Laurence Turner MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Apr 2026 · Strategic Defence Review: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister look at the sorry tale of Glenart Castle Mess in Longbridge, Birmingham? This is armed forces accommodation not from decades ago; it opened in 2017 at a cost to the taxpayer of £36 million. It was built with 95% flammable external cladding, and the fire defects within the accommodation have now been judged to be so severe that the facility will be closed for up to a year at further great cost to the taxpayer. This was hopelessly mismanaged by the previous Government. The armed forces personnel who work at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine in Birmingham do an essential job, and they deserve better.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Official History Programme · Hansard source

  More

  I draw the House’s attention to my vice-chairship of the all-party parliamentary group for archives and history. I strongly welcome the statement that my right hon. Friend has just made to the House. For more than 100 years, the Official History Programme provided valuable insight on matters such as war, peace and social policy. The Pilling review concluded that it should continue, so it is a welcome update that new works will be commissioned. Will the House be further updated on progress on the commissioning of those new works?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Railways Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I must start by slightly disagreeing with the Minister on his approach to railway puns. The shadow Minister referred to the discussion on amendment 257 as a dispute; I reassure him that this is not a case of pistons at dawn— [ Laughter. ] It is going to get so much worse. Before I come to the Minister’s substantive response, I will briefly respond to a few other comments that have been made in the debate. The shadow Minister spoke about changes in passenger numbers over the years, which is a good illustration of why it is important to look across a whole time series, and to bear in mind the old maxim that correlation is not causation. After all, passenger numbers were already falling by the time that we got to vesting day in 1948. The railways were exhausted after years of war—indeed, passenger numbers halved between 1920 and 1947. In fact, the actual nadir in passenger numbers was not in the early 1990s but in 1983. I thought that Opposition Members might have wanted to take pride in the successful sectorisation experiment under the Thatcher Government, perhaps aided by some benign neglect from that Administration, which was sadly not repeated by the subsequent Major Administration. We have some good explanations for why exactly passenger numbers rose so dramatically in the 1990s and 2000s. For a long time, I think we could have all substituted our political explanations for why that happened. However, in 2018, a very good study, led by eminent modellers and academics, was published by the Independent Transport Commission on precisely that question. It found that passenger growth was overwhelmingly driven by changes in the job market—the types of roles being created and the areas of the country in which they were being created. It was also aided by changes to tax incentives for company cars in the early 2000s, which led to an additional increase in rail traffic.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Railways Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  As in this morning’s sitting, I draw attention to the fact that I am a member of Unite. I did not intend to speak in this particular debate, but I wish to respond briefly to some of the things that have been said and to mount a perhaps limited defence of Network Rail and the importance of engineering in such organisations. The comparator, of course, was Railtrack, which outsourced its engineering functions, had only a single engineer on its board of directors and had only one non-executive director from an engineering background, with deadly consequences, which are well understood and do not need repeating. If there is sometimes caution in the organisation, I suggest that the long shadow cast by the events of the late 1990s and early 2000s is why. There is good and sound logic behind not running too many trains across congested track. The real reason why we do not run as many trains as is theoretically possible is that lack of capacity on the network. Birmingham New Street, for example, will be exhausted once the Camp Hill services start in the spring—any more services simply cannot be safely got in or out on the network. When path allocators have to make decisions on which services to prioritise, freight tends to be squeezed out. That is a long-standing problem.

