Rachael Maskell MP: speeches

Speeches

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Member for securing this important debate. York is fortunate that two thirds of its high street businesses are independent, but they are really struggling at the moment, not least because of the costs pressing on their finances—particularly business rates, which have gone up incredibly steeply. Does the hon. Member agree not only that businesses are laying off staff, but that they are not recruiting staff, which is vital for the regeneration of high streets? We need the Government to take an overview and make a plan for regeneration, as my right hon. Friend the new Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) made the case for just yesterday.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is being incredibly generous. He has talked about infrastructure and agencies. It is also important to ensure that we have facilities such as public toilets and good seating on our high streets, but the disinvestment in our local authorities over a long time has prevented that. Will he support my call for investment in local areas so that we have seating for the elderly and play areas for children on our high streets?

• 29 Jun 2026 · Asylum Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  This decision looks like the politics of the past, not the future; a decision made in Whitehall, not in our communities. In 2022, RAF Linton-on-Ouse was deemed unsuitable as a site, because the drainage and sewage system would need major restoration, there would need to be an upgrade in the power capacity, and there are no amenities near the site—and the site has deteriorated further since that decision. The inadequacy of public transport, and other forms of transport there, also stands out. In my human rights city, we rejected the proposal last time, and we worked cross-party in order to put forward that case. People from Linton-on-Ouse contacted me over the weekend, restating those reasons for rejection. Will the Minister listen to local residents and local authorities? City of York council, which I spoke to this afternoon, has said that it has not been offered any resources, planning or engagement regarding the decision, yet Linton-on-Ouse faces York and there would be major implications for the city. Will the Minister ditch this plan, work with MPs and find an alternative way forward?

• 9 Jun 2026 · Water Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms McVey. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) on the way he introduced this debate, and I share my condolences with all the families who are grieving at this time. It is a national tragedy that we come here, year after year, to raise these issues. The bank holiday heatwave must be a turning point for the Government’s approach. These lives matter, as does their legacy. I pay tribute to York Rescue Boat, which does phenomenal work in our city, as we have heard. It has saved 45 lives—as a volunteer force, that is remarkable—and attended 974 incidents in our city, responded to 447 call-outs and dedicated more than 105,000 volunteer hours. It has a simple message: educate, prevent and, when necessary, rescue. York Rescue Boat’s education programme in York schools is phenomenal for giving young people the opportunity to hear about the risks on the River Ouse and the River Foss. Every weekend it is out protecting the night-time economy and patrolling the rivers, looking for vulnerable people, breaking into conversation with them and going into the water to rescue people. Sadly, so many people enter the water in York because of poor mental health. It is important to acknowledge that and address the issues that challenge people in our society today. I pay tribute to the parents of Sonny Ferry, who was 19 when he died in York. His parents, Kate and Steve, raised funds for York Rescue Boat to have a fully equipped new boat to bring rescue efforts into our city. I also pay tribute to the aunt of Leah Bedford. Leah was just 16 when she entered the water in 2023. Her aunt’s petition, which attracted 1,428 signatures and which I presented to the House, called for more safety measures on the infrastructure around our rivers: signage, lighting and CCTV cameras. That would make such a difference, but our local authority does not always have the money needed for such measures. Sir Chris Whitty is leading the public health water taskforce; I say to the Minister that it would be timely to introduce drowning and water safety measures into that. Finally, I want to raise the issue of water pollution. The water in the River Ouse often looks very inviting, but it has seen over 18,500 hours’ worth of sewage release in the last year, with 2,950 sewage releases in York Central. The water is so polluted that people in my city are becoming ill, which is another completely avoidable danger that has been introduced into our water, and another public health response is needed. We are very much hoping to introduce a lido in our city, which will allow people to enjoy the water in a safe, outdoor place, but we must address those real risks in the River Ouse and the River Foss as we move forward.

