Miatta Fahnbulleh MP: speeches

Speeches

• 28 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank hon. Members for their continued engagement and their insightful debate on these issues. In the remaining time, I will respond to some of the particular points that have been made. I want to put on record my thanks to Opposition Members for the constructive way in which they have approached the debate, so that we can progress the Bill. The hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds) and I will continue to disagree on whether this is a centralising Bill or a radical shift in power. I still fundamentally believe that the Bill marks a huge step in transferring power outside Whitehall, but, candidly, we will demonstrate that through our actions and through the impact of Bill. What drives us is the impact that this will have in our communities, and we have strong measures that will help us to ensure that we are putting communities in the driving seat so that they can shape their place. I hear the points made by the hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) on local government governance. The example of Sheffield is one that many of my hon. Friends have advocated for on behalf of their communities, which is why we made the original concession. We think that we have found the right balance. We are clear that if we are to empower local authorities in the way that we want to, they need strong governance in order to make decisions for their communities that will impact on those communities. The reason we are trying to support the shift in governance arrangements is to ensure that we have enduring local authorities that can fundamentally deliver. We think that we have achieved that in the concessions that we have made. Throughout the passage of the Bill, I have found it hugely heartening that there is a clear point of consensus across the House that if we are to deliver change in our communities, we must push power out into our communities, into the hands of local leaders, into our neighbourhoods and to people who know their patch best. I hope this Bill represents the start of a journey that will fundamentally change the way that Government works and how we, in this place, serve the communities that we are here to represent; where the principle of devolution by default, underpinned by a clear framework, is locked in; where local leaders are empowered to drive economic change and improvements in living standard across their patch; and where communities are put in the driving seat and given powers to shape the places in which they live and work. I have been clear throughout the passage of the Bill that this legislation represents the floor, not the summit, of our ambition for devolution. I look forward to working with my hon. Friends on the Government Benches and with hon. Members from across the House as we build on the provisions in the Bill. Finally, I would like to thank my brilliant team of officials who have worked on the Bill—Hannah, Caragh, Guy, Jenna-Marie, Alice, John, Rachel and Wendy—as well as my private office team—Molly, Simon and Lucy—who have all done an absolutely heroic job in taking a mammoth Bill through the House. With that, I commend the Government motions to the House. Question put and agreed to . Clause 59 Local authority governance and executives Resolved, That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments 36, 90 and 155, insists on its amendments 155A to 155F and 155H to the words so restored to the Bill by that disagreement with Amendment 155, and proposes amendment (a) to the words so restored to the Bill by that disagreement.— (Miatta Fahnbulleh.) Clause 92 Commencement Resolved , That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments 85 and 86, 97 to 116, 120, 121 and 123, insists on its amendments 123C to 123H and 123J to 123K in lieu, and proposes further amendments (a) to (e) in lieu.— (Miatta Fahnbulleh.)

• 28 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to speak once again on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. I thank Members from across the House for their constructive engagement in getting the Bill to this point. This Bill matters because, if we are to transform our economy, drive up living standards and deliver better public services in every community, a fundamental change is needed in the way that the country is run. This landmark Bill will deliver just that. It represents the biggest transfer of power out of Whitehall to our regions and communities in a generation. I am glad that we have found a way forward on several of the issues that we most recently discussed—namely, the role of strategic authorities and mayors in rural affairs, agents of change in the planning system, and the role of town and parish councils in neighbourhood governance. We have listened carefully to the concerns raised in both Houses on the remaining issues: the ministerial power of direction in schedule 1, the prioritisation of development on brownfield land, and the models of governance in local authorities. That is why the Government have today tabled three amendments, which I will now outline. On the question of the ministerial power of direction in the Bill, I remind the House that ensuring that every part of England can benefit from devolution remains a key objective of this Government. I repeat for the record that we on this side of the House believe strongly that the Government have a duty to drive economic growth, unlock investment and deliver better outcomes for our communities. To deny communities that opportunity would be to hold them back. That is why we originally put in place a backstop power of direction for the Secretary of State to use in exceptional circumstances—I emphasise “exceptional circumstances”—but to be clear, the approach that we are taking in practice is to work with local leaders to forge enduring local partnerships and strong local institutions with their consent. However, we have heard the concerns and strength of feeling from some noble peers about the scope of the powers previously included in schedule 1. To that end, and in the interests of not delaying the progress of the Bill and of showing that communities can benefit from the powers that we all wish to see enacted at the earliest opportunity, the Government are content to remove all powers in schedule 1 that would allow the Secretary of State to direct the establishment of a strategic authority, whether mayoral or non-mayoral, or to provide directly for a mayor of an existing non-mayoral strategic authority. In addition, I am happy to commit that the Government will not seek to use the remaining power to direct the addition of a local government area to an existing strategic authority for a period of four years following Royal Assent. It will then remain subject to all the same safeguards that have been discussed at length. As I have said consistently throughout the passage of the Bill, our policy and our practice are very clear. We are working with local leaders and we will continue to work with them to develop devolution proposals that command broad support across their area. That collaborative approach will always be our clear preference. The concessions I am making here today put that commitment beyond any doubt. I shall turn now to the issue of brownfield land. The Government consider Lords amendments 89B and 89C to be unworkable. They would undermine effective plan making, constrain proper consideration of local circumstances and introduce inconsistency between spatial development strategies prepared by mayors and strategic authorities and those prepared by other authorities. As I have previously said, national policy remains the most effective route through which planning reform can be pursued, and it is the right place to set clear expectations about where development should take place. Where concerns have been expressed about the effectiveness of existing policy, it remains too early to assess the full impact of the recent and proposed changes to national planning policy. However, in recognition of the strength of feeling expressed about inappropriately located development and to further reinforce a brownfield-first approach, the Government have tabled their own amendment. This would set a requirement in primary legislation for the Secretary of State to use existing regulation-making powers to ensure that strategic planning authorities have regard to the desirability of prioritising development on land that has been previously developed. This will put consideration of brownfield land on the same legal footing as other highly important issues that are also on the face of the legislation, such as promoting sustainable development and the impact on health and health inequalities. It will ensure that the prioritisation of brownfield land is front and centre when strategic planning authorities are producing a spatial development strategy and considering how to meet the growth needs of their area. The drafting of our amendment is consistent with national policy, making it clear that prioritising development on brownfield land is an overall objective and clearly desirable. Enshrining this requirement in legislation will elevate its importance and further solidify the Government’s clear commitment to a brownfield-first approach. I now turn to the matter of local authority governance. As hon. Members will know, the Government have set a clear default position. Councils that are currently operating the committee system and are not otherwise protected should be required to move to the leader and cabinet model within one year of the relevant Bill provisions coming into force. That remains the Government’s firm expectation. However, we have heard concerns expressed in the other place and in this House that requiring a council to move to the leader and cabinet model within a year could create challenges for some councils, their members and officers—for example, where an authority has submitted a proposal for a boundary change or merger in response to the Secretary of State’s new power to invite such proposals. The Government amendment we are bringing forward today responds to those concerns. It allows the Secretary of State to extend the one-year transition period for non-protected councils by a further year in certain circumstances. This provides flexibility where a council is already on a clear path to dissolution, so that it is not required to undertake a significant governance change that may have little practical benefit. This does not change the Government’s wider policy on local authority governance reform, but it does provide a proportionate and pragmatic safeguard in response to the points that have been raised over the pace of change. To conclude, the Bill has undoubtedly been improved as a result of the scrutiny in ping-pong so far, and I thank the noble Lords and this place for their contribution in helping us with that. We are pleased to be able to offer concessions on brownfield land, local authority governance and the ministerial power of direction. I urge the House to support the Government’s position and accept these concessions.

