Manuela Perteghella MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 22 May 2025 · Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  My constituency of Stratford-on-Avon has always been a place where arts and creativity flourish. Does my hon. Friend agree that Government action is needed now to ensure that our British artists, musicians and writers—the William Shakespeares of the future—are fully protected and compensated by the big tech companies?

• 20 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source

  More

  The impact of the Creative Europe programme between 2014 and 2019 on the UK arts, film, publishing and other creative sectors was hugely beneficial, and not just for practitioners and organisations but for the country as a whole. Will the Government look into the possibility of participating again in this creative programme to further boost the economic potential of our creative industries?

• 20 May 2025 · Adoption and Kinship Placements · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith), who spoke so passionately for children and families. Kinship carers and adoptive families perform an extraordinary public service, providing stability, love and hope for children who have experienced trauma, loss or neglect. I had the privilege of meeting many adoptive families and family carers in my Stratford-on-Avon constituency. Too often they are left to navigate complex systems with little support. More than half of kinship carers say that their children are not getting the help that they need in education or to access mental health, or indeed any legal advice about their rights or options. Many are forced to reduce their hours or leave work entirely, yet there is still no statutory right to paid employment leave for kinship carers. On adoption, the situation is no less troubling. Post-adoption support is patchy at best, with some families waiting six months just for an initial assessment, and the Government have now reduced this important fund. The cuts to the ASGSF threaten the very purpose of the adoption system and might lead to adoption breakdowns. These families deserve stability, not sudden U-turns. They need clear, consistent support, not muddled promises. Above all, they need a Government who stand with them, not just in words but in action.

• 7 May 2025 · Personal Independence Payment: Disabled People · Hansard source

  More

  In Stratford-on-Avon, I have heard from constituents who fear that the welfare reforms could actually undermine their ability to remain in employment. Does my hon. Friend agree that many of our constituents rely on PIP as a crucial support that allows them to overcome the barriers they face to staying in work?

• 6 May 2025 · Emergency Dentistry: Access · Hansard source

  More

  7. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of access to emergency dentistry.

• 6 May 2025 · Emergency Dentistry: Access · Hansard source

  More

  The dental contract imposed in 2006 is widely recognised as a key factor driving dentists out of the NHS. In my constituency of Stratford-on-Avon, there are no NHS dentists currently taking on new patients, and existing NHS patients are being actively pressured to go private or seek care out of county. Will the Minister commit to urgent reform of NHS dentistry, and set out a timeline for negotiations, so that I can reassure my constituents?

• 28 Apr 2025 · SEND Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I have met children who have experienced significant trauma, who are not in full-time education and who are supported through the adoption and special guardianship support fund. On 1 April, the Government announced that that funding would continue, which was welcome. However, on 14 April, it was announced that funding would be reduced by 40%, capping the support at £3,000 per child for the academic year. That reduction will be devastating for families and therapy providers. Does the Minister agree that without proper funding enabling specialist support, we risk placement breakdowns and increased pressure on already stretched mental health services?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Sewage · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 23 Apr 2025 · Sewage · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, I joined constituents involved in citizen science projects testing water quality in the River Stour. The findings were deeply concerning: the very high levels of phosphates and nitrates in the water are clear evidence of the ongoing damage to our waterways. Will my hon. Friend join me in commending the important work of volunteers in citizen science projects, and does he agree that the Environment Agency must be properly resourced to monitor water quality in our rivers, brooks, streams and seas?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Hospitals · Hansard source