• 1 Jun 2026 · Health Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The national must determine the “what”, and bringing NHS England into the Department is therefore the right decision. However, as many Members have said today, it is the “how”—how we do this at a local level—that determines the outcomes we see. Given the huge inequalities in our constituencies, which we have all spoken about today, the question of how we deliver, in particular, the third shift to prevention, is really important. The right integration, the right systems and the right focus will bring our health service together at a local level. I agree that the accountability processes are not in the right place under the Bill, and I agree with the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer) about the need to ensure that we in this place have that connection to the national and the local, while also integrating with those held publicly accountable in our councils and combined authorities. But the focus also needs to be there. It is because there is no coterminosity between commissioners and providers that people are looking in both directions in trying to bring about a system that cannot have the capacity to deliver in such ways. We need to see that bringing together of services to focus on a “population health” approach, but the Bill does not do that. We need to think about what the outcomes that we want to see. I have lived through so many reorganisations, and I know that it is not reorganisations that ever deliver the satisfaction outcome. Given that ICBs have now been stripped back to such an extent—unable to communicate with us, as MPs, and not having the resources to make decisions—I fear that that delivering the “how” will become harder under this model. However, we also need to ensure that local accountability comes from our communities—and that leads me to the issue of healthwatch. What we called community health councils were abolished in 2003. We replaced them with public and patient involvement forums, and replaced those with local involvement networks and then with healthwatch, which is soon to be scrapped. If it did not exist, we would invent it, because it has the independence that the new structures do not have, giving patients and people confidence in a system that enables them to raise their voices, and to be sure that their voices will be heard and systems will be held to account. I therefore oppose clauses 64 and 65, with the respective schedules 9 and 10, and ask the Government to reconsider and also to take on board the questions that have been raised about the systems that make it possible to hold investigations. HSSIB has done that well, and I think that its role should continue. Given what has happened over a decade of raising concern in the House, I welcome the commitment of the former Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), to a public inquiry, but we do not have a chair and we do not have terms of reference. It is therefore really important that we put in place the right structures to hold the system to account.

• 13 May 2026 · Debate on the Address · Hansard source

  More

  I do agree. It is daylight robbery, and people should not be profiting from our natural resources. We should not see the levels of pollution that exist in our rivers, which should be pure and clean. I have a sewer running through the middle of my city, and it is not acceptable. It is right to legislate, but also to ensure that we are not adding carbon to our natural environment. On airport and road expansion, we should ensure that we bring down levels of carbon, and I fear that might not be the case with airport expansion. The draft commonhold and leasehold Bill is welcome, as is freezing ground rents, but as developers extract all they can and people pay extortionate rents and management costs, we need to see good-quality housing as a right and to rethink the model. As I have witnessed in my constituency, co-operative housing is a powerful antidote that is worth investing in, alongside a new generation of council-built housing for the common good. The system is rigged against ordinary people, as it was 126 years ago, when trade unions came together to form the Labour party. It is our duty in this Parliament to once again set the ambition to drive transformation for our communities, address the grotesque inequalities that drive people apart, and rewire the system to bring us together. That is our purpose. As the unions fought for common terms and better pay, Labour reimagined a society in which everyone can get on, a welfare state for those in need, and an NHS in which Bevan positioned the duke and the dustman as equals. Not understanding a collective, cohesive society puts all this at risk, as Opposition parties seek to exploit opportunity and people, sell off our common assets and sow division. That is why Labour has an immense obligation to be bold and ambitious, not for those who take all they can, but for those who serve, work and play their part—and to take away the stigma and barriers for those who cannot. I implore the Government to maintain the rights of those with indefinite leave to remain, as new communities work alongside established communities. When it comes to restraining traumatised children, on which the Government are consulting, I simply warn them: don’t! I will not support that. All children must be treated with dignity—nothing less.

