Linsey Farnsworth MP: speeches

Speeches

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the package of Bills in the King’s Speech. By accelerating the transition to renewables and by producing energy for the UK here in the UK, we will strengthen our energy resilience and make bills lower. For that to succeed, another barrier must be addressed. Time and again, manufacturers in my constituency tell me that they are being held back by the constraints on our grid infrastructure, which is stifling expansion and the creation of new jobs for people in Amber Valley. The combined double burden of high energy prices and insufficient grid capacity has been keenly felt by Denby Pottery, which has sadly gone into administration. I was shocked to learn that for years it had been forced to switch off its solar panels at weekends, rather than sell excess power back to the grid—a cruel irony, given the circumstances. The Minister for Industry, the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald), will be acutely aware from our many meetings on this subject that I will not stop pushing for support for the energy-intensive ceramics industry, and I will not stop fighting to save Denby Pottery unless and until the doors close for the very last time. National Grid’s plans to upgrade the network are central to increasing capacity across Amber Valley, which in turn will support local businesses. However, I know many residents are deeply concerned about the proposed pylon route, which is set to run through my constituency from top to bottom. I am working hard to ensure that the final route minimises impact and intrusion for residents, schools and businesses. In Amber Valley, our communities have consistently stepped up to support our nation’s infrastructure, from open cast mining to our ironworks, and that contribution must be recognised. The community benefit fund can be used to support local priorities, such as healthcare, education and skills. No level of funding can fully offset disruption, but it is none the less essential that the communities most affected see a fair and proportionate return. I have raised this issue directly with the Minister for Energy, my hon. Friend the Member for Rutherglen (Michael Shanks), who knows that I will always fight for what is right for my constituents. That is why I want to take the opportunity today to reiterate that, given that Amber Valley is once again being asked to contribute more than others to this nationally significant project, it is only right that my constituents receive a ringfenced and proportionate share of the community fund. Some in this place seek to use energy policy as an opportunity to play culture wars, but my constituents know more than most that this is not a game. The measures in the King’s Speech will make our energy resilience stronger and our energy supply fairer, while preserving and creating jobs, and making bills cheaper. For my constituents, that cannot come soon enough.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  This is a decision that magistrates make every day. Every sitting day, they look at allocation, and they do not put their finger in the air to decide what the sentence might be. The Sentencing Council provides guidelines for each individual offence. I know that the Conservative party does not like the Sentencing Council and has at times called to get rid of it, or Conservative Members have, in particular the former shadow Justice Secretary who has now moved to the Reform party, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick). The sentencing guidelines, however, are used by magistrates every day. Sentencing guidelines are also already available to Crown court judges. Does the hon. Lady accept that this is not something that judges will do willy-nilly? There are guidelines and factors that have to be taken into consideration, which is a safeguard in itself to ensure a fair decision.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We have heard a lot about the Bar Council and the Law Society. What we have not heard a lot about is the position of the Crown Prosecution Service on this point. If the Crown Prosecution Service was a legal firm, it would be the biggest in the country. It has thousands of lawyers working for it. Tom Guest, a member of the policy team at the Crown Prosecution Service gave evidence to the Justice Committee, in which he set out that the CPS is supportive of this legislation to look at structural reform. He said that it is not the only answer, but that it is necessary. The CPS considers us to be at a critical juncture, and that the backlog needs dealing with. Does the hon. Member agree that it is not universally the case that people working within the criminal justice system are against the legislation? Actually, the biggest law firm in the country is in favour of these structural reforms.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Productivity and Economic Growth: East Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing the debate. Many in Amber Valley—including me—are proud descendants of coalminers, textile makers and engineers. That heritage still shapes our economy: 20% of the workforce are in manufacturing, mining and utilities. Amber Valley’s industrial history, national significance and visitor offer are currently underdeveloped, but I am working hard to change that through my visitor economy strategy. A thriving visitor economy will boost footfall, inject money into hospitality and support local businesses and high streets. I am therefore delighted that my three towns of Alfreton, Heanor and Ripley have come together to submit a joint bid to the UK town of culture competition in recognition of their remarkable shared story. My visitor economy work complements that of East Midlands Mayor Claire Ward, whose vision for growth projects an additional £960 million in direct gross value added for the region and £730 million indirectly through the visitor economy. No discussion of Amber Valley’s heritage and economy is complete without mentioning the Denby Pottery Company. Founded in 1809, it has made stoneware in Derbyshire since the industrial revolution. It is the constituency’s largest employer: about 350 of its 500 staff are local, and many have worked there for decades. As a tourist