Rebecca Long Bailey MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  It is clear today that the privatisation of water was one of the biggest cons in British history. We have seen water bills rise by 44% in real terms since privatisation, rivers polluted, infrastructure deteriorate and shareholders extract to the tune of £85 billion from our water industry. Regulation has failed to fix it; we have to be honest about that. Water companies have been fined millions of pounds, but that has demonstrably failed to change their behaviour. Chronic underfunding of the Environment Agency and failures by Ofwat have meant that even the limited regulatory powers available have too often gone unenforced. I am pleased that the Prime Minister understands these issues, because it is time to bring water back into public ownership. There is an economic case for doing it: Professor David Hall’s research estimates that public ownership could reduce financing costs by between £3.2 billion and £5.8 billion a year. That is money that could be invested in repairing pipes, tackling leaks, improving sewerage infrastructure, protecting our rivers and keeping bills affordable. But I must stress that public ownership has to mean much more than putting a Government sign above the door. Public control cannot mean just some sort of franchise model with the pretence of overarching Government control, or the odd token councillor sitting on a water company board. That will solve nothing. We need regional publicly owned water companies with democratic accountability and meaningful representation for workers, customers and communities. The revenues from water bills should be used to operate and improve the service, not provide returns to shareholders; investment should be planned for the long term; and environmental protection has to be at the very heart of the industry. Of course, that has a cost—we have to be honest—but we already know from research that public ownership would pay for itself within around seven years, with savings thereafter. We do not need a referendum; we need to take water back into public ownership now.

• 8 Sept 2026 · Media Green Paper · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) for his pertinent opening comments. He said a lot of the things that I was going to say, so I will keep my comments as brief as possible. I very much welcome the Government’s intention to tackle misinformation, but a crucial question that follows is who will decide what is trustworthy. It cannot be Ministers, and it certainly cannot be the tech giants. First off, then, I ask this Minister to consider an independent accreditation scheme based on the Press Council of Ireland model, with an independent chair and representation from journalists, the industry and civil society—protected by legislation but, crucially, independent of Government. To be clear, trustworthy news has to mean more than public service broadcasting. That is a central pillar, of course, but it must include other outlets, independent publications and freelance journalists who meet recognised standards. The Government should support prominence for trustworthy news online, but that prominence must not become de-ranking by another name for journalists who challenge those in power. Alongside regulation, education is critical, so will the Minister commit to a nationwide, properly funded media literacy programme and restore the strategic priorities grant for journalism education, as urged by the National Council for the Training of Journalists? We must have stronger duties on the platforms themselves, as we have heard from colleagues today. One option, supported by the National Union of Journalists—I am a chair of its parliamentary group—is the Cairncross review’s proposed news quality obligation. Will the Minister consider introducing stronger obligations on those technology companies that are amplifying harmful and misleading content, and will he ensure that Ofcom’s standards apply to online content, including video on demand? We know that social media is dangerously fragmenting our information environment, so it is clear that public service broadcasting matters now more than ever. The BBC and other public service broadcasters provide journalism, investigation, culture and local coverage on crucial issues in the public interest, which commercial operators often do not consider profitable. Yet sadly, at the moment, the BBC is cutting hundreds of jobs and programmes. How can we honestly claim to be strengthening our information environment while we are allowing the capacity to produce trusted journalism to be cut away? I have some key questions on which I am pretty sure the Minister is already working. Will the Government use the charter renewal process to secure sustainable funding for the BBC? Will he intervene to protect the jobs and programmes now under threat? If the Government believe, as I do, that over-75s should receive free TV licences, will they fund those licences directly, rather than making the BBC pay? Crucially, at a time when disinformation crosses borders in seconds, will the Government restore full funding to the BBC World Service? We must also address media ownership. Will the Government strengthen ownership rules and invest in local public service journalism, as proposed in the NUJ’s news recovery plan? Finally—this case has been made articulately by hon. Members in this debate—we must protect access to television. We know that Freeview reaches 99% of the population and that a premature switch to internet protocol television risks excluding older people, disabled people and rural communities with poor connectivity. Will the Minister reject any Freeview switch-off timetable until free-to-air public service broadcasting is universally accessible and free at the point of distribution? I welcome this debate and hope that the Government can address the issues raised. Getting this right means truly creating an information environment that serves our communities and democracy, not a wild west that serves whoever has the biggest algorithm, the deepest pockets or the loudest voice.

• 7 Sept 2026 · Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  The Chief Secretary to the Treasury’s comments about regional growth and the active state are music to my ears, but rather than simply picking winners or de-risking private investment, how will she ensure that we get detailed local industrial strategies that build our domestic productive capacity and supply chains?