Josh Newbury MP: speeches

Speeches

• 24 Jun 2026 · Farming: Financial Sustainability · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing the debate. I have been applying for a debate on this subject for many months, so it is great that we are having one. I warmly welcome the new farming Minister to his place, too. I recently had a catch-up with farmers in Cannock Chase and heard about various challenges that they are facing. We are living in highly uncertain times. The new series of “Clarkson’s Farm” is shining a light on how financially tough farming can be, but also on the many ways that technology can improve that picture environmentally and financially. The Government’s investment of £123 million to help farmers boost their productivity is therefore very welcome. I am also very pleased that the farming road map is now out. As chair of the APPG on UK food security, I was particularly pleased to see the restated commitment to maintaining our food production at at least current levels. I am also keen on making sure that supply chains are fair for our farmers—something that we often could not have said in recent years. Over the last couple of weeks, the EFRA Committee has had the privilege of visiting New Zealand, where I was struck by the prevalence and power of agricultural co-operatives and the power that they give Kiwi farmers. I would love to see more of that here, because it would go a long way to redressing the imbalance that we all too often see in our supply chains here in Britain. I look forward to working with the Minister on that and many other issues that colleagues have raised, but in the interests of time I will leave it there.

• 24 Jun 2026 · Farming Road Map and Profitability Review · Hansard source

  More

  The road map is a very welcome step forward that will give our farmers certainty for the future. I particularly welcome what the Secretary of State had to say on co-operatives, which could go a long way to redressing the current power imbalance in our food system. I hope we can begin that work at pace. We hear consistently from farmers that they feel that the planning system—made so much worse by the Conservatives—is stacked against them. Broiler chicken farmers, for instance, are expected to lower stocking densities but cannot get permission to expand their sheds to compensate, while farms in water-stressed areas are having to go through years of bureaucracy to build reservoirs. Does the Secretary of State agree that reforming the planning system will be key to freeing up trapped investment and getting us to the sustainable, prosperous future for British farming that this road map sets out?

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  After the increase to the time limit, I think I will buy a lottery ticket tonight, Madam Deputy Speaker. Having worked in energy, I am all too aware that it has not always been high on the political agenda, but since the invasion of Ukraine, it has of course seized the headlines, and it is in the news once again because of President Trump’s distraction plan in Iran. I welcome the Government’s focus on energy security, but I hope that we will not narrow our view of what energy security and clean energy mean. Reliance on fossil fuels is a growing drag on our economy, so the Government are right to push for electrification where viable, alongside home-grown renewable energy to get us off that rollercoaster, but zero carbon renewable gas should also be a critical part of our plan for energy independence. Many aspects of the energy independence Bill are fantastic, such as new obligations on landlords to invest in renewable energy and beefing up Ofgem with new powers that will enable it to step in where consumers have been ripped off. When it comes to the warm homes agency, I welcome the huge investment that will be going into insulation, but remain concerned about the direction of travel on electrification for almost all homes. Since I first entered the energy industry just over a decade ago, the zealousness in the London-based civil service around heat pumps has not waned, despite years of evidence that the roll-out and cost reduction of heat pumps has not matched optimistic estimates. I say this as somebody who got a heat pump last year. The total cost of my installation was over £14,000 beyond the £7,500 boiler upgrade scheme payment. I am in a fortunate position, but I cannot say to my constituents that they should spend their savings or get themselves into heaps of debt to get a heat pump. With the way things are right now, the vast majority of people in Cannock Chase cannot afford one, and I have not seen anything about the warm homes agency that will fundamentally change that reality. If we are serious about helping struggling households, we have to ensure that the agency’s immediate mission is to bring bills down. Let us ensure that the energy independence Bill lives up to its name by also kickstarting a revolution in renewable gas production. A boost to biomethane production could support farmers to handle organic waste better and to secure a reliable income stream; it would bring down emissions in sectors that cannot easily electrify, including the potential for carbon-negative gas through the usage of carbon capture and storage; and it would ensure that we are masters of our own destiny when it comes to a critical fuel that will remain part of our energy mix for decades to come. The extension of the green gas support scheme to 2030 is welcome, but like all energy investment pipelines, producers and investors need longer-term certainty on the Government’s position. I have heard similar concerns from the hydrogen industry. Although there is widespread support for the Government’s investment in CCS and the first round of hydrogen investment, we still do not have the hydrogen strategy. All these strands need to be knitted together as part of a balanced approach on reaching net zero, supporting our constituents and businesses along the way. In the Government’s focus on clean energy and the jobs of the future, let us not lose sight of the promise of biomethane and hydrogen as other examples of home-grown clean energy. Above all, let us always be on the side of our constituents who want to do the right thing in decarbonising their homes, but worry how on earth they will afford it.

• 9 Mar 2026 · Middle East: Economic Update · Hansard source

  More

  The Chancellor has taken decisive action to bring down energy bills, but as she noted, those who rely on heating oil are often the most exposed to sudden price shocks. Even in my fairly urban constituency, there are hundreds of households in that position, and some of them have been on touch with me because the cost of heating oil has doubled in a week due to the effect of the Iran conflict. As the Chancellor works to shield the British public from the economic fallout, will she ensure that our households on heating oil are protected from the shocking increases we are currently seeing?

