Marie Goldman MP: speeches

Speeches

• 17 Nov 2025 · Asylum Policy · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure that all of us across the House can agree that a key aspect of dealing with the asylum system is to deal with the crisis of the backlog, which is enormous. The Home Secretary said in her speech that the Government are looking at a number of large military sites as an alternative to asylum hotels. One large military site already in use is RAF Wethersfield in Essex. I understand from Essex police that Braintree district council has been given funding to the tune of about £2 million to help with community cohesion, because that facility is nearby. However, buses are taking asylum seekers from Wethersfield to such places as Colchester and my constituency of Chelmsford several times a day. That is placing extra strain on Essex police in those areas, yet they are unable to access those funds. Will the Home Secretary commit to providing extra funds to Essex police in those areas to help police them?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met the Centre for Action on Rape and Abuse, also known as CARA, which supports thousands of victims and survivors of sexual violence across Essex, including in my constituency. CARA is concerned about future funding and the need for a stronger focus on tackling sexual violence. Will the Minister confirm that funding for the rape and sexual abuse support fund and independent sexual violence adviser services will continue beyond March 2026, and outline how the Government will prioritise addressing sexual violence?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The British Council is in dire financial straits. If it disappears, so will the invaluable soft power that it wields. Will the Foreign Secretary commit to meeting the chief executive of the British Council to discuss that as soon as possible?

• 27 Oct 2025 · Prisoner Release Checks · Hansard source

  More

  The trial, sentencing and mistaken release of Hadush Kebatu all took place in the heart of my constituency, and it is entirely unacceptable. First, I thank Essex police, British Transport police and the Metropolitan police, as well as the public for their vigilance, for ensuring that he was apprehended and will now be deported. I welcome the announcement of an independent investigation, but the Government must ensure that any recommendations are implemented in full without delay and not just left to gather dust on a bookshelf. On prison leadership, does the Justice Secretary agree that scapegoating a single prison officer for systemic failure is unacceptable and that if leaders—including prison governors—are found to be at fault, they should resign?

• 23 Oct 2025 · Black History Month · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member speaks very powerfully and knowledgeably, in particular about maternity services. I note with interest the maternity services review being kicked off by the Government at the moment. Does the hon. Member agree that many of the changes he is suggesting could be implemented right now and that we do not need to wait for the outcome of that review before we get started?

