Manuela Perteghella 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.
8 published records · newest first.
Speeches
- 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.
- 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companies are unaccountable, and there is no regulation to stop charges being raised unreasonably, or a service being withdrawn without explanation.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.
- 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?
- 31 Mar 2025 · Political Donations · Hansard source
More
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I thank the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) for opening the debate and the petitioners for bringing to Parliament this important petition, warning of the corrosion of trust between elected politicians and voters and of the vulnerability of our political finance system. I was proud last month to bring forward a ten-minute rule Bill on political donations, and I am pleased that Members from across the House continue to shine a light on this important issue. I hope that today’s debate has further encouraged the Government to take political finance reform seriously and give it the priority it deserves. This debate has made one thing very clear: there is growing agreement across the House that our system of political donations is in urgent need of reform. We must act to restore public trust in our democracy, and that means protecting it from undue influence, whether foreign or domestic. For too long, our political finance rules have lagged behind the reality of modern campaigning. The result? A system that concentrates too much power in too few hands, while many voters feel increasingly unheard. Politics should be for everyone, not just the super-rich. The Liberal Democrats would introduce a cap on political donations and close the loopholes that continue to allow foreign money into our system. Our current rules leave the door dangerously open to influence from sources that do not always reflect the values or interests of the British people, as my hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) rightly observed. We believe that every voice should count equally. That is the only way we can ensure that it is the people of this country—not billionaires, not oligarchs and not corporate lobbyists—who decide our future at the ballot box. We have heard good points from the hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) about the lack of transparency in lobbying. Trust in politics is faltering. A recent poll showed that more than two thirds of the British public support a cap on political donations. The case for change is clear, and the public know it. It is time that the Government caught up. Under the current rules there is still no limit on how much a single person or company can donate and, despite years of warnings, loopholes in our political finance laws remain wide open. These weaknesses have allowed foreign actors to funnel money into our politics through opaque networks and UK-registered companies. Successive Governments have failed to act. Now the new Government have a real opportunity to deliver meaningful political finance reform and safeguard our democracy. I look forward to hearing from the Minister what steps will be taken to ensure fairness and transparency. Public participation in politics is worryingly low—and why would it not be when so many people feel that their voice does not count and that decisions are made in private boardrooms, not public debates? As public servants, we have a duty to change that, and we can start by strengthening the integrity of our political system. This is not just a question of fairness; it is a question of national security, as my hon. Friend the Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) explained. The malign Russian influence on one of the most important referendums in British history must be investigated as a matter of urgency. Our current rules leave our democracy exposed. Whether through digital interference, shell companies or strategic donations, hostile actors have found ways to reach into our democratic process. We have seen worrying headlines about foreign billionaires expressing interest in bankrolling political parties. Under our current rules, we are worryingly powerless to stop that, even when the money could distort public debate and undermine faith in our institutions. Britain has long taken pride in being a beacon of democracy, but pride alone is not enough. We need meaningful action from the Government to protect what we value. Our political finance system is riddled with loopholes, and they are not minor technicalities: they are gaping vulnerabilities that can be and have been exploited. If we are serious about protecting our democracy, we must introduce a fair and proportionate cap on political donations, and close the blatant loopholes that allow foreign money to flow unrestricted into our politics. These are not radical ideas; they are overdue reforms backed by a broad public consensus. Our politics must serve the British people, not the privileged few. Every citizen deserves an equal voice, and protecting our democracy from undue influence is the test of our commitment to that principle. Let us act now. Let us introduce fair caps, close the loopholes and give our constituents confidence that their votes matter just as much as anyone else’s. If we want to restore faith in our democracy, we must show that it really belongs to the people.
- 24 Mar 2025 · European Union: UK Membership · Hansard source
More
Absolutely. The Government need to stand up for our British farmers, and that includes during the negotiation of trade deals—which, by the way, should be brought to Parliament to be fully scrutinised. Young people have lost opportunities to study, live, travel, work and fall in love—as I myself did many years ago. Our creative industries, once thriving on European collaboration, now face restrictions and uncertainty, with artists, musicians and performers unable to tour their own continent. A priority must be not only to rejoin Erasmus+ but to create a youth mobility scheme, as many Members have discussed today. We must have a credible roadmap to rebuild trust and ties with our European neighbours. We must start by deepening co-operation on climate, research, security and education, and we must then negotiate a new trade deal that includes a customs union to bring down the barriers holding our economy back. Ultimately, as Liberal Democrats, we want to rejoin the single market and restore the freedoms that our constituents deserve. However, this is not just about trade; it is about values, opportunities, who we are and the role we choose to play in the world. With Trump and Putin now both a threat to our security, as already mentioned by my hon. Friends and other hon. Members, we must stand shoulder to shoulder with our friends in the European Union. As Europe rises to defend peace and democracy in the free world, the UK must not be a bystander. We must lead from the front, working with our European friends and allies to strengthen our shared economic prosperity and national security.
