Kevin Bonavia MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 18 Dec 2025 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  The people of Ukraine are not alone, as we have heard in this House today. Their sacrifices are for their own country, but they are for us all. I am therefore very grateful for what this Government are doing in leading the way; so much more is being done to support our brethren and sisters in Ukraine. However, Russia is a threat not just to Ukraine but to all of Europe, and we have heard about the threats to this country. What can the Minister tell us about the cross-Government steps we are taking to stop interference in our democracy, attacks on our infrastructure and, indeed, attacks on our whole society?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  May I add my personal tribute to the Minister? This work is a huge achievement for her, but not just for her; she is doing it on behalf of all women and girls in this country. She said that all of us across the country have a role to play, as individuals or organisations. She will recall that in Stevenage we have an amazing charity called Survivors Against Domestic Abuse. One of the challenges it faces is that many victims keep going back again and again, because the justice system is not strong enough for them. I am sure that SADA will welcome domestic abuse protection orders. Will she explain to SADA and other organisations how this Government will help them to provide support to women and girls who need it?

• 15 Dec 2025 · Defence Spending: Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  As the Secretary of State knows from visiting my constituency, Stevenage hosts a thriving defence and space sector, with more than a quarter of satellites in space built in our town. Next month, Airbus Defence and Space will open Launchpad, a new facility in Stevenage giving small and medium-sized enterprises and start-ups space to work and develop technologies. Can the Secretary of State confirm that our innovative primes and SMEs will receive proper attention when the defence industrial plan is implemented?

• 15 Dec 2025 · Defence Spending: Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  15. What steps he is taking through defence spending to help increase economic growth.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Costs for Commuters · Hansard source

  More

  7. What fiscal steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to reduce costs for commuters.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Costs for Commuters · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Chancellor and the Transport Secretary for freezing rail fares next month, which will help to ease commuting costs, especially for my constituents who use Stevenage and Knebworth stations. However, affordability alone is only part of the railway jigsaw; regeneration schemes like Stevenage station gateway, supported by the Government’s towns fund, are part of a wider £1 billion regeneration programme for our town and provide a real opportunity to modernise transport hubs and improve connectivity, helping commuters get to work more easily. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that infrastructure investment for projects like the station gateway are prioritised, so that commuters can get to work—

