Miatta Fahnbulleh MP: speeches

Speeches

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning that what we are doing is not peripheral—I was so incensed by that that I forgot to mention it. It is fundamental that we respond to the challenges in our high streets. The key point that I want people to take away is that we are acting, whether it is through the pride in place strategy and programme or through the action that we are taking on business rates. The hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs mentioned business rates. From April 2026, eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties with rateable values below £500,000 will benefit from permanently lower business rate multipliers. That will, critically, level the playing field between online retailers and high streets.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move an amendment, to leave out from “House” to end and insert “recognises the need to rejuvenate high streets following 14 years of decline under the previous Administration; welcomes the Government’s action to restore Pride in Place backed by £5 billion to support 339 locations to empower communities to drive meaningful change in their local area, including high streets; supports local communities being given new powers to tackle vacancies, and prevent new betting and vape shops in their areas, including the ability to auction off persistently empty premises through High Street Rental Auctions; further welcomes the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill that will ban upwards-only rent reviews in commercial leases, helping to create fairer rental conditions; endorses the Government’s support for property owners; also welcomes that from April 2026, eligible retail, hospitality, and leisure properties with rateable values below £500,000 will benefit from permanently lower business rates multipliers; welcomes the Plan for Small Businesses which supports high street small businesses as the backbone of local economies and which commits to cut the administrative burden of regulation for businesses by 25%; and further recognises that the Employment Rights Bill will bring employment rights legislation into the 21st century, extending the protections that many small businesses already offer their workers to all.” I will start with where I agree with the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith). Our town and city centres are part of our identity and our sense of belonging. When they do not meet expectations—when shops are shut and footfall is down—that can dent pride in place, hold back the economy and leave our communities divided. Put simply, they are part of the nation’s barometer of whether we—all of us in this House—are doing a good job. That also means that, when our high streets prosper, the country can too. Retail and hospitality form the engine of our economy. Every pound spent on our high streets supports jobs, renewal and living standards. But, after 14 years of decimating our high streets, I think the Conservatives have some cheek in raising this debate and pretending they have solutions. The shift to online and out-of-town retail left too many high streets with increased vacancy rates, and the Conservatives did absolutely nothing about it. Austerity and cuts to local government robbed our public realm of investment, and they did absolutely nothing about it. The harshest pain of all was felt because of the cost of living pressures resulting from Liz Truss—remember her?—and her catastrophic mini-Budget, which Conservative Members supported every step of the way. Where the Conservatives oversaw neglect and decline—for which they should hang their heads in shame—this Labour Government believe that the best days of the nation’s high streets are ahead of us. But to reach them, we need the full force of Government to make that a reality. Only by raising household incomes and putting more money in people’s pockets can we boost the demand that our high streets need. To the Conservative party, who pretend that there is a quick fix, I say this: you crashed the economy; do not forget that. You put jobs and livelihoods at risk; do not forget that. You oversaw 14 years of decline for our high streets and our district centres; this Labour Government are dealing with the mess that you left behind. So, quite frankly, we will take no lectures from the Conservatives.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I will make progress. Hon. Members have mentioned retail crime. We have scrapped effective immunity for low-value shoplifting, and we are taking action to protect retail workers from assault. Alongside the Employment Rights Bill, which we are proud of, that will make retail a more desirable career choice, improve retention and make recruitment clearer. We are very clear that employment rights are good for workers, but also for businesses and for the economy.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  What has damaged the high street is 14 years of neglect. The Conservatives pretend that it was thriving for 14 years and that we did not see shops closing down, boarded-up shops and the decimation of our public realm. We will take no advice from them, because they had 14 years to respond, but they categorically failed.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  It is incredibly telling that the hon. Member thinks that regulation consists of things such as protecting our workers, banning exploitative zero-hours contracts and ensuring that workers have sick pay. This is a fundamental part of the social contract. We are trying to ensure that when the economy does well, the everyday person does well, and that requires them to have basic rights and protections. We are very clear about and proud of that. Quite frankly, it is tragic that the Conservatives, who governed for 14 years in which workers were hugely exploited and the economy crashed, cannot see that. Finally, before I make progress, I will reflect on energy bills. We understand that businesses are under pressure from energy bills. That is why we are driving forward our clean power mission, because we are clear that the shift to renewables will drive down bills. Alongside that, we are giving SMEs access to the Energy Ombudsman for the first time, strengthening their ability to renegotiate contracts through blend and extend, and helping businesses to reduce their use in order to reduce energy costs.