s animal welfare standards for decades to come, undermining our farmers and the hard-won animal welfare improvements that we need to build on. That risks putting more farmers out of business, jeopardising our food security and offshoring animal cruelty. To put it simply, if it is too cruel to produce here, it should be too cruel to import. If it is not good enough for our farms, it is not good enough for our shelves. Ultimately, we need to get the balance right by supporting our farmers to raise standards, making sure that consumers understand what they are buying and ensuring that the whole system—domestic or international—reflects our values as a nation of animal lovers.

• 22 May 2025 · Independent Sentencing Review · Hansard source

  More

  Is the Lord Chancellor as astounded as I am by the hypocrisy of the Conservatives? They really are the arsonists attacking the firefighters. We are having to clean up their mess, because, in the words of the National Audit Office, this crisis is the result of their failure “to ensure that the number of prison places was aligned with criminal justice” priorities.

• 22 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T6. Cannock Chase is home to many fantastic dance schools such as the Crystal Academy in Hednesford, which has been crowned dance school of the year. Dance can empower people from all backgrounds, but a third of schools are not teaching it, despite its being on the national curriculum. A varied, high-quality sports offer should not be only for a privileged few. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that all schools can inspire their students through dance?

• 22 May 2025 · Grassroots Sports: Cannock Chase · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome the Minister’s response. Through the park tennis project, Cannock Chase has benefited from £215,000 of investment from the Government and the LTA Tennis Foundation to revive tennis courts in four of our parks, but the notorious British weather remains a barrier to participation, and many in my towns and villages lack access to covered tennis and padel facilities. With the park tennis project coming to an end, will the Minister consider funding the development of more covered courts to allow my constituents to enjoy tennis, whatever the weather?

• 22 May 2025 · Grassroots Sports: Cannock Chase · Hansard source

  More

  3. What steps her Department is taking to support the provision of grassroots sports facilities in Cannock Chase constituency.

• 20 May 2025 · Adoption and Kinship Placements · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) for enabling us to speak on this subject. I declare an interest as an adoptive parent and foster carer. That experience has shown me the transformative effects that adoption can have and the immense challenges faced by many children who are looked after and care experienced. When we talk about Government support, let us be clear that we are talking about lifelines, not luxuries. Around 3,000 children in England are placed in adoptive families every year, and 80% of them will have suffered from abuse, neglect or violence, so it is no wonder that they often need specialist support to help them and their families to heal, and to live with the scars that will never fully fade. I will not speak at length about the adoption and special guardianship support fund, as many hon. Members are raising it in their speeches, but I will say that to limit its reach is to effectively clip the wings of the young people and families it supports, as well as those of the incredibly skilled and compassionate professionals who work with them. I highlight the fact that the Minister is among that group. She draws on a wealth of experience from her career as a social worker, and I know how deeply she cares about adopters and kinship and foster carers. If she faced no financial constraints, I know that the money would be out of the door tomorrow, to support every family to the fullest. Yesterday, I met Adoption UK, which stressed to me not only the importance of the ASGSF but of the need to ensure that all healthcare and education professionals are aware of the impact of early-childhood trauma and care experience, so that affected children and young people can receive targeted support and advocacy services. In advance of an Adjournment debate led last month by the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), I spoke to the social worker who supports my husband and I with what we hope will be the adoption of our second child. She had lots of thoughts on the subject, and I would like to mention some that I could not raise in that debate. She highlighted the need for improved holistic support in schools, enabled by integrated working among schools and healthcare professionals such as occupational therapists, so that there is continuity of support; closer working between psychologists and adoption teams, because access to support within teams could reduce the need for families to apply to the ASGSF; and higher levels of short-term funding to allow for weekly therapeutic support, which is currently very difficult to obtain through the ASGSF. Although I do not have enough time to say as much as I would like about kinship care, I will say that too few families receive financial or therapeutic support, but they still face the practical and emotional challenges. The route closest to my heart, which my husband and I took, is fostering to adopt, which gives the benefits of early permanence, but without a cast-iron guarantee that the placement will end in adoption. I hope we will have the opportunity to debate that more in the future. My point is that whatever the route into permanence, children’s needs are no different. What is different is the consistency and quality of the support they receive. When we ask families to step up for vulnerable children—and they do, day in and day out—the least we can do is make sure that we step up for them.

