Liz Jarvis MP: speeches
4 Jul 2024–3 Jul 2025
How these years work
Our reporting years run from 4 July to 3 July, starting with the 2024 general election. They are not official parliamentary sessions. Office costs keep IPSA’s April–March financial years. Records may cover only part of a year; a missing record does not mean no work was done.
Read what this MP said, asked and contributed in Parliament.
23 published records · newest first.
Speeches
- 1 Jul 2025 · Supporting Economic Growth · Hansard source
More
5. What steps she is taking to help increase economic growth in Eastleigh constituency.
- 1 Jul 2025 · Supporting Economic Growth · Hansard source
More
Small to medium-sized businesses are the backbone of the local economy in Eastleigh, creating jobs and driving innovation. However, local businesses, including the precision manufacturing firm G. W. Martin, have told me that the increased costs as a result of the changes to employer national insurance contributions have left them with no choice but to pass those costs on to customers, making UK manufacturing less competitive globally. What concrete steps will the Government take to help businesses in Eastleigh?
- 24 Jun 2025 · Department for Education · Hansard source
More
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my constituents, including the hundreds of families who feel they are being let down by a system that simply is not working. Over the past year, I have heard heartbreaking stories from constituents whose children have been left waiting years for EHCP assessments and the specialist support they desperately need. Hampshire’s SEN service received over 3,800 EHCP requests in the last academic year alone. My constituent Chrissy’s daughter has struggled severely with reading, writing and confidence. When Chrissy asked for a dyslexia assessment, her daughter’s primary school was unable to provide one, and the family cannot afford private testing. Her daughter has missed days of school due to the sheer fear of going in, becoming physically sick as a result. Natasha, another constituent, told me that she is at her wits’ end trying to secure the right support for her son. He has an EHCP but is still without an autism diagnosis and a specialist placement after over two years of delays and miscommunication. What reassurance can the Minister give my constituents that their children will get the support they need to reach their full potential? I have also been contacted by constituents who have expressed concern about the cuts to the adoption and special guardianship support fund, which has been a lifeline for some of the most vulnerable children in our society. Will the Government consider reversing the cuts to help give all children and young people the best possible future? I welcome the Government’s decision to expand eligibility for free school meals to all children in households receiving universal credit. It is a long-overdue step in the right direction. To make the policy work in practice, the Government must introduce auto-enrolment and ensure that the expansion in eligibility is fully funded and properly implemented. I have heard from the headteacher at Chandler’s Ford infant school in my constituency that the funding provided to schools has not kept pace with the actual cost of meals. The cost of delivering meals now exceeds Government funding by £1.11 per meal, which has forced the school to find another £31,468 out of its budget for the financial year. Eastleigh college receives £2.66 per student, but meals are costing the college closer to £5. Have the Government considered the impact on other areas of school budgets, as schools and colleges try to keep up with the increased cost of free school meals, and what provisions are being made to cover the shortfalls? After years of neglect under the Conservatives, our education system is failing to deliver the outcomes that children deserve, and teachers and parents are having to pick up the pieces. We urgently need a system that works with families, not against them.
- 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this vital debate. It is imperative that we get the Bill right and that the protections and procedures are watertight. I thank my constituents on both sides of the debate who have written to me. I support amendment 4, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), which would allow those with neurodegenerative diseases to be eligible for an assisted death if they are within 12 months of dying. Nigel Hartley MBE, the chief executive officer of Mountbatten Hampshire hospice in my constituency, told me that palliative care and assisted dying are not and should not be at odds with each other. Palliative care can provide incredible support. I am very glad that this debate has reopened the national conversation about funding for palliative care. However, as I know from my personal experience with my mum, who died last March after a seven-year struggle with Alzheimer’s, sometimes palliative care can only go so far. Amendment 4 recognises that those with neurodegenerative illnesses deserve the same compassion, control and dignity as others at the end of their lives. By extending the timeframe to 12 months, they will be given more control over their ultimate decision. I support new clause 10, which extends the right for any professional to opt out of providing assistance under the Bill, and extends the protections to a broader range of professionals who may be involved. I also support amendments 59 and 62, which relate to training on domestic abuse. Those amendments are critical to ensuring that the co-ordinating doctor can identify signs of domestic abuse. The inclusion of training enhances the Bill’s protective framework, as no medical professional without specific and up-to-date training on domestic abuse will be able to serve as a co-ordinating doctor. Importantly, amendment 74 defines “domestic abuse” using the language of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which explicitly includes coercive, controlling and economic abuse. Amendment 63 removes any ambiguity about the scope of eligibility, and makes it clear that only terminal illness qualifies under this legislation. That clarity is essential to maintaining public trust and ensuring that the Bill is not open to misinterpretation or misuse. It can be incredibly difficult for people with disabilities, and their families and carers, to get their concerns across—they can often feel unseen and unheard—so the amendment is vital. Finally, I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) for her work on the Bill and her tremendous courage, determination, willingness to engage and resilience. As others have said, the decision before us is fundamentally about whether we believe in an individual’s right to have choice at the end of their life. I know what my mum would have said.