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I got far too excited about the music industry. Suffice it to say that the Government recognise its importance. That is why the debate about the agent of change is so important, and why we are committed to playing our part in supporting that aim. I turn to the Bill and the amendments. Let me pick up on the amendments relating to the removal of the Secretary of State’s directed powers. The Government have committed to not commencing powers to direct the establishment of non-mayoral strategic authorities for a period of two years following Royal Assent. That will provide sufficient time for areas that do not currently have devolution agreements to develop workable proposals based on sensible geographies. At the same time, we have also listened and responded to concerns expressed in the other place. We recognise that it will be important for non-rural authorities to have the opportunity to build capacity and effective partnership working before taking on the deepest powers and funding at mayoral level. For that reason, the Government are removing the power for the Secretary of State to provide directly for a mayor in an area without local consent. We believe that that strikes the right balance, but I encourage Members from across the House to judge us by our actions.

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank hon. Members for their continued engagement on the Bill and their insightful contributions to the debate. I am glad that our concessions have secured support. I thank both my hon. Friends on the Labour Benches and hon. Members across the House for their feedback and insights, which have led to these concessions— [ Interruption. ] Thank you. Since the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds) piped up, I will start with him. There is the consistent theme of the hon. Member accusing the Government of making this a centralising Bill and, in a way that is becoming tradition, I must push back on that. I remind him that this is the biggest transfer of powers out of Whitehall and Westminster to our local leaders at regional level and to our communities. I also remind him that his Government had over a decade to drive through wholesale, consistent devolution in the way that this Government are doing, and they did not take up that opportunity. We had a decade of slow, ad hoc, piecemeal transfer of power to our communities and our local leaders. We do not agree with that approach. In the Bill, we are doing two things. We are setting out a framework for clear economic devolution to our regions that makes devolution by default the norm and creates a mechanism by which that can happen without individual deals being negotiated. Critically, we are also building the power of our communities, whether through strengthening the community right to buy so that communities can take hold of assets of community value or through the creation of neighbourhood governance so that we have a tier of local governance that ensures that communities have the power and voice to drive the change they want to see in their place and shape their neighbourhoods and communities.

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am always very happy to commit my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing to any meeting that my hon. Friends would like. We are very keen to meet in advance of the NPPF biting. May I also say a word about support for the music industry? My hon. Friends have talked with great passion about the music industry in their constituencies, and have shown that they care about it. The Government are absolutely committed to supporting the UK music industry as part of our industrial strategy. We will soon publish a music plan, drawing together all that the Government are doing to support the music industry, which is a vital part of our communities, cultural heritage and local economies. That includes a £30 million music growth package over three years from 2026, to support domestic growth, talent development and music exports. We are also supporting the sector’s work to adopt—

• 27 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I was just coming to the hon. Member’s earlier contributions. We absolutely want to move at the pace at which our most ambitious and fastest-moving places want to move. We recognise the unique circumstances in Cornwall. I have spent a lot of time with hon. Friends from across Cornwall, who have been very passionate, effective and robust advocates for their place. I had the pleasure of visiting Cornwall and seeing some of the issues, as well as the huge amount of work and innovation. We have invested £28.6 million in the current industrial growth fund—creating 300 jobs and an additional 1,000 jobs in the supply chain—because we understand and recognise the economic potential of the area. We are committed to working with the council and with Cornwall MPs to take that further. We have set out the framework for a devolution deal, we have set out the progress that we are making to recognise minority status, and we are committed to moving further in the days and weeks to come. The Government’s approach to local authority governance arrangements has been pragmatic. We are ultimately trying to reach solutions that we believe will bite and work in places. I remind Members across the House that 80% of local authorities are already deploying the cabinet and leader model, and it is an effective model that allows strong decision making for communities. In areas that already have a democratic mandate for an alternative—whether committee or mayor—we have created the space for those structures to continue. But we are very clear that we are having to fix the mess of the last Government, which did absolutely nothing for local government and allowed a decade in which local government was denuded—I come back to that. Our job now is to ensure that we build strong local authority institutions, because we are localists: we believe in devolution, but we need strong institutions to do that. That means both having structures that work for the communities they represent and in which, critically, decisions can be made to improve the lot of their place. We believe that the cabinet and leader model works. We think that we have found the right balance. I implore Members across the House, particularly given that 80% of local authorities are already deploying the model that we are talking about, that we are keen to make progress and allow our local authorities to move forward. In conclusion—[Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] No one is more pleased about that than me. In conclusion, I thank Members for their contributions and the constructive way in which they have engaged with the Bill. I hope that they see that we are a Government who are absolutely committed to pushing power into our places and our communities. It is beholden on all of us to make sure that this Bill does get Royal Assent, because this is the first step towards fundamentally changing the settlement between this place—between Government—and our communities, who do not feel that they have power and agency, and who do not feel that change is being driven in the way that they want. We have to rebalance that. This is the first step, and I implore Members across the House to support the Government’s position. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House does not insist on its disagreement to Lords Amendment 2 but proposes Amendment (a) to the Lords Amendment. After Clause 37 Brownfield land priority Motion made, and Question put, That this House disagrees with the Lords in their Amendments 89B and 89C .—(Miatta Fahnbulleh.)

