Liz Jarvis MP: speeches

Speeches

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 2, in clause 38, page 20, line 18, leave out from “must” to the end of line 19 and insert— “be allocated by the relevant Local Health and Wellbeing Board to public health projects.”. This amendment would direct funds from Fixed Penalty Notice fines to public health initiatives, determined by Local Health and Wellbeing Boards.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have one sentence left. The amendments would ensure that the penalties imposed for regulatory breaches contribute directly to mitigating the broader harms caused by tobacco and vaping.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I do not know the answer to that, so I will refer that question to the Minister.

• 14 Jan 2025 · Renters’ Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, which is important to my constituents, and to me personally, as I grew up in rented accommodation. New clause 1 would limit the maximum rent that landlords can request or receive in advance to no more than two months-worth of the tenancy. Excessive deposits mean that far too many people face exclusion from the housing market altogether. For families on lower incomes, younger tenants or those receiving benefits, that practice can make finding a home almost impossible. Landlords increasingly use methods such requiring rent in advance to exclude those they deem undesirable tenants. According to the charity Shelter, 52% of private landlords refuse to let to tenants receiving housing benefit. By capping rent in advance, the new clause would help to level the playing field and reduce the financial burden on those who are looking for somewhere decent to live but cannot get in the door because they are living pay cheque to pay cheque. Amendment 1 would ensure that any rent increase is capped at a maximum rate in line with the Bank of England base rate. Unchecked rent increases are driving families in Eastleigh and across the country into financial hardship. In the current system, unscrupulous landlords can impose excessive hikes that effectively force tenants out. One couple in my constituency, who are already working two jobs to provide a home for their young children, were forced out of their rented accommodation when their landlord hiked their rent to an unaffordable level. They had no choice but to move to a smaller property that does not cater as well to their family’s needs. Allowing that practice to continue undermines the stability and security that the Bill seeks to provide. Linking rent increases to the Bank of England base rate is both logical and fair. It would create predictability for tenants, while allowing landlords to adjust rents reasonably in response to economic conditions. Office for National Statistics figures show that private rents in Eastleigh rose by 7.6% in 2024. The amendment would provide more protection for people who are struggling because of the cost of living crisis and cannot pay extremely high rents. New clause 23 would ensure that landlords approve necessary home adaptations for disabled tenants where a professional home assessment has been carried out. One in three disabled people in private rented properties live in unsuitable accommodation. The failure to secure appropriate housing can be life-limiting and make regular activities such as accessing a bathroom or moving between rooms very difficult. In England, 8.8% of disabled people rely on the private rented sector because of the chronic shortage of social housing, yet private rented properties are rarely accessible or adaptable, and only 6.6% of disabled facilities grants are used to make such homes suitable for disabled renters. Unsuitable housing not only hinders independence, but increases reliance on social care, leads to higher hospital admissions and reduces participation in work and community life. The amendment would ensure that disabled tenants have the autonomy and dignity to live independently in homes suited to their needs. Finally, I express my support for amendment 10, which would extend protections to students in HMO properties. Students are some of the most vulnerable renters, often dealing with insecure housing, high rents and landlords who fail to maintain properties. This amendment would ensure that landlords of student HMOs are held to the same standards as other landlords, providing greater security and accountability. I also express my support for new clause 6: all young people deserve somewhere safe to call home, and as much support as possible to help them find it. I welcome this Bill as an opportunity to reset the balance of power in the rental market. My constituents in Eastleigh and renters across the country deserve a rental market that works for them, not against them. I urge Members to support the amendments to which I have spoken, to ensure that the Bill delivers the fair deal that renters have been waiting for.

• 14 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Mr Dowd, I was just going to ask the shadow Minister to speak up because I cannot hear her at all.

• 7 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Do you think the Bill goes far enough to protect children and young people from the harmful effects of tobacco and vaping? Professor Linda Bauld: It is very ambitious on tobacco. We will be the first in the world—after unfortunate events in New Zealand, from my personal perspective—to introduce the smoke-free generation policy, and the world is looking at us. That is good. In terms of protecting people from vaping, the Bill has a proportionate set of measures, but if I come back to the answer that I gave to the shadow Minister, we really need to keep our eye on the regulations and—going back to the Minister’s questions—make sure that we are striking a balance. Given the evidence that we have for much stronger regulations on vaping, I think this strikes the right balance, but we need to make sure that we do that in a proportionate way. Finally, to go back to the comments from the previous set of witnesses, we also need to make sure that local areas have the flexibility around some of the measures to adapt them for their local circumstances.

