Rachael Maskell MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 17 Dec 2025 · Draft Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  I have to say that, after listening carefully to her speech, I now have even greater concerns about trade unionists taking legal industrial action outside facilities. That would clearly disrupt the infrastructure and the operation of that infrastructure, which would fall under the wording of this legislation. Therefore, we could end up criminalising trade unionists for taking legitimate industrial action because of the disruption it causes—protest does cause disruption, after all. As a result of that, I think that, as the Labour party—the party of the trade unions—we need to take this incredibly seriously. I am sure that is an unintended consequence, but that is a problem that comes with poorly drafted legislation. I therefore really do ask the Minister to review the detailed wording of the legislation to ensure that that situation could never occur.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Draft Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Alec. I will commence by looking at some of the paperwork accompanying the draft regulations. The fact that the explanatory memorandum says that consultation “took place informally” highlights some of the challenges with this legislation. We know that when the Government have adhered to their manifesto they have done incredibly well, but these measures were not in the manifesto, and then they moved forward with an informal consultation. From what I can see, there does not seem to have been much scope behind that informality. It has meant that the public have not had the opportunity to engage. That is deeply regrettable, and I think that is why the Government are coming unstuck on this measure. I really urge the Minister to reconsider, not least in order to do things in the right way, trusting the British public to be able to respond to these measures, but also clearly because of the distaste for this. I am really grateful to my constituents who have alerted me to this measure in their correspondence, and to the campaigning organisations that have highlighted the risk. I disagree with Opposition Members: I do believe that the Public Order Act was a massive overreach of the state, and I have serious concerns about the suppression, as our party did in opposition. I have to question what changed, because clearly something has changed to trigger the Government into believing that that Act should go even further. I have deep concern about that, because at the heart of that legislation was suppressing the right to protest. That has serious consequences for our democracy, for this place and how it operates. We have been able to achieve so much because of protest in Parliament. I stand for animal welfare protectors—for those people who have deep concern for the welfare of animals. I have certainly campaigned on many such issues; I have led some of the work on the forced swim test, which was referred to earlier. Our time today would be better spent working on how we could perhaps better legislate against that. I note the levels of distress to animals in a pointless exercise, but those licences will continue until 2028. That would have been time better spent. We must also ask what the urgency is. We know that the average time for a pharmaceutical product to come online is 12 years. We are not talking about something urgent in that respect. It can take up to 30 years for a new pharmacological product to come onstream. The fact that we are talking about a protest over perhaps two or three days will hardly stall the process. The Government are making a mockery by saying that this is an urgent requirement, to the point that they could not even carry out a consultation, as they say in the documentation. It seems slightly dystopian, given that Lord Vallance came forward just last month with a faster phase-out of animal testing programme. For some time now we have been following the replacement, reduction and refinement strategy—the three Rs—to switch from animal-relevant science to ensuring that we use the new technologies available to reduce the use of animals in experimentation. The faster we do that, the better. Again, that is a better use of Government resource. I also want to raise with the Minister the issue of protesting outside such infrastructure. Supposing the workers within voted for industrial action, and supposing that they chose to strike outside that infrastructure, would that also be unlawful under the Act? Could trade unionists end up with a sentence of perhaps 12 months because they were standing up for their own rights? Of course, the legislation does not state the implications of that. I think it is badly written legislation and should be withdrawn on those grounds as well. We have existing law to protect against criminal damage, against harassment, against threats and intimidation, against violence, against trespass and against blocking the highway. We also have health and safety legislation. I have to ask the Minister: what is the purpose of this legislation, if we already have that whole framework? Will it be targeted at the peaceful protester who is holding up a sign with a picture of a bunny rabbit on it, saying, “Don’t inject disease into this animal”? If that is where we have got to, it is a really sad day for this Government. Quite frankly, I believe that we are better than that. It is a massive overreach of the state. I also want to raise my significant concern about the implications for the criminal justice system. I know from informal discussions with the police during the passing of the 2023 Act that they were deeply concerned about the overreach of the state. They prefer fostering a cordial relationship with protesters, because it helps them in their work and in being able to keep order. Having to move into the space of criminality is an overreach. Our prisons, as we hear daily from the Government, are full to the brim. Why are we introducing more legislation to put people behind bars? There seems to be a lack of join-up between the Ministry of Justice and the Home Office. We need police officers on our streets as well. I really do urge the Government to withdraw this measure. If they do so, there will be no need to bring it to the Floor of the House, but we should at least give this House an opportunity to vote these measures down.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Draft Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is my recollection that we were locked down during the pandemic when much of this science was being undertaken, so people would not have been able to protest anyway. When we face such extreme circumstances, I think the country understands, but this provision is far broader in scope, and if that is the Government’s intent, I have to press the Minister on why that is not written in the legislation.