• 21 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Whether it is in the planning system or in other systems, in instances where we have a contentious situation and disagreement because a local authority has not discharged its responsibilities in disposing of statutory trusts, at the moment we are in limbo. The amendment creates a mechanism by which that can be resolved. We are very clear that strict criteria and safeguards are put in place. Ultimately, the Secretary of State will opine and come to a decision based on what is in the public interest. The ability of the community to make representations is very clear and very firmly built into the way we are designing the policy. Madam Deputy Speaker, I will try to make progress. I move on to amendments made by peers in the other place. We welcome the scrutiny and challenge provided, and are willing to make sensible concessions in some areas, but most of the amendments in question serve to undermine the core principles of the Bill. For that reason, we cannot accept them. Let me be clear about precisely why, starting with Lords amendment 2. Lords amendment 2 seeks to include rural affairs as a stand-alone area of competence for strategic authorities. Peers in the other place highlighted the distinct challenges facing our rural communities, from public transport through to employment opportunities and affordable housing. The Government recognise those challenges and agree with many of the points made in the other place. However, we cannot accept the amendment because we consider it unnecessary. The areas of competence have been deliberately framed in broad terms, allowing a wide range of activities to fall within scope, including matters relating to rural affairs. From transport through to local infrastructure and housing, the existing areas of competence already allow for strategic authorities to address rural needs where relevant. Crucially, this is now being borne out; York and North Yorkshire combined authority, for instance, is already piloting affordable rural housing. There is no disagreement on policy; the Government recognise the role that strategic authorities can play in supporting our rural communities. Given that, I am happy to commit to bringing forward non-statutory guidance to support strategic authorities in delivering for rural communities using the powers and functions that they have been given. Lords amendment 4 seeks to ensure that appointments of commissioners by mayors are made through a fair and open selection process. On this, we agree. That is why the Government have published statutory guidance that sets out the selection, appointment and remuneration process. We hope that doing so satisfies the points raised in the other House. Lords amendments 13 and 87 seek to reduce the threshold needed for the London Assembly to amend the Mayor of London’s final draft budget from a two-thirds majority to a simple majority, which was the point the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune) was making. It is the Government’s intention to simplify and ensure consistency in voting arrangements across all our strategic authorities, including the Greater London Authority. For most decisions, the default will become a simple majority, but that does not apply for mayoral budgets, which will continue to require a two-thirds majority to amend. Given that mayors and combined authorities may have their budgets amended only by a two-thirds majority, the Government believe that these amendments would bring scrutiny of London’s mayoral budget out of line with other strategic authorities. We therefore do not support the amendments and urge the House to reject them.

• 21 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The question of unitarisation is being dealt with. Applications have been made and the Government are going through the process and looking at the objective criteria. No doubt the hon. Member has had many conversations with the Minister for Housing and Planning on these matters. I will, however, try to focus the hon. Member’s mind and attention on the key premise of this Bill, which is community empowerment and devolution, and on the Lords amendments we are discussing. Before speaking to the Lords amendments, I thank my noble Friend Baroness Taylor for so ably guiding the Bill through the other place. I put on record my appreciation to all peers who contributed to its scrutiny. I will begin with the Government amendments that were made in the other place. Following the insightful contribution of peers, Lords amendment 1 adds culture as a distinct area of competence within clause 2 of the Bill. By doing so, the Government are sending a clear signal on the role that strategic authorities can and should continue to play in supporting cultural initiatives, as well as recognising the important role that culture in its many forms plays in enriching quality of life and supporting local economic growth. We are also improving the operational flexibility of the commissioner model introduced by the Bill. Lords amendments 3 and 5 increase the potential number of commissioners to 10, and Lords amendments 125, 127, 129, 131, 133 and 135 allow more than one commissioner to operate in a single area of competence. The next group of important changes that the Government made in the other place concerns local accountability and scrutiny. The Government committed to exploring a local Public Accounts Committee model in the English devolution White Paper. We recognised that greater powers of local scrutiny are needed to reflect the increased scale of responsibility that will be devolved to mayoral strategic authorities through the Bill. To that end, Lords amendments 7, 137 and 138 introduce local scrutiny committees, which replace overview and scrutiny committees in mayoral combined and combined county authorities. Local scrutiny committees will provide an enhanced scrutiny regime with stronger oversight, a broader remit to reflect the scale of mayoral responsibilities and greater teeth to hold mayors to account. On Report, the Government introduced amendments to the Licensing Act 2003 and created a new strategic licensing role for the Mayor of London. That included an amendment to create a new duty on the Mayor of London to determine and publish a new strategic licensing policy.

• 21 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will have to make progress in case I incur the wrath of Madam Deputy Speaker. Finally, Lords amendments 85, 86, 97 to 116, 120 and 121 and 123 collectively seek to remove the Secretary of State’s power to direct the establishment or expansion of a combined authority or combined county authority or to provide for a mayor in certain circumstances. The Government have been clear that devolution has the potential to drive growth. We have also been clear that we will always seek to make sure that partnerships are locally driven. I hope that the new combined authorities we established in recent weeks and our invitation to all areas to form foundational strategic authorities serve as evidence that we are taking a local-first and locally driven approach.

• 21 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  With the leave of the House, I will close what has been a considered and insightful debate. Many hard-working communities in this country have been neglected for far too long. They have seen good jobs disappear, their high streets decline, and the dream of a decent, affordable home fade. This Bill will do the job of empowering forgotten communities and restore local pride by making devolution the default setting. It will give our strategic authority mayors new powers over transport, planning, housing and regeneration, and help rebuild local government so that it can once again deliver strong local services that we all rely on. I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for their important contributions, and I will respond to some of them in the time left. Again and again, the right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly) has accused the Government of this being a centralising Bill. Candidly, that is just not true. The Conservatives, who had an ad hoc and all-over-the-place approach to devolution over the last decade and a half, had the opportunity to fundamentally reset the relationship between national Government and local government, and they chose not to do so. We are acting where they did not act. We are doing the biggest transfer of power that we have seen in a generation—

• 21 Apr 2026 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will come back to that point, because it relates to an amendment that I would like to speak to, but I want to fully address the point that has been made about call-in powers with regard to licensing. My hon. Friends the Members for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman), for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake), for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier), for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi), and for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) have provided clear, insightful feedback and constructive engagement, and they have done a fantastic job of representing the concerns of their constituents. Let me reassure them on all the key points that they have raised. It is important to put on the record that the amendment will be embedded in the Licensing Act 2003. The licensing objectives that seek to protect and safeguard local communities will apply, and the mayor will be required to have regard to them when exercising the powers conferred through the amendment. The Government are incredibly clear that there must be the right balance between encouraging the growth of hospitality and the night-time economy, which we want to do, and protecting the needs of local communities and their places. The safeguarding and reassurance that are required are locked into the way that we have designed this policy. As I have said, local licensing authorities will continue to be the default decision makers, so the mayor must have regard to the evidence that they provide to determine the decisions that they make. Finally and crucially, where cumulative impact zones have been designated by boroughs, this will remain the case, and the mayor must have regard to the cumulative impact assessment. We hope that we have designed this policy in a way that provides a balance between growth, residential amenities and safeguarding the protection of local communities. As we design the detail of potential strategic importance, we are committed to working with Members from across the House, as well as our licensing authorities, to ensure that we get this right. On pavement parking, which affects communities across the country and disproportionately harms people with mobility or sight impairment, as well as those with prams or pushchairs, who rely on safe, accessible pavements to move around independently, this Government are committed to creating safer, more inclusive streets. Lords amendments 41 and 158 will enable the Secretary of State to make regulations under which English local transport authorities are able to prohibit the parking of motor vehicles on pavements in their area. The regulations will include details on how local transport authorities will exercise the power to prohibit pavement parking, on which vehicles would be excluded and on permissive exemptions.

