Paula Barker MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 1 Dec 2025 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is entirely up to you.

• 3 Nov 2025 · Public Office (Accountability) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. and learned Member give way?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Public Office (Accountability) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to support the Bill. I start by thanking the Prime Minister for delivering on our manifesto promise to bring the Hillsborough law before the House. As a Liverpool MP and someone who had family and friends at Hillsborough —they fortunately all came home—I would not have accepted anything that was not accepted by the families, and I know that my neighbouring colleagues feel the same. I am grateful, as I know the families will be, to the Prime Minister for confirming that he will accept no watering down of the Bill during its parliamentary passage. I sincerely hope that those in the other place have heard that pledge loud and clear. I pay tribute to my constituent Mark Corrigan, who is in the Public Gallery, along with many family members of the 97. Mark’s brother Keith McGrath was one of the 97 who was unlawfully killed at Hillsborough. His parents, Mary and Joe Corrigan, fought all the way to the end for truth and justice, and demonstrated the strength, dignity and resilience of all the families. Our city, on the banks of the Mersey, knows about solidarity, love and empathy. We have one another’s backs, and we know all too well that an injustice to one is an injustice to all. I can say proudly that the bonds that were forged in the fire of 15 April 1989 are as a strong today as ever. As I have said previously in this place, Scousers have long memories. We shall never forget. We will continue to mourn our lost loved ones, and we will always fight for truth and justice, opposing those who continue to spread the appalling lies about that fateful day with every fibre of our being. On that point, Margaret Aspinall, who lost her son James at Hillsborough, has said: “Today Hillsborough Law is finally debated in Parliament. But justice won’t be done until the S*n, too is made to answer for its abuses. The Prime Minister promised us that he would see this through. It is time for him to deliver the justice he promised, to build on today’s vital achievement by making Leveson 2 a reality, and ensure the media is held to account for its role in state failures and cover-ups.” Appallingly, The Sun played a key role in the cover-up of the Hillsborough disaster by working with South Yorkshire police to spread lies about what happened and hide the truth. The Bill before us does not contain any references to Leveson 2 or the role of the press and is exclusively focused on public officials and authorities. As welcome as that is, I would be grateful if the Prime Minister could update the House as soon as possible—I note that he is no longer in his place. Will he consider establishing a public inquiry into the relationship between the police and The Sun ? Will he keep his promises by meeting with victims of press abuses and working with them to introduce further legislation to tackle press standards and corruption? If any small flicker of light can come from the darkness of Hillsborough, it must be protection for succeeding generations from the pain and anguish of the lies, the misinformation and the cover-ups that we witnessed and suffered from for more than three decades. I welcome the fact that this law will ensure that families bereaved by public disasters are treated far better and do not have to fight for decades, and I welcome the duty of candour, although I can hardly believe that we must legislate for people to tell the truth. The fact that it has taken more than three decades to get to this point is a grotesque abdication of responsibility by those in this place to those whom we represent, those who do not pull the levers of power, and those with little resource other than their collective determined voice. When we say “Never again” to Hillsborough, we are also saying “Never again” to Grenfell, the Manchester Arena attack, the Horizon scandal, nuclear test veterans, the infected blood scandal and so many more. If the law does not place itself on the side of ordinary, good and decent people, it will consign itself to being a hobby tool for the privileged and powerful in safeguarding their own interests. We should never hear just the voices of those in this place; we should listen to the people who do not walk these corridors of power. Let us give power to them and amplify their voices. Anything less is an injustice. We need to pass this Bill in full for the families, the victims, and the survivors. Justice for the 97!

