Rachel Taylor MP: speeches

Speeches

• 22 Apr 2026 · Osteoporosis and Bone Health · Hansard source

  More

  As someone who is taking medication to ward off the progression of osteoporosis, I was delighted to welcome Bedford’s new state-of-the-art physical activity hub, which will help residents to stay active and stop their osteoporosis developing. I would like the Minister to explain how the Government will make better use of the growing physiotherapy workforce to deliver early intervention, fracture prevention and rehabilitation in the community in places such as the Bedford physical activity hub.

• 22 Apr 2026 · Osteoporosis and Bone Health · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important debate. I was diagnosed with pre-osteoporosis when I suffered a minor injury from playing tennis, so for the last eight years I have been taking Adcal tablets regularly. I was proud recently to welcome a new state-of-the-art physical activity hub in Bedworth in my constituency, which will help residents to stay active and stop the symptoms of conditions such as osteoporosis. I would therefore like the Minister to address how the Government will make better use of our growing physiotherapy workforce—

• 22 Apr 2026 · Government Procurement Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister join me in congratulating Bedworth company Toye, Kenning and Spencer on its proud history of ribbon weaving and supplying ribbons for insignia and medals to the Queen, the King and the Government for many years? Will he tell me how the procurement strategy will help other local manufacturers in North Warwickshire and Bedworth?

• 14 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I welcome the clauses we are considering. This Government were elected to renew the nation’s contract with those who serve, and this Bill promises to do that. We cannot do it without ensuring that armed forces personnel are protected from sexual and violent behaviour, domestic abuse, stalking and harassment. We must ensure that, if such incidents do happen, justice is swift and victims are supported. As far as possible, the service justice system reflects the provisions of the civilian justice system, and the Bill is modernising and improving victim support. It was extremely helpful to speak to those involved in the service justice process, and I thank the Chair for organising those visits, which helped to inform us all. Among the key measures being introduced are the sexual harm prevention orders and the sexual risk orders, which can be issued in the service court in response to provost marshal. The Bill also allows for service domestic abuse protection notices to be issued by the service police, and for service domestic abuse protection orders and service stalking protection orders to be issued by the service courts. This will ensure better protection for personnel and civilians. The Bill also solves the discrepancy that exists between service courts and civilian courts if an offender is sentenced by the service court when they have committed a serious offence. Currently, the transfer from the service courts to the civilian justice system is undertaken on a discretionary basis. The Bill will modernise that system, and bring offenders sentenced by the service courts into line with the civilian justice system. The Bill will better support victims of a service offence by streamlining the complaints procedure. I have some sympathy with the arguments behind new clause 12 and a great deal of respect for the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford. However, in practice, individuals cannot simply leave the armed forces to avoid proceedings. A serviceperson will not be discharged or given a final leaving date until disciplinary or criminal proceedings have been properly concluded. Even after an individual has already left service, sections 57, 58 and 61 of the Armed Forces Act 2006 allow them to be charged with an offence committed while they were subject to service law. My argument in respect of new clause 12 is that it is simply not necessary. However, I think dialogue between the Minister and the right hon. Member would be welcome.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for North Devon for tabling the amendment, and I have just a few things to say. Its impact would be to remove the voice of the victim from the process in deciding the jurisdiction of sexual offences and domestic abuse cases. If a victim does not want their case dealt with in the criminal justice system, it is possible, as is the case with many situations where we see violence against women, that they will withdraw from the process. We have seen lengthy delays in the civilian justice system for dealing with rape and serious sexual offence cases. We have seen many instances of victims removing themselves from the process. The amendment would have the impact of removing the victim’s choice for the matter to be dealt with in the service system, possibly leading to a case where no prosecution was ever pursued. That cannot be right and therefore I cannot support it.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  These provisions are so important. The main thing that witnesses who came before the Women and Equalities Committee said, when talking about the impact of non-consensual intimate image abuse, was that the harm grew and grew, the longer the images stayed online. This measure is vital, and I thank the Government for listening to the Committee’s important work.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Crime and Policing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I know that feeling safe is very important to my constituents in North Warwickshire and Bedworth, and that is why the Bill is so important for so many people. Today I am immensely proud to welcome the Government’s amendment to equalise hate crime law—Lords amendment 301. I proposed a similar amendment in the House of Commons, and I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) and for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) for their support, along with that of over 100 colleagues across the House. I welcome the Government’s introduction of a new offence of misogynistic hate. I got into politics to fight section 28 and the hate it created. Section 28 attacked the right for people like me to live openly. It stigmatised lesbian, gay and bisexual people. It pushed us out of public life and made us fair game for attack. I got into politics to fight that cruel law and everything it represented. Today I am proud to continue that fight for all LGBT people, for disabled people and for victims of misogyny. Our politics is becoming increasingly hateful and divisive, and the impacts are heartbreaking. Less than half of LGBT people feel safe holding their partner’s hand in public. As many as 70% of disability hate crimes go unreported. Girlguiding UK revealed that one in 10 girls have missed school to avoid sexual harassment. Hatred towards women and girls, disabled people and LGBT people threatens our entire society. It creates fear—fear to go outside, fear to speak up, fear to be seen. It silences people. It makes all of us afraid. Lords amendment 301 now shows that whether it is due to someone’s race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity, or indeed their sex or disability, Britain is a country that will not tolerate hate, that all hatred is equal and that all those who commit vile acts of hatred will face the same grave consequences. Because of this amendment, victims of hate will have more time to report crimes. For victims who may not feel safe reporting hate crime instantly, that is a lifeline. Perpetrators will get tougher sentence and higher maximum penalties. Aggravated offences are often pursued in the Crown court, where better victim support is available, including the ability to keep them apart from defendants. I know that some people thrive on the politics of hate. Today, I am proud that the Labour Government have stood firmly against hate in all its forms. We will halve violence against women and girls in a decade, we will fight homophobia and transphobia, and we will confront ableism and hate against disabled people. I welcome, in addition to the tougher action on hate crime, the measures on antisocial behaviour, fly-tipping, knife crime, illegal trading, intimate image abuse, violent pornography and the exploitation of children. This Government are clearly standing with victims, creating safer communities and safer streets. I commend the Bill to the House.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure, Mr Efford, to serve under your chairmanship. Liberal Democrat amendment 5 is well intentioned, but I find it troubling. The hon. Member for North Devon seems to be trying to create a minimum requirement that organisations might reach and then decide that they will take no further action. I am hugely concerned that it could be detrimental to delivering the best possible service to veterans and service personnel. A one-size-fits-all national protocol removes the ability for decisions to be made at a local level and tailored for local context and circumstances.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful argument; we can all relate to the specific problems that anyone faces when they move house, and that is far more likely for service personnel. However, requiring patients to retain waiting list positions regardless of clinical urgency surely risks distorting NHS prioritisation principles, which are based on clinical need in order to ensure fairness and safety. Could he address that point?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Member makes a very valid point. I invite him to submit his speech to the consultation on the Government’s White Paper on special educational needs. If he is going to withdraw the amendment, perhaps he would consider that, and then we could move on.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention, and that is exactly the point I am making. We need to encourage the best from all our services, local authorities, police, education, courts and so on. We should not lose the approach of striving for the best, in favour of having a national minimum, because that becomes a drive to the bottom. We need to allow organisations to design their own approach with their local community to do the best they can for the armed forces—veterans and serving personnel—within their communities.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister has been extremely generous with his time. I want to come back to this definition and whether it will help us, because what the Minister is saying is that we need to educate, inform and work with the champions in local authorities, rather than set up a system that litigates the meaning of “an appropriate amount of weight”. I fail to see how a definition that talks about an appropriate amount of weight is any more helpful for someone interpreting it than the phrase “due regard”, which, from a lot of evidence, is well understood by most of the people delivering on the armed forces covenant.