Mary Kelly Foy MP: speeches

Speeches

• 2 Jul 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  It has been more than two years since the devastating explosion at Coronation Terrace in Willington, and although the immediate emergency has long since passed, the impact on local residents continues. Families have had to live alongside an unsightly, derelict and potentially dangerous site, and there have been prolonged delays in resolving insurance claims involving numerous parties, leaving the community in limbo. As usual, discussions take place behind closed doors, but my constituents deserve to see all those involved working together to bring this matter to a conclusion. Will the Leader of the House advise me on the best way to expedite action in cases such as these, where complex insurance processes appear to have stalled progress for far too long?

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the ambition in the King’s Speech to grow the economy, raise living standards and make Britain a secure place to invest, but for my constituents in the City of Durham growth cannot exist only in national figures or ministerial speeches—it must be felt in everyday lives. That means secure work, better wages, stronger businesses and young people imagining a future close to home. The Employment Rights Act 2025 saw massive improvements in that regard and the measures in the King’s Speech will help further. I particularly welcome action on late payments. For many small businesses in Durham, late payment is not a minor irritation; it damages confidence and stalls employment. Durham is fortunate to have a vibrant range of high-quality businesses. Every year, I run a small business of the year competition and I am overwhelmed by how many constituents get involved. Whether it is past winners such as Daisy Rose Coffee House, Vanity Hair Salon, Newhouse General Store, the Weigh to Shop or numerous other businesses across the constituency, the message is very clear: they are the bedrock of our communities. We must acknowledge the severe challenge facing our small businesses, particularly in a sector that is vital for the city—hospitality. They are being squeezed by skyrocketing costs and the impact of the cost of living on their customers. If we want them to thrive, we need bolder steps to ensure long-term viability. The Government may say that the business rate system has been improved, but the feedback from small businesses is clear: this is the same old system, just tinkered with. A comprehensive overhaul to support them is urgently required. We need to see the Government row in behind strategic employment sites, such as the . Stalled for years, this critical site has now been purchased by a new developer and is on the cusp of delivering the benefits promised to the city. It will be a measure of the Government’s commitment to delivering growth in all our regions. I also welcome the focus on removing barriers to growth and building better trading relationships with our European neighbours. These issues sound technical, but they really matter to the north-east. Our region was historically a net exporter to Europe, meaning steps to reduce burdens on exporting businesses will have a huge impact on our local economy. As we go further with clean energy, Durham could be at the heart of the transition. Energy independence must create high-quality jobs, support local supply chains and give people the skills they need to seize these opportunities. Durham University, through its Energy Institute, brings world-class expertise to Durham. It is carrying out pioneering work on energy sustainability and geothermal energy. The very mines that powered our industrial past could literally heat our homes in a green future. Alongside long-term environmental benefits, we need immediate structural support for our communities. That means real investment in local training, ensuring young people from Durham are equipped to build these systems. I saw that potential first-hand last week when I spoke at the regional T-level networking event in Durham. It brought together colleges, employers, young people and local partners to discuss how we build the skills pipeline our economy needs. That is exactly the kind of practical partnership we need to stop the persistent brain drain that forces our brightest graduates to pack their bags. We need local economies strong and diverse enough to allow them to stay and build beautiful and meaningful careers in the City of Durham. That growth relies fundamentally on connectivity, so I welcome the inclusion of Northern Powerhouse Rail. Specifically, the Government must now prioritise fully the reopening of the Leamside line. The King’s Speech sets out an important direction, but the test will be delivery. For Durham that means supporting small businesses, good well-paid jobs, unlocking the sustainable energy potential of Durham University, investing in skills and ensuring the green economy creates opportunities that local people can build their lives around.