- 13 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source
More
I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate and to highlight the impact of the botched Brexit deal on businesses in my constituency, including pharmacies and the local hospitality industry. Stuart Yalden, the managing director of GW Martin, a small and medium-sized enterprise in engineering in my constituency, has raised concerns over the additional costs and regulatory requirements the business now faces when trading with the EU. In one recent case it exported a small volume of products to a customer in France worth around £5,000 but the combined cost of paperwork, export licences and transport came to £2,500. This is not a sustainable way to trade. To reassure my constituents, I hope that the Minister will give this important matter some consideration, and that he will raise these issues next week. We cannot ignore the opportunities that have been taken away from young people for no good reason and with no benefit to anyone. I have listened to arguments from Conservative Members, but I still cannot understand why anyone would want to stop young people from experiencing all that the world has to offer. I hope the Minister will agree with me that giving young people, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds, the opportunity and freedom to live, study and work in Europe with a youth mobility scheme would be hugely beneficial to them and to the country. We must also recognise the negative impact that Brexit has had on our creative sector. We need urgent action to renegotiate touring arrangements with the EU, ensuring that British artists can showcase their talent abroad without excessive red tape. The Liberal Democrats have set out a clear road map to reset UK-EU relations. We must start by restoring trust, rebuilding co-operation in key areas such as research, climate policy and security and removing the barriers that have been strangling our economy. It is time to take meaningful steps to repair our relationship with Europe and restore the prosperity that our country so desperately needs. I sincerely hope that the Government will use the EU-UK summit to turn a page on the chaos of the last five years.
- 18 Mar 2025 · Free School Meals · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. I agree that it is essential that children have the best possible quality food, as well as a sufficient quantity. I absolutely support the roll-out of breakfast clubs, but we must ensure that schools have the resources to provide them. The Government have talked about their plan for change, but addressing the core issues of funding for free school meals, the low threshold for eligibility and the way children are locked into appalling poverty is paramount. In England, only families earning £7,400 or less a year after tax and benefits qualify for free school meals. That threshold is far too low and excludes hundreds of thousands of children in need. The limit must be increased, so I was pleased to support a Liberal Democrat amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to increase the threshold to £20,000 a year after tax, which would expand eligibility to children who are currently missing out. According to analysis conducted by the Child Poverty Action Group, 900,000 children living in poverty do not qualify for free school meals because the eligibility criteria are so restrictive. Those children are being denied a meal that they desperately need. That is a shameful legacy of years of underfunding. It is also unacceptable that thousands of children entitled to free school meals are not receiving them due to administrative barriers. The Liberal Democrats believe that auto-enrolment is the solution, which is why my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) tabled an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill to implement that change. A report by Policy in Practice in 2024 estimated that 471,000 children missed out on free school meals due to a complex application process. Auto-enrolment been proven to work. When it was introduced in Durham, nearly 2,500 additional children gained access to free school meals, leading to a £3 million boost in pupil premium funding for the local council. A system designed to support the most vulnerable should not be so complex that it prevents children from accessing the help they need. It is not just parents who are struggling with the administrative burdens, but teachers. My constituent Mrs Beckett, the headteacher of Nightingale primary school in Eastleigh, told me that the need to continuously justify how pupil premium funding is spent is one of the ongoing frustrations for schools. In reality, that funding allows them to provide additional support that benefits every child. Given that free school meals eligibility is a key driver for pupil premium funding, she questioned whether there had been any discussion about reducing the bureaucratic burdens on schools in this area. It would be more beneficial for the Government to acknowledge the broader support impact of the funding than to expect schools to repeatedly demonstrate its effectiveness, which is not a good use of staff time. Beyond the bureaucratic hurdles that families and schools face, many families simply cannot afford to provide their children with nutritious meals, leaving schools on the frontline of a food insecurity crisis. A survey conducted in January 2025 by the Food Foundation found that 18% of households with children reported experiencing food insecurity, compared with 12% of households without children. That is deeply concerning, not least because of the growing child obesity crisis. According to NHS England, almost one in 10 children are already obese by their first year of school, and by year 6 it rises to 22.1%. Schools should be part of the solution, ensuring that every child has access to healthy, balanced meals that support their growth, learning and wellbeing. If the Government are serious about raising the healthiest generation ever, they must go beyond rhetoric and ensure that free school meal funding is high enough to provide the right meal for every child who needs one. Providing universal free school meals for primary school children is a good social and economic policy. Research from Sweden found that children who receive free school meals earn 3% more in lifetime earnings, rising to 6% for the poorest children. Expanding free school meals would be an investment in our future. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s analysis has shown that without additional action from the Government, poverty and deep poverty will remain largely flat until January 2029, with child poverty in the same terrible state. The Liberal Democrats would extend free school meals to all children living in poverty across both primary and secondary schools, with the goal of providing them to all primary school children when public finances permit. The Government must use targeted support, starting with more free school meals and establishing a fairer social security system that lifts families out of poverty, removes cruel policies such as the two-child benefit cap, and provides a proper safety net. I have consistently called for the two-child benefit cap to be scrapped, which is the quickest and most cost-effective way to lift children out of poverty. No family should have to choose between paying bills and putting food on the table. No teacher should have to worry about making sure that pupils have had enough to eat so that they can learn, and no child should have to struggle through the school day. I hope the Government will act with urgency and step up for the children who desperately need their support.
- 18 Mar 2025 · Free School Meals · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. Schools are now being forced to subsidise meals from their already overstretched budgets, which takes away from vital resources such as staff salaries and school supplies. For Chander’s Ford infant school, the cost of providing meals now exceeds Government funding by £1.11 per meal, forcing it to find another £31,468 out of its budget for the financial year. Schools should not be forced to cut services or make tough decisions to cover the cost of meals that should be fully funded.
- 17 Mar 2025 · Women’s Changed State Pension Age: Compensation · Hansard source
More
The hon. Member makes an excellent point, and I will come on to that later. Mary and Karin, like so many of my constituents who were impacted by the changes to the state pension age, feel incredibly let down by the Government. After being ignored for so long by the previous Conservative Government, they really believed the MPs who told them that they supported their claim for fair and fast compensation. The Government should be compensating these women because it is the right thing to do. Many of the women in my constituency who were impacted found themselves in dire circumstances with little to live on. They were forced to take low-paid jobs to make ends meet, and in some cases they turned to food banks. These are not wealthy women, and the unexpected loss of income and the fact that they had to work much longer than they were expecting has had a huge impact on their lives and those of their families. That is in addition to having to cope with the loss of the winter fuel allowance, which is particularly challenging when it has been so bitterly cold. Many of the women are also unpaid carers. There is also the wider issue that these women feel that they do not matter to this Government—that because they are women of a certain age, they are somehow invisible. These women were born in the 1950s. They spent years working and raising families, and many of them will now have caring responsibilities. Frankly, the way that they have been treated by successive Governments is appalling. They deserve respect and to be treated with dignity. This issue has been incredibly badly handled by the Government. We all recognise that the previous Conservative Government left the country in an absolute mess and that there are many issues that need fixing—including, most urgently, the NHS and social care—but that does not make this head-in-the-sand approach right. The parliamentary ombudsman said very clearly that there had been maladministration, and the Secretary of State and the Government accepted that. To then turn around and say, “We are sorry about what happened, but we just don’t have the money to compensate you,” is simply not good enough. These women feel betrayed. Telling them that 90% of them knew about the changes, when the ombudsman found that that was not the case, is gaslighting. Indeed, the ombudsman stated that 43% of the women knew; that is quite a difference. If the Government continue to ignore the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s recommendation for compensation, it raises the question: what is the point of the ombudsman? Where else can people turn if they are victims of maladministration or wrongdoing and feel that no one is listening to them? Many women maintain that they did not receive letters at all, and the Department for Work and Pensions does not have a record of who it wrote to. I can believe that; if any Member has had dealings with the DWP, either as a private citizen or on behalf of constituents, they will know what a nightmare it can be. I suspect that if we asked many people, even now, they probably would not know the exact date when they could retire and receive the state pension. I urge the Government to reconsider their response, and to look at providing a scheme of compensation starting with those on pension credit. We know that the Government are facing incredibly difficult challenges, but ignoring the voices of thousands of women is a huge mistake. This issue is not going to go away.
