Peter Swallow MP: speeches

I completely agree with the Minister. There are many SUDS in Bracknell Forest that have been delivered as part of alternative natural green spaces, and they create lovely nature corridors in our community. I just wanted to put that on the record.

I wholeheartedly welcome the Bill and all it will do to support the very Labour promise that everyone should have access to a safe and secure place to call their home. While the Leader of the Opposition apparently believes that if nurses, teaching assistants and tradies cannot afford to live in Bracknell Forest, with its high rents and house prices, they should be forced to move out, I believe the answer is more social and council housing to support people from Bracknell Forest to stay in Bracknell Forest. That is why I support the push by the leader of Bracknell Forest council, Helen Purnell, to make the council a leading force in delivering new council housing. I welcome the measures in the Bill on the disposal of social houses by registered providers, but the Minister will not be surprised to hear that I think we need to go further. Since 2018, housing associations have permanently sold 28,585 social homes to private and other non-social purchasers, with 5,806 sold in 2024-25 alone, the highest annual figure on record. Some 87% of those went at open market value, far beyond the reach of a local authority’s purchasing power. Unlike right to buy, these homes are not being sold to the families living in them—they are being sold out of the sector entirely into private ownership. In my constituency, 154 homes have been sold since 2018, including bungalows and several three and four-bedroom properties, which are the very homes Bracknell Forest families most need. As it stands, the Bill asks housing providers to give local authorities notification of any disposals that they are planning, but the measures are not sufficiently strong. On Third Reading in the other place, the Minister confirmed that the Government are planning a Commons amendment on the notification period, so may I press the Housing Minister for more information on that and on what we can do to strengthen that measure? Will he also consider two further changes to the Bill? First, Homes England should develop a code of responsible disposal practice, with the regulator and the sector more widely, to which housing providers can be held as a condition of holding long-term partner status under the social and affordable homes programme. That is a very simple principle: if they are receiving Government money, they should not be disposing of homes, wherever possible. Secondly, when a social home is disposed of, the Government should do more to ensure that the income is reinvested in replacement social rent homes in the same local authority area. I know my right hon. Friend the Housing Minister shares my concerns about this issue and I am committed to working with him and the Government to ensure the Bill addresses disposals properly. I look forward to constructive conversations with the Minister as the Bill progresses.

Through their Representation of the People Bill, this Government are already doing a lot to protect our democracy from dodgy foreign donations, but my right hon. Friend knows that I am also concerned about foreign misinformation and disinformation undermining our democracy, support for Ukraine and community cohesion. What conversations is he having with Cabinet colleagues about what more we can do to target foreign misinformation and disinformation, particularly from Russia, and to protect our democracy?

I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for the UK Youth Parliament. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I warmly welcome the Minister to her place for what I believe is her first Westminster Hall debate. Many colleagues have taken their seat in this place after years of serving their community as a local councillor or in a political role, but before my election I was a teacher and an academic. Standing for Parliament was almost the first time that I had run for anything; in fact, my only prior experience was running to be a Member of the Youth Parliament when I was about 14. I am sorry to say that I came third, although the confidence that I gained from putting myself forward stayed with me and, I have no doubt, helped me to reach this place.

Absolutely, and that is a theme to which I will return. Investing in young people is so important, not only for empowering them but for the skills and experience we need in the economy, so that young people can go on to get good jobs and support their local communities. That is exactly why I have always championed everything we can do to empower young people at the earliest age.

I quite agree. That is a theme to which I will return. I think that there are sometimes some miscomprehensions about how diverse the YP scheme really is, but as the Government look to its future, we should absolutely be talking about making it even better and more inclusive; that is all to the good. In the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s own words: “The UK Youth Parliament is DCMS’ key mechanism for engaging with young people and ensuring their voices are heard in policy and decision making.” If we are serious about protecting and nurturing our democracy, we must also protect and nurture the opportunities that we give our young people to properly engage with it, understand it and feel a part of it.

I completely agree. Sadly, I have not yet secured Pride in Place funding for Bracknell Forest, but I encourage all right hon. and hon. Members to think about including their local MYPs and other youth representatives as part of that programme. It can only be for the better. With the welcome enfranchisement of 16 and 17-year-olds, all this has never been more crucial. The UK Youth Parliament has a vital role to play in seizing the opportunity presented by votes at 16 to make the next generation the most informed and engaged ever.

I welcome the point. I will do my hon. Friend one better: I think that that should be the job of every single Minister. The Government’s role is to deliver for people up and down this country, and we have a particular duty to deliver for our young people. Sometimes it is their voices that are the most forgotten. I recognise that the UK Youth Parliament scheme always has room for improvement. It is certainly disappointing that not every area is represented in the Youth Parliament and that not all local areas engage evenly with the scheme. To coin a phrase, I want to see youth opportunity and youth engagement in every postcode. I have also heard concerns that it is not diverse enough and that it engages only those most likely to participate already. In fact, on that measure the Youth Parliament is far outperforming this Parliament, its older sibling. It is a far more representative body than we are. About 52% of the previous UKYP intake were women, compared with 41% of MPs; 40% had an ethnic minority background, compared with 14% of us; and 9% came from the most disadvantaged 10% of areas, according to the index of multiple deprivation, with roughly 51% coming from postcodes ranked in the most deprived half of IMD deciles. There is always more work to be done, but we would do well to take note of the UK Youth Parliament’s success in electing a rich and diverse group of representatives. I also think it is important to stress that although the programme’s most visible success might be the annual debate in the House, where young people stand up and debate so eloquently, there are many local successes that we should remember as well. We have already spoken about many of those here today. All those successes, both locally and nationally, come at a cost, but in departmental terms—certainly in Government terms—they are extremely small and extremely good value. The last full two-year funding commitment given by DCMS came to only £750,000. I hope colleagues will appreciate that I have tried to avoid too many clichés about young people. From a man of my age they are, in the words of young people, “cringe”. But I do want to indulge a little bit now with some final thoughts, not from myself but from Kingsley, our current MYP for Bracknell Forest. He put it so much better than I ever could hope to, saying that “investing in UKYP is investing in young people, our communities and the future of our democracy”.

I quite agree. Many young people have used their time as MYPs to make a real difference, including Sienna, a former MYP for Wolverhampton whose campaign against knife crime delivered bleed control kits across the west midlands, and Caitlin, a former MYP for Durham who worked on setting up the Big Debate in her local area. I am proud that I will be working with Kingsley, the MYP for Bracknell Forest, on his priorities for our community, including young people’s mental health and local transport.

Absolutely. I passionately believe, as do the Government, that it would be very wrong to form policies that will directly shape young people’s lives without actually engaging with young people. We might not always agree with their conclusions—on the social media ban, many of the young people I spoke to in Bracknell Forest came to a different conclusion from mine—but I hope they feel that I have listened to their concerns. Their views have very much shaped my thinking on that issue and many others. In 2023, DCMS commissioned IFF Research to evaluate the UK Youth Parliament. The evaluation found that the programme is delivering on its intended goals: to engage young people across the country in the democratic process and give them a route to express their voices on the issues that matter most to them. MYPs reported improved confidence, resilience, communication, problem solving, teamwork and critical thinking skills, to name but a few—the very skills that employers are crying out for from young people, and the very skills that the Government have committed to placing at the heart of our education system. I emphasise that MYPs consistently reported that meeting and making connections with other young people from across the country was a highlight of the programme. I share the concern raised by parents and teachers across the country that an increasingly online world is an increasingly atomised, isolated one for young people. Programmes such as the UK Youth Parliament, which inspire and excite young people and give them the opportunity to connect and learn from their peers away from the online world, are crucial. The Government’s national youth strategy was the first in two decades. It sets out our commitment to building a country that works not just for but with young people. The UK Youth Parliament has a clear role to play in helping the Department to achieve the strategy, especially its key aim that our society must be one in which young people are meaningfully seen and heard.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for making that point, to which I will return at the end of my speech. As we look to deliver better youth services and participation for all our young people, we certainly need to think about how to fund it properly. The UK Youth Parliament is an institution in which we can take great pride. It develops skills, provides opportunities to young people right across the country and helps them to have a voice in our democracy. I have had the privilege of meeting Erin and Kingsley, the last two MYPs for Bracknell. I believe that Kingsley has joined us in the Gallery today, alongside other MYPs; we briefly lost them to the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), but I am glad to see that he has let them go so they can join us for this debate. I have heard at first hand from MYPs in Bracknell and across the country about the benefits of the scheme for them personally, as well as for the young people they represent. I should declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment. Just before the summer, the APPG concluded its inquiry into votes at 16 with a report that I encourage all Members, especially the Minister, to read. The inquiry’s aim was to explore and make recommendations on how the Government can prepare young people to feel educated and empowered to use their vote at the age of 16. We heard from a wide range of young people, education professionals and youth and civil society organisations on how votes at 16 can be not just implemented, but made a success. Contributors to the report highlighted the importance of engagement with democracy and the democratic process, not just in the classroom but through wider enrichment opportunities. The UK Youth Parliament is a perfect example. Votes at 16 has been a long-standing campaign of the UK Youth Parliament. Its imminent introduction is a direct example of the power of the UK Youth Parliament to give young people a platform to make change at the highest levels. I firmly believe that the Government would not be making this historic change were it not for the campaigning zeal of successive generations of MYPs. I pay tribute to them all.

What a lovely thing to have on the record. Sienna sounds like an incredible young woman. MYPs, like MPs, are elected to represent their local area. They engage in debate at a local, regional and national level on a huge range of issues. In 2009, the Youth Parliament became the first body ever, aside from Members of Parliament, to use the Commons Chamber.

I am grateful to the Minister for giving way—he has been very generous. May I pursue the point about enabling more people to travel to airports on public transport? I have raised with him my fear that the draft Heathrow expansion national policy statement is not strong enough to ensure that, if we are to have a third runway at Heathrow, we will also have improved rail links, including a southern rail link, which could well benefit my constituents. May I urge him, as the Government look at the responses to that consultation, to think again and strengthen the policy to ensure that we get not only the third runway, but the infrastructure that would be needed to support it?

I recently stopped by the wonderful Koh-I-Noor Indian restaurant in Priestwood to meet its owner, Kamran, and to speak about the realities of running a family-owned restaurant. He told me how rising costs were making it challenging for him to invest and grow his business. I genuinely welcome the Chancellor’s action on cutting business rates for pubs and music venues ahead of the Budget, but will the Minister look at what more he can do to support the hospitality and retail businesses at the heart of our local communities?

18. What discussions he has had with representatives of hospitality businesses on the potential impact of business rates relief on the sector.

When I speak to parents in Bracknell Forest, they tell me of their anxiety about what their young people might be exposed to online and their feeling of powerlessness—they do not feel that they have the tools to do anything about it. Today’s statement makes it clear that this Government believe that the power to act lies squarely with the tech companies, and that they should get on and fix their platforms so that our young people can be safe.

I agree with the point that the hon. Member is making. To add the voice of a member of the Education Select Committee, the Committee’s report equally found that we have to have a system where ICBs can be held to account for delivering on EHCPs.

The Secretary of State is being incredibly generous in giving way. She is right to pay tribute to the spirit of the 2012 Olympic games. I was a teenager at the time, I am afraid to say, and it changed my life; being able to go to some of those events was transformative. It did not turn me into a world-class athlete, it has to be said, but it nevertheless gave me a sense of pride in my country. I share the Secretary of State’s ambition for us to bid for future events—hopefully future football world cups as well as future Olympics. However, the Secretary of State will also know that many were concerned by some of the scenes at the world cup this summer—not on the pitch, but in relation to ticket sales and the high price of tickets. Can she assure the House that, if this Government bid for events, we will always prioritise making them as accessible as possible as part of those bids?

I welcome the £39 billion of investment in the social and affordable homes programme that this Government are making, but my right hon. Friend will know that for every social home we build, when a social housing provider disposes of another home, not only are we losing a valuable home that could support residents in Bracknell Forest and across the country, but we also need to replace that home. That is why I am calling on the Government to go further than currently envisaged in the Social Housing Bill to clamp down on disposals. Will she continue to look at that with the Housing Minister, so that we can do everything we can to protect the social homes we already have as well as building more?

My hon. Friend makes a really good point. As I said, I welcome the amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, which gives some assurance to those at risk of family separation through the care system. However, the proof of the pudding will be in the implementation. As my hon. Friend highlights, there are real practical barriers to that. I hope that the Minister has heard her point and will make sure that it is addressed as we seek to implement that law, which is now rightly on the statute book.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that point; it gives me another opportunity to place on the record again my thanks to everyone who hosted us in Leeds and York, where we saw some fantastic work being done to support care-experienced young people. I know that that is replicated in councils across the country, including, may I say, in Bracknell Forest, whose children’s social care services were recently rated outstanding by Ofsted—I got the local plug in there. I pay tribute to all those working tirelessly to support children in the social care system. The shortcomings I have highlighted today in no way take away from the many people who have dedicated their working careers to supporting the most vulnerable in our society. My hon. Friend makes a very interesting point. Making care-experienced a protected characteristic in law is something that we explored as part of the inquiry. The responses that we received on that point were mixed. Some felt that that would be singling care-experienced children out in some way, when in reality what they were hoping and asking for was to be treated no differently from anyone else, so that as they enter adult life, they can leave behind the fact that they are care-experienced and go forward with their lives. Others felt that the proposal would be beneficial. The evidence was mixed. If I remember correctly, I think we settled in the report on not having that as a recommendation —I will correct the record if I am wrong, but I think that was our decision. It was something we considered, though, because it is something that is raised, and it is interesting to hear that it has worked well in my hon. Friend’s local area. That shows that sometimes these solutions should be locally based.

My hon. Friend gives me the opportunity to reference another report that the Human Rights Committee undertook, as pre-legislative scrutiny of the Mental Health Act 2025. We very much looked at this issue, and particularly the issue of vulnerable young people being placed on adult mental health wards, and urged changes at that point. It is absolutely the case that vulnerable people who are care-experienced and are also facing mental health crises face a double vulnerability, which heightens the duty of the state to those individuals even further. Some of the measures we have suggested to reform the rights of disabled children can absolutely play a part in that. I will also highlight something that I did not get a chance to mention. There are recommendations in the report to strengthen the complaints system, including by making sure that there is no wrong door when a care-experienced young people is making a complaint and that they all have an opt-out right to a legal advocate. That would go some way to making sure that children, particularly those facing a mental health crisis, have an advocate in the way that is also envisaged in the Mental Health Act 2025. I hope that if the Government listen to some of the recommendations in the report, we can go some way to addressing the very real concerns that my hon. Friend has raised.

The hon. Member has done me the great honour of promoting me: I am not, in fact, the Chair of the Select Committee. That is my noble Friend Lord Alton in the other place, because we are a Joint Committee of both Houses. Nevertheless, I will pass on the hon. Gentleman’s request, and I am sure that the Committee can send a copy of the report to all relevant persons in Northern Ireland. I thank him for his interest.

Thank you, Mrs Barker; it is an honour to serve with you in the Chair. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting the time for this statement, and my fellow members of the Joint Committee on Human Rights for asking me to make it. I am also grateful to the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), for his attendance. As he knows, I never miss an opportunity to raise with him the progress of my local special educational needs and disabilities school, but I am getting that in at the start of my speech so that we can focus on what we are actually here to talk about: the very important matter of children’s social care. This statement sets out the work done and recommendations made by the Joint Committee on Human Rights in the report “Human Rights of Children in the Social Care System in England”. It goes without saying that the state’s ability to intervene in families to remove children where, and only where, deemed absolutely necessary for a child’s welfare in the first instance is among the gravest and most serious of its responsibilities. But the responsibility the state takes for that child and how they are cared for next, which has the capacity to shape the rest of their life, is equally as serious. No parliamentary speech can do true justice to the experiences of the care-experienced young people whom the Committee spoke to during its work on the report, in Leeds, in York and at a roundtable in Parliament. What we heard from them will stay with me for the rest of my life. I extend the sincere thanks of the Committee to every one of them for giving voice to their experience in the report, and I hope they see their voices reflected in the recommendations we have made. Many of the young people I spoke to were curious about how a Select Committee inquiry works, but sceptical of there being any hope that anything they may say could make a difference to the social care system in the UK. I hope that scepticism may prove unfounded. Given that my hon. Friend the Minister is in his place, I take it that he is willing to listen to the experiences of those young people. If I had to summarise all that the Committee heard in one sentence, it would be this: the outcomes of children in and around the care system are too often marred by challenge and difficulty, and too often end in tragedy. Children in the care system are regularly left with inadequate mental health support, despite the substantial trauma they may have faced. For some young people, that means that challenging behaviours that may be met with support and love in a family home are often handled by services including the police, which means that the care system can be a driver of criminalisation. The Committee also heard that when young people leave care, they too often face a cliff edge, and are left alone to navigate adult life without suitable support and the enduring social networks that so many of us rely on. That means that some young people fall into destructive behaviours and relationships, which can end in criminalisation, mental health difficulties or isolation. Those outcomes are troubling in and of themselves, but they can also lead to something far more tragic. The recent review into early deaths of care leavers, which was commissioned by my hon. Friend the Minister, led by Ashley John-Baptiste and Clare Chamberlain and published just after the Committee’s report, demonstrates that point exceptionally starkly. In 2025, the death rate for care leavers aged between 18 and 24 was three to four times higher than that of the general population. The report offers a window into the lives and experiences of some of those young people who died far sooner than they should have. It sets out how the services that are supposed to support them, both during and after their time in the social care system, could and should have served them better. That is why the Committee is clear that more targeted support must be made available for young people when they are in and once they have left the social care system, and that there should be greater discretion to extend that support past age cut-offs where necessary. The Government must do more to work with young people, local authorities, the police, social work professionals and others to address the root causes of the challenges too often faced by care-experienced children and adults. Throughout our evidence gathering, the Committee heard that the legal framework around children’s social care must be reformed and strengthened to deliver a reality where children and professionals understand and can advocate for their rights. One of the recommendations we received most often was also one of the simplest. Despite what I know to be the genuine commitment of this and previous Governments to the UN convention on the rights of the child, the convention remains unincorporated into domestic law in England. Bodies including the Children’s Commissioner, UNICEF and ECPAT UK all highlighted in their evidence to the Committee that the incorporation of the convention could have significant and wide-ranging impacts on children’s rights. The Committee recommends its full incorporation. All children who are in or around the social care system are vulnerable, but those who have disabilities often face extra barriers and challenges. The Committee heard that those difficulties were often exacerbated by the disjointed and piecemeal legal landscape that comprises the disabled children’s social care framework. The framework is complex and difficult to navigate for professionals, let alone families and the young people themselves. For that reason, the Committee is in agreement with the Law Commission that there should be a single and comprehensive piece of statutory guidance on disabled children’s social care law, as well as an explicit duty to assess where need is identified. The Committee also heard that the provision of support following assessment is a postcode lottery. It therefore supports the Law Commission’s recommendation to introduce national eligibility criteria to standardise support across local authorities. On top of that, the current working definition of disability in the Children Act 1989 is outdated and must be updated using the language of the Equality Act to be truly inclusive and reflective of the needs of children today. I remember many of the conversations I had on the doorstep during my general election campaign, but one in particular will stay with me forever. I knocked on the door of a woman who took a good look at me and asked whether I knew what a kinship carer was. I have to confess that at the time I did not. I say that because I suspect that I was not alone in that, despite the fact that kinship care is the most common form of alternative care for children in the UK and across the world. Since the election, I have been incredibly humbled to speak to those delivering kinship care in Bracknell Forest, and I pay tribute to the work of charities such as Kinship that work so hard to represent them. I welcome the work the Law Commission is doing on the legal reform of kinship care, including on clarifying the legal framework. The Committee is looking forward to seeing the outcome of that work. The children’s social care market is fundamentally broken, and across the country children are being placed in unsuitable and in some cases illegal and unregulated accommodation, lacking proper safeguards and scrutiny and away from the vital support networks of their family and friends. At the same time, the cost of residential accommodation is hitting local authorities’ already stretched budgets. I welcome the introduction of new powers in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 for Ofsted to issue fines for breaches of the Care Standards Act 2000 and the introduction of regional care co-operatives to drive up standards and end profiteering. The 2026 Act will also require local authorities to allow reasonable contact between children in care and their siblings. Although that is to be welcomed, our report concluded that the Government need to follow implementation closely. I could say much more about the complaints system and the rights of unaccompanied asylum seekers, all of which is included in the report, but I will just finish by again thanking the Minister, paying tribute to my colleagues on the Committee and thanking the young people who spoke to us during our inquiry.

As the Government work at pace to move power out of Westminster and into our communities, I am keen for Bracknell to get a share of that. That is why I support devolution for the Thames valley. The First Secretary of State will know that leaders across Oxfordshire, Berkshire and Swindon have written to her setting out their ambition for a mayoral strategic authority. That is excellent progress, but we have been here before and I do not want to see us lose the momentum. Will she set up a meeting for herself and her No. 10 North team with leaders and MPs from across the region so that we can sign on the dotted line, get this agreed and finally get the devolution that the Thames valley so badly needs?

I chair the all-party group on schools, learning and assessment, and we conducted an inquiry on votes at 16. We were speaking directly to young people, and they are delighted that the Bill will empower them with the vote. However, they are equally concerned about misinformation and disinformation, and having the tools that they need to engage in the democratic process. Does the Minister agree that that is a key issue, and that if we are to empower young people with the vote, we must also empower them with the tools that they need to use that vote in an informed and engaged way?

The hon. Gentleman is making an incredibly powerful case. The tragic case of Adam will be felt across the country, including by my constituents in Sandhurst where we remember the tragic death of Lewis Marsh in not dissimilar circumstances while he was taking part in a sporting activity. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that screening is available for young people who might be at risk of cardiac death. I pay tribute to the work of the charity Cardiac Risk in the Young. Does he agree that we should see more of that rolled out, so that young people, in particular those who might be at a heightened risk, have screening made available so that they know they face that risk?

Happy birthday, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Prime Minister will know that the commitment he has made on social and council housing will be very welcome in places such as Bracknell, where lots of families are waiting for a home. However, that is undermined when social housing providers sell off their social homes through the disposals process. I know that we are taking steps to address that issue through the Social Housing Bill, but I am concerned that we are not going far enough. It is good to see the Housing Minister in his place. Will the Prime Minister work with him to address this issue and ensure that we can stop disposals?

The Hong Kong community in Bracknell Forest has welcomed the announcement of the continuation of the five-year settlement route for BNO visa holders, as well as the expansion to adult children. However, real concerns remain around changes to language and income requirements, as well as concerns that Hongkongers prosecuted by the Chinese state under the national security law are seeing delays to accessing indefinite leave to remain status. Will the Minister set out when my constituents will be given clarity on these really important issues? It is right that we stand by the Hong Kong community, given our long and historic ties.

12. What assessment her Department has made of the effectiveness of the British national overseas visa settlement route.

2. What steps she is taking to help increase prosecution rates for crimes involving violence against women and girls.

My right hon. and learned Friend is right that the system needs to change. I have been contacted by a constituent who has waited four years for her day in court, following her ex-partner being charged with coercive and controlling behaviour. She has seen her trial date repeatedly pushed back, often within two weeks of when it was due to start. My right hon. and learned Friend will know that this is a well-known tactic that abusers use to continue the harassment of their victims, to delay justice, and, ultimately, to frustrate their victims and urge them to drop out of the trial altogether. What work are the Government doing to stop this tactic, and ensure that victims like my constituent see the justice that they deserve?

The shadow Minister says that Israel is a critical ally. Is it not possible ever to be critical of one’s allies in return?

Of course, we must fix the back door and help people get out of hospital quicker, but there is also a challenge at the front door, with too many people feeling that they need to go to secondary care for health treatment. Is it not so important that we fix the foundations of the NHS by having a shift to community treatment, so that fewer people feel that they have to go to a hospital in the first place?

T8. Year 7 students from Ranelagh school in Bracknell have written to me as part of the Creative for Climate Justice Project. As well as sharing some incredible artwork and poetry, they wrote that the impacts of climate change are already visible, and that we should act now to avoid irreversible damage. Does my hon. Friend agree? Will she assure those students that the Government heed their call for action?

It is my view that Shabir Ahmed, a vile paedophile, signed up for a one-way ticket out of this country on the very day that he started committing his vile crimes. I thank the Minister for his statement setting out that he will stop at nothing to see him deported, but is it not also the case that this situation demonstrates the importance of the Government’s ability to deprive individuals of British citizenship, notwithstanding that that must always be done with the utmost care and with proper scrutiny?

We know that Russia orchestrated not only an arson attack on the Prime Minister’s family, but then the spreading on social media of misinformation about the attack, so I welcome the Rycroft review’s recommendations on strengthening enforcement. Does the Minister agree that this has to target not only foreign actors who spread misinformation and the countries behind them, but the social media companies that are allowing misinformation to spread on their platforms?

In moments like this, I feel the privilege of serving on both the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Education Committee. The Prime Minister is right to say that it should not have taken two Select Committee reports to get us here today. More important, it should not have taken the victim survivors of this terrible scandal having to retell their stories, retraumatising themselves again and again, to get here. As the JCHR report makes clear, there are some things only a Government can do; for that reason, I thank the Prime Minister from the bottom of my heart for his apology on behalf of the state today, and ask him to set out in a little more detail how he and the Department for Education have worked with survivors to get to the full apology he has given today.

T7. Bracknell residents are concerned that two vital local post offices, in Crown Wood and in Bracknell town centre, are at risk of closure because of the travails of their host stores, Morrisons Daily and TGJones. That follows the recent closure of a post office in Easthampstead. Will the Minister please set out what work the Government are doing to protect these vital local services?

My hon. Friend will know that Bracknell welcomed Afghans who supported our armed forces in transitional accommodation under the Afghan resettlement programme, but under the system introduced by the Conservatives that is not taken into account when considering a local area’s ability also to deliver asylum accommodation. He will know that I have been lobbying him on this matter, because small unitary authorities such as Bracknell Forest council cannot be expected to do more than their fair share. Can he provide an update on progress?

My hon. Friend is making an important point. I have been contacted by many constituents who have engaged with the “People’s Emergency Briefing” campaign. One of its key asks is greater public awareness of the effects of climate change. Does he agree that the Government should do more to make sure that people are aware of the effects of climate change? Perhaps we could start with the shadow Secretary of State.

rose —

It absolutely will be about jobs—I thank the right hon. Lady for giving way. The CBI—not the Government, but the CBI—has found that the net zero economy is worth £100 billion of investment in this country every year and supports 1.1 million jobs.

Last week we had a powerful reminder of how important trusted news broadcasting is when the BBC reported that arson attacks targeting the Prime Minister and his family were orchestrated by Russia. Not stopping there, Russian-backed bots then spread homophobic misinformation about those attacks. We know how the Conservative party responded to that: its deputy chair, the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), went on national TV and laughed. Now we can see how this Labour Government are responding to the issue. Can I urge the Secretary of State to go even further on supporting trusted news sources, as a powerful response to misinformation and disinformation online, a lot of it fuelled by our foreign adversaries?

On a quiet day in Westminster, I have had a chance to dive into the Conservative party’s 2024 manifesto, which promised: “We will complete the implementation of the Cass Review”. A similar commitment appeared in our own manifesto, which we are now cracking on with and delivering. Does my right hon. Friend share my concerns that the Conservatives seem to have abandoned their commitment?

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

Whether it is cheering along to every one of those England goals, bawling our eyes out as we watch the heartbreaking social drama “Tip Toe”, or even following the latest twists and turns at Westminster from trusted news sources, it is undoubtable that public sector broadcasting enriches all our lives. We have heard about a lot of the challenges today, but what will the Secretary of State do to champion public sector broadcasting and ensure that it is fit and ready for the future?

My hon. Friend will know that I am a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which recently published a report called “Forced Labour in the UK’s Supply Chains”. One of our recommendations was that the Government need to strengthen section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, and specifically the reporting duty, in a way that reflects the size and capacity of the business in question. Does my hon. Friend agree with that recommendation? Would he like to see more done to strengthen the Modern Slavery Act?

Thames Water was responsible for a third of all major pollution incidents in 2025. Now its creditors want to jack up my constituents’ bills, delay improvements to infrastructure and dodge future fines. My constituents are being failed. I welcome the action the Secretary of State has taken today, but I urge her to go even further and put Thames Water under special measures.

My hon. Friend may or may not be aware that the proposers of the Bill can withdraw it at a time of their choosing. If amendments were to be made to the Bill, I fear that the proposers would simply choose to withdraw it from consideration.

My hon. Friend will know how enthusiastic I am for a Thames Valley foundation strategic authority covering Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Swindon, but he will also know of my concerns about a spatial development strategy being imposed on us using a different, larger geography. Does he share my concern that that would undermine devolution before it even started?

T2. One of the biggest barriers to accessing community healthcare in Bracknell Forest is constituents not being able to get routine diagnostic procedures done at their local GP or health centre, and instead having to travel. One constituent with cancer was told that he had to go to Guildford for a simple blood test. How will the introduction of a single patient record help to break down some of those barriers?

Last week there was a major fire in Bracknell, and I pay tribute to the emergency services, Bracknell Forest council, local businesses and the community, which all came together to respond. Alongside the hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mr Reynolds), I have since contacted the Environment Agency to raise residents’ concerns about the environmental impact of the fire, including on Bracknell’s waterways, and I thank the EA for its ongoing work to mitigate the impact. What policies are in place to support nature and waterway recovery following such incidents?

10. What steps she is taking to help clean waterways in the Thames Valley.

The hon. Lady just said that we should not be arguing about flags, and I totally agree with her. In my view, it should be up to councils and community groups to decide the version of the pride flag that they choose to fly, whether it be the traditional pride flag or the progress pride flag. I do not think that that is arguing about flags; it is giving people choice. Is the hon. Lady comfortable with the Leader of the Opposition ordering Conservatives up and down the country not to support the flying of the progress pride flag, and does she not think that taking away that choice is, in fact, creating the argument?

The hon. Member makes a profoundly important point. We have all seen the conversation around preserving the rights of everyone in our society—women and trans people—increasingly made into a political football and into something deeply personal. A lot of that is being driven by social media. Every Member who chooses to speak in today’s debate will have weighed up whether the comments they are making will be clipped and pushed out on social media, and whether they will receive abuse because of what they have chosen to say in this place. That is profoundly wrong. While I recognise that feelings from those on both sides of this issue often go well beyond the pale, it is incumbent on all of us in this place, whatever our views on this delicate and important issue, to treat the debate with the respect and dignity that those affected by it deserve. That is fundamentally where we need to get to on this important issue. The hon. Member kindly highlights my role on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, on which I sit alongside him. That reminds me that the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which has been rightly championed in today’s debate, was passed in large part because of a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that confirmed that trans people have the right not to be outed under article 8. A lot of us have spoken today about how important it is that we feel able to be our authentic selves and to come out. It is incumbent on us all to create a society where LGBT+ people feel that they can live their authentic lives and be honest about who they are. I also think that we all have a profound right to keep personal matters private, if that is what we choose. One of my concerns—it has been raised by many Members today—is that the draft code of practice undermines that human right to privacy, which is set out in law. This is a really challenging debate to be part of. At times, it has been overwhelming, because I am so proud of my party’s record on LGBT+ rights and because, if I am being honest with myself, I think that reputation is at risk. We are at risk of losing our reputation as the party of equality, and our very soul as the Labour party, if we are not willing to stand up for the rights of everyone, including the LGBT+ community. I want to finish on a slightly happier note by wishing everyone in Bracknell Forest and beyond a very happy Pride Month. This is a time to remember, to celebrate hard-won rights and freedoms, and to look forward with a renewed sense of community and hope for the future—for everyone in our great country: all members of the diverse communities that call it home, including, today in particular, all members of the LGBT+ community.

The Minister is making a really important point. The fact that the first action of many Reform councils has been to tear down Pride flags and to ban or defund Pride events really speaks to who they are and their values, and I do not think that they are the values of the vast majority of British people. The Minister is talking about the importance of supporting the LGBTQ+ community in our workplaces. She will know that the Government have today accepted all the recommendations of my noble Friend Lord Mann’s report on antisemitism in the NHS, and I really welcome that. My only question is about political symbols in the NHS. My view is that the Pride flag is not a political symbol, but a symbol of inclusion. Will the Minister work with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that when we bring forward the guidance, we do not fall into the trap of labelling Pride flags or Pride symbols as political symbols, but instead continue to allow our NHS to demonstrate that it is an inclusive organisation for the LGBT+ community?

As my hon. Friend knows, local Reform members in Bracknell tried to block Bracknell Forest council flying the progress flag in recent years, and he knows that I share his view that we need a common-sense fix for this. Frankly, it is a waste of council time to be debating this issue and putting it though planning, when we all want a common-sense approach that allows our communities to show that they are inclusive of everyone within those communities. This is a common-sense change that we could make.

It is a huge privilege to follow that incredible contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West and Leigh (David Burton-Sampson). I think many of us in this place recognise a lot of the experiences he talked about—many of us who know what it is to be holding hands with the person we love as we walk down the street, and then to see someone turn the corner and immediately let go of our loved one’s hand, because we do not know if it is safe to continue holding the person we love close. I pay particular thanks to the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), for her powerful speech. She is doing incredible work to support LGBT+ rights, and she shared a powerful contribution from her constituent that it was very important to put on the record. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) not only for his powerful words, but for giving Hansard a real job with his foreign language skills. There are those who say that we do not need Pride any more—that we have achieved equality; that discrimination and hate based on sexuality and gender is no longer tolerated in this country—but there are also those who say that Pride is not suitable for children with “impressionable minds”, that gay men are “poofs” who mince about, and that if LGBT people “want acceptance”, they need to “stop making a big song and dance about it”. Homophobic comments like these will sadly be familiar to many in this Chamber and across the country. To my mind, such intolerant views are profoundly un-British; they are also the words of Reform’s candidate in the Makerfield by-election. I do not think there could be a clearer demonstration of why we still need Pride, and why we still need today’s debate, than that. I am proud to say that my constituency of Bracknell hosts its own Pride, which will celebrate its fourth year this July. Growing up as a young gay boy in Berkshire—my hon. Friend the Minister grew up in Berkshire herself— I never thought I would see a time when not only Reading, but smaller towns across our county, had a Pride. Wokingham, Windsor, Newbury and other towns all now celebrate Pride every year. This is important, because Pride should be celebrated in every community so that every person can feel that they are loved and included, wherever they come from and whoever they are. I remember how, growing up gay, I sometimes felt like I would never belong. That could be an incredibly isolating feeling. Even in the 2000s, it was very scary for me to come out, knowing that not everyone would accept me for who I was. I take this opportunity to thank everyone who has worked so hard to bring Bracknell Forest Pride to where it is today, and I look forward to celebrating with them later this summer. I want every young LGBT+ person growing up in Bracknell Forest not to have to feel the fear I experienced growing up. In her opening speech, the Minister rightly recognised that the progress made on LGBT+ rights has been hard won, and that the battle for a society where LGBT+ people can truly live without fear of hate and discrimination is far from over. Through the Crime and Policing Act 2026, this Government have acted to equalise hate crime law, so that victims of homophobic hate crimes can know that perpetrators will be fully held to account. We are bringing LGBT+ veterans the justice they deserve after the suffering they have endured, and we are issuing nearly half a million pounds-worth of specialist funding for LGBT+ domestic violence services, as well as committing £21 million over the next three years to support the LGBT community internationally in this time of increasing hostility towards our community nationally and globally. We must now go one step further by delivering on our manifesto commitment to a fully trans-inclusive ban on conversion therapy, as we have committed to doing in the King’s Speech. Those measures are welcome and important, but I cannot in good conscience say that the path of progress in this country is straightforward, even now and even under this Government. I will briefly touch on the draft EHRC code of practice laid before Parliament, which many Members across the House have mentioned. I recognise and respect the judgment of the Supreme Court. It is a narrow and specific judgment about a specific aspect of the Equality Act, but I do not think that in order to make the world safer for women, we must make it less safe for trans people. I have real concerns that where the new EHRC guidance was supposed to bring clarity, it has instead brought only more anxiety, fear and confusion. The Government can and must find a way forward that balances the rights of women and of trans people. If we fail to do that, we risk the safety of both groups, and risk entrenching ourselves in a divisive culture war that we can and must move beyond.

1. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his Department’s policies of the Supreme Court judgment in the Dillon case [2026] UKSC 15.

Terrorists were responsible for the vast majority of deaths during the troubles. Many of those murders remain unsolved, and the last Tory Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 sought to offer immunity to the perpetrators. Does the Secretary of State agree that that is wrong in principle, and can he provide an update on when he plans to move the approval motion for the remedial order to repeal it in the other place?

The hon. Member is making a really important point about the need to focus on early years. Given that, does he regret the decision taken by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government in 2010 to cut Sure Start?

Absolutely. I thank my hon. Friend for making that point. I am aware that the financial strategy sits with the Treasury but, like many of the tasks that face this Government, there must be a cross-Department approach. It is really important that all Departments grapple with the need to deliver better skills for our young people, and I am sure that the Minister has heard my hon. Friend’s request. Today, when it has never been easier for young people—I should add that it is not just young people—to be misled by mis- and disinformation, and to be sucked in by algorithms and harmful content on social media that comforts them with easy answers in a complex world, essential skills have never been more crucial. I am thinking of skills such as being able to think critically, communicate and reason; having the confidence in ourselves to form opinions; and, above all, having the resilience and will to engage with the world in all its complexities, rather than turn away from it.