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I agree that some protests can feel intimidating. On the Palestine protests, people have never protested outside synagogues, and they do not protest outside mosques. Given the proper police protections that already exist, there is no reason for the Jewish community to feel intimidated. But the fact is that this goes far beyond the Jewish community, for all the reasons that I have outlined. It was said in the past that we should not protest again and again for women’s right to vote, or for trade unions to win their rights against unscrupulous employers. In their name, and in the name of the whole Labour movement, Lords amendment 312 ought to be rejected.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Tobacco and Vapes Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest: I am proud to be the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on smoking and health. I am pleased that the Bill has returned from the Lords with minimal amendments. All the amendments before us are either Government amendments or have Government support, so I hope that the Bill can achieve Royal Assent as soon as possible. I understand that the amendments put forward today by the Secretary of State are simply to correct drafting errors, so I assume that they will need only brief consideration by the Lords. I am proud that the Bill will become law under a Labour Government. I hope that this Government will be remembered as the one that began the end of smoking in this country. In a few decades’ time, I hope that people, particularly young people, will look back on smoking with disbelief, and will say, “Can you believe that selling tobacco, a lethal product, with the aim of getting us hooked, was ever allowed?” Before coming to this place, I was a councillor in Gateshead council, where I held the public health portfolio from 2009 to 2019, and I chaired the Gateshead Tobacco Alliance. Tackling smoking was a central part of my work during that time, and it continues to be so today, because it remains the single biggest driver of health inequality in communities like mine and across the north-east. In areas of high deprivation, smoking is not just a public health issue, but a deeply entrenched inequality. It is far more common in disadvantaged communities, where people are more likely to start smoking younger, find it harder to quit, and suffer the worst health outcomes as a result. That means higher rates of cancer, heart disease and respiratory illness, and lives cut tragically short. I have seen that reality at first hand over many years, and it is why action like that set out in the Bill is so important. We should remember that tobacco is the single most harmful commercial product on sale in the world. It is sold for profit, while killing around two thirds of its long-term users and generating enormous returns for the companies that manufacture it. It is highly addictive, and many who start smoking wish they never had. Over 80,000 people die in this country every year because of it, and if it was introduced today, it is unthinkable that it would ever be permitted. This Government are right to legislate for a smokefree generation, because there is a fundamental imbalance at the heart of this issue. Companies are making vast profits from a product that drives disease, kills two in three of their customers, deepens inequality and places huge costs on our NHS and wider society. We know how important it is to work towards a truly smokefree future, and to drive smoking rates down to as close to zero as possible. In the north-east, we have a clear declaration for a smokefree future, endorsed by all directors of public health, our integrated care boards, Fresh, all 12 local councils and all 10 local hospital trusts. That kind of whole-system commitment is vital, not just for improving health but for tackling poverty, supporting a more productive region and preventing the premature loss of loved ones to smoking-related disease. That work is already delivering results. In County Durham, smoking rates have nearly halved over the last decade, reflecting a sustained effort across prevention and support to help people quit. However, rates remain higher in some communities, so we cannot afford to lose focus now. I am equally pleased about the strong cross-party support for the Bill. We saw that clearly in debates in the other place. The APPG on smoking and health is a great cross-party effort, which I am proud to co-chair with the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman). There is much to welcome in the amendments. In particular, amendment 80, which requires the Government to review the Act, is an important addition that strengthens the Bill. To be clear, it is not a sunset clause, nor is it a test of whether the smokefree generation policy has succeeded in its health aims—the impact assessment makes it clear that we are playing the long game—but rather it will assess how smoothly implementation has progressed and what burdens, if any, have fallen on retailers. I am confident that it will report positively, and that it will encourage other countries to follow our lead. I note that a similar private Member’s Bill is before the French Parliament, which I hope reassures colleagues about the policy’s compatibility with EU law.