• 11 Feb 2026 · Woodland Creation · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak in today’s debate with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North (Chris Curtis) for securing this debate. He set out perfectly the value of woodlands to both nature and people, and his city is clearly a living example of that. I appreciate that hon. Members might wonder why, as the Member of Parliament for Cannock Chase—a constituency famed and named for its forest—I might want to speak in a debate on creating new woodlands, but my answer is this: “You can’t have too much of a good thing”. Woodland creation is central to building a greener, fairer Britain, and the Government have set ambitious targets, aiming to increase woodland cover in England to 16.5% by 2050. Our current woodland cover remains significantly lower than many of our European neighbours at 13.5%, compared with an EU average of around 38%. In Britain, describing somewhere as “leafy” usually is shorthand for “wealthy”, which says a lot about how access to nature reflects inequality on multiple levels. The Woodland Trust’s tree equity score clearly demonstrates that the many benefits provided by trees are disproportionately enjoyed by wealthier communities. Even in my constituency, that disparity is evident. Chadsmoor is one of the most deprived areas of Cannock Chase and is also among the most nature deprived. By contrast, more affluent areas like New Penkridge Road in Cannock benefit from significant tree cover despite being less than two miles away. That contrast shows that the communities that stand to gain the most from access to green space are too often those with the least access to it. Planting trees is often the easy part, but explaining to residents why an unmanaged woodland has suddenly appeared at the end of their road is considerably harder. In Hednesford, an urban woodland was established on Bradbury Lane with positive intentions, but insufficient maintenance generated understandable complaints from residents—an important reminder that successful woodland creation requires sustained stewardship and community involvement. I welcome the Government’s commitment to funding not just planting, but long-term management and skills development. However, on the flip side, I have heard concerns about newly planted trees on housing and commercial developments not being properly cared for and subsequently dying, or even not being planted in the first place. Although the national planning policy framework makes it clear that planning decisions should require aftercare, councils need to ensure that those conditions are attached and enforced. Alongside expanding woodland cover, it is equally important that we improve the quality and resilience of the woodland that we already have. In December, I visited Birches Valley in my constituency, where I met the Forestry Commission’s agroforestry woodland officer to discuss the restoration of ancient woodland. Plantations on ancient woodland sites—often referred to as PAWS—account for around 17% of the nation’s forests. Forestry England has set an important ambition to restore those sites to resilient native woodland, but achieving that will require a doubling of the rate of restoration. The work is ecologically vital. Moving woodland from predominantly non-native canopy cover towards native broadleaf species strengthens biodiversity, increases resilience to pests and diseases, and helps to ensure that our woodlands are better able to adapt to climate change. The Climate Change Committee has recommended that two-thirds of new woodland should be broadleaf and one-third conifer, to maximise climate and biodiversity benefits while reducing the risks associated with monoculture planting. However, foresters have highlighted concerns such as the impact of pests such as deer and grey squirrels, and the long-term financial sustainability of restoration. I therefore welcome the Government’s funding for Forestry England’s PAWS restoration programme. As we expand woodland creation, we must also carefully balance environmental ambitions with the needs of our farming communities. Agroforestry—integrating trees into productive agricultural land—presents significant opportunities, including improved soil health, enhanced biodiversity and increased flood resilience. Here, the Government’s approach recognises the vital role that farmers and rural communities play in environmental recovery. Many farmers are already boosting natural flood management by increasing woodland cover, as well as natural water storage areas. Concerns have been raised, though, particularly in upland areas, about productive farmland being taken out of use or tenant farmers being displaced in pursuit of woodland creation targets. It is vital that environmental policy retains the confidence and support of our farming sector, particularly the 50% of farmers who are tenants. Schemes such as the sustainable farming incentive present an opportunity to strike that balance by encouraging tree planting on less productive land or areas already identified for nature recovery, or intercropping with arable crops, allowing us to increase woodland cover without undermining food production or rural livelihoods. In closing, I note that woodland creation and ancient woodland restoration are not competing priorities. They are complementary pillars of a broader strategy to restore nature, improve community wellbeing, strengthen climate resilience and protect our natural heritage. Not only that, but in representing Cannock Chase, I am contractually obliged to be enthusiastic about trees at all times. Thankfully, trees are one of the few policy areas where we can improve air quality, biodiversity, public health and community pride simultaneously, which in policymaking terms is about as close as we can get to a unanimous win.