- 27 Feb 2025 · Electronic Travel Authorisations: Tourism · Hansard source
More
Our travel, tourism and hospitality sectors continue to face huge challenges, yet the Home Office’s own impact assessment of the 60% increase in electronic travel authorisation fees concluded that it could reduce the number of tourists wanting to come here and result in a loss of revenue to the wider economy of £734.7 million over five years. If the Government are to succeed in achieving the inbound tourism target of 50 million by 2030, would an agreement between the EU and the UK to facilitate easier travel not be a good place to start?
- 12 Feb 2025 · Fuel Poverty: England · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Normanton and Hemsworth (Jon Trickett) for securing this important debate. The subject of the debate is vital to my constituents. Fuel poverty has left thousands of people in Eastleigh and across the country in a terrible situation this winter. The Liberal Democrats are gravely concerned that Government delays in tackling poorly insulated homes have left thousands of people cold and living in fuel poverty. The UK has the oldest housing stock in Europe and it is among the least energy-efficient. The previous Government failed to commit to a meaningful renewable energy programme or a decent homes standard to bring down energy bills, reduce emissions and improve public health. As a result, an estimated 6 million households are in fuel poverty. I have spoken to constituents whose hands are turning blue because they are so afraid to turn on the heating. My constituent Kay wrote to me after discovering that she would lose her winter fuel payment. She told me: “I have had no heating this winter. I suffer from PHPT, which means I cannot work or move around easily. It is so cold in my maisonette that I can see my own breath.” Another constituent who lost the winter fuel payment told me: “I am wrapping myself up in blankets and extra layers. I try to stay out of the house longer so I don’t have to turn the heating on. Finding that extra £300 last winter was a lifeline”. According to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero sub-regional fuel poverty data, 7.2% of households in my constituency, amounting to nearly 3,000 families, live in fuel poverty. Many pensioners are just over the income threshold for receiving pension credit, but still struggle immensely. Constituents tell me that they have resorted to using only a microwave to cook meals, because it is cheaper than an oven, while people living in park homes have told me that they have had to turn off their electric heating entirely, even though their walls are just two inches thick and not properly insulated. According to the Committee on Fuel Poverty, energy efficiency programmes are essential to reducing fuel poverty. Liberal Democrats are concerned that the Government have delayed the new decent homes standard and the warm homes plan, leaving people without support this winter. Citizens Advice in Eastleigh has confirmed that it has seen a massive uptake in energy-related casework among low-income households this year. Their clients are being forced into impossible decisions. With bills expected to rise again in April, I hope that the Government will do more to protect my constituents and all those in fuel poverty across the UK. I am deeply concerned about the thousands of pensioners who are still waiting to receive their winter fuel payment, even though they applied on time. Can the Minister please update us on when they will receive their payment? They should not be left struggling through the coldest months due to Government delays. The Government’s own analysis has confirmed that cuts to the winter fuel payment could push 100,000 pensioners in England and Wales into relative fuel poverty. That means 100,000 more people who will struggle to afford heating, more elderly people who will face freezing winters in homes they cannot afford to keep warm, and more people suffering preventable illnesses caused by cold and damp conditions, and yet the Government are pushing ahead with this mistaken approach which will put so many more people at risk. Truly to address this ongoing crisis, the Government must be more ambitious. My hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) tabled an amendment to the Great British Energy Bill that would have ensured that the new body facilitated the home insulation programme, but the Government voted it down. A proper windfall tax on the super-profits of oil and gas companies would help fund support for the most vulnerable, rather than allowing energy giants to continue making billions while families suffer. We must also fundamentally reform how energy is priced. Electricity prices should be decoupled from the wholesale gas price to prevent outdated pricing mechanisms from inflating household bills unfairly. This winter, thousands of pensioners and vulnerable families in my constituency are suffering in cold homes and struggling to pay their bills. I urge the Minister to rethink cuts to the winter fuel payment, and to introduce meaningful support for those who need it most.
