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?

• 15 Jun 2026 · NHS Dentistry · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, and I declare an interest as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for dentistry and oral health. I pay tribute to the British Dental Association, our secretariat, for the work it continues to undertake to keep NHS dentistry in the spotlight. Due to my APPG role, I hear regularly from patients and dental professionals across the country, and the message I hear nationally is echoed by my constituents in Durham: NHS dentistry is becoming harder to access and the current system is not delivering the practical care that patients need. We need to measure access properly. Ministers should publish local data showing which practices are accepting new NHS patients, how many NHS clinical hours are being delivered, whether urgent care is being completed, how many children are being seen, and whether disease is being stabilised rather than left to worsen. One issue raised with me is the NHS Business Services Authority reporting and payments. Recent system changes have led to incorrect payments, and have made it harder for practices to calculate associate dentists’ pay. For practices already operating under serious financial pressure, that creates yet more uncertainty. Another issue is unit of dental activity caps. One local dentist described a practice with the chair, the associate dentist and the patient ready to go, but no additional UDAs were available. The associate dentist was left, in their words, twiddling their thumbs, while patients were turned away or offered private care. I also heard from award-winning Claypath dental surgery, one of the last remaining NHS dentists in Durham city. The practice manager said the practice had “witnessed firsthand the steady destruction of NHS Dental Services over the last 20 years by successive Governments, that have used the demolition of NHS Dentistry as a way of saving money in the NHS”. As part of the cost cutting, the practice’s contract was reduced by 2,000 exams in April. During an attempted appeal, the practice was told to accept the change or lose the whole contract. I ask the Minister: how does cutting contracts like that improve access for patients? I welcome the Government’s recent steps, including the urgent care changes and the beginning of wider reform discussions, but tweaks to the existing system cannot become a substitute for fundamental reform. We need a clear timetable for formal negotiations on a new dental contract, a deadline for replacing UDAs in this Parliament, and proper funding, so that practices do not lose money for providing NHS treatment. The challenge before us is to build a system that allows dentists who want to provide NHS care to do so, and a system that ensures that patients can access that care. The measure of a healthcare system is not how well it serves those who can afford an alternative, but how it protects those who cannot. We must stop treating the collapse of NHS dentistry as inevitable. A generation is growing up with pain, fear and preventable disease. We know the problems. We know the solutions. What we need now is action.

• 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

  There is much in the Bill that is serious and worthy of support. The measures to tackle shop theft, protect retail workers, strengthen the response to exploitation and abuse and deal with knife crime are all important. However, Lords amendment 312 raises a very different prospect. It is not really about violent disorder or intimidation. It is about making it easier to restrict repeated protest. It would require the police, when deciding whether to impose conditions on a protest, to take into account what the Bill calls “cumulative disruption”. That means not just the disruption caused by the protest, but disruption said to arise from other protests in the same area that were held, are being held, or are intended to be held. The organiser does not have to be the same; the cause does not even have to be the same. That should concern every Member of this House, because effective protest is very often cumulative, and democratic campaigning is nearly always repetitive. The campaigners come back again and again. That is true of the trade union movement, true of the suffragettes, and true of the civil rights tradition more broadly. The cumulative nature of protest is not a flaw in our democracy. It is often the means by which democracy speaks, and that is why amendment 312 is so dangerous in principle. It takes something that has always been central to democratic struggle—persistence—and starts to treat it as a problem to be managed down. It turns the repeated exercise of democratic freedom into a reason for state restriction. Once the House accepts that logic, we move on to very difficult ground indeed. Laws like this are never drafted only for the Government of the day. They remain on the statute book. They pass into other hands. We would be naive not to ask how a future hard-right Government might use a power like this. As the TUC has warned, broad “cumulative disruption” tests could all too easily be used against trade union demonstrations, against long-running industrial disputes, against repeated pickets, rallies and marches, and against the kind of organised working-class protest that has been central to the Labour movement and to the winning of rights in this country. That is not alarmism. It is exactly why Parliament should be careful about creating broad powers that can later be wielded by Ministers and authorities with far less respect for civil liberties. Peaceful protest is not an inconvenience to be tolerated only once. It is a democratic right, and one of the clearest tests of whether we truly believe in that right is whether we still defend it when it is persistent, visible and effective. That was true of the Chartists demanding political reform, the match girls and dockers fighting for dignity at work, the anti-apartheid movement that refused to give up, and the suffragettes who were crucial in securing the vote for women.

