Marie Goldman MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 Jun 2026 · Equality Act 2010: Code of Practice · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement. After the Supreme Court’s ruling last year, the Government’s job was to give people, businesses and organisations clear, workable guidance. The code is instead unworkable, exclusionary and expensive for businesses. As the Minister knows, the Government must ensure that they meet the legal obligations placed on them by the public sector equality duty. That requires the Minister to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct, to advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not, and to foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not. Yet the Government’s own equality impact assessment identifies disproportionate harm to those with protected characteristics, and a failure to set out how that harm will be addressed. Can the Minister really say, hand on heart, that she believes the guidance does that? The impact assessment notes how the guidance will likely impact women who are not trans, yet do not meet cultural and social expectations around what a woman should look like. There have already been stories of women with mastectomies being challenged when accessing women-only spaces because they do not look like women. Has the Minister truly considered that? For trans, non-binary and intersex people, the code operates from a position of exclusion. It risks driving those small minorities away from public life, as leading mental health charities have since warned. The guidance conflicts with our core British values of tolerance, decency, respect for individual liberty and the rule of law. That is why I urge the Minister to withdraw it and to accept that this issue needs to be resolved by Parliament as law makers. To achieve that, I beg the Minister to adopt the Liberal Democrat proposal to appoint a joint committee of cross-party MPs and peers, to conduct post-legislative scrutiny of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 and the Equality Act 2010, taking evidence from all communities who have been impacted, in order to propose amendments or new legislation that it sees as necessary to ensure that existing rights are protected. If we work together we can fix this; sowing division will not.

• 14 Apr 2026 · “For Women Scotland” Court Ruling: First Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart) for securing this important debate, even though I know we are on slightly different sides of it. For far too long, trans, non-binary and intersex people have understandably been left anxious and fearful about the practical implications of the Supreme Court ruling. In its judgment, the Supreme Court stated: “It is not the role of the court to adjudicate on the arguments in the public domain on the meaning of gender or sex, nor is it to define the meaning of the word ‘woman’ other than when it is used in the provisions of the EA 2010.” Would the Minister therefore confirm that the judgment does not and will not affect the interpretation of any other Acts of Parliament? The ruling also reaffirmed that trans people continue to be protected from discrimination under the Equality Act. Unfortunately, a year on, the Government have still not provided adequate detail on how that will be achieved. Instead, they have created a legal minefield that has left trans, intersex and non-binary people in limbo while exposing businesses and organisations to costly legal action. The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s draft code of practice, which was leaked in November, only worsened the environment. Trans people who hold gender recognition certificates have explained to me the legal limbo that they now find themselves in. During the lengthy process to obtain such a certificate, they are required to provide formal evidence that they live, and will continue to live, in their acquired gender, yet the draft EHRC guidance indicated that they may be required to use facilities based on their birth sex. That simply is not a coherent legal position, and we urgently need clarity on the practical implications of the Supreme Court ruling for someone trying to obtain a gender recognition certificate. The draft EHRC guidance also proposed that staff working across the economy, from hotels and hospitals to cinemas and care homes, could be required to question people about their sex based on how they look, their behaviour or concerns raised by others, and refuse access to them if there is doubt they are telling the truth about their sex. That is unacceptable and unworkable. It would put trans and non-binary people in unsafe situations, and it is inevitable that it would acutely impact women and girls.

• 12 Feb 2026 · LGBT+ History Month · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, and for reminding us that this is about people. They are not statistics—they are people, whose everyday experiences and lives are being harmed by the decisions that are being made right now and by the awful, appalling, divisive rhetoric that is coming from some parts of the community, and some parts of the political community in particular. We must fight against it, and I thank the hon. Member very much for reminding us that this is about people and that their voices must be heard. As we celebrate LGBT+ History Month and reflect on the historical achievements of LGBTQ+ individuals, we must also look forward, challenge prejudice wherever it appears, and recognise our responsibility as Members of Parliament to continue to push for LGBTQ+ equality.

• 20 Jan 2026 · Holocaust Memorial Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As the Holocaust begins to fade from living memory, it becomes ever more vital that the next generations continue to be properly educated about it, and that the victims are commemorated with dignity and care. The theme of this year’s Holocaust Memorial Day, “Bridging Generations”, reminds us that remembrance of the Holocaust does not end with the survivors; the responsibility now passes to all of us. We must engage with the past, so that its lessons are not lost in the future. The work of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust encourages us to honour the legacy of all who were murdered in genocides, including those who have no family left to remember them. We remember them not through bloodlines, but through education and memorial. A Holocaust memorial and education centre in the heart of London would be a powerful, permanent commitment to that responsibility. Six million Jews, along with millions of others—Roma, disabled people and LGBTQ+ individuals—were murdered in the Holocaust. That shows where hatred can lead. The genocides since show that we have not learned enough. Last year, hate crimes increased across our country, fuelled by political extremism. When we say, “Never again”, it cannot be empty words; it must be our commitment to stand united against hatred. Alongside my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) and my hon. Friends the Members for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) and for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), I have met the Board of Deputies, the Jewish Leadership Council, the Community Security Trust and the Antisemitism Policy Trust to discuss the alarming rise in antisemitism and how we must respond to it. The Liberal Democrats believe that no one should feel scared or anxious when going to their place of worship. That is why, in our manifesto, we pledged funding for protective security measures for places that are vulnerable to hate crimes and terror attacks. While we are devastated that this is necessary, we are pleased that the Government have increased protections for synagogues, and ask that they continue to work hand in hand with those organisations for the safety and security of all Jews in the United Kingdom. This memorial presents a vital opportunity to challenge antisemitism through education. We recognise the work that the House of Lords has done to safeguard its educational purpose, but we must ensure that robust security measures are in place, so that people can visit the memorial safely and without fear. It is also key that we deliver the memorial in a timely manner. The Conservative Government committed to this project following the findings of the Holocaust Commission in 2015; it is unacceptable that 11 years later, construction has yet to begin. In 2023, Holocaust survivor Manfred Goldberg said, “I was 84 when Prime Minister David Cameron first promised us survivors a national Holocaust Memorial in close proximity to the Houses of Parliament.”