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  I am afraid I will not. I welcome the Government giving us an opportunity for a national debate through this consultation. It is time that we have this debate. I am so pleased that so many Members are here today and that so many people have signed this petition. It is right to look at their concerns. There are legitimate concerns about whether ID should be mandatory and, if so, in what circumstances, and about those people who cannot access this system and whether the proposed scheme can really make the improvements that we hope it will. Digital ID is not a panacea. I say to anybody who claims it will be a panacea for ending illegal immigration that it will not be. But will it be better? That is the question before us. We must not talk about a dystopian future when so many of our neighbours are already going through the process. Why do we not learn from our neighbours and think the best of our country, rather than talking it down—as we have heard so much in this debate? I ask the Minister to answer those questions today.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  I will not, I am afraid. I am now convinced that it is necessary. Why is that? It is because today, identity checks are not a novelty; they are a necessity across all our lives. Why is it that a company such as Amazon can do far better handling our data than the national health service? My hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley), a respected doctor, explained how we cannot, as individuals, access the services that we need. Why is this seen as so un-British? Is it not British to be ambitious for our people? If we think that other countries can do it, but we cannot because we are so rubbish at such things, why should we not discuss that?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair today, Ms Furniss. The historian AJP Taylor said: “Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state…He could travel abroad or leave his country for ever without a passport or any sort of official permission.” Sounds great, does it not? Yet the world wars that followed changed all that. By the second world war, we had a national identity card—as has been mentioned—and that requirement only ended in 1952. However, individual registration numbers remained, and do so to this day, for national insurance and the NHS. When the NHS was being formed, many people said, “Oh no—not the socialist state that is taking over all our lives.” Yet so many of us depend on it to this day. It would be wholly wrong to claim that there has been no need for the state to provide a system to verify a citizen’s identity, either for national security or for the right to access public services. If someone had asked me 20 years ago, the last time a national identity service was being properly considered, I would have had my doubts as to whether it was really necessary.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  This Budget shows that after years of decline, this Labour Government are building a stronger and more secure economy, one that works for working people in Stevenage and the villages across our constituency. We are beating the forecasts, with growth upgraded to 1.5% this year and wages rising faster in our first year than in the entire first decade under the Conservatives. But this is all for nothing if working people cannot see and feel positive changes in their day-to-day lives. That is why this Budget makes the fair and necessary choices to cut the cost of living, renew our public services and bring stability to the economy. For families in Stevenage, the cost of living has been a real pressure, so I welcome the measures that will put money back into people’s pockets, with £150 off average energy bills, rising to £300 off for those who need it most, alongside freezing prescription charges and, for the first time in 30 years, freezing rail fares. That means that commuters travelling from Stevenage or Knebworth will not see the annual hike that they endured year after year under the previous Government. Take, for example, one of our fantastic young apprentices from Airbus who wrote to me before the Budget asking the Chancellor to consider a rail freeze to ensure that he could afford to do the job he loves. When working people call, this Labour Government answer. We are cutting NHS waiting lists, with 250 new neighbourhood health centres and millions more appointments, and we are freezing prescription costs. For Stevenage, where the Lister hospital serves not just our town but the surrounding villages, this investment in our infrastructure and in our patients is vital. We are doing all that while reducing borrowing every year so that interest rates—already cut five times since the election—can keep falling, helping families with mortgages and businesses with investment. Let’s deal with the nonsense we have heard from the Opposition Benches. We have been told that this is a Budget for “Benefits Street”, that Labour is hiking taxes to pay for welfare and that borrowing is spiralling out of control. Here are the actual facts: borrowing will fall every single year of this Parliament, moving to surplus by 2028. That is fiscal responsibility, not the chaos of unfunded tax cuts that crashed the economy under the last Conservative Government. Scrapping the two-child benefit limit is not a handout; it is an investment. A child growing up in poverty is less likely to work as an adult and earns 25% less by the age of 30. Lifting 450,000 children out of poverty is both morally right and economically smart. On taxes, the biggest changes fall on those with the broadest shoulders: high-value property owners, landlords who pay less tax than their tenants and online giants who have dodged their fair share for too long. Compare that with the Conservatives, who now talk of £47 billion of spending cuts, hitting working people the hardest and still leaving public services crumbling—they have some cheek, after 14 years of doing just that. That figure would be the equivalent of firing every police officer twice over. Reform’s fantasy economics, with billions of cuts and no plan as to where they fall, would mean complete, unbridled chaos. That is why we need a sensible Labour Budget. That is what we have, and that is why I will support it tomorrow night.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Lady says that people will pay for people on benefits, but some 60% of those people on benefits are working. Does she not agree that we are supporting people into work?

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

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for leading today’s debate, and the Movers and Shakers for promoting both the debate and the Parky charter. My hon. Friend talks about working together. One of the issues I have heard from constituents in Stevenage is misdiagnosis at the outset, where GPs have not identified the condition or referred patients to the right pathway. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is not just about funding, but about training as well?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q15. I pay tribute to a new veterans group in Stevenage, The Muster Point, which was founded by Stuart Mendelson and Steve Black. Last week, I joined them in a continuous 72-hour vigil at Stevenage war memorial, where veterans shared stories of family and friends lost in war. But veterans deserve more than just our tributes, so will the Prime Minister commit to working with veterans in Stevenage and across the UK in delivering this Government’s new veterans strategy in full?