• 20 Apr 2026 · Community-owned Assets: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  We are committed to working with all councils, which we know are under huge pressure, to ensure that they are sustainable and that they can do the fundamental work that we need them to do to support and empower their communities. Colleagues in my Department are working with individual councils that we know are facing a very difficult time financially, particularly in the context of local government reorganisation. There is a bigger piece for us, though, which is that we absolutely believe it is right to empower communities to take on assets. This is a principle that we believe in; we believe in co-operative ownership and community ownership. We are conferring rights through the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill in order to drive that forward. We must continue building on it to ensure that we are giving communities the wherewithal, the resources and the know-how to be able to exercise those rights. We are committed to doing this to ensure that communities can take on and maintain assets, because it is fundamental to our view of how we drive change in place. Ultimately, this Government are clear that we were elected to do things differently, because business as usual is not working for too many of our communities. That means moving away from short-term competitive bidding and towards longer-term, locally-led change. It means trusting our communities, backing their ideas and giving them the tools to succeed. I once again thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East for raising the important issue of community ownership and community power so eloquently. She is right to shine a light on this subject. We will continue to work through Pride in Place and community right to buy and by providing targeted support for urgent local needs to ensure that our ambition for communities is matched in practice and in reality. My right hon. Friend spoke about encouraging collaboration between arts and culture organisations and higher education providers, and this work has begun; we are working closely with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Education to ensure that we are aligned. I will continue that collaboration, as she suggests. I would absolutely love to accept her invitation to visit the Ultimate Picture Palace—I think it will probably be the highlight of my year. I look forward to working with her and with Members across the House who have a shared commitment and ambition for what we can achieve by empowering our communities to drive the change that they are so desperate to see. The Government are committed to this aim, and we will work diligently and effectively with all Members across the House to make it a reality. Question put and agreed to.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Water Supply and Housing Targets: West Kent · Hansard source

  More

  On that specific point, our methodology is trying to strike a balance, where we think there is both need for homes and the capacity to build those homes. I absolutely acknowledge that the water sector and some of our other infrastructure providers are not where they need to be. All the reforms we are trying to drive through in planning reform and the water sector, and the robust action that we are taking to work across the piece, are in response to that very problem. For example, in the context of the investment required to build our water assets, the Government are ensuring that £104 billion of private sector investment is going into the water sector over five years to enable that building of assets. I want to reassure the right hon. Member for Tonbridge and hon. Members that the Government will introduce the water reform Bill when parliamentary time allows, working in partnership with water companies, investors and communities to make sure that we have a system that is fit for purpose. An important part of that reform, which pertains to this very debate, is the establishment of regional water planning function, which will enable a more holistic, co-ordinated approach to water, environment and supply planning and support the delivery of national strategic objectives such as economic growth, meeting house building targets and nature recovery, while enabling regional and local priorities to be realised. That more joined-up approach will deliver a more resilient and future-proof water system—that is our hope and our intention—better able to absorb shocks, which will hopefully prevent situations such as those we have seen in west Kent from ever happening again. I think there is consensus that such situations are appalling and that we absolutely must mitigate them in the future. To answer the direct questions put by the right hon. Member for Tonbridge about the water companies and their role in the planning system, we are just going through the responses to a consultation on statutory consultees. The Government intend to list water companies and sewage companies as consultation bodies for new plan-making, so that they are involved right up front in the system. However, we are also looking at their relationship with regard to planning applications in particular, for the reasons that he set out. Critically, the right hon. Gentleman also asked me to sit down and discuss this issue with my team and other Ministers. My hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook) is the Minister for Housing and Planning, but I will take that suggestion away and get that meeting in the diary as a priority, because we appreciate and understand the specific issues. I come back to the fact that we know there is a systemic problem; we are working hard to deal with it, but we recognise the urgency of the situation, because the plan-making process is happening. To conclude, I again commend the right hon. Member for Tonbridge for securing this important debate and shining a spotlight on the particular issues and concerns in his constituency. I return to the fact that the status quo is appalling; the water shortages that we have are absolutely unacceptable, and the Government are committed to working with him and with his local council to make sure that we are resolving this situation. We all agree that we need more homes. We also all agree that the water sector has to be reformed, so that we can deliver the infrastructure we need to service those homes. This Government are committed, as we have been from day one, to driving through whole-system reform to ensure that the interaction between planning, house building and the wider infrastructure sector is right and fit for purpose, in order to deliver what we need. I look forward to continuing our engagement and to making sure that we resolve the specific issue with the plan and the capacity within the plan. My Department is ready and willing to work very closely with the council to do that, and we will take the plan forward. I again thank the right hon. Member for securing this debate and you, Sir John, for chairing it. Question put and agreed to.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Water Supply and Housing Targets: West Kent · Hansard source

