Lewis Cocking MP: speeches

Speeches

• 25 Mar 2025 · Asylum Hotels and Illegal Channel Crossings · Hansard source

  More

  Small boat crossings are up 30% since the general election. The number of illegal asylum seekers in the asylum hotel in my constituency of Broxbourne is also up. Illegal asylum seekers are being prioritised for GP appointments and school places, which is outrageous to me and my hard-working constituents. Can the Minister tell the House when she will meet her manifesto commitment of closing the asylum hotel in my constituency of Broxbourne?

• 25 Mar 2025 · Draft Town and Country Planning (Fees and Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2025 Draft Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment etc.) (England) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  I draw the Committee’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests that I am a local councillor. Given what the Minister has outlined, will he give us a flavour of how local people can make representations, even if it is straight to the Secretary of State or the Planning Inspectorate? I am concerned that removing applications from local councils and putting them through the new routes he has described will make it harder for local residents to feel that their voice has been heard, even on important national infrastructure projects.

• 25 Mar 2025 · Great British Energy Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that building more of that infrastructure here in the United Kingdom would be good for British jobs and for our energy security, just as issuing new oil and gas licences in Scotland would be, as that would allow us to produce more of our energy here at home and make us safer from volatile energy markets abroad?

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I know my hon. Friend is a passionate advocate for urban design, and he makes an important point. Of course we must invest in urban design, because it is the council—and MPs through our casework—that picks up the pieces. If a development is not planned correctly, with the right number of car spaces, for example, there are issues when people try to park their cars. Our inboxes get clogged up with all of those issues and the council is put under extra pressure with antisocial behaviour and so on. We really have to think about planning the communities, rather than just saying, “Oh, we will give in to the developers—they say it takes too long, so we’ll make it quicker and just rely on them to create places that people want to live.” As I said, I have sat on a planning committee, and I have seen developments come forward that are utter rubbish. We need to change the mindset of developers, and we must ensure that we have good design. The Government are not seeking to change that; they are embracing it by committing to a target that can only be achieved by rushing the construction of low-quality homes with no plans for those who will live there. The Government need to focus more on the communities that we are trying to build within this country, rather than specific targets and house building across the country. This Bill reveals that the Labour Government have their priorities wrong. Local people should have the largest influence over where new housing development goes and when it happens in their communities, not Ministers in Whitehall.

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an excellent point, and she is right that infrastructure must come first. I will come on later in my speech to the fact that there is nothing in this Bill to make developers put that infrastructure in first. In Broxbourne, we have already had more than our fair share of development. Thousands of new homes have been built in the past few years, but new or expanded infrastructure to take the strain off our already overstretched services is nowhere to be seen, and it is having a serious impact on my constituents. A Health Minister has admitted to me that patients trying to see their local GP in my constituency are more likely than the national average to wait two weeks. Drivers are forced to sit in traffic as roads clog up, and I hear time and again that parents are unable to get their child into the local school that they want. The Bill before us seeks to make it easier to build major infrastructure. Of course I support building roads, airports and runways more quickly, but what the Government define as major infrastructure is way too narrow. Major infrastructure, to my constituents, is whether they can get a GP appointment or a school place. I see no mention of that in this Bill. There is nothing about providing new powers for local councils to ensure that that kind of infrastructure is in place before new housing is built. I had to fight extremely hard to get the NHS round the table to say that we desperately need a new surgery to meet the demand from existing residents, but it would not listen to me—and now the Government are forcing us to build even more houses. In December, the Housing Minister said he was “considering what more we can do to ensure that we get infrastructure for developments up front”. —[ Official Report , 12 December 2024; Vol. 758, c. 1068.] But where is that within the Bill? That is how to get existing residents on side and get people behind the new development that we desperately need in the right location. Local councillors are in fact having more of their powers over and responsibility for planning taken away, which dilutes local accountability and removes the voice of residents in deciding what is built in the local area. That is an attack on local democracy. The Minister should be taking on developers, not local communities and councils. I have sat on a planning committee, and the reason the process is sometimes so long and—developers would argue—so onerous on the developers is that they try to build utter rubbish. Some of the stuff they put forward is utterly disgraceful. I would not want to live on some of the developments that they bring forward and try to get councillors to approve. Of course we must have a robust process, because we need to focus more on urban design. Simply making it easier for developers to get through the planning system is putting way too much trust in developers to build appropriate communities, with all the infrastructure that our residents need.

