Lee Dillon MP: speeches

Speeches

• 18 May 2026 · Youth Justice · Hansard source

  More

  The White Paper contains many announcements that we, as Liberal Democrats, can support, so I gently ask the Deputy Prime Minister what evidence the Government have that the potential threat of a prison sentence will be an effective mechanism for compliance with a parenting order. Have the Government done an impact assessment, and how can he guarantee that the use of stricter punishment will not adversely affect the outcomes for the child involved?

• 27 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I worked at McDonald’s throughout my GCSEs and A-levels and while at university—it is a good employer for those who are studying. Newbury Soup Kitchen is a local charity that is supporting a constituent of mine, spending many hours on the phone to universal credit staff. However, they do not consistently accept the authority to discuss, demanded an in-person meeting despite the resident being wheelchair dependent, and offered a Teams meeting only for the resident to find out that Berkshire does not offer Teams meetings. Will a Minister meet me to discuss the case and the process failures?

• 27 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

• 27 Apr 2026 · Lord Mandelson Humble Address: Government Response Update · Hansard source

  More

  How does the Prime Minister’s promise of delivering honesty, integrity and accountability reconcile with the potential blocking of a motion to the Committee of Privileges? If the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister is not willing to comment on the Government’s voting intentions tomorrow, will he commit to accountability by ensuring that he votes in favour for it being referred to the Committee?

• 21 Apr 2026 · Middle East: Economic Update · Hansard source

  More

  In her statement, the Chancellor outlined a plan for tomorrow, but no help for today. The residents of Newbury—the small businesses and farmers—want to know how high the Chancellor will allow the prices of petrol, red diesel and fertiliser to go before she decides to take positive action and reduce the impact of the cost of living crisis on those people. How high do those prices have to go, Chancellor?

• 21 Apr 2026 · Gulf Conflict · Hansard source

  More

  19. What assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of the situation in the strait of Hormuz.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Gulf Conflict · Hansard source

  More

  Given President Trump’s latest threats to destroy bridges and power plants—attacks that would be against international law—has the Foreign Secretary made representations to her US counterpart that threatening war crimes is not the way to achieve peace or to open the strait? More importantly, if Trump does start to attack civilian infrastructure, will she withdraw US access to British bases?

• 13 Apr 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  The Lebanese Health Ministry confirmed earlier today that 2,055 civilians have been killed since the start of this latest crisis, including 167 since Friday alone, so I join the Prime Minister in calling for the urgent ceasefire to include Lebanon. Since this crisis started, the Treasury has received over £200 million in additional VAT from fuel. Will the Prime Minister commit to using those funds in the UK to mitigate the cost of living crisis that the middle east crisis is causing?

• 25 Mar 2026 · Road Safety of Horses and Riders · Hansard source

  More

  Having tabled an early-day motion, presented a Bill and hosted a Westminster Hall debate on equine road safety, I am now pleased to be able to submit this petition on horse and rider road safety. The petition states: The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Declares that horses and riders face significant risks on UK roads due to inadequate enforcement of passing distances and limited driver education. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to introduce legislation to make the minimum passing speeds and distances for horses in the Highway Code a legal requirement, to require equestrian safety to feature in all driving theory tests, and to introduce standards for the teaching of equestrian safety in driver education. And the petitioners remain, etc . [P003174]

• 11 Mar 2026 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Member agree that the way the Government have approached this has hurt their main aim of economic growth, because farmers have delayed ordering and, because of the new rules, there is now no incentive to grow their farms over that £2.5 million threshold?

• 4 Mar 2026 · Ministry of Defence · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend may have been coming to it, but how much would it cost to get to his vision compared with what we have in budgets today?

