Peter Prinsley MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Jun 2026 · Health Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 13, in clause 4, page 3, line 22, leave out lines 22 to 29 and insert— “1C Health improvement and health inequalities duty (1) In exercising any functions relating to the health service, Secretary of State must have regard to the need to— (a) improve the health of persons in England, (b) reduce inequalities between the people of England with respect to their ability to access health services, and (c) reduce inequalities between the people of England with respect to the outcomes achieved for them by the provision of health services. (2) Health inequalities ‘between the people of England’ means health inequalities between persons, or persons of different descriptions, living in, or in different parts of England. (3) ‘Health inequalities’ means inequalities in respect of life expectancy or general state of health which are wholly or partly a result of differences in respect of general health determinants. (4) Under subsection (3) ‘general health determinants’ are— (a) standards of housing, transport services or public safety; (b) environmental factors, including air quality and access to green space and bodies of water; (c) employment prospects, earning capacity, and any other matters that affect economic security; (d) access to public services; (e) the use, or level of use, of tobacco, alcohol or other substances, and any other matters of personal behaviour or lifestyle, that are or may be harmful to health; (f) any other matters that are determinants of life expectancy or the state of health of persons generally, other than genetic or biological factors.” This amendment would amend clause 1C of the National Health Service Act 2006 to introduce a duty on the Secretary of State to have regard to health improvement and health inequalities.

• 23 Jun 2026 · Health Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 33, in clause 7, page 4, line 31, at end insert— “(2) Training under subsection (1)(a) includes training in general health determinants as defined by section 107ZB of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.” This amendment would place a duty on the Secretary of State to ensure that the health and care workforce is adequately trained in the wider determinants of health such as housing standards, exposure to air pollution, occupational risk, and use of harmful substances like tobacco.

• 17 Jun 2026 · Steel Tariffs · Hansard source

  More

  Although I do not sound quite like the distinguished Minister, I did in fact grow up in Teesside in sight of the mighty Redcar works, which closed in 2015 with the loss of 2,000 jobs. The Conservative party did not stop that. Does the Minister agree that we finally have a Government acting to protect our steel industry?

• 21 May 2026 · Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I was interested in the hon. Gentleman’s comment about the shortage of welders. Does he agree that the Government’s plan for construction colleges of excellence, including the one in Bury St Edmunds, will be crucial for the provision of welders?

• 22 Apr 2026 · Junior Doctors’ Foundation Programme · Hansard source

  More

  I know—it is hard to believe. I was a medical student in Sheffield, and my first jobs were at the Royal Hallamshire hospital and the Northern General hospital. I have fond memories of the time that we started there. There was, for instance, a doctors’ mess with hot food. There was somewhere for us to live; we had residences. It is ironic that the name “junior doctors” was changed—just last year, I think—to “resident doctors”, because that is the very last thing they are. The residences have all disappeared—they have been sold off—and the doctors work shift systems, sometimes with absolutely nowhere to rest. We had six-month rather than four-month rotations, which meant that we got to know the teams we worked with. We worked with named consultants. We had a distinct pyramidal team, with senior registrars, registrars and senior house officers, and we knew the people we were working with. They were people we had known as medical students; they were often the people who had taught us. That meant that there was a sort of support network for young doctors as they started in their careers. On the whole, the newly qualified doctors of today do not experience anything quite like that.

• 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I know that some in this Chamber are sceptical about the role of the other place. However, after dinner last night, at about 11 o’clock, I took some visitors into the House of Lords Gallery, and was completely astonished to find a very lively debate taking place in a full Chamber. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising the great diligence of our colleagues in scrutinising legislation? However, does he agree that the House of Lords must not obstruct the will of the elected Chamber?

• 18 Mar 2026 · Student Loans · Hansard source

  More

  Student finance is complicated. With thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South (Gordon McKee), who has been in and out of his seat all afternoon, I was able to produce a biscuit explainer today, which is available on all good social media channels. Reforming the student finance system is not straightforward. It is a complex challenge—it is made much more difficult by the need to stabilise the economy, which is something that I obviously strongly support—but we must be clear that the task is harder because of the economic mess left behind by our predecessors: years of short-termism and under-investment that have constrained what can now be done. Yet even within those constraints, the direction proposed by the Opposition is a bit flawed. The suggestion to scrap degrees, particularly in the arts and cultural sectors, is culturally dismissive, plainly disrespectful and insulting. It reflects a narrow view of value and ignores the real contribution of the creative industries to our economy and our national life. Turning to the system itself, student finance is not neutral. It perpetuates an inequality. Those from less well-off backgrounds must take on larger maintenance loans simply to afford the cost of living, graduating with significantly higher debts than their peers. That undermines social mobility. Instead of higher education acting as a ladder of opportunity, the system has reinforced disadvantage. Those who start with less, leave with more to repay. In reality, we all know that what we have is a form of a graduate tax—long-term, income-contingent and unavoidable for many—but without the clarity or fairness such a system should have. So we do need reform, but not through the Opposition’s plan; we must make a better plan. The Labour party is and will remain the party of working people, grounded in the principles of fairness, which means confronting systems that entrench inequality and replacing them with ones that expand opportunity. If we are serious about fairness, we must act—and act we will, for we will use the levers of the state to ensure fairness.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Has the Leader of the House had the opportunity to see the shocking Channel 4 programme “Dirty Business”? It brought to my mind Mr Binks of Stowmarket, who showed me a collection of photographs of the River Gipping over 50 years. They showed a once navigable river, full of fish and clear water, which is now blocked with fallen trees, brown water and neglected banks, causing repeated flooding. Does the Leader of the House agree with me that that is a consequence of the previous Conservative Governments’ disastrous deregulation of the water industry, which has ruined our rivers?

• 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for introducing the debate. This is an issue of intergenerational inequality, of which we should all be ashamed. My university cohort and I graduated without debt. We entered a housing market that was accessible and over time we accumulated assets, property, pensions, savings and security. I served 40 years in the NHS, until that was interrupted by an astonishing election result. Now, the landscape has changed. I see the difference in my own family. My two older children studied under plan 1; their repayment terms were short and less onerous. My youngest fell under plan 2 and she has a huge debt, which is growing despite the fact that she is paying it off. This debate is about aspiration, which, as my hon. Friend said, simply cannot compete with compound interest. It is about whether young people begin adult life with opportunity, or decades of liability. Let us sort this out. Let us increase the repayment thresholds, ensure that interest does not outpace realistic repayment capacity, explore tax-deductible repayments similar to pensions, and improve transparency so that students fully understand what they are signing up for. Education should expand opportunity, not entrench intergenerational unfairness. That is a reality we must confront, and a duty we must uphold, as we deal with this utterly iniquitous system.

• 12 Jan 2026 · Call for General Election · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. It is lovely to see so many hon. Members on the Opposition Benches—that is unusual in a Westminster Hall debate. I am a new politician, but I like elections. I like them very much, especially if I can talk about the health service. I like talking about hospitals, about our plans for our hospitals, about getting the waiting lists down and about our plans for neighbourhood health centres and for revolutionising the IT. I also talk up research. However, I do not think that now is the right time for a general election because, as the Health Secretary is fond of saying, although much has been done, there is much still to do. I am sure that we will see great changes as we bring the public with us and renew the NHS, as is our sacred duty. I am an optimist, unlike the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover). Some will say that we are U-turners, but I say that we are a Government who listen—we listen. We listen to my constituent, Roxane Marjoram of The One Bull, Bury St Edmunds, who met the Chancellor of the Exchequer and then wrote her a personal letter about the difficulties of the rates revaluation for pubs. I understand that we will see some reversal of that revaluation. Just a few minutes ago, in the Lobby, I met farmers from Suffolk who told me they were so happy with what the Prime Minister had said about increasing the threshold for the inheritance tax. This is a Government who listen. Some Opposition Members have been critical of the Prime Minister. They say that he perhaps lacks vision. I am not sure quite what they mean by that. I say that he is the right man at the right time. Mr Boris Johnson—hon. Members may remember him—was previously described as a man with the wrong set of talents for his particular crisis. Our Prime Minister is, I believe, exactly the opposite. The situation of the world at the moment is as hazardous as any of us can recall. I met a man in a dinner jacket at a black tie dinner just a few weeks ago who told me that he is the chairman of a local Conservative association and that, given the way the world is at the moment, he believes that the Prime Minister is doing a brilliant job. I also believe that to be the case, so let us not have a general election right now. The hon. Members sitting on the Opposition Benches know very well that we must not have a general election.

• 5 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. Happy new year, Mr Speaker. My visit to France with the Select Committee on Home Affairs exposed the reality on the beaches: French officers facing pitched battles against violent smuggling gangs to stop hazardous boats launching. Many of the crossings are successfully thwarted. Does the Minister agree that the populist myth that our French partners are simply waving migrants through is not only offensive to those brave officers risking their lives but undermines the critical intelligence sharing that is needed to address this sinister trade, and that the support provided by the Sandhurst funding is money well spent?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The Hanukkah murder of the Jews on Bondi beach has reverberated around the world. I shall go from here to sign a book of condolence at Australia House. UK synagogues require security guards for religious services. If that were true of churches in the United Kingdom, it would be considered a national emergency. The oldest hatred has re-emerged in our times. This is not otherwise lawful protest against the actions of an elected Israeli Government. “Globalise the intifada” has only one meaning, as far as UK Jews such as myself are concerned, so will the Leader of the House provide Government time for a debate on antisemitism in the United Kingdom? Now is the time for action.

• 11 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Many of us are concerned about the progress of the assisted dying or Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the other place. There appears to be an orchestrated filibuster in progress to defy the will of the elected Chamber; many amendments have been tabled, including amendments demanding pregnancy tests for old men with prostate cancer. What does the Leader of the House recommend we do about this?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend acknowledge that the cost of clinical negligence claims in maternity services is now greater than the cost of maternity services?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Neurodivergent People: Employment · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank the hon. Member for Ely and East Cambridgeshire (Charlotte Cane) for securing this debate. It is also a pleasure to see so many colleagues from the east of England here. That is not because we have a larger number of more neurodivergent people than anywhere else, but perhaps we care a little bit more. It is a sad truth that far too many neurodivergent people struggle in the workplace. It is an avoidable problem, one that is unfair and unjust in its own right. More than that, it is economically nonsensical. Better support for neurodivergent people would unlock the potential of millions in this country. The technology and engineering sectors show us the way, and the tremendous impact that neurodivergent people can have. The Equality Act 2010 places a duty on employers to provide reasonable adjustments for neurodivergent people, but the reality is that these are inconsistent and inadequate. The problem starts at recruitment: traditional methods such as application forms, timed tests and panel interviews disadvantage neurodivergent candidates. Employers should be encouraged to adopt inclusive recruitment methods—for example, allowing the candidate to see the questions in advance. We heard about the Access to Work scheme, which currently provides vital support, but it is slow, complex and inconsistent. The Government should cast a critical eye over that process and consider how to make it more streamlined. The problem continues in employment: rigid hours, loud workplaces, obstructive technologies and a lack of written instructions all pose significant barriers to neurodivergent people. Simple steps to address problems such as those could be quick and cheap and could have a significant impact. The Government’s own research shows that most adjustments cost less than £75. Furthermore, proper neurodiversity training for managers and HR professionals would go a long way towards ensuring that those reasonable adjustments were widely understood. Sadly, employers do not know where to start, which is why we need a national framework of best practice, co-produced with neurodivergent people. Although there is a long way to go, it is good to see the Government making some progress. As the MP for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket, I was delighted to see that the Government have allocated £9.5 million to Suffolk county council to provide employment support for 2,700 disabled people. That will certainly help neurodivergent people in our community get into work and stay in work, but there is much more to be done. Making adjustments is not about lowering standards, but about giving people the tools to meet their full potential. Surely that is our duty. Reasonable adjustments must become the norm, not the exception.

• 8 Sept 2025 · Point of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), at a congressional hearing and in written evidence, has suggested that the US Government explore possible trade consequences in response to the UK’s Online Safety Act 2023. Would you agree that suggesting that a foreign Government take measures harmful to the interests of this country is not behaviour commensurate with the office of a Member of the UK Parliament? Indeed, would you agree with several constituents of Clacton who have described the Member’s statements as “treacherous”?