• 16 Mar 2026 · Grenfell Tower Memorial (Expenditure) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The creation of a permanent memorial to the people who lost their lives in the Grenfell Tower fire is deeply important and necessary, and I welcome the Bill before the House today. It is right that Parliament ensures there is a lasting place of remembrance for the victims, the bereaved families, the heroic firefighters and emergency services, and the community whose lives were changed forever on that night. Grenfell was an avoidable tragedy. It was the result of political choices made over many years—choices to weaken building safety regulations and to erode proper inspection and oversight—and a system and culture that allowed cost-cutting to take precedence over the safety of human life. It was a national scandal caused by institutional failings at the highest level. The result was an apartment building covered in flammable materials, allowing the fire to spread rapidly, reflecting with utter shame the decisions that were made, which resulted in the death of 72 people. At its heart, Grenfell exposed the dangers of a deregulatory approach to the economy. When safeguards are stripped back in the name of efficiency or profit, it is too often working-class communities who pay the price. Residents of the Grenfell Tower block had raised concerns about safety for years, as had the fire service. They warned about the risks and about the conditions in which they were living, yet those warnings were repeatedly overlooked. In the same year of the fire, I attended an international workers’ conference in Madrid. One session focused on health and safety, looking in particular at disasters in places where factories had collapsed or fires spread because safety standards had been neglected—places in the global south. When I mentioned Grenfell, delegates from Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Bangladesh and elsewhere already knew about it. They were shocked and horrified that something like this could happen in the United Kingdom—one of the richest countries in the world—and asked how on earth it could have happened. That is why this memorial really matters. It must honour those who died, support the bereaved families, and recognise the deep and lasting impact on the community. I welcome the fact that the community will be involved in all stages of its design. It should also stand as a reminder of the dark and deadly side of capitalism, and serve as a lesson about the catastrophic consequences of neglecting safety regulations and ignoring the warnings of the people whose homes and lives were at risk. The victims have waited long enough for justice. Those responsible must be held to account and must, where necessary, be prosecuted. Remembering Grenfell must mean more than remembrance alone; it should force us to act quicker to ensure that everyone has a decent and safe home, and that tragedies like Grenfell can never happen again.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  Before I make my remarks and my plea to the Government, I must respond to the complete nonsense from the shadow Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp), and other Members on the Opposition Benches. The 14 years following 2010 saw catastrophic cuts to the police service, a rise in recorded crime, unmanageable police force budget deficits, the demise of neighbourhood policing and the near destruction of the Probation Service. No part of the criminal justice system was spared from mismanagement. It is incredible that the penny still has not dropped that when austerity is forced on an area, antisocial behaviour and fragile communities are the outcome. Opposition Members will have to excuse this Government for not taking lectures from them. This debate is crucial as it is about how we fund the services that keep our communities safe and resilient. Safe communities are the foundation of economic growth and local prosperity; businesses invest where towns feel secure, families settle where neighbourhoods are stable, and regeneration succeeds when antisocial behaviour is tackled and police are visible and responsive. Public safety underpins economic renewal and long-term confidence. Our police and crime commissioner, Joy Allen, has raised serious and legitimate concerns about the structural pressures faced in Durham and Darlington under the current funding framework. Those concerns are about not performance—Durham constabulary is highly regarded and delivers daily for our communities—but capacity and sustainability. Durham has one of the lowest council tax bases in England and a very high proportion of band A properties, meaning that each £1 added to the police precept raises significantly less locally than it does in many other force areas. In practice, a 1% increase in the precept in County Durham generates £490,000, while in Surrey it generates approximately £1.7 million. At a time when we are rightly focused on narrowing the north-south divide, the funding framework risks reinforcing it. North Road in Durham is a clear example of why sustained neighbourhood policing matters. It is one of the city’s busiest corridors and has, at times, been a hotspot for shoplifting and antisocial behaviour, particularly drug and alcohol abuse, placing real pressure on local traders and creating a perception of fear for residents and visitors. In response, Durham constabulary has worked with businesses to introduce the Shop Watch scheme, and it now holds regular meetings with retailers to share intelligence, co-ordinate action and improve visibility. That kind of partnership approach is starting to make a difference, but it relies on having the capacity and presence on the ground to sustain it. County Durham also covers a large and diverse geographical area, with dispersed rural communities creating distinct policing pressures in terms of travel time, visibility and response. A prime example is when yobs on e-bikes terrorise our villagers, our football clubs and walkers; people feel scared, but police cannot reach them in time to take action. A single national framework does not, therefore, produce equal outcomes. The same policy decision yields very different resources, and over time that gap is compounded. Between 2010 and 2020, under the Conservative Government, Durham constabulary lost 408 officers—around 20% of its workforce—and officer numbers have still not returned to 2010 levels, meaning sustained pressure on neighbourhood teams and frontline capacity across that wide geography. For three consecutive years, local consultation has shown that residents are willing to invest more when it protects visible neighbourhood policing and community safety. There is democratic backing locally for strengthening capacity. The issue is not willingness, but ability. When funding depends heavily on council tax capacity, areas with lower property values are structurally constrained, regardless of need or performance. Equal percentage increases in grant do not offset unequal precept yield. If we want to see places like Durham flourish to attract investment, support local business and build confident communities, the framework for funding policing must not entrench the inequality between regions that soared during the Conservatives’ imposed austerity measures. Safer communities—