• 7 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Lord Bichard mentioned Border Force. Will ensuring that it has enough resources to implement this Bill successfully be a consideration? In response to my question, Matthew Shanks mentioned a public health campaign. Are there any plans to have a public health campaign to back that up? Andrew Gwynne: The short answer to both those questions is yes. We have committed to an investment across HMRC, trading standards and Border Force of £100 billion over the next five years to enforce these measures—sorry, it is £100 million. The Treasury will be having a fit; I am getting my billions and millions wrong. I wish it was £100 billion. As far as public health campaigns are concerned, just this week we committed £70 million for smoking cessation. For this new year, I have signed off a concerted public health campaign for smoking cessation on social and broadcast media. As this Bill progresses and becomes law, there will be a huge public health publicity campaign so that everybody is aware of our Smokefree 2030 target ambitions.

• 7 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q One thing that I have picked up from my conversations with youth workers and police is that children are being given vapes outside school. For example, if they are not at school for any reason or if they are particularly susceptible or vulnerable to other influences, they might be given them in the playgrounds or wherever. Obviously you have the issue that it can be a gateway to county lines as well. How do you think this Bill will support education, encouraging children to turn away from vaping, and should the Bill be backed by a public health awareness campaign aimed specifically at children and young people? Matthew Shanks: I would say yes to the second point, but I would aim the campaign at everybody, because we also need to educate parents to get them to understand. On the first point, I think people who want to find ways of rewarding people to get them to join things that are not appropriate will find something, and vapes are something that is being used at the moment. I am not saying that this Bill will stop that happening, because people will always find ways, but it will certainly help the majority of people to see that vaping is not something they should engage with.

• 7 Jan 2025 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I would like to understand more about how you think the gradual change in age of sale will affect tobacco and vaping behaviour, compared with increasing the age of sale in one go. If a child has an older sibling or someone who may be bringing the products into the home, or has older friends, I do not see how this will change the behaviour or the desire to try the products. Professor Sir Chris Whitty: It is important to be realistic about the fact that—as I suspect you will all remember from your schooldays, and if you have children, you will know from them—people do not stick exactly to the current law as it is. The idea that, magically, there will be a cut-off and people will exactly follow it strikes me as flying in the face of lived reality. However, as the age of sale moves up over time, I am very confident that it will lead to a significant reduction over time in the number of children buying cigarettes, because it will be illegal for people to sell them to them. It will not be illegal for them to possess cigarettes—that is an important distinction—but it will be illegal for people to sell them to them. If you are a 17-year-old you can usually pretend to be an 18-year-old, but pretending, or even wanting to pretend, to be a 30-year-old is a different thing completely. Over time this measure will become more effective. The impacts will be seen first in things such as children’s asthma and developing lungs. It will probably next be seen in birth effects, because the highest smoking rates are in the youngest mums: the rates are up to 30% in people who have children before they are 20, but much lower in people who have them in their late 20s or early 30s. In that younger cohort, the effect on stillbirths, birth defects, premature births and so on will be the next big impact that the Bill will have, and gradually it will roll over time. It is not a perfect mechanism—I do not think any piece of law that has been designed is a perfect mechanism—but, as a way of gradually driving smoking down in a way that does not take away anyone’s existing rights, it seems to me a reasonable balance between those principal aims. To go back to my first point, in reality the borderline will probably be a bit fuzzy, because it always is, but over time the effects will be very substantial.

• 18 Dec 2024 · BBC: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Gentleman. Does the Minister agree that the BBC’s funding model must not be a Trojan horse for those who seek to undermine its editorial independence and pave the way for figures such as Elon Musk, whom we have little opportunity to scrutinise or hold to account? Liberal Democrats are committed to a strong, independent and well-funded BBC that continues to reflect the diversity of our nation and serves all audiences.

• 18 Dec 2024 · BBC: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  I do not disagree that there needs to be a plan, but at the moment I do not see one on the table. The next charter review is the time to have a serious, evidence-based discussion about funding, but any changes must strengthen, not diminish, the BBC. Through the BBC we see things about our nation and the world that we might never encounter in our own lives. As Sir David Attenborough has said, the world would be worse off without our stories. It must be taken with great pride that the British public has a direct role in providing the platform needed to nurture and share the genius of so many British individuals in the creative industry. I hope we can continue to protect public ownership of the BBC, to preserve the voices and stories that make us who we are.