• 23 Oct 2025 · Black History Month · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour and a privilege, although also slightly daunting, to follow the Mother of the House, the right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), who speaks so powerfully on this subject. This year’s theme for Black History Month, “Standing Firm in Power and Pride”, speaks to a long and ongoing history of courage, resilience and leadership—of driving change in the face of injustice—and to the pride, purpose and strength found in black communities around the world. We owe an enormous debt to the black British community; from the Windrush generation’s foundational role in building the NHS to the countless trailblazers who pushed boundaries in politics, the arts, science and activism, their legacy is woven into the fabric of this country. However, the work is far from done. Too many people still face daily injustices, from racism and hate speech to unequal opportunities and barriers that prevent full participation in society. Prejudice continues to harm lives, communities and trust. We must acknowledge that reality and act to change it. I am proud that the Liberal Democrats are committed to standing firm in this fight. We reject racism in all its forms and are determined to drive meaningful change, but very sadly, we saw again last summer that racism is still far too prevalent in our society. It creeps into everyday life, especially for people of colour, including my constituent who told me at a surgery last week that his wife no longer feels welcome. He told me that he fears for the future of his mixed-race children and desperately wants more politicians to stand up and stand firm against prejudice and hate—to call it out for what it is. It is vital that those of us with platforms do so. I want to be clear: racism is abhorrent. It is not representative of my wonderful, diverse community in Chelmsford or, by and large, our wonderful country as a whole, and it must be called out. Like the rest of the UK, Chelmsford has a proud history of being a welcoming home for everyone and, for the avoidance of any doubt, I am proud to say that we are better for it. Recognising this, my party and I are clear that we must address past injustices, including implementing the Windrush lessons learned review and ending the Conservatives’ hostile environment policy. Let me turn to an issue that is very close to my heart: maternity services. I think everyone across the House knows that maternity services in general are in dire straits. Indeed, although I applaud the incredible hard work of midwives and NHS staff who are battling a system that is so obviously not fit for purpose, the problem is so systemic that a casual observer might be forgiven for thinking that women have only been giving birth for a few years. I and countless others have spoken on this matter on many occasions. It is crucial that the Government implement the immediate and essential actions in the Ockenden review and reverse their decision to end the ringfencing of £100 million for vital improvements to maternity care. I mention this specifically today because Liberal Democrats are clear that we must urgently address the appalling, disproportionately high maternal mortality rates for black women and eliminate racial disparities in maternal health. This must happen right now. It surely cannot be right that we continue to accept these inequalities today on the promise that there will be more parity in the future. Looking to our friends in other countries, I recently returned from a British Group Inter-Parliamentary Union delegation to Senegal in west Africa. It was wonderful to return to a country where I had spent a year as a student. It was especially heartening to see the progress that Senegal has made in the intervening quarter of a century, and the pride with which its elected officials talk of the strength of their democracy, in a region beset by violent conflicts. They are keen to strengthen ties with other countries around the world, especially the UK. Like us, they are ambitious when it comes to increasing trade—working together for the mutual benefit and growth of both of our economies—and to tackling the huge inequalities that persist. It is clear to me that working together with our friends across the world is what truly helps keep us all safe; indeed, I wear a pin today as a symbol of the new UK-Senegal friendship group that we have formed to further that aim. Closer to home, I pay tribute to some of my own constituency’s local organisations, which affirm this year’s Black History Month theme of “Standing Firm in Power and Pride” day in and day out. The Over 50s Black Men Forum—a not-for-profit group that has been established in Chelmsford and across Essex for some years, and is chaired by my constituent, Enitan Kane—does excellent work improving the health and community voice of black men over the age of 50, and aims to reduce future dependency on the NHS among older black men. Working with UK Government Departments, the NHS, local councils and sports organisations, O5BM now has projects across much of the south and east of England, providing critical support for community-led programmes that improve this marginalised group’s health, that tackle inequalities and that challenge prejudice. More recently, O5BM has launched an oral history project. Its title, “Soro Soke - O5BM”, is from a Yoruba phrase translating to “speak up”. As it says, it is highlighting “the untold stories, memories, and experiences of older Black men in Essex,” encouraging them to “speak out, raise their voices, and demand change”. Creating such projects, where black people are given space to remember and celebrate their cultural heritage, communities and local stories, is so important. As O5BM points out, this is true for a number of reasons—from Essex-born black British youth learning about the experiences of their elders to celebrating the joyfulness of our diverse communities in Essex, and creating an inclusive and accurate history of our British Isles more broadly. We must all preserve history, teach younger generations about how far Britain has come, and draw inspiration, knowledge and courage from such stories to continue the work of challenging discrimination and improving the lives of the black community. On that note, Black History Month also presents a wonderful opportunity to build community, which is one of the greatest tools we have against division and hatred. In my constituency, the New Generation Development Agency is running some brilliant community events, supported by Chelmsford city council and the local business improvement district, Chelmsford For You. Whether it is NGDA’s “Chattie ‘n’ Pattie” drop-in sessions or providing an open space for people to share their views and experiences of race equality, these events provide space for the recognition of local black community voices and teach others how to be better allies. They help us all to better empathise and strengthen our relationships with our neighbours. They reinforce that humans really are not that different from one another, and we should all be sceptical of those who claim otherwise. We all have dreams, we all experience loss and love, and we all have one life. This Black History Month, as we honour the pioneers, the local activists and the next generation, Liberal Democrats are clear: we stand with you; we will stand firm in your power and pride; and we will continue working for a more just, equal and inclusive United Kingdom.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Probation Service · Hansard source

  More

  10. What steps he is taking to support the Probation Service.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Probation Service · Hansard source

  More

  My constituency of Chelmsford is an important hub for the justice system in Essex; it is home to several courts, including a Crown court. The independent sentencing review led by David Gauke found that the reoffending rate for those who were homeless or rough sleeping was double that of those who had accommodation to go to upon release. Indeed, I have heard examples from charities of those on probation being recalled to prison simply because they have no fixed address. At a time when prison places are so limited, what steps is the Justice Secretary taking to ensure that such frustrating examples of recall stop, and how does he intend to work with the inter-ministerial group for homelessness and rough sleeping to ensure that the Probation Service’s work is not undermined by a lack of accommodation upon release from prison?

• 16 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T6. It is estimated that £80 million is locked in disabled children’s funds, such as junior ISAs and child trust funds, with parents unable to access them on behalf of their children. The constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne), Andrew Turner, has met no fewer than eight Justice Ministers and fought tirelessly for years to make the Court of Protection application process accessible to parents who are trying to access the funds for their disabled children. Will the Minister update the House on the Government’s timeframe for simplifying the process?

