Sarah Pochin MP: speeches

Speeches

• 13 Apr 2026 · Social Housing Standards · Hansard source

  More

  In my Runcorn and Helsby constituency, Riverside housing association is flattening 365 properties, demolishing them to build new homes. Residents have been left with no communication, no support and no number to ring—residents such as John and Barbara Wheldon, now in their 80s, who have lived in the same property for more than 50 years and are facing the trauma of that move without knowing where they are going. Will the Minister agree with me that housing associations have a duty of care to residents and that, where they fail in that duty of care, they should be held to account?

• 13 Apr 2026 · Social Housing Standards · Hansard source

  More

  17. What steps his Department is taking to help ensure that housing associations improve the quality of social housing.

• 19 Jan 2026 · Iran: Protests · Hansard source

  More

  Given the horrific scenes of pro-democracy protesters being attacked by the police in London over the weekend, what steps will the Minister take to ensure that peaceful protest can take place in this country?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Local Elections: Cancellation · Hansard source

  More

  Last year, a junior Housing Minister, the hon. Member for Peckham (Miatta Fahnbulleh), stood at the Dispatch Box and said that “local council elections are happening in 2026. We are cracking on with it”. —[ Official Report , 4 December 2025; Vol. 776, c. 1164.] For some communities, this is the second year in a row that elections have been cancelled. How does the Minister expect the British people to believe anything this Government say, or have any faith in their commitment to democracy?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Packaging: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank the hon. Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) for securing this debate. I come at this issue from a slightly different angle. In my constituency of Runcorn and Helsby, I have an incredibly impressive business, Encirc, one of the largest glass manufacturers in the UK. I have had the pleasure of visiting the factory and meeting the impressive team. It employs 1,000 people. Quite rightly, as the Member of Parliament for Runcorn and Helsby, it is my responsibility to do everything I can to protect jobs there. Encirc is owned by Vidrala, which is looking at a £500 million investment in Encirc, which is so important for the north-west and for the UK. It is now reassessing that £500 million investment because of this tax, which is unfairly penalising glass as a material. I have jobs and investment at risk in my constituency. On the impact of the EPR, first, the proposed level of the EPR for glass in this country is the highest of such schemes in the world. In Germany, for example, glass is cheaper than any other material for use in bottles. I ask the Minister to please reassess the level of fees for glass as a material. Secondly, I want to point to the potential impact on manufacturing jobs and businesses. The 120,000 jobs in the glass manufacturing industry nationally are potentially affected, and could be endangered with these increased costs. The EPR is already causing significant business damage, leading to falling revenues in the UK glass manufacturing sector, primarily in the north of England. Customers of my glass manufacturer are already switching to less environmentally friendly products. That is what does not make sense about the way that the Government have calculated the fees. Customers are switching to plastics or cans; glass is infinitely recyclable and those materials are not. From an environmental point of view, it just does not make sense. There is a disproportionate burden on glass. Glass will bear £500 million of the £1.5 billion cost to businesses of this EPR in the current fee format, despite being less than 5% of total packaging in the UK. It is totally disproportionate, and penalises glass manufacturers. The solution that I ask the Minister to look at is, first, urgently changing the inaccuracies in the current fee methodology, which includes glass having an inaccurately low value in EPR, inflating the EPR price. Secondly, would she please look at recalculating the fees based solely on volume, not weight, as soon as possible, to ensure that glass producers and users are not being unfairly penalised to the benefit of plastics and cans? We must act now to avoid further material switching by customers. To summarise, I ask the Minister to look at moving from a weight-based fee calculation, which penalises glass and favours less environmentally friendly plastics and cans, to a volume-based fee calculation. In Runcorn and Helsby, 1,000 jobs and £500 million of investment are at risk.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Asylum Policy · Hansard source

  More

  The Daresbury asylum hotel in Runcorn has been emptied, thanks to my by-election campaign. What assurances can the Secretary of State give my constituents that the many houses in multiple occupation in Runcorn will be emptied of illegal migrants and criminals under her Government, and that they will be deported without delay, never to be allowed legal entry into the UK?

• 20 Oct 2025 · Asylum Seekers: Support and Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a bit of progress. The immediate action needs to be that all these hotels are closed to illegal migrants, and that they are moved out of the community into holding centres to be processed and sent home. The conditions in which they are held in these processing centres will be humane but not luxurious. There will be no free tickets to theme parks and no free trips out into the community. I had an asylum hotel—the Daresbury hotel—in my constituency. My campaign in the recent by-election saw the hotel eventually shut down, but the implications of shutting the hotels are that these illegal migrants are dispersed in houses of multiple occupancy in our communities. In Runcorn, we have approximately 900 illegal migrants in 80 HMOs that we know about. Once in those HMOs, they are lost to the authorities, yet still live free at the taxpayers’ expense.

• 16 Sept 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I was a magistrate for 20 years, so I hope that I speak with some authority and have something to contribute on Second Reading. This Bill is based on recommendations in the recent Gauke review, which falls woefully short of addressing the many concerns that the British people have about the current judicial system. Worse still, it does nothing to reverse the current trend for woke justice, and enables the further politicisation of our once great judicial system. The left will describe the Bill as progressive, but in fact it is unrealistic, requires vast amounts of investment and funding for the Probation Service, and will take years to implement, and in the meantime it puts the public at risk. The Bill makes whole life orders mandatory for certain types of murder, but does not specify which types of murder. It allows for “special sentences for offenders of particular concern” to be imposed for rape and certain other serious sexual offences, without giving any explanation of what that actually means. The British people want to know that life means life—that murderers, terrorists, rapists, hate preachers and paedophiles will be sent to prison and never allowed out to threaten the safety of the British people again, that they will face harsh conditions in prison, and that prison is punishment, not a soft option. The Bill does nothing to defend our democracy and end the era of two-tier justice in this country, where free speech is a crime punishable by a more severe sentence than sexual assaults or paedophilia. It enables the continued facilitation of the special treatment of defendants according to their racial, cultural or religious identity.