• 3 Nov 2025 · Defence Sector: Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  I draw attention to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests in respect of the GMB, a defence manufacturing trade union. Defence is an engine for growth, but skill shortages remain. What steps are being taken to increase the number of high-quality apprentices? If I may, Mr Speaker, can I also ask the Minister to join me in congratulating my constituent Andy De Comyn, whose design has just been chosen for the proposed national memorial to all members of the parliamentary community who have fallen in conflict?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Defence Sector: Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  8. What steps he is taking to help ensure that the defence sector supports economic growth.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement and for her recent decision, when she was Home Secretary, about the Ukraine permission extension scheme. Does she agree that when Putin probes weakness we must respond by demonstrating strength? Does she further agree that the post-war development of Ukraine’s significant energy resources, which may require British technical expertise, would serve the dual purpose of helping to reconstruct Ukraine’s shattered economy and increase Europe’s security of energy supply?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Jaguar Land Rover Cyber-attack · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) for securing this urgent question, and welcome the Minister to his new role. JLR employs hundreds of people directly in my constituency, and many more indirectly. This is an extremely concerning time for them, and I hope that the Department will consider providing information directly to local MPs, in addition to engaging with the company. As has been said, this attack follows attacks on Marks & Spencer, the NHS, the British Library and other public institutions. I understand why the Minister has set out that the Government’s focus is on ensuring that companies are better protected and report these kinds of incidents, but can he assure the House that all steps are being taken to identify areas of critical national vulnerability in both the public and private sectors, so that we can try to avoid these attacks in the first place?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Property Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to be called in this debate, even if I must start by questioning the wisdom of the Opposition’s decision to bring forward today’s motion. After all, the memories and consequences of their so-called mini-Budget are still fresh—the culmination of Liz Truss’s economic policies, which the present Leader of the Opposition said were “aspirational and inspirational”. Their dreams became our constituents’ nightmares—to say nothing of the Conservatives’ failure to pass renters’ rights reform, which this Government are now putting through, or of their dreadful record on wages, which left people in my constituency with £300 a month less, after inflation, every month. It cannot be reasonably denied—although the Conservatives have tried—that the incoming Government faced a bedevilled inheritance last July. For all the sound and fury, there is little mystery about this now. As Richard Hughes, the chair of the OBR, told the Treasury Committee: “When we had a high-trust relationship with the Treasury those things were being well managed, and managed within the total. That system very clearly broke down… there was about £9.5 billion-worth of net pressure on Departments’ budgets, which they did not disclose…which under the law and under the Act they should have done.” What a disgraceful set of affairs, and decisions that awaited the Government on public sector pay had been ducked and delayed until after the election. We need to be clear about this: Conservative Ministers already knew the recommendation of the schoolteachers review body. They also knew that the recommendations of each pay review body tend to be similar. Why were those recommendations delayed, given that the pay year started not in July or even at the beginning of the pre-election period, but in April? It was because Conservative Ministers and their Departments submitted the remit letters and their evidence late. As the Office of Manpower Economics said in its 2022 efficiency review: “The work of the PRBs is demand led and essentially non-negotiable—departments set the remits and timetables.” There we have it: the additional cost was always coming, and the only reason why it came seven months into an election year was because Conservative Ministers were content for it to be so delayed. Today Opposition Front Benchers claim that they would have rejected the recommendations, but not once has any Opposition Member had the courage to say how much less they would have paid nurses, paramedics, teachers, police officers and armed forces personnel in each of our constituencies. Are any Opposition Members able to enlighten us today? No. The reality is that they want the investment that means 25,000 fewer people are on a University Hospitals Birmingham waiting list compared with last year, and which is almost doubling the free school meals entitlement in my constituency of Birmingham Northfield, but they do not support a single measure to pay for it. We should be clear in saying that strong public services create value. Businesses and working people in all our constituencies need roads, schools and hospitals that are resourced and decent.

• 1 Sept 2025 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement and his leadership on this issue. As the pressure on Ukraine to agree a ceasefire builds, Russia too escalates its campaign of aerial attack on Ukrainian civilians and civilian infrastructure. In the liberated city of Kherson, Russian first-person drone operators are turning state killing into a grotesque spectacle that is publicly broadcast and has been christened a “human safari”. The provision and conversion of Ukrainian Soviet-era missiles into the Gravehawk system represents both real material aid and an accomplishment of British military engineering. Crucially, it helps to reduce dependency on any single supply chain and technology for aerial defence. Will the Defence Secretary give the House an assurance that all steps are being taken to increase both the quantity and the diversity of air defence systems for Ukraine?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Extending the Ukraine Permission Extension Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  Has the hon. Member seen the research produced by the University of Birmingham on the experience of Ukrainian refugees in circumstances such as those he describes, particularly loss of employment and loss of tenancies? Does he agree that landlords and employers should not be acting in this way, that to do so may be discrimination on the grounds of nationality, and that some form of remediation needs to be found in these cases?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  I am truly thankful to be called to speak today. In three weeks, we will remember as a nation the end of the second world war and the deliverance of peace from that bloodiest conflict. In this House, too, we remember the terrible scale and depths of human suffering, the more than 50 million civilians killed, the service personnel who risked their lives at home and abroad, those who gave their lives and those who came home forever changed by what they endured. When the instrument of surrender was signed aboard the USS Missouri on 2 September 1945, a young seaman of the Royal Navy was present. In the space of just a year, that teenager had already faced down the terror of kamikaze pilots and rescued sailors from submerged explosives. He later said: “You were in that situation, and you did what you had to do, whatever the circumstances. I went in a boy and came out a man.” My constituent, Ken Tinkler, a witness to the momentous events that shape our world today, is still telling his story at the age of 98. I pay tribute to a remarkable life, well lived. As the guns fell silent, the world learned the true extent of the cruelty that the imperial Japanese state had inflicted upon its prisoners of war. In Birmingham, work continues to this day to preserve the memory of those British and Commonwealth servicemen and women who were captured. After the war, many far east prisoner of war associations were created, and Birmingham’s is one of the few that is still in operation today. The Birmingham Association of Far East Prisoners of War has produced a VJ80 badge, expertly manufactured by Thomas Fattorini Ltd in the jewellery quarter in Birmingham. It depicts a Commonwealth torch, the everlasting flame, and I am proud to wear it in this House tonight. In preparation for this debate, I asked the secretary of the association, a constituent whose father was a POW in the far east, what words it would be appropriate to read into the record to commemorate him, his comrades and all others represented. She replied with this: “To remember them is to honour them.” As the war fades from direct memory, it is important to say here, as we will shortly across the nation, that we remember the war and its end. We remember those who served, and we remember those who now are gone. We will endeavour to preserve and pass on those memories to our children and grandchildren, and onwards to the uncounted generations that are yet to come. They will not be forgotten. We honour them by remembering them. I am truly grateful to those who have made this debate possible, and for the funding that has been put in place so that we can mark the VJ80 anniversary appropriately.