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

  More

  I thank the families who were at the rally outside Parliament today for their continuous fight, which is a battle that has been going on for many years. It was wonderful to see so many of them keeping up the fight and making sure that MPs are hearing their stories. That is why so many hon. Members are in the room today. I could tell Members about the stories that those families told me just today. One parent has been waiting 91 weeks to get an EHCP. Another parent told me about the rigid attendance rules that punish children who are unable to attend school because of their special educational needs. One grandmother was in tears because she was worried that she would not be able to get the support that her granddaughter needed. Most of all, they told me about the worry that the EHCP rug would be pulled from underneath them, with nothing left to catch them. That is what I am particularly worried about. I am sorry that the Minister is not in her place at the moment, but if she were, I would say to her that parents need the support to be there. Any new system has to be properly tested. It also has to be trusted by parents, and that trust simply is not there at the moment. I say to the Government: tread very carefully, because parents are really worried, and they will be very cross indeed if they do not get the support they absolutely need. Governments do not have a very good reputation for getting things right: think of the many disabled children affected by the Primodos scandal, or the terrible birth defects suffered because of sodium valproate. They have special educational needs and disabilities too, and they all need support.

• 11 Sept 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the new Leader of the House to his place. I join him and the shadow Leader of the House in thank the previous Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), for her sterling efforts, especially with so many people bobbing to ask questions every Thursday morning. I look forward to working with the Leader of the House in the various Committees on which we serve. I hope that he will follow the Government’s mantra to go further and faster, especially in modernisation. Today is a big day for news. In particular, I echo the words condemning the appalling attack on the office of the hon. Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson)—[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]—for whom I have a huge amount of respect. I also join other colleagues in recognising that today is the 24th anniversary of 9/11. I am sure that the whole House agrees with the importance of remembering the victims, including British citizens, their families and those who continue to be affected physically and mentally by the attack and its aftermath. This week, I again met victims and family members who have been subjected to ongoing injustice in our health system, in particular women and their children who were affected by shocking failures of medical devices or by the prescription of drugs that had devastating and life-changing consequences. While pregnant, my constituent Mary was prescribed the anti-epilepsy medication, sodium valproate. Very sadly, Mary joined so many other parents whose children were consequently born with significant birth defects. Like any parent of a disabled child, Mary is incredibly worried about their future and what support will be in place to look after them when she is no longer able to. Victims and their families are exhausted. They have campaigned for many years to draw political attention to such matters, but it seems that successive Governments are not listening. Indeed, the Government have yet to respond to the Hughes report on the sodium valproate and pelvic mesh scandals that was published more than 18 months ago. Will the Leader of the House ask the Health Secretary to make a statement to this House to provide an update urgently?

• 4 Sept 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday at Prime Minister’s questions, the Prime Minister told the leader of my party, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), that the situation in Gaza was “horrifying” and “a man-made famine”. We agree. More than 60,000 Palestinians are estimated to have been killed in the conflict. Just yesterday, five adults and a child were reported to have died of malnutrition, as a direct consequence of the Israeli Government’s man-made famine and illegal restrictions on aid entering the strip. It has been the deadliest war ever for journalists, with at least 192 killed by Israeli forces, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, and 20 Israeli hostages are still thought to be alive and brutally held by Hamas terrorists. Across the House, we have begged the Government to do more to help end the conflict, to save the lives of the hostages and Gaza’s civilians. Indeed, it is something that constituents write to me and undoubtedly all Members about on a daily basis, yet action has been excruciatingly slow. In July, the Prime Minister set a deadline for further action. He said that “the UK will recognise the state of Palestine by the United Nations General Assembly in September unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and commit to a long-term, sustainable peace”. That deadline is fast approaching: the UN General Assembly convenes in less than a week. The House should surely have the right to debate and vote on this important step. Recognising that Parliament will break for conference recess in less than two weeks, will the Leader of the House grant a full debate in Government time before then to show the strength of support for the recognition of the state of Palestine in this House?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Living Standards: East of England · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse, and I thank the hon. Member for Norwich South (Clive Lewis) for letting me speak. As a fellow east of England MP, I thank him for securing this important debate, and I hope he agrees with me that health is central to living standards. As vice-chair of the East of England all-party group, I note that my predecessors published a report on levelling-up in the region in 2022. The report found that women in the region can expect to spend 19 years of their lives in less than good health, compared with 16 years for men. According to an international Global Burden of Disease study, 42% of ill health in the east of England can be linked to preventable factors linked to socioeconomic deprivation and other health inequalities. I regularly receive casework from constituents experiencing long delays in referrals following GP appointments. That is shown in the data, with gynaecology waiting times a particularly bad example. For example, in June Chelmsford’s Mid and South Essex integrated care board had the highest gynaecology treatment waiting list of any ICB in the east of England at 15,768, with almost half of women waiting for longer than 18 weeks for treatment—well below the Government’s 92% target. Indeed, one of my constituents wrote to tell me that she would face a 78-week wait for a gynaecology appointment, not 18 weeks. We all recognise that the longer someone needs healthcare, the more complex, financially costly and serious the consequences can be, and we need the Government urgently to bring down referral waiting lists. As the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists noted, the public health grant must be adequately funded to address the underlying causes of sickness, especially those that acutely affect women. In Chelmsford, my city council has emphasised how important that is, helping to meet one of the statutory duties of ICBs, which is health and wellbeing, especially in the context of reduced staffing, the abolition of NHS England, and ICBs being asked to reduce their costs by 50%. I urge the Government to commit to expanding the number of women’s health hubs in the east of England in particular.