• 18 Dec 2024 · BBC: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) for the opportunity to discuss the future funding of one of our nation’s most cherished institutions. The BBC has been at the heart of our national life for more than 100 years. It embodies a mission that is simple yet profoundly important: to inform, educate and entertain. The BBC is not just another broadcaster; it plays a vital role in our cultural life and our national identity. It is universal, independent and unparalleled in its reach and influence, and it remains the most trusted broadcaster in the world. From BBC Bitesize, which has educated millions of children, to the drama, music and comedy that enrich our lives, the BBC has no equal. Unlike global streaming services, which are motivated by profit and primarily serve international markets, the BBC exists to benefit the UK public. Public service broadcasting ensures that content is produced for everyone, regardless of wealth or geography. It brings us together, whether to watch the coronation, follow the Olympics, enjoy the sounds of Glastonbury or tune in to local radio to hear about issues in our communities. A Netflix-style subscription model would be divisive and exclusionary. It would force the BBC to focus on content that attracts paying subscribers, sidelining the universal services that make it so valuable. The BBC’s services serve all audiences, not just those who can afford to pay. A subscription model would drive up costs for consumers and reduce the money available for investment in content. The notion that the BBC’s entertainment content should be put behind a paywall is misguided. For many households, including the digitally excluded, that would make BBC services inaccessible. It would also result in the loss of free access to well-loved shows such as “Strictly Come Dancing”, “Match of the Day”, “The Traitors” and world-renowned drama. The proposal also ignores the reality of subscription-based financial models. Since its launch in the UK in 2012, when it charged £5.99 per month, Netflix’s standard plan has increased to £10.99 month, and its premium plan to £17.99—increases of 83% and 200% respectively. Consider the impact on a young person from a low-income household who might discover a passion for science through a BBC documentary, or be inspired to pursue their dreams by a BBC film. Those transformative experiences would be lost if access were restricted to only those who could afford to pay. An advertising-funded BBC would be equally damaging. It would siphon advertising revenue away from commercial broadcasters, weakening the entire UK media ecosystem. Worse still, it would compromise the BBC’s independence by exposing it to commercial pressures. That would push the BBC to prioritise more generic, mass-appeal programming over distinctive, high-quality British productions. It would also undermine the BBC’s ability to deliver the rich, global and multicultural programming that has become its hallmark. The BBC’s current funding model guarantees universality and independence. For just over £3 a week, households gain access to a treasure trove of content, including nine TV channels, 39 local radio stations, and online services such as the BBC iPlayer and BBC Sounds, yet the BBC has faced a 30% real-terms funding cut over the past decade, forcing tough decisions and service reductions. We cannot continue with perpetual uncertainty about the status of the BBC. The BBC’s current charter ensures the licence fee model until at least 2027, but beyond that we must commit to a funding model that is sustainable, fair and fit for the future. Part of that future must include stronger support for the BBC World Service. This unparalleled institution is not only a vital source of impartial news for 450 million people globally, but a key pillar of the UK’s soft power. Whether it is exposing corruption, raising awareness of public health challenges or championing education and human rights, the BBC World Service not only projects British values but does real good in the world. However, recent funding cuts forced the closure of language services. This is unacceptable. We must restore full funding to the World Service through the Foreign Office budget to allow it to continue its invaluable work. The BBC is also a driver of the UK’s creative economy, contributing nearly £5 billion annually. It commissions more independent productions than any other broadcaster, invests in research and development, and supports apprenticeships and training. At its heart, the BBC’s mission is to act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output. In a media landscape dominated by billionaires seeking to engineer narratives that align with their personal interests and agendas, the BBC stands as one of the few institutions committed to impartiality and serving the public.

• 9 Dec 2024 · Fireworks: Sale and Use · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. I thank the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for opening this important debate. I, too, pay tribute to Josephine’s family. Fireworks have been part of our celebrations and traditions for years. Whether at a public display or a family gathering with sparklers and sausages, they can bring joy and excitement. However, for some people, including hundreds in my constituency of Eastleigh, fireworks are more than just a spectacle—they are a source of profound distress. As we have heard, those living with PTSD, dementia or other mental health challenges can find the unexpected bangs and flashes deeply disorientating and distressing. For shift workers, including our NHS staff, and for families with young children, the sudden noises can be incredibly disturbing. Of course, it is not just human beings who are affected. As I know from my personal experience of having a much-missed rescue dog who was petrified every November and new year’s eve, fireworks can be terrifying for our four-legged friends. Research by the Blue Cross tells us that 70% of pets are affected by fireworks, with many trembling in fear, hiding for hours or even becoming physically ill. Horses startled by fireworks have been known to suffer injuries. Sadly, there have even been cases of animals losing their life as a result of stress caused by fireworks. We need to strike a balance. Public firework displays provide a structured and predictable environment, minimising unexpected noise and allowing people to prepare. However, private fireworks, when used carelessly and at unexpected times of the year or in instances of antisocial behaviour, can amplify the distress for both people and animals. That is where our collective responsibility comes in. What steps are the Government taking to address the concerns of people living with PTSD, dementia or other vulnerabilities, who are disproportionately affected by fireworks? I support calls to reduce the noise limits for F2 and F3 fireworks to 90 dB, and to enhance the legislation governing the use and sale of fireworks. Will the Minister consider setting stricter noise limits for fireworks sold for private use to ensure that they are safer and more inclusive for people and animals? Finally, I echo the concerns of my hon. Friend the Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison). Ultimately, it is our emergency services, our NHS, our vets and our animal rescue centres that have to pick up the pieces. A proper review of the fireworks legislation is long overdue.