• 10 Feb 2026 · Independent Water Commission: Final Report · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak in this debate with you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy. I thank the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for securing this important and timely debate on the Independent Water Commission’s final report and the Government’s White Paper, which will move forward with many of the commission’s recommendations. I put on the record my thanks to and respect for the Minister for setting up the commission. I also thank Sir Jon Cunliffe and his team for their forensic assessment of our water industry—many recognise its fundamentally flawed, if not completely broken, state. Since being elected, I have heard from constituents about flooding, sewage discharges and water infrastructure failures. I have heard from families worried about river pollution, from businesses concerned about the resilience of supply, and from residents frustrated that the problems they see locally are addressed so slowly. For too long, the sector has been characterised by fragmented planning, overlapping regulation and ageing infrastructure, so the proposal to establish a single integrated regulator, alongside setting out a clearer long-term strategic vision for the sector, is an important step forward in restoring public trust and delivering the resilient water system our country desperately needs. As a member of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, I am particularly conscious that reform has to be judged not only on its intent but on delivery. As Sir Jon did, the White Paper is right to identify the historical lack of joined-up, long-term planning as a central weakness. About 60% of water mains were built before 1981, and a significant proportion are now more than a century old. I have seen the effects of that in my village of Norton Canes, and in Rugeley, where water companies have struggled even to work out who owns the broken pipes. Public confidence in the sector continues to be shaped by the visible impact of pollution and sewage discharge. My constituency is served by Severn Trent and South Staffs Water, and performance across the sector demonstrates both areas of progress and ongoing public concern. Although Severn Trent has achieved long-term strong performance ratings in some operational areas, data shows that in 2024 there were more than 450,000 hours of discharge in its area alone. That contrast illustrates why stronger transparency, oversight and accountability are essential if reforms are to rebuild public confidence. I therefore welcome proposals to move towards open monitoring, to ensure that companies are no longer effectively marking their own homework. As has been said, agricultural run-off contributes significantly to water pollution in some catchments. That has to be part of any long-term strategy if we are serious about improving river health and water quality, but it needs to be tackled in partnership with farmers, rather than characterising them as wilful polluters of the waterways that they rely on. The move towards integrated regional water planning could be a significant step forward in that respect. In constituencies like mine, effective co-ordination when it comes to flood prevention, agricultural practice, environmental regulation, planning and economic growth is essential. Regional planning could deliver more preventive and nature-based solutions, but it will require clarity about governance, accountability and its relationship with water company investment decisions. On accountability, as a member of the Co-operative party I was glad that the Government make powerful customer panels a key plank of last year’s reforms. For too long, customers have felt completely disempowered, but with the incredible work of citizen scientists, and the action taken by the Government, that is starting to change. I note that the commission’s final report was lukewarm about the mutual model for water companies, because of a perceived risk to customers, but I hope the Minister will continue to look at ways we could incorporate co-operative principles into reforms to the sector, up to and including mutual ownership if that would resolve some of the issues. Before I conclude, I cannot speak on this topic without referring to executive bonuses, given the galling payments we have seen for senior figures in failing water companies, despite the action taken by the Government in the Water (Special Measures) Act 2025. It is shameful that we have got to a point with the water industry where the Government cannot trust bosses to follow the spirit of the law, and instead have to take further action because bosses who would not earn performance-related bonuses would rather spend their time cooking up creative ways of re-labelling bonuses with their legal teams, or re-routing bonuses with their accountants, than spend their time cleaning up the filth that our constituents are paying through the nose for. If they will flout the spirit of the law, the letter of the law will have to change. I am glad we have a Government who are decisive about the need to do that. The Independent Water Commission has provided a clear diagnosis of the challenges facing our water system. The Government’s White Paper sets out an ambitious pathway for reform in many areas, and I welcome its focus on long-term planning, stronger regulation and improved environmental outcomes. Clearly, the task ahead is to ensure that reforms translate into real-world improvements that our constituents can see and feel.

• 10 Feb 2026 · Independent Water Commission: Final Report · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has often heard from water company bosses that the criticisms of their companies are impacting morale on the frontline, but we point out that if any bonuses are available to people on the frontline, they are certainly not of the order of those the bosses are receiving. I absolutely agree that we need to respect those people and make sure their voices are heard as we reform the sector. As I was saying, we need to see safer waterways, more reliable infrastructure and a water system that is fit for the future. I am grateful for the opportunity to have spoken in the debate.