• 3 Sept 2025 · Pavement Parking · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for securing this important debate on something that is a problem across the country. Indeed, a Chelmsford resident recently wrote to me about taking her nan for a walk, when they were forced to walk in the road due to cars obstructing the pavement. That is entirely unacceptable for anyone, let alone an elderly resident. Parking on a pavement and blocking it is already an offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988, but only the police have the power to issue tickets, and they are rightly prioritising more serious crime. Organisations such as the South Essex Parking Partnership have the resources to issue fixed penalty notices, but they do not currently have the power to do so, as they can issue FPNs only where there is a specific parking restriction, such as double yellow lines or residents-only parking. The use of traffic regulation orders to bring in restrictions in specific areas is slow, cumbersome and costly—something I know at first hand having previously been an Essex county councillor, as it took two years to bring in junction protection or double yellow lines to prevent parents from parking on corners when picking up their children from school. As has already been referenced, in 2019 the Transport Committee published a report in which it made a clear recommendation that a new civil offence of obstructive pavement parking, enforced by local authorities, should be created. Given that the House yesterday debated a Bill to give more powers to local authorities, I hope the Minister will introduce that power as well.

• 2 Sept 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I think we are in danger of getting into the weeds on exactly how local government would be reorganised. We talk about the size of the unitary authorities that would be created. The three-unitary model in Essex would instantly create three of the top five biggest unitary authorities in the country; after growth, they would be three of the top four biggest unitary authorities. It would create enormous councils with considerably less connection with the local communities they served. That is the opposite of devolution, and I worry a lot about the loss of identity that it could lead to. A lot of the talk is about savings. The Deputy Prime Minister talked a bit about savings from reorganisation, but there is very little evidence to support that using real-world data. Past models produced by consultancies have not used real-world data. However, according to real-world data, if the five-unitary model is chosen, local government reorganisation is expected to save only £105 million across the whole of Essex after five years. If the three-unitary model is chosen, we will end up with £49 million less than that. This is a huge undertaking, with a lot of resources going in for very little, and we still do not have a plan for special educational needs, adult social care and all the things I mentioned earlier. The really important point is that Greater Essex contains Thurrock, which has a very, very big debt problem: about £800 million of unsecured debt. There is no model of local government reorganisation or devolution in Greater Essex—even keeping the existing structure, frankly—that would be financially sustainable without central Government stepping in and providing funds to cover Thurrock’s debt. The maths simply do not work. I am looking directly at the Minister, because we need a solution. There will be much more unity in Essex on how to move forward if we can work out how to deal with Thurrock’s debt. It cannot be that other local residents, such as my constituents in Chelmsford, are asked to shoulder the blame for something that they did not bring about in the first place. I turn to Essex county council elections, which were cancelled last May. We have absolutely no idea whether they will go ahead next May; it would seem a bit strange if they did, but equally we want democracy. Can the Government provide some clarity? Finally, why is first past the post being scrapped for mayoral elections, but not for local government or general elections? That seems rather inconsistent.

• 2 Sept 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. My problem with this Bill is that it feels rushed. More people want to contribute to the discussion. Constituents want to be represented and to have local government reorganised in a way that they have been able to contribute to. That would truly be democracy. What we are seeing right now is rushed and is not a proper representation of democracy. The three-unitary model is not the only proposed model. That is being proposed by the county council, but the model that has the most support from the local district councils—nine of them—is the five-unitary model. I certainly support that, because if we have to go ahead with local government reorganisation, surely it should be with the model that keeps power closest to people.

