Sarah Russell MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 4 Jul 2025 · Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister mentions forests. I want to congratulate Trees for Congleton, which has just planted its 30,000th tree in Congleton. It set out a few years ago to plant one tree for every citizen in the town, and it has achieved that. I think that is quite remarkable.

• 4 Jul 2025 · Dogs (Protection of Livestock) (Amendment) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth) for bringing forward this Bill, which is immensely popular with local farmers. I have met with the NFU and its membership repeatedly over months, if not most of the last year, and it is always one of the first things they mention to me. I commend her for her sterling work and for the collegiate way in which she always conducts herself, including in this matter. It is fantastic that we are extending protection to alpacas and llamas. No one wants to see attacks or worrying, and including both those definitions is really important and strengthens the law appropriately. I am incredibly impressed that the Bill covers paths and roads. The hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury thinks her constituency is the most beautiful in the country but, of course, it is not even the most beautiful in Cheshire, because mine is better. One of the really beautiful things I did recently was go to Goostrey Rose Festival last weekend. We have new paths in Goostrey and they are used incredibly regularly by dog walkers, but they are on farm boundaries. This legislation is so important for covering paths like those. I have been on a farm with a family in the aftermath of a dog attack, and it is terrible. I am not here to demonise dog owners—we have so many considerate, sensible, countryside-loving dog owners in my constituency—and I know the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury is not either. We are here to make sure that the overwhelming majority of people are left in peace to go about their everyday lives, in both the farming community and the dog-owning community—they are often one and the same—and to make sure that rural crime is properly prosecuted. GPS theft is another major component of rural crime in my area. Our local police and crime commissioner, Dan Price, has been doing work on this, and the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury has been involved in it. It would be great to get an update from the Minister on that. I want to take a moment to thank the NFU, which has lobbied me extensively on this issue. I am on its food and farming fellowship and have learned a great deal from it. I also thank the farmers in my constituency for continuing to feed us and for looking after the countryside so well.

• 4 Jul 2025 · Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for introducing this fantastic Bill, which does important things for animal welfare. Sadly, my constituency has a problem with dog-on-dog attacks, which are truly distressing to their owners. The overwhelming majority of dog owners in my constituency are incredibly responsible and keep their dogs under control at all times, but a tiny minority are doing a great deal of damage. Does the hon. Member have any thoughts on what we could do about that?

• 4 Jul 2025 · Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  May I take a moment to mention Dobermann Rescue, based in my constituency, which also does fantastic work? I am sure my hon. Friend will join me in commending its work.

• 3 Jul 2025 · NHS 10-Year Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for the 10-year plan. Moving quickly on the dentistry contract is extremely important to my constituents, but I want to raise the fact that, at the moment, parents in my constituency are frightened. They are frightened about how long it takes them to get diagnoses for their children, particularly in relation to neurodiversity; about the lack of support once they do get those diagnoses; and about the lack of child and adolescent mental health services. They are also frightened that their neurodiverse children are being removed from those services on the basis that autism is apparently regarded by some people in our local services as inherently anxiety-creating and therefore children with that diagnosis do not need mental health support. Can the Secretary of State tell me how my constituents will benefit from this plan when it comes to the support children need with their health?

• 3 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  My constituency has a fantastic group of volunteers and sponsors for Congleton Pride, but they have had to show extraordinary resilience after multiple attacks on their banners for Pride month and our major Pride event. I know that the Leader of the House will want to thank all the volunteers and sponsors who have provided new banners and put more banners in more locations. I thank very much the volunteers for persevering and the police for their involvement in this matter, and I thank the members of the community who support Pride. I encourage as many people as possible to come to the Pride event in Congleton town centre on Saturday 19 July from 10 am. Please can we have a debate in Government time about how we can support the LGBTQ+ community?

• 2 Jul 2025 · Whistleblowers · Hansard source

  More

  My recollection of the development of the law during that time is that the cap on unfair dismissal awards applied to whistleblowing, which made it much more difficult for me to get adequate compensation for my clients, particularly if they were high earners in the financial services sector.

• 2 Jul 2025 · Whistleblowers · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton) for securing this debate. As is well known, I worked as a solicitor prior to coming to this place, and I advised a significant number of clients on whistleblowing matters. Based on that experience, I think my hon. Friend is quite right that whistleblowers make an immense contribution to society and that their protection is extremely important. I will take this opportunity to highlight two gaps in the law as I saw them in practice. The first relates to who is covered by the existing law. The EU whistleblowing directive would have introduced in this country coverage for self-employed people under the purview of the whistleblowing Act, but of course we have left the EU, so I assume we will not be implementing it. That is a terrible shame, because self-employed people are really important in this picture. I have some casework relevant to this matter that I cannot refer to because it is going through tribunal, but in 2022 Inside Housing magazine found that, post Grenfell, fire risk assessors were coming under pressure from their employers or, if they were self-employed, their commissioners to downgrade their assessment of fire risk in social housing, because it is so expensive to remediate. In other words, fire risk assessors were whistleblowing that they were concerned that, when they had to make a professional judgment about danger, they were being put under pressure to assess things as being less dangerous than they actually were. A lot of fire risk assessors are self-employed and are incredibly vulnerable, particularly if they have a major social housing client, as many do. They have all the vulnerability of being a whistleblower but none of the protection of employment legislation. They also work for other people, so they are not an employee and may not meet the definition of worker, so they are currently completely excluded. Protect has been campaigning for us to introduce protection into the law, and the EU has recognised that we need protection in law for self-employed people who whistleblow. I would very much like to see the law changed. It would be in the best interests of the whole country and everybody’s safety if we did so. The second problem with whistleblowing law is that it is hard to advise a client that it is worth their taking the risk to bring a case because it is very difficult to prove reliably that what caused the breakdown of the relationship with their employer is the fact that they whistleblew. Employers understandably do not want to admit that their employee was mistreated because they whistleblew, to the extent that they systematically delude themselves about why that person was excluded and subsequently dismissed. There are two ways in which that happens. In a financial services context, I have seen a person’s performance being heavily criticised as “non-commercial”. What that actually means is that the person is not giving the advice that people want to hear, which is quite different from not being commercial; it means that the person actually has regard for the law, and that is unpopular. We have seen examples of that. It is well known that the in-house counsel for the Post Office stopped being invited to meetings because she was not providing the advice on the law that people wanted to hear, so the board and the chief exec just started shutting her out. It definitely happens in legal contexts and financial services contexts. People’s performance starts to be criticised very heavily, but to the person advising them there will be a systematic set of evidence that shows that they were being performance managed. The person advising the client has to tell them, “This is high risk. Your employer is going to say that you were underperforming. I am going to say, on your behalf, that you were being penalised for whistleblowing, but some of this will depend on what the tribunal finds on the day.” That is quite a difficult environment in which to advise people to continue to whistleblow. The second line of case law that is really problematic in a whistleblowing context is about the irreconcilable breakdown of relationships. There is a whole line of case law about how badly people fall out with their colleagues when they start whistleblowing. I have seen that in an NHS context—in fact, the line of case law comes from an NHS context. The employer says, “Oh, no—you haven’t been penalised for whistleblowing. You’re an impossible human being. You are impossible to work with. You have fallen out with all your colleagues and you have been dismissed completely legitimately for another substantial reason: you cannot work with anyone, and that is compromising patient safety.” I have watched an NHS trust systematically trying to line up a member of staff—it is clear from reading the papers—to say that they absolutely cannot get on with their colleagues any more. It carried out independent investigations to find that the person cannot get on with their colleagues. The reason why the person cannot get on with their colleagues is that they are repeatedly raising concerns about their clinical practice, which those people do not want to hear, so they all round on the whistleblower. The case law on the irreconcilable breakdown of relationships is hugely problematic for whistleblowers, and we need clarity in the law such that employers cannot hide behind—or frankly, construct—an irreconcilable breakdown of the relationship to hide, and make potentially lawful, a dismissal that in any other circumstance would clearly be a whistleblowing dismissal. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset for securing the debate, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister. There is a significant need for legal change in this area.

• 2 Jul 2025 · Whistleblowers · Hansard source

  More

  I need to apologise to the shadow Minister—I was inaccurate on that last point, so I just want to correct the record.

• 16 Jun 2025 · Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  It is extremely surprising that the right hon. Gentleman is taking this position, given that his party is generally associated with deregulation and removing bureaucracy. Does he not agree that the proposal he is describing would create additional bureaucracy around an independent organisation?

• 11 Jun 2025 · Space Industry · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I thank the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) for securing this important debate. I am delighted to say that my constituency is part of the space economy, as it includes part of the Jodrell Bank site. Jodrell Bank is the home of the Lovell telescope—an incredible, major radio telescope that was first built at the beginning of the cold war, after world war two. It is part of the University of Manchester, so I should say that my husband is employed elsewhere in the university but has nothing to do with Jodrell Bank. The site makes a major contribution to the local economy, and its science contributes to our country’s global scientific stature. Two hundred people are employed on the site, and more than 180,000 people, including a great many children, visit the visitor centre every year. Members present may have fond memories of a Jodrell Bank school trip, and I have taken my children there since they were tiny. The site welcomes about 200 school pupils every day during school term time, providing early inspiration that a science career might be for them. The Jodrell Bank workforce is so important, and local businesses have spoken to me about the importance of our young people having a science, technology, engineering and mathematics education. Jodrell Bank is far more than an employer and a visitor attraction, however. It is also a world-leading research facility that, for more than 80 years, has been making internationally important contributions to our understanding of the universe. I am very proud that it is part of my constituency. The work done at Jodrell Bank requires dark, quiet skies, which means that future space technology needs to be deployed in a careful, consultative and sustainable way. The world has changed enormously in the 80 years since Jodrell Bank was built. As the hon. Member for Wyre Forest mentioned, where once there was a space race, there is now SpaceX. In that context, Jodrell Bank is also contributing to national space security and sustainability. Scientists are now using the Lovell telescope and e-MERLIN—the enhanced multi-element, radio-linked interferometer network—to track satellites, monitor space debris and observe near-Earth asteroids using radar techniques. As space becomes increasingly congested and contested, that is a powerful and important capability in which the UK is playing an internationally leading role. It is vital to ensuring space situational awareness and planetary defence, which are key priorities of the UK national space strategy. This is not fantasy stuff: the possibility of satellite collisions risks everything from navigation to online banking, so this is crucial national infrastructure. The increasing congestion of airspace has implications for air traffic control, and the economic value of supporting that work is very real. The world will, of course, continue to change—that is inevitable—and local businesses that are part of the aerospace industry could definitely move more towards space too. I spoke recently to Bird Bellows, an aerospace manufacturer in my constituency that creates bespoke, precision-engineered metallic bellows and flexible joints. It is incredibly specialist and is used to working to the very tight, regulated demands of the aerospace industry. Last week, I visited CLD, which, if the UK Government build infrastructure, is very likely to be the company that manufactures the fencing and other security that protects it. It is fantastic that we have these local businesses, but there is real scope, particularly as part of the north-west’s investment in the net zero industrial cluster, for us to crowd in and work with academia and the manufacturing businesses in my constituency, of which there are many, to develop the space economy in my area. I want to see the high-skilled, high-value jobs and investment that can bring. I am pleased that the Government are protecting record funding for research and development, which will be a relief to anyone who recalls the words of Jodrell Bank’s founder, Sir Bernard Lovell: “civilisations that abandon the quest for knowledge are doomed to disintegration.” Thanks to researchers such as those at Jodrell Bank, we may be safe for a while longer yet.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Dementia Care · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing this debate. Caring for a relative with dementia is one of the most tremendously difficult things that many people will ever have to do. I pay tribute to the many people in my constituency who are caring for a relative with dementia; it is incredibly challenging. Over time I have spoken to many people on the doorstep whose relatives were suffering from dementia, and who were finding things very difficult. When I read a dementia care plan, I saw that 51% of carers providing unpaid care in my constituency are providing more than 100 hours a week. That is the most phenomenal commitment, and I thank ever so much all those who are doing that. I have heard the Minister speak extremely movingly about his family’s experiences and I know that he is very committed to improving dementia care in this country. However, it is shocking that at present only about 67% of people with dementia in my constituency will actually receive a diagnosis. I recently spoke to a resident whose mother has been in a care home with advanced dementia for three years, but is still undiagnosed. As long as we do not have a full set of diagnoses, we cannot properly explore good healthcare outcomes for people, what proportionate spend would look like and how we can improve the system generally. A huge amount of unpaid care is provided by women—although, of course, there are people of all genders providing it and I salute everyone who does so—which is one reason why the gender pay gap doubles when women are in their 40s. Work by the Women’s Budget Group has shown that as well as improving the wellbeing of those providing that care, investment in the care sector could create 2.7 times as many jobs as the same amount of investment in construction. I do not think that we should be providing better care just because there is a good economic basis for doing so—we should be doing it because it is the right thing to do—but it is important to note that there would be huge economic benefits. I welcome the Government’s launch of an independent commission into adult social care as the first step towards creating a national care service. In Cheshire East, there has been inconsistent funding of Admiral nurses, which has led to inconsistent support. I have been impressed by the care provided by local hospices; although traditionally associated with cancer care, they are now often involved in dementia care. I would like us to provide more funding for hospice care as soon as we are able to do so. The services that people receive are hugely important to them, whether they are delivered in the community or in care homes. A dentist in my constituency has told me that due to an issue with insurance, many dentists are no longer covered to provide services in care homes, which is a huge loss as those people deserve dental care. The Alzheimer’s Society has called for dementia training for paid carers, and I agree that we should be moving to do that at pace. I want to thank not just the unpaid carers, but the volunteers in my constituency who are doing the most incredible work. In Congleton, we have the Congleton Lions dementia buddy scheme and the New Life church “Forget-me-not” group for carers and those living with dementia; we have over 1,000 Dementia Friends in Sandbach and the “Bring me sunshine” group at Sandbach library; we have memory cafés at Alsager library, Astbury village hall and Holmes Chapel Methodist church; and I would like to say a huge thank you to everyone involved in making Holmes Chapel a dementia-friendly village. I have not captured the full range of support provided and I apologise to the groups that I may not have picked up on, but the variety of services provided by people on an unpaid basis across my community is staggering. However, that does not take away from the fact that we need the right paid services for people in their homes and subsequently in care homes, if that becomes the right choice for families. I thank everyone who is providing enormous support to the people who they care for, across our entire society. I know that hon. Members from all parties will agree that we need to provide more support to those giving that care.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. On that point, does my hon. Friend agree with my concerns about new clause 2, which, although genuinely meant and intended, is in danger of being read, together with new clause 1, to indicate that it should not be discussed with children at all, even if they raised it first, because of the difference between the wording of the two clauses?

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend give way?

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. On that point, I have particular concerns—

• 15 May 2025 · Recalled Offenders: Sentencing Limits · Hansard source

  More

  The Conservatives appear to have forgotten quite a number of things, and I think it might be a good time to remind them. Former Justice Secretary Chris Grayling’s disastrous partial privatisation of the Probation Service was overturned in 2019 after the number of serious offences—including rape and murder—committed by those on probation skyrocketed. Does the Minister agree that we are seeing the long tail of Conservative failure, which overshadows everything that we must do now?

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Lady accept that pilots already seem to manage to fly throughout our nation and many others, despite there being widespread solar panels in, for instance, Spain, where there is more sunshine? It seems unlikely that they will be unable to manage in her constituency.

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with hon. Friend. That is disgraceful, and I am very pleased that the relaunched solar taskforce is focusing on developing resilient and sustainable supply chains, free from forced labour. It is important that we work with our farmers and growers across the country. British farmers own about 70% of our total solar generation capacity, whether it be on the roofs of their agricultural buildings or on solar farms. I am extremely pleased that the NFU is participating in the Government’s relaunched solar taskforce. We must continue to ensure that farms are properly consulted about land use, and that previously developed or lower-quality land is prioritised. I thank the businesses in my community that have supported solar energy, including manufacturers Siemens and Bespak, which both use renewable energy sources. The Dane Valley Community Energy company is a not-for-profit mutual society that was set up by a group of volunteers in my constituency. They have constructed and run the Congleton hydroelectricity generation project at Havannah weir, and they supply electricity to Siemens and donate money to local community groups. A sister project, Congleton Solar, has installed rooftop solar on a number of sites in my constituency and beyond. Havannah primary school in my constituency will officially unveil its rooftop solar panels next week. I know that the project will inspire the next generation of green champions. I am very proud to be part of a Government who are meeting communities where they are, and following their lead.

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that the Conservatives’ failure to have proper national strategies for development means that we do not have enough prison places to lock up all of our criminals, and that not having sufficient solar energy will do the same?

• 15 May 2025 · Solar Farms · Hansard source

  More

  The climate crisis grows more urgent, and our children’s future is under threat. Solar energy will play a crucial role in the mission to produce secure, affordable energy in this country. Since the general election, the Government have consented to more solar power projects than were consented to over the entirety of the past 14 years. Great British Energy is investing £200 million in new rooftop solar energy panels, including for the roof of the newly built Leighton hospital near my constituency, and in renewable energy schemes for schools, hospitals and communities. That will take hundreds of millions of pounds off public sector energy bills. New building standards will ensure that all new build houses and commercial buildings are fit for a net zero future. The standards are expected to encourage the installation of solar panels, and I welcome that. It is critical that we exclude slave labour from the supply chain for solar panels, both on moral grounds and to enable alternative producers to compete on a fair playing field. Much of the global supply of solar-grade polysilicon —a key component of solar panels—is manufactured in Xinjiang, China, where over 1 million Uyghur Muslims are imprisoned in a vast network of forced labour camps. This week, I met people from Open Doors to learn more about its work tackling religious persecution around the world. It said in its 2022 report that “In Xinjiang you are always watched; a computer decides your fate, against which there is no appeal.”

• 29 Apr 2025 · Criminal Injuries Compensation · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Northfield (Laurence Turner) for securing this debate. There is an interesting paradox at the heart of this scheme. The fundamental eligibility requirements are that “You must apply as soon as it is reasonably practicable“ and that “this should normally not be later than two years“ after the incident occurred. That is the time limit for adults, which can be extended “due to exceptional circumstances”. If the person was under 18 at the time of the incident, an application must be received by their 20th birthday if the incident was reported to the police before their 18th birthday, or “within two years of the first report to the police, if the incident was reported to the police on or after“ the person’s 18th birthday. I was sexually harassed as a teenager—nothing that would have met a criminal standard—and it never occurred to me to apply for these sorts of things. That is not something that enters the head of someone aged 18, 19 or 20, let alone the victims of child rape and sexual abuse. First, we should accept and implement the recommendations of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. That is a basic moral requirement. Secondly, we should look at the “exceptional circumstances” rules, which allow someone who did not manage to apply as soon as reasonably practicable, or within two years, to apply if “due to exceptional circumstances an application could not have been made earlier; and the evidence provided in support of the application means that it can be determined without further extensive inquiries by a claims officer.” That is a much tighter exception than most legal “exceptional circumstances” exception rules. It basically requires that there be no work to do on the part of the agency that would be required to investigate. I do not understand why whether people get compensation is determined by what inquiries a claims officer would be required to make. I do not think that represents justice. Significant numbers of claims are being refused; in 2023-24, nearly 2,000 were refused because they were not submitted within the time limit, and another 765 were refused because of a failure to report as soon as reasonably practicable. What we do not have statistics on, as far as I am aware, is the number of people who do not apply in the first place because they know that they would not meet the eligibility criteria. I suspect that it is substantial. It seems to me that whether someone hears about the scheme in the first place, or can meet the requirements, is very much an accident of their life chances and various other factors. That is no way to determine whether people should receive compensation. At the moment, we are listing Crown court cases for more than two years hence. The police can take more than two years to investigate a crime. About 21% of claims under the criminal injuries compensation scheme take more than two years to conclude; in fact, 2.8% of them take more than five years to conclude. We habitually accept, and have done for some time—although we may not like it—that it can take the state more than two years to deal with a crime, but we do not accept that it can take more than two years for a victim to deal with a crime. That seems, to me, a fundamentally irrational and indefensible position. In this country, we let people make a breach of contract claim six years after the breach of contract occurred, but we will not let them take more than two years to process their trauma. That is not, in my opinion, the right position for the state to take.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Criminal Injuries Compensation · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Gentleman see that there is some irony in his asking why our current Minister has not responded to a 2020 consultation, when his Government, which was in power for another four years, did not do so?

• 29 Apr 2025 · Criminal Injuries Compensation · Hansard source

  More

  If we create a right to be made aware of the scheme and a claimant can demonstrate that they were not made aware of it, could we amend the rules for exceptional cases reviews so that that automatically counts as an exception?

• 22 Apr 2025 · Residential Estate Management Companies · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing this important debate. My constituents are being treated as a cash cow. There are managing agents causing a problem across my entire constituency, and I have casework in Alsager, Congleton, Sandbach and Holmes Chapel. I do not have time to go into every one of those items, but the worst—the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) referred to this—relates to insurance charges for terrorism. I am not flippant about terrorism, but retirement properties in Alsager are unlikely to be victims of it. The retirement community in Alsager received a £14,000 bill for electricity in communal areas, where there were approximately three lights. Residents challenged that bill, which suddenly became £7,000, with no explanation as to why it had halved or why it had been £14,000 in the first place. They challenged it again, but they still do not have a proper breakdown as to why so few lights cost so much money—they simply cannot get that information. As others have mentioned, when people challenge bills, they get charged again and again. There is an absolute lack of transparency about these organisations and about transactions, including where insurance is being bought from connected parties. There is a real question about whether corporate governance as it stands is fundamentally capable of addressing some of these issues. I absolutely second the calls by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) for the adoption of section 42 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, the creation of an equivalent for roads, and the requirement for play areas and public areas to be adopted by local authorities. I am worried that the charges my constituents see are just the beginning and that, as their estates age, those charges are likely to become significantly larger, particularly in unadopted areas. Will the Minister please confirm what we can do about these many issues?

• 22 Apr 2025 · Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I have the pre-sentence report guidance in front of me. It says: “When considering a community or custodial sentence, the court must request and consider a pre-sentence report (PSR) before forming an opinion of the sentence, unless it considers that it is unnecessary”. It then goes on to describe various circumstances in which a pre-sentence report might be considered necessary and may “normally be considered necessary”. It does not remove judicial stipulations and interventions completely, and to suggest otherwise is not accurate.