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I was happy to take that intervention. To the right hon. Member’s point— [ Interruption. ] If he cares to listen to my response, what he said is exactly what I am doing now: I am urging the Government to look again at the council tax precept. We are playing catch-up for the years of mismanagement and austerity when his party was in government. Safer communities enable growth. The settlement should reflect that principle fairly and consistently across the country if we are ever to repair the damage caused by the Conservative Government’s period in office.

• 20 Jan 2026 · County Durham: Cultural Opportunities · Hansard source

  More

  We are delighted that culture in Durham has been backed by our North East Mayor, Kim McGuinness. She shared our dismay at the loss of Lumiere, having backed it with nearly £250,000 of funding. She has long advocated a tourism levy—a small £2 per night charge that could bring £20 million into our region’s culture. She has also backed the Women of the World North East festival, celebrating the achievements of women while tackling the inequalities that still exist. But we cannot rely on the mayor’s office alone; we need our schools, colleges and local authorities to be fully engaged in offering real opportunity in music, art, performing and sport. Those miners knew that a century ago, and it is reflected in the motto of the newly refurbished Redhills: “The past we inherit, the future we build.” As the residents of County Durham know today, culture is essential for our wellbeing, but unless we support it, it will die on the vine. What value do we truly put on culture? Does the Minister agree that culture should not be the preserve of those with the deepest pockets? What can we do as a Government to ensure that culture remains a contested space and is able to spring and flourish from the grassroots? What can we do to get young people to see that there is a future for them in performing arts and music, by engaging our schools, colleges and community spaces? How do we make sure that in our communities bands such as Jam Tub have a place to play, that Durham fringe can continue and that the recently rehomed Durham folk festival can survive and flourish? Finally, will the Minister pass on my invite to the other Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock), to come to Durham and see what we have to offer, while also seeing what we need? I am sure that my hon Friend will be left feeling assured that our county is a place to invest in culturally, to help the talented people here chase their dreams without them having to leave for pastures down south.

• 20 Jan 2026 · County Durham: Cultural Opportunities · Hansard source

  More

  Once again, I could not agree more. Of course, it was the railway that took the coal from Newcastle down to London. That built the wealth of this country, so we have to remember where it started. Those tourism opportunities need to be encouraged by our county council.