• 19 May 2025 · Gender Self-identification · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mr Mundell. According to the Rainbow Map, which ranks European countries based on their legal and policy practices for LGBT people, the United Kingdom is now as low down as 22nd. We should bear in mind that just 10 years ago we were at the top of that list, but since then we have slowly but surely made our way down it. Let us be clear: trans people in this country are facing a wave of hostility, misinformation and marginalisation. Regardless of our position on the topic of the petition, that should concern us all. Some organisations have jumped the gun on restricting access to single-sex spaces in advance of the full guidance from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, in the misguided belief that they are following an updated law. I am afraid that the interim guidance, as other Members have said, does nothing to help that situation, and actually exacerbates it. In particular, there is the inexplicable assertion that, in some circumstances, the law also allows trans women not to be permitted to use men’s facilities, and trans men not to be permitted to use women’s facilities. In other words, trans people are excluded from all single-sex spaces. For me, it is the vigilante enforcement of the so-called guidance that is perhaps the most toxic and damaging aspect of all. Toilets are becoming ideological battlegrounds, with the casualties including not just trans people but cisgender women who are not stereotypically female. It is clear that there is no adequate test for determining whether a person should now have access to a single-sex space, except for a DNA test perhaps, which is clearly not going to happen in a toilet, refuge or anywhere like that. Out there, and perhaps in this place too, access is being based on whether a person appears to be a certain gender and whether they adhere to gender norms. I thought that we had left outdated notions of what a women should look and sound like where they belong, in the past, but now they are being dredged back up. Worst of all, that is being done by people who call themselves feminists. The toxicity in this debate is not new; in this House, successive Conservative Governments not only failed to defend the trans community and advance their rights, but actively stoked division and rolled back the clock. Today, although there are calls for wider reforms, including on gender recognition and self-identification, we must also be honest about the political and social climate we are in. These are such important conversations and they require the right timing and sensitivity, not culture wars. Over the last decade, both in the UK and globally, a lot has happened. I worry that we have started to channel wider fears into isolating an already marginalised group who just want to live their lives with the same dignity and respect that so many of us take for granted. A survey from Stonewall in March this year found that 17% of LGBT+ people have experienced physical assault because of their gender or sexual identity, and the number for trans and non-binary people is almost two in five. The Labour party has a proud history of advancing LGBT+ rights, from legislating for a statutory right to NHS fertility treatment for lesbian and bisexual women to leading a United Nations campaign for the decriminalisation of homosexuality and, of course, introducing the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which was a groundbreaking change to the law at the time. However, 21 years on, as the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) so eloquently put it, the Act is in need of reform and modernisation. Today, the Labour party once again has the opportunity to champion dignity and equality for all. Our manifesto commitments include a ban on all forms of conversion practice; improving access to high-quality NHS care, including gender-affirming care; making LGBT+ hate crime an aggravated offence, leading to harsher sentences; and that all-important gender recognition certificate reform. I know the profound impact it has when the law reflects our identity and allows us to live freely as who we are. Labour Governments have always understood that, and we have always known that progress never comes from standing still or failing to show up when the going gets tough. The petition calls for legal recognition based on self-identification, and I completely understand why. As my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) said, our neighbours in Ireland introduced self-ID without incident or issue way back in 2015. In the words of an Irish lady I spoke to last week, “the sky didn’t fall in and I’m pretty sure it’s still up there.” Meanwhile, trans people here still face long-winded, undignified, medicalised processes just to have their identity legally recognised. The Gender Recognition Act ultimately allows people whose gender identity does not correspond with the sex registered on their birth certificate to obtain recognition and a revised birth certificate. However, as has been said, that process involves two medical certificates, including a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and details of any treatment received. Further, it requires evidence of a person living in their true gender for at least two years and a declaration that they will continue to do so permanently. Clearly, there is much unfinished work ahead on untangling the legal mess that we have been plunged into, restoring dignity for transgender people, modernising the Gender Recognition Act and ensuring that our laws reflect the lives and identities of everybody in Britain. As a cis man, I understand completely that progress must be built on trust, on consensus, which I hope we are able to come to, and on delivering what we have promised. Let us begin by delivering on banning conversion practices in all their vile forms, equalising the punishment of all forms of hate crime, reviewing adult gender identity services and ensuring that all trans people receive appropriate and high-quality care, and, of course, making the Gender Recognition Act fit for the future. I invite the Minister to confirm that the Government are still fully committed to those advancements, as I am. I conclude by reaffirming my allyship for trans people, who now, more than ever, need our respect, acceptance and steadfast support.