attraction, Denby Pottery Village brings in more than 250,000 visitors a year. However, as Members know, the company has filed a notice of intention to appoint administrators, which is devastating news for staff facing uncertainty about their livelihoods. I have spoken to the GMB union, and I encourage colleagues to support any affected constituents. I have also met Denby’s leadership and ensured engagement with the Department for Business and Trade, and I remain in contact with the Treasury and the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). Although the news may feel sudden, the truth is that the UK ceramics industry has been hit by sharp and unpredictable swings in energy prices, and the impact of new trading arrangements and global tariff pressures have hampered competitiveness. We hope that an investor will come forward to secure a future for the business, as it is hugely important to save the company. I urge Ministers to expand the British industry supercharger scheme, as very few ceramics companies currently qualify. Amber Valley contains some of the most deprived areas in Derbyshire. People know that they have been overlooked and left behind for years, and a much-loved employer going into administration, putting 500 jobs at risk, compounds that belief. Bringing pride in place back to communities such as mine is absolutely essential, so will the Minister outline what more can be done for Amber Valley and how she will work with colleagues across Government to support Denby Pottery?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Genocide Risk Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  On 2 October, as part of the UK delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, I voted in favour of a resolution on the “devastating humanitarian catastrophe” in Gaza. Paragraph 8 of the resolution referred to the UN Human Rights Council’s finding that genocide was taking place, which the hon. Gentleman has mentioned, and it highlighted the obligation of all state parties to prevent genocide under article 1 of the UN convention. Would the hon. Gentleman also welcome a comment from the Minister on the UK’s response to that Assembly resolution?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  It is an indisputable fact that Amber Valley has the best pubs in the country. [ Interruption. ] It is true: they include the Moot Bar in Alfreton, Tom Said in Ripley and the Tip Inn in Loscoe, near Heanor. I welcome the Government support announced for pubs, including the £4.3 billion for businesses as covid-era business rates relief is phased out. However, increases in valuations mean that many pubs still face sharp increases. What assurance can the Leader of the House give directly to publicans, including those in Amber Valley, that there will still be support for the great British pub and that it will be protected as a community hub?

• 17 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q10. Just days before Christmas, heartbroken Derbyshire families and staff have learned that the Reform-led council is closing eight care homes, including Rowthorne in Amber Valley. That comes just days after we learned that the council’s cost-saving claims were entirely fabricated. Does the Prime Minister agree that when Reform talks about DOGE, it is actually talking about cutting vital public services such as care homes? Will he join me in urging Derbyshire county council to think again?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Young People not in Education, Employment or Training · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered support for young people not in education, employment or training. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I am delighted to introduce this debate on an incredibly important topic. Young people not in education, employment or training are often referred to as NEETs. As Members will know, the proportion of 16 to 24-year-olds who are NEET has been rising since 2021, and is now nearing its highest level since 2014. Too often, the narrative we hear—be it in the media or from some Members of this House—is that these young people are lazy, unmotivated or overly sensitive, but that view is short-sighted and reductive, and ignores the complex reality behind that growing number. On Friday, I had the privilege of speaking with two people who understand this issue not from spreadsheets or reports, but from years spent on the ground with young people and the unemployed. The first was Colin at Derbyshire Unemployed Workers’ Centres, and the second was Christopher Nieper, chair of the education trust for the David Nieper Academy, and owner of the David Nieper clothing manufacturing company. They both work in my constituency town of Alfreton. When we talked about NEETs, both raised the same point above all others: the Government must work with industry to facilitate the demand for jobs and educational pathways. That is also borne out in conversations I have had with constituents. I recently met Shaun Holland at my advice surgery. Shaun is a 22-year-old motivated man who desperately wants to work. He suffers from arthritis and severe foot problems, which makes standing for long periods difficult. The only work he has found is through agencies, which is unpredictable and insecure, and employers are often reluctant to make simple adjustments such as providing a chair to do packaging work. As Colin told me, agency work has shifted from an emergency measure to a business model that often fails workers, offering no clear career path. He likened it to the old “butty man” system, where men were recruited in pubs for a day’s work when the coal mines were first opened, and sent down the pit. That was not a sustainable or fair practice then, and, as Shaun’s case makes clear, it certainly is not now. For young people to succeed, academic, vocational and technical pathways must not only exist, but feel accessible and achievable. Another example is Lily Hill, who wrote to me after losing her electrical apprenticeship through no fault of her own. Lily went to a jobcentre, where she was met with “indifference and a lack of empathy from the staff”. She described how she was left “feeling humiliated and let down by a system that is supposed to be a safety net for people like me—people who have