• 5 Dec 2024 · Cumberlege Review: Pelvic Mesh · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for securing this important debate and for the opportunity to speak about the devastating impact of pelvic mesh impacts and the systemic failures surrounding their use. Among those affected is my constituent Rachel. In 2014, she was assured that a pelvic mesh implant was the best solution to her incontinence, but instead it led to years of unrelenting pain, infections and a diminished quality of life. Repeatedly dismissed by medical professionals, she was left self-catheterising and enduring ever-worsening symptoms. She eventually had to borrow £12,000 for private surgery to remove the mesh, only to find that her pain and nerve damage persisted. Today, she is in debt, relies on strong pain medication, and struggles daily with the physical and emotional toll of her ordeal. Equally distressing is the experience of Suzi, the daughter of two of my constituents. After her initial surgery to relieve mild stress incontinence, she experienced severe complications, including debilitating pain and a hole in her urethra caused by the mesh. Over the years, she underwent multiple surgeries to remove it. Each time she was told that the problem had been resolved, but each time fragments of the mesh remained, prolonging her suffering and leading to permanent damage. Her pain was dismissed as psychological. Today, Suzi lives with chronic pain, relies on a wheelchair and battles PTSD. Her life, once full of independence, activity and joy, has been irreversibly changed. Thousands of women have suffered avoidable harm as a result of pelvic mesh implants. The Cumberlege review described the health system that allowed this to happen as “disjointed, siloed, unresponsive and defensive”, and recommended a comprehensive response, including the establishment of dedicated redress schemes. The recommendations have not been fully implemented, and there is still no redress scheme. Victims have been failed. The Government must act now to implement the Cumberlege review in full. That includes accepting the call for a moratorium on pelvic mesh implants, ensuring appropriate care and psychological support, and urgently addressing the lack of redress for victims. The absence of a formal compensation scheme is a glaring failure. Even though the Patient Safety Commissioner reiterated the need for action earlier this year, no meaningful progress has been made. We know the scale of harm is vast. At least 10,000 women in England have been affected, although campaigners suggest that the true figure may be closer to 40,000. These women trusted the healthcare system and were let down at every turn. They were misled, gaslit and left to suffer alone. They were promised a risk-free procedure, only to endure life-altering complications. When they sought help, they were ignored or dismissed and told that their symptoms were imagined. Women’s health must be taken seriously. There has been a financial settlement for some women, but it came with no admission of liability. That is not justice. The Government must provide clarity on their plans and not leave my constituents, their families and women across the country in limbo any longer.

• 4 Dec 2024 · Hospitality Sector: Eastleigh · Hansard source

  More

  The hospitality sector is about not just numbers, but people, culture and community. In Eastleigh, hospitality businesses provide jobs for students, opportunities for young people entering the workforce, and spaces where people come together. They are integral to our social fabric and our economy. They deserve meaningful support from this Government. Without decisive action we risk losing not only businesses, but the vibrant communities they sustain. I urge the Government to reform business rates to support productive investment, reverse the increase to employer national insurance contributions and provide targeted relief to the hospitality sector. Let us not allow short-term measures to undermine the long-term health of our economy and communities. In the spirit of hospitality, I conclude by inviting the Minister to visit Eastleigh to meet representatives from the hospitality industry and enjoy the very best that the constituency has to offer.

• 4 Dec 2024 · Hospitality Sector: Eastleigh · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for the hospitality sector in Eastleigh. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I am grateful to have the opportunity today to discuss the urgent challenges facing the hospitality sector in my constituency of Eastleigh and across the UK. Hospitality is not only a significant economic driver, but the beating heart of our high streets and communities. From the pubs that act as social hubs to the restaurants and cafés that bring people together, the sector is central to our economy and way of life. My constituent, Lorraine, is the landlady of the Master Builder in West End in my constituency. Her heating costs are around £3,000 a week, placing an unsustainable strain on her business. Although December bookings provide some hope, she worries that the quieter months of January and February could push her pub to the brink. Despite the pressures, Lorraine’s commitment to her community is unwavering. Her pub hosts local care home residents for darts and meals and welcomes charities, including Southampton Sight, for Christmas dinners and Sunday carveries. As she says, “it’s not just for coming in on a weekend and letting off some steam, it’s about friendship, kindness and community.” Yet with rising costs Lorraine is questioning how much longer she can keep her doors open while working over 90 hours a week to make her business work. In Eastleigh the hospitality industry contributes £114 million annually. It employs 1,805 people and encompasses 84 venues, including some fantastic cafés such as the Coffee Cabin, which recently celebrated its third birthday, many superb restaurants and 32 local pubs. Eastleigh is also home to Steam Town Brew Co., an independent brewery, and The Steel Tank Alehouse, an independent micropub in Chandler’s Ford, both of which embody the entrepreneurial spirit that drives our local hospitality sector. Our football club and world-class cricket ground attract visitors from across the UK and beyond, many of whom stay in our local hotels and enjoy local hospitality.