• 11 Nov 2025 · Remembrance Day: Armed Forces · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to mark Armistice Day by speaking in this debate about our armed forces—those who serve today and those who served before them. Their courage and service is woven into the tapestry of every village, town and city in this country. In my constituency, that tapestry has been preserved thanks to the vital work of local historian Paul Johnson, who created the Herts at War project. Thousands from Stevenage and surrounding villages fought abroad in both world wars, each one with a unique character, life, home, family and with a story to be told. Take Herbert Charles Cooper from the village of Aston, who at just 18 years old enlisted in 1914 and joined the 9th East Surrey Regiment. He was the son of a local chimney sweep. On the western front, Herbert was tragically shot by a sniper while replacing sandbags on a parapet. He gave his life valiantly in service to his country and now lies in Spoilbank cemetery in Belgium. Take Edward John Croft, born in 1886 on Stevenage High Street. He joined the Royal Navy as a boy seaman in 1904. His career was extraordinary: he served in the suppression of the Armenian massacres, supported the Messina earthquake rescues, and even acted as personal signalman to the Prince and Princess of Wales aboard HMS Renown. During the great war, he fought at Jutland aboard HMS Caroline, where he suffered shell shock. Later, while serving ashore, an air raid caused a relapse that ultimately led to his death in 1919. He is buried in the Royal Navy cemetery at Southsea. Their stories are powerful, moving and inspiring, but also devastating. The stories do not end there. That brings me to the reality of modern service. Our armed forces are not only defending us abroad but protecting us at home—from cyber-threats, terrorism, even natural disasters. Their remit is expanding, and so must our support. I was honoured to meet service personnel from the Royal Air Force last year while taking part in the armed forces parliamentary scheme. That gave me a real insight into the lives that they lead on our behalf and what they need in terms of support, equipment, accommodation, childcare and so much more. Now I turn to those who have served. I want to draw the House’s attention to an important piece of work produced in my constituency: the Hertfordshire veteran report, created by Stu Mendelson, co-founder of the Muster Point in Stevenage. This report is the first evidence-based overview of veteran need in Hertfordshire, using data from the 2021 census, the Department for Work and Pensions and Jobcentre armed forces champions. It moves the conversation from assumption to evidence, and the findings are stark. Hertfordshire has fewer veterans that the national average but more at-risk veterans than expected, and their hardship is concentrated in specific districts. Over 5.8% of Stevenage’s veterans are on universal credit, which is well above the national average, and many rely on housing support. I know that Stevenage borough council is doing all it can for veterans in our town. I want to pay particular tribute to Claire Parris, the council’s armed forces champion, for her tireless work in making this happen. I also want to thank Stu, Steve and their team at the Muster Point for everything they do for veterans in Stevenage and beyond. It is more than a hub; it is a lifeline offering practical support. I joined them last week at a 72-hour, non-stop vigil at our war memorial to mark remembrance and raise awareness. We need to give veterans support. I take this opportunity to ask my hon. and gallant Friend the Minister to visit the Muster Point in Stevenage to see at first hand how the armed forces covenant is being implemented and how we can go further and faster—as we must do—to deliver the full extent of its benefits to those who have served our country.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  This motion is a masterclass in political gaslighting. It claims to support high streets, but proposes slashing public investment, scrapping workers’ rights and deregulating the very protections that keep our communities safe. It is not really a motion; it is a demolition notice for our high streets and our town centres. Neglect, not regulation, is the real threat to our high streets. Under the previous Tory Government, shoplifting rose by 71%, street theft increased by 59%, and violence against shop workers hit 2,000 incidents per day. This is the legacy of the Conservative party—a record of abandonment and inaction. The Conservatives let crime spiral and neighbourhood policing collapse. This Labour Government are reversing that damage. Through the safer streets summer initiative, more than 500 towns, including my town of Stevenage, are seeing a surge in visible policing, targeted enforcement against shoplifting and antisocial behaviour, and bespoke local action plans to tackle violence against shop workers. This is not a short-term stunt; it is the first wave of Labour’s neighbourhood policing guarantee, backed by a £200 million investment this year alone. This Government will deliver 13,000 new officers and police community support officers by the end of this Parliament and £5 million for our pride in place programme, giving communities the power to reclaim boarded-up shops, save derelict pubs and block unwanted gambling and vape outlets. This means boots on the ground—not empty promises—restoring safety and confidence to our high streets. This motion offers slogans about energy bills, but it is Labour that offers systemic reform. We are reforming the energy market to make it fairer and more transparent for businesses and accelerating clean, home-grown energy to reduce long-term costs and dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets. We are not capping chaos; we are ending it. The Opposition attack the Employment Rights Bill—a Bill that bans the fire and rehire practices that caused the exploitation of so many workers under the previous Government, introduces bereavement leave for grieving parents after pregnancy loss, ends non-disclosure agreements that silence victims of harassment and discrimination, and lifts standards for thousands of my constituents in insecure work. The Opposition call it red tape; I call it basic decency. The Bill will reward decent employers by punishing the bad behaviour of others. In their motion, the Opposition talk about protecting post offices, pubs and pharmacies, which we all want to do. But how dare they? How dare they preach about protecting post offices? The Conservative candidate in a by-election in the Roebuck ward of Stevenage sent out leaflets to my constituents falsely insinuating that the local post office was closing—this was scaremongering. I checked with the post office, and there was no threat of closure. It was part of a national campaign by the Conservatives, telling people, “Your local post office is being closed,” with no evidence behind it. It is merely a cynical attempt to mislead voters.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I am very happy to intervene. We are talking about changing the status quo under the hon. Gentleman’s Government.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  Will the shadow Minister confirm that under the previous Conservative Administration, thieves could get £200 worth of goods with impunity, and that has changed under this Government?