• 15 May 2025 · Youth Services · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon East (Natasha Irons), a fellow ageing millennial, for securing this debate. I speak not only as a parent who would love to see well-funded youth services, but as somebody who has witnessed the consequences of short-term thinking when it comes to youth services. In 2014, Conservative-led Staffordshire county council took the callous and short-sighted decision to close our youth service completely. The complete emptiness of the Opposition Benches speaks volumes about whether the Conservatives’ attitude to youth services has improved in the past 11 years. For them, this was a line on a budget sheet, but for communities in my county it was the closure of 38 youth clubs and the loss of 400 jobs. However, the real cost of these decisions lies not in numbers but in the experiences of young people in my constituency. The day-to-day impact of cuts often goes unnoticed, but the long-term impact is impossible to ignore. As an antidote to the gloomy picture that I may have painted, I will mention a couple of the incredible organisations that, despite the closure of our youth service, are doing incredible work. The Staffordshire Council of Voluntary Youth Services, fondly known as SCVYS, offers practical support to charities and local groups and ensures that the voices of children and young people are heard. The VYSIONS youth service was created by children and young people in Brereton and Rugeley and provides a range of programmes and activities, from shooting and fishing to arts and crafts, in some of our most deprived white working-class communities. I welcome the investment announced by the Government but, in closing, I urge the Minister to ensure that that funding is front-loaded in areas, such as Staffordshire, that have no council youth services left whatsoever. I sympathise with colleagues who represent inner-city areas and have seen deep cuts, but I ask them to imagine a world in which their youth service no longer exists at all: that is the world that my constituents have lived in for the past eleven years. All of us here have the highest hopes for our young people, and I am incredibly glad that once again we have a Government that do too.

• 14 May 2025 · Glass Packaging: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mr Stringer. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) for securing this debate, and for her frank and wide-ranging speech. I will use my time to highlight the significant and growing concerns within the hospitality sector, particularly in our pubs. The principle behind EPR—ensuring that producers take responsibility for the packaging waste that they create—has my full support. It is absolutely right that we strive to reduce waste, increase recycling, and shift towards a more sustainable circular economy. In delivering these changes, however, we must also ensure that we do not unfairly burden working people or the businesses that serve our communities, especially when many of them are already doing their part. A truly circular economy means designing waste out of our systems and reusing valuable materials like glass. Glass is one of the most recyclable materials that we have, and in the hospitality sector it has been instrumental in supporting closed-loop recycling systems, not just recently but for decades. The Government have highlighted the development of the EPR policy since 2019. I acknowledge the points raised in a written response to me from the Minister, which outlined the extensive consultations undertaken in 2019, 2021, and 2023 on the implementation of the legislation. It is clear that the Government have engaged with stakeholders, including glass manufacturers, to shape the policy and assess business impacts. Despite the consultation, concerns remain, particularly among those at the frontline of hospitality, about the unintended consequences of this otherwise positive step forward. I echo what has been said about the specific challenges those on the frontline face, and ask whether the Minister will consider targeted adjustments that would maintain the integrity of the scheme while ensuring fairness for businesses that are already contributing to recycling efforts. Specifically, the classification of glass packaging used in pubs as household waste, as has been said, is estimated to cost pubs £2,500 a year on top of the other cost increases they face. That is despite them already managing their waste through commercial channels, at a relatively high cost that often rises above inflation. Pubs are assets to communities in Britain. They are not just alcohol vendors, but places for people to hold what might be the only conversation they have that day. They are community centres, workplaces, incubators for the hospitality staff of tomorrow, and linchpins of many village economies. However, the British Beer and Pub Association estimates that the double charging that the EPR could inadvertently bring in could add between 5p and 7p to every bottle of beer sold in the UK. The risk is that the producers of beer will be discouraged from using glass and could gravitate towards alternatives, such as plastic, which although lighter, does not offer the same level of recyclability. There is a level of unfairness in the proposed EPR fees for pubs, which, as other hon. Members have stated, will effectively pay twice for waste collection. The fact that the OBR has defined EPR as a tax but DEFRA deems it a levy, has left pubs uncertain as to whether costs will have to be absorbed by businesses or whether they will be passed on to their customers, something that could depress demand and make it even harder for businesses to plan for the future. We must get the implementation of EPR right, so that we achieve environmental progress without putting an unfair burden on the very people and businesses who keep our communities going. Pubs, brewers, and hospitality businesses are already doing their bit. I hope that the Government will ensure that their policies rightly reflect and reward that effort.