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for clarifying that, but instead we should push our local authorities and other public bodies to create tailored solutions. For example, I recently asked organisations in my constituency how they are supporting the armed forces covenant, and I was delighted with the response I received. Organisations reached out to explain the specific actions that they have taken, and how they have gone above and beyond to support armed forces personnel, veterans and their families. Warwickshire police told me that it has achieved gold status in the defence employer recognition scheme, which is managed by the Ministry of Defence. It has developed an armed forces network that has worked hard to develop referral pathways for veterans and their families. We should encourage organisations to aspire to be the best that they can be and to achieve that gold status, rather than enforcing a basic minimum.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Although the amendments are well-intentioned, they are somewhat problematic because they target health, education, adoption and fostering, which are all devolved to the respective Governments. They risk recklessly breaching our devolution conventions, including the Sewel convention. The purpose of the Bill is not to strain relationships with the devolved Governments; instead, it seeks to empower them to design the right solutions for each nation. The covenant duty is intentionally flexible and is supported by guidance and existing frameworks. It allows each Government to design their response. I believe that this Government should seek to work collaboratively with the devolved Governments on supporting our armed forces, rather than prescribing duties to them in legislation. Furthermore, our NHS already works effectively with the covenant duty to support continuity. The amendments would risk governance and clinical risks. Instead, the Government are focusing on initiatives that aim to promote awareness of the armed forces community. The Ministry of Defence already provides comprehensive guidance for service families through the adoption and fostering defence instruction notice, which embeds the MOD’s role firmly within existing civilian-led systems. These long-standing frameworks already ensure continuity for families when they move. In combination with the strengthened covenant duty, they will provide a far more practical and effective approach than is proposed in the amendment.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Armed Forces Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  When coming to a definition that everybody can agree on, it often ends up being very narrow, because that is what the group can agree on and apply. Does the hon. Member agree that if we end up defining due regard in the Bill, the definition will be narrow and, by its very nature, bodies will apply it in a very narrow sense in practice, to the detriment of veterans and service personnel?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  No, I am not giving way. We cannot afford to sacrifice the future of vulnerable young people on the altar of ideology. The trials received ethical approval and were recommended by one of the country’s foremost experts in child health. It is vital that they go ahead so that we can build the evidence we need to support safe, effective healthcare for young trans people.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. Over the past year, the public debate has become often heated and personal and, at times, deeply harmful. The rhetoric has consequences, and we in this House must take responsibility for the climate that we help to create. The Cass review’s recommendations were so important, and among them was a clear call for carefully designed clinical trials to build the evidence base around puberty blockers. Those trials would allow clinicians, patients and families to make informed decisions grounded in robust data rather than speculation or ideology. Those who argued that puberty blockers should be restricted due to insufficient evidence are now opposing the very research that would provide that evidence. That does not suggest a commitment to scientific rigour; it suggests a shifting position driven by political ideology. I am not a clinician, and I do not pretend to be. On matters such as these, we must be guided by medical evidence.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  For the sake of time, I will not. The need to be guided by evidence is precisely why the current situation is so troubling. It is concerning that the MHRA initially raised no objections to the trial when it was approved but has since changed that position. As Dr Cass made clear, no new evidence has been presented to justify that shift. That raises serious questions about the basis of the decision, and whether an independent regulator has buckled to pressure from a well-funded lobbying campaign. As a consequence, vital research is now at risk, and that matters. The trials are not an optional extra; they are the mechanism through which we build the evidence base that critics say is lacking.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Puberty Blockers Clinical Trial · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman. I have used that very service myself on many trips to Cromer and Sheringham. I used the service from West Runton either to get into Cromer or to go all the way to Norwich, and also the other way to Sheringham, so I absolutely know what he means. I think I might have had to get a taxi from the Gunton Arms one night because of the lack of trains back from the station there. This Government have already done so much for rail users, including freezing rail fares for commuters, lowering the cost of getting to work and nationalising West Midlands Trains so that we can put passengers above profit. I hope that this proposal is considered carefully. I wish my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury all the best with the campaign, and I will continue to support her and my constituents to get the rail routes they deserve.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I have disabled constituents and disabled friends who want to use the railway, but sometimes just getting on to the platform is too difficult unless they have pre-booked assistance, and sometimes that assistance is not there when they need it, so I absolutely agree with the hon. Member. At a time when town centres across the country face unprecedented challenges, strong transport links are more important than ever. For people looking to move into the west midlands, this route will make Coleshill an attractive prospect for anyone who needs to regularly commute to London. It will also provide opportunities for away football fans from Wrexham, which is in the same league as Coventry City, who are also hoping to be promoted—perhaps, unlike Coventry, it will not be an automatic promotion. Coleshill’s businesses stand to benefit enormously from improved rail connectivity as well. A direct link to London would support growth, attract investment and encourage tourism to this lovely historic town.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury (Julia Buckley) for securing this important debate. She has spoken passionately, as she always does, about the benefits of a new route to link towns and cities from Wrexham through the west midlands to London. The proposed route would make a real difference to my constituents, particularly those living in Coleshill and the surrounding villages, who currently do not have a direct link to London. For them, that lack of connectivity represents not just an inconvenience, but a barrier to opportunity. For too long, parts of the west midlands have been left disconnected from each other because of poor planning and under-investment. We are rightly encouraging more sustainable travel and balanced regional development, and the importance of strong local rail connections cannot be overstated. Constituents in Coleshill and the surrounding villages, such as Curdworth, Lea Marston, Nether Whitacre and Shustoke, deserve rail routes that take them directly to London and to other west midlands towns and cities, opening up opportunities for work and leisure, particularly in the motor manufacturing supply chain across the Black Country. We have already seen the benefits of improved rail connectivity for constituents in Atherstone, who can now travel directly to London from the town’s station every hour, although it would be good to have a later service back home, so that we could enjoy the theatre and still get back. It has removed the need to drive to neighbouring stations such as Nuneaton or endure long indirect journeys with multiple changes and cold waits in platform shelters. It has made travel simpler, quicker and more accessible. I intend to work with constituents to ensure that everyone can benefit from that route by improving bus routes from Polesworth and villages in the north of the constituency. My constituents who use Coleshill Parkway deserve the same quality of rail service—a direct, reliable connection to London. They should be able to travel easily to nearby towns and cities across the west midlands, such as Walsall and Telford, as well as Shrewsbury, without the need to travel into Birmingham only to come back out again. That kind of inefficiency discourages rail use and, as other Members have said, once people are in their cars, they will stay in them to make relatively local journeys.

• 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend will be aware that I used to own a retail shop in the town of Ashby-de-la-Zouch in her constituency. Quite often, constituents of mine in Atherstone ask if they can have a direct bus service to get to Ashby-de-la-Zouch. Will she join me in campaigning for that direct bus service, which would enable her constituents to catch the train at Atherstone station, where they could get to London in an hour and 20 minutes?