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Can the Secretary of State outline what powers in the Bill she will use to take on developers and make sure that they build based on the planning permissions they already have?

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  rose —

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wish to seek your advice. I have just been cited as saying something in my speech that I did not say. I was merely talking about developers and my time on the planning committee, when developers would come forward and propose utter rubbish. I did not say the houses my residents live in are rubbish.

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I refer hon. Members to my entry in the register of interests. At his first Prime Minister’s Question Time in July last year, I asked the Prime Minister to reassure my constituents that they would have a meaningful say over the new development in the green belt in their area. He said that the Government “will work with communities”—but this Bill could not be further from that promise. We are seeing housing targets go through the roof in rural areas, as green-belt protections are removed. In my local councils of East Herts and Broxbourne, the targets are going up by more than 20% and within Broxbourne district specifically they are almost doubling. The loss of protections for unrestricted sprawl around the villages I represent is extremely worrying for my constituents who live in those villages of Brickendon, Hertford Heath, Great Amwell, Stanstead Abbotts and St Margarets, as their unique character and historical charm could be lost forever. At the same time, targets are going down in London, where there is the infrastructure to cope. The plans do not add up. There is something in this Bill on which I can agree with the Government: the explanatory notes state that limited infrastructure delivery is a real cost on the lives of working people. I completely agree. It is far too common for new housing to be built without the increase in public service capacity to match.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  Last July, the hon. Lady stood on an election manifesto that did not include the removal of winter fuel payments to pensioners. Is she proud of the fact that she was elected on a manifesto that said something completely different from what she is supporting the Government in doing now?

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister not agree that it is the hypocrisy from the Labour party, which did not include this policy in its manifesto at the general election?

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an important point. What the Government could do to lower energy bills is to secure North sea oil and gas investment in this country, so that we produce here more of the gas that we need to power all the industry in this country, instead of importing it.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  No, I will not give way. The Government got elected on a manifesto. Within eight months, they have introduced significant policies that were not in that manifesto, including the family farm tax, the national insurance increase, and of course withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance. That is what my constituents in Broxbourne are really cross about—it was not in the Labour party manifesto. People went out and voted in good faith in the July election, and lots of the people I speak to in my constituency who voted for the Labour party now heavily regret it because of the choices that Labour and this Government are making. They were not honest about those choices with the British people. What was in the Labour manifesto, though, was a commitment to cut energy bills by £300. The Government have got in—secured a mandate from the British people—and have then said, “You know what? The manifesto we were elected on doesn’t mean anything. We can throw it in the bin and concentrate on things that we really want to do, rather than concentrate on putting British people first and lowering energy bills by £300.” I hope that when the Minister sums up, he will tell us about the progress that the Government are making towards bringing energy bills down. I suspect that it is very little, because they are too busy concentrating on things that they have not been elected to do.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member makes a point that he is passionate about, but I do not agree with him. We need to produce more of our energy here at home, rather than relying on imports. That is why the Government should change their policy and issue new oil and gas licences. I urge hon. Members on the Government Benches —lots of them are honourable—to please support pensioners today and vote to keep the winter fuel allowance.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  When I was out on the doorsteps during the general election campaign—as I am sure every Member of this House was—I spoke to my electorate in Broxbourne. They said, “Look, Lewis, we know what’s coming. We know we’re going to get a Labour Government. We know they’re going to get into power and then they’re going to tell us how awful it is, and they are going to come for us. They are going to come after pensioners.” The electorate in Broxbourne already knew, so the British public are not fools. This argument about a £22 billion black hole and difficult choices that we are told the Government have to make will not wash with the British people outside of this Chamber, because they did not believe it in the first place.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 17 Mar 2025 · Sentencing Council Guidelines · Hansard source