• 21 Oct 2025 · Ending Homelessness · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. As co-chair of the APPG for ending homelessness and the co-sponsor of this debate, I thank all colleagues who have attended; our new Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Alison McGovern); Crisis, the secretariat for the APPG; and our fantastic steering group, comprised of organisations that support people who are homeless. This debate comes at a vital moment. In 2023-24, some 1,611 people died while homeless—up 16% on the previous year. Eleven of them were children. Four were babies aged under one. Long-term rough sleeping is up 13% compared with last year, and long-term rough sleepers now outnumber those who are new to the streets. We have already waited long enough to see a strategy that addresses the moral injustice of homelessness, and I hope the Minister can share an update on progress. The Prime Minister was absolutely correct to say in Liverpool that we must renew Britain. However, true renewal is possible only with deep roots and strong foundations. We often talk about the importance of a home as a foundation for a good life. Today, I would like to set out how ensuring that the cross-departmental strategy for homelessness delivers secure, affordable homes for everyone can be the foundation of a good society and a better Britain—a country where parents know they will be able to feed their kids after they have paid their rent, where workers can focus on their job and not where they are going to sleep that night, and where people are welcomed into secure communities, not left on the streets. The latest report of the APPG for ending homelessness, “Homes, Support, Prevention—Our Foundations For Ending Homelessness”, sets a clear blueprint to build that foundation, and I urge the Minister to consider it. The report includes the ambition of halving the use of temporary accommodation and ending rough sleeping by 2030. I am incredibly proud that in their time in office the last Labour Government managed to drastically reduce rough sleeping and the use of temporary accommodation. As an heir to that Government, will the Minister commit to that target and to emulating the progress made on this issue by her Labour predecessors? This is no utopian target. Our report sets out how to get there by delivering social homes, improving support systems and prioritising prevention to address the root causes of homelessness. On that first point, I welcome the new Secretary of State’s enthusiasm for building and his recognition that we need homes to end homelessness, but England has seen a net loss of 180,000 secure, truly affordable social homes over the last decade, and we must be mindful that our current plans will not match the 90,000 social homes a year that the National Housing Federation and Crisis have calculated we need. It is therefore doubly important that the homes built are accessible to people experiencing homelessness. For example, domestic abuse survivors often have to leave at short notice, with little to no help. Although the changes to the local connection rule for survivors are welcome, it remains the leading cause of homelessness among women. Too often, survivors cannot access a secure home. When compiling evidence for our APPG report, we heard a heartbreaking story from a survivor of domestic abuse who had been stuck in temporary accommodation so filthy that she could not let her children play on the floor. Will the Minister set out how she intends to work with the Housing Minister on the long-term housing plan and with the Safeguarding Minister on the violence against women and girls strategy, to ensure that those plans complement her own strategy and that every survivor who takes the decision to leave has a secure home to go to? Will she also consider a full roll-out of the “whole housing” approach? On improving support, the evidence we collected from frontline services and homeless charities was clear: they need to secure funding to deliver effective support for people with multiple needs who need more than a home to end their homelessness. People and local authorities are trapped in a cycle in which the scale of urgent need is overwhelming services, leading to worse outcomes despite higher spending. The National Audit Office gave evidence that the current system was “unsustainable” and over-focused on crisis management, not prevention. We need to break the cycle with both an emergency response to spiralling rates of homelessness and an ambitious, resourced plan to transform homelessness support within a decade. Will the Minister commit to matching the calls for homelessness funding to be consolidated, flexible to needs and based on multi-annual contracts? Finally, on prevention, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) spoke about the importance of breaking down silos in public services, but it is also important that broader departmental spending decisions do not cause homelessness. For example, when compiling our report, the APPG heard evidence from charities and local authorities that the decision by the Department for Work and Pensions to freeze local housing allowance is making homes unaffordable as rents continue to rise. I can see that playing out in my Liverpool Wavertree constituency: according to analysis by Crisis and data from Zoopla, just three in every 100 properties advertised for rent last year were affordable for people who rely on local housing allowance. When people inevitably miss out, they have nowhere to go but the local authority. It is therefore entirely unsurprising that council spending on TA is spiralling, with a 25% rise across England in the last year alone, and as the Minister has rightly identified, record numbers of children are now homeless and housed in temporary accommodation. Does the Minister agree that although the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has every right to be prudent, we cannot simply ignore the economic reality of how much it costs to rent a home and ask local authorities and society to pick up the pieces? Will the Minister also consider rolling out Housing First? The pilots in Greater Manchester, the Liverpool city region and the west midlands achieved 84% tenancy sustainment—84% of people sustained long-term tenancies after three years—and measurable cost savings. Analysis from the Centre for Social Justice finds that for every £1 invested in Housing First, the public purse saves £2 through reduced A&E, policing and justice costs. Social homes, secure support and a truly preventive system that helps people to avoid homelessness are the kind of common-sense steps that will build the foundation of a Britain that we can all be proud of at the next election.

• 20 Oct 2025 · Maccabi Tel Aviv FC: Away Fans Ban · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to preface my comments by saying that everybody in this place was horrified by the attack on the synagogue in Heaton Park, and that my comments today are purely based on safety. A year before the Hillsborough disaster, safety concerns at Sheffield Wednesday’s stadium were raised by an official, but the ex-council safety officer was told by bosses in 1988 to keep his nose out of such concerns. Nobody in this place needs to be reminded of what happened as a result of ignoring that safety advice: 97 innocent men, women and children lost their lives. We have safety advisory groups for a reason, and it is a slippery slope when safety concerns are ignored. I believe it is unprecedented for a Government to try to overturn such advice, and I respectfully disagree with the Secretary of State that bans do not go on, because we have had a lot of cases, both nationally and internationally, with the most recent one being Napoli versus Eintracht Frankfurt. Can the Secretary of State be explicitly clear: has she seen the safety advice? If so, does she disagree with the safety advice? If she does disagree, can she tell the House on what grounds she disagrees? It is imperative that this House is clear, because if the Government are successful in having the decision overturned, particularly after the scenes we witnessed last night at the Israeli derby, people are going to ask questions.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Pride in Place · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome this Labour Government’s £22 million investment in Fairfield in my constituency, which was ignored by the Conservatives. Does the Minister agree that it is crucial for this programme to provide not just new money, but new powers for local people to decide how it is spent? Will she confirm, for the avoidance of doubt, that the money should not be used to deliver core council services?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Duty of Candour for Public Authorities and Legal Representation for Bereaved Families · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. Let me begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne) for securing and leading this important debate. His personal testimony of that fateful day in April ’89 is a moving one. He has used his voice in this place to continue the fight for truth, justice and accountability. Most importantly, I pay tribute to the family and friends of the 97, to the survivors of that terrible day and to my city, which has always stood together and continues to do so today. Their tenacity, resilience and dignity are a lesson to us all. I would like to take a moment to quote Jenni Hicks, who lost her two daughters at Hillsborough. “I’ll never get that accountability for my daughters but we’re still fighting on behalf of Grenfell, Manchester Arena and other disasters that are bound to happen in future. What runs alongside the loss of my daughters is the knowledge that this is a country that’s prepared to accept this injustice and that’s why the system has to be changed. You can't just say that’s it, that’s how it is. If something’s wrong, you have to try and do something about it.” Let’s forget the legal speak. Can anyone name a better summary of the guiding light and principled mission of this campaign for change? The truth is that none of us should be here in Westminster Hall today. Our Prime Minister promised this legislation at the Labour party conference in Liverpool last year, and in our manifesto. So, yes, I am angry that it is not yet on the statute book. Whether specific Ministers are to blame, or senior civil servants, or Government lawyers, I really do not care. This needs to be sorted, and sorted quickly. In the last week or so, we have seen several media reports that state we are near an agreement on the legislation, but I must place on record that the delay is one thing, but the watering down is another. It is quite frankly unacceptable, and should shame my party. It should not take a backlash to focus minds to do the right thing. As MPs and Ministers, that should always be our guiding principle. We must deliver this legislation in full, no ifs and no buts. Anything else would be an affront and a betrayal to my city. The purpose of the state, indeed of our whole system of Government, is the service of people. The welfare of the people should be the highest law. I finish by asking the Minister to get this on the statute book as quickly as possible, and by saying: justice for the 97.

• 3 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  May I place on the record my sadness at the loss of Diogo Jota and his brother Andre? I know it will be felt across my city of Liverpool. My thoughts and prayers are with his wife and three young children. The six-week statutory maximum for the use of bed-and-breakfast accommodation is being ignored. Under the direction of the late Lord Prescott and the previous Labour Government, this rule was enforced, and while I welcome our Government’s commitment to building social homes, we need short to medium-term interventions to address the crisis now. We cannot wait for the social homes to be built. Will the Leader of the House enable a debate to take place in Government time on the 165,000 children languishing in temporary accommodation?

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

  More

  Let me start by saying how shocked I am that the Minister has intervened, near the end of the debate, to say that he will be removing the whole of clause 5 from the Bill. While I am grateful for the concessions, this has further laid bare the incoherent and shambolic nature of the process. It is the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen. As the House has just heard, we will vote tonight on the Bill as it stands on the Order Paper, and not as amended. I am really sorry to say this, but when it is not written down, it is not worth the paper it is written on. We were promised a Hillsborough law by April this year, and nothing has come to fruition.

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

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for her excellent intervention, and I absolutely concur with her views. We must be crystal clear on what we are voting for tonight: we are voting for the Bill as it stands, unamended. The late changes, combined with the compressed parliamentary timetable, mean that MPs will have just a single day to debate and consider amendments, and the fact that this is a money Bill means that it will not be subject to amendments from the House of Lords. Our movement, at its best, is the rising tide that lifts all boats—not some, but all. I cannot in good faith look my constituents in Liverpool Wavertree in the eye and tell them that this Bill would improve their lot, because quite frankly it will not.