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We know that there is a fundamental link between public services that work and can support people across the economy and how well the economy does. This Labour Government have made the decision that it is right for us to invest in our public services, and right for us to invest in our NHS, because it is good for people, but also good for the economy. We do not resile from that decision.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is completely right. We feel that we are giving places the tools and levers that they need to turn around the legacy of the last Government.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Lady is absolutely right, and we are densifying. I return, however, to the 14 years for which the Conservatives failed on housing. Do they remember removing housing targets completely? Their carping on at us for making progress on our commitment to deliver 1.5 million homes is for the birds. We are clear that we need thriving high streets, and that requires mixed use and a range of things in our strategy.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is completely right—7,000 pubs. Statistic after statistic speaks to the Conservatives’ failure, so rather than being smug and providing fake solutions, they should be far more humble about the state in which they have left our communities. It is now on this Labour Government to fix the mess they left behind.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for setting out all the failures and mistakes that we are now having to fix. We are very conscious of that. That is why, through our Pride in Place strategy, for example, we introduced an action plan that was fundamentally about how we build strong communities, create thriving places and allow our communities to take control. As part of that, we are taking new steps to support high streets and town centres. That includes rolling out high street rental auctions, banning unfair upward-only rent review clauses in England and Wales, supporting property owners to establish business improvement districts, reforming the compulsory purchase process and land compensation rules to allow local authorities to shape their high streets, and opening a new co-operative development unit within the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to help our communities take greater control and ownership of their high streets. The problems in our high streets so often stem from the “we know best” attitude that we saw from the last Government over 14 years, so the answer must be to hand power to communities.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  We absolutely understand the pressure that businesses are under, but that pressure did not happen overnight; it is the consequence of 14 years in which we have not seen productivity growth and 14 years in which the economy has not grown. We understand the economic reality and we are taking action to respond to it, but, candidly, it is pretty disingenuous for the Conservatives to pretend that the foundations that they left for the economy were not absolutely corrosive and decimated. That is the inheritance that we are building on.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is completely right. Through our Pride in Place impact fund, we are providing a cash injection to 95 places across the country. That will be spent by local authorities specifically to drive and improve high streets. That is a direct, tangible action that this Labour Government are taking against those 14 years of decline.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I hope that when the shadow Minister stands up, he will respond to that question and say whether the Conservative party will return the money. In the end, we need investment in our communities. That is what we are providing, whether it is by reducing business rates or through the work of my Department for Business and Trade colleagues to deliver the backing your business plan, a long-term strategy for supporting small and medium-sized enterprises and the everyday economy. As part of that, family-run businesses on the high street will benefit from new tools to unlock access to finance, action to crack down on late payments—we know that is a massive issue for SMEs—and easier access to the business growth service.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  We understand that businesses across all sectors are under pressure. We are working with the tourism sector, because it is absolutely vital to the growth of the wider economy, and with all sectors. This requires a whole set of interventions, whether that is what we are talking about today, in terms of our high streets, the action we are taking to support training and skills for the workforce, or the investment we are putting into the economy. We recognise the pressure, but I come back to the fact that that pressure did not come overnight. If you decimate and under-invest in the economy for 14 years, you end up where we are now. The choice for this Labour Government is that we can now do the job of renewal. It takes time, and we recognise that, but that is a journey that we are determined to go alongside business on.