• 4 Mar 2026 · Ministry of Defence · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the Chair of the Defence Committee on securing the debate; I also thank the Backbench Business Committee, of which I am a member. As the Chair of the Select Committee said, the first duty of any Government is to ensure the safety and security of their citizens, but as we speak, smoke continues to rise in the middle east, leaving destruction across at least nine countries in the region. In this volatile era, we must work in lockstep with our European partners, restart talks to join the EU’s Security Action for Europe—SAFE—fund and take greater responsibility for our continent’s security. We require bold action, and I welcome the Government’s decision to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP, but we need urgent cross-party talks on how we can get this to 3% as soon as possible and keep pace with NATO spending, on which we are falling behind. At this critical juncture, we must ensure that those figures translate into steely capacity both at home and abroad. In June last year, the strategic defence review set out a compelling vision: the establishment of a new cyber-command, cutting-edge warships and a landmark shift to warfighting readiness, but the defence investment plan, which should turn that strategy into fully costed delivery, is yet to be seen. We must see the DIP published as soon as possible. Without it, industry lacks certainty, long-term procurement decisions are delayed and jobs remain in jeopardy. Our small and medium-sized enterprise defence sector is ready and willing to step up to the challenge of supporting the SDR and the 20-40-40 strategy. In my constituency, Airborne UK plays an active role in strengthening the UK’s sovereign capabilities in the unmanned aerial vehicle and defence sector as a trusted composite scaling partner. While based just over the border in Berkshire, it is obviously keen to work with the Swindon cluster. Companies like this will benefit from the additional £1.1 billion investment in R&D, but I have also heard from SME companies that changes made under the previous Government—tax credit uplifts were cut from 130% to 65%—have led to SMEs working with more foreign Governments rather than our own. Of course, we deeply want them to work with us, so I urge the Government to look at these rates to supplement the increases in spending in R&D. To create overmatch, we need to work faster and more flexibly. We need to have better procurement and rebuild trust with the Treasury so that, with accountability, funding is scaled up. Just two months ago, the head of the armed forces said that the UK was “not as ready as we need to be for the kind of full-scale conflict we might face”. That warning should focus minds in this House. If the UK is to lead within Europe, we need pace and clarity, but we also need the personnel to deliver it. The Army’s training strength now stands at around 73,000—its smallest size in generations. Because of the operational demands and lack of resources, we have seen service personnel joining the field Army with formal training deficits recorded against them because they have not been able to fire all types of ammunition in training. I welcome the Government’s £9 billion investment in the defence housing strategy. For our brave men and women who serve the country, decent accommodation is the very least they deserve, and it is a stain on the previous Government’s record that military family homes were left in such a mess. We are in a fragmented and predatory era. We cannot afford to dither. We must move faster, strengthen our European partnerships, rebuild our armed forces and ensure that every pound approved by this House bolsters our security at home and abroad. We need to do that so that we can create a whole-society approach to defence, one that can become a reality, including improving public engagement on the threats we face, where we have gaps and what trade-offs will be needed to ensure that we are safe at home and strong when we go abroad.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Leasehold Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his response and welcome the support being given to leaseholders; however, many of the problems they face could be addressed through stronger regulation of managing agents. Persistent failings by companies such as FirstPort continue to fill my inbox. In Newbury, we have a block of flats where a lift has been out of order for two years, and one constituent told me that, because it was broken, her son had to carry her husband down the stairs when he moved into a care home. No family should ever have to face that. Will the Secretary of State outline what steps the Government have taken to strengthen the regulation of managing agents and ensure that they are properly accountable to residents, who pay for their services?

• 23 Feb 2026 · Leasehold Reform · Hansard source

  More

  22. What steps he is taking to support leaseholders.

• 9 Feb 2026 · Procedure committee · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Member and will pass on his thanks to the Committee. We genuinely took into wider consideration the multiple aspects that would have to change if call lists were brought into effect.

• 9 Feb 2026 · Procedure committee · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his comment. We agree—spontaneity is such an important aspect of how we operate in this place.