• 15 Dec 2025 · NHS: Winter Preparedness · Hansard source

  More

  I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a former leader on healthcare in a trade union, and also as a clinician in respiratory medicine. I am deeply concerned about patients right now. I recognise that the Health Secretary shared a lot of information with the House on Wednesday evening about how he wants to take things forward. Could he set out the process of engagement, not least with ACAS? Could ACAS sit down with the BMA, and work through the proposals to see if they could be enhanced or tweaked, so that we achieve the right resolution for patients and the NHS, and abate these forthcoming strikes?

• 15 Dec 2025 · Sudan: Humanitarian Situation · Hansard source

  More

  We know that health workers have been targeted and killed, that 80% of health facilities are no longer functioning and that a generation have not received vaccines. We have seen this happen not only in Sudan, but in other conflicts. Rather than being reactionary or using the law retrospectively, what proactive measures are the Foreign Office taking to secure vital humanitarian structures such as healthcare and ensure that they are in place, and to ensure that countries are held to account in real time?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Unfair Dismissal: Protected Characteristics · Hansard source

  More

  5. If she will monitor the protected characteristics of people judged to have been unfairly dismissed in the first six months of employment.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Unfair Dismissal: Protected Characteristics · Hansard source

  More

  We know that workers are often unfairly dismissed before the two-year threshold despite the application of the Equality Act 2010. That threshold was one year under the previous Labour Government; we are reducing it again down to six months. However, there is still a risk of disabled workers, ethnic minority workers and young workers being unfairly dismissed. Will the Government monitor the data about workers who have been unfairly dismissed in the first six months to ensure that their protected characteristics are not a feature of their dismissal?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q3. While the last Government were indifferent to child poverty, this Government’s driving mission must be to eradicate child poverty, and the strategy is a first step on that path. Over the first 1,001 critical days in pregnancy and early years, poverty contributes to malnourished babies, developmental delay, hypothermia and poor life outcomes. That is unacceptable. Will the Prime Minister lift pregnant women and babies in York and across the country out of poverty in this Parliament and ensure that we relieve poverty over the first 1,001 critical days?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Independent businesses in York are really struggling with the revaluation of business rates. In 2024 they were £6,200; in 2025 they are £15,000; and in 2026 they will be £19,100, after discounts. Will the Minister meet representatives from York High Street Forum to understand the challenge of those rates for my city?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  On Friday, I learned of an 81-year-old constituent who had had to return to work because of the cost of living in York. Will the Government take a deep dive and carry out an inquiry into poverty in later life, so that we can ensure that we deal with pensioner poverty once and for all?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  I have scanned the Labour manifesto, in which ID cards do not feature, and I have sought the evidence that ID cards prohibit illegal working, but there is none. Yet we are told that digital ID is the way forward. I understand the argument about the data in the pocket, the convenience, everything in one place, and data checks for work and rental accommodation. However, this project is not about holding information about ourselves on our phones for our own convenience. It is about data—big, augmented data from different places and different sources, intersecting someone’s health records with their records in the Department for Work and Pensions, or Home Office records with HMRC or local government, about where we live, where we work and where we are. Mix them together with facial recognition technology, run the algorithms and see what we get. Of course, this Government would not dream of doing such a thing, but a future one might—indeed, a future one would. Following the passing of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, academics have shown that aggressive actors will have access to this data and therefore we have to be warned about data theft and identity theft, which are not uncommon today.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  I will just press on. If DWP data and NHS data are in the wrong hands, social security will become insecurity; if Home Office data contains someone’s location, then the ICE teams will find them. This could be our future. Behind our screens, the datasets that researchers use for good will be used by others for ill. Of course there is interest in digital ID. We see the revolving door of those from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change and people from his former office; there is Larry Ellison of Oracle; after all, he already has 185 contracts with the Government. He recognises the power, the money and the opportunity, which is why we cannot afford to go there. We have already heard about the scale of the money. However, I must say that the interest in this project will only expose us all to the risks of future Governments and what they might do with our data. It will not then be just about each one of us individually, but about that knowledge being used to determine each one of our futures, including our mortgages, our social security, our health and our economics. Let us not forget that the insurance companies are also eager to lay their hands on this data. Technology may be agnostic, but it will have behind it people who most certainly are not and will be using its power, augmented for their own gain and opportunity. This House cannot go into this space. Parliament needs to wake up to the reality that it is not about what is on our phone, but about the data behind that and how it will be misused in future. I beg the Government to stop. The fact that this was not in the manifesto is enough to tell us all that it does not have public consent and therefore should not proceed.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The point that my hon. Friend is making is that this is not about fair dismissal, but about unfair dismissal. Does he agree that the people who will experience the most discrimination will be disabled workers, young workers and ethnic minority workers?

