Neil Coyle MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 16 Dec 2025 · No Recourse to Public Funds: Homelessness · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. She is right that it is not cost free to do this. London councils spend tens of millions of pounds supporting families through emergency accommodation. Does she agree with the Select Committee on Work and Pensions report in the last Parliament, which suggested exempting parents with dependent children from no recourse to public funds?

• 15 Dec 2025 · NHS: Winter Preparedness · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State and his whole team for all that they are doing to fix the NHS, including boosting the number of appointments by more than was in our manifesto last year. In Southwark, there is particular NHS pressure on GP access. Southwark council is helping to expand and improve provision, but how do the Government ensure that GP practices’ self-reported access times—four in five people can see a GP within two weeks—are accurate and heading in the right direction?

• 11 Nov 2025 · Draft Radio Equipment (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  indicated dissent.

• 5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source

  More

  My intervention is similar. Under Sadiq Khan’s period in City Hall, there have been 8,236 Greater London Authority-funded affordable starts in my borough of Southwark, including 636 completions in the last year. That somewhat contradicts the hon. Gentleman’s statements. Rather than trying to pin it on the mayor, could it be that the hon. Gentleman’s council is failing on this front? Perhaps we could be working together, rather than trying to pin it on one man.

• 23 Oct 2025 · Building Safety Regulator · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friends the Members for Milton Keynes North (Chris Curtis) and for Northampton South (Mike Reader) and the Backbench Business Committee on this debate. My hon. Friend talks about the frustration of a nine-month delay, but the BSR is supposed to work to a 12-week turnaround. Is he aware that 338 council homes at the Bermondsey biscuit factory have already been held up for 54 weeks? When approached, the BSR asked for another 12 weeks to complete the application decision.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  It is a point of order, so just let me put it on the record.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  It was a point of order.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Ms McVey. Members are all required to not mislead, or accidentally mislead the House, and there is an issue with some of the figures that have just been presented. Could you encourage the hon. Member to either give the dates for the figures he was using, which will show that they are out of date, or use the correct data, which show that knife crime has fallen in the capital, which is something we should welcome together?

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  When we are done, yes.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Ms McVey.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member on securing the debate. Having had to work with the families of victims of knife crime, I know that this is a hugely important and very sensitive issue. Given the picture he is portraying, does he welcome the fact that the violence reduction unit and other efforts in London, including a public health approach, have seen a reduction in this problem in the capital city, led by our Mayor but also by individual councils investing to support families and individuals to stay out of crime?

• 15 Oct 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  Wow, brilliant.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Member give way on that point about fraud?