I thank Members for taking part in today’s debate. It has been fantastic to hear support from across the House for improving access to skills for our young people. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) for reminding us that skills can be delivered across the curriculum. Classics is an excellent example, as it can teach young people not just about declensions, but democracy; not just Augustus, but oracy. Other subjects are available. The hon. Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) is a doughty champion for young people, particularly those with SEND. He made many excellent points about some of the barriers faced by young people. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton North East (Kirith Entwistle) was right to highlight early years. I am grateful for the work being done in Bracknell Forest to roll out new services through our Government-backed Best Start family hub. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) brought, as always, a thoughtful insight from the Northern Irish perspective. He was right to highlight the need for screen time guidance, which I know the Government are committed to delivering. I was delighted to hear my hon. Friend the Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) raise the issue of reading. As a member of the Education Committee, I have been working on its inquiry into reading for pleasure. The evidence we have heard was echoed in my hon. Friend’s contribution. I respectfully disagree with the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) on the EBacc. As the Minister has heard me say many times before, it did not support all humanities subjects equally. Citizenship GCSE, for example, was not included. I do, however, welcome his comments about early years and careers guidance. I thank the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) for his contribution, but I will quote to him from Alan Milburn’s interim report, which says “the school system is built on young people gaining qualifications which is not the same as ensuring they are ready for work.” I encourage the hon. Member to read Milburn’s interim report thoroughly. Finally, I thank the Minister for all the work she is doing in this space. I am excited to see the enrichment framework when it comes forward. I will scrutinise it closely, as she would expect, but I welcome her commitment to delivering it inclusively. As we have all agreed today, getting this right is crucial to supporting our young people’s futures. We all want to see opportunities for young people in our constituencies, and that is what has inspired each of us to speak today. I thank you, Dr Allin-Khan, and all Members for their contributions. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Government support for children developing essential skills.

The hon. Member’s point is well taken. I will talk about the interim report from the Milburn review later, but it is really clear that the skills system that we inherited from the previous Government has not set up our young people for the world of work. Essential skills are about more than just preparing young people for the world of work—they are also about preparing young people for the world of life—but such preparation has an important role to play. I am keen that we work proactively with tech companies to create such opportunities, where doing so in the best interests of young people. Social media companies in particular need to do a lot more to protect young people from harm online. The one thing being true does not detract from the other thing also being true. Returning to the curriculum and assessment review, I welcome the fact that the Government have accepted the recommendation that citizenship be made a statutory requirement for key stages 1 and 2, and that the secondary citizenship curriculum will encompass topics that are vital to raise engaged citizens, including government, law and democracy, climate education, and financial and media literacy. Hon. Members have already made those points. Given the Government’s plans to lower the voting age to 16, those topics have never been more important. The Government are right to recognise that young people are an important voice in our society, but if we are to extend the franchise, we must make sure that we get it right and grasp the opportunity to use the classroom to its full potential, so that young people feel empowered and confident about using their vote. As the chair of the APPG on schools, I have heard from young people and educators both in England and across the devolved nations, where 16 and 17-year-olds already have the vote in some elections, as part of our ongoing inquiry into votes at 16. It was clear from those sessions that young people do not feel as empowered as they should feel by our current democratic education, but that is perhaps not surprising given that many teachers have also reported a lack of confidence in the guidance on how to facilitate conversations about democracy and politics in the classroom. It is right that teachers do not tell young people what to think, but it is deeply concerning that many are so afraid that they might be seen to be doing so that they do not feel comfortable enough to broach the subject of current affairs at all. As a former teacher, I know that the classroom can and should be a place where ideas and questions are explored openly, not feared or hidden from. I ask the Minister to bear that in mind as the Government continue their important work to reform the curriculum, because the best curriculum in the world will not be a success without teachers who feel properly equipped to deliver it. Another theme that stood out strongly from our evidence sessions is the importance of essential skills being integrated into the curriculum, rather than being just the preserve of citizenship or personal, social, health and economic education. I was delighted that the schools White Paper explicitly recognises the relationship between skills such as media and financial literacy and critical thinking, and the wider school curriculum, including core subjects like English and science. It was notable from our sessions that there is a widespread perception that democratic education is often tokenistic, relegating it to a niche, subject-specific interest, rather than making it a fundamental priority of our education system; indeed, I think that is true of all essential skills. The embedding of democratic education throughout the curriculum and connecting it to broader work on employability is an important rejoinder to that perception. On that point, I was also pleased to see the Government recognise in the schools White Paper that oracy is vital not only to education but to employability and the Government’s growth mission, as well as more widely to the confidence and mental health of young people. As we now seek to implement the changes set out in the White Paper, it is important that we do not tokenise oracy and other essential skills but recognise that they represent more of an approach to teaching and learning. In the case of oracy, it is focused on learning through talk and learning to talk. Over the last week, we have heard from Alan Milburn on the essential skills that young people are missing as they leave education and seek to enter the workplace. Embedding oracy into the curriculum and into school-wide teaching can be a significant driver of the very skills that our young people are missing, including increased confidence and communication skills, greater critical thinking ability, and a greater capacity for listening to and empathising with others. I emphasise that all those skills will never be taken by robots. As oracy organisations like Voice 21 highlight, oracy is an explicitly inclusive practice. Oracy-rich teaching supports early identification of children with speech, language and communication needs; it removes barriers that are highest for students with special educational needs and disability, and for those from disadvantaged backgrounds; and it helps to nurture the learning environment that the Government have been clear is their ambition to create, where high standards and inclusion are one and the same. I recognise that we are moving in the right direction, and I thank the Minister for the important steps that she is already taking towards a more holistic approach to education. I also thank her for visiting my constituency last year to discuss the work that we are doing to reform the SEND system and ensure that education is inclusive of everyone. I also thank Voice 21 for the work that it is doing to support schools in my constituency, including at St Joseph’s primary, where, as I heard on a recent visit, oracy is empowering the students to feel more confident and boosting their communication skills. A fully holistic approach to essential skills means not only integrating them into what is taught in the classroom but the wider school and enrichment experience. Both inside and outside the classroom, enrichment opportunities are fundamental to the development of skills like resilience, collaboration and confidence. Just in the last recess, I saw an excellent example of how students volunteering in the community can build essential skills and a spirit of citizenship, through the fantastic MindGreen initiative at Bracknell and Wokingham college. When we have these conversations, we often speak about schools, but it is vital that the same principles are not forgotten in our further education colleges so that all young people are given the opportunity to develop the skills to succeed. With that in mind, I warmly welcome the Government’s commitment to an enrichment entitlement for every young person alongside a national framework and benchmark for schools. Some organisations, however, like the Duke of Edinburgh’s award, have raised concerns that enrichment often gets lost in the wider school curriculum and becomes too thin or inconsistent to make a difference. Research has shown that that is especially likely to be true in state schools compared with private schools, with the Sutton Trust finding that one in five teachers in state schools do not think their school provides good opportunities for pupils to develop these non-academic skills, compared with just one in 10 teachers in private schools. Needless to say, no Labour Government would be satisfied with allowing that gap to continue, so I ask for the Minister’s assurance that the Government are committed to making sure that such opportunities exist meaningfully for all young people in all schools, regardless of background or location.

The hon. Member makes a valuable point. To again reflect on the interim report by Alan Milburn, he highlights that one of the challenges we face is not just that the current education system does not do enough to develop skills; it is also not doing enough to develop a love of learning and inclusion. Young people feeling disaffected, and that they do not belong in schools or colleges, means that we are also unable to make sure that they are accessing a great education. I have always said that the best education is a fun education, because when young people enjoy getting involved in school—enrichment can be a huge part of that for many young people—they are more likely to feel that they belong and to succeed. Over the recess, I was reminded of the importance of enrichment opportunities in young people’s lives at a visit to the Bracknell Cobras, a basketball club in my constituency that works with more than 500 young people a week. During my visit, I heard that the Cobras do not just teach young people to play basketball; they also develop essential skills like teamwork and resilience. They even train them up as referees so that they can gain a nationally recognised qualification. That last point brings me to the crux of my argument: even when young people have the opportunity to develop skills, both in the classroom and through enrichment more widely, they often feel unable to properly identify or quantify their learning, or that the skills can be meaningfully demonstrated to future employers or education providers. That is why, as the Minister knows, I have been working with a wide group of stakeholders to gather views and build the case for reform of the skills passport, inspired by the invaluable work of Skills Builder, which has built a brilliant framework to quantify the skills that young people need to thrive. That idea was first raised with me by young people themselves. On a visit to Garth Hill college in Bracknell, a group of GCSE citizenship students delivered a fantastic presentation to me asking why the school’s curriculum was not better at teaching them essential life skills, such as financial literacy, and why those skills were not measured. Their question, which has stayed with me, was this: why is there no Duke of Edinburgh’s award for life skills? It is obvious to anyone with experience in education that what is not measured is not recognised. I fear that we are failing young people and employers by neglecting to ensure that the essential skills young people develop both in and outside the classroom are properly and meaningfully recorded. As part of its research into the future of the labour market, the National Foundation for Educational Research found that it was essential skills such as collaboration, communication, problem solving and information literacy that will be most needed by employers by 2035. We are already facing deficits in those areas, which are likely to only get worse. It has never been more vital that we equip young people to not just develop essential skills, but record and demonstrate them. That area has strong potential to support the Government’s wider work with regard to growth and supporting young people back into the workforce. I was very pleased to see a commitment to exploring skills passports in the post-16 White Paper, and the recent launch of the UK standard skills classification, which is an important step forwards in a common understanding and vocabulary around skills. I am also grateful to Skills England for meeting with me to discuss that very point. However, it is clear to me that for any form of skills passport to be truly meaningful, introducing it at the end of the school journey is too late. If young people are to be properly empowered to recognise, develop and communicate their essential skills in a way that speaks to them and to potential employers, we must help them to identify those skills much earlier. I want to touch briefly on the new careers service for schools and colleges planned by the Government. I have referred to Alan Milburn’s important interim report numerous times, but another point we have heard over the last few days is the importance of the early years of someone’s career and the long-term impact of missing out on opportunities at that stage. I therefore ask the Minister for assurance that a recognition of the importance of essential skills will be built into the new careers service, so that young people are given the best and most holistic advice possible at this vital point in their educational and personal development. Essential skills are essential for so many reasons. They help us to become more employable and educated, but, more than that, they help to make us better, more resilient, confident and well-rounded people with more capacity for empathy and more curiosity about our world. At a time when we are facing so much uncertainty and volatility, it is incumbent on all of us to equip our young people with the skills they need to be active and empowered citizens in the world. The evidence is clear: our most essential skills are our human skills. Building an education system that no longer overlooks or sidelines but nurtures them is vital. It is up to the Government to build on the great work already started in a truly holistic way so that young people are supported to develop the skills that we as a country need from them, not only as future workers, but as citizens. That is how we break down the barriers to opportunity for every child.

I absolutely agree with my constituency neighbour, and I will come on to talk a lot more about citizenship, which is vital. Just this week, I have been dealing with my local Reform party using AI to create fake images of our community, which is exactly the kind of fake news being put on social media by bad faith actors that we need to ensure that all people—particularly young people—are equipped to face. Schools have a fundamental role to play in preparing young people for life. Both the recent curriculum and assessment review and the schools White Paper recognise the importance of skills and enrichment as part of a holistic education in and outside the classroom.

I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for children developing essential skills. It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I start by declaring that I am chair of the all-party parliamentary groups for schools, learning and assessment; on social mobility; and for classics. It is wonderful to see so many young people in the Public Gallery. We are facing a generational moment. We know the risks that technology and artificial intelligence increasingly pose to our world, but we also know the opportunities. It strikes me that it is up to us to shape a generation that responds to these challenges not with despondency, but with the confidence and authority to make these tools work for humanity, not against it. Without the human skills to properly engage with, discuss and question the world around us, we are setting our children up for failure.

My hon. Friend has rightly talked about the need to avoid using any particular group as a political football and the need to treat everyone with dignity and respect. I agree with her on that, but the Government’s own equality impact assessment says: “The debate on single sex services and the treatment of trans people is particularly divisive at this time. The Code of Practice may exacerbate these tensions.” Does she accept the Government’s own impact assessment on that point?

I declare an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment. I thank the Minister for his virtual visit to a school in Hebron yesterday. What did he hear directly from pupils at that school about their hopes for peace, and what more can we do to ensure that everyone in Palestine and across the world has the right to an education?

Families in Bracknell Forest often tell me that the schools holidays can be bittersweet; the opportunity to make treasured memories and spend time with their children must be balanced against having to juggle childcare and work, as well as the cost of living pressures that come from keeping their children entertained. The measures VAT cuts for summer attractions that the Chancellor has announced today will therefore make a real difference. May I ask her to encourage people across the country to make use of the fantastic leisure facilities in Bracknell Forest, including the Look Out Discovery Centre, South Hill Park and Play World soft play, as they take advantage of this new scheme?

I start by declaring that I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment, of the all-party parliamentary group on social mobility, and of the all- party parliamentary group for classics. I welcome the ambitious agenda set out yesterday in a King’s Speech that places working people at its heart—an agenda that builds on our promises to deliver a safer, stronger and more prosperous country. It is an agenda that will get Britain working and break down the barriers to opportunity, both for our country on the global stage and for every young person in it. Opening up new opportunities for growth and trade is a vital part of this Government’s commitment to working families, because it is crucial that my constituents not only hear about the change we are delivering, but feel it in their pockets. As such, the Prime Minister is right when he says that a stronger relationship with Europe is in all of our best interests. Our European neighbours are our closest friends and allies, and greater opportunities on the continent for our businesses and our young people can only mean a more prosperous country with more opportunities for all. [ Interruption. ] It does not make sense to be so fixated on an ideology that we act against the interests of our nation and reject the opportunities that are on our doorstep—we are hearing some of that in the chuntering from Conservative Front Benchers. I remind those lining up to cry “Brexit betrayal” that the Leave campaign never promised that we would be completely isolated from our closest economic and defensive allies. In fact, it promised quite the opposite. A closer relationship with Europe means a safer, stronger, more prosperous Britain at a time when that has never been more important, and youth mobility offers brighter futures for our young people. I am proud to support the Government’s clear leadership in this area. I also welcome the Government’s commitment to supporting British businesses and jobs through tackling unnecessary regulation and supporting businesses to introduce 50,000 more apprenticeships. I was delighted to see this in action in my constituency with the recent opening of a new youth employment hub in Bracknell, which will support hundreds of young people to enter the workplace and develop their skills and futures. I extend a huge thank you to the local businesses across Bracknell Forest that are supporting this initiative, because I and this Government recognise that youth unemployment is not just a problem that lies with individuals. It will take a whole-of-society approach to reach the one in eight young people who are not in education, work or training, and give them hope again. We also know that for many young people the barriers to opportunity begin far before they even think of entering the workplace. Of all the issues that constituents have raised with me since I became Bracknell’s MP, none has been as complex, pervasive, emotional or deeply personal as those I have heard from parents and children experiencing our broken SEND system. As such, I could not welcome more strongly the commitment this Government have made to face the problem head-on and reform our broken system. This Government’s determination to deliver for SEND young people is already making a big difference in my constituency, where funding has been confirmed for a new SEND school at Buckler’s Park in Crowthorne. Under the previous Conservative Government, that school was promised, but never funded. This Government are ending the years of empty promises, and are not only investing in the services that families so badly need, but getting on with the work we were elected to do and rebuilding those services so that they actually function. My only ask—the SEND Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Queen’s Park and Maida Vale (Georgia Gould), who is in her place and always listens very attentively on this issue, knows what I am going to say—is that we build that school as quickly as possible. Having visited my constituency, she knows all too well that in Bracknell, and across the country, there are very many young people who need us to act as quickly as we can to get them the places in mainstream education and specialist provision that they so badly need. On that note, it is also hugely welcome to see the Government delivering an initial £1 million in funding to Bracknell Forest council to establish our new Experts at Hand service, which will improve the availability of occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and educational psychologists to our local schools. I was delighted to get an update on that new programme earlier this week. Many parent carers are concerned about the need to train more practitioners. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister also recognises those challenges, so I hope we can set out an ambitious but deliverable workforce plan as soon as possible, to make sure that the new service can make the difference it is intended to make. Recently, I hosted a meeting with parents in my constituency to discuss the SEND proposals. There was no doubt among those who attended that the system is badly in need of change, but parent carers raised concerns about individual support plans containing the right safeguards to ensure that every young person gets the support they need. I know that Ministers take that task extremely seriously, and I welcome their resolve to listen to families and educators and to make sustained, meaningful change. Accountability is important, so I simply ask Ministers to focus on that issue as they respond to the consultation. I look forward to the Government setting out all of their proposals in the education for all Bill, to rebuild a system that will give every child the education and opportunities they deserve. Reform to our education system is about high standards for all, but it is also about preparing our young people to be active, informed and ambitious for their futures. As a former teacher, I know that young people have much to contribute to our political and civic life, and I wholeheartedly welcome the plans set out by this Government to extend the right to vote to 16 and 17-year-olds. As chair of the APPG for schools, learning and assessment, I have been leading an inquiry into votes at 16 and how we can ensure schools are supporting young people to engage in our democracy. I thank the democracy Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Chester North and Neston (Samantha Dixon), for attending one of our evidence sessions. We have heard from a wide range of young people, educators and civic organisations, and the message has been clear. This is the moment for a wider reflection on our education system and how it serves all of us in areas of civic life—not just in the classroom, but across society. The success of votes at 16 will be reflected, not just in how many young people vote, but in how they feel about their experience of voting and the tools that are available to support them to exercise their right to vote. I welcome the work that is already being undertaken in this area, including the curriculum and assessment review and the schools White Paper. I urge Ministers to grasp the opportunity to embrace a fully cross-departmental approach to delivering this policy, so that our young people develop the skills that employers are crying out for, the skills that will empower them in every area of their life, and have a sense of belonging. It is so important for everyone to feel that they belong to, contribute to, and are part of this United Kingdom. This Government are fixing the foundations of this country. A quality education and secure employment are the gateways to opportunity, but so too is having a safe and decent home to live in. Too many people are denied that—stuck in insecure, impermanent accommodation and on long waiting lists for social housing simply to find somewhere suitable to live. We have already done a huge amount to tackle those injustices through our Renters’ Rights Act 2025. I am proud that Bracknell’s history as a post-war new town shows what ambition a Labour Government can have when staring a housing crisis in the face, a point that was made eloquently yesterday by my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) when seconding the Humble Address. Let me quickly put on record that I am as proud of Bracknell as he is of Harlow. As everyone in this House will know, that is quite a big boast, given how supportive he is of Harlow. I welcome the announcement of a social housing renewal Bill, including measures to protect our vital social housing stock and to introduce greater protections for tenants in instances of domestic abuse. I am pleased that the Government are proposing reforms to tackle disposals, but I would like us to go even further in this area so that local authorities are not just informed of any disposal of valuable housing stock, but must approve of it. Given that we have so many families on our waiting lists, I think that is very important. The social housing renewal Bill will ensure the investment and reform needed so that the great legacy that made Bracknell and other new towns what they are today can belong not just to Labour Governments past, but equally to this Government. Finally, I will touch on something a bit more personal, but no less important. There is no place in the Britain I know and love for abusive conversion practices to continue. The promise we made to ban them is one we must keep, and I offer my full support to the Government’s plans to bring forward draft legislation to do so in this Session. It is right that that ban will be fully trans-inclusive. The British people elected this Labour Government to deliver change. In my maiden speech, I emphasised that that would not be easy and would not necessarily always happen as quickly as we would like. Transparently, this week has demonstrated the truth of those words far more than I would have liked, so let me simply finish with this promise to the constituents who put their faith in me and sent me to this place to represent them. Whatever the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune care to throw at me, I will remain focused on the one and only thing I was sent here to do: delivering change for my constituents.