• 12 May 2025 · British Nationals Murdered Abroad: Support for Families · Hansard source

  More

  Some aspects of the cases that the hon. Gentleman is eloquently describing are sadly very similar to those in the case of Rob Spray, from my Cannock Chase constituency, who died suddenly in Bulgaria in 2019. Rob’s case is about to be heard at inquest, so I will not comment on the legal aspects, but I can say that his family were left in the dark by the Bulgarian authorities and, sadly, by the Foreign Office. They had very little guidance, even on how to bring Rob’s body back to the UK, and they had to resort to a translation app to decipher Rob’s autopsy after they were told that they would have to wait six months for an official translation. That all deepened their grief and frustration at the worst possible time. The worst part of all is that Rob’s mom sadly passed away not knowing what happened to her son. I will do everything I can to help Rob’s family get the answers that they have waited so long to get, and I know that the hon. Gentleman will continue to campaign on this. Does he agree that we need to make sure that bereaved families like the Sprays get the full support of the British Government, so that they can get the closure that they need and deserve?

• 12 May 2025 · British Nationals Murdered Abroad: Support for Families · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for the open and sensitive way in which she is responding to the debate and for sharing the experiences of the family of her constituent Nathan. I am familiar with that case. She heard me explain the contact that I am having with the family of Rob Spray in my constituency. Would she be willing to meet me and the family, when the time is right for them, to see what could be done to get them the answers they so desperately want?

• 7 May 2025 · Educational Opportunities in Semi-rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree, and my hon. Friend hits the nail on the head. Often, the premium in semi-rural areas is very real. I will finish by saying that children and young people in the semi-rural communities that those of us here represent have just as much potential as those in rural and urban areas. I look forward to working with the Minister and the Government to make sure they finally realise that potential.