• 13 May 2026 · Debate on the Address · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member has put that well and truly on the record. We need to reform the system. It is really prejudiced against so many people who are working hard in our society. We should not increase the time taken to get indefinite leave to remain, because our word should be our bond, and we should honour the agreements we make. That brings me to Labour Members’ ambitions for reforming the special educational needs and disabilities system. We need an inclusive approach, so that every child finds their place and reaches their level. More inclusion means rewiring the culture to be therapeutic and trauma-informed, with new pedagogies; mapping out learning styles for children; and ending harsh discipline and the single channel of exam-based assessments. Instead, we must include children and bring out their best. I urge the Treasury to invest the funding needed to help raise this generation and future generations, by supporting parents and babies with the right foundations during the first 1,001 critical days, and by providing the wraparound support that teachers, health professionals and support staff need, so that our SEND system is fixed once and for all. The benefit of that investment will show in the years to come. As we support our young people into work, we must recognise that state neglect under the last Government caused so much harm. We must be compassionate and work with, not against, our young people, as they struggle to navigate their way and transition into independence and work. Society and our communities should be brought together. Our centralised system is failing; decisions are made far from the realities of the regions and nations. That is building a sense of remote dystopia, and of not being in touch with the daily challenges that are being experienced as the cost of living weighs heavy, while others live profligate lives. Today, we need a radical devolution of power, finance and opportunity to help people see themselves as having agency and purpose. We should recognise the diversity of all our communities, and our common bond. It will not be found in the idealisms of some, or the toxic divisions of the right, which, believe me, will set community against community, while its crypto-backed leaders sow chaos and division, ripping up our NHS and our welfare state—our incredible inheritance that has glued our society together through generations. In the King’s Speech, we have so much to celebrate, and I will sew in the voices of my community in York as we progress. I want to ensure that the Railways Bill protects the wellbeing of all who work in the sector. Having championed the Removal of Titles Bill in the last two parliamentary Sessions, I hope that we can move fast on cleaning up our politics. I welcome the move to tackle antisemitism, as antisemitic graffiti has been found in my community this week. It brings such shame, and we must move fast on that. Improved relations with the EU will help to build the bridges we need. York is a visitor and tourism hotspot, so I will work carefully with the Government on the overnight visitor levy. I trust that businesses will not pay a penalty, and that our city will get the reward. The draft taxi licensing Bill will really help to bring licensing back under control. I trust that we will do more on the climate crisis. As the national emergency briefing highlighted, we do not have the luxury of time. The UK is in the bottom 10% of countries in the biodiversity intactness index, and one in six species is at risk of extinction. While our planet burns and our icecaps melt, we need to invest fast. Finance should be invested to hasten decarbonisation, and projects such as BioYorkshire should be funded to ensure that we hasten agricultural resilience, preventing the low yields and crop failure that are escalating the cost of food. That is why I am really glad that we are moving to independence in our energy market, too. We need a second employment rights Bill to capture the single status of worker, extend collective bargaining, and improve the wellbeing of workers. My final point is this: if we are to bring a diversity of voices to Parliament and ensure that they are heard, this place must change. Governments have been destabilised in recent years due to too much power being held by the Executive, and too little power being invested in Parliament. If that does not change, the discourse of distrust between Parliament and the people will continue. Our voices, representing the diversity of the country, must be heard, and must impact the programme of government. I want all Bills to go through in-depth consultations with MPs, who would input the experiences of their communities. Just running artificial intelligence across consultation responses is not good enough. I want full pre-legislative scrutiny, so that we can ensure that Bills are robust, unifying, and do everything possible to improve the lives of those we represent. Without that, I fear that we will let down the people we were sent here to represent. It is time to include all; the mission is too great to be for just a few. This parliamentary Session must be like no other, connecting communities, unifying society and transforming our future.

• 22 Apr 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q14. In 1777, Bootham Park hospital was given in trust to the people of York. Since it closed in 2015, NHS Property Services has squandered £5.5 million—almost its sale price—keeping the building empty, and threatened to sell it for a luxury complex our city does not want. This much sought-after community space for charities and services would significantly benefit York residents, so will the Prime Minister now release this site so that public land can be used for public good, and we can get Bootham back?

• 26 Mar 2026 · Local Bus Services · Hansard source

  More

  In York, we are ambitious to see modal shifts that get people out of their cars and on to buses, but we have an affordability problem. The mayor has a very generous transport budget, but only 6% can be spent on revenue. Will the Minister look at the ability to transfer capital funding into revenue, so that we can really boost our buses?

• 25 Mar 2026 · Proposed Visitor Levy · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Efford. I thank the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) for bringing forward this debate. I have long campaigned for a visitor levy. York itself sees 1.7 million overnight stays—6.2 million visitors to our city—and as a result we recognise the cost of tourism to our local authority. Whether it is about tidying our streets, putting infrastructure in place, cleaning our city or making additional provisions, the pressure of tourism on our public services is being paid for by local residents. There is an equation where local residents feel that they pay into the system and tourism gains, but that tourists are not making their contribution. I listened carefully to the right hon. Member; he talked about the money, the taxation and the benefit that goes into the national funding pot from the taxation system but is not being invested in local communities.

• 25 Mar 2026 · Proposed Visitor Levy · Hansard source

  More

  I was coming to the point the right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon (Sir Julian Smith) raises, because I believe that the levy should be collected by local authorities. If the mayor collects it, it should be hypothecated to local areas so that they can determine the spend of that resource. Certainly I would propose that half the money be spent directly on tourism, through work with the industry, but there is also the opportunity to invest back into our communities and in local projects. I would put in place exemptions for children; I think that would be appropriate. I would exempt certain forms of accommodation, camping and hostel accommodation, because we know that those are used for budget holidays. Of course we need to respect the cultural need of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people for overnight stays in different areas, but I certainly would include in a levy scheme short-term holiday lets. I just met the Minister to raise again the issue of short-term holiday lets, and the proper licensing system that we need in that respect. I believe that this should be a flat-rate levy. I have always said that the price of a cup of coffee could be the benchmark—people would not think twice about going and getting an extra coffee. If it were something like £4, we would bring £6.8 million into our city and that would help our local economy. We will struggle to support our tourism industry otherwise, so I would encourage that factor. We could use the money to promote the local tourism offer, from which the industry would gain, and could gain substantially. I am talking about putting on events, ensuring that we have better facilities and better infrastructure in our city, and supporting our bid to become a UNESCO world heritage site. All that would benefit not just York, but North Yorkshire and the wider region. It could include putting on projects such as Wild in Art and so on, to draw in even more tourism. I believe that a measure such as that could be seen as an investment in our future.

