Polly Billington MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 12 Apr 2025 · Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman clarify whether he was aware that the Chinese company that is now in possession of British Steel was sold it by a Conservative Government of which he was part?

• 8 Apr 2025 · Energy (Social Tariff) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require energy companies to provide social tariffs for low income customers; and for connected purposes. Last week, we saw people’s energy bills go up by another 6%, as Ofgem raised the energy price cap again, meaning that typical households now face bills of not far off £2,000 a year. My argument for a social tariff is born out of a career spent grappling with Britain’s energy market, including in my work with the current Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero in the old Department of Energy and Climate Change, where we saw, through the global financial crisis, the need to better protect consumers from volatile energy prices. Watching him trying to convince energy companies to lower their prices as the country faced spiralling costs and economic chaos convinced me that a social tariff was the least a Labour Government could and should do to protect the most vulnerable. Much has changed since then. There has been significant success in shifting to cleaner power, as a result of a political consensus—held across this House until recently—on the need to decarbonise our energy system to tackle climate change. This Labour Government’s mission to achieve clean power by 2030 is part of our long-term solution to bring energy bills down for good. People see increasingly that there are further benefits to such a shift: greater energy security from generating our own energy rather than being exposed to the whims of petrostates and dodgy regimes, as well as a reduction in the costs of generating that power. Some 96% of newly installed solar and wind capacity has a lower generation cost than natural gas. However, consumers are not feeling the benefits of cheaper costs as much as they could, partly because our energy prices are set by global oil and gas prices. As an MP, the reality of fuel poverty is frequently rammed home to me on the doorstep, where concerns are raised about the rising costs of energy and the pressure that they put on household budgets, especially among those on low incomes. I remind the House that East Thanet is not a leafy, affluent community of the kind that many people associate with the south-east. It is a coastal community with high levels of deprivation, much low-paid and insecure work, many elderly residents, many families with a disabled member, and many cold, old and draughty homes. In Thanet, a quarter of all working-age adults claim universal credit, and over 40% of people claim at least one form of benefit from the Department for Work and Pensions. These are the people who suffer most from increasing energy bills, and who often have to choose between heating and eating. A social tariff that supports the most vulnerable with their energy bills and prevents them from falling into fuel poverty would protect them from some of the failures of the current energy market, and shield them as that market is reformed to make the most of leaving fossil fuels behind. The energy market needs to change so that the efforts the Government are making to decarbonise our energy system truly deliver benefits for consumers. The reform of retail prices will need to be part of that. As a member of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, I have heard witnesses’ growing calls for such change. The vast majority of homes are heated by gas, while electricity is much more expensive. The costs of shifting to cleaner power have been loaded on to electricity bills, creating a disincentive for many to choose to shift to electric heat. We artificially make electricity more expensive, which makes it impossible for some to move to clean power. It is those who cannot pay who are least prepared. Rapid change has always been associated with upheaval and risk. A social tariff, working as part of the welfare state, can support people as we make these changes. This is the right thing to do from not only a fuel poverty perspective but a decarbonisation one. A modern welfare state has done this before, and it can do it again. The Labour party is the party that created the welfare state, and on these Benches, we understand why having a strong social safety net is vital, but energy is an area where the safety net has a gaping hole in it. That is why a targeted social tariff is needed—so that we can provide vital support for those in the greatest need. There is also an increasingly chronic problem with consumer energy debt. People owe more than £2 billion in energy bill debt, and that figure has doubled in the past three years alone. Those in debt then become stuck in a cycle where they face an increase in energy bills while also trying to pay off the debt they have built up. That is not sustainable for those consumers or even the energy retailers, which have to deal with the fallout from fuel poverty debt. The warm home discount is the most prominent current scheme to help with this issue, but it is simply not sufficient for the scale of the challenge. It has not scaled with retail prices—as energy bills have increased by hundreds of pounds, the warm home discount has increased by only £10 since its introduction. The discount is also limited to households receiving means-tested benefits, meaning that many families living in fuel poverty miss out on this vital support. A social tariff should build on the warm home discount but not replace it. The purpose of the Bill is to enshrine in law the principle that a social tariff should be provided by all energy companies, to ensure there is no supplier lottery for those who need support. It should be additional to existing and planned support, it should be targeted, and it should be sufficient enough to reduce costs to an affordable level. National Energy Action has argued that we need to aim a social tariff at people on low incomes, people with disabilities, carers, households with low energy efficiency, off-gas grid homes and households with prepayment meters. There are far too many complaints by energy companies that they cannot identify the people who need this support. These categories tackle that problem, because we already have the data: we know who is in receipt of universal credit, disability benefits and carer’s allowance; we know those on prepayment meters and the homes with poor energy ratings. These are people who face huge financial pressures and who are at the forefront of the cost of living crisis. These are the people who are most at risk of fuel poverty, and, crucially, we can find these people, so that those who need the support get it. This Government have rightly established a child poverty taskforce to tackle the scar on our society of children growing up poor. A social tariff can be part of a wider approach to tackling this moral outrage by ensuring that the families who are most in need have to worry less about their energy bills. Children who grow up in households that struggle to pay their energy bills are more likely to struggle at school and more likely to end up struggling in life. However, simply protecting people from a failing energy retail market is not sufficient. We should be developing a package of measures that prioritises shifting the most vulnerable on to the cleaner, cheaper and more secure energy that we are generating ourselves. There is always a risk that the case for such market interventions is made simply by talking about protecting people from the worst extremes of the market, but it is also important to say that such a measure increases economic security and is therefore good for economic growth. It puts money in people’s pockets. Money they are spending on excessive energy costs is money they are not spending in their local economies. With this relief, they can be part of the economic revival of the places in which they live. This is not a new idea; social tariffs are already working in many other countries. For example, Spain has a tariff that provides a 35% discount for vulnerable customers and a 50% discount for severely vulnerable customers. I have spent a lot of my career working on how energy can be generated, supplied and consumed in a way that does not cost a packet or the planet. For far too long, energy companies have urged consumers to “engage” with the energy market. That, in my view, has always been based on a failure to understand that for most people, energy is a means to an end. It is not exciting, and it can be stressful, especially for those who are struggling. We should be in the business of reducing that stress, so that people can spend their time and energy doing things that are more interesting and fulfilling. The very least we can do for those who already struggle to do exactly that because of limited means is to protect them from the market. That is why a social tariff should be part of our plan for change and our national mission to transform this country for the better. Question put and agreed to . Ordered , That Ms Polly Billington, Yuan Yang, Torcuil Crichton, Andrew Pakes, Pippa Heylings, Luke Murphy, Wera Hobhouse and Mike Reader present the Bill. Ms Polly Billington accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 2 5 April , and to be printed (Bill 220 ).

• 26 Mar 2025 · Smaller Platforms: Regulation · Hansard source

  More

  The domestic abuse charity Oasis in my constituency has alerted me to the appalling situation whereby young women are being coerced into setting up OnlyFans accounts to generate income. Will the Secretary of State outline what steps he is taking to ensure that the sector can root out coercion and exploitation?

• 26 Mar 2025 · Spring Statement · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement, and in particular her recognition of the excellent work of Labour-run Thanet district council, which is building more social homes with local firms and employing local people, including local apprentices. The Government’s recent planning changes mean not only council homes for local people, but growth. Will she confirm that the Office for Budget Responsibility has scored only the effect of the national planning policy framework changes, and not the effect of the upcoming Planning and Infrastructure Bill?

• 20 Mar 2025 · Coastal Communities · Hansard source

  More

  Indeed, we need a place-based approach with that active state. If we want economic growth that reaches all parts of the country, invest in coastal communities. If we want public services that really improve the experience of people who are most alienated because of state failures, invest in coastal communities. If we want to create an environment that works for nature and people, invest in coastal communities. I am speaking not just about financial investment, but about investment of Government time, energy and focus. When colleagues and I were trying to work out which Department would be answering this debate, we literally did not know. While I am obviously delighted to see the Minister in his place, the issues raised in this House today span all Departments, whether that is Health, Transport, Environment, Education, the Home Office, the Treasury or many others. I simply note that if there is not one Minister who fits the portfolio, there should be one—a Minister for coastal communities who can focus on regenerating our towns and growing our coastal economies. I will end with a point about the previous Labour Government. In the 1990s, cities were not the places they are today. That Labour Government had a relentless focus on improving them, and the regeneration we have seen is testament to what can be delivered. Coastal towns are in the same position now, and the Labour Government have not only—