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Agricultural Sector: Import Standards · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling) for securing this vital debate and for his thoughtful speech, and I extend that to other hon. Members who have spoken in the debate, too. It is an important opportunity for us to consider an issue that sits at the intersection of the food we eat, trade, animal welfare and the sustainability of our rural economy. The UK’s post-Brexit free trade agreements have rightly opened up new opportunities for British exporters, but they have also raised concerns about how imports are produced, particularly as we look to increase our welfare ambitions. By cutting tariffs on agricultural products from partner countries, those deals can unintentionally allow products to enter the UK that are produced to far lower animal welfare or environmental standards than those expected of our farmers. These are not minor issues; they go to the heart of how we support our brilliant domestic producers and how we maintain public confidence in the food we eat. Practices that are banned or tightly regulated in the UK—conventional battery cages for hens, sow stalls, tail docking of pigs, and certain pesticides—remain permitted elsewhere, and those products inevitably end up on our supermarket shelves. Without clear protections, imports produced in that way risk undercutting our farmers, and they undermine the principle that high welfare production should be the norm, not just for British producers. The Trade and Agriculture Commission, which advises the Government on trade deals, has highlighted those differences and warned that they have both ethical and economic consequences. British farmers investing in high-welfare sustainable production should not be left competing on an uneven playing field against imports produced more cheaply by cutting corners. That applies to raw materials as well as finished products. On Tuesday, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee that I sit on heard from the formidable Baroness Batters about her profitability review. She mentioned a comment made by Sir Liam Fox, who, as Trade Secretary, argued that the UK should shift post Brexit to importing cheaply produced raw materials and then add value to them under the Union flag. I agree with Baroness Batters that we should reject that reductive view of the value of the excellent raw materials that our British farmers produce. We should be proud of and protect them. Many organisations, including the National Farmers Union and the National Pig Association, have called for core standards for imported agrifood products. These standards would ensure that all food sold in the UK, whether domestic or imported, meets the welfare, environmental and production standards expected by the British public. It is entirely reasonable for consumers to expect that pork, beef, eggs or poultry produced abroad meet very similar, or the same, requirements as those produced here. Two other realities that we have to confront in this debate and which the all-party parliamentary group on UK food security, which I chair, has discussed at length are the cost of food and keeping our shelves stocked. As someone who represents a constituency with pockets of deep deprivation, including neighbourhoods that are among the 5% most deprived in the country, I am concerned that a rapid move to equalise all import standards could have a knock-on effect on food prices, which, as I am sure hon. Members right across the House will be aware, have been very high, particularly over the last five years. Equally, we do not want to see a repeat of the empty shelves that we all remember from the pandemic, which brought home the fragility of just-in-time food supply chains when unexpected disruption hits. As my hon. Friend said, these issues are interlinked, and the more we undermine our domestic supply, the more prices will go up and the more reliant we will become on overseas imports. The Government have recognised these varied concerns. In the trade strategy published last June, it was clear that the Government will uphold high animal welfare standards and will not lower food standards to accommodate imports. It explicitly acknowledged practices that are not allowed domestically, such as sow stalls and battery cages, and committed to assessing whether those imports have an unfair advantage. I hope it will find that they do. Where necessary, powers such as quotas, exclusions and safeguards will be used to protect domestic sectors that are most at risk. That approach is welcome. It strikes a balance between maintaining the benefits of free trade and ensuring that British farmers are not undermined. But as we have seen in previous trade deals, including in discussions with the United States, it is vital that those protections are clear, enforceable and applied consistently. Without them, we risk creating a market where the lowest welfare products set the price and not the highest standards. Equally important is transparency for consumers. Recent polling by Opinium for Humane World for Animals shows that the British public often misunderstand what products labelled as, for example, “welfare assured” or that carry the Red Tractor logo actually guarantee. For example, 65% of people incorrectly believe that “welfare assured” prohibits keeping pigs and chickens in cages and 67% believe it prohibits the use of CO 2 for slaughter. If consumers discovered that labelling does not match the reality they think it does, nearly half would feel misled, angry or disappointed. Mandatory labelling is vital. It will protect consumers, support domestic producers and ensure that imported products adhere to the same high standards—or at least that we can see if they do not. Public support for stronger labelling measures is overwhelming, with 77% backing a new animal welfare labelling law and three quarters supporting stricter enforcement by trading standards and the Advertising Standards Authority to prevent misleading claims. I acknowledge that getting labelling right will require many tricky balances, and that there is only so much space on a packet. I do not downplay those issues, but by combining robust import standards with transparent labelling, the Government could ensure that trade works for farmers, for animals and for consumers alike, reinforcing confidence in the British food system while maintaining fairness and ethical standards.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Fishing Industry · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is speaking with real expertise and personal experience. As the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee mentioned, we had the chance to visit Brixham, where we heard at first hand that Government funding for fleets has often been focused on keeping old vessels in service, some of which are 60 years old. They may have upgraded equipment that can boost catch values, but then the crew are stuck with outdated and substandard living quarters. Those we met are calling for the growth fund to pay towards new vessels that could massively improve both profitability and quality of life for crews. Cannock Chase is about as far from the sea as a constituency can be, but even I can see the logic of that. Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be far more efficient and impactful for us to use the funding in that way?