• 7 May 2025 · Educational Opportunities in Semi-rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your esteemed chairmanship, Sir Edward. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean) for securing the debate and particularly for including the phrase “semi-rural” in the debate title. Often in this place we debate the issues facing rural and urban areas, but the specific challenges facing areas such as my constituency—whose towns and villages, although a little too compact and urban to be considered rural, are certainly not major towns or cities—are not always heard. However, they are being heard today, so I thank my hon. Friend for that. One of the biggest challenges facing families in my constituency is securing a place at a primary school in—or even near—their community. In the Cannock area, 147 primary school applications were refused across 11 primary schools for September 2024—the figure will be even higher this September—and in neighbouring Rugeley, 17 were rejected. That means that over 160 families in my constituency were essentially told that there is no place for their child at a local school. Similarly, Norton Canes primary academy in Cannock and Poppyfield primary academy in Hednesford each turned away 35 applications, which is more than a full classroom of children. This acute shortage of school places has been going on for at least six years, yet county councillors have not engaged in finding solutions and schools have been left in the dark. These are not just numbers; they represent real families, often with both parents working. Suddenly, they are forced to find alternative arrangements, often miles from home. Cannock Chase has grown significantly over the last few years, which is certainly something to be proud of. After all, why would people not be drawn to such a fantastic area? But growth without planning leads to pressure, and in this case the pressure is being felt in our school admissions system. It is clear that local capacity has not kept pace with housing developments. Beyond admissions, access to education, from reception to college, is being hindered by poor public transport infrastructure, as has been mentioned. Like many of the semi-rural communities represented here, Cannock Chase suffers from infrequent and unreliable bus services. I have heard from teachers and parents whose children face long waits after school and who, in some cases, cannot attend extracurricular activities or get home safely. Although Staffordshire county council provides free transport for some eligible pupils, eligibility is narrowly defined as living over 2 miles from a primary school and 3 miles from a secondary school, and only if the child is attending the nearest suitable school. That often leaves parents with no viable alternative but to drive their children to school.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Staffordshire: Cultural Contribution · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak with you in the Chair, Ms Furniss. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) for securing the debate. It has been a real pleasure to hear colleagues pay tribute to Staffordshire, from our world renowned pottery to our vibrant theatres, diverse festivals and creative talent. Although I might be a little biased, Cannock Chase, my own perfectly formed slice of Staffordshire, stands out as one of our cultural gems. Not only are we fortunate enough to have the chase itself, but we also have countless fantastic businesses, landmarks, museums, theatres and schools. I have had the privilege of visiting many of our fantastic schools, which are nurturing future artists and performers who will go on to contribute to Staffordshire’s cultural landscape. Despite the disadvantage of the national funding formula, we must support a broad, inclusive curriculum that includes the arts, music, drama and design: such a culturally rich education is open to young people in many parts of our country but not as open as it should be to our constituents. Cannock Chase has raised renowned talent such as the hilarious Steve Edge, and our Oscar-winning film-maker Chris Overton, who scooped the Academy award for the beautiful short film “The Silent Child”. In more recent news, Jenii Luperi, the vocal coach of this year’s Eurovision entry, also hails from Cannock. It is clear that Staffordshire has always punched well above its weight culturally, and we must ensure that it has the support and resources to do so for generations to come. Young performers who are just starting out, seasoned performers, and Oscar winners all need venues to support them. The Prince of Wales theatre in Cannock, a cornerstone of our local cultural life, had its final curtain call on Saturday night, though it is hopefully not closing for good. The emotional evening involved eight fantastic local musical theatre and amateur dramatics companies, who all managed to get to the theatre safely despite Staffordshire’s notoriously potholed roads. We have also, with great sadness, seen the Museum of Cannock Chase close its doors. Such venues are not just buildings but homes for local talent, heritage and the collective memory of our communities. Thousands of schoolchildren have come through their doors to experience the rich heritage of our area; they leave with a sense of pride in where they are from, inspired to shape its future. I am supporting two incredible charitable groups who have been working non-stop for the last six months to reopen those venues. We are exploring what support might be available to them from the Arts Everywhere fund. That fund was announced in the inaugural Jennie Lee lecture, named for our first Arts Minister, in whose footsteps as an MP I am privileged to follow. Staffordshire’s cultural contributions are about not just the past but the future that we want to build: a future where our children can grow their creativity in schools, local groups, grassroots museums, and on stages big and small.

• 28 Apr 2025 · Pupil Referral Units · Hansard source

  More

  I recently visited Chaselea alternative provision academy in Cannock and met headteacher Mr Archer, who told me that it receives £8,300 less per pupil than the average for PRUs due to the unfair funding formula. With year after year of real-terms funding cuts under the previous Government, Chaselea had to stop all off-site education and halt new admissions, which means longer stays for students. Will the Minister confirm that this Government will ensure that PRUs have the resources and support they need to do the vital work of helping young people return to mainstream education?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Pupil Referral Units · Hansard source

  More

  13. What assessment she has made of the adequacy of levels of funding for pupil referral units.

• 22 Apr 2025 · Road Safety and Active Travel to School · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) for securing this debate. Just a few weeks ago, I visited Hazel Slade primary academy in my constituency. Pupils there told me in no uncertain terms that each day they are frightened when they walk to school. They told me what they want to see to make them feel safer and asked for my help to make it happen. Parents, children and teachers have all told me that they want to see a road safety assessment carried out and traffic calming measures put in to reduce the risks posed by dangerous driving along Rugeley Road and Cannock Wood Street. Parents should be able to trust that every day their child will get home from school safely. Between 2018 and 2023, there were a staggering 869 road casualties in Cannock Chase, including two fatalities on the Rugeley Road between Hazelslade and Brereton. In Bridgtown, where the A5 separates older and newer parts of the village, parents and wheelchair users have told me that they feel they are taking their life into their hands by crossing a major road, and that their county councillor has ignored their pleas for support for a proper pedestrian crossing. Choosing active travel should not come at a risk. Proper pedestrian crossings, school-appropriate signage and enforceable speed limits are all needed to stop those risks. As we lack that in many parts of Cannock Chase, parents often feel that they have no choice but to drive their children to school. That brings me to roadside parking by schools, an issue that all too often exacerbates those risks to children, as I am sure we have all seen. Many drivers in Staffordshire know that enforcement is limited, so parking on double yellow lines is becoming increasingly common, partly due to a lack of penalty notices and partly due to a lack of parking options. That is the case for nearly every school in my constituency, so to support active travel and to ensure that we are able to keep streets safe, stronger enforcement options are vital. I would like to see the county council take up the offer from our parish councils to work together on that. For now, it is clear that it is the responsibility of local authorities to take steps to reduce collisions. I once again voice my full support for the residents of Hazelslade, Bridgtown and all the towns and villages that I represent in demanding further action on road safety.

