Rachel Blake MP: speeches

Speeches

• 16 Sept 2025 · International Day of Democracy · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Sir John, for bringing us together for this important debate. I put on record my thanks to everybody who has joined us in the Public Gallery to listen to this debate. What better demonstration of how democracy is alive and well than that people will come out on a Tuesday morning to listen to a debate about the International Day of Democracy. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for talking about lobbying rules and the risks of revolving doors; to the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell), who talked about the importance of free speech; to the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord), who discussed electoral reform; to the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton, who talked about the important role of women in politics; to my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for talking about the vital contributions of local communities; to the right hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd (Liz Saville Roberts) for discussing the rise of disinformation and authoritarianism; to my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger) for a powerful discussion about how democracy must be nurtured; to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for a powerful tribute to free speech; and to my hon. Friend the Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin) for talking about how important it is to have these respectful debates. We also heard from the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) about the values of democracy. My hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) gave a powerful discussion of electoral reform. The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) talked about the Windsor framework. My hon. Friend the Member for Loughborough (Dr Sandher) talked about how we can overcome division by investing in the social contract. Finally, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary) talked about the vital role of international support for contribution, while the Opposition spokes- person, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), discussed support for the Commonwealth in his contribution. I also welcome the Minister’s remarks. In this debate, we have heard about the scale and complexity of the challenge that we face. We have all been sobered by the rise of disinformation and authoritarianism. We have been able to discuss the terrible political violence that occurred in America last week, and able to discuss the importance of investing in the social contract and overcoming some of the barriers in order to have confidence in democracy. Democracy means a stake in one’s community, a stake in the rules, and a stake in all our futures. In this debate, we have seen how democracy helps us to disagree. I agree with much of what was said and disagree with some remarks, but this debate has given us a chance to come together and discuss. I imagine that every hon. Member in this Chamber has lost an election. I might be unusual among politicians to think that, every once in a while, such losses are an important opportunity to learn lessons about how we conduct ourselves going forward. Through that process, we have all learned how to be better politicians—one example of how disagreeing respectfully is an important part of democracy. We have learned that freedom of speech and expression is not the preserve of the right or the left, but a foundational principle in our democracy, and one that I know we will all defend. I finish by saying that there is hope. Every day, communities in the UK and internationally are organising and influencing their democracy and the decisions made by their leaders, at some level or another. There is hope in investing to tackle the cost of living crisis and investing in the social contract, and hope in the international support for the release of my constituent, Jimmy Lai. I am grateful to the Minister for his remarks, and the confidence he has given about the Government’s commitment to espousing democratic values and supporting democracy internationally. I am grateful, too, for your chairship, Sir John. Question put and agreed to . Resolved , That this House has considered the International Day of Democracy.

• 11 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member has spoken passionately about local government schemes, and I have quite a lot of experience of them. Does she agree that they have many regulations that would meet some of the proposals in new clause 2? That might allay some of her concerns and mean that we do not need a Division on the new clause.

• 11 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have read the new clause with interest, and listened carefully, and I am sure that this Committee is united in wanting there to be good advice on pensions. It would help me to better understand the proposal if the hon. Member could describe why he thinks the Money and Pensions Service is not already providing that, and why he thinks there is a gap that would justify this type of measure.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Occupied Palestinian Territories: Humanitarian Access · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I put on record my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) for her leadership and wisdom on this topic over a number of years. Today we have heard powerful testimony and evidence about the desperate need for doctors and aid workers to be able to get into Gaza. There is not a day that goes by where we are not seeing terrible suffering in Gaza: we are hearing about it from our constituents, we are seeing it for ourselves through what is happening, and we are listening every single day to the devastating situation there. It is vital that we secure access for doctors and aid workers, and that journalists are able to get in so they can tackle the crisis of misinformation in the region. I would like to hear from the Minister today about the international pressure on securing a ceasefire and on ensuring that we can get aid trucks in. We know the UN estimates that we need 600 trucks of aid every day, but we are seeing only half that. How can we maintain that ceasefire through international pressure to make sure that we see long-standing sustainable peace in the region?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Critical Infrastructure Funding: Maintenance and Repair · Hansard source

  More

  Constituents in Marylebone want to see improvements to the railway engines that go into Marylebone station. Does the Treasury agree that more work can be done to ensure that the overall investment in those trains is supported by the benefits that accrue across the whole line, all the way down to Aylesbury, as investment in those trains will make a big difference to growth along the whole track?