• 16 Mar 2026 · GP Contract · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend the Minister mentioned the Carr-Hill formula. York had the lowest funding under the primary care groups, the primary care trusts and the clinical commissioning groups, and it now has the lowest funding under the integrated care boards. It is because it is not the most affluent place that it is really important that the new funding formula works for areas such as York. Could the Minister say a bit more about how that will be determined, so that my community gets the health spending that it deserves?

• 10 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill · Hansard source

  More

  When debating justice, I am first minded of the victim’s right to a process producing a fair and timely verdict and the defendant’s right to know that justice has been served fairly and without delay. There is much to commend in the Bill, including the removal of the presumption of parental involvement, protecting children from becoming the proxy target of a perpetrator’s abuse and the better handling of evidence. The listing backlog is not universal. York Crown court’s cases are being listed for 2026-27. The Government must learn from successful courts and think about instituting things like Nightingale courts to deal with the backlog. When I visited York Crown court, I was told about the dysfunctional IT system and how difficult it was to connect to achieving best evidence videos. I was told about the PECS contracts. I say to the Government that we should in-source that work to ensure that we do not see those delays. Estate improvements are also vital, not least in a Crown court built in 1777, like York. I want to focus on the removal of jury trials. We know that the judiciary lacks diversity, as we have heard, and I fear that is the result of unconscious bias, as academic papers have pointed out. We need to ensure that we have stronger deliberations of trials, and therefore to hand that to a jury would give more security. The final point I want to impress upon the Justice Secretary is a political one. When victims and defendants have lost confidence in the establishment and the elite, including the judiciary, a bridge to maintain confidence between them and their communities and the justice system is vital. As has been put to me, without that, a victim is less likely to have confidence in someone whose experiences are a million miles from their own. The same is true for a defendant, having been failed by the establishment time and again. Maintaining the bridge to justice with people who have walked in their shoes, grown up on their street and faced the same challenges enables the victim and the defendant to know that at least the court understands, even if it has not found in their favour. For someone to have their truth told to those from their community serving on a jury, and to know that the evidence has been deliberated well, upholds confidence in the courts and in justice, but to break that trust breaks justice and builds barriers. Justice must not only be done but be seen and felt to be done. It is easy for Ministers to get lost in the data and miss the purpose of justice, and I believe that it is this miscalculation that we wrestle with today. It is about who holds power and, ultimately, trusting that power.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Palliative Care · Hansard source