  More

  My constituents are confused about the Justice Secretary’s position. She says she believes that these sentencing guidelines are wrong in principle, and that they amount to differential treatment before the law, but she is in government; she has the power and the tools at her disposal to stop this and change it. Why has she not done so?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Anti-social Behaviour: East of England · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Member agree that when police set up patrols to catch people who speed, the news quickly gets on to apps to tell people coming down the road that there is a policeman standing there with a speed gun? Does he think the Government should explore whether to ban apps that do that, so that we can catch people who speed on our roads?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Anti-social Behaviour: East of England · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister mentions a multi-agency approach. I think the public get frustrated with us when we have meeting after meeting about the same issue. What assurances can she give us that this multi-agency approach will lead to action taken on the ground to solve some of this antisocial behaviour in our communities?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Anti-social Behaviour: East of England · Hansard source

  More

  I remind the hon. Member that the last Conservative Government recruited 20,000 police officers across the country and the only force not to meet that target was the Metropolitan police under Labour mayor Sadiq Khan.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Anti-social Behaviour: East of England · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate the hon. Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald) on securing this important debate this afternoon. Some antisocial behaviour problems can be extremely localised down a single street, in a block of flats or between neighbours, ruining the lives of individuals targeted but sometimes going unnoticed by the wider community. In recent months, many constituents have written to me and asked for help in dealing with antisocial behaviour problems caused by their neighbours in housing association properties. Research found that those living in housing associations are up to 30% more likely to experience criminal or inconsiderate antisocial behaviour compared with those who own their own property. That sort of behaviour ruins lives, and when it is happening in the vicinity of our own homes, there is often no escape. The situation is made even worse when the victim is vulnerable due to their age or a medical condition. Sadly, it is far too common for me to hear that housing associations responsible are failing to take this issue seriously. As I have said before in the House, it is clear that, as well as the police, housing associations must play a full role in dealing with antisocial behaviour. While I welcome the Government’s rhetoric on tackling the scourge within our communities, it remains to be seen whether their new respect orders will be fully utilised by housing association providers. From my experience, they are not always interested in hearing about antisocial behaviour problems in the first place. Previously in the House, I was told that “existing civil injunctions will be renamed as housing injunctions, which will deal with that more low-level antisocial behaviour between neighbours.” —[ Official Report , 27 November 2024; Vol. 757, c. 799.] The explanatory notes to the Crime and Policing Bill state that housing injunctions can be applied for in the same way as the previous civil injunctions. How exactly will renaming something that already exists help to deal with this type of behaviour in our communities, when my constituents are telling me that the current system does not go far enough? I look forward to clarification on that specific point from the Minister, when she winds up this debate. What has been proven to cut antisocial behaviour is hotspot policing, and I am pleased to say that the fruits of this can be seen in my constituency of Broxbourne, thanks to the efforts of our fantastic police and crime commissioner, Jonathan Ash-Edwards, and our hard-working local police officers. In January alone, Waltham Cross saw more than 682 hours of additional police patrols being carried out, eight arrests were made, and two weapons were seized. That increased visibility is reassuring to residents and prevents crime before it actually occurs. In some hotspot areas in Hertfordshire, antisocial behaviour has been reduced by up to 50%, which I absolutely welcome. Our constituents, whether they live in social housing or are simply using their local town centre, expect and deserve to feel safe. As the Minister knows, driving down antisocial behaviour is crucial to achieving that, and I will be watching the Government very closely to see whether they follow through on their promise.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. The Government say that foreign national offenders make up 12% of the prison population. Can the Secretary of State tell me when that number will be zero?