- 11 Feb 2025 · Terms and Conditions of Employment · Hansard source
More
I pay tribute to all parents who have campaigned for change, and I commend the Smallest Things charity for its work on this issue. Co-founders Catriona and Sarah have put their heart and soul into the campaign, laying bare their own experiences to shine a light on the realities of neonatal intensive care and trauma faced by families. These statutory instruments are a welcome and necessary step in ensuring that parents who find themselves in one of the most distressing and uncertain experiences of their lives have the right to neonatal leave and pay. Under the current system, parents have been left to rely on maternity, paternity or shared parental leave to care for their child in hospital. Neonatal care can often bring additional, unforeseen expenses, including travel costs. For many parents, statutory maternity or paternity pay simply does not stretch far enough. Although the legislation is a step forward, we must recognise that more can be done. There is a wider picture of maternity and neonatal services that are under growing strain. The NHS workforce is overstretched, and maternity services have been repeatedly flagged as needing urgent attention. We need more midwives, more neonatal nurses and more support for families experiencing traumatic births and baby loss. Will the Minister outline what discussions he has had with colleagues to ensure that maternity and neonatal care services are properly resourced and funded? Additionally, we must recognise that support for parents should not cease once they leave hospital. The impact of neonatal care does not go away when a baby is discharged, as many children and parents will have long-term health complications. According to Smallest Things, the incidence of mental health difficulties such as post-traumatic stress disorder are thought to be as high as 70%. We should have expanded access to NHS mental health support for all parents who experience a neonatal stay, rather than requiring them to wait until they are at breaking point. The Government must do much more, alongside the welcome introduction of paid neonatal leave, to tackle and end the unacceptable maternal and neonatal health disparities. This legislation is long overdue, but there is still lots more to do to support families after neonatal care. The Liberal Democrats committed to the introduction of paid neonatal leave in our manifesto. I hope that the Government will continue down that route and consider what more they can do to improve maternity services, including with a national maternity safety ambition beyond 2025, with clear baselines to measure progress. We need real investment in the NHS workforce to ensure that every baby and every parent gets the care they deserve. No parent should be sitting by their baby’s cot worrying about pay or work. It is the Government’s duty to provide families with the stability, care and support they need during such a critical and challenging time.
- 27 Jan 2025 · Creative Industries · Hansard source
More
I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in the debate, not least because I spent many years working in publishing before I came to this place. I have the honour of serving on the Culture, Media and Sport Committee and I am a former ambassador for Xbox, which is possibly the only time my son thought I was cool. Recently, I visited Barton Peveril, a consistently successful local sixth-form college in my constituency, where many students have a keen interest in the creative industries. For all those students and the thousands of young people across the UK who want to pursue careers in film, music, video games, TV, fashion, architecture, design and, of course, publishing, it is vital that those sectors are supported. Yet over the past 14 years, there has been a 47% drop in students taking arts-related GCSEs and a 29% decline at A-level. Universities are also slashing creative courses; at least 14 institutions are cutting arts funding or merging departments. That is hugely concerning. Arts education fosters ingenuity, critical thinking and innovation, which are skills that benefit all industries. We must protect arts education and funding. For those talented performers who want to share their work, Brexit red tape continues to make it unnecessarily difficult for performers and artists to tour in Europe. The complex visa and permit requirements stifle opportunities for British talent to showcase their work abroad, and independent musicians are among those hardest hit. Touring has become increasingly hard because of the mountain of bureaucracy now involved. Musicians face navigating different visa rules for each EU country and financial burdens that make tours unviable for many. I sincerely hope that will be addressed. As we have heard, AI poses a growing threat, and Sir Paul McCartney and Sir Elton John are right to have concerns about that issue. While AI offers exciting opportunities, it must not come at the expense of our talent. Recent reports that The Guardian used AI to produce stories during industrial action are concerning. Can the Minister outline what steps the Government will take to ensure that AI serves and enhances the creative industries, rather than undermines them? The Association for UK Interactive Entertainment has highlighted the need for better support to ensure that the gaming industry, which is growing rapidly, can continue to thrive. Sector-wide job losses and the rise of AI replacing creative roles are putting studios under immense pressure. As a global leader in video game creation, it is vital that we protect this sector. To ensure that Britain remains a global leader in creativity, we need continued safeguarding of copyright, investment in arts education, and more support for grassroots venues. We should be proud of our creative industries, so let us work together to ensure that they continue to be world class. I hope that the Government will provide the ambition, investment and vision needed to ensure that the creative industries continue to thrive.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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)
Explore activity by topic or department
Contributions by debate topic
4 Jul 2024–3 Jul 2025. Existing keyword taxonomy applied to official debate titles and contributions; a contribution may appear in more than one topic and unclassified records are retained.
View as listWhat this shows and doesn't show
Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →