Sarah Russell MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Jun 2026 · Draft Employment Tribunal (Extension of Time Limits) (Miscellaneous Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2026 Draft Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) (Amendment) Order 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. The shadow Minister asked whether this is really what Members came here to do, and I can say that I genuinely and literally came to this place to do this, so I am delighted that we are doing it. I was one of the people who joined Pregnant Then Screwed in its #Givemesix campaign against maternity discrimination. I spent years practising in employment tribunals, and I saw very large numbers of women with maternity discrimination claims and people with discrimination claims of all types. There is a huge problem: 74,000 women a year are estimated to lose their job while they are pregnant or on maternity leave, over and above what would otherwise be expected for their demographic. This absolutely enormous problem is affecting our national productivity, with so many women falling out of the workplace after they have children. When women have just had a baby and suddenly lose their job, they have very limited money because statutory maternity pay is extremely limited—it is awful—so they cannot afford legal advice. They also have a tiny baby, so bringing legal proceedings is not something they are seeking to do. It often takes them a long time to seek advice about their situation. Women are regularly being ruled out of bringing perfectly legitimate claims for the widespread problem of discrimination. I gently remind the shadow Minister that his Government failed to recruit any employment tribunal judges from 2010 to 2018, and that is how we ended up in this mess. We have no pipeline of people coming through who have seniority. This Government recommenced the recruitment of judges, and, to be fair, at the very back-end of the last Government there was some realisation of the catastrophic mess that had been generated in the employment tribunal system. It is not in employers’ best interests for the system to be run down, and it is not in employers’ best interests for us to assume that the best thing for employees is to insist that they have no rights and are unable to enforce those that they have. None of those things make business better in Britain; what they do is level down so that the worst employers are enabled to get away with misconduct while penalising those who do the right thing. I literally came here to do this. I have campaigned for this for years, and I could not be more pleased to see it happen, because what I think we will see is that good employers have absolutely nothing to fear from these measures. Good employers are the ones who are taking the time to deal with grievances properly, and that takes more than three months. At the moment, we are seeing people being pushed to bring claims to protect their position far too quickly, which pushes them into an adversarial process that is not in their best interests or employers’ best interests, and it is potentially enabling unscrupulous employers to find ways to get people to time-out by unduly elongating the process. I absolutely support these measures, and every Labour Member should be proud of them. I want to say a huge thank you to Pregnant Then Screwed for the campaigning it has done for many years. I am really proud to be here today.

• 3 Jun 2026 · Small Towns: Transport Links · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) for securing this important debate. I have spoken previously about train services in my community; I will not spend a huge amount of my limited time on them, but I want to flag that we have been in government for two years, and train strikes in my constituency have written off our Sunday services for the entirety of that time. We talk a lot about bringing train services into public ownership, but those train services in my area were in public ownership. My residents are furious that they have no Sunday service from Congleton station and have not had one for a long time now. I would be very grateful if the Minister took that back to the Rail Minister with the utmost urgency, because this really needs to move forward. We also have a long-standing problem with accessibility at Sandbach station, which is frankly disastrous. It is a huge problem for anyone who cannot manage the extremely steep stairs. The service runs to a major city and an airport, so by definition people have luggage, buggies and so forth. What I really want to talk about is buses. There are so many problems with buses in my area. The Government’s transport improvement funds for buses have helped, and so have section 106 contributions from developers. I would like to praise my local council, which has been able to put on some additional services with those two sources of funds. None the less, there are so many problems. When I spoke to young people at Shipton Explorer Scouts, they spoke at length about the difficulty of buses that are just too full: there are too many students trying to get on them, so the buses stop letting them on. I have GCSE students who are terrified. One called my office recently because his bus simply had not shown up. We eventually got to the bottom of it: the app was not working, the bus had been diverted because of roadworks, and no one had informed the school or the pupils. These buses only run once an hour. When children and young people need to get to life-changing exams, the consequences of unreliability—buses that do not show up or that do not stop because they are too full—are potentially devastating. Local employers I speak to in places like care homes and nurseries, some of which are not in the centre of town, have huge problems recruiting because people simply cannot get to them without car access. In rural and semi-rural areas, this is a huge, long-standing economic problem. It makes it difficult for parents to work, because they cannot reliably get their children to school on public transport. The economic and other impacts for people are absolutely massive. My constituents also talk to me about a sense of rural isolation—which I would go into further, but I have run out of time.