  More

  I will make more progress. The lack of water infrastructure is blocking our capacity to deliver more homes and is resulting in water outages such as those in west Kent. That is a clear signal that we need wholesale reform and that the system is not doing what needs to be done. We believe that we can secure water supplies for the future only by managing water demand, reducing leakages and creating new water assets. We have to do all three of those things, and we are working with the water industry and the regulator to do that.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Water Supply and Housing Targets: West Kent · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady makes an important point. It is a challenge, but our job is to work across Government and the different agencies, and with the water companies, to rise to the challenge. I gently point out that over the past decade and a half, the Conservative party could have introduced reforms to bring our water sector up to scratch and deliver what our communities need for the housing they also need. That was not done, so we are working on it at record speed. Our commitment is to work holistically across the piece to resolve the challenge, but we absolutely recognise that it is a challenge. Hon. Members have questioned the validity of our housing targets. It is absolutely right that the Government are taking bold action to overhaul the planning system and carry out the reforms necessary to deliver the homes and infrastructure that every single community needs. There is consensus across the House that the status quo in terms of housing development is not adequate for the needs in our communities, so we have to step up. We believe that our revised standard method strikes the right balance between meeting the scale of need across the country and focusing additional growth on the places facing the biggest affordability pressures. While those targets are ambitious, we have always been clear that they are necessary, given our inheritance. The key is to ensure we work consistently across the different parts of the system to deliver that objective and ambition.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Draft Sussex and Brighton Combined County Authority Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Sussex and Brighton Combined County Authority Regulations 2026. The draft regulations were laid before the House on 11 February 2026. Before I proceed, I draw the Committee’s attention to the correction slip, which corrects the name of the appropriate administering authority for pension purposes from East Sussex to West Sussex. This change was requested by and agreed with the constituent councils. From here on in, when referring to Sussex and Brighton combined county authority, I will use the term “strategic authority”. Let me state very clearly that we believe that devolution is a critical lever for delivering growth and prosperity, with mayors and local leaders being best placed to take the decisions that benefit local communities. The Government were elected on a manifesto commitment to widen and deepen devolution across England, and the English devolution White Paper sets out our plans to achieve that. Much of that White Paper is now being taken through Parliament via the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. The White Paper also launched the devolution priority programme, to provide a fast track to establish a new wave of mayoral strategic authorities, including Sussex and Brighton. This statutory instrument, which will establish their strategic authority and provide for the mayoral elections, represents substantial progress towards fulfilling our commitment to move power out of Whitehall and back to those who know their patch best. The Government have worked closely on the draft regulations with the constituent councils in Sussex and Brighton: West Sussex county council, East Sussex county council, and Brighton and Hove city council. All the constituent councils have consented to the making of the regulations, and I thank personally the local leaders and their councils for their support in getting us to this point. The regulations will be made, if Parliament approves them, under the enabling provision in the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023. The strategic authority will be established on the day after the regulations are made. The inaugural mayoral election is due to take place on 4 May 2028, and the elected mayor will take office on 8 May 2028, with a four-year term. The draft regulations make provision for the governance arrangements for the strategic authority. Each constituent council will appoint two of its elected members to be members of the strategic authority, with the mayor also a member once in office. The strategic authority can also appoint non-constituent and associate members to support its work. Each voting member is to have one vote, and the vast majority of decisions are to be determined by a simple majority of the members presenting and voting. Once the mayor takes office, that majority must include the mayor, or the deputy mayor acting on the mayor’s behalf. The regulations provide some functions in relation to transport and economic development, but there is a strong link to the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. Subject to Royal Assent, which I hope we will get, the Sussex and Brighton strategic authority will be classed as a mayoral strategic authority, and the functions reserved for that tier will automatically be conferred. Even before the mayor is in office, the strategic authority will be able to exercise mayoral strategic authority functions, with the exception of those specifically reserved for the mayor. As this is an important change to the governance landscape of the area, we ensured that there was robust and effective consultation with stakeholders across the area. The consultation was promoted using social media, a communications campaign, a dedicated website, online and in-person events, and the distribution of the consultation material. Responses could be made online, by email and by post. We received a wide range of responses from key stakeholders: the public, businesses, councils, universities, and third sector and other bodies. A summary of the responses has been published on the gov.uk website. We are clear and confident that the statutory tests to establish the strategic authority have all been met. Subject to the regulations being made, the strategic authority will receive devolved funding, including funding for transport and adult skills, capacity funding, and a 30-year mayoral investment fund to support key local priorities. The draft regulations represent clear progress on our mission to widen and deepen devolution in England and will make that a reality in Sussex and Brighton. They will empower local leaders to deliver for their communities, improving residents’ lives and opportunities. I look forward to answering any questions that Members may have, and I hope that the Committee will join me in supporting these critical regulations.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Productivity and Economic Growth: East Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing the debate, and I thank Members who have spoken for their insight, passion for their area, and fantastic contributions. Let me start with my hon. Friend’s insightful analysis of both the challenges and opportunities in the area. I look forward to reading the APPG report, and to drawing insights on how we can continue to work with the area to advance its economic potential. We all agree that economic growth is paramount, and it is one of the Government’s top priorities. Economic growth is central to raising living standards, which we absolutely must do, funding improvements in public services after a decade and a half of under-investment by the Conservatives, and rebuilding the country. That is why the Government are determined to not only drive growth from the centre but empower local leaders with the tools they need to drive growth in their area—local leaders such as Mayor Claire Ward, a fantastic Labour mayor whom I have had the privilege of working with, and who has been an important champion for the region before and since her election. Productivity, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) pointed out so eloquently, is one of the key drivers of growth. While we can debate the causes, we all recognise that productivity has been weaker in the years following the 2008 financial crisis. Improved productivity will require relentless work and a focus at every level of government—from national Government, through to our regional government and our local authorities—in partnership with the business community and industry. That work is essential to everything that my Department and others are doing to make progress—and we are making progress. Analysis by the Resolution Foundation last month showed that UK productivity grew more in the last year than in the previous seven combined. But we acknowledge that there is more that we need to do. My hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe was right to point out that productivity varies across the country. Indeed, the gap between our cities, where we would expect some of the highest productivity, and the UK average stands in contrast to the performance of many comparable cities across the OECD. Cities such as Lyon, Frankfurt, Turin and Bilbao have productivity higher than the UK average, while many of our own cities have productivity lower than our UK average. As my hon. Friends the Members for Rushcliffe and for Loughborough (Dr Sandher) pointed out, devolution is key to unpacking, unlocking and dealing with the challenge. We know the impact that devolution can have on growth and in improvements for local people. The parts of the country with the longest and deepest devolution of powers and funding are the ones where growth is taking off. That is why we are giving more areas, including the East Midlands combined authority, the tools and funding that they need to address the challenges in their areas and to realise the opportunities for growth. Devolution is fundamental to achieving the change that the public expect and, frankly, deserve: growth, more joined-up delivery of public services, and politics being done with communities, not to them. I am conscious, however, that the debate is not just about the East Midlands combined authority; it is about the whole of the east midlands. Local leaders have an important role to play in growing the economy. We want more collaboration, not less, and we are supporting places to access devolution so that they can work together to drive outcomes locally. We have therefore issued a call for areas without devolution, including parts of the east midlands not within the combined authority, to come together with their neighbours to form strategic authorities so that they can benefit from devolution. Local leaders will have greater control over economic development levers, transport and skills, as well as having revenue-raising powers, to ensure that they invest in the economic prosperity of their area. In the meantime, we encourage local leaders to work together and to set a vision for their area. Many local authorities already have an economic strategy, and we encourage them to set out a vision for growth in their area and to work across administrative boundaries for the benefit of their region. Industrial strategy zones are a perfect example—industry, innovators and government coming together, and local leaders equipped with a powerful set of tools to drive growth in each of the sectors. My hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe rightly pointed out under-investment in these areas, and Members across the House reiterated that point. I would say that that is, in fact, a double whammy, because we have had under-investment across the piece under previous Governments for 15 years, in every key part of the economy and in the infrastructure that we need to unlock economic development. In addition, investment was skewed to some areas, to the disadvantage of others, and we are absolutely determined to turn that around and put that right. That is why we as a Labour Government are putting in record investment across all key sectors of the economy. On the key point of transport, where Members have pointed out a range of transport investment schemes and key pinch points to economic growth, the Department for Transport has unlocked a record £2 billion of support for transport in the east midlands. That is an important first step to deal with some of the critical transport connectivity issues, combined with investment in the green economy—which we see across the east midlands —in advanced manufacturing and in defence, with £180 million of local growth funding next year alone, to ensure that we put the money in to unlock the potential that we can see and that my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe so eloquently pointed out. My hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker) made the point that when we put investment in, it does not always touch our communities or lift the lives of people in those communities. We need to be intentional about it, which is why what my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) and other Members said about skills is absolutely critical. We have to combine the investment with intentional work to ensure that we develop a workforce strategy for the area and the skills, and ensure that we have the employment support to get people into jobs. That is the approach that we will take with the combined authority and that we intend to take with Team Derby. Our absolute commitment is to do our bit to work alongside leaders to unlock potential. My hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth) talked about the critical role of the visitor economy, which we absolutely recognise. One of the key requests of our mayors was for a visitor levy so that they can raise revenue that can then be invested in the enabling infrastructure and the support we need to boost the visitor economy. We are now consulting on that, and we will legislate on it. My hon. Friend the Member for Erewash (Adam Thompson) talked about how this cannot be just a short-term blip; we need a long-term commitment and long-term plans. In the mayor, Claire Ward, we see a long-term plan for the area, but that long-term commitment from local leaders must be matched by a long-term commitment from this Government. That is why we are moving to multi-year funding that is looking at the long-term horizon in our places, and standing with our local leaders to invest and unlock that potential over the next decade. As my hon. Friends the Members for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) and for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) made clear, however, the plan cannot just be for our urban centres, as critical as they are as engines of growth in the region. It must also speak to our rural areas to make sure that we unlock opportunities, not just in our towns and cities, but across the agricultural sector and our rural economy. We must also ensure that we deal with those pockets of deprivation. Pride in Place is targeted at that very question: how, alongside the big work that we are doing regionally or in a local area, do we get investment into some of our deprived communities so that they can invest in the things that will lift up their area and restore pride in place? That goes hand in hand with the work that we know needs to be done regionally. Finally, the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling) made the important point about SMEs, which make up 99% of businesses in the economy. Under the last Government, however, we saw a huge neglect of the SME economy. Our job is to make sure that we support the backbone of our economy, which is why we have an SME strategy that looks at everything from late payments to procurement and how we provide the support to ensure that SMEs continue to be the key engine for growth. I will end by referring to the comments of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for North West Norfolk (James Wild), who spent a long time bemoaning the Government’s growth record. I would gently point out, as has been acknowledged by Members across the House, that the legacy that we are trying to turn around is a function of the fact that we had a decade and a half of Governments who did not have an economic strategy, who chose to under-invest in key services, and who deliberately took money away from regions across the country, such as the east midlands, to make sure that they did not meet their economic potential. We are turning that around; that is the job and we are getting on with it. The underlying fundamentals are there. We have been in power for 18 months; it will take time to repair the damage that was done over a decade and a half, but we are getting on with that job. Today, the Chancellor will set out our economic plan and the sectors that we will be boosting. Part of that will be a critical step around how we devolve to areas, such as the east midlands and across the country, to ensure that they work alongside us in partnership to unlock their potential. To sum up, it is clear that we all agree on the need to boost productivity and support economic growth across the east midlands. I hope Members can see the Government’s commitment, passion and determination to work alongside leaders in the east midlands to ensure that we do that. Devolution is a critical part of that, and my job is to ensure that, whether through mayoral strategic authorities or foundation strategic authorities, we equip our local leaders with the skills, tools and capabilities they need to do their job. But that is just one part of the answer: from day one, the Government have been clear that while local leadership in all its forms and at all levels is vital, it sits alongside the work that we are determined to do at the national level to boost the economic potential of the east midlands and every region across the country. I again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe for being such an amazing champion for the area. I look forward to working with him and Members across the House to make sure that we do right by the region.