• 4 Dec 2024 · Hospitality Sector: Eastleigh · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, I do share the hon. Gentleman’s concerns. Despite the remarkable community contribution that our hospitality generates, the sector is under immense pressure. Nationally, hospitality employs 3.5 million people. It generates £140 billion in economic activity and pays £54 billion in taxation. The Government’s Budget, however, introduced £3.4 billion of cost increases, including rises in employer national insurance contributions. Those measures disproportionately impact lower-paid and part-time workers, who form the backbone of the industry. The Office for Budget Responsibility has said that next year 60% of the employer national insurance contribution’s increase will be paid for by staff in reduced real wages. According to UKHospitality, employer national insurance contributions for a part-time worker on 15 hours will increase by 73%. Combined with reductions in business rates relief from 75% to 40%, these policies are creating unsustainable pressures on businesses already operating on razor-thin margins. The Steam Town Brew Co. is a local success story. David from Steam Town raised the issues of residual inflation in food and drink, the prices of raw ingredients for brewing and high interest rates. He wants to grow the business, but the current economic conditions and existing market restrictions, such as the lack of access to tied pubs for smaller breweries, have made it challenging. The situation is made worse by the surging costs of energy. Hospitality businesses are among the most energy-intensive sectors, with pubs and restaurants relying heavily on refrigeration, heating and cooking equipment. High energy costs have led to dramatic increases in operating expenses that are becoming too hard to bear. For smaller businesses the increases are not sustainable and many businesses are at risk of closure. Will the Minister share the steps the Government are taking to help hospitality businesses to manage their energy costs in the coming months? Post-covid recovery remains a significant challenge for hospitality businesses. Many are grappling with debt, reduced footfall and the shift of consumers to online food shopping. Last year alone, 2,704 hospitality businesses went into insolvency, highlighting the fragility of the sector and the urgency for Government support. The cost of living crisis has created a perfect storm for the hospitality sector, as households across the UK tighten their belts, reducing discretionary spending on dining out, hotel stays and social experiences. That squeeze on disposable income directly impacts the vibrancy of our high streets. Individual prosperity and high street prosperity are intrinsically linked. When families feel they cannot afford to participate in social activities, it is not just their individual wellbeing, but the fabric of our communities that suffers.

• 4 Dec 2024 · Hospitality Sector: Eastleigh · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an excellent point and I will say more on that shortly. When the previous Conservative Government presided over an historic drop in living standards—the first time British households ended a Parliament worse off than when it began—it is no wonder that the hospitality sector has struggled in recent years. A sector thrives when people have confidence in their financial futures. That confidence has been eroded by years of poor economic management. High streets should be centres of activity, creativity and connection. The Government’s current policies risk turning them into boarded-up remnants of what once was. Hon. Members know that all too well, as we witness the slow erosion of our high streets with each closed pub, restaurant or café. What reassurances can the Minister provide that the Government are committed to preventing further closures and fostering growth in our high streets? This weekend sees Small Business Saturday, an opportunity to celebrate and support our small businesses. Instead of stifling those businesses with increased taxes, the Government should lift burdens to allow the hospitality sector to thrive. A strong hospitality sector brings busy pubs, bustling hotels, vibrant nightlife and a renewed sense of community spirit. That is what our towns and cities need to recover from years of economic stagnation. The Government should create economic conditions so that entrepreneurs are clamouring to open new restaurants, cafés, bars and pubs, finally putting a stop to the steady erosion of the sector in our communities. Every closed hospitality venue is not just a lost business but a lost opportunity for social connection and local employment. The Government must step up and deliver policies that support hospitality and ensure a brighter future for our high streets and the communities they serve. I would like to know the specific steps the Government are taking to support this vital sector and restore hope to our high streets. If we want to see thriving high streets filled with energy and purpose, the Government must act decisively. At the heart of these challenges lies a deeply flawed business rate system. Business rates actively harm productivity by taxing structures and equipment instead of profits or land value. That outdated system discourages investment, stifling innovation and growth. Liberal Democrats have long called for its replacement with a commercial landowner levy, which would tax only the land value of commercial sites. That reform would encourage investment in buildings and infrastructure, reduce taxes in 92% of local authorities, particularly in deprived areas, and shift the administrative burden from businesses to landlords. For high streets such as those in Eastleigh, that could provide a much-needed lifeline. It would allow businesses to focus on growth and innovation, while alleviating the crisis faced by small enterprises and hospitality venues. Although the Government have announced plans to introduce lower business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure properties from 2026-27, those changes are far too delayed. By the time those reforms take effect, many businesses will already have shut their doors. Moreover, reducing relief for small businesses from 75% to 40% is a devastating blow to thousands of enterprises trying to recover from years of economic strain. In particular, pubs are bearing an unjust share of the burden. According to the British Beer and Pub Association, despite accounting for just 0.5% of total business turnover, they pay 2.8% of the business rates bill, an overpayment of around £500 million each year. I ask the Minister what plans the Government have to review that inequity.