I am grateful to the Minister for giving way; I tried to intervene on the shadow Minister but was not successful. On that cross-party consensus, was she as surprised as I was to see no commitment at all on special educational needs in the Conservative party’s so-called alternative King’s speech? Does she share my concern that that demonstrates its complete lack of seriousness on that really important issue?

The hon. Lady makes a powerful case, but her party was the future once, so why were all the challenges that she identifies not fixed when the Conservatives were in government? They were the ones who set up and built this welfare system.

The hon. Member knows how fond I am of her, but how can she possibly in one voice condemn building new homes and in the next sentence suggest that we do not have enough homes for young people to live in? She simply cannot have her cake and eat it.

The hon. Member said that the victory secured by the SNP at the elections earlier this month was bigger than the victory secured by this Government in 2024. Could he clarify whether the SNP won more or less seats at that election than it previously held? Has the SNP’s majority increased or decreased?

I want to push the Minister on mitigations around surface access. This is an opportunity not just to mitigate concerns about existing surface access arrangements, but to massively improve those arrangements. He will be aware that across a large swathe of the south of England, there is effectively no way to get to the airport apart from driving. Through this process we have an opportunity not just to mitigate concerns, but to boost and upgrade public transport networks to get to Heathrow airport.

The Minister is making a really important point about the importance of surface access. He will know, because I have pressed him on this before, how important I think it is that we get better rail access to Heathrow, regardless of whether there is a third runway. Heathrow has committed to looking at both a western rail link and, importantly for my constituents in Bracknell, a southern rail link. Would he like to see those plans go ahead? Will he press Heathrow to make sure that they are part of any proposals, and will he do everything he can to deliver better rail access for my constituents?

I thank my constituency neighbour for giving way. As he knows, there are many park homes across Bracknell Forest, which we both represent. I understand the scepticism that some have expressed about the call for evidence, but as he has identified, the Government need to put forward something that can stand up to those with very expensive lawyers behind them. Will he therefore take this opportunity to urge everyone who lives in a park home, whether in Bracknell Forest or elsewhere across the country, to contribute to that call for evidence, so that the evidence base can be as robust as it needs to be and we can abolish the 10% charge?

My hon. Friend is making a powerful point. A conflict is sometimes presented between our understandable concerns about animal welfare and good science, but, as she set out, there is no such conflict. The really heartbreaking, frustrating thing is that many of the ongoing experiments that cause animals to suffer are far less rigorous than some of the alternatives that we already know work better but are not yet regulated in the same way. Does she agree that the Government’s road map fires the starting gun to make sure we have regulated alternatives in place as quickly as possible? Will she join me in urging the Government to move as quickly as possible so we can get better, more robust science and protect animals? It is an “and”, not an “or” or an “either”.

As a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, I thank the Secretary of State for appearing in front of our Committee on two occasions—he has truly embraced scrutiny. The JCHR is currently carrying out legislative scrutiny of the Bill, and the remarks I offer tonight are informed by the evidence that we have received, although we are still working through that process. As we all recognise, there is no more complex and sensitive a legacy than that of the troubles, which is why it is so tragic that the previous Government’s legacy Act failed so greatly. It failed because it could not command cross-community support, because it was rejected as unlawful by the British courts and, of course, because it introduced immunity, including for terrorists—a point made most strongly tonight by the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart). We owe it to the victims of the troubles to do better, and as my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker) pointed out, that includes the families of service personnel and the police. On veterans and those who served, I note that genuine concerns have been raised. As the MP for Sandhurst, I know how important this issue is for all those who put on a uniform and bravely put themselves forward to defend our country. I thank the Secretary of State for listening to those concerns and for committing to bring forth amendments. Although all Members of this House will scrutinise those amendments closely when they are brought forward, I am grateful for that commitment. It is important that we carry over the Bill, so that all Members can scrutinise it. This Bill is our opportunity to finally begin to address the legacy of the troubles. I feel very strongly that all of us must take that duty seriously and carry it out with all due seriousness.

1. What recent discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on support for clean energy projects in Wales.

The war in Iran has put in stark relief the importance of clean energy to the UK. From Bracknell to Bangor, we have all seen the effects on our bills. Will the Secretary of State update the House on the role that clean energy is playing in Wales and its importance to the future of Wales?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for bringing this debate to the House tonight. I have been asked to come along on behalf of my constituent, James Nichols, who lost a dear friend in just that age group to SUDEP and has been a tireless campaigner on the issue ever since. He explained to me that the really tragic thing about SUDEP is that it can often come somewhat out of the blue through breakthrough seizures after an individual has not had seizures for many years, which can make it a particularly traumatic experience for loved ones and family members. Will the hon. Gentleman perhaps touch a bit more on what we can do to support family members?

The hon. Lady is setting out an extraordinary situation. I want to draw her attention to another real challenge facing drivers: collisions with people who are not insured. Uninsured drivers cost the economy £1 billion a year, and they are disproportionately likely to be involved in collisions, speeding and hit-and-run incidents. That is why I introduced a ten-minute rule Bill last year to increase penalties, and I was delighted to see the Government take up that call for action in their road safety strategy. Is the hon. Lady aware of the massive issue of uninsured drivers, as well as the scams she is reporting on, and does she welcome further action on it?

At the start of his speech, my hon. Friend mentioned the involvement of AI in this. That issue was raised with me by the Thames Valley police roads team, which said it is now quite possible for uninsured drivers to use AI to generate a fake insurance document at the roadside, and in that way to prevent the police from tackling this crime. I detect that my hon. Friend may know more about this than me, so I encourage him to say a little more about it before he wraps up his excellent speech.

T8. As the MP for Sandhurst, I am proud to represent many armed forces families. As the Minister will know, armed forces families often move around, but no particular support seems to be given to their children. There is no marker to identify these children, they do not qualify for fair access protocols, and they are given no particular priority in admissions. Will she meet me to discuss how we can better support the children of armed forces families?

When this Government took office, they inherited an armed forces on its knees and responded to that challenge with the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the cold war and a bold 10-year strategic defence review to ensure that we have an armed forces that once again is able to protect our nation. That is why it is so important that we get a defence investment plan as quickly as possible. I have heard today from my hon. Friend that he is keen to get that out as quickly as possible and also that it should be the right plan. May I simply take this opportunity to urge him to keep going so we can get that plan as soon we can?

As well as being a member of the Education Committee, which has done sterling work on this point, I am a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which is undertaking an inquiry on human rights in the care system. We held a powerful roundtable with care-experienced young people, and that point was powerfully made to us. We have not yet reached the end of our inquiry and do not yet have recommendations, but I want to put on record my gratitude to those young people for sharing their experiences, and to the Government for making this really important change; I know that it will make so many lives better.

7. What steps his Department is taking to improve levels of access to GPs in Bracknell Forest.

I declare an interest: my brother is a GP. Many residents in Bracknell Forest find the best way to contact their GP is online or by phone, but others have told me that they want to be able to visit their local surgery and book an appointment in person. Can my hon. Friend confirm that the new GP contract guarantees that patients have the right to choose to contact their GP in the way that works best for them, whether by phone, online or in person?

Russia is in our seas and undermining our North sea cables. It is on social media spreading myths and disinformation. It is even in our politics: we must remember that the former Reform leader in Wales is currently serving time in prison for accepting Russian bribes. Members across the House recognise the ever-present threat that Russia poses to this country, but I am not sure that the public are always quite as aware of the scale and presence of Russia as it affects our society at every level. I thank the Minister for coming to the House today and updating us on what has been going on. It is really important that we expose what Russia is up to. Can I urge him to work with colleagues across Government to ensure that we continue to expose Russia wherever it is attacking us?

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

I recently hosted an open meeting with parents on these reforms. Although there was widespread welcoming of much of what is in the White Paper, they urged that real, sustained change should happen. One concern was about the enforceability and accountability for ISPs, what would happen if a school was not delivering what was needed to support a child, and where that accountability would fall.

I thank the Prime Minister for his leadership on this issue. Unlike certain other world leaders, it is clear that he recognises the consequences that international crises have on the cost of living at home. My constituents feel that impact every time they go to fill up the car, which is made more galling by the fact that in Bracknell fuel is between 2p and 10p more expensive than in neighbouring towns. What conversations have the Government had with the Competition and Markets Authority and the sector at large to clamp down on that obvious unfairness?

I genuinely welcome the fact that my hon. Friend stresses the need for locally led decision making. She will know that there is widespread support across the Thames valley for a foundation strategic authority for Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Swindon, and that a bid along those lines is with her ministerial colleagues at the moment. She will also know that there is genuine concern about a different proposal, wholly unacceptable to local leaders, that is being mooted. Will she reassure me and colleagues across the House that when it comes to FSAs, MSAs, SDSs or any initialism that she chooses, there will always be priority given to locally led decision making?

The hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) may call me Pothole Pete after this question. Residents in Bracknell Forest are frustrated about potholes, so I welcome the fact that Bracknell Forest council has committed over £7 million to fixing local roads in this year’s budget, backed by millions of pounds of support from this Government. Does the Leader of the House agree that this shows how a Labour council and the Labour Government can work together to address residents’ priorities and deliver better roads across the borough?

I thank the Minister for all that he has said so far. We have had an incredibly harmonious debate, with views shared by Members from across the House on this important issue. I note that a Member of Reform UK, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), has now entered the Chamber, but does the Minister share my concern that Reform Members did not contribute to the debate? This is not the first time that we have had an important debate on defence from which Reform Members have been absent. Does he agree that if that party wants to present itself as being serious about defence, perhaps it should involve itself when we are debating important issues such as this?

I am privileged to have seen the service and sacrifice of the Gurkhas to the British Army at first hand during my visit to Brunei last year, where I had the honour of being hosted by the First Battalion, The Royal Gurkha Rifles as part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme—a scheme that I know the Minister is a firm supporter of. The Headquarters Brigade of Gurkhas is also located at the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst, which I am proud to represent, though I should clarify that the headquarters itself falls just outside the constituency. Bracknell Forest is also home to a thriving Nepalese community, focused mostly around Sandhurst. In fact, Nepalese is the second most commonly spoken language in our borough after English. Every time I meet a Gurkha, or visit our armed forces and see how integral the Gurkhas are to our global reputation and our capabilities, I am reminded of the words inscribed on the Gurkha soldier memorial, not 500 yards from this Chamber. I thank the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) for reminding us of these important words. “Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had country more faithful friends than you.” As today’s debate has already demonstrated, there is rightly deep respect for Gurkhas across this House. Today is an important opportunity to recognise all that Gurkha veterans have done to defend this country’s interests and security, and to pay tribute to them for that. That is why it is only right that we respect their sacrifice and contributions in kind. I was proud recently to put my name, alongside a number of colleagues, to a letter to the Veterans Minister from my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker), who is an ardent champion for the Gurkhas. Her work on this has already been rightly highlighted today in this debate. The letter welcomed the election of a new Government in Nepal and recognised the importance of continued constructive engagement on Gurkha welfare with Nepal. I know that the Government are committed to putting the delays of previous Governments behind us and making progress where others have failed to do so. I look forward to supporting their work to achieve a fairer deal for Gurkha veterans. One area that I would particularly like to highlight, as the Government pick up our conversations with the new Government in Nepal, is the recruitment of women into the Gurkhas. I know that this is an issue that the Government have raised previously, so can I take this opportunity to ask for the Minister’s assurances that they will continue to pursue this with the new Nepalese Government? Madam Deputy Speaker, may I emphasise the will that I know exists in this place to work collaboratively with Nepal on this issue? I welcome the opportunity to continue the dialogue with the new Government and reinstate my support for efforts to find a resolution that properly recognises the enormous contribution made by Gurkhas to our country. Only then can we ever hope to begin to repay the huge debt of gratitude that we owe to our Gurkha veterans; and to be as faithful friends to them as they have been, and continue to be, to us.

I thank Sir Philip Rycroft for his important work. In his review, he notes: “The online environment has created a cheap and relatively simple means of getting anonymised content in front of ordinary people in a way that seeks to undermine their trust in the political process.” He notes that this activity is “strategic, long-term and patient”, and that “dissonance is its own reward.” Does the Secretary of State agree with those findings? What can we do to address the challenge of misinformation and disinformation on social media and in online spaces?

The Minister mentioned energy security. Of course, that is fundamentally the most important issue facing us as a country at the moment, not only because of the conflict in the middle east, but wider conflicts, including that in Ukraine. Is it not the case that we must stop taking short-term decisions and instead look to the long-term future of our energy so that we can get nationally controlled energy security, which is good for our national security, too?

T2. Last week, I visited Estonia with the Education Committee to learn about early-years education, and I heard that even nursery-aged children are taught to spot fake news. What conversations has the Minister had with colleagues across Government about taking a whole-of-society approach to misinformation and disinformation?

The right hon. Lady knows that the challenge at the moment is that, because of the way that the system works, local authorities can control the number of admissions to good and outstanding maintained schools, but have much less control when it comes to academies. When there are falling pupil numbers—as she knows there are across the country—and work needs to be done to ensure we have the right number of places in the right areas, the only lever that our local authorities have to pull is reducing admissions to good and outstanding maintained schools. Does the right hon. Lady not agree that it is right that this Government act to make sure we can make choices in the interests of children and parents, regardless of the type of school?

I thank the Defence Secretary for all he is doing to support our troops in the region and protect British citizens. It is clear that a long conflict would pose real risks not only to our troops, but to energy prices and the cost of living here in the UK. Does he agree that we need to see urgent de-escalation and a reduction in tensions across the region, and does he share my concern that the Conservatives and Reform would see us dragged into a conflict that could have such devastating consequences for British lives and livelihoods?

21. What assessment he has made of trends in levels of disinformation by foreign state actors.

Last week, a representative of Meta appeared before the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and when I pressed him on its role in safeguarding democracy, he was unable to say whether it is doing enough to prevent foreign actors from using social media to undermine our democratic rights and freedoms. This week, we have had the Second Reading of the Representation of the People Bill, which seeks to strengthen our democracy. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to use this opportunity to get together with social media companies—or rather, to get tougher with them; I only wish we could get together with them—that are not doing enough about foreign interference on their platforms?

Absolutely. As we heard, the range of children’s books is growing. It can be slightly reductive to suggest that a single type of book appeals to a single kind of child, so we need to see a broad range of books. We need non-fiction as well as fiction, because lots of young people love to get into reading by picking up a non-fiction book. Whatever we can do, with the help of children’s authors, to encourage young people to find the thing that gets them reading and gets them hooked so that they carry on reading, including a broader range of works, is important. This is a world where boys and young men are facing unique pressures. They are increasingly vulnerable to turning away from the world and towards the misogyny and hatred they too often encounter online. Hon. Members in the Chamber may have heard me speak many times about the importance of skills in our education system, but it strikes me that this debate concerns the most essential skill of all, which goes to the heart of how we equip our boys to become healthy and happy young men in today’s world—not reading per se, as important as that is, but empathy. Ultimately, whatever the genre or type of book, reading is about seeing the world from a new perspective and a point of view that is different from our own. That is why it speaks to our common humanity. As we come together as a nation this year to celebrate our shared love of reading and our mutual responsibility to foster that in the younger generation, we must ensure that that effort is inclusive and inspiring. That is perhaps the biggest challenge, but it also holds the greatest rewards. If we can take reading for pleasure as our starting point, not our ending point, everything else will follow. I will finish by sharing the book that I am reading at the moment, which is “Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead” by Olga Tokarczuk. I am reading it with my book club. I thought I would finish with that, purely to point out that no one is ever too old or too young to pick up a good book.

The hon. Lady provokes me to add a huge thank you to all the grandparents, kinship carers and extended family who support parents in reading to their children. In my family, it is often my dad who reads to my nieces and who they run to for a book at bedtime, so I say a huge thank you to the surrounding family who support our young people to love reading.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I declare an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment, and the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on social mobility. This debate was opened so passionately by my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), Chair of the Education Committee, who rightly reminds us of the role of parents in World Book Day, scurrying around and supporting their young people to dress up in fantastic costumes. One of my happiest memories of World Book Day is of when I was a teacher and put together a fantastic costume of the Cyclops from Homer’s “Odyssey”—I do not think the pictures are still online, so do not try to look for them. Reading is one of life’s joys. It is a bridge to new worlds, to new opportunities and to new ideas. One of my proudest and happiest moments so far as Bracknell’s MP was having the honour to open a new school library at Fox Hill primary in my constituency. Seeing the excitement from so many young readers who could not wait to make use of the new renovated space warmed my heart. So too did visiting Uplands school in Sandhurst alongside the Education Secretary last year, and speaking to students there about the books they were reading and why they had chosen them. I take this opportunity to officially wish everyone here, in Bracknell Forest and across the country a happy World Book Day, and a happy National Year of Reading. The Government are marking the event with a commitment to ensure that every primary school in England has a library by the end of this Parliament. Reading has proven benefits for attainment. It has been linked to stronger writing skills, improved brain development and even higher future earnings, but it is not just academically that it benefits young people. It also has a demonstrable impact on wellbeing, including on confidence, empathy and emotional intelligence. Given the challenges facing young people in our modern world, these are the skills we need to help them develop. As the Chair of the Education Committee said, we are conducting an inquiry into reading for pleasure. We have heard evidence about the wide range of benefits of reading for young people, and that reading for pleasure—reading what we want to read, because we want to read it—has particular advantages. We have also heard alarming evidence that there has been a 36% decrease in the number of children between eight and 18 who are reading for pleasure since 2005. Only a third of children are now picking up a book and enjoying doing so. We are seeing that decline in two particular groups—those with special educational needs and boys. There are obvious barriers to reading for many SEND learners, particularly those with dyslexia, but that does not mean that they should not be afforded the same opportunities as their classmates to access the benefits and joys of books, or that they do not stand to benefit from reading just as much as their peers. There are many ways to access the world of reading, from traditional physical books to audiobooks, graphic novels, newspapers and e-readers, and it is not just format where inclusion matters. What international evidence exists suggests that the systemic use of age-appropriate, culturally inclusive children’s literature, coupled with an engaging reading experience, can help build positive reading habits and enhance comprehension for SEND learners. For that reason, it is so important that we support and empower schools to create inclusive cultures around reading. The British Dyslexia Association, a fantastic organisation that just so happens to be based in my constituency, has stressed that there are concrete measures that schools can take and Government can promote that would make a real difference. Those include funding widely stocked and accessible school libraries, providing training and technology to support staff, and early intervention to identify reading difficulties as soon as possible. According to the National Literacy Trust, reading rates are lower for boys than for girls at every age, and fewer than one in 10 boys aged 14 to 16 read for daily pleasure. That is an important point. Reading is important for attainment but, as I have said, it is already a joy, and it should be encouraged not purely for academic purposes but simply for fun. It is especially interesting that the NTL’s research shows that reading for pleasure dips for both girls and boys in early adolescence, but recovers for girls while remaining persistently low for boys. That drives the widening gender gap on reading for pleasure in the teenage years, so why do young men not pick up books again while their female classmates do? We do not have all the answers to that, but we need to find them.