• 2 Sept 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I also used to be a councillor, like many Members across the Chamber. I was deputy leader of Chelmsford city council for five years and an opposition member at Essex county council. I have seen at first hand the work of local councils and I know that they do it in very difficult circumstances—circumstances that have got harder and harder, with dwindling funds and increased demands on council services. Despite the very best efforts of council leaders across the country and council officers, who are often the unsung heroes local government, there are crises in housing, in special educational needs and in adult social care. We do not seem to have a plan to fix any of them, yet we seem to be rushing ahead with local government reorganisation and devolution, which to me seems a bit like putting the cart before the horse. Is the best way to fix the crisis in special educational needs or in adult social care, or to truly deliver all the housing we need a different form of local government? Why are these really important issues not part of the mix? Why do we not have a plan to fix them first—before we reorganise local government and trap ourselves in a corner? I am in favour of devolution: it is right to have power closer to the people it affects. I want local communities to be empowered, but this Bill does not deliver that. In fact, although it devolves powers relating to transport and skills—and other things in the Bill are good, too—the local government reorganisation that goes with those measures means that this legislation does the exact opposite of delivering devolution. Let us take Essex as an example. I choose Essex because I represent the constituency of Chelmsford in the very heart of Essex, because I used to be an Essex county councillor and because Essex is in the first wave of reorganisation. Essex will not benefit from the scrapping of first past the post, so my constituents will not benefit from their votes truly being represented. There is a proposal to replace Essex county council plus the district councils with either three, four or five unitaries. If we include the other existing unitaries plus Essex county council, we are talking about 15 councils in total. Replacing them with possibly three unitaries would be the exact opposite of devolution; it would take power away from the people and make the councillors elected to represent the people further away from them.

• 17 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  If you will indulge me, Madam Deputy Speaker, I join the shadow Leader of the House and the Leader of the House in thanking you, the other Deputy Speakers and Mr Speaker, as well as the Clerks of the House and the House staff, for all the amazing work that they do to support us in our jobs. It is not an exaggeration to say that we would not be able to do it without all of them and all of you. I also join the shadow Leader of the House in thanking the Leader of the House for the responses that she gives to business questions, which I see every single week. It has been a pleasure to get to know both of them on the various Committees and boards that we serve on, and I thank them for that. Turning to a slightly more serious matter, last week the Secretary of State for Transport announced that the Government have cancelled the A12 widening scheme between Chelmsford and Colchester. That is incredibly disappointing news and a real blow to my Chelmsford constituents, Essex residents and the east of England as a whole. The A12 is a crucial link for communities across Essex, which supports logistics to the major international ports and airports in the region. It is also dangerously congested. The scheme would have addressed both of those problems and improved the journeys of the approximately 90,000 vehicles that travel on the road every day. More critically, the cancellation’s impact on house building could be profound. Local plans, including that of Chelmsford city council, are reliant on the A12 widening scheme going ahead. The cancellation could severely hamper the building of an estimated 55,000 new homes in the area. With Labour pledging to build 1.5 million new homes by the end of this Parliament, this issue cuts across party lines. While I appreciate the financial constraints under which the Treasury is operating, it is notable that the two major road schemes that were cancelled in the recent announcement were both in the east of England, yet this region is a net contributor to the UK economy and has huge growth potential. Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretaries of State for Transport and for Housing, Communities and Local Government to meet me and a cross-party group of MPs so that we can discuss how we might still find ways to move forward with this vital project that will help the Government to deliver on their promises?

• 10 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Yesterday, LBC published a month-long investigative story on special educational needs and disabilities. Shockingly, it revealed that families have been sent legal cease and desist letters in attempts by some schools and local authorities to deter parents from seeking education, health and care plans for their children with SEND. The report uncovered that some parents and the independent SEND advocates assisting them have been threatened with legal action and with being reported to the police simply for daring to ask questions about the SEND provision to which their children are entitled but that is not being delivered. Let us be very clear: SEND children and their families have a legal right to support, and I am sure that the whole House would agree that attempting to prevent or limit the provision of such assistance, particularly through intimidatory tactics, is completely unacceptable. We all know that the SEND system is fundamentally broken and that reform is needed. That is why the Liberal Democrats set out our five principles for SEND reform in England yesterday. Principle No. 1 is ensuring that children’s and families’ voices are at the heart of the reform process. Indeed, the Prime Minister said yesterday that he wants “to work with parents and teachers to get this right.” —[ Official Report , 9 July 2025; Vol. 770, c. 941.] Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State for Education to make a statement explaining exactly how their voices are being not just heard, but understood as part of the SEND reform process, and will she join me in condemning the outrageous practice of issuing legal threats to parents who are simply trying to do their best for their children?