• 3 Dec 2025 · Local Media · Hansard source

  More

  I was certainly referring to such an example in my speech, but I am particularly concerned about the influence that disinformation is having on this place and on the policies of Governments over time, which have been brought out in response to that social, unregulated space. Is that not all the more reason for the urgency behind ensuring that a properly regulated environment is put in place, so that we do not have those influences, and we instead pull on the real stories and evidence out there?

• 3 Dec 2025 · Local Media · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to be called in this debate with you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan, and to the hon. Member for Bromley and Biggin Hill (Peter Fortune). With the media industry’s moves from print to broadcast to digital, and we with the rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence, there are new challenges before us. We must ensure that we have inclusive, authentic media that we can depend on as a reliable source within our democracy—media that can enable close scrutiny and ensure that we hold our country to account, while reaching deep into our communities and creating the connectivity that is so desperately needed in this time. I am grateful that we have a daily paper, The Press , in print in York. Although its content has thinned over the years, it still provides a substantial record of all that is occurring within our community, with high-quality journalism and interest, as it has done for 143 years. It is so important that local news outlets continue; many journalists learn their skills and cut their teeth there, and they ensure that proper accountability within our communities. As we have heard already in this debate, it is important to ensure that the industry can continue to put planning applications and alcohol licensing information in the papers—not just because of the revenue stream, but because it enables our community to engage. We have seen that in our city, where communities have campaigned as a result of seeing such placements of information. I also recognise the breadth of media within York, including the newer forms. There is YorkMix, That’s TV, the Yorkshire Post —a campaigning paper—YO1 Radio and Jorvik Radio, a real community-based radio station. Our universities also have papers, and I when I visited Archbishop Holgate’s school last week, I found that my Q&A there was on the record. It is great to see young people engaging in the future of media. In the light of the fact that we are looking at the new royal charter, I want to turn to BBC Radio York. It has battled so well to bring its expertise and experience to our city, and to shine a light on good-quality journalism and connectivity. If we are to rebuild our national sources of media, we have to start with the local. I therefore urge the Government to look at how we can move more content to local outlets, rather than pursuing the regionalisation that we have seen. That regionalisation breaks connectivity and, in its last iteration, has not been a positive step; we must review that. What we need are more hours of local content—that hyper-local approach makes a difference. If we are to rebuild trust in the BBC, we need to go from the local to the national, not the national to the regional. The new media in this volatile and heated media space provides unfiltered, biased content, when we need critical analysis of what we are witnessing and a recognition of the profiteering of the tech giants. We need serious regulation, and fast: this new digital world is spinning out of control and the toxicity it generates is making some people incredibly vulnerable. It can be incredibly dangerous, and it is building division and hate. A media that started out to extend democracy is now rapidly shutting it down. We must look at regulation—we could have a commission that pulls the industry together to do that. I recommend the NUJ’s “A Future for News” plan, which sets out a balanced approach to how we move forward. As we navigate this new world of fact and fake, we must ensure that the route out is through our local media outlets, so we can hold on to authenticity and rebuild trust.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Homelessness: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to contribute with you in the Chair, Mr Vickers. I congratulate the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on securing this debate. He has focused homeless prevention, but we need also to think seriously about homeless recovery and permanence as we move forward. It is right that Housing First provides that blueprint for us. I thank Professor Nicholas Pleace at the University of York for all his work on that, and for showing the value to people as well as the economy of putting housing first. We need to be able to support the transition into Housing First, particularly changing accommodation. We are trying to retrofit our hostels to ensure that there are single-based units to accommodate people in that path to permanence. I also draw the Minister’s attention to some of the work the Salvation Army has done. We have a NAPpad, which is a temporary unit where people experiencing chronic street homelessness can see a transition step into accommodation, by having a very simplified unit which gives them the feeling of independence but comes before taking that big step into Housing First. I agree with colleagues that we need to look at the local housing allowance again. It is far too limited. It is almost at 50% in York, which goes nowhere near the costs. The local authority then has to pick up the tab for the differentials that people experience. That is unsustainable, not least as we have the lowest funded unitary authority in the country yet far from the most affluent. I also have my eye on the Department for Work and Pensions budget. We spent £31.8 billion on housing support, so I urge the Government to look again at rent controls, because we are seeing a spike in the escalation of housing costs in the private rented sector, which is often where people find themselves. That is unsustainable. People are falling out of housing but cannot get back in. Looking at rent controls is important, alongside social build, which we know is really needed as well. Supporting People has been mentioned. That was introduced by the last Labour Government and was absolutely a game changer in recognising the holistic needs. We have heard about the financial and health risks people have, but also the levels of trauma. We do not have a real focus on trauma capacity to support people. Supporting People did keep people in their homes, provide support, build resilience and gave people independence and confidence so they could manage their own affairs and be able to sustain their living. I trust we can look again at how we can ringfence that money and ensure we address those complex needs. As York introduces its focus round a multidisciplinary, multi-agency, independent team to provide that support, we need to ensure we do not only move people out from the streets into temporary accommodation, but also break the cycle of homelessness into the future.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Office for Budget Responsibility Forecasts · Hansard source