contributed and now need help getting back on their feet.” She was told to update her CV, which got only two responses, but ironically her old CV landed her a job at Nottingham Forest football club, where she now works as a level 3 qualified electrical technician. They said that her CV was the best they had seen. While I hope that the Minister will join me in congratulating Lily on her success, the sad truth is that it came not because of jobcentre advice, but in spite of it. Since being elected, I have spoken to local businesses, teachers, charities and many others like Shaun and Lily. Their experiences have made it clear that the barriers facing many young people are not simply about personal choice or effort, but are structural. The National Centre for Social Research has found that the most significant risk factors for becoming NEET include not having an academic qualification above level 1, having a limiting disability, becoming a parent before the age of 25, living with a mental health condition and being identified as having special educational needs. The charity Impetus has highlighted how those disadvantages compound. A young person with low qualifications from a disadvantaged background is 130% more likely to be NEET. There are also the new challenges brought about by technological change. Artificial intelligence is transforming the labour market, and entry-level jobs in some sectors are disappearing. Despite all that, much of the conversation on this issue labels young people the problem, as if all the fault lies squarely with them. In fact, the Reform party leader of Derbyshire county council has said that he thinks there is a massive overdiagnosis of what he calls “general behavioural disabilities”, echoing the comments from the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) that we are creating a “class of victims” in Britain. That overlooks another possibility: that the systems are not designed for those who do not fit the narrow definition of “mainstream”. Our employment structures, training pathways and workplace cultures often fail to accommodate young people with special educational needs and disabilities, mental health challenges or caring responsibilities. I want to talk about opportunity and aspiration, two principles that must underpin our approach if we are to empower young people to fulfil their potential. Today, the Chancellor said: “Let there be no doubt that this Government are on the side of our kids and will back their potential.” I am proud to have stood on a manifesto that promised every child the best start in life. The Government have already made progress. The Chancellor has just announced further important measures, including merging jobcentres with the National Careers Service to create a single platform offering personalised coaching, digital tools and real links to employers. The youth guarantee reforms apprenticeship eligibility and funding for foundational apprenticeships. These changes will ensure that people like Lily are not let down in the same way again, and will enable Shaun to speak with a work coach and receive personal advice about stable, non-agency work going forward. I also welcome the designation of Derby college group as a construction technical excellence college. It is working with the East Midlands Mayor Claire Ward and industry experts to make sure that its excellent programmes and apprenticeships equip students with the ever-evolving skillset needed in construction. Fairer funding will ensure that council budgets reflect need and deprivation. I will be fighting hard to ensure that Derbyshire county council is awarded its fair portion of that, so that it can invest in SEND provision and in our schools. Those are important steps, but more needs to be done to build a system that is based on the principles of equal opportunity and aspiration. First, we need a joined-up, cross-departmental approach to tackling the root causes of disadvantage, one that is informed by the recently announced independent investigation into youth inactivity. Given that the investigation will not look into the SEND system, it is all the more important that the upcoming schools White Paper upholds legal protections and ensures that SEND children are given the support they need to excel. Secondly, we need to meet demand by ensuring that flexible, inclusive opportunities that dismantle barriers to work and education are readily available. Thirdly, we need to show young people where these pathways can lead and how to access them, including by encouraging stronger links between schools and employers. I encourage the Minister to visit David Nieper academy, which works with local industry leaders and teaches employability skills. As a result, the academy has achieved zero NEETs aged 18 for the last two academic years. On a recent Friday, I visited Heanor Gate Spencer academy and saw a notice board showing what each of the students went on to do last year. It included their courses, universities and apprenticeships. Like me, many of this year’s students will be the first in their family to go to university. Some will be the first to take up an apprenticeship. Seeing a noticeboard like that shows them what is possible and raises their aspirations. Whether their talent lies in skilled trades that will rebuild our country, after years of decline, in the green energy projects of the future, such as STEP Fusion in Nottingham, or in academic routes such as university, every young person in Amber Valley deserves their chance to fulfil their aspirations. If we invest in giving young people the tools to succeed, we do more than create jobs; we build stronger communities, restore faith that politics can change lives and deliver hope where it is most needed. That is why, although I welcome the independent investigation into youth inactivity, we cannot just wait until the final report is published in summer 2026. Action is needed now. Will the Minister tell us what steps will be taken before then to prevent this crisis from worsening? Given that the investigation will not look at the SEND system, what assurances can the Minister give to young people with SEND that they will not be left behind? Finally, how will areas such as Amber Valley be empowered to deliver specific, tailored solutions for our children?