  More

  I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. We have had 20 contributions to the debate, with 12 excellent speeches from Back Benchers; I have to say that it has been a debate of the highest calibre. I heard so clearly such praise for the staff working in palliative medicine right across the country—in Scotland and in England—and I thank them myself, too. I particularly acknowledge the speeches made by my hon. Friends the Members for Worcester (Tom Collins) and for St Helens South and Whiston (Ms Rimmer), who talked about the loss of their mothers, with very contrasting experiences. That demonstrates the inequity across palliative medicine, and it cannot be right that people are not getting the care that they absolutely must get. I wanted to ask the Minister a follow-up question about how the transition takes place. If we do not frontload the funding, we will never see the development of community provision, because we will not be able to pull people out without the resourcing in the community. The challenge really arises from the whole model, which was the emphasis of my speech. I trust we will look very carefully at enabling the flow of patients into the community and getting care in the right place, but also at the sufficiency of funding, as so many hon. Members said, to ensure the excellence of the care itself. We also heard about the challenges that all hon. Members have had, whether for child or adult services, and we need to ensure that we train the workforce and have a sufficient workforce in the future. We need to get the commissioning right, and address those very pertinent issues. Above all, we must invest in the time and the compassion that is needed to give families and patients excellence in palliative care. As a clinician, I have witnessed working with people at the end of life. In such special moments, the whole workforce crowds around the patients, and supports them and their families. It is so moving, and today I also heard my hon. Friends’ moving reflections, which is what the debate is all about. It is about ensuring that we have those really special moments at the end of life, and we should really invest in that time so people can have those memories and cherish everything they possibly can. We have debated assisted dying so much in this place over the last year or so. I have heard so many examples of poor care, where I know that specialist palliative medicine could have made such a difference to the individuals. That is why today’s debate is not only timely, but necessary. We must really invest so that everyone has the opportunity to receive that amazing care, love and support at the end of life, and so they do not have to even contemplate assisted dying. I think we have a responsibility to put this front and centre. Let us move on from the debate on assisted dying to make sure we get care right for everyone. I want to close by saying a huge thank you to everyone here; I really do appreciate it. I should put on record that I am the co-chair, with Baroness Finlay, of the all-party parliamentary group on dying well. I invite all hon. Members to join us as we really try to advance this debate. Question put and agreed to. Resolved , That this House notes the findings of the Independent Palliative Care Commission; calls on the Government to implement its recommendations in full, including to establish a comprehensive and specialist palliative care service that is equally accessible to everyone and properly funded, as well as a new commissioning framework that secures a service across all settings and is available from the point of a terminal diagnosis, the advancement of a life-limiting illness or latter stages of a chronic condition; and further calls on the Government to have a focus on workforce planning and training, to provide a comprehensive palliative care service, and to ensure that patients are empowered through future care plans to articulate what they want to happen towards the end of their life, while also establishing bereavement services for all.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Palliative Care · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is right, and we know how much palliative care, including specialist palliative care, costs. That must be built into the commissioning process at population level, so that we see equity. I am sure that many in his constituency will see certain demographics in his community excluded from being able to access that specialist care. We must drive the model, and if we do not have the funding, resources or staffing, it will be very difficult to deliver the comprehensive service that everybody deserves at the end of life, should they need palliative care.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Palliative Care · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member makes such a powerful case. We are talking about essential medicine. We would not do this in any other field of medicine, yet we are dependent on charities, which do phenomenal work to fund essential healthcare. We must ensure that we fund it properly. I will come on to make a few suggestions about that. Although I recognise the dedication of St. Leonard’s hospice in my constituency, and the whole community around it in York, which is both generous and caring, it receives less than 24% NHS funding. This year, it got just a 2% uplift from the integrated care board. To invest in equipping it, in staffing in the community, and in building the capacity to meet need, funding will be needed, and there is already a significant shortfall. Without that funding, transition will slow and the model will fail. The sector agrees. ICBs have no transition funding, and without a health transformation fund, how will the Minister be able to deliver proper care for everyone? If patients are moving into domiciliary or hospice settings, funding should follow. Clinical staff, pharma, capital, utilities, and other essential costs should be covered by the NHS, since patients are now transferred from secondary care into the community. The modern service framework is due for publication in a matter of months, and implementation is due in April 2027. It requires a strong framework of accountability and governance, and it would be helpful for the Minister to set out how the MSF will be evaluated, and how outcomes will be measured.

• 24 Feb 2026 · Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor · Hansard source

  More

  Unaccountable power must not hide, privilege must not be protected, money must be accounted for and elite networks of men operating here and overseas must meet their reckoning for dehumanising, subjugating, exploiting and sexually assaulting women—women who must have justice. The web of abuse surrounding Mr Epstein and his associates must be brought to book, and Mr Mountbatten-Windsor, as a known associate, must also be held to account for his role as a special trade envoy and for his associations. We have all been revulsed by the stories that we have heard, and that is why today’s debate must also be about the victims and survivors. I first raised my concern because my constituency carries the name of York and the Duke of York’s ambassadorial associations with our city were causing much concern in my community. I therefore brought those concerns to the House on 21 February 2022, just days after the settlement of the lawsuit to Ms Giuffre, known to be in the region of £12 million. My city—a human rights city, no less—was clearly disturbed, and as a result of that I sought a separation between the title and the city. Later that year, after working closely with the Clerks, I brought forward a Bill to remove the title, but that still has not been done. I brought forward another Bill just last year on the removal of title, this time bringing in the option of removing the title from peerages as well, but I have still not had a positive response. The reasons I am speaking in this debate today are: first, that in looking into these issues, I realised that the Humble Address was narrow in its scope; and secondly, to ask what we should do with the information once it has been corroborated. Clearly the police investigation must take its course, and I am sure it will be deep and thorough because it runs so far, but ultimately, if we are just looking at the appointment, we must also ask about that period of time when Mr Mountbatten-Windsor carried out the role and the implications to wider networks. I do not want this to end up in the court of public opinion, or perhaps with the media digging deeper and deeper into more and more stories. But what does it do to this place? What does it do to change the way the systems work?