• 21 Jan 2026 · Water White Paper · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the White Paper because customers right across the country have been failed by their water company, and all too often, when turning to Ofwat for support and to hold executives to account, they have been met with bureaucracy and a weak response. Will the Secretary of State confirm that the creation of a new combined, powerful water ombudsman, set out in the White Paper, will finally give customers a route to resolve complaints quickly when companies fail to deliver this most basic of public services?

• 20 Jan 2026 · Water (Special Measures) Act 2025: Enforcement · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful speech on behalf of his constituents. Last year, it emerged that Thames Water was planning an enormous additional compensation package under the guise of a management retention plan. After being grilled by those of us on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, and an understandable public outcry, it announced that it would no longer go ahead with that. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that any water company setting its moral bar lower than Thames Water should take a long, hard look in the mirror?

• 20 Jan 2026 · Water (Special Measures) Act 2025: Enforcement · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak with you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) for securing this debate and giving those in positions of power in our water industry a chance to hear hard truths and take accountability. Although the state of the industry and the morally questionable behaviour of many companies is a talking point for some, I know that he has been a dogged campaigner on this for many years. In fact, I am sure I saw a photo somewhere of him wading in the River Nidd, such is his commitment to getting up close and personal with the issues. Speaking of getting up close and personal, those of us who are members of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee have had—I hesitate to say the pleasure—the task of grilling the bosses of nine water companies as part of our inquiry into reforming the water sector. We have dived into many of the issues that we are hearing about, such as sewage overflows, compliance with environmental laws, support for vulnerable customers, the impact of flooding and outages, and, of course, the atrocious corporate culture and disconnection from the principles of delivering an essential public service that has taken hold in much of the water industry. That work has reinforced for me just how bad things have got, how far public confidence in the water industry has been damaged and how necessary robust reform has become. What I have heard from my constituents is echoed across the country: a sense that accountability is an afterthought, that communities are left to pick up the pieces when things go wrong, and that bosses can get additional compensation regardless of how their company performs. That is precisely why the Water (Special Measures) Act is so important. It rightly strengthens the powers available to regulators and makes it clear that persistent failure—environmental, operational or corporate—must carry real consequences. It reflects a clear Labour principle that essential public services must work in the public interest and not simply for shareholder return. Crucially, the Act marks a decisive shift away from the regulatory complacency of the past. In the year from July 2024, criminal prosecutions of water companies rose by 145%—a clear sign of meaningful progress. However, enforcement needs to be felt not just at operational level, but at the top. It is impossible to justify the need for customers to tolerate sewage in our waterways, botched responses during outages and poor communication, while senior executives still receive substantial payouts with impunity. That disconnect is corrosive. It undermines confidence not only in individual companies, but in the whole system, regulators included. That is why I believe that the true test of the Act and the newly released water White Paper will be whether they drive a genuine shift in the industry—one in which transparency and consumer trust are central to how success is measured. Some companies, as we have heard, have sought to repackage rewards under labels such as “retention payments”. The public do not distinguish between a bonus and a retention payment. They see only failing senior execs continuing to be rewarded. The boss of South East Water is set to receive a £400k bonus just for staying in his job, despite, as we have heard, the company leaving thousands of households in Kent and Sussex without water for days and issuing some of the worst crisis communications I have ever seen. Last month, the BBC picked up on the comment I made on social media that David Hinton should do his job or go. Having heard him in front of the EFRA Committee, I absolutely stand by that. Ofwat is currently responsible for enforcing the Act. Enforcement has often been too slow and remote from customers’ lives, and that cannot be separated from how the regulator has operated. The Committee took a long, hard look at Ofwat and found a regulator that was too cosy in dealing with water companies and too bureaucratic in dealing with customers. A regulator that is slow to act, overly procedural and reluctant to challenge company behaviour will never deliver the cultural change that the Government are determined to secure. It is important to recognise that not all regulators have failed. During a recent Committee session with South East Water and the drinking water inspectorate, the response from the DWI was, as the Chair of the Committee has said, incredibly useful. It was clear that it is doing very effective work, despite having fewer than 60 staff. As we move towards a new single regulator, we have to preserve the DWI’s culture, expertise and robustness. I hope that, in responding to the debate, the Minister can set out what the Department will do to make sure that the few examples of where the current regulatory system is working well are preserved rather than thrown out with the bathwater. I welcome the measures set out in the new water White Paper, such as an end to companies marking their own homework. An MOT-style regime for water assets will finally move us from crisis response to prevention. The new water ombudsman, with its legally binding powers, will be customers’ advocate when things go wrong. Our communities want action. They want to know that when rules are broken, consequences will follow. The only way to change behaviour in a broken system is to change the law, and I am confident that we will continue to see tough action from this Government where the last failed so miserably.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Merry Christmas to you and your team, Mr Speaker. Alongside many colleagues on the Government Benches who are passionate about farming, I will continue to argue for a rethink on inheritance tax, but I back this Government and their mission to improve the profitability of our farms. We are speeding up planning, tackling unfair supply chain practices, unlocking finance and boosting exports. Does the Minister agree that the findings of the Batters review mean that we can finally turn a page on dwindling farm incomes and unleash benefits for farmers, the rural economy and our nation’s food security?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Christmas Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  I wish you, Madam Deputy Speaker, our fantastic House staff and all hon. Members a very merry Christmas. It is a time to reflect on the year that we have had and on the year ahead. In Cannock Chase, there is cause for celebration. Though many of us face uncertainty, there is plenty of hope for optimism in 2026. I will start with the heroes who produce the food that is central to many of our Christmases: our farmers. They have weathered two difficult winters, disease outbreaks, the abrupt closure of support schemes and changes to inheritance tax. Those who cannot pass their farm on in time face impossible choices, such as selling off land or stopping farming altogether. Yet we now have Baroness Batters’ profitability review, which I believe will drive positive changes in 2026, some of which the Government have already committed to. Next year, we can look forward to many chances to turn the corner on more than a decade of uncertainty for farmers. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Danny Emmott who, until seven weeks ago, was the chair of the Staffordshire Young Farmers. This week, we have received the awful news that Danny has taken his own life. He was just 28 years old and leaves behind a two-year-old daughter. I only met Danny on a couple of occasions, but his passion for the incredible work and fundraising that young farmers do shone through. He was an advocate for many brilliant causes, such as the Yellow Wellies campaign that supports our farming community with mental health and wellbeing. Danny will be hugely missed by so many in Staffordshire, and I extend my deepest condolences to his family and friends, who I know will be going through unimaginable grief. As 2025 comes to a close, I hope the spirit of goodwill will carry us forward with the positivity and determination that we need to make sure 2026 brings us lots of good news and certainty for the towns and villages that it is my pleasure to represent.