• 19 Nov 2025 · Northwich Railway Station: Accessibility · Hansard source

  More

  It is very exciting to hear the proposals coming forward from Network Rail. Can the Minister give us some more information on how we local constituency MPs can support our local communities in pushing forward with the campaigns to have our stations included in that? As he heard me say earlier, it took 20 years of campaigning by very committed local Labour councillors in Alfreton town council to get the measures put in place in Alfreton so that everybody can enjoy access to the train station. We still have a train station in Langley Mill, which is much simpler to resolve, but I am told by Network Rail that although it is not against doing improvements there, it depends on footfall. More people would be able to use the train station if it was accessible, but it will not be accessible unless more people use it, so it is a bit of a Catch-22. I would very much welcome advice on that.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Reform-led Derbyshire county council has recently abolished its climate change committee and scrapped its aim to tackle the causes and impact of climate change. Will the Minister outline the steps that his Department is taking to ensure that local authorities continue to address climate change effectively and meet national targets?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  On the subject of criminal co-operation, before I came into Parliament I was an international liaison prosecutor. My job was to get evidence from overseas and help to get people overseas in Europe extradited to the UK for prosecution. That work relies on the ECHR, which underpins that legislation. Does the Minister share my concern about what some Members in this Chamber are proposing? Does he agree that they should be the ones who talk to a victim of rape about why her case cannot go forward because we cannot get the evidence from a European country, or tell a mother that we cannot get the murderer of her son back because we have left the ECHR?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a very powerful speech. I was looking at some of the examples of how this mechanism protects people in the UK. For example, the injunction served on The Sunday Times preventing it from reporting on thalidomide was overturned by the European convention on human rights. Such cases show how important it is for checks and balances on our own Government. God only knows what the future will look like if we come out of the ECHR.

• 29 Oct 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does the right hon. Member realise that the Sentencing Council does not just pluck out of the air its sentencing recommendations? It consults widely with a variety of organisations, people working in the criminal justice system and the public before coming to its conclusions about the right sentences for offences. I would submit that there should be recognition of the work that it does.

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

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for opening this important debate. The strength of feeling behind this petition is clear, with over 1,000 signatures in my constituency alone. It was raised by my constituent, Natalie Elliott, a formidable campaigner and a vital supporter to families facing fines, often in stressful and traumatic circumstances. The petition proposes that families should be permitted to take their children out of school for up to 10 days without facing fines. While I will not pre-empt the Minister’s response, recent indications suggest that the Government are unlikely to support this proposal, given their stance that absence is one of the biggest barriers to success. However, despite differing views on the status quo, it is clear to me that both the petitioner and the Government share a common purpose: the wellbeing of our children. I am a firm believer that a good education is one of the most powerful tools for social mobility. Coming from a working-class background, access to quality state education gave me opportunities that ultimately led me to serve in this House. However, under the current system, families face significant challenges. The national framework for penalty notices is applied inconsistently across England. Research by Confused.com found that Essex issued over 35,000 fines between 2022 and 2024, while Cornwall issued just 535. Even within local authority areas, there is a postcode lottery. Educators have told me that pressure to improve attendance can lead to overly rigid policies. Some schools mandate only four sick days per year, refuse to authorise any Friday absences and demand medical evidence for minor illnesses. That not only contradicts statutory guidance but adds pressure to an already overstretched NHS. There is sometimes a lack of empathy for family circumstances. My constituent Chris faced court action because the local authority could not find a special school place for his child. Thankfully, the judge agreed that fining a parent because the local authority was not meeting their child’s needs was inappropriate, and promptly kicked the case out. I have also heard of fines issued during bereavement. There is no appeals process—just pay the fine or risk criminal conviction. Will the Minister consider an appeals mechanism? SEND families are particularly affected, and the system in Derbyshire is under immense strain. Children with autism or ADHD often cannot cope with busy holiday periods, yet their families are fined for going away when it is quieter. Those children have a right to family life and legal protections, but too often they are overlooked. If this Government are serious about reducing absenteeism, I urge them to include school attendance in the upcoming SEND White Paper. I acknowledge the Government’s efforts to ease the cost of family life, from expanding free school meals and nursery care, to breakfast clubs and cheaper uniforms. Those are important steps. But when families with the means to send their children to private schools are exempt from penalties, and those who can afford peak-season travel face no deterrent, yet others must choose between incurring a fine or forgoing a family holiday altogether, we are not dealing with a minor inconvenience but confronting a structural inequality. The injustice does not stop at the school gates. Holiday companies continue to exploit demand through dynamic pricing, pushing costs beyond reach for ordinary families. What action will the Government take to tackle this profiteering and ensure that family holidays are not a luxury for the few, but within the reach of all?

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

  More

  On that point, is the Minister also concerned about local authorities such as Derbyshire county council, whose leader is parroting the sentiments of the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) about “overdiagnosis” of SEND? All the families in my constituency that face SEND issues are at their wits’ end trying to get the support that they need, against the backdrop of a council that, on the face of it, does not believe in their plight.