• 4 Mar 2026 · St Piran’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) on securing this debate and on his tireless work on behalf of Cornwall and its residents. I will also take this opportunity to recognise the significant role that Cornwall plays economically and culturally for both the south-west and the United Kingdom. St Piran’s day is an important moment to celebrate the historic county of Cornwall. Historic counties are an important element of local traditions that support the identity and cultures of many of our local communities, giving people a sense of belonging, pride and community spirit. In recent years, St Piran’s day has grown into a modern celebration of Cornwall’s culture, language and history; a day that reflects not only pride in Cornwall’s past, but confidence in its future. As an example, we can look at Cornwall’s strong industrial legacy in mining—a history often traced back to St Piran himself, who is said to have discovered tin. That legacy now speaks to Cornwall’s future as the county evolves to embrace new opportunities in clean and renewable energy, carrying forward a tradition of innovation in a modern, sustainable form. I agree with my hon. Friend that, culturally, Cornwall remains unique across England, with its national minority and protected language status, and I celebrate the rich heritage that Cornwall brings to this country. However, the beauty of Cornwall’s countryside and coastline can often mask the reality of living and working in the county. This Government are committed to working together with local leaders to overcome those issues, driving growth and unlocking investment. My Department is taking steps to boost local growth through devolution and investment, which will see us working closely with local leaders to support growth and make the most of the opportunities in each and every part of the area. Recognising Cornwall’s successful delivery of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund through the good growth programme, the recently announced £30 million Kernow fund is an exciting opportunity to support growth. This was created especially for Cornwall, in recognition of its comparative sectoral advantages in key areas of the UK’s industrial strategy. Decisions on the fund will be devolved to Cornwall council, in line with the Government’s devolution agenda, empowering local leaders to invest in projects that best meet local needs. I would like to take this opportunity to thank our Cornish MPs and my hon. Friends for their tireless work in ensuring and securing this important investment and in championing the huge comparative advantage of the area. Devolution remains a critical tool for this Government to unlock growth. There is a strong opportunity for Cornwall to build on its existing devolution agreement. Officials in my Department are currently working with Cornwall council to discuss next steps and to maintain momentum on this exciting next phase of empowering our local leaders. Housing, as my hon. Friend pointed out, remains one of the most pressing challenges in Cornwall. Managing the impact of second homes while increasing the supply of affordable housing is fundamental to ensuring that young people who have grown up in Cornwall can afford to build their lives there. To help support housing in Cornwall, this Government have confirmed a new 10-year, £39 billion social and affordable house building programme at scale across the country. Through Homes England, my Department is working closely with Cornwall council and welcomes the publication of the Cornwall housing growth prospectus launched last year. Homes England is committed to working with the council to unlock the opportunities and constraints for the county and to work collaboratively to ensure that we are unlocking the housing development that we all want to see. Alongside this, the Government are committed to delivering better infrastructure and services, so that everyone has access to a suitable mode of transport, enabling them to live healthy and fulfilling lives. That is why we have provided significant transport support to Cornwall, as well as £221 million in local highways maintenance funding to repair and renew its roads and fix potholes over the next four years. I am also pleased to re-emphasise our Government’s commitment to building a society where all communities feel acknowledged. It was with great pleasure that, in December 2025, the Government granted the Cornish language further recognition under part III of the Council of Europe’s European charter for regional or minority languages. Granting part III recognition acknowledges the efforts of many who have been part of the revival of the Cornish language, and who are giving communities the opportunity to speak, listen to and appreciate it. Most importantly, celebrating and protecting our regional and minority languages allows us to connect with our history and provide a foundation for diversity to flourish. I understand that there are particular challenges that coastal communities face and recognise that recent storms across this winter have brought disruption to residents across Cornwall. Officials from my Department and across all Departments will continue to support partners across the Devon, Cornwall and Isles of Scilly local resilience forum on impact and recovery, co-ordinating cross-Government engagement to help residents and businesses that we know are still impacted. In conclusion, I again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth for securing the debate. It is consistent with the passionate, committed and persistent way in which he and my hon. Friends who represent Cornwall are such amazing advocates for their place. I look forward to continuing to work closely with our Cornwall MPs as we deliver this Government’s agenda, secure the devolution deal and work together to ensure that we unlock the huge economic and local potential of this amazing part of the country. Question put and agreed to .