• 8 Sept 2025 · Renters’ Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I wish to speak against Lords amendments 58 to 62, which expand eviction grounds, and Lords amendment 27. I also wish briefly to revisit the core principles of the Bill, which are: ending no-fault eviction, and providing stability, not just for individuals but for the private rented sector; introducing a private renters’ database and an ombudsman, to restore rights to private renters, as well as transparency, so that they understand their tenancy in more detail; and to establish Awaab’s law in the sector. Those are vital interventions in the private rented sector, which we know is diverse, and it is important that the Bill becomes law as soon as possible. All of us, on both sides of the Chamber, will recognise the impact that uncertainty on the issue has had on the private rented sector for a number of years. I have to say that it was pretty unedifying to listen to the Opposition reneging on their previous commitments to ending no-fault eviction. The first commitment from the Conservatives to ending no-fault evictions was in 2019—I think that was about four Conservative Prime Ministers ago, but I have given up counting. I understand that the shadow Housing Secretary might not remember the position that the previous Prime Minister took on the issue, but this provision cannot come into law soon enough. The number of private rented sector no-fault eviction notices that my constituents receive, and the instability that they cause in the sector, are causing real harm and distress to those who live in it. Lords amendments 58 to 62 would expand possession ground 5C, and those completely unnecessary expansions provide yet more uncertainty in the sector. They open up the risk of further additional claims, and of introducing other grounds for eviction, which undermines the overall principles of the Bill. I support my colleagues who have spoken against Lords amendment 27, which would raise the evidence bar. It is completely unrealistic to think that it would be possible to do that, not only because bidding wars and contests often take place through verbal dialogue, but because of the lack of resources available to local authorities to investigate such cases. I do not believe that the amendment is practical, or was tabled in particularly good faith. We want renters’ rights restored, and a balance between renters and landlords. I cannot stress enough the urgent need to bring forward the Bill, to give confidence to renters, all those who rely on people living in private rented accommodation, and those living and working across the UK who need the sector to be successful. I urge Members to vote against the Lords amendments, and to support the Government in getting the Bill into statute.

• 8 Sept 2025 · Renters’ Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way again?

• 8 Sept 2025 · Renters’ Rights Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I was intrigued by the right hon. Gentleman’s remarks about the success of the private rented sector. If the sector is so successful and is working so well, why have the Opposition consistently held the position—both when they were in government and, I believe, going into the election—that they would go forward with ending no-fault evictions? I am confused. I would be grateful if he could explain.

• 8 Sept 2025 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for those remarks about the concerns of his constituents in Harrow. In any forthcoming consultation, I will focus on ensuring that we stick to those values of fairness and stability. There is already a high bar for those seeking indefinite leave to remain, who came to this country expecting to comply with particular rules and will be going forward with their applications in the very near future.

• 8 Sept 2025 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I thank the Petitions Committee for scheduling this important debate, and I welcome the spirit in which it has been conducted so far: the original purpose of debating indefinite leave to remain has been respected and we have risen above the appalling and divisive rhetoric that we have heard recently in relation to the role of migration and the lives of asylum seekers. My constituency has a long track record of welcoming migrants and refugees. The historic neighbourhoods of the City of London, Soho, Fitzrovia and Pimlico are just some of the villages in the very centre of London that have a long track record of welcoming people. They continue to be proud of their diverse heritage. Indeed, our country prides itself on fairness and stability in our approach to the law and to migration and asylum policy. We are a place where people come to build and rebuild their lives, and to invest in their futures. I think we are all richer for that.