• 3 Dec 2024 · National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. I have previously raised in the Chamber the impact that increased employer national insurance contributions will have on GPs, dentists, pharmacies and care providers in my constituency of Eastleigh. I have also been contacted by many owners of small businesses who are hugely concerned about the impact that changes to employer national insurance contributions will have on their businesses. That includes the early years sector, which plays a crucial role in supporting working families and the wider economy. Providers who operate on tight margins and with a limited ability to adjust income face unique challenges. For a sector that is already under immense financial pressure, this added burden feels short-sighted and risks undermining the stability of a service that families rely on so heavily. Crestwood pre-school in my constituency serves local families by providing care and education for children aged two to five. As a charity-run pre-school, it is already stretched to its limits, despite huge fundraising efforts. Clare, the manager of Crestwood, wrote to me explaining how the increase in employer national insurance contributions will add tens of thousands of pounds to its annual costs. Those are funds that it simply does not have. I have also heard from Forest Footsteps Childcare in Chandler’s Ford, another early years provider in my constituency. Erin, who opened the centre in 2022, is worried about how she will manage the extra costs. She calculated that the new national insurance plans for employers’ contributions along with the rise in the national minimum wage will cost her approximately £13,000 a year more. While she is showing remarkable resilience, she told me that some providers have been less fortunate and already closed their doors. The YMCA Eastleigh nursery and community centre has also shared its concerns. It told me that the combined impact of these changes will cost the nursery and community centre an extra £95,000 a year. This is a problem being acutely felt across the whole sector. These stories are not unique. Across the country, nurseries, pre-schools and childminders are warning that rising employer national insurance contributions coupled with inadequate Government funding will lead to higher fees for parents, reductions in staff pay and closures in those essential early years settings, which would not only harm working families but risk deepening the staffing crisis in the sector. What reassurance can the Minister give early years and childcare providers in Eastleigh and across the country that they will not be adversely affected? Raising employer national insurance is a tax on jobs that will hurt small businesses and essential services. The Government must reconsider their approach. The early years sector, primary care and small businesses are not staffed by those with the broadest shoulders. This weekend we have Small Business Saturday, a chance to celebrate the incredible work of small businesses, who do so much for our communities. They need our support. The Government must think again and support working families. They must rethink this unhelpful policy.

• 19 Nov 2024 · Infected Blood Inquiry · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this incredibly important debate. I begin by paying tribute to all those who had their life destroyed by the infected blood scandal, and everyone who has campaigned for justice. They include my constituent Gary Webster. For those who are not familiar with his story, Gary was born with haemophilia, and at the age of nine he was sent to Treloar’s college, a specialist boarding school in Hampshire. His parents hoped that the school’s on-site medical facilities would enable Gary to lead as normal and happy a childhood as possible. All the boys at the school and their parents trusted the doctors who saw them implicitly, but in fact, the boys were being given contaminated factor VIII blood products imported from the US. Gary was in his final year at school when he was told that he had been infected with HIV/AIDS and hepatitis, and that there was no guarantee that he would be alive in six to 12 months. Of the 122 haemophiliac boys who attended Treloar’s between 1973 and 1986, 80 have since died. The infected blood inquiry report by Sir Brian Langstaff found that “deaths, illness and suffering were caused needlessly to people with bleeding disorders by…Treating children at Treloar’s with multiple, riskier, commercial concentrates, prophylactically and as objects for research” and “Treating children unnecessarily with concentrates (especially commercial ones) rather than choosing safer treatments.” One can only imagine the pain of the survivors and all the families, and it beggars belief that it has taken so long for them to get justice. The thousands of victims of the infected blood scandal and their families from across the UK have been waiting far too long for justice, accountability and compensation. The Liberal Democrats welcome the introduction of the infected blood compensation scheme. We are glad that it will bring the victims of this gross miscarriage of justice, including those who were infected and those who have been affected, closer to the justice that they deserve. It is crucial that this compensation scheme is implemented as quickly and effectively as possible. We are also backing calls by the survivors for a duty of candour on all public officials. The infected blood scandal campaign organisation Factor 8 has highlighted that the guidance on the Infected Blood Compensation Authority website states: “Should an eligible affected person die during the application process to the Scheme, their compensation award will not be paid. This is in line with the Inquiry’s recommendation.” However, Factor 8 has examined the inquiry’s second interim report, and in the summary of conclusions, on page 14, at conclusion t), Sir Brian Langstaff says: “Where an affected person who has not made a claim dies, the sums that they might have received if they had claimed should not become part of their estate.” The key wording is “who has not made a claim”. Will the Government update their policy and ensure that all affected persons who make an eligible claim have their claim honoured? That is important for those affected who are elderly or ill, and are concerned that they may not live to see the end result of the claim process. I hope the Minister will look at that as a matter of urgency. The infected blood scandal has highlighted the importance of robust blood safety measures and tools. Will the Government look into the merits of pathogen inactivation technology to ensure that no one else unnecessarily suffers from infected blood, and that we have a safe, reliable supply of blood products? I spoke with Gary Webster on Friday, and as he put it, “the whole process needs speeding up”. After so many years of secrecy, deceit and delay, the Government must ensure full transparency about the progress of the scheme, and open, ongoing communication with all those affected. As for the families who have been impacted by this appalling scandal, please give them a national memorial, and reassurance that measures will be put in place to ensure that nothing like this can ever happen again.