• 10 Feb 2026 · Independent Water Commission: Final Report · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy. I congratulate the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) on securing the debate. We inherited the most dysfunctional water system imaginable. The governance was not there and there was no accountability in the system. Labour came in to put that right. Although we have gone so far on that journey, and I congratulate the Minister on the legislation we have passed and the legislation to come, there is clearly so much to do. My city of York is based on two rivers that flood and, with all the pollutants in the water, it is a crisis when that occurs. In 2023, there were 16,357 hours of sewage releases on the River Ouse and another 3,254 hours on the Foss. We now know that the Foss has the worst levels of pharmaceutical pollutants—which we have not heard about in this debate—of any river in Europe. I draw the Minister’s attention to the work being undertaken by the University of York in its Ecomix project, which is looking at 1,000 different chemicals—whether from agriculture, pharmaceuticals, cleaning products, personal care products or things like tyre additives—in order to raise standards. We have to know what is in our rivers so that we can address the issues. Although we have come so far with the excellent report by Sir Jon Cunliffe, there is clearly more to do. I again draw the Minister’s attention to the work of the University of York—it is such a leader in the field—and its action for quality aquatic environments project, which is drawing citizens into the science project to detect chemical and biological pollutants in order to put things right in the future. That mass community research enables communities not only to own their rivers but to press for change. They pressed me to take part in this debate, and I am grateful for that. We must move forward. This country had the reputation of being the “dirty man of Europe”. That changed, particularly under the last Labour Government, and yet standards have slipped back so much over the last 14 years that we are getting that reputation again. It is important that we maintain those standards, and we should be adopting the principles of European legislation—the urban wastewater treatment directive—into our legislation, ensuring that we close that gap on pollutants and move forward so our water can be safe again. We must also move to ban the dangerous forever chemicals that are finding their way into our waterways. There is too much flexibility about the chemicals that people have been using, and keeping our waterways safe is really important. I want to raise the issue of our infrastructure and modernising our sewerage system, which is predominantly still based on the Victorian infrastructure of the past and does not segregate rainwater from sewage. That is causing so many problems. We need those investments to come at pace. We need to ensure that, locally, we are measuring and reporting the scourge of what is happening in our waterways. As has already been mentioned, Yorkshire Water has failed. Bills have gone up and accountability has gone down, and the chief executive is taking eye-watering sums of funding. We need better governance and, with all these failing contracts, we need to move water into public ownership again.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Town and City Centre Safety · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for all the work she is doing in Darlington. Clearly, PSPOs can be used in a really powerful way to create safer spaces in our town and city centres. I called two meetings in York, one for the night-time economy in the city and one for the daytime economy, because they operate in very different ways. I called together all the agencies involved to examine, first, where the strategies for the two economies can be co-ordinated and come together, and, secondly, the specific issues for each economy. The issue that came to the fore was CCTV and ensuring that there is a proper strategy for it, including making sure that cameras are switched on, are in the right places and are of the right resolution, so that we can identify crime. I am working with agencies across our city to ensure that we have proper CCTV protection. I am also looking at how we can ensure there is co-ordination across the different agencies that work in our city, which is really important. However, the words that come to the fore so often are that we need more bobbies on the beat. We need more police on our streets, and there is also an issue with the funding formula for policing. When I spoke to our deputy mayor for police and crime, they highlighted the real challenges in areas such as North Yorkshire, which is a huge rural area with crime hotspots in our urban spaces. I ask the Minister to look at that funding formula again. Let me briefly mention Unite’s important campaign, Get Me Home Safely—I declare my interest as regards Unite. We need to ensure that our taxis are safer. I want to ask the Minister what has happened since Casey’s recommendation on changing taxi licensing regimes. We operate a safe taxi licensing process in York. We want to ensure that there is such a process in the city, and that we have the resources to control and monitor it. Will she also consider how we can protect our transport staff? I know that the RMT has campaigned hard for that, because it is so important. In closing, I thank all the agencies that keep our city safe.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Town and City Centre Safety · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker) for securing the debate. York may have a purple flag, but the feeling of security is certainly not spread across my community. There are particular areas of crime where we have great concerns, such as bike and shop theft—I welcome the measures that the Government are taking on that—and personal safety across our city. We have already heard about the challenges people face with substance misuse. We have to drive that public health model to ensure that there are safe places people can use, and that they get the help and public health support that they need. We also need to go upstream and ensure that we are addressing the waves of county lines, which come into the city of York and cause much disturbance. We must ensure that we have early intervention and a seamless approach to youth services in our city. I called two meetings—