• 20 Jan 2026 · County Durham: Cultural Opportunities · Hansard source

  More

  That is a valuable point. Last year, Durham applied to be the city of culture but, unfortunately, came second to Bradford, which had a fabulous year as the city of culture. I wish my hon. Friend success with Bishop Auckland’s bid to be the town of culture. Such events are the social glue that keep our rural and ex-mining communities resilient, yet today it can sometimes feel that culture in Durham is in retreat. We have been told that Lumiere, which transformed our streets into a world-class art and light installation, bringing millions into our economy, has turned off the lights for the last time. We have always been proud to say, “It started here. It started with us,” so losing it is a devastating blow to our prestige and our economy. A few years ago, Rocking Horse rehearsal rooms was unceremoniously turfed out of its city centre location, as the landowner simply wanted to build some more industrial units. Even though the owner of Rocking Horse, Rich, has managed to relocate outside the city, there is now no dedicated recording space in the city of Durham for non-students. What am I supposed to say to bands such as Jam Tub when they tell me that the cost of equipment and space is prohibitive? There is also a huge lack of venues for new up-and-coming bands to perform in. To follow their dreams, they are often left with no choice but to leave the north-east. Sadly, the new administration at Durham county council views culture through a lens of division. It has grandstanded over Durham Pride, claiming that it has saved money by cutting funding, while branding that key annual event, which brings thousands of people to the city, as “political street theatre”—I do not know about you, Ms Vaz, but I love a bit of street theatre. We cannot let the divisive views of other parties diminish the importance of such events to many people in our communities. Pride is about dignity and equal rights, self-affirmation and an acceptance of ourselves and each other, as well as a shared remembrance of our struggles and victories achieved together. When events are made to feel like political targets by the council that should be their champion, our communities become less cohesive. The north-east is populated by people with diverse histories. I think of migrants from Scotland and Ireland who came into the region to work in our shipyards, mines and steelworks, and, more recently, migrants from further afield working in our NHS. We should be embracing new cultures, with their food, music, language and dance, and new traditions. That is how we build community and inspire creativity. Grandstanding and division do not build a culture; they tear it down. At the heart of the city, we have the astonishing Durham cathedral. It sits atop a stunning peninsula at the centre of the UNESCO world heritage site. We are rightly proud of that jewel in the north-east’s crown, but for a resident in Sherburn village or Willington, or someone further afield in Stanley, Crook or Newton Aycliffe, that grandeur can feel a world away if their local community hall is shut or the community group has run out of cash. Those are not simply things that would be nice for communities to have: if centres close or groups struggle for cash, where do we tell people to go for their music classes, art groups or dance classes? Under the coalition Government, education reforms removed the arts as core subjects in the curriculum. The effects of that are clear: the north-east has the lowest entry rates for music and performing arts, and whole areas of the north-east have schools with no students at all applying for music. If young people cannot access art through schools, and their opportunities in the community are limited, where will that spark of inspiration come from that will produce our next generation of artists, performers, writers and musicians? The answer cannot be, “You can participate if you can afford it.” Cultural opportunities should never be left as a preserve of the rich. I do not want to paint a picture of total decline. I recently heard from Dr Stephen Cronin, chair of the Durham fringe, which was launched in 2021 by volunteers and is now the north-east’s largest recognised fringe. By using alternative spaces, it ensures that creativity remains workable and rooted in the community. Stephen is putting together a fringe academy to give young people a chance to learn the trade of the arts. Stephen’s message was clear: culture does not always need multimillion-pound capital grants for shiny buildings. We need to look beyond the usual suspects for funding, and grassroots groups like the fringe do the most with the least. They do not need cathedrals of glass and steel; they need consistent support to keep the lights on in the hall and to feed those shoots of creativity. They need a Government, a region, and a local authority that provide fertile soil— [ Interruption. ]

• 15 Jan 2026 · Access to Sports Facilities · Hansard source

  More

  Durham United football club kicked off this season in the northern league. It is the first time in decades that the city has had a men’s team playing at this level, yet they do not have a permanent ground. At the same time, local authorities are finding it harder and harder to maintain their playing pitch stock to a reasonable standard, meaning that high-quality pitches are harder to access despite more football being played than ever. What can the Minister do to encourage local authorities to transfer these assets into the hands of well-established grassroots clubs, such as Durham United, to give them security and access to larger grants, thereby improving the maintenance of these vital community assets?

• 12 Jan 2026 · Leasehold Reform · Hansard source

  More

  Residents of the Aykley Woods development in my constituency have recently been informed that collectively, they will be charged £15,000 this year for the management company to run their estate of just over 270 homes, on top of a scandalous £31,000 just to cover the running costs of the management company itself. This is happening to millions of homeowners up and down the country, so does the Minister agree that it is long past time that we end the scandal of freeholders being locked into agreements with management companies and make local authority adoption the default for new builds?

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

  More

  I had the pleasure of meeting Fergus, Freddie and Michael, members of the band Jam Tub, on a recent visit to Framwellgate school in Durham. These musicians are passionate about contributing to Durham’s cultural vibrancy, performing at events such as the much-loved Durham fringe festival. They contacted me after they noticed a distinct lack of venues across the whole of County Durham for young bands to perform and practice in, limiting their opportunities to grow as musicians. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on the importance of addressing regional cultural inequalities that are having an impact on the opportunities available to talented youngsters not just in Durham, but across the country?