• 10 Mar 2025 · Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Funding · Hansard source

  More

  I draw the attention of Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I have a school in my constituency that is very good at helping students with education, health and care plans—so much so that it is struggling with the number of students who have EHCPs. Will the Minister meet me to discuss this issue and wider SEND issues in my constituency?

• 7 Mar 2025 · Protection of Children (Digital Safety and Data Protection) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is making an impassioned speech. Does she agree that in some cases social media has made bullying 24 hours a day, because it means that it can happen at any point, even when a child is no longer at school?

• 7 Mar 2025 · Protection of Children (Digital Safety and Data Protection) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I often say that I would not like to be a teenager growing up today in an environment dominated by social media. It was bad enough that by the time I got to secondary school everyone had a phone, and by the time I left everyone had a smartphone. There is no doubt that the threats to children have been utterly transformed in just the last decade, so we need to transform how we address those issues in this place. I certainly support the thrust of the Bill. The Government must treat children’s use of digital devices and social media as a health issue. Children are spending more and more of their lives on social media at younger and younger ages. Those aged 12 to 15 spend on average 35 hours a week on their smartphones, and we know that poor mental health has spiked among young people in the last 15 years. I do, however, have some concerns about the proposals before us. While I fully respect the intentions of the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister) for the Bill, and his passion for the issue, I am frustrated that the Bill does not seek to make any changes to the current situation. It places a duty on the Secretary of State to publish a plan for research into the impact of the use of social media within 12 months. In general, the public get really frustrated with Parliament and politicians when we say, “We are going to do some research,” or, “We are going to have a meeting.” They want to see action in lots of the areas that we speak about in this place. There is massive consensus from all parts of the Chamber for the hon. Member’s Bill and the work that he has done to introduce it. Among those who have spoken, there is also consensus about the need to go further and faster on the issue, which I would certainly support. The Bill contains just a feeble instruction. Would parents and kids who are struggling now be comforted merely by the publication of a plan for research into the topic as far away as the middle of 2026? As we have heard, the Government have established a research project that is due to report its findings in May. Do we really need to add to the statute book to ask the Government to do that? I also fear that the Bill will simply outsource decision making to others rather than allowing our elected Parliament, parents and children themselves to contribute to a policy solution. Rather than publishing a plan for research in the next 12 months, would it not be better if the Government came forward with a proposal, for example, to increase the digital age of consent, so that Parliament could debate that? The Bill mentions consultation with Ofcom and the Information Commissioner. It should be Members of Parliament representing families in our constituencies who ultimately make a decision on the right course of action. If the Bill does pass, I hope that Parliament will be consulted before any changes are made. We can all agree that there is a serious problem affecting society and younger generations as a whole, but, because we can all agree on that, we need to see firm proposals from the Government coming forward, and not just more research. I completely concur with what my hon. Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) said. I will not often call for Government intervention, but this issue has become so great to lots of members of our society that we do need to legislate in this area. It is quite clear that, over the short to medium term, social media companies have failed to step up and do more. They could do so without legislation—they could be more proactive—but they have failed in that. The time is right for that. I hope we can take away from today the fact that we have had a debate and aired some of the grievances around the harms that social media does to younger generations. By the time the proposal comes back within 12 months, I hope—I do live in hope—that social media companies might have solved some of the issues and worked harder and faster in the fear that legislation is coming, and I hope that legislation will come. I think we all have skin in the game. My sister has recently given birth and I am now an uncle, so I do have skin in the game. We have to act. If we do not, I fear not only that we will let down generations coming through the education system now, but future generations, including my niece, who have not even started in the education system. I fully support a lot of the comments in the House today. I urge the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington to keep going and to help the Government to come forward with some stern proposals. I believe there is cross-party support among all who have spoken today that we need to go faster to solve the issue, and hopefully save future generations coming through the education system and wider society.