• 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 totally agree with my hon. Friend. We must keep in mind the fact that it is smoking that causes harm and death, not vaping, which can be a very successful cessation tool. I hope that the Bill will continue to push that. Powers in the Bill cover marketing, display, packaging and product design, as well as flavours and their descriptions. However, there is a crucial balance to strike: reducing youth appeal without limiting access or effectiveness for those using the products to quit smoking. We must keep the harms of smoking firmly at the forefront of our minds. A review after four to seven years feels appropriate to assess how the regulations are affecting usage and the market, and whether we are striking the right balance. This should be considered alongside the disposable vape ban and the forthcoming vape excise tax. I would welcome reassurance today that the review will place the harms of smoking and the needs of smokers at its centre. Many of the other amendments are technical in nature. I welcome the comprehensive definition of tobacco coming into force on Royal Assent, through Lords amendments 89, 90 and 91, as there is no need for a transition period. The exemption for vape-vending machines in Lords amendments 3 and 4 is also welcome, as others have noted, because we must ensure that vulnerable smokers are supported as much as possible to quit. As my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson) has recently taken up her role, I welcome her to her position as Minister for Public Health. I look forward to working with her as this Bill, soon to be an Act, progresses, so that we can continue our work, and hopefully set out a road map for a totally smokefree country and to look again at introducing a polluter pays levy. Finally, as someone who has spent many years advocating for a smokefree future, free of death and disease from tobacco, I know from speaking and listening to many people affected by smoking just how much the public want and need this action. We have already shifted the social norms around smoking and now, thanks to the work of organisations such as Action on Smoking and Health and Fresh, and the work of colleagues across the two Houses, a smokefree future is now possible. That is truly something to celebrate.

• 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

  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. ]

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

  More

  That this House has considered cultural opportunities in County Durham. I am grateful to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz, and I am pleased to have the opportunity to bring this debate to the House. To many, culture is an add-on: a luxury for when times are good or a line item to be trimmed when budgets are tight. In County Durham, we know better. For us, culture is the thread weaving through our communities. It is our history, our pride and our future. It does not just inform what we do; it defines who we are. To understand why culture matters, one must look to the history of the Durham miners. They did not just extract coal; they built entire communities. They created a welfare state long before 1945: out of their own pockets, through subscriptions and solidarity, they built the institutes, the schools and the libraries that stand today as monuments to self-improvement and collective dignity. They knew that a person needs more than just a wage; they need a sense of belonging. They knew that they had to nourish the mind as well as the body. That culture lives on in the newly refurbished Redhills—the pitman’s parliament. My constituency office is in Redhills and I never fail to be struck by the fact that it was built by the pennies of pitmen. It is a beacon of working-class heritage and culture. That spirit is reflected in the continued success of the Durham miners’ gala, the big meeting, which was first held in 1871. It has survived strikes, wars and the closure of pits to remain the largest celebration of trade union culture in Europe. From the blessing of the banners at the cathedral to the brass bands on the racecourse, it is a reminder that although the pits might be gone, our solidarity is permanent.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Business Rates: Retail, Hospitality and Leisure · Hansard source

  More

  Hospitality and leisure businesses in the City of Durham are incredibly concerned about their future. Does the Minister agree that if we are truly to level the playing field between the high street and the online giants, it is time we show our much loved pubs, cafés, restaurants and hotels the same level of support that distribution warehouses, office blocks and supermarkets are receiving?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  City of Durham is home to fantastic hospitality businesses. I have had the pleasure of visiting some of them recently, such as the Station pub in Langley Moor, as well as Notch and Kitt’s Pool Room and Bar in the city. We are aware that the hospitality sector faces an existential crisis, with many much-loved cafés, pubs, restaurants and hotels struggling to survive. Will the Leader of the House urge his colleagues in the Treasury and the Department for Business and Trade to listen to the calls of campaigners and Back-Bench MPs and address the House urgently to commit to a sector-wide business rates solution?