• 11 Sept 2025 · Regional Transport Inequality · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak in a really important debate on regional transport inequality. For too long, communities in the north-east have suffered the effects of chronic underinvestment in transport and the flawed legacy of privatisation. What should be a public service has instead become a patchwork system that too often fails local people. On the railways, the proposed LNER timetable risks cutting vital stops at Durham. For many that would mean unnecessary changes at York or Newcastle. For older people, disabled passengers and those travelling with children, that creates real barriers and makes our railways less accessible at a time when they should be opening up. Buses tell a similar story. In Brandon, Ushaw Moor, Waterhouses and Newton Hall, people depend on services from Arriva and Go North East, yet complaints reach my inbox every week. The X20 from Langley Park to Sunderland and the 43 from Esh Winning to Durham are both unreliable, and in some villages buses simply do not run at all on Sundays or bank holidays. Too often, our area is left with the oldest buses, prone to breaking down, while the newest vehicles serve the routes in Newcastle and Sunderland. Although funding for new bus stops is welcome, my constituents ask what good they are when the services to go with them are not reliable. There are workforce challenges too. A shortage of engineers causes delays, when our further education colleges could be supported to provide apprenticeships and skills. Locating a depot in Consett, where bad weather frequently disrupts operations, has only added to problems. Another issue is that our drivers in the region are paid less than colleagues in the north-west by the exact same companies—hardly a recipe for recruitment or retention. All that reflects the wider picture of years of underinvestment and inequality. Had the north received the same per person transport spending as London since 2009, we would have had £140 billion more—enough to transform the system. Instead, nearly a fifth of rural bus routes have vanished in just five years, deepening isolation for many.

• 11 Sept 2025 · Regional Transport Inequality · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more. Although we may improve our bus services and the types of modern buses we have, they are not accessible in all areas, and that is a huge inequality. The Government’s Bus Services (No. 2) Bill is a chance to put this right. With franchising, fair pay and investment in modern vehicles, we can build a system that works for passengers, supports jobs and meets our climate goals. Reliable and affordable public transport should not be a luxury; it is the foundation of a fair economy and connected communities. My constituents in the City of Durham deserve no less. They deserve a transport service that serves local people, not profit, and Ministers must act to deliver it.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Defibrillators · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my colleague and neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth), for securing this important debate. Nearly half the postcodes in my constituency are not within easy reach of a defibrillator. That is not just a statistic, as we have heard; it is the difference between life and death. We know that when a defibrillator is used within three to five minutes of cardiac arrest, survival chances rise from just 8% to more than 70%, yet too often communities in Durham are left without timely access. This inequality is compounded by cost. Community groups, sports clubs and small businesses fundraising for devices face average VAT bills of £500 per defib. That is an unnecessary barrier to saving lives, so I join colleagues in urging the Government to look at abolishing the so-called heart restart tax. One organisation that has done magnificent work in helping to get defibs into key locations across our region is Rotary North East, which has installed more than 100, including in Durham city centre. The work it does, particularly the work of my constituent Tom Sharples, has genuinely saved lives in the north east. Not only has Tom worked to roll out defibs across the region, in conjunction with our brilliant police community support officers for Brandon and Brancepeth, Paul and Dan, but he has invested his time in delivering training sessions for young people in those communities. Following the harrowing scenes during the 2020 Euros, when Christian Eriksen suffered a cardiac arrest on the pitch, I became determined to improve lifesaving equipment. I supported the roll-out of CPR training for young people across my constituency. In 2021, I led a campaign that helped bring about a change in Football Association policy. Since then, all new FA-funded facilities must have a defibrillator as standard. That was an important step forward, but it is only part of the solution. Every day, 80 to 90 people die from cardiac arrest outside hospital, and many of those lives could have been saved. Wider availability of defibs would save lives, reduce pressure on our ambulance service and prevent the devastating long-term impact of brain injury and loss that follows so many of these cases. I urge the Government to act to close the defibrillator gap, end the postcode lottery and give every community, including mine in the City of Durham, the fair access that they deserve.