• 3 Mar 2026 · Community Cohesion · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger) for securing this debate and for his powerful and eloquent contribution, and all the hon. Members who have spoken for their contributions and insight. There is clear passion and commitment across the House to tackle this issue, which I agree is cross-party. Throughout our history, the United Kingdom’s ability to withstand external challenges has been underpinned by a shared sense of pride, tolerance and courage. We are accepting of our neighbours, proud of our varied experiences, traditions, national identities and customs, and confident that those differences enrich our communities and our country. Those core foundations that have kept us united in the face of adversity on so many occasions are now under threat. One of the privileges of my role is that I have been able to talk to communities across the country. Time and again, I have heard clearly about the rising tide of hate and division seen in communities. I talk to our Jewish, Muslim, Sikh and Hindu communities, and hear that people, who have made this country their own and have been here for generations, feel scared in this country, in their communities and in their homes. We have got to turn the tide on that. People are under pressure, and in that context—it is a tale as old as time—bad faith actors will try to exploit our communities in order to tear them apart. My hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Leigh Ingham) is absolutely right; at the heart of this is a story about economic neglect and of the failure of the Conservatives to properly fund our amazing councils and invest in our communities. We see the impacts of that in terms of closed shops on our high streets, shut up libraries, closed youth clubs and the abandonment of so many of our vital community assets that bring people together. That sense of decline on too many of our doorsteps has bred a real, justified sense of frustration, anger and a lack of control. I agree with the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that it is not just a question of local growth; it is a question about cohesion. We cannot and we will not pretend that the legacies of any of those issues can be reversed overnight, but as both a Labour Government and as a Parliament, we can be confident that the way in which we restore cohesion and pride in our communities does not lie in this building or the corridors of Whitehall. The answer is in the communities and people that we represent. We all know that the bonds that hold society together are anchored locally, so often it is the voluntary community and charity groups and the grassroot bodies at the heart of our communities—we all have them in our constituencies—that bring people together every day. To build stronger communities, we must bring people together to make positive, meaningful change in their own neighbourhoods. That ethos is at the heart of our groundbreaking Pride in Place programme, which, importantly, will mean local people will decide how money is invested. They will work together to unite their communities and bring everyone around the table to find common ground and invest in their priorities. That point has been made time and again by hon. Members, who have provided amazing examples of how that is happening. As a Government, we see our role as supporting and enabling that, whether it is through places that have received Pride in Place funding or, more broadly, the approach that we want to increasingly see where we create the ability for communities to get a grip on the funding the Government are already spending. That will enable them to shape it, drive it and, fundamentally, invest in their priorities. To achieve all that, we are working closely with pioneering councils and communities. A great example is in Rugby, where the local authority and other partners are stepping forward as one of the first to deliver the work that we want to see on our high streets through, for example, high street renewal auctions. That will unlock vital spaces on our high streets for local businesses and community groups so that everyone can be part of building thriving high streets. That is renewal in action, led by people who know their patch better than we ever will in this place. They are backed by the Government who are choosing unity over division. Let me pick up the point on flags that was made by my hon. Friends the Members for Rugby, for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) and for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Danny Beales). I absolutely agree that we must reclaim our flags and national symbols, and push back on those who want to use them to divide and intimidate our communities. We know this is a difficult area for councils to navigate, and that is why we are providing guidance, best practice and training to support them in navigating this terrain and to ensure they can hold our national symbols so that they represent all our communities, and to push back on those who want to use them in a divisive way. We are absolutely clear that we need to work on social cohesion. We are working across Government to develop a response, led by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, and we will say more very shortly. To update hon. Members, this includes three key strands. First, building confident communities that bring people together so that we can build common ground. Pride in Place is one example, but this is about creating spaces and places where people can cohere around issues they care about in their area. There is a critical role for voluntary, community and faith organisations in doing this hard work. Many have been doing so during difficult periods under the Conservative Government, but without support from Government.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Northern Ireland: Local Growth Fund · Hansard source

  More

  With funding from the UK shared prosperity fund ending, we are committed to continuing local growth funding in Northern Ireland to boost productivity and growth. We are working closely with the Northern Ireland Executive and the Northern Ireland Office to design and deliver an investment plan that will support infrastructure, business growth, and skills and employment.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Northern Ireland: Local Growth Fund · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for meeting me with people from parts of the voluntary sector. As he said, local growth funding will direct capital funding into the enabling infrastructure that is required for boosting the Northern Ireland economy. That sits alongside a £19.3 billion spending review settlement and £370 million in Budget funding to the Executive, which has the flexibility to support programmes delivered by the voluntary and community sector. But as we have heard, the voluntary and community sector is under huge pressure, and we are committed to working with the Northern Ireland Office and the Executive to find ways to support the sector through the transition.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  We have committed to local growth funding to boost growth in Scotland. We have also delivered record investment to the Scottish Government, who have in their gift the ability to invest in communities and in programmes that will drive the prosperity of local areas. The hon. Gentleman should not be looking to national Government; we have done our part—now it is over to the Scottish National party.