  More

  Despite overwhelming support, the Coventry and Warwickshire integrated care board has decided to cut all beds at the Ellen Badger hospital in Shipston-on-Stour, an anchor building and community hospital that is at the heart of our town. Does the Minister agree that cutting such vital services is unacceptable, and that community hospitals play an important role in rural areas by providing equality of access to our health services?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I will ask the Minister to take action later in my remarks.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  I fully agree. The term itself is misleading. The money is not being taken by the state; it actually goes back to HSBC. Had it been labelled properly, as an integrated pension deduction, many people would have asked questions much earlier.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is unfair and we need to ensure that HSBC is accountable. In correspondence with MPs, the bank states that because clawback is lawful, its policy is acceptable, but I say: lawful does not mean just. This Parliament has a duty to act when the law permits injustice. We need to modernise pension legislation to ensure that it reflects today’s values of fairness, transparency and equality. After the WASPI—Women Against State Pension Inequality—pension injustice, we must be alert to further pension scandals.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for raising that important issue. Absolutely, we need to ensure that the Government have a long-term outlook, so that the young working British people of today will be able to retire on a comfortable pension. We urgently need a full review of pension clawback practices. Many constituents have written to me about other unfair pension schemes, including former police officers and people on occupational pensions that are not protected from inflation.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  Pension funds hold not just financial value but moral weight. How we treat our pensioners, and how we invest in the future of the hard-working people of this country, says everything about the kind of society we are. I want to bring to the House’s attention one of the most concerning injustices faced by thousands of former HSBC employees, particularly women: the use of an outdated, punitive policy known as pension clawback. I support the Midland Clawback Campaign, which seeks justice for the 51,000 affected members of the Midland bank pension scheme, now administered by HSBC, who were misled about the nature of their retirement income and are being short-changed as a result. Unlike most other institutions, which phased out clawback in the 1980s, HSBC continues to enforce it in its most punitive form. Clawback was originally introduced in 1948 to offset national insurance costs when the state pension was created. Midland bank introduced clawback to its pension scheme in 1975 as a cost-saving measure. Former employees were told that they would receive a defined-benefit pension at two thirds of their final salary, in addition to their state pension. Instead, when they reached state pension age, HSBC began deducting a portion of their occupational pension, calling it a “state deduction”.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that valuable point. I have a message for HSBC later in my remarks. Campaigners have presented robust evidence, including research by the University of Exeter, showing the disproportionate impact on women and low-paid staff. One of the recommendations in the University of Exeter report is for policymakers—us—to consider the suitability of the equal pay provisions that have not been available to members of the post-1974 Midland bank pension scheme, despite evidence of the disproportionate impact on women. When campaigners turned to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Government Equalities Office, they were passed from pillar to post. No one took responsibility; no one acted. Equality law does not cover pensions. Let us not forget that HSBC’s pension fund currently stands at £4.1 billion in surplus after liabilities, but the estimated cost of ending clawback is just £450 million. HSBC has the resources; what it lacks is the will.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  Yes. The hon. Member makes a good point. The lack of transparency allowed this policy to persist under the radar. The formula used is regressive and unfair. For a start, the deduction is based on the full state pension rate one year before retirement, not on salary or actual state pension received. It is then divided by 80 and multiplied by years worked. The result? The longer someone worked and the less they earned, the more they lose. That injustice falls heaviest on women.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, the practice is a relic from the past and needs to be abolished. Women have historically occupied lower-paid roles at Midland bank and HSBC. They have taken career breaks to care for children or elderly parents, or have been placed on new contracts with clawback attached—often without being told the implications for their pension rights. HSBC claims that there is no discrimination because the policy applies to all, but indirect discrimination is defined as a policy that appears neutral but disproportionately harms a particular group.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for making that important point. We need legal reform to ensure that pensions in payment are finally brought under the protection of equality law. We also need greater transparency and accountability from pension providers, especially those entrusted with the retirement futures of hard-working people. HSBC’s clawback policy is discriminatory in its impact, misleading in its language and fundamentally unjust in its effect. I therefore urge the Minister to bring forward legislation to put an end to this outdated practice and to finally stand up for those whose voices have gone unheard for far too long. Clawback is just one part of a broken pension system; we must also ask where our pension funds are invested and what future we are buying with that money.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Pension Funds · Hansard source

  More

  I fully agree. It is really important that pensions reflect ethics and morality and that the people investing in them have a voice. It is no longer good enough to see pensions in isolation from sustainability, ethics or morality. Whether it is because of the way in which funds are clawed back from low-paid pensioners or the way in which they are funnelled into destructive, high-emission industries, the system is crying out for reform. As we look ahead to COP30, billions of pounds of local government pension schemes are still invested in fossil fuels and in industries that drive deforestation, biodiversity loss and wildlife extinction. If we are to build a just and sustainable future, we must build a just and sustainable pension system that protects not only people in retirement, but the planet and generations to come.