  More

  To bring to a conclusion the ensuing debate about who knew what and when, does my right hon. Friend agree that he should publish a detailed timetable of the economic information that the Chancellor was in receipt of, including the return on tax receipts and the impact on wage growth?

• 1 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  City of York council has gone from “requires improvement” to “outstanding” in all areas due to the innovation it is driving. In particular, it has been working on halving the number of children in social care, ending the use of agency workers and setting up a SEND hub. The director of children’s social care would like the Secretary of State to visit. Will she come to York and see what we are doing?

• 1 Dec 2025 · Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund · Hansard source

  More

  I met people from my regional adoption agency just last Thursday—I thank them and all their partners for their excellent work—who raised the adoption and special guardianship support fund, recognising that the quantum in resource is not there and that the demand is so high. Will the Minister meet the all-party parliamentary group on adoption and permanence to talk about the future of the fund and work with people who have lived experience to ensure that we get it right in the future?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Children of Alcoholics · Hansard source

  More

  I am really grateful for all that the hon. Gentleman does in this place. I want to raise the issue of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. We know that its prevalence is now 4%, which is higher than autism, and there is no screening programme for pregnant women, as the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) just mentioned. It is really important that we understand these issues and find a sensitive way to protect children from developing such a disorder.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  I like drilling into the data and getting to the facts. You can see a correlation between the rise in people claiming social security and the rise in waiting lists in the NHS—they map identically through all Parliaments, whether Tory or Labour. Will the right hon. Member look at the data before making assumptions? Getting waiting lists down has got to be our objective.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Indifference to poverty, as we have just heard, marks out the political divisions of our time. The task of restructuring our economy to ensure that those who serve and work hard are not exploited by profiteers and the powerful is our mission. Today, it is clear which side Labour is on. Leveraging resources from accumulated wealth, not simply income, must be the economic pivot that this Parliament determines to make. We should hold wealth accountable, not just the fruits of hard labour. That is why I welcome measures such as the surcharge on council tax. As John Maynard Keynes said: “The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones”, such as the notion that the success of growth will trickle down to provide economic security. Generations have failed to receive that. Unlike the economic engineering we have seen today, economic neoliberalism has been a failed experiment that holds people back and holds people down in poverty. Some 14.5 million people now sit below the poverty line, and 4.5 million children sit in poverty. Tonight, 180,000 children will not sleep in their own bed, and 1 million children are in destitution and dependency, not given dignity or decency. We inherited that shameful legacy from those on the right. Today is monumental: 450,000 children lifted out of poverty, 1,650 of them in my constituency. Scrapping the two-child limit is the right thing to do—it is the Labour thing to do—but we must go further. Another 80,000 are held back by the Tory benefit cap, and I trust that the child poverty strategy will ditch the cap and the ideology behind it. When a baby comes to York hospital with hypothermia, and when a mother begs me for formula because she has no milk, we must recognise the impact of pregnancy and baby poverty. It causes low birth weight, malnutrition and impeded development. From cold and damp homes, we get poor lung health. I therefore urge the Government to look specifically at women during pregnancy and at their babies, and to say that we will prioritise lifting them out of poverty, because it will make a difference to their life course. As we seek to abolish child poverty here at home, I plead with the Government to recommit to 0.7% of GNI for overseas development aid. Every child’s life must be of equal worth, no matter where that child is born. Cutting aid will be catastrophic for infants, and we must not