• 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Christopher. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) on securing this important debate. As the Member for the City of Durham, I am immensely proud to represent a world-class university. For many students, coming to a city like Durham is not only a period of excitement, discovery and personal growth, but one of vulnerability. They are away from home for the first time, facing academic pressures far beyond A-levels and dealing with situations that they may not have had to deal with before, from problematic landlords to issues with utility suppliers, difficulties getting medication under shared care agreements and loneliness. They face situations that can pile on the pressure and exacerbate existing anxieties. For some, that vulnerability is even greater. Just yesterday, the Unite Foundation reported that well over a quarter of care-experienced and estranged students face financial concerns that directly damage their mental health. That number is over and above that of their peers who do have a family support network in place. We are witnessing a crisis of scale. Higher Education Statistics Agency data shows that the number of students disclosing a mental health condition has increased by 480% since 2011. Office for Students statistics show that 25% of undergraduates in their final year have experienced sexual harassment, and we know that that is a tragically under-reported figure. Some argue that because students are adults, a legal duty would make universities risk-averse, but I disagree. There is no need for a duty of care to be in loco parentis, where every move is monitored. It would be a duty to provide a professional standard of care, at the same level that we would expect from an employer or healthcare provider. If a student stops attending lectures for weeks on end, or their work shows signs of severe distress, a clearly defined process outlining how the university can and should support the student would potentially help with pressure points before they turn into emergencies. Currently, student safety is a postcode lottery, and support varies widely between institutions. A statutory duty would replace this patchwork with a single national baseline and would help to give consistency, providing a floor below which no institution can fall. It would provide clarity on data to empower pastoral teams to involve emergency contacts without fearing that they are breaching GDPR, and integration to ensure better data sharing between the NHS and universities. Alongside that, we must be mindful of the concerns raised by the University and College Union. Although a duty of care would be a huge step in the right direction, we need to be aware of the context in which this new responsibility would be introduced. A statutory duty of care would help to close gaps in accountability and would lead to earlier intervention, but there is already a funding crisis in higher education. Imposing a duty of care on universities will not work if already overstretched staff and underfunded pastoral teams are expected to pick up the pieces. In fact, there is a risk that introducing a duty of care and thinking that that is job done could lead to more problems for students. If a duty of care is to be introduced, it must also come with the resources and funding to ensure that universities can deliver the training that their teams will need and that they can dedicate their own resources to already creaking mental health support teams. Of course, they need to ensure that their own staff are working in a safe environment. A student’s safety should not rely on the terms and conditions of their specific university, but we cannot rely on passing legislation without the proper funding to allow universities to deliver the best support for their students. We owe it to every family to ensure that when a young person leaves home for higher education, the sector and the Government work hand in hand to ensure that they are protected by a properly funded, well-regulated and easy-to-understand statutory standard of care.

• 12 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T3. Major planning applications in Durham, such as those for the Milburngate site and Stack in the city centre, have been stalled for years. This has not only left two white elephants in the city centre, but had a significant impact on jobs, the economy and key venues that have been left undeveloped. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that major developments in the City of Durham and across the country are not subject to long delays?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Railways Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to speak about a matter that is so important to my constituents. For too long, our railway has been held back by fragmentation, competing interests, and a lack of clear accountability. By bringing services back into public hands and creating Great British Railways, the Bill gives us the opportunity to plan, run and improve the railway as a single coherent system. For my constituents, a key priority is reliability. People want trains that turn up when they are meant to, connections that they can trust, and information on which they can rely. A unified, public operator, with responsibility for timetabling, infrastructure and service delivery, gives us the best chance of reducing disruption and building a network that works consistently, day in and day out. A strengthened public railway also depends on the people who operate it. The workforce is essential to improving reliability and delivering a better experience to passengers. Staff deserve clarity about how, and if, the transition to GBR will affect their jobs. If we want a well-run railway, we must support the people who maintain the tracks, staff the stations and run the trains. I ask Ministers to continue the constructive dialogue with trade unions, in order to ensure that the employment conditions of their members are protected during the creation of GBR and into the future. The need for a more co-ordinated railway has been brought into sharp focus in Durham recently. London North Eastern Railway’s proposed timetable changes would have removed important morning commuter services on which many local residents rely. I worked closely with local people to challenge those plans, and I welcome the progress that has been made, but the experience showed how vulnerable local connectivity can be when decisions are made in isolation, or via flawed consultation processes. Communities must have certainty that key links will be protected, strengthened, and not placed at risk. The Bill gives us a chance to build a railway that is more reliable, better connected, and more focused on meeting public need. I support it strongly, and I look forward to working with Ministers to ensure that, as it progresses, it delivers the improvements that passengers in Durham expect, and the support that rail workers deserve—including my niece Kate, who has just started her training with Northern Rail. I look forward to her getting me to King’s Cross and back to Durham on time, and safely, in the future.

• 3 Nov 2025 · Huntingdon Train Attack · Hansard source

  More

  Of course, my first thoughts are with the victims of this horrific attack. The RMT union has called for urgent meetings with the Government, police and the industry to ensure that we have the strongest resources and procedures in place to protect staff and passengers. Can the Home Secretary confirm that the Department for Transport and the Home Office will facilitate those meetings as soon as possible?

• 14 Oct 2025 · Net Zero: Evidence-based Policy · Hansard source

  More

  This Government’s mission to make Britain a clean energy superpower is not only delivering against climate targets, but delivering jobs and investment in places like Durham and the wider north-east, where around 500 renewable energy companies already employ around 17,000 people in good-quality jobs—a figure that is set to rise to 24,000. Those who take a stand against climate action would put that growth at risk. Does the Secretary of State share my concerns that the fearmongering by some in this House about the cost and safety of renewables is not only misguided, but fundamentally against our national interests, and will he work with local teams to provide suitable knowledge and education, as suggested by Retrofit Reimagined?

• 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 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.