• 23 Feb 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The tourism levy has been campaigned for by mayors and local areas. We are consulting on the levy at the moment, but we are clear that there will be a balance between the ability of areas to generate that tax and ensuring that local businesses and small and medium-sized enterprises are thriving in the area, which is the remit and the priority of both mayors and the Government.

• 28 Jan 2026 · Draft Cheshire and Warrington Combined Authority Order 2026 Draft Cumbria Combined Authority Order 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Minister for his points and for the cross-party support in getting these important statutory instruments through. I will take his questions in turn. We have made a clear commitment to the 30-year investment fund, and it is worth saying that this is a commitment that the previous Government made with our established mayoralties. There has been a change of Government, and we have upheld that commitment. I intend, and imagine, that our Treasury and future Governments would do that. The key for us is that there is a clear pipeline that areas are putting in place and that there is Government support for that pipeline. In the way we have approached that with our established authorities for nearly a decade now, I hope and intend that that is how we as a Government and our Treasury would approach it, and how any future Government would approach it, too. The shadow Minister asked an important question about data sharing, which a huge amount of work is going on to enable and support. There are obviously some technical barriers, as well as some safeguards that we need to put in place. Clear protocols govern the way in which different public institutions share data; that is one of the reasons why it can be quite slow and painful, but we will adhere to those protocols. My experience is that when it works well, it is because partners recognise that there is a common use and that there are opportunities and benefits for their particular area of service or investment, and because they are willing to work together. That is the way mayors have done it in other areas and the way I imagine it will continue to be done, supported by Departments where there is a common agenda and a common landing zone. On the critical question of the level of the precept, central Government grants will always be part of that. I draw the hon. Member’s attention to what we are already doing with established mayoral authorities. There is investment from the Department for Transport into things like Northern Rail and particular transport schemes, alongside co-investment from mayors, which may come from the precept or from work they are doing with the private sector to invest in their place. I imagine that the set of mayors that these instruments will create will take a similar approach, but ultimately it will always be a partnership between central Government and our mayoralties and regional strategic authorities. There is no intention on our side to undercut our strategic authorities or not to work together to ultimately drive the infrastructure that we both care about because it unlocks growth and improves living standards. Finally, on the important question that the hon. Member raised about Warrington, we are acutely aware of the challenges that it faces. The Minister for Local Government and Homelessness is working with all the places where a debt burden needs to be managed. The Department is working actively to support them to do so. There is no intention that the specific challenges faced by Warrington will be ported on to the combined authority—not least because a lot of the funding pressures apply to local services, and this is about economic development functions. We have made a clear commitment to work with constituent authorities where there is a challenge around their public finances and debt to resolve it. Having responded to those questions, I thank the Committee for its support. These instruments deliver on an important commitment that we made to Cheshire and Warrington and to Cumbria on devolution. It is the next stage of our journey, as we progress more places towards becoming mayoral strategic authorities. I thank the Committee and look forward to working with the areas to take the instruments forward. Question put and agreed to. DRAFT CUMBRIA COMBINED AUTHORITY ORDER 2026 Resolved , That the Committee has considered the draft Cumbria Combined Authority Order 2026.— (Miatta Fahnbulleh . )

• 28 Jan 2026 · Draft Cheshire and Warrington Combined Authority Order 2026 Draft Cumbria Combined Authority Order 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  The draft orders were laid on 18 December 2025. For both the Cheshire and Warrington combined authority and the Cumbria combined authority, I will hereafter use the term “strategic authority”, unless there is a reason to be specific. Devolution is critical for delivering growth and prosperity for local communities, as mayors and local leaders are best placed to take decisions that benefit their communities. This Government were elected on a manifesto commitment to widen and deepen devolution across England, and the English devolution White Paper, which was published in December 2024, sets out our plans to achieve that. Much of the White Paper is now being taken through Parliament via the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. The White Paper also launched the devolution priority programme to provide a fast track to establish a new wave of mayoral strategic authorities. Following an expression-of-interest process in February 2025, we announced six places on the programme, including Cheshire and Warrington and Cumbria. These statutory instruments will establish those two mayoral strategic authorities and provide for their mayoral elections. In doing so, they will represent substantial progress towards fulfilling our commitment to move power out of Whitehall and Westminster and back to those who know their patch best. The Government have worked closely with the constituent councils in Cheshire and Warrington and Cumbria on the instruments, and all constituent councils consented to the making of their respective instruments. I personally thank local leaders and their councils for their support in getting us to this critical point. If Parliament approves them, the instruments will be made under the enabling provision in the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. Both strategic authorities will be established on the day after the day on which the instruments are made. The inaugural mayoral elections are due to take place for both on 6 May 2027, and their elected mayors will take office on 10 May 2027 for a four-year term. The instruments make provision for the governance arrangements of the strategic authorities. In each case, each constituent council appoints two of its elected members to be members of the strategic authority, with the mayor also a member once in office. The strategic authority can also appoint non-constituent and associate members to support its work. The instruments provide some functions in relation to transport and economic development, but there is a strong interrelationship with the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. Subject to Royal Assent to the Bill, these strategic authorities will be classed as mayoral strategic authorities, and the functions reserved for their tier will automatically be conferred on them. That is why the instruments confer fewer functions than previous instruments establishing strategic authorities. The provisions in the Bill will give these strategic authorities functions on transport, strategic planning and housing, adult skills and employment support, economic regeneration, and the environment and climate change, ensuring that they can deliver for their residents even before a mayor is in place. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government consulted on the proposals to establish these strategic authorities between February and April last year. The purpose of the consultation was to gather evidence and information on the effects of establishing the strategic authorities and to ensure that we had local consent. We considered the responses, and on 17 July we confirmed to Parliament that the statutory test for establishing strategic authorities both in Cumbria and in Cheshire and Warrington had been met. Subject to these instruments being made, both strategic authorities will receive devolved funding, including for transport and adult skills. They will also receive capacity funding to support setting up the new institutions. Furthermore, they will receive a 30-year mayoral investment fund to kick-start local economic growth and support key local priorities. These instruments represent clear progress in our mission to widen and deepen devolution in England, and will make that a reality in both Cumbria and Cheshire and Warrington. They will empower local leaders to deliver for their communities, improving the lives and opportunities of their residents. I hope that the Committee will join me in supporting these instruments.