• 18 Dec 2025 · Christmas Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to start by saying a big thank you to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, to Mr Speaker and to all your Deputy Speaker colleagues for all your hard work over the year. I also thank all the House staff and parliamentary staff, without whose amazing work and organisation we simply would not be able to do our jobs. It has been wonderful to listen to this afternoon’s debate and especially to hear the pride with which hon. Members from across the House have been speaking about their constituencies. As many of us look forward to spending more time with our loved ones over the Christmas period, I find myself looking back over 2025 and reflecting on all the amazing people I have visited in my constituency. What strikes me is something very simple: none of the organisations that I visited would be anything without the people working in them and, more often than not, volunteering for them. In every constituency, there are people who give up their free time to help others. That is something to celebrate, to champion and to shout about, especially at this time of year. If you will indulge me, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will share a few highlights based on my visits to some wonderful charities in my Chelmsford constituency and further afield. In January, I spent a cold and blustery winter’s morning with the dedicated Chelmsford Litter Wombles. This is a fabulous group that turns out all year round in large numbers to help keep our streets, verges, parks and everywhere else in between free from litter. Rather than complaining about unsightly rubbish and pointing a finger to say it is someone else’s problem, they roll up their sleeves, quite literally, and get stuck in. In March, I visited Open Road, a crucial drug and alcohol support service operating across Essex and Medway. Hearing about the important, often lifesaving work that they do with people with addiction problems was incredibly heartwarming. I was delighted to attend a reception in Parliament recently celebrating the work that they do, and crucially hearing directly from some of the many people they have helped, some of whom are now volunteering themselves to help others. In April, I visited the brilliant Independence Project. This great little organisation in Chelmsford provides opportunities for people with learning disabilities and autism to achieve independence. The team do an amazing job supporting those who are perhaps less fortunate by giving them the skills and opportunities they need to lead rich and fulfilling lives. There are so many more voluntary organisations that I have met in Westminster and beyond who are doing fabulous work on a national level. I am privileged to be taking part in a new initiative called the parliamentary knowledge scheme for frontline services, which is a crucial opportunity for MPs to hear at first hand from the emergency service organisations that rescue us in our hour of need. So far, we have spent time with the amazing Royal National Lifeboat Institution, hearing about the bravery of their volunteer crews who go out in all weathers, all year round, and at any time of the day or night to help those in distress at sea. An organisation with which I have a personal connection is Mountain Rescue England and Wales. I say that because the service saved my life when I fell from height in Scotland a few years ago. If it were not for the actions of the service’s heroic volunteers, I may not have been here today. While we tuck into our Christmas dinners, or snuggle up on the sofa for some festive viewing, many of those selfless volunteers will be on call, ready to help those in need. In conclusion, I ask all Members from across the House to spare a thought for all those continuing to help others over the festive period. I encourage everyone to hold their loved ones tight, to raise a glass to those not with us and to celebrate in style the dawning of a new year. Wishing everyone a very merry Christmas.

• 15 Dec 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I stand here today disappointed—disappointed that women and girls continue to be unsafe in Britain in 2025, and disappointed that the strategy has been delayed three times this year, when urgent action is clearly needed. This Government should not have to be dragged before the House for an urgent question on a strategy that should have been published months ago. I am disappointed that, now that it is finally set to be published—on Parliament’s final sitting day of the year—stakeholders have said that the consultation process was inadequate and that the strategy “feels like an afterthought”. Meanwhile, the Home Secretary has been trailing it on the airwaves without parliamentary scrutiny. One in four women have experienced domestic abuse. A woman is killed by a man every three days. Only 2.6% of rape offences result in a charge or summons. Those are shocking figures, and they are certainly not an afterthought to me or to the millions of women and girls in Britain. The police have called this a national emergency, and they are right, yet consecutive Governments have either sat on their hands or produced VAWG strategies that have failed time and again, as a National Audit Office report showed this year. How will this strategy succeed where others have failed? How will progress towards halving violence against women and girls be measured? What interim targets will be set, and what consequences will follow if those targets are missed? Finally, as long as violent, misogynistic content continues to reach children online, the crisis will persist. Social media companies are failing to enforce their own terms of service, and the Online Safety Act 2023 has yet to deliver. What will the Home Secretary do to change that?

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.