• 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman has referred to plan 2 loans but plan 3 loans were also brought in by his Government. Plan 3 loans are for those with postgraduate qualifications—people who are definitely making an economic contribution to our society—and now kick in from when they earn £21,000. Does he agree that that was the wrong thing for his Government to do?

• 25 Feb 2026 · Student Loan Repayment Plans · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to see you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for securing this debate. The system just is not fair; it does not make any sense and it does not set people up well for life. Realistically, a person makes a decision about whether to go to university when they are about 16 or 17 years old. We would not let banks lend money to 16 and 17-year-olds on these terms—we would think it wrong; people cannot enter into those contracts until they are 18—but when someone makes the decision to apply to university, unless they are from a very wealthy background, they are essentially signing up to a huge amount of ongoing debt. Young people quite rightly aspire to own homes, start families and have the same sort of life and pension savings that the generations before them had, and I do not see how that is unreasonable. Yet we are allowing a system to persist in which many of them are paying 9% of their income, on top of the tax they already pay, spiralling house prices and the incredibly high requirements for childcare, if they wish to have a family. Of course, Labour has rightly helped with many of those problems, but the student loans system remains a barrier to opportunity. We should have great aspirations for our young people. Education is a right, and should not be a privilege, but those privileged enough to have parents who can pay for their fees up front have a massive benefit over everyone else. That is wrong and it needs to change.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Professor Child, I note that you are very supportive of legal reform in quite a number of areas. With emphasis on the Computer Misuse Act, surely the reality is that the Crown Prosecution Service will never conclude that it is in the best interests of the country to prosecute any of the behaviours that people are concerned about, which we recognise as positive and helpful. Is there a need for legal reform? Professor John Child: Yes. It is not the easiest criminal law tale, if you like. If there were a problem of overcriminalisation in the sense of prosecutions, penalisation, high sentences and so on, the solution would be to look at a whole range of options, including prosecutorial discretion, sentencing or whatever it might be, to try to solve that problem. That is not the problem under the status quo. The current problem is purely the original point of criminalisation. Think of an industry carrying out potentially criminalised activity. Even if no one is going to be prosecuted, the chilling effect is that either the work is not done or it is done under the veil of potential criminalisation, which leads to pretty obvious problems in terms of insurance for that kind of industry, the professionalisation of the industry and making sure that reporting mechanisms are accurate. We have sat through many meetings with the CPS and those within the cyber-security industry who say that the channels of communication—that back and forth of reporting—is vital. However, a necessary step before that communication can happen is the decriminalisation of basic practices. No industry can effectively be told on the one hand, “What you are doing is vital,” but on the other, “It is a criminal offence, and we would like you to document it and report it to us in an itemised fashion over a period of time.” It is just not a realistic relationship to engender. The cyber-security industry has evolved in a fragmented way both nationally and internationally, and the only way to get those professionalisation and cyber-resilience pay-offs is by recognising that the criminal law is a barrier—not because it is prosecuting or sentencing, but because of its very existence. It does not allow individuals to say, “If, heaven forbid, I were prosecuted, I can explain that what I was doing was nationally important. That is the basis on which I should not be convicted, not because of the good will of a prosecutor.”