• 8 Sept 2025 · Indefinite Leave to Remain · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that contribution. I want to focus my remarks on those who have BNO visas and particularly on the importance of stability in that system. I first became particularly interested in the lives of people living in Hong Kong because of my constituent, Jimmy Lai, who is currently interned in Hong Kong because he stood up for freedom and democracy. That brought me to be profoundly concerned about the importance of BNO visas. While it is absolutely right that we should be discussing how we appropriately balance the many benefits of migration with the concerns that some people have about the current system, I do think it important that we have stability in the system and recognise that the bar to securing indefinite leave to remain is already high. I will be focusing very closely on the Home Office proposals to ensure that we are standing by those principles and the values of fairness and stability.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T4. I share the anguish and profound distress of my constituents over the conflict in Gaza. Many of them have friends and family in the region; they are living with that torment every day. The Minister will have seen hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens marching for a release of the hostages and for a ceasefire. What are the UK Government doing to support those citizens and the Opposition parties in Israel, who are being so let down?

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Mr Yuille, in terms of your analysis of why there is a higher rate of investment in the UK from international funds than UK funds, do you think that the direction of the Bill will address those causes? Rob Yuille: I am not sure there is, first of all. Canadian and Australian schemes have a big presence here, but I am not sure that they invest more, especially compared with our bigger schemes or in percentage terms. But will the Bill help that? Yes, it will. Driving scale and consolidation, which was happening anyway but which the Bill will accelerate, will open up different types of investment opportunities for those firms. They will be more likely to have in-house asset capability and bargaining power to invest in those kinds of assets. One caveat, however, is that they will be able to invest globally—the same as Canadians and Australians—so it is not a given that they will invest more in the UK. The UK still needs to work hard to be an attractive place to invest.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Can I follow up, then?

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Okay, so that is the one specific measure. Jack Jones: Yes, that is the one specific one. More generally, I think there should be guidance that makes it clear to trustees that they have to weigh up the benefits to members, or to make sure that any kind of surplus extraction benefits members through improved benefits, rather than just through improving the company or returning money to the sponsor in some way, which they may or may not then use to do things that would give the member more security in various ways as an employee. Those are the two areas.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I also wish to declare such an interest.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I want to go back to member and trustee transparency around surplus flexibility. Could you be more specific on what preparations and possible changes would be needed to give that confidence to trustees and members about any surplus flexibility? Jack Jones: Like I said, I think the one specific measure is not allowing surplus extraction where you have a sole corporate trustee.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q My understanding is that there is broad industry support. You have alluded to it in terms of recognising the direction and the purpose of the mandate. So there does not seem to be that much difference between those years, is my observation. Zoe Alexander: I think the trustees we have spoken to, of the schemes in our membership, would disagree. It is a significant point to them, which they have asked us to pass on.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I want to probe the suggestion that the mandation sunset clause should come back from 2035. You alluded to your rationale for that, but can you expand on the argument about what difference that could make? Zoe Alexander: If you put yourself in the position of pension scheme trustees, having the presence of the reserve power, which may or may not be exercised, to direct the way that you invest does not necessarily feel like a comfortable position to be in. We understand why the Government are taking that power. We understand the imperative to get more investment in the UK and we support that. Clearly, the longer the power abides on the statute book, the longer there is that risk hanging over those trustees. They may be required to invest in particular ways. We do not know where we will be politically in 2035. We do not know what Government will be in place. It pushes us potentially into another Government, another Parliament—it is the unpredictability. So we did talk with many of our members about this, and had lively debates about whether it should be 2030, 2032 or 2035. There was a really strong consensus around bringing it forward to 2032. We do not want it too early because it might pre-empt a decision that need not be taken. But 2035 felt too far away.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Do you foresee any risks or additional challenges to the regulator in overseeing some of those decisions that might be made by trustees on surplus flexibility? Jack Jones: It sounds plausible, but we have not really looked at that yet. However, that is certainly something that we can do, and we will look at including that in our written submission.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you very much.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you very much for your evidence and your considered responses. There has been a discussion about the £12 billion surplus. Have you done any research on what you estimate would be the extent of the cost of RIPA—the scheme that you have promoted? Roger Sainsbury: That is a very timely question, because for the past couple of years, we have been working on the basis that the RIPA scheme would cost £5.5 billion. That was the estimate given to us by the PPF. Now—I might almost say hallelujah!—about three days ago, the PPF notified us that they had redone the calculation using a much superior methodology. I think it is a phenomenally difficult calculation to do, but they have redone it, and the answer now is not £5.5 billion, but £3.9 billion, or possibly a bit less. Whereas for two years we have been arguing that £5.5 billion is eminently affordable, £3.5 billion, for example, is obviously even more affordable. We do not get that much good news, but that was definitely a bit of good news we recently received. I am pleased to be able to share it with you, if you did not know it.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I used to be on a local government pensions committee, so I bring some of that experience to this question. The Bill talks about the merging of funds and what benefits that could have for savers and members, but it does not talk that much about administration. What impacts do you think that might have on local government pension administration—either positive benefits, or what risks you foresee that perhaps the Committee should consider? Rachel Elwell: The primary focus of the Bill is the consolidation of the assets in pools, but there are provisions, particularly when we see some of the wider things that are happening in policy such as local government reorganisation, where that might lead to closer working between funds and potentially merger. I am fortunate enough—I think Roger Phillips mentioned this earlier—that Tyne and Wear and Northumberland are part of the Border to Coast pool, so I was there and living that experience with them personally. They were working very hard together, with very joined-up thinking and close relationships, and it was still fairly hard work. I suppose from that perspective, like any merger of entities, it comes down to relationships and people. Administration in the LGPS is complex, and many funds have been facing recruitment challenges. What we are seeing already is funds working closely together. For example, again within Border to Coast, Tyne and Wear has recently taken on the administration for Teesside, bringing it in-house. It was previously an outsourced arrangement. There are benefits from that, but it needs to be done very carefully and thoughtfully—it is not something we should rush at.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Pension Schemes Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q You said that it is a very complicated calculation. How much confidence is there in that calculation? What input has there been from your members and part of your group on the confidence of that calculation? Roger Sainsbury: We would not have any ability to do that calculation at all. It all depends on the statistics held by the PPF of the age of all the members, the amount they have all been receiving and so on. It is way beyond us to make that calculation. Terry Monk: I worked with FAS before FAS even came about—at the conception, rather than the birth, of FAS. The PPF and I have worked closely with them for over 20 years. I have immense trust and faith in what they do, how they do it, and what they deliver. Whenever we ask them for help, they give it to us as far as they are able. Roger Sainsbury: I would support that. The PPF have been very helpful and I have had a good working relationship with them. I have to say, that was not always so—about three years ago, it looked as if we would be fighting a continual battle against them, but over time we have got to a really good working relationship, and they have been very helpful. In a question of challenging or doubting their ability to do this sort of calculation, when you look at the asset returns that they are getting, boy, they have got some people that know how to handle numbers, haven’t they?