• 28 Jan 2026 · Local Authority Children’s Services · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for chairing the debate, Mr Western. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster) for representing his constituents so well in this debate, and in particular, given the horror story that he shared, I express my condolences to Sara’s family. Colleagues may have heard York’s story, but those who have not are about to hear it. The hon. Member for Woking was right to say that York moved from the position of “requires improvement” to “outstanding” in one go. I have to point out to the Minister that our local authority has the lowest level of funding per capita after the fair funding review, which does not seem fair at all because we are not the most affluent place by far. The catalyst for the change in York comes down to two people: Martin Kelly, the director of children’s services, and his deputy, Danielle Johnson. I pay tribute to them. If hon. Members want to learn about York’s journey and the outstanding achievements that have occurred, the director and his deputy are open to dialogue. At the heart of the change was a new practice model with a committed workforce. We moved from 45 agency staff to zero, on the basis that if someone was not committed to the service and the children, they had no place in the authority. A pioneering approach puts children at the heart, builds on co-production, innovates for change and evidences practice. Through reform, costs have been cut by £7 million. Through co-ordination across services, the local authority has built stability and made a difference to every child. We are desperate to do more—to reshape services, drive change and press ahead with transformations. The model moves from transactional to relational, risk avoidance to risk management, safe certainty to safe uncertainty—that is just about being honest about risk—and short-term interventions to long-term outcomes. Every decision has the child at its centre and considers the long-term implications of each decision, developing resilience all the time. Its strength-based approach seeks out every opportunity for the child and is summed up, “Our children belong in York, connected to the people they love and supported by the network around them.” But the journey does not end there. A child or young person’s holistic needs should be met in one place, so here are my asks of the Minister. Mental health services must be integrated around the child, not separated in the child and adolescent mental health services, which is failing all our young people. We have a SEND hub in the city where all children can gather, along with parents and professionals, in an integrated way, but we need CAMHS as part of the conversation. That will remove the need for a diagnosis, because a label does not describe where a child is on multiple spectrums. We must have fully integrated support around a child’s needs. We need to start young, so I urge the Minister to put the investment into the 1,001 critical days. We know that in the case of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, for instance, we need to ensure at the very start of life that we have got the right interventions around the parents, including during the nine months of pregnancy. We will then have a stronger opportunity to prevent care orders in future and ensure that there is appropriate antenatal care, as well as comprehensive support for the family. We also need funding in York. I mentioned how low our funding is. We have eight areas in the lowest quintile of deprivation in our city. Everyone, including Ministers, talks about how York is a beautiful city, about the Vikings, and about the walls and the Minster, but that does not make a child safer. In fact, many of the children have never seen those assets, and many are struggling because we simply do not have the resources we need. When it comes to per capita funding, York is in the lowest 25 for schools and 23rd for higher needs funding. Our city needs more funding, because a child in York is worth as much as a child in Camden, and yet we have about a third of the funding to do things. More than that, we want to be able to push our model further, provide more services for parents and ensure that we can keep the family together, which is our objective as we seriously reduce the number of children in social care. We also want to drive our model of good practice further, so that we can draw on the world’s best practice and bring it into York, particularly in the early years—those pre-school years—to support parents on their journey as well. We must work with a child’s developmental pathway, not against it. We therefore need to ensure that we have the right pedagogies in place. I was disappointed earlier in the week in the debate on play in education. To work with children we really need to understand the way that the mind develops. My plea to the Minister is to look through a prism of poverty. We have significant areas of poverty in York, and yet if we put in the right investment, we know that we can make a difference to our children. We are ambitious in York, and I am proud to showcase all that we have done, but we desperately want to go further. We know we can do it—in York, we have always been a laboratory of social change, a pioneering spirit built within all of us—and therefore I urge Government to work with us to deliver more not only of the Government’s objectives but of our own, for our children.

• 26 Jan 2026 · Key Stage 1 Curriculum · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree with the hon. Member. She made the point so powerfully, not least because of her own experience. It is really important that we embed play as a fundamental principle in the curriculum. For far too long, play has been seen as a process of reward or enrichment, not as a fundamental part of a child’s learning, but it is vital throughout childhood for that purpose. To deny play as a core learning approach for improving reading, writing or maths is to not understand education. Helping a child find their own creativity will help them find themselves. Play-based learning is purposeful. Teachers have to really prepare when they integrate play into their work: they have to set the right environment, introduce the right medium, equip the learning space, indoor and out, and integrate that with the interests of the children to optimise the environment and ensure that they really grasp the concepts that they are being taught. As we have heard, England is an outlier in this area, and we have to catch up. When I visited Carr infant school, I saw the contribution that play made to every part of the curriculum. When the school centred learning on play, its outcomes improved. Burton Green school has created environments where children can explore and engage. Whether it is Osbaldwick, Acomb primary or Westfield community school, so many schools across York have totally embraced the evidence of the importance of play. The neuroscience very much determines that play is central. My constituent Charlotte Davies regularly reminds me of the importance of motor and sensory integration so that the brain can be trained to help a child’s ability to play. That is often lost as children are forced away from the right pathways for their education. We need to develop the right pedagogies and ensure that we are creating the physical and mental opportunities to learn. The Government are grappling with the opportunities around developing a proper SEND programme, which we know is important, but if we are going to divert children from just spending time on their screens, creative play, integrated into learning, will make a difference. My plea to the Government is this: follow the evidence, and when it comes to assessments and examinations, let us drop those SATs and ensure instead that we have a proper approach to education.