• 22 Apr 2025 · Coalfields Regeneration Trust · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for giving way, particularly given that he is another Staffordshire MP. As he has heard me say before, the Museum of Cannock Chase in my constituency, which is primarily focused on mining heritage, is due to close by the end of the month. I am working hard alongside the Chase heritage group to rescue it. The Coalfields Regeneration Trust is taking an active interest in the effort. Does my hon. Friend agree that the CRT does fantastic work in preserving and celebrating our mining heritage?

• 22 Apr 2025 · Coalfields Regeneration Trust · Hansard source

  More

  rose —

• 8 Apr 2025 · Easter Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak in this Easter Adjournment debate, and I wish everyone a happy Easter and a restful break. I rise to speak about the British Coal staff superannuation scheme and the need for the scheme’s investment reserve to be returned to its investors as soon as possible. In Cannock Chase, we are rightly proud of our rich mining heritage. That legacy has shaped our communities with generations of hard-working men and women who dedicated their lives to the industry that defined our area for seven centuries. Following privatisation, many British Coal employees were part of either the mineworkers’ pension scheme or the British Coal staff superannuation scheme. I commend the Government for delivering the long-overdue justice for MPS members in the first Labour Budget for 15 years, transferring the £1.5 billion investment reserve. I have spoken to some of the 1,400 MPS members in my constituency since the Government kept their manifesto promise, and they are very grateful for the 32% boost to their pension. However, that has led to members of the BCSSS calling for similar action to be taken on their pension scheme. There are 530 members and dependents of the BCSSS in my constituency, who, like their MPS counterparts, do not receive substantial pensions. Also like the MPS, the BCSSS has returned billions to the Treasury—more than enough to guarantee the scheme for its life. Surplus sharing was ended after an agreement between the trustees and the Government of the day and since then all surpluses are due to go to the Treasury. However, the fundamentals are the same with a substantial investment reserve, which could boost members’ pensions and dependents’ incomes. Very sadly, this is an urgent matter. Last year, more than 2,400 members of the BCSSS passed away, so it is not hard to see why so many members fear that they will not be able to see this money in their lifetimes. These pensioners dedicated their working lives to powering our country, and it is vital that they receive the thanks that such a demanding and important role requires. This is a particular passion of those of us representing coalfield constituents, where the vast majority of the 45,000 BCSSS members live. I wish to pay tribute to many hon. Members for their steadfast campaigning on this matter. We know that, just as it has for the MPS, a return of the BCSSS investment reserve would provide a welcome boost for businesses in our communities, which have been hammered harder than most in recent years. I hope that, in the very near future, we can secure an agreement with the BCSSS trustees, who also deserve credit for their work on this and for fostering a transparent and positive relationship with the members that they serve. Transferring the final £2.3 billion payment from the reserve will ensure fairer pensions for everyone who contributed to the coal industry, whether that be underground, in the offices or in the canteens. It is also worth flagging the gender inequality angle because, unlike the MPS, a large proportion of BCSSS members are women as it was the default pension scheme for clerical and catering staff, who do not always get the recognition that they deserve for the huge contribution they made to such a critical industry. Reflecting the shameful reality faced by women for decades, many were paid significantly less than their male colleagues and now they are campaigning hard for some restitution for that historic injustice with the return of their scheme’s investment reserve. I fully understand that the issue is not as simple as duplicating what has been done for the MPS, given that the schemes were set up differently, and I pay tribute to the work of the Minister of State for Industry, who has confirmed that BCSSS proposals will be considered. Having raised this matter today, I hope that an agreement can be reached in a timely manner. Given that we are losing an average of six BCSSS members every day, the sooner we can get this done, the more members of our community can see and feel justice.