• 17 Jul 2025 · RAF Photographic Reconnaissance Unit · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns) for securing this important debate. Last November, I visited war memorials across the Cities of London and Westminster. From Paddington and Marylebone stations to St Paul’s cathedral, we honoured all those who fought and made such great sacrifices during both world wars. I am honoured to meet veterans regularly in my constituency and to talk with them about their service. Now is a good time to reflect on the importance of memorials. I am a descendant of two second world war veterans. One of my grandfathers fought in the artillery in Burma and the other was part of the Italian army. They fought, made huge physical, mental and emotional sacrifices, and suffered for our freedom. This debate is an opportunity to think about those who put themselves in a different kind of danger—those in the Photographic Reconnaissance Unit. Others have spoken eloquently this afternoon about the huge risks that they took in their expeditions. I want to pay particular tribute to Flight Officer James Downie, born on St George Street in Mayfair, who died on a mission to the Romagne region of France and is commemorated there with a memorial constructed by local residents; Sergeant James Jacobs, who was killed in a propeller accident at just 21 years old; Flight Lieutenant Basil Allen, from Hanover Square; Wing Commander Denis Bennett, born near Hanover Square; Flight Lieutenant Frederick Effort; Flight Officer Noel Henkel; Flight Lieutenant Anthony Oldworth; Squadron Leader John Saffery; Flight Lieutenant Denis Speares; Flight Lieutenant David Wycliffe; Sergeant Robin Vigiers; Flight Sergeant Malcolm Westcott; and Flight Lieutenant Ian Barraclough, all of whom served in the Photographic Reconnaissance Unit. I am really proud to represent so many people who have such an important connection to the unit. I am proud to support the memorial by St James’s Park and I am grateful that it has the Government’s support.