• 20 Jan 2026 · ADHD Diagnosis · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Ms Vaz. It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair. I will be brief. In York, we know that children are waiting for two and a half years to get an ADHD diagnosis. Adults are not even on a waiting list; they are literally in a car park. They fill in a form and then they go no further, although I am assured by services that if people face a crisis, the services will be there—although I am less than convinced of that. In York, therefore, we have been thinking about how we can reconfigure services. This is my specific ask to the Minister. We know that, over a child’s life, the local authority is the controlling mind in providing holistic support for children, particularly those with special educational needs, yet we have a segregated service in child and adolescent mental health services. The two services are not integrated and, as a result, we are not looking at a child holistically. We are seeing them in two sections: their mental health and their holistic needs. That does not work. Therefore, I ask the Minister: can we bring those services together, at least through a formal partnership? If not that, can we put the controlling mind under the director of children’s services, to ensure that they can deliver for that holistic need? As my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson) said so eloquently, we need to ensure that the functional needs of those children are met. A diagnosis, of course, is an important part of that pathway, but when we are talking about people across a whole spectrum of needs, a diagnosis only partially describes the needs of an individual. If we are able to build the holistic support that a child needs, we can ensure that a child gets the security they need in a timely way, integrate that with the rest of the work being done on SEND by the Department for Education, and ensure that we really see the integration and transformation that this Government can bring.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Universities: Statutory Duty of Care · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) on setting out the case for a statutory duty of care so well. Students face an array of intersecting pressures throughout their student journey. One is the cost of living. York is one of the most expensive places to be a student, not least because of the lack of supply and the cost of accommodation. That bears down on students, who have to take on more responsibilities, often working full time alongside their studies. Having to dedicate more of their time to surviving compromises their studies, yet universities seem quite impervious to understanding those cost pressures by putting mitigation in place, whether by providing accommodation or by supporting students who do not succeed because they have to spend more time on their work. Transport pressures also bear down on students, as does the array of challenges that young people face today, including social media, violence and sexual violence, and we have talked about the interplay of neurodivergence and mental health. It is really important that there be a statutory duty of care on universities to provide holistic support around a student. We must also recognise the challenges facing international students, who have not yet been mentioned in this debate. They are from another jurisdiction with different mental health models, but they also face challenges with their immigration status, which I have come across in York. We need to look at the system. An Iranian student today who would not be able to return to Iran because of the situation there must be able to change their status here. There are many intersections for international students, which we must take on board. In 2015, York had a real surge in the number of students who took their lives. I congratulate the universities and the wider community on looking at how they could put mitigation in place, but 1,108 students have since taken their lives across the country. Therefore, this situation does permeate the sector.

• 6 Jan 2026 · BBC Charter Renewal · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) on securing today’s debate. A new charter is an opportunity for a real reset for the BBC. We have heard many criticisms in the debate, but this is an opportunity for a fresh start for the BBC, and that is important. The BBC will only be as good as the accountability systems that are built around it, so it is crucial that independence is at the heart of that. Detachment from this place and from Government decisions on who should sit on the board is an important expression of that. I certainly support workers, who know their organisation so well, sitting on the board, alongside voices and experiences from across the nations. We also need to ensure that the regulator, Ofcom, is robust in its scrutiny of the BBC. I therefore ask the Minister to look at the role Ofcom can play in enhancing the role of the BBC, its accountability and its transparency. In an age when media is driving distrust and disunity, how the BBC re-establishes itself as a trusted media source and brings community cohesion is vital for our democracy and our country. I trust that the report will place huge emphasis on that. I also want to raise the issue of the supply of skills across media, broadcasting and journalism. There is a huge opportunity for the BBC to be a training space for so many of our future skills, whether behind the camera or in front of it. I ask the Minister to think about the role of the BBC within the whole creative sector and how it could become an academy for future voices and skills, drawing people from the regions and nations. Finally, I want to raise the issue of devolution. The reality is that the BBC’s removal of local radio content has seen its listenership fall by 27%. I really hope that the Minister will reverse that and ensure that there is no more playing with words—I am thinking of “neighbourhood radio”, which actually means regional or beyond. We want to see localism as so many people in our community depend on it. It strengthens the BBC when voices are about community; it gives the BBC a real purpose. I trust that that can be at the centre of the reforms. Radical devolution of a centralised BBC would be the regrowth of the BBC.