I have raised my concerns about foreign interference by Russia and China on many occasions, and today’s events underline why the issue is so important. I welcome the Rycroft review; it is fundamental that we get to the bottom of foreign interference in our politics. My only concern is that because the review will consider financial interference specifically, it may not have the scope to get the full facts. If that proves to be the case, will the Minister do everything in his power to ensure that we have further such work, so that we know the full extent of foreign interference in our democracy, in our elections and in this place?

2. What recent discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on increasing economic growth in Wales.

One challenge faced by young people from Bracknell to Bangor is a lack of affordable housing, and not building enough homes affects our economy, too. I was pleased that the Secretary of State recently announced that our UK Government would be devolving powers to create a vacant land tax to the Welsh Government. Does she agree that this move will prevent land banking, and will lead to more houses being built in Wales, which would be good for the economy and good for our young people?

T9. The International Road Assessment Programme, based in Bracknell, has saved well over half a million lives from road crashes around the world, which is a significant contribution to the UN’s sustainable development goals and a real success story of British expertise on the global stage. What can this Government do to champion the work of iRAP more effectively?

I declare an interest: I am chair of the all-party group on schools, learning and assessment, and we are conducting an inquiry on votes at 16 to see what support young people will need to make the most of the vote, when they get it. The most important thing that young people are telling us is that they are concerned that their teachers do not feel confident enough to lead discussions in the classroom around politics. Does my hon. Friend agree that we must support not just our young people, but our teachers, and enable conversations about democracy, the voting process and citizenship?

I agree with my hon. Friend’s argument. I am a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and a representative from Meta spoke to the Committee just last week. I was very concerned about their answers when probed on the work that needs to be done to protect social media sites from foreign interference. Does he share my concerns that social media companies are not doing enough to tackle this issue on their platforms?

On Tuesday, the Education Committee held a public evidence session on historical forced adoptions and heard how, over many decades, unmarried mothers were shamed and coerced into giving up their babies for adoption—a practice driven by the policies of the state and delivered by charities and religious organisations, including the Church of England. Do the Church Commissioners agree that the victims—mothers and adopted children—are owed a full and formal apology from the Church for its role in this scandal? I heard what my hon. Friend said, but only a formal apology will begin to heal the wounds of this horrible scandal.

8. What assessment the Church has made of the potential merits of issuing a formal apology to mothers and adoptees affected by the Church’s involvement in historical forced adoptions.

Oh no it didn’t!

7. What steps her Department is taking to help improve outcomes for young people in Bracknell Forest.

Last week, I dropped into the Wayz youth centre in Bracknell to celebrate its 60th anniversary—that is, 60 years of supporting young people in Bracknell Forest, developing their skills and helping them find and use their voice. This Government are backing the youth centre with our national youth strategy, which young people from the Wayz contributed to. I am delighted that the Government have announced more capital funding to support youth centres after many years of neglect. What specific funding pots are available for the Wayz because when a youth centre is 60 years old, there is always a need to invest in the day-to-day upkeep?

T7. The national youth strategy offers us a once-in-a-generation opportunity to improve access to youth services for young people in Bracknell Forest and across the country. What discussions has the Minister had with colleagues in the Ministry of Defence to tie the strategy together with the strategic defence review’s target of expanding access to the cadet forces by 30% by 2030?

On the last day before the February recess, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government released a consultation on regional strategic planning, including proposed maps for regions where a mayoral strategic authority has not already been established. I am extremely concerned that that amounts to imposing a devolution area on my region from Whitehall, but I have not yet been able to secure a meeting with the Minister in question to share my concerns. Will the Leader of the House speak to colleagues in MHCLG about arranging that meeting as quickly as possible?

T9. I am delighted that two mental health support teams are already at work in Bracknell Forest, supporting almost four-fifths of local pupils with timely, targeted mental health support. There is a lot more to do to fix the child and adolescent mental health services system, but could the Minister set out how school-based interventions are beginning to deliver change?

Countless parents in my constituency have described the constant fight to get support for their SEND children. They have to battle to get a piece of paper that sets out rights that they then cannot access because the support is not there. Will the Secretary of State set out what the new system will mean for the day-to-day lives of children and their parents, and how we can rebuild trust after so many have been let down for so long?

Q3. The Government have delivered the funding needed to rebuild the new Frimley Park hospital after the Conservatives made empty, unfunded promises to my constituents. Now we urgently need to get on with announcing the preferred site, along with the investment needed to improve public transport, road access and parking. Will the Prime Minister urge NHS England to make this a priority and help give much-needed clarity to Bracknell Forest residents?

This week marks 17 years since my mum died of lung cancer. She was just 58, and I was just 15. Last week, when I visited a local lung cancer screening service in Bracknell and heard how it is using AI to speed up diagnosis, it was personal. Can the Minister say a bit more about what we are doing to roll out schemes such as that to make sure that more families like mine do not have to suffer the loss of a loved one to this terrible disease?

Road safety is one of the top issues that constituents write to me about. That is why I took the opportunity to hear from nearly 1,000 Bracknell Forest residents on this issue over the summer, as I conducted my summer campaign on road safety. Those conversations and speaking with many incredible charities and organisations in Bracknell Forest and beyond impressed on me the need for greater action on uninsured drivers. Those who drive uninsured are statistically more likely to be involved in road accidents, as well as to commit other risky offences on the road, including hit-and-run incidents and speeding. Towards the end of last year, I introduced a ten-minute rule Bill to bring in tougher measures, and I thank the Minister for listening to my constituents and launching a consultation on a review of the motoring offences framework, which has not been updated since 1988. Uninsured driving was not the only issue raised with me by residents. Speeding is a concern for so many who use the roads responsibly. They see it happening, and they know that they and their loved ones are put at risk by this dangerous behaviour. In fact, more than 70% of respondents to my road safety survey agreed that people drive too quickly down residential and main roads in Bracknell Forest. I am therefore pleased that the Government are publishing new guidance for setting local speed limits and updating guidance on the use of speed cameras and red-light cameras. I pay tribute to the work already undertaken by Thames Valley police on vehicle offences more generally. Vehicle crime in Bracknell Forest is down 14% compared with the end of 2024, and I know that our local policing team has been working hard to crack down on offences including illegal car meets and uninsured driving. We have already heard from many Members about potholes, so I will quickly welcome the nearly £17 million invested by this Government in our local roads over the course of this spending period.

As the Prime Minister will know, many Japanese companies have their British home in my constituency of Bracknell, so I welcome his visit to Japan. Could he set out a little more about how we can further strengthen our relationship with our Japanese friends and allies, and what that will mean for my constituents?

Across the country, millions of fathers can be denied time off work to spend with a newborn child. Thousands of carers are out of work because employers will not give them the flexibility they need. This Government are delivering day one paternity leave, and we are listening on carer’s leave. I know what a difference that will make to my constituents. Can the Minister think why the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) and his Reform MPs voted against this change?

11. What steps he is taking to improve workers’ rights in Bracknell Forest.

Absolutely. As well as our reservists, there is a huge role for cadets to play. I am so proud that the Government are committed to expanding the cadets by 30% by 2030, including by ensuring that there are more opportunities for cadets to learn science, technology, engineering and maths skills, as I am hearing they are in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

What the hon. Member is saying is so important—more important than party politics. Fundamentally, as we work to fix the special educational needs and disabilities system, we must bear in mind the unique circumstances of those who serve our country. I thank her for raising that important point.

Is the shadow Secretary of State’s defence for the shambles and the shame of military homes that he finally acted as Defence Secretary where his predecessors had sat on their hands? Is that really his defence of the Tory disgrace of our military homes?

Can I just say, as much as we have occasionally sparred across the Chamber, what the right hon. Member just said speaks volumes for the role that our reservists play up and down the country? Whether or not they are deployed or get medals, so many ordinary men and women step forward to say that they would serve this country if push came to shove—and I say that as somebody who has not done it myself, and I hold my hands up to that. That is so important, so I want to pay tribute to what the right hon. Member said and to all our reservists.

Will the shadow Secretary of State give way?

It is so important, is it not, that we recognise, when setting out to tackle violence against women and girls, that that must extend across all of society. It cannot be right for those who are bravely serving in our armed forces to be victims of sexual violence in their workplace while they are doing the most important job there can be—defending our nation.

As the MP for Sandhurst, which is in my constituency, I am incredibly proud to represent the home of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, and I am proud to speak today on a Bill that delivers on our commitment to our armed forces. The Bill fully enshrines the expanded armed forces covenant into law, increases protections for those who serve, including from sexual and violent behaviour, and establishes a publicly owned Defence Housing Service, which is backed by a £9 billion strategy to end the shameful record of the Conservative party and make sure that our service people and their families have the homes they deserve. In the south-east alone, we will see more than 14,000 military homes renewed, including in my constituency. The Bill looks outward as well as inward. It rises to the gravity of the threats that we face as a nation today. In order to protect us, our service people must be supported, housed decently and listened to. They must also be equipped to meet the challenges before them. I am pleased that the Bill contains ambitious measures to grow and sustain our nation’s readiness in these turbulent times. The Bill will enhance our ability to mobilise rapidly by expanding our reserve pool, through increasing the maximum age limit for recall to the reserve forces, and giving my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State the power to authorise recall in a conflict scenario. I especially welcome that these measures are a direct response to the strategic defence review’s call for transformation in the way that our defence and security is organised and delivered.

Absolutely. Many serving in my constituency are right at the start of their careers, but I recognise that the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst would not function were it not for the many armed forces personnel who spend a significant portion of their careers dedicated to training the next generation of Army leaders. I pay tribute to them for all they do. I hope the powers in the Bill are never needed, but we owe it to our brave armed forces to be prepared for any eventuality. We cannot pretend that we are not living in a more dangerous world than even a few years ago, with war returning to Europe following Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. The spheres in which warfare can play out are no longer limited to the physical, and by that I mean in the sky, the sea and the land. It is a fact that our information and online spheres are constantly under attack by those who would wish to see us weakened. We must go further and faster to robustly defend our society and security in all quarters. New and developing technology is changing the nature of the threats we face constantly. It is right that measures are taken to protect security at our military bases by permitting the use of approved equipment to prevent or detect drones being used near these sensitive sites. I welcome the moves that the Government have taken to ensure that we have a modern, world-class cyber and specialist operations command, because threats to our British values, our democracy and our way of life are increasingly cyber-threats. A nation’s defence is only as strong as those who serve to uphold it. The Bill bolsters our armed forces, and it gives personnel and their families the support they deserve, just as they support our most vital national interests every day. This is a Bill from a Government who take their responsibility to our security and to our service people seriously. I am proud to back the Bill.

I welcome this statement. In Bracknell Forest, our neighbourhood policing teams have been listening to residents’ concerns over e-bikes and off-road bikes, and have taken targeted action to clamp down on this kind of antisocial behaviour, although it is not perfect and there is still more to do. Does the Home Secretary agree that neighbourhood-level policing, driven by community concerns, should be the new model of policing?

9. What steps his Department is taking to help ensure that post-16 education provides the necessary skills to support the economy.

I welcome the commitment in the post-16 education and skills White Paper to support the development of skills passports, because supporting young people to develop essential skills such as media and financial literacy, communication and problem solving must be at the heart of our plans to tackle youth unemployment. What conversations has my hon. Friend had with the Education Secretary on developing and capturing skills before 16 as well?

Pilgrim Hearts Trust has been lifting homeless and vulnerable people in Bracknell Forest out of poverty, and supporting them in rebuilding their lives, for 25 years. Does my right hon. Friend agree that local charities and organisations like Pilgrim Hearts must be at the heart of our plan to tackle street homelessness, and will he set out what the Government are doing to cut rough sleeping and poverty?

T5. While Opposition parties fight over who can promise the biggest cuts to our vital public service, Labour believes in an active state, working alongside British businesses to drive growth. Does my hon. Friend agree that we can do more to ensure that British companies are prioritised in procurement?

Will the hon. Member give way?

I am happy to jump forward in my speech to address the issue that the hon. Member raises, but I would just gently say that, by removing the incompatibilities, which the courts have put in legal limbo, this Government are quite rightly acting to correct those incompatibilities. That is good governance, not bad. Let me address his point more specifically. To say that it is unusual for any Government to introduce a remedial order and a Bill, both addressing incompatibilities, on the same day would be an understatement. Indeed, the Committee’s long-held view is that primary legislation is always preferable to address incompatibilities, where that is available—a view re-emphasised in our second report. But, importantly, we also recognise the unique complexities and sensitivities of this issue, and for that reason our recommendation was that this remedial order should be approved. I acknowledge that this is an unusual remedial order, in that it is being presented at the same time as the Bill, as I have said. I welcome the Bill before the House as well. Unlike the legacy Act introduced by the previous Government, this Bill does not give immunity to terrorists. It recognises the rights of communities to access the justice that our legal framework affords to all. It also produces important safeguards for veterans, including protection from repeated investigations, the right to seek anonymity, the right not to be forced to travel to give evidence, protection in old age and protection from cold calling or unexpected letters. Importantly, these safeguards include a right for veterans’ voices to be heard through the inclusion of veterans’ representatives in the statutory victims and survivors advisory group. These measures strike the balance between protecting those who served to keep the peace and protect life, and ensuring that terrorist acts are not granted immunity.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for referring to our report to advance his argument. Would he be so kind as to read the next sentence?

I felt that it was important that I speak today as a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. We had another member of the Committee, the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne), in the Chamber until recently. When he came over to speak to me just now, I was slightly worried that he was defecting. However, I was assured that he was just letting me know that, unfortunately, he was not able to stay for the rest of the debate. I want to start by acknowledging that there were differences of opinion on this important issue. Nevertheless, the Committee carried out its constitutional role to scrutinise this remedial order, as the Standing Orders of both Houses set out we must. As it was mandated to do, the JCHR has produced two reports on this remedial order, and it has been clear and unambiguous in its recommendation that it be approved by the House. I should emphasise that the focus of the reports was on the remedial order in front of us today, not on the Bill. I, similarly, will focus my remarks squarely on the order. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has set out, this remedial order follows rulings by the High Court of Northern Ireland and the Court of Appeal that declared a number of provisions within the previous Government’s legacy Act to be incompatible with our human rights obligations under the European convention on human rights. The legacy Act prohibited any criminal investigations into troubles-related offences from being initiated or continued. It also prohibited any criminal enforcement action in relation to non-serious troubles-related offences. It ended troubles-related civil claims that began after the legacy Act’s First Reading, and prohibited new ones. It also obliged the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery to give immunity from prosecution where certain conditions were met—and yes, this extended to giving immunity from prosecution to terrorists. The legacy Act was a deeply flawed piece of legislation, a fact that has been reflected in the courts’ rulings on its incompatibilities with our human rights legislation. This order, alongside the Bill, seeks to remedy those incompatibilities.

As the report sets out, the Government set forward their reasons for proceeding with the remedial order alongside a Bill, and the Secretary of State has shared those reasons today. It always behoves a Government, where an incompatibility has been identified, to choose the manner in which to address it. There are four options. The first option is to do nothing, which we very well could have done. However, as the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler), eloquently pointed out, that would see us failing to comply with our international obligations, which I would not be comfortable with. The second option would be to introduce a remedial order that had to be approved urgently. The hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) will forgive me if I do not remember the precise language while on my feet, but there is a route for a more rapid remedial order. That is not the route the Government decided to go down, and I welcome that as well, because it is important that we have the time to properly scrutinise anything on this most sensitive issue. The third option is the one that the Government have taken. The fourth option, of course, is to deal with it solely in primary legislation. As the Secretary of State set out—he was very forthcoming in appearing before the Committee and providing additional correspondence to us—the decision he took was that the appropriate route was to address this with a remedial order. He did that because it was important to build trust in communities across Northern Ireland by more swiftly addressing the incompatibilities that have been identified. I hope that my fulsome response has addressed the hon. Gentleman’s concerns and that I can continue with my speech. [ Interruption. ] Fantastic. Thank you. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has been clear that he recognises that this is a sensitive Bill which seeks to address not only the lasting legacy of a highly emotive and contested period of our history, but the enduring lived reality of what that legacy means for communities across Northern Ireland and the whole of the UK. For that reason, the Government have set out their grounds for seeking to use a remedial order. I referred to that in great detail. I also emphasise that, given the nature of the Bill before the House, the legislation will take some time to progress as it is scrutinised by both Houses and, indeed, our Committee. [ Interruption. ] As you indicate, Madam Deputy Speaker, that is more than enough from me in setting out the reasons why the Joint Committee on Human Rights recommended that this remedial order be approved. I end by emphasising that, as a member of the JCHR, I stand by our reports, and our considered recommendation to approve is clear.

I am also a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. Although I cannot respond directly to the claim that the hon. Gentleman just made, because that would be breaching parliamentary privilege, which I would not want to do, I will simply put on the record that our Committee considered all the relevant evidence when we created not just our second report on this remedial order but our first too. We considered all the evidence in front of us, we made our reports and we stand by both of them.

Let me briefly recognise the point that my hon. Friend has just made. We cannot have immunity for one group and not another. The previous Government recognised that position—it was recognised in their Act—which is why their Act gave immunity to terrorists. Is that not the case?

I wonder where the Tory MPs are. They cannot all be having cosy chats with Robert Jenrick—

Of course, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do apologise. I welcome the warm homes plan for the support that it will give, not only to the constituents most in need in Bracknell Forest, but to everyone who is making important upgrades to their home, including through low and no-interest loans for solar panel upgrades. What thought has my right hon. Friend given to supporting leaseholders in making these changes, and to ensuring that they are not held back by freeholders turning down common-sense requests?

I recently met Youthline, a fantastic mental health charity for young people in my constituency, and Berkshire Women’s Aid to talk about the effects of social media on young people’s mental health and their ability to form healthy relationships. Will my right hon. Friend commit to listening to the views of such organisations, as well as to Bracknell parents and children, as she looks at the results of the consultation?

I have been sceptical about this new embassy, but I take the points made today by Members on the Intelligence and Security Committee, as well as the response from GCHQ and MI5. I have also listened to my constituents, including the Bracknell Forest Hong Kong community, who tell me that they are concerned about the ongoing transnational repression that they are experiencing. My hon. Friend has talked a lot about the work that the Government have already done. Will he commit to continuing to engage with the Hong Kong community, so that we can continue to adapt our response to the emerging threats that they experience?

rose —

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way; he is being generous with his time. I have had constituents contact me about this issue. Many of them recognise the importance of fireworks as a great British tradition on fireworks night and other such nights, but they want more regulation around the times of year at which fireworks can be enjoyed—and until what time in the evening—and around their volume, so that people are able to enjoy fireworks on great occasions in a responsible way that reflects that they are not as enjoyable for those with trauma, and those with pets. Does the hon. Member agree that we can get that balance right?

