Samantha Dixon MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Sept 2026 · Thirlwall Inquiry: Final Report and Recommendations · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I really appreciate that. This is another very dark day for the families affected by events at the Countess of Chester hospital—those who grieve, who suffer and who continue to live with the terrible fallout. It is crucial for them, as well as every one of my constituents, and those of my right hon. Friend the Member for Alyn and Deeside (Sir Mark Tami) and others, to have absolute confidence that our local hospital—my local hospital—is a safe place. Lady Justice Thirlwall’s inquiry needs the firmest response possible from Government. She shines a light on a truly appalling state of affairs. Too many times in this place, in response to catastrophic events, we say, “Never again.” I have served previously as Minister for Building Safety, my work guided by the recommendations of the Grenfell tower inquiry. My right hon. Friend the Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed) and I argued consistently inside Government for the establishment of a national oversight mechanism to capture the recommendations from important public inquiries, such as this one, to ensure that they are carried forward and are never forgotten or overlooked. Given Lady Justice Thirlwall’s evidence that inquiry recommendations are so often overlooked, will my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State support the calls to broaden her essential recommendation beyond the NHS to all inquiries and set up a national oversight mechanism so that when we say, “Never again,” we mean it?

• 2 Sept 2026 · Representation of the People Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi) to her place. She has taken on an immensely challenging role, but one that I am sure will bring her great joy. It is often said that a week is a long time in politics, and a year has been an extremely long time for this Bill. The evidence of that is the hefty number of amendments that have been tabled; as each political event moves on and people fall on their swords, more amendments come forward. I know that it has been of real interest to Members across the House, as well as many civil society organisations, that the Bill should be crafted to respond to events as they happen. I pay tribute to the Bill team, who have responded incredibly well to the number of amendments that have been tabled and the legislative challenge that the Bill represents. The Bill removes barriers to voting that were put in the way of electors. It protects our democracy, as my hon. Friend the Minister described, and there are extremely important measures on votes at 16, as well as on automatic voter registration and the powers that will be taken to pilot it, so that we can find those lost voters who fall out of our electoral system and bring them back into democratic engagement. Committee stage was lively, and I certainly enjoyed it. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes)—I think we struck something of an accord. I have to refer him back to one particular point in Committee when he said, “We have a groundbreaking piece of legislation—I am sure when we get to Report stage, the Minister will now say in the Chamber, ‘the shadow Minister said this is groundbreaking legislation’. It has its bad points and very good points, but I accept that it is groundbreaking”. –– [ Official Report, Representation of the People Public Bill Committee, 16 April 2026; c. 393.] Now, neither he nor I are the Minister or the shadow Minister, but I think we agreed on that point, and I thank him for the spirit in which he and other members of the Committee conducted themselves. What we have to remember is that any political party, candidate or elected representative who abides by the rules that this legislation sets will be able to flourish in our political system, and those who do not can expect to be held very firmly to account. The only point on which I agree with the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam)—who I welcome to her place—is in urging my Labour colleagues to continue working constructively with other political parties. It is not the case that we as a Government have not engaged on this legislation. We have been at great pains to do so, and I urge her to continue to engage not only as the Bill progresses through this House and the other place, but as we go through the secondary legislation that falls from it. My final point is about the Rycroft review. The final recommendation from Philip Rycroft’s review concerned the organisation of the civil service in response to democracy and elections. He suggested that a permanent secretary be appointed to look after democracy and elections. We have just had the statement from the First Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh), about rewiring public services and government. It often felt to me that many of the areas that this legislation covers do not fall just within the remit of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government; they fall within the remit of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the Cabinet Office and even the Home Office. I urge the Secretary of State to consider all these things in the round and whether a more strategic Government position could be found in taking this legislation forward. There is sometimes a tension between the powers of the MHCLG and the powers of other Departments. I am sure that that will be debated this afternoon. It was an enormous privilege to take this Bill through Second Reading and Committee, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for bringing the Bill back in such a timely way on Report.