• 9 Feb 2026 · Procedure committee · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak on behalf of the Procedure Committee about our fourth report of the Session, which looks at the idea of introducing call lists. I am happy to stand in for the Chair of the Procedure Committee, the hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Cat Smith), on this occasion. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for giving us time today, and my colleagues on the Procedure Committee for the thoughtful and constructive way in which they have approached this work. We launched this inquiry because Members from all sides of the House raised concerns with us. Some colleagues told us that they wanted more certainty in the sitting day, and others spoke about the challenges they face because of disabilities, long-term health conditions or caring responsibilities. Colleagues from smaller parties explained how difficult it can be to know whether they will be called at all in a debate. For many of them, call lists seemed like a straightforward answer. We also heard the opposite view, which is strongly and sincerely held. Some Members were worried that call lists could change the very character of debate in this Chamber. They feared that we would lose the spontaneity, energy and genuine back and forth that makes this place what it is. Our task was to look at all of this in a balanced and evidence-based way. We took written and oral evidence from a wide range of people, including the former Deputy Speakers Nigel Evans, Baroness Laing and Baroness Winterton, smaller parties, the Hansard Society, Centenary Action and the presiding officers of the devolved legislatures. Their insights were incredibly helpful, and we are grateful to all of them. After weighing everything carefully, the Committee concluded that call lists should not be introduced. This was not a decision that we reached quickly or casually, so I want to explain the main reasons behind it. First, we found that there is not a single, clearly defined problem that call lists would solve. The concerns raised with us were varied; they included accessibility, work-life balance, speaking opportunities, and the general flow of business. Call lists might help with some of those issues, but not all, and certainly not in a consistent or fair way. They are simply too blunt an instrument to deal with such a wide range of issues. Secondly, we heard real worries about what call lists would do to debates themselves. Many Members reflected on the pandemic period, in which call lists were used out of necessity. Those arrangements were right for that moment, but they undeniably reduced spontaneity—interventions were limited or banned, and the Chamber felt flatter. The natural rhythm of debate was lost. That experience made clear that call lists can change the atmosphere of this place in ways that we might not want to repeat. Thirdly, we looked at how other legislatures use call lists. It was a useful exercise, but in truth, those legislatures’ systems operate in a very different procedural environment. Many of them allocate speaking rights proportionately between parties; that is not how this House works. We cannot simply lift one feature from another Parliament and drop it into ours without considering the procedural ecosystem around it. Fourthly, we examined how call lists would fit in with the way time is currently managed in this House. Our existing system strikes a careful balance between certainty and flexibility; we know when the day starts and ends, and we know how long different types of business can run, but we also have the ability to respond quickly to events through urgent questions and statements. That flexibility is essential to the House’s role in holding the Government to account. Introducing call lists would disrupt that balance, and would require a much wider rethink of how the parliamentary day is structured. Finally, we considered the role of the Speaker and Deputy Speakers. Their discretion in calling Members is fundamental to how debates are managed. They are elected by the House, they are impartial, and they are trusted to use their judgment fairly. Call lists would inevitably limit that discretion. We did not find a strong enough case to justify restricting the Chair’s ability to steward debates effectively, and we note that informal mechanisms are already in place to support Members who have genuine health or accessibility needs, and that the Speaker’s Office handles these with care and sensitivity. Our report also suggests that the Modernisation Committee should set out how it intends to approach its upcoming work on the use of time in the Chamber. That broader perspective will help the House to think about these issues in the round, rather than in isolation. We fully understand why some colleagues may be disappointed by our conclusions. We listened carefully to all the views put to us and took them seriously, but our recommendation is based on detailed evidence and a clear view that call lists are not the right solution to the concerns raised. They would change some of the fundamental features of how this Chamber operates, and not necessarily for the better. This report is not the end of the conversation; what it does is give the House a structured foundation on which those conversations can continue. With that, Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this report to the House.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Women’s Safety: Walking, Wheeling, Cycling and Running · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing this debate. Will she join me in congratulating Newbury Road Club, Newbury Velo and West Berkshire Spokes, which organised a glow ride in October last year as part of Cycling UK’s “My ride. Our right” campaign? If we had segregated cycle lanes, it would help to improve all cyclists’ safety on the roads, including women.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Commonhold and Leasehold Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the introduction of this draft Bill and, as a member of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, I look forward to scrutinising it. I wonder whether the Minister will make available to the Committee evidence around the peppercorn rent and the 40-year requirement. I suspect is to do with investor confidence, but could that time period be brought forward? My overarching feeling, which I know will be reflected in my inbox when I get back to my office, is that people across the country would have expected to see within the draft Bill action on service charges; we are consistently contacted about managing agents not performing their duties and charging too much for it. The Bill was meant to be presented at the back end of last year and I know that the Government concluded a consultation in September. We want service charges to be addressed as soon as possible. Will we be able to get an additional clause on this issue into this legislation?