I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for visiting my constituency last year, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education for visiting last week, when she came to see an expanded school nursery at Uplands primary in Sandhurst. She took the opportunity to speak to some fantastic hard-working teachers, and to hear their concerns about the level of SEND need and the need for more support. I welcome the announcement of £200 million extra funding for SEND training, which will be vital for teachers who need that extra support.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) for securing this very important and enlightening debate. Science and discovery centres have a crucial part to play in nurturing and developing curiosity and scientific endeavour for thousands of young people across the country, including in my Bracknell constituency. The Look Out discovery centre in my constituency played a defining role in my childhood, and fostered in me a lifelong love of science, and I know that many constituents will have similarly fond memories of visiting the Look Out as children. I have been delighted to return there not only last year as Bracknell’s MP, but with my nieces, to introduce the next generation of Swallows to everything that this remarkable place has to offer. The Look Out offers more than 90 interactive exhibits: visitors are invited to touch, pull, push, launch flying machines, play with circuits and explore their senses. That is all designed to spark curiosity in children aged three to 12, as well as in the adults who accompany them. This Government have been clear that they want the UK to take a leading role in the development of new technologies, and that that will accelerate development not only across our economy, but in our health system, our universities and our national security. I welcome that ambition, but it will not be possible to achieve those aspirations without a strong foundation on which to build. Whether it is AI, semiconductors, lifesaving research or cutting-edge innovations, bringing up a young generation with a love of learning and a passion for the pursuit of the new—in our ever more complex world—is a fundamental prerequisite for the pioneering role that this Government want the UK to take. This year, I have heard about how the outdoor learning programmes and discovery shows at the Look Out have taken young people who did not believe that STEM could be for them, and transformed their attitude and perceptions to such an extent that the same young people are inspired to enter STEM-based careers. Discovery centres provide a vital space for exploration outside the pressures of school. At the Look Out, young people are given the opportunity to develop a wide range of skills in a relaxed and fun extracurricular environment—as a former teacher, I say that learning should be fun, and it should be fun to learn. For those who alight on a newly discovered passion, the Look Out also takes on work experience students to support and provide a step up in their STEM-related career ambitions. Colleagues may know that the opportunity to engage and measure skills-based learning both in and outside of schools is a particular passion of mine, and I am pleased that a renewed recognition of the importance of skills-based learning is driving much of this Government’s approach to education. It is critical that we recognise that centres such as the Look Out have a fundamental role to play in inspiring and developing the workforce of the future and equipping them with the skills that matter. The Look Out is also an important place for our community to meet. It hosts live family-friendly science discovery shows such as the “Superhero Science show”, birthday parties, school group visits, home educator days and toddler days, as well as offering inclusive facilities such as wheelchair-accessible play. It is also a place for many members of the community, including those with toddlers and those supporting adults with special educational needs and disabilities, to meet. Overall, science centres across the country welcome more than 5.2 million people every year. This Government are firm in their belief that educational opportunity must be accessible to everyone, whatever their needs or background, and science and discovery centres play a huge part in delivering that commitment in communities. The Look Out is special not only for what the centre itself offers, but for its location—situated, as it is, in the heart of Swinley forest. I know that many families use the Look Out as a launch pad to explore nature. The land is actually owned by the Crown Estate, which I thank for its ongoing support for the centre. The misinformation and disinformation that are spread, particularly online, about lifesaving innovations such as vaccinations do nothing for our unity and prosperity as a nation; they serve only to erode trust in expertise, science and, ultimately, democracy itself. That is why it is so important that we support science and discovery centres, which have a role in building public trust, understanding and dialogue about new technologies. That has to come alongside making sure that we have the right support for capital funding. As other Members have mentioned, discovery centres do struggle to access some of those grants. I am committed to working with Bracknell Forest council and other partners to ensure the long-term future of the Look Out, so that not only this generation of Bracknell Forest children can access it, but many generations to come can continue to visit and enjoy the centre. I know that you are keen for me to wrap up, Mrs Harris, so I will just finish by saying a huge thank you to everyone who works at the Look Out for all that they do to make science accessible and exciting for young people in Bracknell Forest and across the country.

For five years, against Russian aggression, Ukraine has been bravely defending not only its own border but the eastern flank of Europe. That means that security guarantees for Ukraine are also security guarantees for all of Europe. Given that, does my right hon. Friend share my concern at the leader of Reform today suggesting that he would vote against those security guarantees?

Bracknell Forest council has submitted a bid to the Heat Networks Delivery Unit for a feasibility study on a district heat network that would stretch across our town centre. Does the Minister agree that such schemes can support local businesses and residents in cutting emissions and bills?

Will my hon. and gallant Friend take this opportunity to welcome the 156 new recruits who started last week at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in my constituency? Those new recruits put the academy well on track to meet its recruitment targets for this year.

Between 2015 and 2020, under the last multi-year settlement, the Conservative Government cut Bracknell Forest council’s funding by £500,000. I am delighted that this provisional settlement would see Bracknell Forest’s funding rise by almost £10 million—an increase of over 7%. Does my hon. Friend agree that this shows that Labour will always invest in our local services and the Conservatives will always choose austerity?

It is fair to say that the recommendations of the Cass review were not welcomed by everyone—not least by all members of the LGBT+ community—but the Conservative party commissioned the review and accepted its findings, and the Labour party supported the review and supported its findings. Does the Secretary of State share my concern that there are those who would now seek to cherry pick which of the findings they agree with and which they do not? Is it not the case that an independent review with such serious and important findings should be accepted in its entirety?

As a member of the JCHR, I am concerned that the shadow Northern Ireland Secretary may have inadvertently misled the House when he suggested that our Committee did not discharge our roles seriously and consider all the evidence in this case when we produced our report.

Our report recommended that this remedial order be made in no small part because of the incredible sensitivity around anything to do with the Northern Ireland troubles and the need to make sure that we are building bridges across communities, and in no small part, too, because of the seriousness with which the Committee feels the Secretary of State takes this issue. It is therefore quite right, I believe, that the Secretary of State make this remedial order. Does he agree that it is not right, and not serious politics, to play party politics with such a delicate issue?

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. The point I was trying to raise in my question to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland was that on any issue to do with the Northern Irish troubles, we must tread with appropriate solemnity and seriousness. It was therefore disappointing to be accused of being an idiot by a Member on the Opposition Front Bench while making that very point. What advice would you give on ensuring that the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) apologises appropriately, not to me but to the whole House, for lowering the tone of that serious debate?

A once senior leader of the Reform party is now in jail for colluding with Russia. When the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) heard about that, did he launch an inquiry? Did he perhaps review his own previous statements on Russia, including saying that he admired Putin? No, he did not; he called Nathan Gill a “bad apple”. I welcome this review and the fact that all political parties will be invited to contribute, but will my right hon. Friend commit to make clear to the House, when he reports back on the findings of the review, exactly which political parties took part in this exercise of scrutiny and transparency and which did not?

I am pleased to say that I did. The hon. Member for Clacton is not in his place to hear my comments, but I hope he is listening anyway.

When I met local nature activists in Bracknell, they told me that swift bricks are used not just by swifts, but by house martins and sparrows. Sadly, they are not used by swallows—although this Swallow certainly welcomes them. As the Minister knows, I have been strongly calling for swift bricks, so I am really pleased to see that they will be a requirement in new developments. Does he agree that this demonstrates that bringing forward the housing that we need to address the housing crisis does not have to come at the cost of nature? If we get this right, we can make sure that there is fantastic access to nature, alongside the homes we so badly need.

I thank the Foreign Secretary and the shadow Foreign Secretary for their powerful words on the horrific antisemitic attack in Australia. Jimmy Lai has been persecuted for standing up for human rights and democracy, and I know that the Bracknell Forest Hong Kong community shares my utter horror at this cowardly act by the Chinese and Hong Kong Governments. As many Members from across the House have said, such communities face their own security threats from the long arm of the Chinese state. In the light of that, I thank the Foreign Secretary for recognising the importance of the 5+1 British national overseas settlement route. It is really important that we have recommitted to that. However, will she share with Home Office Ministers my constituents’ concerns about changes to the language and income requirements for that route? It is right that we stand by Hongkongers with that settlement route and that we recognise our historical commitment to the Hong Kong community.

The Minister is setting out the strong action that the Government are taking to target those threats. Does he think that social media companies are doing enough to ensure that their platforms are not being used by Russia and others to undermine democracy?

These are dangerous times for democracies in Europe and across the world. I will not be alone in having heard one particular word used increasingly to describe our social and political state as a country over the last 10 years: “divided.” From Brexit to immigration, from the conflict in Gaza to LGBT+ rights, it feels as though we as a country are more divided than ever. In a sense, Madam Deputy Speaker, division is a feature of democracy—so much so that when we vote in this, the mother of Parliaments, you quite literally shout “Division!”, and we divide off into our respective voting Lobbies. However, healthy division must be underpinned by a willingness to listen to other views, respect them even when we disagree passionately with them and, yes, sometimes accept that we are wrong. That is what I fear we have lost in this country—the ability to engage in the debate—and I fear that social media has much to do with that. I see a democracy under pressure, not from internal division but from external actors looking to destabilise our way of life and our beliefs. It will not be a surprise to hon. Members or to our constituents that social media is used by foreign actors, particularly Russia, Iran and China, to actively undermine our democratic institutions and exploit the natural disagreements present in democracy to sow the seeds of division. As anyone who has been on Twitter recently will know, it is also increasingly being manipulated by its owner to promote a very specific—and, in my view, very dangerous—narrative. Today, I want to focus my remarks on Russia and the impact of its state-affiliated and state-aligned online activities on our democracy. Earlier this week, the Foreign Secretary strongly reaffirmed our commitment to UK support for Ukraine against Russian aggression in her speech to commemorate the signing of the Locarno treaties here in London. Ukraine is fighting to defend western democracy against Russia’s illegal invasion, and is paying a high price to do so. As the Foreign Secretary recognised in her speech, though, while Russia’s war may be physically constrained, its offensive is playing out on multiple frontiers, including our very own social media feeds. Evidence given to the Foreign Affairs Committee identified Russian operations across every single conceivable channel and platform, including Minecraft. These operations include bot farms that produce fake accounts at a rate far faster than they can be banned, and use them to create significant noise around a particular issue, drowning out legitimate discussion and undermining trust in UK institutions. If I had stood here and said even a few years ago that Russia had infiltrated my local Facebook groups to spread disinformation, as well as the local Facebook groups of many Members across this House, that would have been received with some scepticism. Now, if I may say so, we should be more sceptical of the fool who believes that Russia is not doing that. The corrosive effect that it has on community cohesion is immense, and it is happening every day on a hyper-local level. Russian troll factories are spewing out lies not to push any single political ideology, but simply to sow chaos and undermine faith in institutions. I fully welcome the Government’s decision to sanction a further seven entities and individuals for their role in destabilising Ukraine, but I also ask the Government to go further and consider what action can be taken within our own borders to curb this economy of disinformation. I welcome the provision in the Online Safety Act 2003 to limit foreign interference as a priority offence, meaning that services must take proactive steps to identify and minimise users’ exposure to state-sponsored or state-linked disinformation aimed at interfering with the UK, but I question whether any social media company is living up to its obligations under the Act. I have asked to meet Meta to discuss the issue, but I am disappointed to tell the House that I have not yet been given that opportunity. I assume that all social media companies are aware of the threat of foreign interference and know that it is happening on their platforms, but I have not seen any evidence of their taking any action to stop it. If social media companies do not take action, then we must pursue them and force them to do so because our democracy is more valuable than their profits. We cannot ignore the fact that Russian interference is clear and evident not only within the borders of our own country, but within the walls of this House and the political sphere across the great nations of this country. I am sure that I do not need to remind colleagues that the former leader of Reform in Wales is now behind bars for taking bribes to make pro-Russian statements. Reform is now refusing to conduct an investigation into pro-Russian interference in the party. That prompts a question: what are they hiding? That is, of course, a question we could have asked Reform Members today, had they shown up. Pro-Russian narratives are nothing new to Reform or its previous incarnations, the Brexit party and UKIP. In fact, during the 2024 election campaign, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) suggested that the EU and NATO had “provoked” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He said that he “admired” Putin. Madam Deputy Speaker, he is a Kremlin apologist. The fight against Russia in Ukraine is morally right, but it is also strategically right, and the Government are correct to be unwavering in their support of Ukraine—for their future and for ours. Ukraine is defending Europe’s eastern flank. Any Government who neglect that approach neglect their first duty to the security of the public, and we must be in no doubt that Reform is a threat to that and to all of us. A further aspect highlighted by the Royal United Services Institute report is the need to support civil society and media ecosystems that are directly targeted by such operations. It is not just about technical defences, but also about improving media literacy so that everyday citizens can be better prepared to spot deepfakes, fake news and misinformation. Yesterday, the Government released their national youth strategy and, amid all the fantastic announcements about funding for more youth facilities, a plan to address workforce challenges and give more young people a voice. I want to highlight specifically the commitment to embed media literacy into the curriculum and ensure that Ofcom can fulfil its obligations under the Online Safety Act to promote media literacy. Media literacy is important not just for young people—although it is—but for everyone, especially older people who may be more vulnerable to the effects of deepfakes and misinformation. Our democracy rests on our ability to disagree with each other, but to remain a united country. We must not allow ourselves to be siloed. We must not refuse to listen to those whose views we do not share, but who we should nevertheless respect. Losing sight of the ability to disagree agreeably drives a wedge into the unity of this United Kingdom, and leaves us more vulnerable than ever to the narrative that hostile foreign actors would so like to see spread. We are a country of diversity, and proudly so. Our greatest strength must not be allowed to be exploited to become our greatest weakness. We must all of us in this place commit to fighting Putin’s corrosive influence over our democracy, wherever it is found. That starts by recognising the extent of the challenge we face.

The hon. Lady is making a powerful case about Reform UK speaking on Russia’s talking points. Of course, the biggest talking point of them all is that NATO is the enemy. When her leader says that the Green party believes we should leave NATO, is that not a Russian talking point?

During the Budget debate, I asked the shadow Chancellor whether he would address the fact that, on multiple occasions, he referred to the public finances in a fantastically negative tone that appeared far from the truth that was revealed at the Budget, suggesting at one point that there was a £40 billion black hole in the public finances. As the shadow Minister says that we were not being straight with the public about the state of the public finances, will he take this opportunity to apologise on behalf of his colleague for doing just that?

The shadow Secretary of State talks about modernisation and his concerns about the Government’s approach. In 2017, South Western Railway spent £1 billion on new trains to serve my constituents on the Reading to Waterloo line. Those trains sat in sidings, and it was not until SWR was brought back into public ownership that we saw a quadrupling in the number of those Arterio trains being rolled out. That is the real, demonstrable benefit of this Government’s approach. Does he not agree that the model to which he proposes we return failed, and there is no clearer sign of that failing than those trains sitting in sidings?

I am listening carefully to all the hon. Gentleman’s recommendations. Many of them sound wonderful, but I suspect that they come with something of a price tag. I hope he will get on to the part of his speech where he sets out how the Liberal Democrats would fund those investments.

I am delighted to speak today in this debate. I hope that the Bill marks the start of a new era for our rail system. Bracknell’s rail links are its lifeblood, connecting us to jobs, friends, family and opportunities through lines to London and Reading, as well as to Gatwick airport from Crowthorne and Sandhurst. That is why I am so delighted that South Western Railway has now been brought back into public ownership, with Great Western Railway services to follow shortly. The renationalisation of our rail services will create more opportunities for growth, more opportunities for investment, and a rail service for the public good. First, the Chancellor froze rail fares in the Budget, which means my constituents will save almost £300 on the cost of a season ticket into London, and now we are laying the foundations for a new, modern and joined-up railway system, owned by the public and run for the public. The new GBR livery revealed today, which proudly incorporates our Union flag in its design, is, I think, a powerful symbol of the national pride that we should feel in our railways, but which has, for many years, been undermined by high prices and low reliability. Bracknell is already seeing the benefits of renationalisation, including the ongoing upgrade of the fleet on the Reading to Waterloo line. The new Arterio trains will provide 50% increased capacity compared with the outdated class 455 fleet, and will offer accessible toilets, air conditioning, charging points at every seat, real-time information screens, on-board wi-fi and walk-through carriages, meaning that more people can travel in better conditions every day. These trains were first purchased back in 2017 at a cost of £1 billion but have been stuck in the sidings. What greater symbol can there be for the failure of privatisation than that? I thank the Rail Minister for meeting me recently and for all his work to roll out this new stock. I am also delighted that the Bill makes provision for GBR to take control of the timetable, as the current system has led to some inexplicable gaps in service. As the SWR timetable stands, after 9 pm there is only one service an hour from Bracknell to Reading. Trains from Reading to Bracknell are also reduced to an hourly service after 10 pm. Needless to say, that has a significant impact on the ability of Bracknell Forest residents to travel for work and leisure. Again, I call for that to be addressed. The north downs line is deeply unreliable, and I know that Members across the House are concerned about the need to electrify it. The Minister knows that I care passionately about a rail connection to Heathrow airport as well, which is vital, and I know he cares passionately about delivering that along with private sector investment. On that, I will—

I am honoured to represent Bracknell in this place. It is a relatively prosperous community, but still one in five children are growing up in poverty after housing costs. Bracknell food bank gave out 8,000 food parcels last year, 3,000 of them to children. Does my right hon. Friend agree that poverty affects all communities across the UK, with children living in poverty in every constituency, and that that is why it must be our moral mission to stamp out child poverty wherever we find it?

I thank the Minister for making this important announcement about a consultation on the role of trustees. As part of that consultation, will he keep in mind the important issue of pre-1997 indexation so that we can ensure that trustees are acting in the best interests of their pensioners?