• 3 Feb 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Obviously no one wants to put crippling costs on to businesses, but cyber-security costs money—there is no way of avoiding that. We only have to look at the JLR attack to see the scale of the impact on our economy when it does not work, and we are looking at only critical national infrastructure here. Have you had any information from business about whether and to what extent this will promote increased spending on cyber-security? Jill Broom: We can assume that it will, because if you are in the supply chain or come within scope, you will have certain responsibilities and you will have to invest, not just in technology but in the skills space as well. How easy it is to do that is probably overestimated a bit; it is quite difficult to find the right skilled people, and that applies across regulators as well as business. Generally speaking, yes, I think it will be costly, but there are things that could probably help smaller organisations: techUK has called for things such as financial incentives, or potentially tax credits, to help SMEs. That could be applied on a priority basis, with those working within the critical national infrastructure supply chain looked at first. Dr Sanjana Mehta: If I may expand on that, we have been consulting our members and the wider community, and 58% of our respondents in the UK say that they still have critical and significant skills needs in their organisations. Nearly half of the respondents—47%—say that skills shortages are going to be one of the greatest hurdles in regulatory compliance. That is corroborated by evidence, even in the impact assessment that has been done on the previous regulatory regime, where I think nearly half of the operators of essential services said that they do not have access to skills in-house to support the regulatory requirements. Continuing to have sustained investment in skills development is definitely going to require funding. Taking it a step back, we need first of all to understand what sort of skills and expertise we have to develop to ensure that implementation of the Bill is successful.

• 14 Jan 2026 · Northern Powerhouse Rail · Hansard source

  More

  Northern Powerhouse Rail will be great for economic growth across the north and that will very much benefit my constituency. My constituency is geographically located in such a way that it should be great for travel to London, Liverpool and Manchester. Sadly, at the moment it is usually terrible for travelling to any of them. Will the Minister please meet me to talk about accessibility at Sandbach station, the quality and regularity of services across all those areas, and how we can make Northern Powerhouse Rail deliver for Cheshire?