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  We understand the pressure that businesses are under with energy, but it is driven by our dependence on global fossil fuel markets. We can do sticking-plaster or short-term fixes, or we can deal with the fundamental problem. We are pushing towards clean power, because that is how we ultimately drive down bills. That is not an offer to do so in 10 or 20 years; we are committed to driving down bills in this Parliament, and we will not resile from that. Labour Members agree that our high streets will always be at the heart of our communities, and we welcome the cross-party agreement on that. Unless we grow the economy and put more money in people’s pockets, however, our high streets will never match local people’s ambition. That is why our high streets are front and centre of our growth mission, and why we are committed to driving their renewal. I ask everyone in the House to remember the record and the legacy of the Conservatives, who are holding this debate pretending that they really care. For 14 years, our high streets were decimated, shops were boarded up and people in all our communities saw the impact of the Conservatives’ actions.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The new clause conflates two issues, and I will try to unpack them. On the one hand, there is the question of recognition of national minority status, which is particularly pertinent in the case of Cornwall. My hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth has been a steadfast, impassioned and persistent champion and advocate for it. My departmental colleagues and I have put it on the record that we absolutely recognise the unique status of Cornwall. We are looking for ways both to enhance the protections that are already there and, critically, to support the Cornish local authority in responding to the challenges that it faces and unlock the potential of the area. That is all on the record. We will continue to work, not just with members of the Committee but with MPs across Cornwall and the local authority, to take that forward. However, that is distinct from the ambition to create a regional tier of government. I remind colleagues that that was roundly rejected in a referendum. I know it was a couple of decades ago, but the question was tested. There is a fundamental question here: if we are trying to drive the economic prosperity of places, where is it best to locate that? One model proposes that the best place is large regional blocs, while another model says that functional geographies around city and county regions are better placed to drive that. The large regional blocs model was tested with the regional development agencies, and we found that the connection to the local economy was weaker. Critically, the democratic link to people in those places was weaker. That is why the model did not endure, and why, unfortunately, the Conservatives undid all the good work that we did when we were last in power. Our strong view is that strategic, functional geography—city and county regions—is the best place to make decisions around transport, housing and planning, skills and travel-to-work areas. That is why we are conferring powers at that level. If we seek to create another regional tier that is not about the collaboration that we are seeing, for example, with Northern Powerhouse Rail or our authorities in the midlands to deal with issues, predominantly to do with rail, that cut across functional areas, I worry that we will denude the very institutions that we are trying to strengthen, confuse the system, create more complexity and bureaucracy, and undermine the one thing we all want to achieve: stronger, functional economic geographies that can drive prosperity in places. There are two issues here. I understand what the hon. Lady’s new clause is trying to do, but it is fundamentally wrong. We have tested that model, and we believe that functional geographies at the strategic authority level are where we can make progress. I point her to the evidence of the past decade, in which we have had mayors in Greater Manchester and the Liverpool city region driving growth and prosperity. That is the right geography. We need to build the power there. We should not confuse the matter. I ask the her to withdraw the new clause.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member, who has consistently talked about the challenge of tackling climate change and the important role that local government has to play in that. We absolutely recognise the imperative of climate change and nature recovery, and the vital role that all levels of government, including our strategic and local authorities, can and must play in that endeavour. Local authorities already have a statutory duty to improve air quality in their areas. Thanks to the combined efforts of local authorities—for example, the Mayor of London—we have seen huge improvements. That is testimony to the fact that, when all tiers of government work together, we can tackle these big structural issues. My key point is that the existing tools and duties already support the things that the hon. Member is trying to achieve through her new clause. For example, we have talked before in the Committee about the local nature recovery strategies, the biodiversity duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, and the Environment Act 2021. All of that requires public authorities to consider, take account and take action to conserve and enhance nature and biodiversity. On the point about climate adaptation, I recognise that there is both an urgency and an imperative for us to take action, and Local authorities are at the vanguard of wanting to push this already. The Government are working with a number of local authorities that have come forward with climate risk assessments, and that is something we hope and expect to see at authorities across the country. In October we launched a local authority climate service, which provides tailored data on climate change impacts to enable local authorities to do their assessments and think about adaptation strategies. We also ran the first adaptation reporting power trial for local authorities last year, providing guidance and support on how to assess climate risks to their functions and services. That is all to say that this Government recognise the importance of this issue, and we are taking action. Acting and working in collaboration with all tiers of government to respond to the climate change and the nature recovery challenges is the way we do that. Further duties at this stage would not add to that; what we need is action and collaboration, and that is what this Government are cracking on with.