• 14 Oct 2025 · Criminal Courts: Independent Review · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Intervention to fix the Crown court backlog is needed now. Without radical reform, things will only get worse; but in my submission this situation presents an opportunity to present the positive case for modernising our system. The changing nature of crime is recognised by all agencies in the criminal justice system. This is an opportunity to change the criminal justice system so that it is fit for the modern day. The system has been modernised many times over many years. That is why we have the Crown court system in operation and no longer the courts of assize or quarter sessions, which made way in 1972. Later, we got rid of old-style committals for trial, so that witnesses did not have to give evidence twice. Those are the sorts of modernisation efforts that can improve the criminal justice system for the modern world. At this time, we have a key opportunity to both deal with this crisis and modernise the system. I am conscious of time, so I will make a few brief observations from Sir Brian Leveson’s very thorough report. First, I ask the Minister to be cautious about what sorts of cases can be expanded into the domain of out-of-court resolutions and, in particular, the deferred prosecution scheme. It would not, for example, be suitable for domestic abuse cases, particularly as there is no requirement for the defendant to have an admission of guilt. We have to think about faith in the criminal justice system and the manipulative nature of domestic abusers, who often promise time and again to change before going back to their old ways. Furthermore, the use of bad character evidence often underpins a prosecution for domestic violence, and we would need to consider how a deferred prosecution might impact that. We have heard about the removal of the right to elect for offences with a maximum sentence of two years. It would be imperative that the magistrates retained their power of committal for sentencing if they felt, having heard all of the evidence, that a sentence in excess of 12 months would be required. The reclassification of offences is less attractive and more troublesome, because dropping some offences to summary-only would mean a maximum sentence of 12 months. The Sentencing Council is careful to ensure public and statutory consultations, so that the wider public and criminal justice professionals are consulted when it looks at sentencing guidelines, but this would effectively reduce maximum sentences for a number of offences. Careful consideration must be given to that. Again, it would not be suitable for domestic violence or abuse cases to fall within that reclassification. Breaching a non-molestation order, which is one of the offences listed as potentially forming part of the reclassification, has a maximum sentence of five years. We would be reducing that down to 12 months, which would lead to a lot of concern from practitioners. I will leave it there, but there is a lot more to be said and I look forward to future debates.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As a former Crown prosecutor of 21 years, like my hon. Friend the Member for Forest of Dean (Matt Bishop) and my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan), I have seen close up the impact of our broken criminal justice system on victims, on communities and on our country as a whole. Because of that, I can say, hand on heart, that I am proud to be stood here today in support of this Bill and the transformative reforms it proposes—changes that will target reoffending and address the root causes of crime in a meaningful, lasting way. I will use my time to talk specifically about probation resourcing. Before I get into the specifics, I ask Members to cast their minds back to just over a year ago. The Secretary of State has already set some of this out, but, having heard from Opposition Members, I think it is worth reiterating what last year looked like and remembering the crises we inherited from the previous Government: prisons nearing maximum capacity, the Probation Service understaffed and stretched to the brink of collapse, and a court backlog of more than 73,000 cases. And to what effect? Justice delayed is justice denied. We had a revolving door of offenders going through an underfunded, under-resourced system that was nearing the point of being unable to effectively deter, punish or rehabilitate criminals. Difficult decisions were taken to manage those issues, regain control of our prisons and ensure that the most dangerous offenders were kept off our streets. I am pleased that the Government acted quickly and decisively, but we must never find ourselves in that position again. That is why it is time to look forward and to consider how we can create a system that breaks down the cycles of reoffending, enables victims to secure swift, fair justice, and always has space to lock away society’s most violent and perverted offenders. Those are precisely the provisions that the Bill will drive through, with measures such as the move away from short custodial sentences, which are shown to be ineffective in deterring and rehabilitating offenders, and towards a system that puts those aims at its heart. Current evidence shows that nearly 60% of people sentenced to 12 months or less in prison reoffend within a year of release—a clear sign of a system not working as it should. It is not cheap, either: it is estimated to cost the taxpayer £47,000 per year per prisoner. Those shocking statistics only confirm what I witnessed year in, year out when I worked for the Crown Prosecution Service, where I repeatedly saw the same people coming through the system, often committing the very same offences. I am old enough, Madam Deputy Speaker, that throughout my years working for the CPS, I was saddened to see those regulars later joined by their children, with entire generations of families caught up in gruelling cycles of reoffending. The Bill introduces a presumption to suspend short custodial sentences of 12 months or less, subject to certain exceptions, and creates the pathway to improved community sentences with more effective measures.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I am saddened to hear that that is his position, but I am afraid it does not change my view of the Bill. Strict and stringent measures will be in place to encourage rehabilitation. Those will be accompanied by a simplified probation requirement, which will empower the Probation Service to determine the terms and volume of rehabilitation activity for each offender on a specific and individual level. Every offence is different, and under this system tailored community orders will reflect the nature of the offence and the offender. That means putting in place measures best suited to punish offenders for their crimes, encourage rehabilitation and deter them from future criminal activity. That is supported by evidence. The rate of reoffending for those on community orders is 36%, and it is 24% for suspended sentence orders with requirements, so this approach works. Let it be clear stated that in this system offenders are far from free to do whatever they like. They will be supervised intensively and placed under a set of strict conditions. That will lead to a shift away from the root causes of crime, such as addiction, and towards gradual reintegration into society. Of course, these reforms must be accompanied by significant investment in our Probation Service, and I am pleased that the Government have already committed to an extra £700 million in funding and recruited 1,000 new probation officers, with 1,300 more to come. However, as I said in previous debates when the sentencing review’s recommendations were first announced, the Government must be prepared to provide further resources to the Probation Service if that becomes necessary. I am honoured to sit on the Justice Committee. Our inquiries have involved speaking to probation officers, and two things have been made clear. First, officers are absolutely committed to rehabilitating offers. Secondly, regardless of their goodwill and no matter how hard they work, probation officers cannot do their jobs effectively without proper resources. It is clear that the Probation Service has been working for many years on extremely limited resources, and we cannot let that continue under the measures in the Bill. As a young prosecutor in the mid-2000s, under the previous Labour Government’s Respect agenda, I worked as part of the community justice initiative in Nottingham. The initiative, which was based on the Red Hook community justice centre in Brooklyn—America’s first multi-jurisdictional community court—adopted a holistic approach to tackle the root causes of a person’s offending, with agents such as housing officers, drug treatment workers and employment advisers under one roof taking part in the sentencing process together. The approach has been shown to significantly reduce the number of people receiving jail sentences while enhancing public confidence in the Government. The award-winning centre is still running today, but sadly the Nottingham community justice court is not. Despite early and promising signs of success, it lacked resources and sustained funding. We must learn from our previous mistakes. Many of the recommendations of the independent sentencing review are carried forward in the Bill. Importantly, the review noted specifically that probation officers “should be provided with the time, resources and autonomy necessary to build meaningful relationships with offenders and discharge this new responsibility to determine the appropriate content of probation requirements.” Justice, the cross-party law reform and human rights charity, has also outlined concerns about shortfalls of probation staff, including a deficit of around 10,000 Probation Service staff in August this year. The charity suggests that despite more Probation Service officers being appointed in the last year, the target staffing level of full-time equivalent probation officers has not yet been met. As I said, I have seen at first hand what happens to great projects and well-evidenced initiatives if they are under-resourced. The Bill’s provisions rightly place increased responsibility on the Probation Service to deliver proper justice and to rehabilitate offenders, but it needs to be supported to do so. Therefore, although I welcome the Bill and the Government’s announcement of increased funding for the Probation Service and the aim to recruit more probation officers, I am compelled to urge the Minister to ensure that adequate resource is in place so that the changes in the Bill will ensure that our criminal justice system can once again keep our country safe, protect victims and reduce crime.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. Unfortunately, in Derbyshire, obtaining an EHCP is merely the start of the struggle. It is certainly not the end of the struggle for those families who desperately need the support that their children deserve. Many view the legal right to which the petition relates—the right for SEND children to get assessment and support in education—as an important guarantee in what for far too long has been an unstable, broken and chaotic system characterised by long wait times and prolonged poor communication with little or no meaningful action. Having legal protections in place will absolutely guarantee that my constituents in Amber Valley will continue to be able to fight for the support that they need, even though they are battling against a council whose leadership do not even believe that SEND is an issue that they need to address. On that basis, I ask the Minister to confirm today that, going forward, legal protections will be in place for those families who so desperately need that support.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I thank the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for opening this Petitions Committee debate. I want to take this opportunity to address the 208 people in Amber Valley who put their names to the petition, and the more than 100 constituents I am supporting with their fight to get the SEND provision they need. In November last year, Ofsted released a damning report that found that the then Conservative-run Derbyshire county council’s SEND provision had “widespread and…systemic failings” and that it created a postcode lottery. Fast-forward less than a year, and now the Reform-led council has done no better. In one of my first meetings with the new leadership, I asked them whether they agreed with the comments of their party leader, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), about the overdiagnosis of SEND. They told me that they did not believe that. Imagine my shock when just weeks later, the leader of Derbyshire county council said that he agreed with the hon. Member entirely. Among all this chaos and uncertainty in Derbyshire, it is hardly surprising that over 208 of my constituents and 124,000 people nationwide who have experienced similar struggles have signed this petition. It reflects the anxiety felt up and down the country about what the proposed reforms in the schools White Paper might look like. Although families, teachers, parents, children and educators all know that the SEND system absolutely needs to be reformed and better enforced, they are worried and scared that these changes could let them down yet again. My constituents in Derbyshire have experienced that for many, many years.