contemplate it. Instead, we must restore our commitment to 0.7%. The moral injustice of the social determinants of poverty must be addressed. After a decade in this place, I have concluded that holding power and wealth in Westminster and Whitehall fails to realise the opportunities across the towns and cities of our country. A pound spent by a Government has a limited reach, but when infused with partnerships and people in localities, it stretches further and deeper into the solutions that can transform lives. The Government must trust our communities and invest to return better health, better education, better employment and opportunities for all. Today I challenge them to embark on a radical devolution of the nation’s resources to our communities, making finances work harder and reach further, restructuring services with transformational local partnerships and relationships. I urge the Government to review the broad rental market area. Housing injustice is a major cause of poverty in York. The local housing allowance has fallen far below rental costs, to nearly 50%, and a review is essential, while more social housing is a priority. We must examine this issue. Enabling local revenue-raising is also critical, and after years of lobbying hard for it I welcome the tourism levy, which, at just the price of a cup of coffee, will raise £7 million for York. I urge the Chancellor to look at cities such as York, because we are struggling. Our city may have an affluent core, but much is extracted, leaving it with a very high cost of living and a low-wage economy. Eight communities in York sit in the lowest quintile nationally, and the Government funding formulas are failing us across the board. We receive the lowest funding of any unitary authority but we are far from the most affluent, with one of the lowest settlements for health, schools, special educational needs and disability, police and fire. The cumulative impact has caused significant impediment. School heads who come to York cannot believe the inequity. We have far less than other areas for health and care, we need more police on our streets, and our brilliant Labour local authority is on its knees. Combined with decades of fiscal oversight, the cumulative impoverishment has driven a cultural change in York, and, sadly, the new fair funding formula is just not fair for our city. We are experiencing disadvantage, and I want the Government to look into this inequity in order to understand why the matrices are not working economically for our city and others like it and how the Treasury can rebalance them. I trust we can have a meeting to discuss that. I believe that Labour can build a safe and secure economy, nationally and in my city, working for all. Addressing poverty, its causes and effects, must always be our driving force: keeping the elderly warm, giving disabled people dignity, and ensuring that child poverty is consigned to history. Today resets the moral purpose of politics, powerfully showing Labour on the side of families and communities, using our socialist roots to collectivise revenue to work for the common good. Poverty, in all its forms, destroys the hope that we long for and the opportunities that we need. Labour must always recognise that ending the injustice of poverty and inequality is our moral purpose, and the route to a strong economy.

• 25 Nov 2025 · G20 and Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  It is feared that the brutality in El Fasher will only intensify and spread to Tawila and beyond if international action is not convened and focused on the resolutions that are needed, not least to stop the incursions with drones supplied via the United Arab Emirates and mercenaries. Will the Prime Minister say more about what happened in South Africa to put the necessary focus in place, and about the next steps to stop the expansion of the atrocities we are witnessing in Sudan?

• 25 Nov 2025 · COP30 · Hansard source

  More

  Leadership at home, leadership globally, and now we need leadership on the fossil fuels road map. I am sure that my right hon. Friend will play a pivotal role in setting the terms of reference, the scope and the ambition of that. It is also important to build the industrial strategy to ensure that we can see a just transition for so many countries. How will he lead that opportunity for our country and others to ensure that fossil fuels are the focus leading into COP31?

• 25 Nov 2025 · Immigration Reforms: Humanitarian Visa Routes · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister set out what the English requirements and the earning requirements will be for someone with a learning difference? Clearly, those requirements will be significantly different from those for the wider community. How will they be assessed?