• 20 Mar 2025 · Coastal Communities · Hansard source

  More

  Jane Austen mentions not only Cromer but Ramsgate—in “Pride and Prejudice”—although certainly in a less salubrious way than she may have referred to Cromer. Ramsgate and Wells-next-the-Sea share the concerns that the hon. Member mentioned about short-term holiday lets. Does he support the calls that many colleagues and I have made for not just a registration scheme but a licensing scheme for short-term holiday lets, in order for local authorities to be able to control and shape their own local economies?

• 20 Mar 2025 · Coastal Communities · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend confirm that this Government understand that there is a clear distinction between the challenges in rural communities and those in coastal ones? I noticed that the Liberal Democrat spokesman used the words “coastal” and “rural” almost completely interchangeably, and we know that the levels of deprivation and the challenges in coastal communities are significantly different from those in rural communities. Can he give me that confirmation from the Government?

• 20 Mar 2025 · Coastal Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest as chair of the coastal parliamentary Labour party and co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for coastal communities, alongside my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume). We are in danger of violently agreeing with each other, so I will not repeat much of what has been said—needless to say, much of it also applies to East Thanet. What I will cover, however, is the potential that coastal communities have to drive economic growth across the country through our people, our heritage and our environment. Take the Government’s mission to build 1.5 million homes; East Kent Colleges Group is working with house builders and construction companies such as WW Martin, offering apprenticeships to develop the next generation of workers. There is a demand for non-graduate jobs in our community, and if we tap into that potential, there is no reason why it could not be workers from coastal communities who build those 1.5 million homes across the country and refurbish our shoddy, draughty and damp housing stock. It is important that we build on people’s identity and heritage to develop resilient coastal communities. In East Thanet, we have tapped into our artistic heritage of Charles Dickens and J.M.W. Turner—the Turner Contemporary gallery in Margate is a monument to what can happen when energy and resources are focused on regenerating coastal towns. Of course, our natural environment is not just a nice-to-have; it is an integral economic asset. However, we cannot talk about increasing opportunity without first providing people with security. How can people look to the horizon when they are having to watch where they step? This is a mission-driven Government with five missions to transform the country.

• 20 Mar 2025 · Coastal Communities · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 20 Mar 2025 · Conflict in Gaza · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to commend my right hon. Friend for all the hard work he has been doing to secure a ceasefire in Gaza, and indeed for maintaining accountability to this House, as he has done today, in so much detail. It is devastating that Israel has resumed the indiscriminate bombing of Palestinian civilians. While the ceasefire held, there were comments from those on the Treasury Bench about the possibility of a trade deal between the UK and Israel. Does the Foreign Secretary agree—surely he does—that a trade deal between the UK and Israel must be completely out of the question now that the ceasefire is over?

• 18 Mar 2025 · Electricity Grid Decarbonisation · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister is clearly aware of the foolhardy decision by the Opposition to abandon the political consensus on net zero, but has he made an assessment of the cost to the consumer of pursuing that disastrous path, which would lock us into our dependence on polluting fossil fuels, volatile oil and gas prices, and the whims of foreign dictators?

• 18 Mar 2025 · Welfare Reform · Hansard source

  More

  My right hon. Friend will know that the Tory legacy in coastal communities such as mine in East Thanet is a broken welfare system and a broken economy. The number of people claiming PIP has more than doubled in my constituency since 2018, and the statistics on young people claiming for mental health conditions are particularly heartbreaking. However, two things can be true at once: too many people are being written off without a path to wellness and work; and there must be reliable support for those who cannot work. Can my right hon. Friend explain how reducing support for those who struggle to wash and dress themselves will help tackle either of these challenges?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  No, I will not give way. This law will strengthen their hand. I say, in the words of the greatest pub manager of all time—Peggy Mitchell—to the proposers of the amendment, “Get outta my pub!”