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  I came to this House determined to speak up for the people I represent, particularly those who feel under pressure, children whose life chances are held back, and 1,500 former mineworkers. In my maiden speech, I spoke about our proud mining heritage. When I made that speech, this Labour Government had just delivered justice for members of the Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme and, just over a year later, I am immensely proud that the same has been done for the British Coal staff superannuation scheme. These former mineworkers, who built the communities that I am proud to represent and helped to power our nation, had to wait far too long to even be heard, so I commend this Government on righting this historical wrong, but even more so all those campaigners on never giving up. The action taken by this Government will mean a 41% boost to the pensions of 40,000 former mineworkers. Turning to the cost of living, we have taken action to reduce energy bills by taking 75% of the renewables obligation off bills, and the energy company obligation will be scrapped as well, saving my constituents an average of £150 a year. That saving will be added to by the first freeze to rail fares in 30 years, the continued freeze on prescription charges and the £89 that they will not have to pay on fuel duty. As the Chancellor said, one policy above all has supressed the life chances of children in the most deprived households and neighbourhoods in our country: the two-child benefit cap. Scrapping it will lift 2,430 children in my constituency out of poverty. Contrary to the stereotypes often peddled by Opposition Members, almost 60% of the families who will benefit from this change are in work. While the cost of scrapping the limit is £3.5 billion, the cost of child poverty is £39 billion. Behind that staggering sum are life chances blighted and immense talent that our country is missing out on. Along with expanding free school meals, increasing the minimum wage, introducing Best Start family hubs and introducing apprenticeships that do not cost small businesses, these changes will ensure that all children and young people have the best start in life. Finally, another matter close to the hearts of many in my constituency and county is growth in rural communities. Many people in rural towns and villages have felt left behind by successive Governments, and that is particularly true in the world of farming, which often feels far removed from the corridors of Whitehall. This Government deserve great credit for the biggest farming budget in history and for getting money out of the door, something that the Conservative party failed to do. However, while visiting farms in my constituency, I have heard repeatedly that changes to agricultural property relief are hanging over many farmers and their families, and supressing confidence. The personal impact of that was brought home to me when I sat down with a couple in their mid-80s, 15th generation livestock farmers in my constituency, who told me about farming families that they know being affected by mental ill health, particularly among elderly farmers. They told me that they feel paralysed in the face of these changes, not knowing if there is a way to ensure that their farm has a 16th generation. The changes are holding back growth in the agricultural sector, as many are not investing in new machinery or rapidly advancing technologies. However, following concerted efforts by many Labour Members, we have the change that will enable spouses to transfer their allowance to a surviving partner. That will take some farmers out of inheritance tax and will reduce the bills of many others, so it is welcome. Looking ahead, I am encouraged by the Government’s relentless focus on farm profitability and changes to the planning system, which will free up farmers to get on with the things that help their businesses and infrastructure and the environment. Baroness Batters’ review, due to be published next month, will be critical in charting a path to more profitable farming, and I and many Labour Members will engage with it keenly. Rural Britain is ready and willing to make a greater contribution to the vital mission of growing the economy and ensuring that the benefits are felt in every corner of our country. Yesterday’s Budget made it clear that there will be no return to austerity or short-termism. It rectifies the injustices of the past for members of the BCSSS. It acts right now, in the present, to cut the cost of living, and it safeguards Britain’s future. This is a Budget that keeps us on the path to renew Britain and improve life for people in the towns and villages I represent in Cannock Chase, so I very much welcome it.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Land Use Change: Food Security · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I thank my constituency neighbour, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), for securing this debate on an issue that sits right at the heart of our nation’s resilience. This is a real area of interest for me, as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on UK food security and a member of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee. Our land is finite, so every acre has to do as much as possible for the country. The choices we make about it must balance food production, nature recovery, clean energy, and the homes and infrastructure we need. If we get the balance right, we not only protect our landscapes, but strengthen our ability to feed the nation and support rural livelihoods for decades to come. A lot of good groundwork has already been done, as we have heard. Henry Dimbleby’s national food strategy set out a compelling vision for our food system and the need for a land use framework to break down Whitehall silos. The national conversation launched earlier this year, involving voices from farming, conservation and communities, shows that Ministers want to get this right. The evidence base gathered gives us something solid to build on, and the publication of the new food strategy for England, with its 10 high-level recommendations, is another important step towards a resilient, affordable and sustainable food system. The consultation on the land use framework gave us estimates for the amount of land that may need to shift partly or wholly away from agricultural use—the former representing about 10% of land and the latter 9%. Our commitments to the environment, biodiversity and clean energy production necessitate changes in the way that we use land, but I share the view of many in the farming community and the wider food supply chain that we cannot afford to see food production as a sideshow—a “nice to have”. As the Prime Minister said, food security is national security. We are acutely aware, of course, of the threats posed by cyber-attacks. In my region we have seen the devastating effects of the attack on Jaguar Land Rover and the thousands of jobs that were jeopardised by that prolonged shutdown. In response to that and other high-profile attacks, the public and private sectors alike are rightly investing in cyber-security. Let us place the same emphasis on food security. I am sure we all remember shelves going empty as global supply chains were disrupted during the pandemic, and we have also seen how the price of staples such as wheat has been affected by the invasion of Ukraine. It is not hard to envisage how geopolitical instability or bad actors could destabilise our food supply chains. By safeguarding agricultural land primarily for food production and by supporting productivity improvements and innovation that help to maintain domestic food production, we can bolster the nation’s resilience in this crucial area. From my work with the all-party parliamentary group on UK food security, I know that farmers are ready to embrace new tools and techniques, but they can do so only in an environment of long-term certainty, with clear policies and priorities. On the contentious issue of our transition to clean energy, the National Energy System Operator’s analysis and the solar road map show that the land required for renewables is comparatively modest, and can in some cases remain compatible with farming, for example sheep and poultry grazing, or with measures under the environmental land management schemes. That is not always possible, of course, and that is why we should prioritise high-grade land for arable farming. That is where a land use framework is so crucial. I am pleased to see that the Government are treating the framework, the environmental improvement plan and other strategies as interconnected. What the sector now needs is a land use framework that does four things: ensures that all the strategies being worked up dovetail, supports food production as a national priority to enable the delivery of environmental goods, facilitates the clean energy transition while ensuring rural communities benefit, and provides clarity and confidence for the people who steward the land every day. With strong evidence, honest conversations and a shared commitment to national resilience, we can ensure that our land delivers for food, nature recovery, clean energy and thriving communities.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Illegal Waste: Organised Crime · Hansard source