• 13 Jul 2026 · Embodied Carbon: Buildings · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a very persuasive case, and I am sure that Sunderland city council will be listening to what he has said. I endorse his comments. Building regulations play an important role in setting minimum standards, but when we regulate, we need clear requirements, clear compliance routes and clear enforcement responsibilities. The Government are committed to reducing waste by moving to a circular economy and making significant reductions in carbon emissions. To achieve that, all sectors must play their part. For construction products, this includes increasing the reuse and recycling of products, choosing more sustainable products and improving information about environmental performance. Our construction products White Paper confirms an intention to remain consistent with the EU’s revised Construction Products Regulation where this meets our objectives, thereby protecting supply chains and reducing burdens on UK manufacturers. That extends to environmental aspects. However, reducing embodied carbon is not just about regulation or planning; product innovation, digital tools, professional training, voluntary disclosure and better design practice will all have a role. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero is already taking forward work to grow the market for low-carbon industrial products, with an initial focus on steel, cement and concrete. It has committed to developing guidance for buyers and producers of construction products on embodied emissions reporting, product classifications and green procurement approaches. This guidance will help buyers to identify and compare lower-carbon products, and help producers to market them. That matters for buildings, because the choices made by designers depend on the products available to them and on information that they can trust. Better product-level carbon data can support better building-level decisions, but the two systems need to be aligned carefully rather than developed in isolation. The materials we use in buildings must be assessed in the round. Lower-carbon products offer real opportunities, but they must also be safe, durable, suitable for their intended use and supported by reliable information. The Government’s work on construction products reform and DESNZ’s work on low-carbon industrial products therefore point in the same direction, and are being developed to work together, with better information, greater confidence and a market capable of supporting both safety and decarbonisation. Let me be clear about what the Government are not saying. We are not saying that embodied carbon is too difficult to address, we are not saying the Government will have no role to play, and we are not saying complexity is a reason to put this issue in the “too hard” box. However, we are saying that complexity matters; unintended consequences matter; burdens on industry, local authorities and consumers matter; housing delivery and building safety matter; and net zero matters. The right policy must hold these objectives together. I therefore welcome today’s debate, and the challenge from Members who want the Government to move faster, but responsible Government sometimes means resisting the temptation to immediately reach for a simple answer to a complex problem. The Government’s position is that embodied carbon in new buildings is important. The direction of travel is towards better measurement and reduction. Industry leadership is welcome and necessary, and the Government must take the time to design an approach that is robust, proportionate and deliverable.

• 13 Jul 2026 · Embodied Carbon: Buildings · Hansard source

  More

  What I will say is that despite those challenges, the Government recognise the excellent leadership already being shown by parts of the sector—which the hon. Member has described—in tackling embodied carbon. Parts of the construction supply chain are already working to measure and reduce whole-life carbon, and we saw that momentum at the conference at the end of last year that the hon. Member mentioned earlier. It was attended by officials from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, as well as the hon. Member, alongside industry and professional bodies. That summit highlighted both the appetite for action and the importance of consistency, better data infrastructure, and a phased approach to give industry appropriate time to adapt. The Government also support the work of the Future Homes Hub on embodied and whole-life carbon in new homes. The hub is developing an industry-led approach to reducing embodied and whole-life carbon, including work on voluntary measurement and disclosure, benchmarking, environmental product data, and practical tools for home builders. However, despite those excellent examples—and there will be many more that I have not mentioned—it would be wrong to assume that the whole construction industry is in the same place already for regulation, as is often claimed. While larger developers and consultancy teams may have the expertise and tools to carry out robust assessments, many smaller builders, local contractors and clients do not. There can also be varied costs in even assessing the whole life or embodied carbon of a project. The Government are therefore taking time to consider the right approach, but taking time does not mean inaction; it means doing the work properly. Rushed policy could lead to inconsistent assessments, poor-quality data, disputes about methodology, and perverse incentives. It could also drive the substitution of materials without proper regard to their safety, quality, durability or cost. Members will understand that the Government need to consider these issues in the round. We have ambitious housing delivery targets, and we are committed to making buildings safer. A policy that reduces reported embodied carbon, but which undermines safety, increases defects or slows housing delivery, would not serve the public well. In considering our approach, the Government must look at several areas: the methodology, the quality and coverage of data, the capacity of industry, the sequencing between measurement and reduction, and the economic impacts. A hospital, a high-rise block and a small housing scheme will not have the same constraints or carbon profile, and any future framework must recognise this. Some have raised the role of planning, which can be an important lever. The planning system provides the freedom for local authorities and developers to carry out carbon accounting. As the hon. Member for North Herefordshire described, some are already encouraging whole-life carbon assessment, but we must also be mindful of the cumulative demands placed on the planning system. The Government have recently consulted on proposed reforms to the national planning policy framework and other changes to the planning system. The consultation sought views on a revised framework, which would encourage applicants to reuse existing structures and materials, and give substantial weight to proposed development for existing buildings where this improves energy efficiency. We are analysing the feedback received and will publish our response in the summer. Any approach to embodied carbon must be considered alongside wider planning reform to ensure our policy is coherent, practical, and capable of supporting both sustainable development and the delivery of the homes and infrastructure that the country needs.