• 22 Apr 2025 · Residential Estate Management Companies · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for leading this important debate. For far too long, management companies have operated in a vacuum of regulation, and communities are paying the price. Residents find themselves locked into contracts with no flexibility in payment, and often no cap on the service charges imposed. There is also a lack of transparency, without proper itemised charges being made available to residents, and a lack of communication and engagement with residents about how the companies are adhering to agreed management plans. This is not just unfair but a recipe for disaster, and it is contributing to yet another housing crisis. Residents in social housing—many housed by the local authority—are not able to keep up with hikes on service charges. Homeowners who want to sell their homes are finding it difficult to do so because of uncapped service charges. These companies are unaccountable, and there is no regulation to stop charges being raised unreasonably, or a service being withdrawn without explanation. Often the service that residents receive is below standard or non-existent. One of my constituents now pays more to FirstPort in service charges than on her own mortgage. FirstPort takes a 5% fee for major works such as roofing, redecorating and carpeting communal areas, which is abhorrent. If we need to have maintenance companies, then residents should be able to shop around for better deals, and the right to manage should be an easy process for both leaseholders and freeholders. Furthermore, we see major issues with sustainable urban drainage systems and unadopted roads—infrastructure that is often left unfinished or below standard when developers walk away with no clarity on who is responsible. In some cases, we have even seen roads constructed below adoptable standards, or taking many years to be adopted. Residents are paying service charges, on top of their council tax, for drainage and roads that will never be adopted. The Competition and Markets Authority recommended that those problems be addressed, but to date that recommendation has not been implemented. Will the Government commit to implementing the CMA’s proposals? I also urge them to consider retrospective powers for councils to intervene where such arrangements are clearly exploitative and unsustainable. At present, local authorities have no power to undo agreements that are already in place. This issue requires national leadership and statutory oversight. The Government must regulate estate management companies and ensure that residents are not left powerless or trapped in the place they call home.

• 8 Apr 2025 · Fly-tipping: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) for introducing this important debate. Fly-tipping is a crime against the environment. It is damaging to our local communities, and creates danger for children and pets, particularly when drugs and drug-taking equipment are discarded. The consequences of fly-tipping extend beyond visible pollution. It affects soil, water, wildlife and human health when hazardous material such as asbestos and oil contaminates groundwater and soil. Fly-tipped waste, including household appliances, can clog drainage systems and streams, preventing water flow and leading to flooding and overflows upstream. It has a devastating impact on wildlife. Fly-tipping blights the roads and fields in my constituency of Stratford-on-Avon, harming nature and putting a mental and financial toll on my constituents. Unfortunately, across the west midlands, we are no stranger to litter on the side of the roads, or broken and abandoned furniture and car tyres dumped in verges, fields and lay-bys. Our struggling local authorities cannot keep up with the scale of fly-tipping, with incidents increasing nationally by 6% in the last year, up from 1.08 million to 1.15 million. Last year, fly-tipping cost local authorities an average of more than £13 million, and as the hon. Member for Birmingham Northfield (Laurence Turner) noted, the burden on councils has increased to such an extent that they are forced to make impossible choices in their funding and vital local authority-funded services are suffering. That includes local authorities’ ability to keep household waste centres open, which is deepening the fly-tipping crisis. When fly-tipping occurs on private land, the situation is even worse. There is no obligation on the local authority to clear up, so landowners have to take it on themselves to clear up other people’s waste. In my constituency of Stratford-on-Avon, as well as in other rural areas of the west midlands, it is often our farmers who are paying the price for illegal fly-tipping. Farmers are forced to pay extortionate fees to clear other people’s rubbish off their land. We want local authorities and the Environment Agency to have the resources to prosecute all instances of fly-tipping. We also want the police to have the appropriate resources, including mobile ANPR cameras and rural drone kits, to help and support any investigation. According to the National Farmers Union, the total cost of rural crime rose to a staggering £52.8 million in 2023, up nearly 22% since 2020. The Liberal Democrats are therefore calling for the Government to commit to proper community policing—and to a rural crime strategy including fly-tipping—to ensure that officers are visible, trusted and able to tackle local and rural crime. In my constituency I have some fantastic groups that generously give up their time to help clear our streets, verges, fields and streams. These include Rubbish Friends in Stratford and Clifford Chambers and Litter Free Alcester, as well as many litter picking initiatives in villages. We saw many of these during the Great British spring clean. I pay tribute to all of our community groups that volunteer to pick up rubbish thrown carelessly by others. However, their actions alone will not keep our streets and fields clean and clear and limit pollution in our streams and brooks and in groundwater. We need effective legislation and enforcement to get rid of illegal fly-tipping. I propose education as well. We must teach our children and young people in schools the value of the natural environment and the importance of protecting it. I hope the next generations, in my constituency and beyond, will grow up understanding the value of taking care of their communities and have civic pride in the villages, towns and cities in which they live.