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that intervention. The point is that we, as politicians, have a duty to explain facts and base our arguments on evidence, which was not done in this case. I put it to all politicians and would-be politicians to base their arguments on facts. This motion is a Trojan horse. It dresses up deregulation as a gift to our constituents while gutting the very foundations of our high streets—fairness and community power. If we accept the premise of this Tory motion, we are no better than a modern-day Troy. Labour is rebuilding what the Conservatives hollowed out of our communities: safety, fairness, opportunity and, dare I say it, pride. We are putting power back in the hands of local people, bobbies back on the beat and dignity back in the workplace. Our high streets do not need hollow gestures; they need real change. Only this Labour Government are delivering it.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is spot on. Pride of place is about actually getting our local communities involved. They know their high streets best, and we should work with them to use that money for long-term strategic decisions. I oppose this motion. It is illiterate and has no answers for our future, it does not add up economically, and it ignores the good work that this Government are already doing for our high streets.

• 27 Oct 2025 · Holidays During School Term Time · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I congratulate the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) on introducing the petition, and I thank the petitioners themselves. I am also grateful to the 865 people in Stevenage who signed this petition, showing how strongly families feel about the issue. I will shortly turn to some of the reasons why the petition really matters, but before I do, I must be clear that every day in school counts—and parents agree. In addition to the evidence that we have heard from the Chair of the Education Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), 78% of parents say that every school day matters, according to the charity Parentkind. The evidence backs them up: missing even a few days can have a big impact. Year 6 pupils with near perfect attendance are 30% more likely to meet expected standards. Secondary pupils with near perfect attendance are almost twice as likely to achieve a grade 5 in English and Maths. Persistently absent pupils could earn £10,000 less by the age of 28. Normalising the taking of time off in term time would send the wrong message. It would undermine teachers’ hard work and risks widening the attainment gap. Every missed day is not just a lost lesson, but a lost opportunity. I am sure that many of the parents who signed this petition would wholeheartedly agree with that, but, as the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley explained at the outset, it is simply the only way they can afford quality family time together. Just last week, a constituent told me that the only way they can afford a holiday is to take their children out of school one or two days before the end of term, knowing they would not risk a fine but can still take advantage of cheaper prices. If parents have to play the system like that, we know that the system itself is broken. The real problem, which many Members have touched on, is that families are not breaking rules because they do not care; they are simply being priced out. My hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash) started with Center Parcs, so let me turn to Center Parcs. Four days at Center Parcs Woburn Forest, near me, in term time is £429. In February half-term, that goes up to £1,449—an increase of 238%. At Center Parcs in Longleat, four days in term time is £579, but in half-term it is £1,599—an increase of 176%. A British Airways flight from Heathrow to Geneva costs £184 in term time, but in half-term that goes up to £3,072, which is a 1,570% increase—and it is outbound only. In May half-term, a TUI Tenerife package for seven days in term time costs £1,204, and in half-term it costs £2,384—an increase of 98%. A Jet2 flight to Bodrum in term time is £500, but in half-term it is £1,065, which is an increase of 113%. Then there are the summer holidays, which are much longer, but people still get hit. A Ryanair flight from Newcastle to Faro in term time is £140, but in the summer holidays, it is £340—an increase of 143%. With packages in Spain on Go.Compare, seven days in term time is £290 per person, but that goes up to £384 in the school holidays, meaning that a family would pay £760 more. What can the Government do to stop the travel industry from exploiting families with outrageous price hikes during school holidays? Fines are simply not working. According to Parentkind, 61% of parents say that the risk of a fine makes no difference to them. Families feel trapped between unaffordable prices and rigid rules. Even when they want to play by the rules, they are still penalised. A single mum in Stevenage told me that she had been fined even though it had been her ex-husband who took their child out of school. Let us not pit education against family time; let us ensure that both are respected and that no parent is forced to choose between their child’s education and quality family time together.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Renters’ Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I fully support my hon. Friend the Minister’s motion to agree with Lords amendments 19 and 39, and I thank him for all his work. I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) for piloting this momentous legislation through the House. If I may, I add my own thanks to the noble Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, who has been a doughty champion in the other place and, of course, in my constituency of Stevenage. Some 7,000 households rent privately in Stevenage. They fear their tenancies coming to an end for no good reason. I was knocking on doors in the ward of Roebuck last weekend. A young mother opened her door, and I noticed that the window next to the front door was broken and patched up with a wooden board. I asked whether it was a council property, and she said, “No, I rent privately. He’s a good landlord.” I said, “Okay, so will he fix that window?” She replied, “Oh, no. He has given me this bit of wood. I am a bit worried that if I ask, he will throw me out.” That is what a “good” landlord is assumed to be. It must come to an end. Renters like that young mother have been waiting 40 years for change. Today, should the House agree, the Bill will go for Royal Assent, and that fear will come to an end, so I support the motion. I thank the Minister.

• 20 Oct 2025 · Asylum Seekers: Support and Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for leading the debate. I think that all of us in the Chamber agree on one point: hotels are simply not the right place to house anyone seeking asylum. They are used as hostels; they are also in areas people feel very uncomfortable about. That is all clear to us. They are not homes; they do not offer the stability or dignity that people need to rebuild their lives. Nor do they allow proper access to services or integration into our communities, to which many asylum seekers wish to contribute. As we have heard from many Members, the impact of the current situation is felt locally. Public services are under pressure. Hard-working local taxpayers feel left out of the conversation. Those seeking asylum, who have often fled conflict, persecution and trauma, are left in a state of uncertainty and are unable to move forward with their lives. Tension is rising, protests ensue, fear is stoked, concerns are weaponised, communities feel demonised and the dream of the tolerant, diverse Britain that we know and love comes under threat. However, let me be clear: I am not and will never be the type of politician who exists only to be against something. Neither I nor many other Members came into politics to cause tension, stoke fear and weaponise concerns. That is the cheap and easy route—promising the quick fantasy fix. That is the politics of weakness. I came into politics to get stuck into the difficult business of being for a solution. I can reject the use of hotels for asylum seekers and understand concerns about managing immigration levels fairly, while also rejecting those who wish to spin this broken record for votes until the sun goes down. It is time to roll up our sleeves collectively and fix this mess together. Let me remind all Members here today that the previous Conservative Government created this problem. The hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), who is no longer in his place, talked about the Rwanda scheme.