• 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) on his excellent maiden speech; I have indeed enjoyed many family holidays in his constituency. I am pleased that we are having this debate today and that the Liberal Democrats are supporting this measure. We have been calling for action on single-use vapes for some time. Single-use or disposable vapes are a menace and the evidence for banning them is clear and overwhelming. It is staggering that each week more than 5 million disposable vapes are discarded in the UK, posing significant environmental and public health challenges and littering our streets, countryside and beaches. The devices, which are difficult to recycle because of their lithium-ion batteries, are a growing threat to wildlife and waterways. It is crucial that our waterways, including the River Itchen, the rare chalk stream that runs through my Eastleigh constituency, are protected. The Rivers Trust has found that the electric components in disposable vapes release chemicals and heavy metals as they degrade, severely threatening life in our rivers. As the Minister highlighted, batteries can, when improperly disposed of, cause fires in waste and refuse lorries, which puts additional strain on local services and poses safety risks. Together, the disposable vapes discarded in a year could provide enough lithium to power over 5,000 electric cars. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has raised serious concerns about the impact of carelessly discarded disposable vapes on animal welfare, as the risk of ingestion or habitat disruption poses a risk to wildlife. Although vapes have an important role to play in smoking cessation, single-use vapes present unique risks for children and young people. Marketed with colourful packaging and a choice of flavours, and at far lower prices than traditional cigarettes, they are particularly appealing to under-18s. According to public health charity Action on Smoking and Health, 18% of 11 to 17-year-olds have tried disposable vapes. I hope that the Government will also address the concerns of the Mental Health Foundation that those with mental health issues are more likely to use disposable vapes. The trusts that provide them with care, including cessation services, should be properly supported in the transition. We face an escalating crisis that affects our planet and the next generation. Young people are our future and we owe them swift and meaningful action. The Liberal Democrats support the measure, but we hope that the Government will ensure that the ban is effective and that manufacturers and retailers will play their part. There must be robust regulations and investment in cessation services, and the health of our communities must be prioritised. I hope that the Government will take this opportunity to address these concerns with the urgency that they demand, to ensure a future that protects the health and wellbeing of young people and preserves our environment.

• 5 Nov 2024 · Income Tax (Charge) · Hansard source

  More

  Over the past few days, I have been contacted by GPs from St Andrew’s surgery in my constituency, whose busy practice looks after 13,200 patients. They include Dr Katie Popplewell, who told me that the proposed increase to employer national insurance contributions is likely to cost the practice a whopping £27,000—the equivalent of two GP sessions a week—before other staffing costs are factored in. As she puts it: “At a time when the Government has promised to repair and invest in the NHS, this decision to place a further burden on practices must change, or we will see an adverse impact on patient care on offer in Eastleigh and more practices closing their doors for good.” Every Liberal Democrat Member recognises the challenges facing the country after years of Conservative mismanagement, but I hope that the Chancellor will consider exempting GPs, small businesses, pharmacies, dentists, care homes and charities from the proposed increase to employer national insurance contributions. Although I was pleased to see a commitment to more funding for breakfast clubs, there was no mention of the two-child benefit cap in the Chancellor’s statement, and frankly I am at a loss in understanding why. The Conservative Government trapped hundreds of thousands of children in poverty with their cruel and counterproductive two-child limit. As numerous charities and the Liberal Democrats have pointed out, scrapping the two-child benefit cap would be the quickest and most effective way of lifting children out of poverty in my Eastleigh constituency and across the UK, with huge long-term benefits for our society and our economy. In Eastleigh, we are also facing a local transport crisis. Hampshire county council has withdrawn funding from multiple routes over the past year, which has had a huge impact on my constituents, particularly in Chandler’s Ford and Valley Park. The bus fare hike will impact those in my community who can least afford it, and could result in yet more routes being cut with no alternative public transport provision. Thousands of women in my constituency who were born in the 1950s have been impacted by the DWP’s failure to communicate changes to their state pension age. It was incredibly disappointing that the WASPI women did not get a single mention in the Chancellor’s speech. It has been eight months since the ombudsman found that the DWP had failed to adequately communicate the changes. I implore the Chancellor to make the resolution of that issue a priority. Do not leave it until the next Budget; those women have already waited long enough.