- 12 Feb 2025 · Political Donations · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about a cap on political donations; to make provision for a review to recommend the level at which such a cap should be set and to consider the impact of such a cap; to make provision about political donations made by foreign nationals through companies; and for connected purposes. This is a Bill that will take big money out of British politics, protect our democracy from foreign interference, and restore public trust in our electoral system. For too long, our politics has been exposed. It is far too easy for those who do not have the national interest of our country at heart, or who have made their wealth through illicit means, to funnel money into British politics. The Bill is simple in its aim: to ensure that it is the people of this country, not the deep pockets of foreign billionaires, oligarchs or corporate interests, who decide our country’s future in elections and referendums. Trust in our political system is faltering. Many people look at our politics and see a system rigged in favour of the rich and powerful. A recent poll by YouGov found that more than two thirds of the British public support a limit on political donations. Not-for-profit organisations such as Unlock Democracy, Spotlight on Corruption and Fair Vote say that that we should take swift action to tighten electoral finance legislation, or else risk democratic backsliding. The message is clear: people want change. We want big money kicked out of politics. Under our current system, however, there is no limit to what a single individual or business can donate. That is not democracy; it is a bidding war for influence, ripe for exploitation by oligarchs and foreign billionaires. Look at the mess this has resulted in. Just over a month ago, people across Britain recoiled in horror to read the news that the US billionaire Elon Musk planned to donate an uncapped amount of money to Reform. If he were to follow up that plan, we would be powerless to stop him. Most alarming were the past donations to the Conservative party from individuals with links to the Russian Government. This is not just about fairness; it is about national security. Britain has long prided itself on being a beacon of democracy, but we must not be complacent. Our political financial regulations have glaring loopholes that are open for exploitation by foreign money, funnelled through UK-registered companies, opaque financial networks and questionable donors. Malign actors who do not share our values of tolerance, liberty and the rule of law should not have unrestricted access to our democracy. We know that hostile states seek to undermine our democracies all the time—we have seen it in cyber-attacks and disinformation campaigns—yet our political finance laws remain riddled with loopholes that allow foreign and dark money to shape British politics. The Bill seeks to close those gaps, ensuring that our elections and referendums belong to the voters and not to foreign interests. This Bill seeks to deliver two fair, necessary and overdue changes. First, it will introduce a fair cap on political donations, as determined by a review, and secondly, it will close British politics to the influence of foreign money by preventing foreign donors from funding our politics. These are essential measures that must be brought into effect. We must protect our elections from manipulation, and ensure that there is further transparency in political funding. In doing so, we will help to restore faith in our democracy and introduce vital safeguards for our political institutions. There is already a consensus in the House that foreign donations have no place in British politics, but that gaps in the law allow this to happen. We must act now to close the legal loopholes that allow these donations to flow unchecked. We in the House have a responsibility to uphold the integrity of our democracy, and it is our duty to drive the change that our country needs. Britain has always been a nation that stands for fairness, democracy and integrity. It is time for us to take a firm stand against undue influence in our politics, and ensure that our democracy serves the people. The Bill is not radical; it is reasonable, necessary and long overdue. It will ensure that political influence is not bought, but earned through genuine public support. Introducing a cap on political donations is not about limiting participation; it is about making sure that every vote, every voice and every citizen matters equally in our political system. Let us give control of British politics back to our constituents, not to unaccountable tech billionaires or those who seek to buy influence. Let us renew our commitment to an open and fair democracy—one that belongs to the people of this country, now and for generations to come. Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Manuela Perteghella, Dr Roz Savage, Ellie Chowns, Liz Jarvis, Sorcha Eastwood, James MacCleary, Claire Young, Mr Alistair Carmichael, Wera Hobhouse, Sarah Olney and Martin Wrigley present the Bill. Manuela Perteghella accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 16 May, and to be printed (Bill 183).
- 6 Jan 2025 · Frozen Russian Assets: Ukraine · Hansard source
More
Does my hon. Friend agree that the UK, working shoulder to shoulder with our European allies, must lead the way in confiscating and repurposing frozen Russian assets for Ukraine? By ensuring that Ukraine has every financial and military resource that it needs, we can not only help the Ukrainians to reclaim their country but send a powerful message that Britain stands unwavering in the defence of freedom and democracy against Russian aggression.
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 →