• 20 Oct 2025 · Asylum Seekers: Support and Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  As I will come to later in my remarks, I am for reducing and speeding up the whole processing system and for finding more appropriate places than hotels—there are a multitude of those, and I am sure the Minister will set out where we get to on that. The point is that we should all agree that we need to have a fair system. It needs to be fast and to deal with genuine asylum seekers. Unfortunately, we currently have a broken system. Returning to what the previous Conservative Government were apparently trying to do with their Rwanda system, they never gave us or themselves a chance to see that one through. They knew perfectly well that it was not working out and they got themselves into all kinds of knots. We hear calls for leaving conventions. People blamed the European Union, but we left the European Union with a hard Brexit and immigration has gone up, so they go and find something else: the European convention on human rights. When that does not work, what is next? The refugee convention. While we are throwing all those rights out the door, it will be, “Well, we don’t need any of that stuff. Who cares about freedom from torture? Who cares about these rights for all of us in this country?” Talking about so-called outdated laws is not the solution. We need far more practical solutions. The answer is to co-operate with our neighbours. This is not a British problem; this is a European and a worldwide problem. If we treat it as a British problem, we will never, ever get the solution. Other Members in this room seek to weaponise this issue for their own ends. It suits them to scaremonger about what is happening, I attempted to intervene on the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin) to ask where her evidence was for all that she said. Those of us who try to look at the facts are dealing with fake news. Some people online on social media will not look at mainstream media or trust journalists who look for second sources, but will happily share a faked video. That is what is happening now: fearmongering and scaremongering from parties like Reform that thrive on division and hate. Give me evidence—that is all I ask. I want genuine evidence, not the fake news that we get on social media, with all the fake videos out there. I welcome the much more sensible and practical approach of this Government. The British people are a practical and pragmatic people who believe in fairness, as do this Labour Government. That is why I welcome the beginning of the returns agreement with our neighbour France. France has a major issue with illegal migration and asylum as well. So does Germany. So does Malta, the country I was born in. People say that we live on a small island; Malta is a small island, much smaller than here. This is not just a British problem. We have to work together to find solutions, rather than running away from rules and clubs just because we do not like them and will not play that game. The agreement with France signals a more constructive approach. What is needed is co-operation, because we have a shared responsibility. Of course, that initiative is not a silver bullet, but it is a practical step forward, unlike using our overseas territories to host people. The hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby did not rule out the use of the Falklands. Islands that we fought so hard for in 1982, against Argentine invasion, are now apparently going to be used for dispersal. She did not rule it out when she was asked to do so—it is under consideration.

• 20 Oct 2025 · Asylum Seekers: Support and Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  I am happy to take an intervention from the hon. Lady, if she wishes. By working with our European partners and other countries we can better manage arrivals, reduce pressure on local services and ensure that those seeking asylum are treated with fairness and dignity. Co-operation must be more than simply operational, however; it means tackling the criminal networks that exploit vulnerable people and ensuring that our asylum system is efficient and humane. Our communities want clarity. They want to know that the system is working, not just for those who come here in search of safety, but for our local communities. That starts with policies that build on partnership, not posturing. While I will always bang the drum for safer and stronger border management, I do not want us to turn our backs on those in need or give up on the multicultural Britain we know and love. Britain has long been a place of refuge and opportunity. We have heard about the 250,000 Belgians this country gave refuge to in the first world war, the Windrush generation and the frontline workers who kept our NHS going during the pandemic. Immigrants have always played a vital role in shaping our country for better. We have a legal and a moral responsibility to support those fleeing persecution. That means building an asylum system that is fair, efficient and humane, and one that does not leave people waiting in limbo for years. At the same time, we must be firm where it matters. If someone comes to this country and breaks our laws, they should be removed. That is not about prejudice; it is about protecting the integrity of our system and the safety of our communities. It is something that those who come here legally, and contribute greatly, wholeheartedly support—fairness matters to us all. That balanced approach must guide us. We need to move away from the use of hotels, which were never designed for long-term accommodation. We must continue the work of clearing the backlog so that decisions are made swiftly and fairly. We must deepen our partnerships with international allies to address the drivers of migration, which affect all countries, at their source. With that in mind, I ask the Minister how and when local authorities will be notified that hotels in their area are being returned to public use, and what support will be provided to ensure a smooth transition for both our local communities and all those applying for asylum?