  More

  My constituency is on the edge of the west midlands conurbation, and has plenty of country lanes and quiet beauty spots. Communities in my constituency, and particularly in my home village of Norton Canes, know all too well the impact of fly-tipping and organised waste crime. We Labour Members have not forgotten the deep cuts made to the Environment Agency under the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Can the Minister assure us that this Government will ensure that the Environment Agency has the resources and powers that it needs to go after those who make a living out of exploiting people and businesses, and destroying our precious environment?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Co-operative Sector: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) on securing this important debate and his impassioned opening speech. I can think of no greater or better-informed champion of our co-operative sector. Although he is a huge loss to the Front Bench, he is our gain in this debate. I associate myself with the remarks about the incredible work of the Co-operative party, of which I have been a proud member since the age of 18, and Co-operatives UK. The co-operative and mutuals sector is one of the UK’s quiet success stories, with an economic contribution seven times greater than its share of the business population. It is not a sector that is standing still. The number of employee-owned businesses has trebled in five years, and the number of community-owned pubs has grown by 51% in the same period, bucking wider high street trends. Why does that matter? Because co-operatives are more resilient, more likely to pay the minimum wage and simply more inclusive. In my constituency of Cannock Chase and across the country, we see that in community energy groups, credit unions, housing co-ops and the pub that stays open because the community refused to let it call last orders for the final time. Co-ops root wealth locally and give people genuine power over the things that shape their lives. In my patch, for example, 10 years ago, under a Labour and Co-operative council, Chase Community Solar partnered with Cannock Chase district council to install solar panels on 314 council-owned bungalows, cutting the bills of tenants by between one third and a half. Five years later, after becoming a Labour and Co-operative councillor, I was proud to be one of the cabinet members who signed off on an investment that enabled a further collaboration with Chase Community Solar, that time alongside the charity Beat the Cold, to install batteries to make even more clean energy and cut bills even further.

• 21 Oct 2025 · Co-operative Sector: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend has given us a prime example of how thinking about problems differently and more collaboratively is rooted at the heart of co-operatives. The roll-out of EVs to people who do not have a driveway and perhaps do not have ready access to charging infrastructure is one of the many challenges that the Government are facing in the move towards net zero. It is a prime example of how we can use co-operative principles to tackle a problem in a different way that helps the community to benefit. Similarly, I want to make sure that our local working men’s clubs are given their due, such as those in Cannock, Rugeley, Hednesford, Chadsmoor and my home village of Norton Canes, where they remain vital community hubs. Those clubs embody co-op principles, offering social support, fostering local connections and supporting grassroots initiatives. They are living examples of how member-driven organisations can enrich community life. As a member of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, I have seen how co-ops can empower small producers to speak with a louder voice, and to secure value and recognition for their labour. Probably the best known is Arla, owned by more than 3,000 dairy farmers and supplying a quarter of the nation’s milk, but there are many more. However, I still look longingly at many of our European neighbours and even the USA, which my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) mentioned, where co-ops are far more present in the agricultural economy. It is no coincidence that they do not have much of the abject unfairness in their food supply chains that we see in Britain. I hope that is being considered by the Treasury and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, as I believe it could unlock a huge amount of growth in rural communities that have been overlooked for far too long. I am proud of this Government’s commitment to doubling our co-operative sector because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton said so powerfully, it is clear that co-ops have long been undervalued and underappreciated as part of our economy. They cradle immense potential not just to transform our businesses but to draw together our communities at a time when many have never felt further apart. Ask an everyday passer-by what co-ops contribute to our communities, and they might answer something along the lines of: “Somewhere to buy a meal deal.” It is an irony that highlights the sector’s need for Government support in making the UK economy one in which mutuals, co-ops and community-owned businesses can thrive and play a more prominent role in national life. I will set out three brief priorities for the Government. First, let us unlock finance by opening up the British Business Bank’s programmes to co-ops and making sure that transitional help is available so that small and medium-sized enterprises can mutualise. Reaching our manifesto commitment cannot just be about new co-ops being created; if we support the mutualisation of existing businesses, we can safeguard them and put them in the hands of the very people they serve. Secondly, we need to shake up legislation and regulations so that co-ops are unleashed to start up, scale up and diversify. That is not asking for special treatment; all it would do is bring us into line with international best practice. That is particularly important for new and innovative co-operative models in emerging sectors. Thirdly and finally, let us offer tailored support, at a regional level, on the nitty-gritty of start-up, conversion, governance and, of course, procurement laws, so that co-ops can compete for public contracts on the scale at which they operate. However, we must also think more broadly. There are sectors crying out for a co-operative approach, and the Government clearly have a role to play in supporting that. In social care, where quality, continuity and local accountability are critical, co-op models offer a way to put care workers and care users at the heart of the system. In some areas of the special educational needs and disabilities sector, we see eye-watering profiteering at the expense of family and council budgets alike. A co-operative approach could provide transparency, trust and better outcomes by aligning support with the needs of families, not investors. In housing, as we have heard, many people live in communities that are defined by shared interests and challenges, so giving tenants a real say through co-op principles could help to improve housing standards, tenant engagement and community cohesion. Finally, looking ahead, local government reorganisation presents us with both a risk and an opportunity. As new councils are created, assets could be shared. Many of those assets are central to the identity of our communities, such as libraries, community centres and green spaces. Rather than lose them to speculative buyers or closure, the Government’s commitment to a true community right to buy, so brilliantly championed by my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton, could make sure they stay in the hands of the community. In conclusion, if we want to supercharge growth in the co-op sector, we must match its potential with political will. If we do that, we will grow not just a sector but an economy in which power is shared in Cannock Chase and every corner of the UK.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Cannock Chase may be one of the most landlocked constituencies in the country, but that has not stopped my constituents from writing to me in support of the Bill, and rightly so. If anyone does come across a marine genetic resource in Staffordshire, I would be impressed and also slightly concerned, but the point is this: what happens in the world’s oceans matters just as much to the people of my constituency as it does to those living on the coast. As the wise Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, “The nation that destroys its soil destroys itself.” I would like to extend that to say that the world that destroys its oceans destroys itself. The UK has long positioned itself as a global leader on marine protection, and with the BBNJ agreement about to enter force—on 17 January—we must not give up our status on marine conservation. That is why I speak in support of the Bill: legislation that gives the Government the ability to ratify that vital United Nations agreement and take part in the world’s first ocean COP next year. As the new chair of the all-party parliamentary group on UK food security, I want to emphasise how vital the Bill is in protecting the long-term health of our global food systems. The high seas—those vast areas of ocean beyond any single country’s jurisdiction—are essential to our food security. They are home to rich marine ecosystems, and globally over 3 billion people rely on fish for at least 20% of their animal protein intake—for many coastal and island nations, that figure is much higher—yet the vast majority of these waters have long been unregulated and are vulnerable to a multitude of threats including overfishing, unrestricted oil drilling, pollution and deep sea mining, which directly threaten not just ocean health but global food security. I echo the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) that, to ensure the agreement has real impact, the Government must rapidly push for new marine protected areas in international waters. The Bill will enable the UK to play an active role in addressing all those threats. It will extend marine licensing requirements to British activities beyond our waters and mandate environmental outcome reports for potentially harmful activity. It will also ensure greater transparency in the collection and use of marine genetic resources, the biological material from marine organisms that holds immense promise for medicine, biotechnology and food innovation. It is often said that the world’s rainforests hold countless discoveries to come that could cure many illnesses and enable advancements that will enrich our human existence—as well as, I certainly hope, our stewardship of the natural world. However, although they are often overlooked, the same is very much true of our oceans. These scientific and ecological discoveries must benefit all nations and not simply be the preserve of the already wealthy. I therefore very much welcome the emphasis on open access repositories and databases that is so prominent in the BBNJ agreement. The agreement also embeds vital safeguards like the “polluter pays” principle and the precautionary principle. I hope it will pave the way for international action that will finally turn the tide—pun absolutely intended—on the reckless destructive practices that nations across the world have perpetrated. I could not let the opportunity to speak on the high seas go by without mentioning the global plastics treaty, on which I hope we can find international agreement soon. I pay strong tribute to the Minister and the British delegation to the Geneva talks. We know from her recent appearance at the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee that she deeply regrets the collapse of those talks without an agreement, and I know that she is already redoubling efforts to find a way forward so that we can start to halt and reverse environmental catastrophes such as the great Pacific garbage patch. I urge the Government to do whatever they can alongside fellow members of the High Ambition Coalition to end plastic pollution and advance international action on this urgent issue. As we have heard, the Government have committed to protecting 30% of the ocean by 2030. The Bill makes good on that commitment on an international level, not just as an environmental ambition, but as a foundation for international co-operation, sustainable development and global food resilience. I commend the Government for their leadership in bringing this legislation forward, particularly, as my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins) said, in a packed legislative programme as we seek to get our country back on its feet. It demonstrates this Government’s commitment to and prioritising of the health and sustainability of our oceans beyond national jurisdiction, and I urge colleagues across the House to support it. Whether we live by the sea or in Cannock Chase in the heart of England, a healthy ocean is essential to a secure and sustainable future for us all. The oceans cannot wait, and nor should the United Kingdom.