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to emphasise that I listened closely to the opening speeches when the hon. Lady’s colleagues were talking about amendment 289. I heard clearly, for example, some confusion over whether sexual harassment was a crime or a civil offence, so I will not take any lessons from the Conservatives on their understanding of employment law or, indeed, what is considered acceptable at work. The amendment is utterly disgraceful. I am proud that this Labour Government have brought forward a Bill to stop workers being harassed wherever they work. It is just a shame that the Conservative party does not agree. The hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), and apparently the hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Alison Griffiths), think that it is wrong that pub landlords will have to be responsible for kicking out customers. He talked about it being a “banter ban”, but pub managers have always known the importance of keeping rowdy behaviour in limits and protecting their staff and customers from being pestered or being made the unwilling butt of so-called jokes. This law—

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and declare that I am a proud member of the GMB. I stand to speak against amendment 289, which would exclude the hospitality sector and sports venues from the Bill’s duty for employers not to permit harassment of their employees. The first time I was harassed at work was when I was 14 years old, waiting tables at a charity event. The second time was when I was 16, in a bistro, except this time I was being paid for the experience. After that, it was when I was a student working in a bar, then when I worked in a canteen, and then in a warehouse. It is because of that experience—one shared by people of both sexes and all ages, but particularly the young and particularly women, across this country—that I was, I am not going to lie, absolutely gobsmacked by the amendment tabled by the shadow Secretary of State for Business and Trade, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith), to the protection from harassment clause, which would exclude those working in the hospitality sector or sports venues. The Conservative party is arguing that some kind of harassment is okay and that if you are working in the hospitality sector or in a sports venue, it is fine. Tories seem to believe that if you go to a pub, your right to harass bar staff is greater than their right not to be harassed. I have to say, that is quite an extraordinary thing to argue for, but I am glad that they are at least being honest with us. Jobs in hospitality often involve insecure work on low pay that is reliant on tips. In Margate, Ramsgate and Broadstairs, thousands of people work in jobs like that, and I do not see why it should be deemed acceptable for them to be harassed in their job, but not people who work in an office.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that intervention. It is indeed a very worrying direction of travel from the Conservatives. We on the Labour Benches think that people should not be allowed to harass any workers. I honestly did not expect this to be a controversial aspect of the Bill for the Conservatives. Perhaps I am being uncharitable, so I would really appreciate it if the shadow Secretary of State, who is now in his place, could answer a few questions. When did it become Conservative party policy to allow staff to be harassed? Why does that apply only to staff working in hospitality and sports venues and not to all workers? Why is it all right to harass bar staff but not office staff?

• 6 Mar 2025 · International Women’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  It is indeed true. It was powerful to see people talking about the strength of increased representation in the workplace by trade unions, giving them greater protections. Housing, housing and housing—my hon. Friend the Minister will recognise that it is key for the kind of security and safety that people, women in particular, require. We spend a lot of time on International Women’s Day talking about the importance of opportunity, because it has been restricted over centuries and we celebrate the smashing of glass ceilings every day. Whether it is because of legislation, a lack of rights, or culture, women’s access to opportunity has been limited. I will, however, give the House a particular example that was raised at the conference by Oasis, our local domestic abuse service. It pointed out that, because in Thanet we have a particularly high level of youth unemployment at about 10% and a high level of young people not in education, employment or training, young women are being “encouraged”, meaning forced, by their “boyfriends”, meaning soon-to-be pimps, to set up their own OnlyFans account to secure income. We need to remember that that is why we need confidence in the law, to ensure we are all safe: security in the home; security in the community; and security for our country. The violence against women and girls conference I hosted brought those issues to the surface. Given the increasingly unsafe and unpredictable world in which we live, this is becoming only more important. It is in that context that I pay tribute to the Government and their commitment to increase spending on the defence of our country. Security and safety are not just personal, but based in the community and throughout our country. However, we need to acknowledge the crucial role of aid in increasing security here and abroad, including for women in the UK and elsewhere. For women across the globe, international aid has been a lifeline, and has given them both the security and the access to opportunities that otherwise they were unlikely to have had. I understand that we are having to make difficult decisions, and I absolutely support increasing defence spending. I simply wish to remind the House of the role of international aid and its impact on women across the globe. We know that 30% of the people who come across the channel on small boats are women and children, and aid can reduce that number. If those women have security and opportunity at home, why would they undertake that dangerous journey? I finish my remarks in my constituency again. Claire Knights would have been my constituent if she had lived, but she was killed while walking her dog on the beach in Minnis bay in August 2023. Last week, her killer was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison. However, it is important to note that he escaped arrest for upskirting the day before her attack. We will hear the names of the women who have been killed at the hands of men this year from my hon. Friend the Minister. Making those women visible is important, and is part of the struggle to eradicate the violence against and hatred of women.