• 11 Jul 2025 · Unauthorised Entry to Football Matches Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time. It is an honour to stand in the Chamber today and present this Bill for its Third Reading, particularly as a lifelong football fan. I put on record that I am a proud Everton supporter—my staff have all too gleefully reminded me that this may be the nearest thing to football-related success that I experience for a long time. Our men’s team last won a major trophy in 1995, and the women’s in 2010, so I am sure Members can imagine my delight when I saw the Amber Valley Codnor Sapphires girls under-10s team win the plate in a tournament in Heanor last Sunday. I am told that two other teams from my constituency, Sleetmoor under-13s ladies and Heanor Junior Hawks, also won trophies that day. I live in hope that Everton can follow suit and get their hands on some silverware at our new ground next season. Football has a rich and impressive history. It bridges communities and brings people together, cutting across generational, gender-based, geographical, cultural and class divides. It is a sport of opportunity and hope that sees girls and boys who began by playing on the streets of their home towns becoming superstars and role models with platforms from which they can enact real change, as we saw during covid with Marcus Rashford’s free school meals campaign. The rules of modern football are thought to have been drawn up in 1863, not far from this place at the Freemasons’ Tavern in London. There, among other things, the somewhat important rule that carrying the ball with hands is not allowed was agreed on. Sadly, the referee seemed to forget that in the infamous 1986 world cup quarter-final between Argentina and England, in which Maradona produced his “hand of God” moment. The introduction of the video assistant referee means that today, such a goal would rightly be ruled out—not that us England fans are bitter. As these examples show, football is in a constant state of change and evolution. It is not only right that as the sport evolves and progresses, the regulations around it adapt to reflect and facilitate those changes—it is paramount. That brings me to my Bill, which considers the issue of unauthorised entry to football matches from a fan safety perspective. It aims to ensure that proper legislation is in place to protect fans and prevent overcrowding in stadiums. As we have heard, unauthorised entry often takes the form of tailgating, also called jibbing. That is where a ticketless person pushes through the turnstiles behind an unsuspecting ticket-holding fan. Currently, if caught, tailgaters will likely be ejected without facing any other consequences; therefore, ticketless individuals can and do repeatedly attempt to gain entry to a match until they give up or are successful. This is not a trivial matter—it has significant consequences for the fans in the stadium, and for the stewards and security staff working there. According to the Football Association, unauthorised entry to football matches results in operational, safety and security problems at major events. There are regularly 600 tailgating attempts at major games at Wembley and at grounds across the country. Occasionally, there are also instances of mass entry, where large crowds of people try to push their way into the stadium. The potential consequences of this kind of mass entry are both dangerous and tragic. In July 2021, during the Euros final, around 1,900 ticketless individuals entered Wembley stadium. It is estimated that around 1,200 to 1,300 of those individuals got into the inner areas of the ground. Two of my friends, Ross and Siobhan, were at the match that day. They are both extremely experienced supporters of many sports, and travel to attend games at many grounds around the world. They were excited that day to watch the game, to experience at first hand the charged atmosphere of such a significant match, and to get behind their team. Unfortunately, they did not have the usual experience that they rightly hoped for. Siobhan told me: “We arrived Wembley around an hour before kick off…it was obvious that things were not as they should be…I felt very uneasy about the atmosphere…We went to the turnstiles, which were still very busy and there were people there without a ticket who had managed to get through the first ticket check and were asking people to let them push through with them…I’ve been to many events at Wembley that are sold out and have never seen it in such a mess. We went straight to our seats which we were able to reclaim from the people occupying them at the time and the rows were overfilled and the stairways were full of people…The place was clearly filled way past capacity…Overall I found it to be unpleasant and a potentially dangerous environment…It has put me off…attending England games and I haven’t been to one since.” My friends were not alone in feeling like that. Baroness Louise Casey was commissioned to conduct an independent review into the events of the Euros final, which she described as turning “ a day of national pride into a day of shame”. The report finds: “The drunkenness, drug taking, irresponsibility, criminality, and abuse of innocent people—including staff, families, and disabled ticket holders—was shocking and intolerable.” Baroness Casey also writes: “There were a series of crowd ‘near misses’ which could have led to significant injuries or even death”. She concluded: “The existing enforcement mechanisms available to the police and other enforcement officers do not offer enough deterrent against those determined to use the cover of football matches to commit criminal offences. Tailgating, for example, should become a criminal offence. Sanctions for those breaking into football stadiums and/or recklessly endangering lives is weak.” My Bill aims to rectify that by inserting a new specific offence into the Football (Offences) Act 1991, namely entering or attempting to enter a designated football match in England and Wales without a ticket that the person is eligible to use. The offence, as we have heard, is summary only and carries a maximum sentence of a £1,000 fine. It can be tried only in a magistrates court, which will help with the big core backlog in the Crown courts. A conviction is likely to lead to a court-imposed football banning order, preventing the person in question attending matches for between three and five years. There is a potential prison sentence if the banning order is breached. The offence, and the banning order in particular, is intended to act as the long-term deterrent that Baroness Casey identified a need for in her report. If passed, the Bill would apply to matches set out in orders made under section 1 of the 1991 Act. As it stands, those are matches in the premier league, championship, leagues one and two, national league, women’s super league, women’s super league 2—previously called the championship—and Cymru premier league, and international fixtures held in England and Wales. After I did an interview with Radio Derby about the Bill, I was touched to hear from my friend, and Amber Valley borough council’s longest-serving councillor, John McCabe. Incidentally, he was also probably one of the longest-suffering Nottingham Forest football club fans. He has sadly passed away since he left me a voicemail message that morning, which I still have. He opened with his characteristic greeting, “’Ey up, Linsey,” before talking about unauthorised entry in his youth. He said, “Well done…It’s been happening for years—it used to happen when I were about eleven—they used to say ‘lift him over, he’ll be alright,’ but it’s been happening for years that Linsey.” That “Well done” sticks with me, and his words and reflections on witnessing unauthorised entry aged 11 further demonstrate the long-standing need for the kind of reform that the Bill proposes. I will now turn to some queries that were put to me during the Bill’s various stages. First, the Bill uses the word “premises” instead of “stadium”, to allow for arrests to be made and prosecutions to be brought against people going through the first cordon where a ticket would need to be displayed, preventing danger to the stadium itself. In Committee, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) raised a concern regarding the challenges of electronic ticketing and ticket duplication as a means to illegally provide entry to matches. I thank him for his concern and assure him that that would be captured by section 166 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994—a provision that covers the unauthorised resale of match tickets, commonly referred to as ticket touting. Also in Committee, the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) asked about the change to the wording of proposed new section 1A(3) of the 1991 Act in the version of the Bill promoted by Lord Brennan of Canton, which fell at the general election. The provision outlines proposed possible defences. Proposed new section 1A(3)(b) in my version of the Bill has been edited so that it covers cases in which a person “reasonably believed” that they had a ticket for the match but in fact did not. That is to ensure that a person who innocently buys a counterfeit ticket is not criminalised under this offence, which is specifically about fan safety and preventing overcrowding. As before, the defence also applies in relation to a person using a genuine ticket that they are not eligible to use—for example, an adult using a child’s ticket. Again, because there would already be a reserved seat in the stadium, safety would not be an issue with respect to overcrowding. The Bill, it should be clear, is about safety and the safeguarding of football fans, not villainising genuine supporters. The hon. Member for Wimbledon wondered whether that alteration might have the unintended consequence of allowing a defence if a person used a ticket that had already been used, regardless of whether they had done so deliberately. I promised that I would raise that with the Home Office legal advisers and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, which I did. They confirmed that a person attempting to reuse a ticket could not be said to reasonably believe that they possessed valid authorisation to enter, meaning that the statutory defence under proposed new section 1A(3)(b) would not apply. Furthermore, in practical terms, the court is likely to interpret the provision as meaning that a person is not eligible to reuse a previously used ticket, consistent with the intent to prevent unauthorised access to football stadiums. I thank the Home Office legal advisers and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel for their help in clarifying that matter. Finally, let me address why the Bill deals with football matches specifically. Of course, the danger posed by overcrowding is not limited to football and is prevalent in other highly attended sporting and entertainment events; however, this is a private Member’s Bill, and as we have heard, in many instances it is best to limit them in nature if one is to successfully change the law within the prescribed timeframe. I visited Wembley to watch the Carabao cup final with the Minister for Policing and Crime Prevention. We witnessed tailgating taking place and when I spoke to staff in the police, they suggested that football specifically was an event at which unauthorised entry regularly happens and that it poses a serious risk at the most competitive games. In the light of the upcoming Euro 2028, which I am glad to say is being jointly hosted by the UK and Ireland, it is necessary that legislation to protect fans is passed as soon as possible, so that it can come into effect and be a proper deterrent beforehand. If passed, my Bill guarantees that that would happen.