Can I say at the outset how much I have enjoyed the debate? I particularly want to highlight the contributions of my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli (Dame Nia Griffith), who powerfully raised some of the issues that I will go on to address, and—purely because I enjoyed the fiscal geekery—the contribution from the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman), who rivals the Minister himself in her enthusiasm for financial issues. What a delight it was to experience that. I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill, which touches on several issues close to my constituents in Bracknell Forest. It is also worth acknowledging the strong action that the Chancellor took in the Budget to support all pensioners by raising the state pension by up to £550. That is possible only thanks to Labour’s steadfast commitment to the triple lock on pensions. That is real action on pensioner poverty, at a time when the Conservatives and Reform have flirted with scrapping the triple lock. Similarly, the Bill delivers real benefits to private pension savers across the country by simplifying and streamlining the system. The measures will increase their returns—around 3,300,000 workers on defined contribution schemes in the south-east alone stand to benefit by about £29,000 more for their retirement—while helping to unlock around £50 billion of investment in the UK economy. Hon. Members need only follow the Minister on Twitter to see why it is so important that we increase investment in the UK economy after many years of under-investment by the previous Government. I thank the Minister for the work to get the Bill to this stage. I welcome in particular the measures providing for action on an issue close to the hearts of many in Bracknell Forest: the slow erosion of pre-1997 defined benefit pensions. It is for that reason that I will focus on new clause 22, which calls for the indexation of pre-1997 pensions. I sympathise deeply with the spirit of the new clause. The erosion of those pensions is an injustice—one that urgently needs addressing. It is important to say that not all pre-1997 schemes are in surplus. Although I agree that that is not the fault of their members, legislating to index would put entire schemes at risk, and I believe that that is not a risk that any sensible Government would take. However, it is vital that the Bill marks the beginning of further action to bring justice to those with pre-1997 defined benefit pensions whose schemes are now in generous surplus. I was delighted when the Chancellor announced at the Budget statement that members of the Pension Protection Fund will have their accruals protected from inflation, ending years of degradation. That has been carried through in amendments before us. I welcome the recognition in principle that those with pre-1997 pensions are indeed facing an injustice, and that action must be taken to rectify it. I have met many constituents who were formerly employed by HP and later HPE, which used to be based in Bracknell. They are now members of the HPE pension scheme, and have seen their returns decimated. I have spoken with other pensioners in other schemes, too—many of which have been mentioned by others Members across the House. It is not right that people who have worked hard and paid into their pensions now face ever-diminishing life savings through no fault of their own, despite many schemes, including HPE, having significant reserves. One of my constituents, Ed, began drawing from his pension nine years ago. In that time, his pension has increased only three times, by three separate percentage increments: 3%, 1%, and 1%. He says that, had his pension risen in line with inflation, he would have seen his pension increase by around 38% over the years to 2025. As a result—this is the real-life impact—he has seen a dramatic fall in his living standards. Ed is not alone. Constituents in Bracknell and across the country should not have to fight any more to make themselves heard and achieve justice. This is an opportune moment to do what we can to put that right. In the Bill, the Government are reforming the use of surpluses, rightly strengthening the hands of trustees to act, as the Government themselves have done for the PPF scheme, for which they effectively act as the trustee—they are leading by example. I thank the Chancellor and the Pensions Minister for meeting me to discuss that before the Budget. The Minister has been clear on his expectations of trustees following the passage of the Bill, including in his contribution today, and I thank him for his comments, specifically on strengthening guidance for trustees. Today must be the beginning, not the end, of the story. I have written to the trustees of the HPE scheme urging them to use the powers in this Bill to right the wrong. I wanted to take this opportunity to call once more on the trustees of the HPE scheme, and other schemes similarly in surplus, to do everything in their power to ensure that pre-1997 pensions are protected from inflation, and I wanted to do so on the Floor of this House because I think it important that we are as clear as possible that trustees will be given the powers they need to act and should follow through with concrete action to protect pensions. That is the right thing to do, and with the powers the Government are granting in the Bill, it is now in their hands to do it.

My hon. Friend is being extremely generous in giving way. Effectively—not legally—the Government act as the trustee for the PPF, which is why they have been able to take this decision. Does she agree that if the Government see fit to use their role to increase PPF pensions, trustees of these companies should act just as the Government have done to address this injustice?

I apologise for interrupting the hon. Lady just as she is getting on to a point that, as she knows, I care deeply about, but I wanted to tease out a point about ethical investment. What I am struggling with is that her Front-Bench spokesperson, the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling), has spoken against mandation, but the hon. Lady has talked passionately about the need to ensure ethical investment. Will she address the fact that there is a conflict here? I am deeply sympathetic to both viewpoints and understand both of them, but I also recognise that there is a conflict. We either have a system in which pension schemes are given clear guidance about where they should invest and what they should invest in, or we do not; we cannot have both. Will the hon. Lady address that conflict and come down on one side of the fence or the other, not—if I may very gently say so—do the Lib Dem thing of sitting on that fence too much?

On 3 September, the shadow Chancellor stood at the Opposition Dispatch Box and claimed that the hole in the public finances could be as much as £40 billion. As it happens, that was not the case, not least because of the Chancellor’s steadfast commitment to stabilising our economy. Does the Minister not agree that it is a bit rich for the Conservatives to go around claiming that people are talking down the economy and talking up the gap in our public finances, when the only people doing that are them?

The right hon. Lady has repeatedly suggested that energy bills are going up— [ Interruption. ] If she does not believe me, perhaps she will believe Martin Lewis, the money-saving expert, who tweeted earlier today: “I’ve just got the new predictions for the April Price Cap, which is a cut in cost of 4.2%. Without the Budget changes, it would be predicted to be rising 3.5%.” Will she correct the record and explain why she does not support the work that we are doing to cut energy bills?

Before the hon. Gentleman gets to the part of his speech that I do not think I will like as much as what he has said already, does he welcome the freezing of rail fares for the first time in 30 years, which means almost 300 quid off a season ticket into London for commuters in Bracknell?

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton), who is my constituency neighbour, for securing the debate and opening the discussion so comprehensively. Colleagues may remember that I led a debate on this very subject in this very Chamber just over a year ago. Accessing driving tests continues to be a source of frustration for constituents across Bracknell Forest. Wait times for a practical test in the south-east remain among the highest in the country, creating a barrier to opportunity for young people and all those who want the freedom that comes from passing their driving test.

Absolutely. I say gently that my hon. Friend’s contribution is slightly more up to date than some of those we heard from the Liberal Democrats earlier, because the Government have already taken action on banning bots. I will come to that in a moment. I know that the Government take this issue seriously, and we are already seeing progress. Focused efforts, including on recruiting driving examiners and improving booking systems, have meant that the DVSA conducted an extra 56,336 tests between June and October 2025, compared with the same period in 2024. I take this opportunity to thank the Minister for all the work he is doing on this vital issue. It is clear to many, particularly in the south-east, that there is definitely more to do, so I fully welcome the Government’s recent announcement on further actions on driving test availability. I was particularly pleased to hear that action will be taken to ensure that only learners themselves will be able to book tests. That will prevent bots from block booking precious slots and selling them on at a substantially marked-up price. We have already heard about the frustration of well-meaning people who just want to get on and book their test, but feel that the only way to get a precious driving test is to use a dodgy site, which may leave them exposed to fraud or greatly increased fees, so it is fantastic to see action being taken. I called for it in my debate last year and am really pleased to see the Government delivering it. What timescale is expected for the implementation of this welcome change? The use of defence driving examiners is a hugely welcome intervention, although I note that the specific test centres set to benefit have not yet been announced. I am sure that I speak for many colleagues from across the south-east when I urge the Minister to bear in mind the high need in our region when he makes the decisions. I also remind him that Bracknell is not served by its own test centre, with the two nearest being in Reading and Farnborough. I therefore press the Minister again for a test centre in Bracknell, which would also benefit constituents of the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, who I am sure would support it. [ Interruption. ] I see him nodding. There is always more that can be done, and I want to use my time in this debate to highlight the desperate need to improve the recruitment and retention of examiners. In 2024, the most common answer to the question, “What more can DVSA do to support you?” in the DVSA’s annual survey of driving instructors was, “Increase driving examiner recruitment and retention”. Although the use of defence driving examiners is welcome, it is not a permanent solution. If we are to meet the Government’s target of reducing test waiting times to an average of seven weeks by summer 2026, we must be more ambitious both in our actions and in how fast we work to implement them, and to prevent shortages from reoccurring we should ensure that driving test examining is an attractive, long-term career option. I would be grateful for the Minister’s thoughts on what more we can do to end the current backlog and ensure that our driving test system remains efficient and sustainable long into the future. The Government inherited a tremendous driving test backlog. Although progress has been made, there is still a lot more to do so that my constituents in Bracknell Forest are no longer being driven up the wall, but are instead back in the driver’s seat.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that it is exactly that mechanism that bots rely on to operate and manipulate the system, which is exactly why the Government have announced closing it? They are doing so to stop the bots.

Bracknell is a life sciences superpower, with Eli Lilly, Sandoz and Boehringer Ingelheim all having a footprint in our town. What can we do to speed up clinical trial set-up to help to deliver the next generation of treatments for our NHS?

I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, and I thank the Prime Minister for the leadership he has shown on Ukraine. Year 6 students from St Margaret Clitherow Catholic primary school in Bracknell have written to me to express their deep concern about the ongoing crisis in Sudan, so I thank the Prime Minister for his leadership at the G20 on this conflict. What message does he have for those students who are concerned about this deep tragedy?

It is clear that trust in politicians from all parties is too low, and that is why I really welcome the setting up of the Ethics and Integrity Commission, but just for the avoidance of doubt, and to place it on the public record, can my hon. Friend confirm his view on the ethics of elected Members of any Parliament accepting bribes from Russia to ask questions?

Bracknell Forest council, supported by Department for Transport funding, has delivered an early Christmas present for residents, with free bus journeys on the first three weekends in December. Will my hon. Friend share my joy in that scheme, which will boost our local economy? I know it is only November, but will he also join me in wishing everyone in Bracknell Forest a very merry Christmas?

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about the penalties for driving without insurance; to require the Secretary of State to prepare and publish a report containing an assessment of the effectiveness of existing methods of enforcing the law on driving without insurance; and for connected purposes. In preparing this ten-minute rule Bill, I have had the opportunity to speak with so many incredible organisations and charities that work to deliver better road safety. At the outset I want to thank, in particular, Brake, Protect Young Drivers, the Motor Insurers’ Bureau, Thames Valley Police and the fantastic Road Safety Foundation, which is based in my Bracknell constituency. I am delighted to bring forward this Bill during Road Safety Week, which raises awareness of the importance of safer driving at a time of year when dark nights come down earlier, fog and icy conditions can increase hazards—we even had snow today—and the temptation to drink and drive is heightened by the festivities. I am proud that this Government have committed to delivering a national road safety strategy, and I am grateful to the road safety Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), for taking the time to speak with me on several occasions about the progress of developing this strategy. Remarkably, it will be the first update to national road safety in well over a decade. Where the previous Government failed to act, we will, because every accident, every death on our roads is a tragedy, and too often an avoidable one. Last month I published my road safety report, which captured the real concerns of Bracknell Forest residents regarding road safety in our community. I thank the almost 500 constituents who responded to the campaign and shared their views on everything from speeding and antisocial driving to the illegal use of off-road bikes and scooters. I am honoured to discuss the report today to ensure that the voices of Bracknell residents are heard and acted upon, making our roads safer for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists alike. Vitally, I have shared a copy of my report with the road safety Minister so that Bracknell Forest’s voice can be heard at the heart of the upcoming national road safety strategy. The findings of the report revealed a critical level of concern among residents and calls for tougher action on antisocial driving. The overwhelming issue that residents felt affected road safety was speeding, followed by off-road bikes and e-scooters. Almost 80% of residents either agreed or strongly agreed that people drive too quickly down residential roads in Bracknell Forest, with similar figures for speeding on main roads. To tackle that, residents agreed that there should be more speed cameras and Community Speedwatch initiatives. They also called for more appropriate speed limits, speed bumps and more visible police patrols, with police providing more information on local patrols so residents can see how their concerns are being addressed. The report identifies a clear public mandate for decisive intervention on road safety, prioritising enforcement and infrastructure upgrades. Concerns were also raised about overly bright car headlights, and I am delighted that the Government have already listened on that point and announced that further research will be conducted into headlight glare. Residents supported more action around schools, with particular concerns that an accident was simply waiting to happen. I heard about the challenges caused by pick-up and drop-off times, the need for more safe crossing points and the widespread support for the implementation of school streets. I am pleased to share that directly with the local council and offer it my full support as it works to address road safety around schools. Residents also raised concerns about potholes, which can cause damage to vehicles and lead to unsafe driving as motorists do their best to swerve around them. That is why I back the Government’s £3.3 million investment in Bracknell Forest’s roads this year, with Bracknell Forest council committing an extra £5 million over four years to pothole repair and other road maintenance. When we design road safety initiatives, and indeed roads, it is vital that we listen to the experts. That is why I want to highlight the work of a fantastic organisation based in Bracknell called the Road Safety Foundation. When I met the Road Safety Foundation, it emphasised how important it was that speed limits reflect the purpose of roads and the vulnerability of the users they support. By mapping the risk on major roads across the UK, the Road Safety Foundation plays an essential role in driving road safety improvements and, ultimately, saving lives. I now turn to the subject at hand: uninsured drivers. Sadly, uninsured driving is all too common. Every 20 minutes someone is the victim of an uninsured or hit-and-run driver, every four minutes an uninsured vehicle is seized, and every year uninsured drivers cost the UK economy £1 billion. A crackdown on uninsured drivers on our roads is essential to improving road safety, as data has shown that those who drive uninsured are often disproportionately involved in road accidents and also more likely to commit offences that put others at risk, such as hit-and-run incidents, speeding and driving under the influence. The economic cost of uninsured driving, which includes compensation for victims, emergency services, medical costs and loss of productivity, is significant. This is a question of fairness: we cannot allow the costs of those who flout the law to be shouldered by honest drivers who are paying hiked premium fees to cover that. Mr Speaker, I want you to imagine for a second that you were involved in a car accident. Imagine an inconsiderate driver has been going too fast, or not paying attention to the road, and has crashed into you. You are standing there on the roadside, perhaps injured, your car a write-off. You are feeling incredibly shaken, as anyone would. But thank goodness you have insurance. Now, Mr Speaker, imagine you find out that the other driver is not insured. Suddenly, a stressful situation becomes so much worse. The victims of accidents involving uninsured drivers often face delays and complications in securing compensation, which only exacerbates the immense emotional and financial toll. I recently met the Motor Insurers’ Bureau to hear about “Operation Drive Insured”, a week-long UK campaign with the National Police Chiefs’ Council that saw police forces increase their operational activity in tackling uninsured driving. It involved identifying and removing uninsured vehicles from the road, as well as an excellent public awareness campaign. During our conversation, the MIB highlighted the need for a real-time database of all uninsured drivers, which would make it easier for the police to catch those driving uninsured. At the moment, it is far too easy for criminals to take out fake insurance under assumed names and present that to police on the roadside because insurers do not update the national insurance database in real time. Insurers also do not always carry out checks to verify drivers’ identities and ensure that they have not been disqualified from driving. I have even heard how some uninsured drivers are now using AI to create fake policies when pulled over by the police, making it more difficult for the police to clamp down on uninsured driving in real time as they struggle to instantly verify the legitimacy of these documents at the roadside. Those who forge or deliberately fabricate such documents, through AI or any other means, are putting other road users at risk and must face tough sanctions. The Motor Insurers’ Bureau estimates that there are 1 million uninsured drivers on our roads, a figure that suggests that existing penalties are not providing a serious enough disincentive. A fixed penalty notice for owning a car without insurance starts at just £100, which rises to £300 and six points on a person’s licence if they are caught actually driving it. The police also have the power to seize and crush the vehicle, but given the serious consequences that can result from driving uninsured, my view is that these penalties should be increased. Cracking down on the number of uninsured drivers will also help to tackle high insurance premiums, because claims made against uninsured drivers are made through the MIB and ultimately paid for through mandatory annual contributions from all UK motor insurers. If we can reduce the number of those driving uninsured, we can reduce costs for the vast majority of drivers who do the right thing by insuring their vehicles. Insurance premiums rose, on average, by 21% between 2022 and 2024, before falling by around £50 this year, so I welcome the action that the Government are taking, through the motor insurance taskforce, to tackle the high cost of driving for the honest many. This Road Safety Week, let us all commit ourselves to taking the action needed to make driving safer for everyone, prevent crashes and save lives. Let us tackle the costly problem of uninsured motorists, deliver on our manifesto commitment to an ambitious national road safety strategy, and back the drivers of Great Britain. Question put and agreed to. Ordered, That Peter Swallow, Sarah Russell, Chris Vince, Rachel Taylor, Josh Newbury and Cat Eccles present the Bill. Peter Swallow accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 29 May 2026, and to be printed (Bill 331).

I beg to move, That this House has considered access to healthcare in Bracknell Forest. It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell. I thank the Minister for Secondary Care, my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol South (Karin Smyth), for her engagement on this important issue. As local MPs, we all hear on the doorstep and at our coffee mornings about the importance of the ability to access timely, good-quality and local healthcare, and the impact not just on individuals, but on our communities more broadly, when the standard is not met. What those who work in our health and social care system do day in, day out touches all our lives and families. I thank those in Bracknell Forest and across the country who work in our NHS and wider health and care system for everything they do. I must declare an interest: my brother and sister-in-law are both NHS doctors. These are challenging times for the NHS. Chronic under-resourcing after 14 years of Conservative austerity has left too many unable to access the care they need and has prevented the system from evolving to reflect the needs of today’s Britain. But although the NHS may be down, it is not out. While other parties threaten the very principle of the NHS—that care should be available to everyone and free at the point of use—the Government are investing in the NHS and putting in place the reforms we need. We have already seen those efforts bearing fruit, with the first cuts to waiting lists in 15 years, the recruitment of 2,500 more GPs and the creation of 5 million extra appointments.