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We acknowledge this is an area we want to strengthen. As I said in the last debate, we are working to make sure that we are taking in view the scrutiny models that we apply, including local public accounts committees and the models proposed by think-tanks and other organisations, in the context of the big reforms to the local audit and assurance framework we are driving through. I ask the Committee to give us time to do the work properly, so that we design something that is fit for purpose and aligned with the big reforms we are driving through. There is no resiling from the belief that we need to strengthen the arrangements. I put that on record and am happy to give those reassurances. Let us get on with the work of figuring out how we do that in the best possible way, by engaging with strategic authorities and critical stakeholders, rather than put in the Bill a requirement that may, in fact, slow the pace at which we are able to develop proposals. On that basis, I ask the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon to withdraw her new clause.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South for his thoughtful contribution. He is well versed, and has both reached out to business in his constituency and advocated his case persuasively. We are very mindful of unintended consequences. We are also very mindful of designing this system in a way that strikes the balance between the investment that we absolutely want to unlock on our high streets and in our local communities, and the protections that we want to provide for tenants and to ensure that our high streets continue to thrive. I will take away my hon. Friend’s thoughts and challenges, and reflect on them as we go into the details of how we design this system in the best possible way. I know that we will go into Opposition amendments in greater detail. However, the key point I want to emphasise at the start of this debate is that this is not a new debate and this issue is not a new one. We have known that we need to do something about this issue for well over a decade now. Huge amounts of work have gone into considering how we reform the system and there have been huge amounts of consultation over the years. So, we are very clear that something must be done, because the status quo is not fair and is not working for tenants, particularly the small and medium-sized enterprises on our high streets. We need to respond and to reform, but we will make sure that we do so in a way that strikes the right balance between the protections that we must provide for tenants and the investment that we obviously want to see in our commercial premises. Amendment 375 agreed to. Clause 71, as amended , ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 31 BUSINESS TENANCIES: PROHIBITED TERMS RELATING TO RENT Amendments made: 376, in schedule 31, page 322, line 24, leave out from beginning to end of line 24 on page 323 and insert— “Part 1 Key terms “Business tenancy” 1 (1) A tenancy is a “business tenancy” at a particular time if, at that time, Part 2 of this Act— (a) applies to the tenancy, or (b) has the potential to apply to the tenancy. (2) For that purpose, Part 2 has the potential to apply to the tenancy at a particular time if, at that time— (a) Part 2 cannot apply to the tenancy because— (i) none of the property comprised in the tenancy is or includes premises which are occupied by the tenant, or (ii) property comprised in the tenancy is or includes premises which are occupied by the tenant, but none of those premises are so occupied for the purposes of a business carried on by the tenant or for those and other purposes, (b) the terms of the tenancy include terms (the “permitted business use terms”) which would permit the tenant to occupy the premises for the purposes of a business carried on by the tenant (whether the terms permit occupation for the purposes of business generally, a specific business or a specific kind of business) or for those and other purposes, and (c) if the tenant were to occupy the premises in accordance with the permitted business use terms (and taking into account all other circumstances), Part 2 of this Act would apply to the tenancy. (3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2)(b), terms of the tenancy which— (a) would prohibit the tenant from occupying the premises for some purposes, but (b) would not prohibit the tenant from occupying the premises for other purposes, are to be regarded as terms which would permit the tenant to occupy the premises for the purposes which are not prohibited. (4) Sub-paragraph (2) must be construed as one with section 23(1). “Business tenancy with a rent review” 2 (1) A tenancy is a “business tenancy with a rent review” at a particular time if, at that time— (a) it is a business tenancy, and (b) it is subject to rent review terms (whether contained in the instrument creating the tenancy or not). (2) In this Schedule “rent review terms” means terms under which an amount of rent payable under the tenancy will or may change during the terms of the tenancy (“rent under review”). Part 2 Triggering and operation of rent reviews Application of this Part 3 (1) This Part of this Schedule applies to a tenancy at a particular time if, at that time, it is a business tenancy with a rent review. (2) But this Part applies to such a tenancy only if— (a) the tenancy is— (i) granted, or (ii) varied so that it includes rent review terms, after this Schedule comes into force, and (b) the grant or variation is not made under a contract entered into before this Schedule comes into force. Tenant to have power to trigger a rent review 4 (1) This paragraph applies if— (a) an action is necessary for a particular