• 9 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am concerned about some of the amendments before us today, in particular those that call for delays to legislation. We are one year into a five-year term—20% of this Parliament is gone—and the public need to see progress, not further delay. I am mindful that Ministers have already done a huge amount of heavy lifting to rebuild trust with disabled people and disability organisations since the election. We should all recall that in July 2024, the Department for Work and Pensions was under formal investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission for unlawful treatment of disabled people. This Government have made considerable progress since then in trying to rebuild trust, including through measures in this Bill and linked to it, such as abolishing the work capability assessment. I have been here for 10 years—some might say it feels like longer—but before entering this place, I campaigned, as the chair of the Disability Benefits Consortium, to abolish the work capability assessment. I know that disabled people and their organisations are grateful and thankful for the inclusion of that measure in the wider package that the Government are bringing forward. Although it seems to have been lost in some of the debates we have had on the subject, I am also mindful that in my own constituency, the number of claimants for PIP will rise in this Parliament, spending on that will continue to rise in this Parliament, and the 12,700 universal credit claimants in my constituency will get an additional payment under this Government’s plans, which will be the first ever above-inflation rise in universal credit. There is much to gain and much that is supported by disabled people and their organisations in the package that the Government have brought forward. I particularly welcome the Government’s commitment to support more disabled people into work. We need to challenge ourselves a little more in this place about some of the language of vulnerability. Being seen automatically as vulnerable because of a health condition or impairment is not in line with the social model of disability. Many disabled people find that patronising and offensive, and we need to update our system, just as we updated our system thanks to previous Labour Governments. We had the first ever blind Secretary of State in David Blunkett—now Lord Blunkett—at a time when the benefits system said that blind people were not required to participate in work-related activity. The benefits system is not a static beast: it is an evolving creature that needs to be updated to reflect changes in assistive technology, medication and adaptation and advances in technology. We must not end up with a system in which people are written off and parked in a system because it is too difficult to get them into work. That is not a Labour solution. We are the party of full employment, which must and should include disabled people if we are committed to disability equality and if we are the party of progress. I will chip in that this party takes no lectures on what is progressive from nationalists, whether it is Scottish nationalists or the populists in Reform. We see the costs to disabled people of parking under the former benefits system and legacy benefits: the longer that somebody is out of work, the more ill health that they experience, including mental health and depression, and the more costs that they incur for the NHS. There are state benefits and individual benefits for getting the right support. I speak from rather too much personal family experience. My mum has schizophrenia and my dad had a stroke in his 40s. He was told by the jobcentre, “This is what you will get. Now, basically, sod off—we do not want to see you, and we do not expect to provide you with anything.” He found his own way back into work through going to university as a mature student—well, not that mature—at Newcastle University, and he graduated in the same year as me. We should look at the wider picture of full employment. I particularly welcome the Government’s broader aim of reducing the disability employment gap, which was deeply neglected for 14 years, and transforming jobcentres from benefit administration centres. They had been failing not because of a lack of will or frontline staff, some of whom are absolutely excellent, but simply because the job they were given to do had changed from being about supporting people into work to simply administering a failing system that, as we discussed earlier, had the highest fraud levels ever seen in the UK social security system. I think most of us believe that disability equality is measured not in the amount of benefits that individuals receive, but in the shared opportunities and access to life chances open to all in our country. I am deeply mindful of that, because while we had a lost generation under the 14 years of the Conservative Government and the Lib Dem coalition Government, we had a previous Government who were deeply committed to those issues. That Government published a report, 20 years ago today, called “Improving the life chances of disabled people” with an implementation and delivery date that was meant to provide those opportunities and equal access by 2025. Sadly, those coalition and Conservative years set back the clock. The report is still available to all those who want to see it, and it talks about pathways to work and dedicated employment programmes being necessary, such as the new deal for disabled people. Those programmes were largely demolished by the coalition. It talks about the importance of the role of the NHS, GPs, occupational health and rehab. Again, a Labour Government are now fixing the wider NHS problems to make those aims and objectives deliverable today. The then Prime Minister’s strategy in the report committed to changing the system so that it tested functionality and ability to contribute, rather than writing people off. Again, this Government have had to come back to that after a lost decade. We had a report 20 years ago that talked about the necessity of a better equipment system and the need to improve access to work—something that Ministers are committed to today and are beginning to transform with faster assessment processes and by delivering the kit needed. The report also talks about the importance of engaging with employers and the positive role that Jobcentre Plus could play in engaging employers early in the process. Sadly, we have seen a long delay in delivering those improved life chances, but this is a Labour party back in government and trying to deliver disability equality and improve the life chances of disabled people. The measures in this Bill are integral to that aim. As I say, I am concerned about some of the amendments before us. I also have some concerns that the Bill needs to go further in tackling barriers to work for disabled people, such as the benefits structure, including for those in supported accommodation. It is great that we have the right to try, but more is necessary. We also need to go a bit further with employers, including around reasonable adjustments and ensuring that employers do not accept resignations based on ill health immediately, but look at the packages of support that might be necessary, as well as working with them to tackle discrimination. The Federation of Small Businesses in particular, which has done work on this issue previously, would be a really useful partner to have going forward.

• 9 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am really intrigued, Madam Deputy Speaker, because the right hon. Member suggested that he has a concern about tackling fraud and responsibility in public finances. Can he tell us where he was under the previous Government when fraud in the benefit system hit its highest level ever seen in the history of the UK’s social security system? Where are his references in Hansard ? Where was he on Bill Committees and in this House when that fraud was soaring? And where was he when this Government began passing legislation to tackle that horrific level of irresponsible fraud in the benefit system?

• 2 Jul 2025 · Investment: Technology Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  Tech businesses are huge in my central London constituency, and I recognise that for the UK to do well, we need London to continue thriving and for Northern Ireland and the rest of the country to succeed, too. Can the Minister assure me that the full benefits of the new industrial strategy will support companies in Northern Ireland and that this Government are generating business opportunities in every corner of the United Kingdom?

• 2 Jul 2025 · Investment: Technology Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  12. What recent discussions he has had with technology businesses on investing in Northern Ireland.

• 1 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Is the hon. Member saying that he regrets the Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition establishing PIP and abolishing disability living allowance? The Leader of the Opposition gave the example of someone with Parkinson’s. Someone with Parkinson’s who is over 65 could be on DLA, PIP and attendance allowance. Does he regret that decision? Should that situation not exist?

• 1 Jul 2025 · Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As one of the Labour Back Benchers who will be supporting the Government, I would just point out that there are not that many Back Benchers behind the Leader of the Opposition, and there are fewer every week. However, given that she has just said that she wants to cut the budget of the Department for Work and Pensions further, perhaps she could tell us what she would cut. What exactly would she do?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  Can the hon. Gentleman remind us whether the disability employment gap and the disability poverty gap rose or fell when his party was in government?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  On the suggestion that there is no evidence, does the evidence not come from when the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee looked at previous assessment changes?

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  On the hugely important issue of discrimination that my hon. Friend touched on, does he agree that it is completely unacceptable that the Government inherited a position where the Department for Work and Pensions was being investigated for unlawful discrimination against disabled people? That is another of the issues that the ministerial team and the Government are having to fix—issues that they inherited from the chaotic and incompetent Governments of the previous 14 years, five of which were in coalition with the Lib Dems.

• 17 Jun 2025 · Disabled People in Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman’s point about DLA is interesting, given that his Government and the Lib Dems abolished it. My question is this: has the £12 billion that the Conservatives said they would cut from the Department for Work and Pensions budget during the last election been identified or outlined? What would his party have done and where would those cuts have fallen?