• 16 Oct 2024 · Carer’s Allowance · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak as someone with direct personal experience of battling the care system. Since I became the MP for Eastleigh, I have been contacted by numerous constituents who have been asked to pay back thousands in overpayments by the DWP. One is a single parent of a child with special educational needs, who worked narrowly over the threshold and has had her allowance cut completely. She has been left without her allowance and is now repaying the overpayment, struggling on a limited income while caring for her son. The carer’s allowance overpayment scandal highlights deep flaws in our social security system. Unpaid carers—those dedicating their lives to caring for loved ones—are being unfairly penalised. Many of the debts could have been avoided had the previous Government fixed system failures and responded to warnings. The system needs urgent reform. The Government must take responsibility and compensate carers for overpayments that could have been prevented. I welcome the news that the Government will review overpayments in the carer’s allowance scandal, but for the sake of all vulnerable carers facing penalties I hope that we see urgent action to rectify the situation too. The financial reality for carers in Eastleigh is incredibly challenging; 29% of unpaid carers in the UK live in poverty, and many are forced to leave work because of their caring responsibilities. One million carers across the country are relying on a carer’s allowance of just £81.90 a week. We must raise the earnings cap, allowing carers to continue working without fear of financial penalty, but financial instability is just one aspect of the difficulties that carers are facing as we head into winter. Changes to the winter fuel payment will impact the 1.2 million unpaid carers over 65. Estimates show that 1.2 million carers are already in fuel poverty, with 42% of caring households struggling to heat their homes. That highlights the urgent need for more targeted support to ensure that carers are not forced to choose between caring and basic necessities. We need urgent reform of carer’s allowance, better pay for care workers and more support for unpaid carers. The social care crisis is leaving too many in Eastleigh stranded in hospital beds because there are not enough care workers to support them at home. We must address these issues, with a higher carer’s minimum wage, paid carer’s leave and guaranteed respite breaks. We must ensure that carers in Eastleigh and across the UK have enough to live on, and are given the respect and support that they deserve.

• 16 Oct 2024 · Access to Primary Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I am so pleased that we are having this very important debate this afternoon. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella), I wish to highlight the issues facing dentistry. Eastleigh is facing an acute NHS dental crisis, with many of my constituents unable to access basic dental care. By the end of 2023, more than 48% of children in Hampshire had not been seen by an NHS dentist in the previous two years. According to the NHS website, only a third of dentists in my constituency are taking on new NHS patients. I have heard from residents who are desperately trying to find an NHS dentist, but, after calling surgery after surgery, they cannot find one taking on new NHS patients. Some 62% of adults in Hampshire have not been seen by an NHS dentist in the past two years. That leaves them with very limited choices: go without any treatment at all, try to find the money for private treatment, or resort to DIY dentistry. One resident told me that their NHS dental appointment was cancelled at very short notice, with no alternative offered, because their highly skilled dentist from Poland left after Brexit and now there is no NHS dentist available at his local practice. Another constituent told me how his dental practice is struggling to keep appointments, and now has only one NHS dentist available, and that is on Saturdays only. Patients are being asked to sign forms agreeing to private treatment at NHS prices, without the protections that they would usually receive under NHS care. The previous Government pushed NHS dentistry to the brink of collapse. I hope the new Government will reverse that trend by increasing investment in dentistry, using unspent funds to increase the number of NHS dental appointments and removing VAT on children’s toothbrushes and toothpaste to make oral health more affordable. As a local NHS dentist told me, the dental contract is not fit for purpose. His colleagues are leaving the NHS in droves. My constituents in Eastleigh would benefit from an emergency rescue plan for NHS dentistry. Proper investment to tackle this crisis would offer more NHS dental appointments and deliver free check-ups for children. This is the kind of direct action that we need to prevent more children from suffering and to ensure that everyone, regardless of their income, can access high quality dental care.

• 8 Oct 2024 · Chalk Streams: Sewage Discharge · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for introducing this important debate. My constituency of Eastleigh has the precious chalk stream, the River Itchen, running through it. Earlier this year, Southern Water was found to be negligent by the Southampton Magistrates Court for dumping sewage into the Shawford lake stream that flowed into the YMCA Fairthorne Manor in Fair Oak in my constituency. Over 1,000 schoolchildren missed out on summer activities as a result. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government should introduce a sewage tax on water company profits? [ Official Report, 9 October 2024; Vol. 754, c. 6WC.] (Correction)