rent review to be initiated (a “trigger action”), and (b) the rent review terms, or any other terms (whether contained in the instrument creating the tenancy or not), do not allow the tenant to take the trigger action. (2) The tenant may initiate the particular rent review by giving the landlord notice in writing. (3) Notice under sub-paragraph (2) may not be given after the time when trigger action may be taken. Tenant to have power to take action to enable rent review to operate effectively 5 (1) This paragraph applies if— (a) an action is necessary for a particular rent review to operate effectively (an “operational action”), and (b) the rent review terms, or any other terms (whether contained in the instrument creating the tenancy or not), do not allow the tenant to take the operational action. (2) The tenant may take the operational action. (3) If the tenant takes the operational action, the tenant must give the landlord notice in writing of the action within the period of seven days beginning with the day on which the action was taken. Part 3 Rent review terms that are of no effect Application of this Part 5A (1) This Part of this Schedule applies to a tenancy at a particular time if, at that time— (a) it is a business tenancy with a rent review, and (b) the rent review terms— (i) do not specify new passing rent, and (ii) include elements 1 and 2. (2) But this Part applies to such a tenancy only if— (a) the tenancy is— (i) granted, or (ii) varied so that it includes rent review terms that do not specify new passing rent and include elements 1 and 2, after this Schedule comes into force, and (b) the grant or variation is not made under a contract entered into before this Schedule comes into force. Rent review terms that “do not specify new passing rent” 5B Rent review terms “do not specify new passing rent” if they are such that an amount of rent under review that will be payable at a time during the term of the tenancy (the “new passing rent”)— (a) is not known, and (b) cannot be determined, at the time when the tenancy is granted or varied so that it includes the terms. Elements 1 and 2 5C (1) This paragraph sets out elements 1 and 2.” This would provide for various definitions; for application of provisions to tenancies that are varied; and for the provision about the triggering and operation of rent reviews to apply to any business tenancy with a rent review (regardless of the particular terms of the rent review). Amendment 377, in schedule 31, page 323, line 38, leave out “relevant”. This is consequential on Amendment 376. Amendment 378, in schedule 31, page 324, line 3, leave out “relevant”. Amendment 379, in schedule 31, page 324, line 13, leave out “relevant”. This is consequential on Amendment 376. Amendment 380, in schedule 31, page 324, line 19, leave out “relevant”. This is consequential on Amendment 376. Amendment 381, in schedule 31, page 324, line 35, leave out from beginning to end of line 19 on page 325. This is consequential on Amendment 376, by which the new paragraphs 4 and 5 would replace the existing paragraphs 8 and 9. Amendment 382, in schedule 31, page 325, line 19, at end insert— “Part 4 Sub-tenancy required to include rent review terms that would be of no effect Application of this Part 7A (1) This Part of this Schedule applies to a tenancy (the “superior tenancy”) at a particular time if, at that time— (a) the superior tenancy is a business tenancy, (b) the superior tenancy requires or permits the grant of a sub-tenancy (the “authorised sub-tenancy”), (c) the authorised sub-tenancy would, at the time of its grant, be a business tenancy with a rent review, and (d) either— (i) the superior tenancy requires the authorised sub-tenancy to include rent review terms, and that requirement can only be complied with by the inclusion of rent review terms which (on one or more particular rent reviews) would produce, or would be capable of producing, the result that is prohibited by paragraph 6(3), or (ii) the superior tenancy permits the authorised sub-tenancy to include rent review terms, but rent review terms can only be within that permission if (on one or more particular rent reviews) they would produce, or would be capable of producing, the result that is prohibited by paragraph 6(3). (2) But this Part applies to the superior tenancy only— (a) if the superior tenancy was— (i) granted, or (ii) varied so that it includes rent review terms that do not specify new passing rent and include elements 1 and 2, before this Schedule comes into force, or (b) if the superior tenancy is— (i) granted, or (ii) varied so that it includes rent review terms that do not specify new passing rent and include elements 1 and 2, after this Schedule comes into force and the grant or variation is made under a contract entered into before then. Modification of terms of superior tenancy 7B (1) The superior tenancy has effect after this Schedule comes into force as if it requires, or as the case may be permits, the authorised sub-tenancy to include rent review terms of any kind which (on each particular rent review) would not produce, and would not be capable of producing, the result that is prohibited by paragraph 6(3). (2) The actual rent review terms that are to be included in a particular authorised sub-tenancy are to be— (a) agreed by the persons who are to be the landlord and tenant under that sub-tenancy, or (b) determined in such other manner as they may agree. (3) Accordingly, the landlord under the superior tenancy may not require the inclusion of particular rent review terms in the authorised sub-tenancy (unless that is what is agreed by the persons who are to be the landlord and tenant under the sub-tenancy). (4) This paragraph does not prevent a superior tenancy from being varied or modified by the parties to it (and accordingly sub-paragraphs (1) to (3) are subject to any such variation or modification). Interpretation 7C (1) The following provision applies for the purposes of this Part of this Schedule. (2) The superior tenancy permits