• 26 Jan 2026 · State Pension Age Changes: Compensation · Hansard source

  More

  5. What recent assessment he has made of the potential merits of compensating 1950s-born women affected by the maladministration of state pension age changes.

• 26 Jan 2026 · State Pension Age Changes: Compensation · Hansard source

  More

  I was one of 100 MPs who signed a cross-party letter calling on the Government to take action for WASPI women. Such is the strength of feeling in my constituency that I am regularly contacted about this issue. In the Government’s determination, are they planning to consult with the Women Against State Pension Inequality Campaign, especially if they are minded to deny 1950s-born women their lived experience again?

• 14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered horse and rider road safety. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I am pleased to have secured this debate and grateful for the opportunity to raise an issue that has, for far too long, not received the attention it deserves. It is a timely debate as well, because just last week the Government published its new road safety strategy, stating that “every individual deserves to feel safe and supported” on our roads. Unfortunately, for many horse riders across the country, that aspiration does not reflect their lived reality. While the Government’s strategy does reference horse riders in some places, alongside other vulnerable road users, this is not consistent, and there is no specific mention of their safety. The issue goes far wider than a single document. Building a stronger foundation of road safety education, with clearer rules and guidance, is essential to ensure that all road users understand how to behave safely and responsibly when encountering horses on the road. According to data from the British Horse Society, in 2024 there were more than 3,000 road incidents that involved horses.

• 14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a key contribution with that intervention: it is that holistic approach to all road traffic management systems that people need to be aware of. It is vital that young drivers understand how to drive safely on our rural roads and how to behave when encountering animals. Alongside that, I urge the Government to consider requiring companies that operate large vehicles, such as buses and delivery lorries, to include specific equine road safety training as part of their initial driver training. In 2019, a horse rider suffered serious injuries, including a fractured pelvis, after being thrown on to a pavement when her horse was spooked by a bus that passed too quickly and too closely. I think that shows why we need that initial driver training.

• 14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  I do add my congratulations to the council. This debate pulls out the local innovations that are taking place, which the Government can hopefully consider rolling out to a national platform. I am conscious of time and of other hon. Members who wish to contribute, but it is important to thank the BHS, the British Horseracing Authority, Project EDWARD, the Blue Cross, Brake and the hundreds of people from across the country who have written to me in support of this debate. I urge the Minister to ensure that horses, riders, carriage drivers and all equestrian users are fully included in the Government’s road safety ambitions, not just in principle, but in practice. I hope that the Minister will reflect carefully on the points raised, and commit to taking this work forward.

• 14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  The hierarchy of vulnerability introduced in 2022 is important in establishing who are the most vulnerable on our roads, but the highway code could go further and say “must” go at 10 mph rather than “should”. Last September, I introduced the Road Traffic (Horse and Rider Safety) Bill. Through that presentation Bill, I called on the Government to strengthen the highway code guidance for passing horses and to improve driver education so that motorists better understand horses’ behaviour and the potentially devastating consequences of their actions. Those changes would raise awareness among all road users and provide greater safety and reassurance when horses are ridden or are pulling horse-drawn vehicles or carriages. As I have mentioned, last week the Government published the road safety strategy. Although I welcome many of its measures, it missed some relatively straightforward opportunities to better protect horses and riders. The strategy announced that the Ministry of Justice “will consult on a new victims’ code.” I welcome that, but it raises an important issue. Under current law, horses are classed as personal property, which means that when one is killed or fatally injured in a road traffic collision, compensation is largely limited to financial loss. I have recently been contacted by Cathryn from Leeds, a long-standing horse rider and a solicitor who supports people who have suffered serious injuries from horse accidents. She highlights the psychological trauma experienced by injured riders as a recurring theme, which is often compounded by guilt, grief and gratitude that the horse took the main impact and saved the rider from even greater harm. The current legal framework significantly restricts recognition of that emotional distress. I urge the Government to use the consultation on the new victims’ code to consider how horse riders and owners who lose horses can be properly recognised in that framework.