• 7 Apr 2025 · Road Maintenance · Hansard source

  More

  For residents in Stratford-on-Avon and across the country, road maintenance is one of the most visible signs of how well, or how poorly, their local area is being looked after. The Local Government Association recently pointed out that the funding allocated for road repairs is falling short of what is needed. In fact, councils are now spending twice as much on repairing local roads as they receive in Government funding. That shortfall is felt on every street in my constituency, where dangerous potholes keep reappearing, road surfaces crack again just a few months after being patched up, and pavements are on a waiting list for many years to be repaired, especially in our rural villages. In Stratford-on-Avon, we are also seeing the consequences of poor long-term planning by Conservative-run Warwickshire county council, which is the local highway authority. Take the Birmingham Road in Stratford-upon-Avon, which is one of our major arteries in and out of town. Residents and businesses have faced seemingly endless roadworks which, incidentally, do not improve active travel and safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and other road users. The delays and disruption were exacerbated by emergency and non-emergency road closures by utility companies, resulting in gridlock, children and young people not able to arrive at school on time, teachers having to act as traffic wardens, and residents arriving late for work. Lib-Dem local district councillor, Lorraine Grocott, has sought answers from the county council about why the Birmingham Road works have taken so long, and why they were not co-ordinated more effectively in the first place. I recently hosted meetings with utility companies to address those serious issues, and I was disappointed that the Conservative portfolio holder for transport and planning did not come. This is not just about inconvenience; it is about the impact on small businesses, which lose footfall and money, especially when our town is gridlocked and there are road closures. It is also about the impact on the daily life of residents, on carers trying to get to appointments, and on families getting children to school. Most frustrating is that it is avoidable. Yes, we need local authorities to be properly resourced and funded, but we also need them to plan better, to co-ordinate roadworks more effectively, and to ensure that contractors do the job well and are more responsive to the communities they serve. Let us give our communities the roads but also the local leadership that they deserve.

• 3 Apr 2025 · UK Democracy: Impact of Digital Platforms · Hansard source

  More

  I start by congratulating the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) on introducing this timely and urgent debate. As we know, the digital age has brought about an unprecedented opportunity for campaigns of any kind, including campaigns of nefarious origins and by malign agents who seek to undermine democracy and the safety of our people. Digital platforms are proliferating at a rapid pace and reaching an unprecedented number of British citizens. They have become the most powerful communication tool of our age and are able to absorb vast amounts of detailed personal information about their users. Further, the platforms can apply complex algorithms to create tailor-made campaigns and personally targeted advertisements and content. That can include spreading conspiracy theories, extreme content and abuse towards citizens and elected officials. Regrettably, successive Governments have not been proactive in tackling the threat. They have been complacent with inertia and inaction, while tech and social media giants have spread misinformation and outright lies. They have let their digital platforms incite hatred and digital and physical violence, and they have caused riots on our streets. The digital world is the last frontier—wide open for exploitation by domestic and foreign powers who do not have Britain’s best interests at heart. The Russian Government have been accused of orchestrating a widespread campaign of interference and disinformation that seeks to undermine the global order. Last autumn, the head of MI6 warned that the international order is under threat in a way not seen since the end of the cold war, accusing Russia of a reckless campaign of sabotage across Europe. Likewise, Elon Musk recently used his platform to suggest that America should liberate the people of Britain and overthrow the UK Government. As we have heard, it is not just our democratic processes that are under threat and being targeted but our children too. With violent misogyny, online abuse, radicalisation and sexualisation on these platforms, who is keeping our children safe? The Online Safety Act 2023 must not be watered down in any future trade deal negotiations with the US. Further, the spread of misinformation online has the power to dramatically alter the outcomes of our elections and referendums, and in doing so change the course of this country. Who will take responsibility for the regulation of digital political campaigns? The Electoral Commission says that its focus is on campaign finance, the Information Commissioner’s Office says that its focus is on personal data, and the Advertising Standards Authority says that it does not regulate political adverts. When we do not regulate to protect our democracy and our children and young people, we rely on companies to regulate themselves. We hope that Facebook’s three-part strategy to target misinformation is robust enough, that Google’s centre for content responsibility takes its job seriously, and that the EU’s fine levied against tech companies for spreading disinformation has any real impact. Unfortunately, our hope will be in vain. In these unsettling times of global challenges, we must take the protection of Britain and its people into our own hands. We cannot rely on our safety being a priority for any other nation or for unelected tech billionaires. We need regulation and legislation to protect the people of Britain and ensure that our democracy is not affected by lies propagated by groups and individuals who do not have Britain’s best interests at heart. Effective tech regulation for digital platforms would result in radical real-time transparency for political advertising—for example, on donations and spending. It should result in strong laws on digital safeguarding, especially for young people and children. As America, influenced by its tech billionaires, withdraws from its role as the protector of the free world, let Britain step up to the mark and become a global leader in digital transparency, regulation and safeguarding.

• 3 Apr 2025 · UK-US Trade and Tariffs · Hansard source

  More

  The tariffs announced by Trump last night will be concerning for many businesses in the UK, not least British farmers, including in my constituency of Stratford-on-Avon. We all recognise that Trump will use the imposition of tariffs to try to get concessions from countries around the world. Will the Business Secretary reassure the whole country and commit today that he will not agree to any deal with the US that would lower food standards and undermine British farmers?