the grant of a sub-tenancy, or the inclusion of particular rent review terms in a sub-tenancy, if granting the sub-tenancy, or including those terms, would not breach the terms of the superior tenancy. (3) References to the superior tenancy, and references to the terms of the superior tenancy, include references to— (a) the terms of any agreement relating to the superior tenancy, and (b) any document or communication from a party to the superior tenancy which gives or refuses consent for the grant of a category or description of sub-tenancy. (4) “Superior tenancy” has the meaning given in paragraph 7A(1). (5) “Sub-tenancy” means a tenancy that is inferior to the superior tenancy (whether or not it is immediately inferior to that tenancy). (6) The “result that is prohibited by paragraph 6(3)” means the result that the new passing rent is larger than the reference amount. Part 5 General provision” This would apply to pre-commencement tenancies that require any sub-tenancy to include terms that would be of no effect by virtue of paragraph 6(3) (as they could result in the new passing rent being larger than the reference amount). It would enable a sub-tenancy to be granted without including such terms. Amendment 383, in schedule 31, page 325, line 24, leave out “new passing”. This is consequential on Amendment 382. Amendment 384, in schedule 31, page 325, line 27, leave out “, in relation to a tenancy” and insert— ““business tenancy” has the meaning given in paragraph 1; “business tenancy with a rent review” has the meaning given in paragraph 2. (2) In this Schedule, in relation to a business tenancy with a rent review— “elements 1 and 2” means element 1 and element 2 set out in paragraph 5C;”. This is consequential on Amendment 376. Amendment 385, in schedule 31, page 325, line 33, leave out “4(2)(b)” and insert “5B”. This is consequential on Amendment 376. Amendment 386, in schedule 31, page 325, line 37, leave out from beginning to end of line 2 on page 326 and insert— ““rent review terms” has the meaning given in paragraph 2(2); “rent under review” has the meaning given in paragraph 2(2). (3) A reference in this Schedule to rent review terms that do not specify new passing rent has the meaning given in paragraph 5B.”— (Miatta Fahnbulleh.) This is consequential on Amendment 376.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The current devolution framework creates the basis by which effective execution of the powers that authorities have on adult skills will be driven forward. The legislative provisions exist; it is now in the doing. As a Department, we will both enable that working between strategic authorities and employers on the ground that I have talked about and, critically, make sure that we provide the tools that they need to strengthen their capability to do that well. It matters to us because effective skills, and developing the pipeline and the workforce to drive the economic change we want, are critical to delivering on housing and our warm homes plan. We are vested in ensuring that our strategic authorities have the tools that they require to do that and to do it incredibly well.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will write to my counterparts in the DFT. The commitment to create the group came in recognition of a problem. We are committed to working with local stakeholders and Members representing the area to respond to that, so I am happy to write to my DFT colleagues to chivvy that along.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady talks about regional assemblies in the context of Cornwall. Can she explain the purpose of the local authority and the elected council in the model that she is proposing?

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 387, in schedule 31, page 326, line 4, leave out “Put options:” and insert— “Arrangements for renewal of tenancies:”. This is consequential on Amendment 393.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We understand the intention behind this provision on allotments, and we are big fans of allotments and nature-rich spaces. However, I would point out that a duty to provide allotments already exists and sits with local authorities, which is the appropriate level. In addition, the provision of nature-rich spaces is already being tackled through multiple Government initiatives, whether that is the access to nature programme or the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, which places a duty on all public authorities operating in England to consider, from time to time, what action they can take to further the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity. We recognise the need for green spaces and allotments for communities. We think that there is already sufficient provision in legislation, so the new clause is unnecessary. Actually, putting the duty at the strategic authority level is not appropriate; it should be at the local authority level. For that reason, I ask the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion to withdraw the motion.

• 28 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Let me start by saying that we absolutely recognise the issue that the hon. Member for Hamble Valley and hon. Members representing the Isle of Wight have raised. That is why the Department for Transport has engaged with MPs and stakeholders on the Isle of Wight to identify their local solutions to the concerns that we understand and appreciate need to be addressed. That engagement has included a ministerial roundtable on this issue and a commitment to create a cross-Solent group. An independent chair has been appointed to take that group forward. We will continue to engage with partners locally to address the genuine issues that have been raised about the ferry service in the area. The power of a democratically elected mayor is that they can make this a core issue and use the levers that they have and the seat that they will have at the table with Government to keep making the case and delivering for their community.