The hon. Member predicts where I am going with my speech. I am sure that the issues in Bracknell Forest are similar to those in Northern Ireland. As I will say, it is important that we have seen changes in the way GPs operate in England. The 10-year health plan for England represents a once-in-a-generation chance to reform and rebuild the health system. It is underpinned by the three radical shifts of hospital to community, analogue to digital and sickness to prevention. In Bracknell Forest, we have already seen the Government’s commitment to moving healthcare to the community through the announcement of funding for the Frimley Park hospital rebuild, which was promised under the last Government but never funded, despite unsafe reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete making up about 65% of the current building. The funding will go directly to help to deliver a hospital that is safe, modern and equipped to deal with the demands facing our healthcare system today. I thank the Minister for meeting me yesterday, and on many other occasions, to discuss the rebuild, and for all the work that has gone into progressing the project behind the scenes, but as she knows I remain concerned that Frimley Health NHS foundation trust is still not in a position to announce the location of the new hospital, despite several deadlines already having been set and missed. I urge the trust to make that announcement as soon as practically possible, so that constituents can have the visibility and transparency they need on the delivery of those plans. Bracknell Forest residents are determined that the new hospital addresses the existing issues with access to Frimley Park hospital, including insufficient parking, and that it should be as close as possible to the current site. Better access by public transport also needs to be baked into the design. Constituents also have concerns about the ongoing need to rebuild the Royal Berkshire hospital. I take this opportunity to reassure them that I am as keen as they are to see that delivered as soon as possible, and I will continue to push for it in this place. As the 10-year plan sets out, the future of our NHS cannot be delivered just through hospitals. Care needs to be embedded in our communities, so I am delighted that Skimped Hill health centre—or Bracknell Forest centre for health, as I believe it will officially be known—is now in the final build stages. Once completed, the centre will bring together in one place several services in the centre of Bracknell, including two GP practices, maternity services and children’s services, rooting healthcare in the community and breaking down the bureaucratic barriers to access both for patients and for service providers. A key element of the shift from hospital to community is ensuring that all health spaces are used to their full potential. Brants Bridge in Bracknell spans both Frimley and Berkshire healthcare trusts and offers a range of services, including X-rays, urgent care, dialysis and chemotherapy. However, constituents regularly tell me that they struggle to access the space, or are turned away and directed to A&E for arbitrary reasons. The centre is a resource with huge potential, but I fear we are not utilising it to its fullest. I would therefore welcome a review of the services offered by Brants Bridge, as well as of its accessibility, to better support the Government’s ambitions for community care. As we build the homes of the future, it is important that we match them with the health infrastructure needed to support them. It is fantastic to see that with the new Skimped Hill health centre and, although it is not in my constituency, I will also mention the new Binfield health and community centre. But Bracknell Forest has a shortage of GPs, with 1,874 patients for every GP, so it is important that we keep developing primary healthcare provision to serve our growing population. We also have a mismatch between pharmacy need and provision, with some areas with the greatest need, such as Bullbrook, relying on just one pharmacy. I recently met with both Forest Health primary care network and Health Triangle PCN, which includes Ringmead, to discuss patient access, the 10-year plan and the implementation of the new GP contracts. I was pleased to hear thar Ringmead has implemented a new booking system and, although not all patients have felt the benefits of that yet, it has been great to hear from many constituents that it has gone a long way to make accessing their local GP much easier. I stress, however, that we still have a way to go when it comes to ensuring that patients can access the right choice of appointment for their needs. For many, online appointments offer flexibility and convenience, but others want the reassurance of seeing their GP face to face. In a local authority like Bracknell Forest it is also important to match healthcare provision to where people live, so that people are not forced to travel long distances to access their appointments. I have heard many residents share their frustrations at getting an appointment in Bracknell when they live in Sandhurst, and vice versa. Although I appreciate that that is sometimes unavoidable or about ensuring that healthcare can be accessed as quickly as possible, I would like more local appointments to be prioritised. The aim in the 10-year plan to end the 8 am appointment rush resonates with many constituents who have, too many times, faced the stress of scrambling for an appointment while unwell and in need of treatment. I am pleased to see the Government delivering on that key ambition, but I am aware that the shift has come with operational challenges for primary healthcare providers when managing patients who book close to closing time. I know that healthcare professionals would welcome the Minister’s thoughts on how the teething issues can be addressed, so that the system works as well as possible for both patients and providers. The Government’s ambition is rightly to raise the healthiest generation of children ever, and early intervention and community-focused care will play a crucial role in delivering that. As many colleagues know, I often speak about special educational needs and disabilities issues in this House, and with my constituents. SEND is not just an educational issue. Among many other things, it is a social issue, an equalities issue and, of course, a health issue. Across the country, children and adults wait far too long to access attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism assessments. The number of children waiting for an autism assessment is acknowledged to be high across all six Berkshire local authorities. In June 2025, there were 682 children aged between five and 18 in Bracknell Forest waiting for an assessment, and a further 241 adults were also waiting. Berkshire healthcare NHS foundation trust has been overhauling its system to improve waiting times and deliver a better performance, and has recently been recognised as one of the top performing trusts in the country, but it will take time for the efforts of those reforms to be felt on the ground. The long waits involved mean that many are turning to private diagnosis, which risks creating a two-tier system in which those who can afford it receive a diagnosis and the support that follows and those who cannot are left to struggle. I fundamentally believe that young people should not need a diagnosis to access essential support. When parent carers, classroom teachers and the young person themselves can all see that there is need for more support, it should be made available, and the diagnosis can be worried about later. As the Government develop their reforms to our broken SEND system, I want to see a shift away from a system that too often feels diagnosis-led, and towards one that is genuinely needs-led. Prioritising early intervention will enable quicker support and treatment and will improve young people’s quality of life and outcomes. I recently hosted a series of roundtables with parent carers and practitioners to hear directly from my constituents what they want to see in a reformed SEND system, and I produced a report on their local concerns and perspectives. Many of those who contributed highlighted a need for joined-up, holistic working across agencies and service providers. Nationally, there is a chronic shortage of trained speech and language therapists and occupational therapists in our schools. That has deep and long-lasting consequences, locking young people out of fully accessing their education and preventing them from reaching their full potential. I urge the Government to recognise the importance of increasing recruitment and retention in those critical roles. I also heard that it too often felt like health services were walking off the pitch and leaving everything to schools and the local authority. Although I recognise the importance of an education-led approach to reforms, local health services, including integrated health boards, need to be held accountable for the parts of the system they are responsible for. I was delighted to welcome the SEND Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Queen’s Park and Maida Vale (Georgia Gould), to Bracknell last week to discuss these issues further and to share the voices of the parents, carers, professionals and young people whose experiences informed my report. Again, I thank those who contributed. I am pleased to have the chance to raise the issue in this health debate too. I recently attended a dementia forum, hosted by Bracknell Forest council, which brought together dementia patients, their families and carers, healthcare professionals and social workers. It was fantastic to hear how a joined-up approach to offering health and social care was having a positive effect on outcomes for those living with dementia and their loved ones. I was also delighted recently to meet our local Admiral nurse, who works with patients experiencing early onset dementia and is supported by Dementia UK. I heard how important it is for the whole team of support around a person with early onset dementia to have access to their health record, enabling a more holistic approach to care. That is a fantastic example of best practice, and it has had a profound impact on patients and their families across Bracknell Forest. Such community provision is essential if we are to meet our goal of developing a genuinely neighbourhood-led health service. There is much that the voluntary sector can contribute. For example, local mental health services are profoundly stretched, and young people face long waits for support through child and adolescent mental health services. In Bracknell, I am proud that we have excellent local organisations such as Youthline, which was just awarded a King’s award, and Create Hope, which works closely with schools to deliver counselling for young people. I would like them to be supported more by the health system, including through commissioning. Young people across the country face unprecedented challenges, and community organisations play a vital role in advancing a preventive approach to the development of longer-term mental health problems and providing the support on the ground that young people desperately need. A healthcare system fit for the future must embrace the technological age we live in, and the Government’s ambition to shift the NHS from analogue to digital is commendable. The lack of reliable information-sharing across services is a familiar barrier for both patients and professionals in accessing and delivering the best healthcare, so I am strongly in favour of the Government’s work on the single patient record, which is currently in a test phase. It will play a key role in our 10-year health plan. The single patient record will lower barriers to access by ensuring that healthcare professionals have a clear, unified view of patient health records, thereby enabling a safer, faster and more co-ordinated approach across services and ensuring that both patients and healthcare providers can access the information they need as seamlessly as possible. That is particularly important in an area like Bracknell, which benefits from services delivered by both the Frimley and the Royal Berkshire NHS trusts—we get the best of both systems. When patients walk into a health centre, GP clinic or hospital, they do not want to have to think about which ICB or trust is providing the service and whether their data can be shared with the other parts of the health system that they access. They just want to be treated, and to know that every part of the system will understand the treatment they have received. Instead, I often hear residents in Bracknell Forest complaining that their blood test at the local hospital has not been shared with their local GP, or that the care provided by Bracknell Forest council does not speak to the care they access through the NHS. Will the Minister provide an update on the progress towards a single patient record, and set out what it will mean for my constituents in Bracknell who rely on overlapping health systems? Building a health system fit for today’s needs is a challenge, but one that I know the Government are determined to embrace. I recognise and welcome the progress that has already been made, and I urge the Minister to continue in the spirit of innovation and ambition to drive forward critical changes. We must ensure that flexibility, early intervention and a community-first approach are placed at the heart of our reforms, and that barriers to access are considered carefully so that no community is left behind. I hope the Minister can take these concerns back to the Department to ensure that they are fed into the Government’s plans to rebuild our health system, and that Bracknell Forest’s voice is heard loudly as the ambitious work continues to build an NHS fit for the future.

I used to be a teacher, and I know from my own practice that many of the measures that were originally introduced to support students with special educational needs, including dyslexia, actually support all children to learn better in the classroom. Does the hon. Lady agree that we need much more focus on inclusive teaching practice, because that will support everyone in the classroom, including, most importantly, those with additional needs?

I warmly welcome this curriculum and assessment review and in particular what it says about a broad curriculum and the importance of enrichment and essential skills such as digital, financial and media literacy and communication. Will my right hon. Friend go further and look at introducing a skills passport, so that young people can have the skills they are learning in school properly recognised for both themselves and employers?

indicated assent.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. This weekend, the hon. Member for East Wiltshire (Danny Kruger) suggested on a Reform UK broadcast that the country could soon be run by an “appalling Hamas-supporting, LGBT-supporting nationalist party”. As a gay man and an MP, I am proud to say I will always support LGBT rights. To suggest that that support is the same as backing Hamas—a vile terrorist organisation that systematically persecutes LGBT people—is beyond the pale. What can we do across this House to make it clear to him and his party that supporting LGBT rights is fundamental to our British values, and to the values of this Parliament?

Over the summer, I spoke to almost 1,000 Bracknell Forest residents as part of my campaign on road safety. Last week, I published my findings, with recommendations including more action on off-road bikes, uninsured drivers and headlight dazzle. Will the Leader of the House ask the local transport Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), to meet me to discuss my report further?

T4. Last Friday, alongside my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, I attended the Get Britain Growing: South East conference, which discussed opportunities across advanced manufacturing, life sciences, digital innovation and beyond. Will the Minister set out how the industrial strategy will ensure that Bracknell and the wider south-east reaches its full potential?

Will the right hon. and learned Member give way?

Respect for democracy is fundamental to our British values, and to who we are as a country, but the world is increasingly an unstable place, and we can no longer be complacent about the multiple threats that our democratic norms and values face. Threats are coming from China, as we see from this espionage case, but also from other malign states, such as Russia and Iran. It is the job of all of us in the House to stand up to those threats and work in the interests of national security. When I held a roundtable with my local Hong Kong community earlier this year to discuss proposed changes to immigration, I was saddened, but unfortunately not surprised, to hear that many members of the community chose not to attend a meeting with their local MP because they were worried about the long arm of the Chinese state, and the repercussions of the Hong Kong national security law on them and their family. Transnational repression is being used by hostile states to directly prosecute those whom they see as their enemies overseas, but it also has a wider, chilling effect, leaving whole communities afraid to engage with their basic democratic rights. Meanwhile, I grow increasingly concerned about the influence of foreign actors on misinformation and disinformation online. In recent months, I have seen how anonymous posting on local social media groups in my community can have a pervasive effect on community cohesion and our democracy. Social media companies need to step up and do more on that. I am not suggesting that every anonymous social media post is from a Russian bot, but we all know that Russia and other states are using social media against us. There have been direct attacks on our democracy, too, such as those from these Chinese spies. Last month, Reform UK’s former leader in Wales, Nathan Gill, pled guilty to eight counts of bribery; he was bribed to make statements in favour of Russia while he was a Member of the European Parliament. I turn to the China spy case. Part of the reason why the case did not proceed to trial and the two gentlemen could not be prosecuted was prevarication over reforming the Official Secrets Act. The Act was introduced in 1911 —it predates the first world war—and despite unanimous recognition for at least eight years that it was completely out of date and not fit for purpose, the previous Government failed to act to fix the holes in our national security laws and left our country ill defended.

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

As has already been set out, the threat from China has evolved over time. I would have loved it if the previous Labour Government had amended the Act, but it was the Conservative party that held a consultation, and then sat on the results for eight years and did nothing.

The Minister quite clearly set out the range of threats posed by China. I am clear that China poses a threat. I also think that we have to be mature enough in this Chamber to accept that the way we deal with the second-largest economy in the world has to be to recognise the threats it poses to our democracy and our national security, but also all the ways in which we have to work with it. I stood for election on a manifesto that committed to our co-operating with China where we can, challenging them where we must, and competing with them where we need to. I genuinely think that is a mature way of dealing with a state that does not share our values, and that poses a great threat to our democracy and to the way that citizens and residents of this country operate within a democracy, but that is also the second-largest economy in the world. As the former director of MI6 said on the “Today” show on the BBC this morning, “we need to learn to walk and chew gum at the same time.” We need a mature acceptance of the risks that China poses, and that means recognising that we cannot just walk off the pitch and not deal with the second-largest economy in the world. It is infantile and not realistic to suggest otherwise. If the new Act had been in place sooner, it is possible that these men could have been prosecuted successfully under it. I therefore have a simple question for Conservative Front Benchers, and they need to be clear on this point: why did they wait so long to replace a vital piece of security legislation, and make sure that we had the appropriate tools to keep this country safe? I am happy to take interventions on that point.

On that point, it is really important to clarify why such tight definitions were important in the first place. That is because the case was brought under a 1911 Act of Parliament, not a modern, up-to-date Act of Parliament. Is that not why we are in this situation?

Will the hon. Lady give way?

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving way and for bringing us back to where he started. He started his speech by suggesting that the Government were intervening unduly in this case. He then went on to suggest that the Government did not intervene unduly enough. Can he be clear on this: is his position and that of the Opposition that the Government should have interfered in an independent prosecution, or not? It is unhelpful to be saying both things at the same time.

The case collapsed because under that Act neither Government provided enough evidence. The witness statements issued by the previous Government are a matter of record, and they do not state anywhere unequivocally that China is a threat. In fact, multiple Opposition Members have said on multiple occasions that it would not be possible to describe China unilaterally as a threat. That is a matter of record.

I welcome the Government’s full review of parental leave as part of our promise to make work pay. It will reshape the vital support that new parents are offered in Britain, so that it can effectively and compassionately align with the changing demands of our modern world. It is vital that the review also looks at the support provided to bereaved parents, because it cannot be right that when mothers and fathers face the greatest tragedy that can affect any of us—the loss of a child—there are barriers to basic support. There is more we can do to support families at the point that their child is first diagnosed with a serious condition. I recently met a constituent, Stephen, at a street surgery in Birch Hill, and we spoke about the challenges his family faced when supporting their daughter through her cancer treatment journey. Beyond the unimaginable emotional toll of caring for his daughter Edie, Stephen spoke to me about the often-overlooked practical difficulties that arose for his family. He told me about how the cost of fuel, hospital parking and food quickly pushed his family into debt. That is why Stephen is backing calls for Hugh’s law, which would give the parents of critically ill children who are undergoing treatment job protection and entitlement to statutory paid leave from the first day of their child’s diagnosis. Hugh’s law is, of course, named after Hugh Menai-Davis, the six-year-old son of Ceri and Frances Menai-Davis.

When I met Stephen at my street surgery, I also got the chance to meet Edie, an energetic, enthusiastic young girl running around with her sister, recovering well from her terrible ordeal. She has been so brave, and I am so proud to stand here as her MP, sharing her and her family’s story.

My right hon. Friend knows how ambitious I am for improving connectivity from Bracknell to Heathrow airport. Heathrow’s proposals say that it is exploring the option of promoting a new rail scheme that combines the objectives of a western rail link to Heathrow and southern rail access to Heathrow, and there are similar commitments in the Aurora Group’s plans. Will she ensure that the review of the ANPS helps us to hold it to account for those promises so that we can deliver the better surface access that my constituents so badly need?

A key part of financial inclusion is supporting young people to be included and ensuring that they have essential skills, including financial literacy. Has the Minister spoken with any colleagues in the Department for Education about how we can make sure that young people have the right essential skills, including financial literacy, as part of the strategy?

My hon. Friend raises the Online Safety Act. Some of my constituents have raised concerns about identity checks to access material online. Would it not have been far easier to prove one’s age online safely and securely if we already had a digital ID, and would that not have helped us to introduce safer checks online?

T7. Let me first declare that I chair the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment and the APPG on social mobility. Businesses, schools and young people in Bracknell Forest all tell me that essential skills such as financial, digital and media literacy, creative problem-solving, communication and collaboration are more important than ever, but are not formally recognised or measured. How can we help young people to succeed by developing and recognising those essential skills?

As my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) and many others have so expertly touched on Ada Lovelace’s story, I thought I might—with your indulgence, Ms Furniss—touch on another champion of 19th-century science who has always inspired me: Mary Anning, a pioneering palaeontologist renowned for her significant geological discoveries on the Dorset coast. Mary’s findings heavily influence how scientists now understand prehistoric life. She discovered the first complete plesiosaur skeleton—she could say it better than I could—and the ichthyosaurus, but she was held back from the proper recognition she so badly deserved because she was working class, because she was uneducated and because she was a woman. I have always been inspired by her story, and I know that many girls and women across the country have too, including Bracknell’s all-girls robotics team, the RealTech Bots, who were crowned world champions at the FIRST Lego League international open earlier this year. The team, made up of school pupils aged between nine and 15, beat 96 teams and 11 countries, flying the STEM flag for Bracknell and the UK, and we are all extremely proud of them. According to BCS, the Chartered Institute for IT, if we continue at our current rate, it will take women 283 years to make up an equal share of the tech workforce. Given the rapid development of AI and the fact that it is ultimately shaped by its designers, this lack of diversity should worry us all. That is why it is so important that the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology has set up a new women’s tech taskforce to, in her words—because the words of a woman here are more important than mine— “finally smash those glass ceilings. Because Britain’s future shouldn’t just be shaped by the Tech Bros in Silicon Valley but our Tech Sisters—right here, in the UK.” While other parties are arguing against diversity initiatives, it is important that this Government are recognising that economic growth must be underpinned by shared economic benefits to everyone. Finally, I turn to the remarks made by the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) and others about the important intersection between Ada’s mathematical legacy and the arts that so influenced her. She often blended mathematics with art, predicting the use of computers in music and visual art, as well as other things. She wrote: “We may say most aptly that the Analytical Engine weaves algebraic patterns just as the Jacquard loom weaves flowers and leaves.”

As the right hon. Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat) emphasises so emphatically, across the whole House we are appalled by the actions of the Chinese state. I want to go back to the precise law under which the charges were brought. The Act was first introduced in 1911 and the Conservatives set out to review it when they were in Government in 2015, but they did not successfully replace with a law that was fit for purpose until 2023, eight years later. Had the Conservatives got on with the job and replaced the law more quickly, would we be in a different position now?

I warmly welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, particularly his commitment to seeking a lasting, long-term peace in the region, because Israel will not be secure and the Palestinian people will not be free until we break this endless cycle of violence. Turning to the immediate situation on the ground, the Gazans still face a man-made famine, so I really welcome the flooding-in of aid that the Prime Minister talked about in his statement. However, could he say a little more about the timescale for that, and how soon we can start to see that aid getting in and having an effect on the ground?

As the Secretary of State knows, I am a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and we have been very engaged in this issue, not least because of the ruling of our courts that the previous Government’s attempt to legislate on this issue was unlawful because it would potentially grant immunity to, among others, terrorists. That is no way to serve justice to families and victims, and it is no way to serve justice to our veterans. Will the Secretary of State confirm that the legislation we are bringing forward will not grant immunity to terrorists? That is a simple request and it is remarkable that I have to make it, but given the legislation that the previous Government attempted to pass, it is important to have it on the record.