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

  More

  No, I will not. It is with sadness that I will vote for the reasoned amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell), and I will vote against the Bill. I implore my Government to do the right thing: to pause, take a breath, and let us get this right. Before entering Parliament I had served local government, the trade union movement and working people throughout my life. Service matters deeply to me, and I see it as my job to do exactly that as a Member of Parliament. I am a passionate believer in the dignity of labour and of secure, well-paid work being the route out of poverty and to opportunity and a life free from fear, but this Bill, I regret to say, will create poverty, and has already induced fear. I think everyone in this House believes that we need to reform our welfare system, but we must be honest: the Bill before us today is not reform. It is simply cuts, which have been brought forward to fill an economic black hole. In the Liverpool city region, nearly 30% of residents are disabled—more than 10% above the national average. Liverpool has one of the highest disability rates in the country, and our region already experiences some of the highest poverty rates in the UK. Even with concessions, this Bill still entails cuts, not reform. It will see 150,000 people pushed further into poverty, and create a stark disparity in our welfare state for disabled people. Despite a commitment to co-production, there is nothing that commits the Government to ensure that the PIP assessment review’s findings have any bearing on this legislation. Over the last few weeks, we have heard a lot about the lack of time to scrutinise legislation when debating another Bill in this place, yet here we are with a Bill that has concessions that are not actually on the face of the Bill because there has been no time. There will only be eight days between Second and Third Reading, which is truly a lack of time to scrutinise proposed legislation.

• 20 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am proud to support my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) as a co-sponsor of this Bill. Through her leadership, compassion and dignity, she has been a beacon of hope for so many. I thank the many hundreds of constituents who have written to me or had face-to-face appointments with me to discuss this complex and emotive issue. There are strongly held beliefs on both sides of the debate both inside and outside the House. I absolutely respect those with views different from mine, and hope that they will respect my views. After all, it is possible for all of us in this place to disagree well. People on both sides of the debate have accepted that we can and must do better for dying people and their loved ones—that has been clear throughout this debate. Too many of us have witnessed the devastation caused when we are denied choice at the end of life. Until the law changes, dying people in Britain will continue to suffer unbearably in their final weeks and days, with many trying to scrape together the funds for an assisted death abroad or taking their own lives behind closed doors. I urge right hon. and hon. Members to keep such experiences in the front of their minds when they go through the Lobby later. At the heart of it, this Bill is about choice: those who wish to exercise their choice can do so, and those who do not wish to do so simply do not have to. The Bill introduces practical measures to assess eligibility, guard against coercion, and ensure rigorous medical oversight and robust monitoring of the process. Dying people have none of those protections under the current law. The status quo is failing people each and every day. I pay tribute to colleagues from across the House who served on the Public Bill Committee, regardless of what side of the debate they were on. They strengthened the Bill by accepting key amendments, including the establishment of a judge-led multidisciplinary panel to oversee every application, with oversight from psychiatrists, social workers and lawyers; the requirement that assisted dying can only be discussed with patients in the context of all their end-of-life care and treatment options; mandatory training for doctors and panel members on detecting coercion; and the creation of a disability programme board. The Bill requires that patients be informed about all care options to ensure that everyone has access to the best possible pain relief, emotional support and hospice care. This will ensure that choosing an assisted death is never a result of ignorance or lack of care I am pleased that the Bill has brought about a long-overdue discussion about palliative care. If we are honest, very few people in this place and outside were shouting about it from the rooftops beforehand. I sincerely hope that after the passage of this Bill, we will continue to discuss how we can improve palliative care, because it should not be an either/or. By having robust palliative care and the option of assisted dying, we will truly have options that will meet individual needs and the values of each patient. Finally, the momentum for law change is spreading across the British Isles and beyond. Last month, MSPs voted by a clear majority to pass Liam McArthur’s assisted dying Bill. The Isle of Man’s Bill is awaiting Royal Assent, and will potentially be available for terminally ill residents from 2027. The direction of travel is to give dying people true choice at the end of life. We cannot leave dying people in England and Wales behind.

• 20 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend give way?

• 13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for coming to the House to make the statement and for the strong action that the Government are taking to make it clear that we hold no truck with extremists who care nothing for peace, but we must go further. He will know the strength of feeling on the Labour Benches on this issue, particularly on recognition of a Palestinian state. I reimpress that on him and hope that he will be here in a fortnight’s time as the Minister who recognised Palestine. Will he advise the House on what discussions he is having about the appalling interception of the British-flagged yacht Madleen, yet again preventing much-needed aid from reaching the Palestinian people?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement, but we have been here countless times before. Last week, Israel approved 22 further settlements in the west bank. Israeli Defence Minister Katz claimed it was “a strategic move that prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state”. What more evidence do we need to call this exactly what it is: a deliberate policy of annexation and genocide? Will the Government now take the long overdue steps that we have all been calling for for years—namely, the recognition of Palestine, sanctions on extremist Israeli Government Ministers, suspension of all arms sales and suspension of all trade? If we want to see a Palestinian state, we must do something now to prevent its erasure. The history books will not be kind to this Government unless we use every form of leverage at our disposal, and our grandchildren will ask why we effectively stood by while a people were eradicated by bombs, bullets, starvation and, no doubt, the further ethnic cleansing that is still to come. This should shame us all.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 14 May 2025 · Gaza: UK Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  Given the genocide we are witnessing unfold before our eyes every single day, will the Government drop the 2030 road map for UK-Israel bilateral relations and impose economic and diplomatic sanctions to apply pressure on Israel to abide by its obligations under international law?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Dozens of families across Merseyside, including my constituents Gemma and Paul Lucas, have been left financially and emotionally devastated by the actions of a home improvement company, Celsius Home Improvements Ltd, and its director Frank Deary. Customers had to pay 60% of costs up front to Mr Deary, but have been left with homes that are uninhabitable and, in some cases, dangerous. The Liverpool Echo has reported that it has seen documents showing that Mr Deary’s companies were providing quotes post 2022 with Celsius branding, but were trading as Clearmetric Ltd. A winding-up order was made against Clearmetric Ltd in the Manchester district registry on 7 January this year, more than three years after Celsius Home Improvements was dissolved in February 2022. What can the Government do to prevent individuals like Mr Deary and his associate Liam McGrath from liquidating one company, which owes more than £1 million to customers, and going on to scam others by setting up other companies, one of which I am led to believe is called Merseyside Construction Ltd? Most importantly, what can be done to get justice and a full refund for my constituents Gemma and Paul?

• 2 Apr 2025 · Gaza: Israeli Military Operations · Hansard source

  More

  More than 300 Palestinian children have been killed since Israel’s new offensive began. What worries me about the Government is that they do not seem to have any red lines that Israel must not cross. We need robust action, not words. The two-state solution, which is on its knees, is not a by-product of peace; it is the route to peace. If the time for recognition is not now, then when is it? What will the Government’s response be when Israel permanently occupies part of Gaza, as its Defence Minister seems to be insinuating it will?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Domestic Violence Court Cases: Backlog · Hansard source

  More

  8. What steps her Department plans to take to reduce the backlog of domestic violence cases.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Domestic Violence Court Cases: Backlog · Hansard source

  More

  The backlog in the court system harms efforts to instil confidence in women persisting with domestic violence charges against their abusers. Violence against women and girls is a national scandal, and femicide is ongoing, with countless women losing their lives to male violence. Sadly, my region of Merseyside is now the second highest region in the country for femicide. Does the Department agree that any moves to fast-track cases via the criminal or civil courts to remove abusers from our streets must involve appropriately severe sentences, irrespective of the prison places crisis?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T8. A significant proportion of those who experience homelessness are ex-offenders. I have previously raised concerns that the drive to alleviate the prison places crisis must not add to the homelessness emergency. The Deputy Prime Minister is in the process of establishing an inter-ministerial group on tackling homelessness. Will my right hon. Friend’s Department play a full and active role in that inter-ministerial group, and ensure that Ministers and officials from the Ministry of Justice are adequately represented?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Southport Attack · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement. It makes me deeply angry to listen to the litany of errors by different agencies across the public sector, not just in failing to realise the level of threat that Rudakubana posed in each instance of encountering him, but in failing to join the dots and realise the common pattern they were all seeing—not least because in 2020, my constituents Jan and Gary Furlong lost their wonderful son, James, in the Forbury Gardens attack. As in the Southport attack, there were systematic failings in the system. The perpetrator had four Prevent referrals and was known to mental health services, and nobody joined the dots. Will the Security Minister ensure that whatever else the inquiry into these tragic and preventable deaths examines, it looks closely at how the agencies talk to each other and assess threats together? Agencies and Departments can no longer be allowed to work in silos. Given the Minister’s statement that the Government will take steps to publish the findings of other independent Prevent learning reviews where there has been an incident of national significance, may I ask whether that will be extended to the Forbury Gardens attack?