• 6 Mar 2025 · International Women’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for giving way during her extremely powerful speech. Will she remind everybody of the importance not only of the fact of rape, but of prosecuting and convicting the perpetrators of those rapes, so that we remember that this is not simply about a passive violence against women and girls, but about identifying the causes and the people who do those crimes?

• 6 Mar 2025 · International Women’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  Last Saturday, women from across East Thanet came together for a conference on tackling violence against women and girls. They gave their testimony on what they most want to see improved: public services, in particular mental health provision; the quality of policing; the lack of reliable, affordable, safe public transport; and safety in the workplace and in the streets. Those issues were all brought up time and time again.

• 6 Mar 2025 · International Women’s Day · Hansard source

  More

  I would just like to remark, in support of my hon. Friend’s observations about the experience of being a female Member of Parliament, that as candidates we were advised by a bunch of white men about security by this place. We looked at each other, we female candidates, and observed that almost everything they were suggesting that we do—“Walk in the light. Don’t have your headphones on. Be careful where you stand on a platform”—was basically the advice we had been given by our mothers at the age of 12.

• 6 Mar 2025 · North Sea Energy · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome my hon. Friend’s statement, and indeed the fact that there is a plan. Although the Tories now accept that they did not have a plan, which is at least an important admission, the result of that lack of a plan is that have been left with uncertainty for both workers and consumers. In East Thanet, we need better jobs and lower bills, and surely she will agree with me that the overall security of our energy is also vital. There is one solution, which is to get off fossil fuels and shift to renewable energy as soon as possible.

• 3 Mar 2025 · Church of England: Safeguarding · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate my hon. Friend’s efforts in getting the debate held. I have previously raised in the House the possibility of holding the Church of England accountable to the public through being subject to the strictures of the Freedom of Information Act. I was advised that that was unsuitable because it is technically not a public body, and yet it is an institution and part of the fabric of this country. It is unconscionable for people who use and revere this institution to find that they are not safe in it, that instead it protects its own—it protects perpetrators—and that the people right at the top use the excuse of legal constructions or institutional formations to justify not pursuing these situations. Does my hon. Friend agree that as legislators we must argue for greater transparency in the Church of England, as the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said about other public bodies?

• 3 Mar 2025 · Church of England: Safeguarding · Hansard source

  More

  We are talking not just about changing attitudes and culture, but about changing safeguarding structures. While power is held by a small number of people who are refusing to let go of that power, it is becoming increasingly apparent that it is impossible to change that culture, so the structures of the Church itself need to change.

• 3 Mar 2025 · Church of England: Safeguarding · Hansard source

  More

  I understand what the Minister is saying. However, we have a situation where the institution is compounding that abuse, by the way that it is protecting the people in power or the people in power are protecting the perpetrators, thereby further hurting victims. I understand that the Minister cannot tell the Church of England how to conduct its safeguarding. However, will she please acknowledge that its failure to conduct proper safeguarding is compounding that abuse and is something that the Church of England has a duty to correct?

• 3 Mar 2025 · Energy Efficiency Standards · Hansard source

  More

  Some 13% of households in England—over 3 million people—are officially in fuel poverty. Does the Minister agree that the last Conservative Government did not just fail to meet their housing targets, but left a legacy of high household bills?