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

  More

  During recess, I became the first interviewee of my constituent Brendan Woodbridge, an inspiring disabled 19-year-old who aspires to be a freelance journalist in order to spotlight accessible places and services so that people like him do not feel trapped at home. Brendan and his mom Natalie told me that when leaving the nurturing school environment, there is often nothing for young people like him to go on to. Will the Leader of the House grant a debate on educational and job opportunities for disabled adults?

• 11 Sept 2025 · Biosecurity at the Border: Britain’s Illegal Meat Crisis · Hansard source

  More

  On the Committee’s visit to the Port of Dover, we heard that many seizures of illegal meat include scales and tills—clear indications that the meat would be sold commercially. Most worryingly, as the right hon. Gentleman said, some of those imports are headed straight for farms, so the potential for a devastating outbreak of foot and mouth disease, African swine fever or many other diseases is huge. Does he agree that, regardless of any potential SPS agreement with the EU, we certainly cannot afford to scale back checks if we are serious about protecting British farming?

• 22 Jul 2025 · Gene Editing · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman is making an important point about the potential for gene editing or precision breeding. Does he agree that one of the clearest examples of its promise is the humble potato? During a recent visit that the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee made to the John Innes Centre, which he mentioned, we met Tropic and saw at first hand how researchers are using precision breeding to develop a blight-resistant potato, a breakthrough that could dramatically reduce the need for fungicide use. It could cut costs for farmers and improve yield resilience in the face of climate change. Does he agree that public engagement and clear, science-led regulation will be key to ensuring that those advancements deliver for both farmers and consumers?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Independent Water Commission · Hansard source

  More

  The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee has heard unbelievable statements from 10 major water companies. We also took a long, hard look at Ofwat, as Sir Jon Cunliffe did, and found a regulator that is too cosy in dealing with water companies and too bureaucratic in dealing with customers. A weak regulator and fragmented powers have let the public down for far too long. Does the Secretary of State agree that while the Conservatives have failed and Reform and the Greens make unachievable, unfunded promises, it is this Labour Government who will call time on failure and protect bill payers?

• 10 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Next week is Bees’ Needs Week, a chance to highlight the vital role that pollinators play in our environment and to encourage everybody to get involved to help these essential species. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Cannock Wood and Gentleshaw Gardening Club on its recent successful open gardens day, which I went along to? Not only does the club bring our community together in the most beautiful way, and inspire plenty of garden envy, but it also raises funds for the Bumblebee Conservation Trust—a fantastic example of local people making a national difference.