• 6 Jan 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Happy new year to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, your team and everyone else in the House. It is no overstatement to say that this is one of the most pressing issues of our time. I suspect that if we were not bringing forward this legislation it would only become apparent quite how pressing it had been when there was a major incident that lay it bare. I think it is one of the marks of successful government that we are, hopefully—I touch wood as I say this—managing to stay ahead of the curve on these incidents. There is nothing more important than national security relating to critical infrastructure. I think it is exactly what our constituents want to see us acting on, and I wish they saw more of us discussing issues on a cross-party basis, with broad agreement. It is welcome to see the Government taking these steps. I particularly want to discuss the enhanced incident reporting duties on the digital service providers and the duties to inform customers. In short, I have real concerns about how those duties will play out in practice. From my experience of having advised whistleblowers in the financial sector, when there are obligations of this nature, some corporations unfortunately make more effort to avoid complying with them than to comply with them. It is an excellent piece of legislation, and I am not suggesting that the Government should have drafted it in any other way, but we need to look at our whistleblowing laws alongside it, because at the moment we do not have strong enough protections for whistleblowers within UK law. That applies both inside and outside employment settings—for example in relation to contractors and other third parties. If we do not ensure that people have mechanisms by which they can anonymously report breaches of those sorts of obligations, and if we do not have the right protections for them when they are raising the concerns internally in the first place, we will not be able to make adequate use of the Bill’s excellent provisions. I want to impress upon the Minister how important it is that this legislation is looked at in that wider context. Also within the wider context is a broader debate—lots of us have touched on this without specifically identifying it—about how we balance the risk across society and the cost of the risk. It is about the risk to individuals, national security, individual businesses and individuals within those businesses, such as directors or other senior leaders. It is about how we ensure that in our country we do not have large tech companies, major data centres and other big private sector businesses taking economic benefits without carrying risk. We need those businesses and they are crucial to us, but we do not want them taking the economic benefits of operating in our advanced economy while the Government and therefore the taxpayer carry all the risk and burden of the regulation. It is great to see that the Bill contains provisions allowing for financial recovery in the enforcement action that we want to take. It is also fantastic that when it comes to the enforcement provisions and finances associated with it, we are looking at up to 4% of global turnover in terms of potential fines for not complying. My position as a former lawyer is always that I want to know that things are enforceable. There are good enforcement mechanisms in the Bill, and there is plenty of money that could potentially be at risk, which incentivises the kind of compliance that we want to see, but we need to look at the broader societal piece about how we balance the risks and opportunities in relation to tech in general. I was going to talk quite a bit about my concerns about my local public services and how they can better manage cyber-security. The Legal Aid Agency cyber-attack enabled criminals to steal the details of anyone who had applied for legal aid between 2007 and 2025. The scale of the financial risks to those individuals cannot be overstated; the amount of personal data that that involved was absolutely huge. Six out of 10 secondary schools are now subject to cyber-attacks. The Cheshire Cyber Security Programme is in place to help local small businesses manage their cyber-risk. It provides training for up to five members of staff in small businesses. Our local police powers are being used to try to take proactive steps to improve the situation for our local small businesses. Schools in academy trusts are spending quite a lot of money on cyber-insurance to try to protect against these risks. We have seen schools across the country shut down because they are unable to open following cyber-attacks. The public sector action plan that the Government published this morning is incredibly welcome in terms of cyber-risk, and I really look forward to the opportunity to go through it in more detail. We again need to look at the balance of cost within our society. I would like to add to the comments of those who have suggested that we should review the Computer Misuse Act 1990 and the lack of current protections for researchers doing important work in this area. We obviously have several institutions that are currently engaged in cyber-security work, including the Alan Turing Institute and the National Cyber Security Centre. We need to make sure that they have the right remit, because this area is only going to expand when the complexities of AI are added. We must ensure that everyone is protected to do their job effectively. That means protecting individuals, businesses and our wider society. Lastly, we need to move as quickly as we can on this. It is great that we are maintaining our EU alignment, because realistically the only way that we can continue to be a major player and have considerable influence over companies, many of which now have much larger budgets than major economies, is if we work in conjunction with other countries. That is what our ongoing relationship with the EU should be about. I thank everyone who has been involved with work on the Bill. I think it is excellent, and it is completely the right direction of travel. It is a shame that the Government doing the right thing every day does not get more publicity, even when it is not likely to grab many headlines. It is about doing the work, getting the right structures in place and moving forward productively in a cross-party way where possible. It is about securing our nation and ensuring that our economy is on a strong footing. There is everything to be said in favour of that.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The No Tier Snooker Society in Congleton has brought joy to those living with early onset dementia and a supportive circle for their families. It is played with revised rules—hence the name—and is a model for initiatives in other areas. It was set up by Ian, with help from nurse Denise Parr, and I am so pleased to see it spreading further. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Ian on his excellent initiative, thank the volunteers and local businesses who have supported it and grant a Backbench Business debate on community initiatives to support those with early onset dementia and their family members?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  My constituents may recall that I once started a speech in this place with the words “Potholes, potholes, potholes”—I thank the hon. Member for North Bedfordshire (Richard Fuller) for that glance of recognition. No one will be more delighted than the people of Congleton with the Chancellor’s announcement in the Budget that we will double the road maintenance budget over the course of this Parliament. The road safety Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), is in her place, so I will take this opportunity to ask that she makes sure my constituents get their fair share of that money. As she has heard me say before, my roads are dark, fast, dangerous and poorly maintained, so I look forward to us bringing that money through progressively over time. The cost of living crisis is another major issue for my constituents. The £150 off energy bills will be extremely welcome for families in my constituency, as will the freeze on prescription charges and the freeze on rail fares—something that has not happened for 30 years. I am proud that we have put up the minimum wage, because work should pay, and families working very hard every day should be able to afford the things they need. With regard to pensioners, we have maintained the triple lock, and the average pensioner on the full state pension will get another £575 next year. Nationally, three quarters of pensioners will remain eligible for the warm home discount, which is very important. I understand that removing the two-child benefit cap will be contentious for some people, but it will instantly take 1,310 children out of poverty in our local area. The widening of free school meal eligibility has also given 2,000 extra children a warm meal every day. Of course, we all want to see children thriving in our community. The reality is that we are exceptionally affluent in our constituency. I know that for many people it does not feel like it, but we are one of the top 20 most affluent places in the country. Nationally, we are spending £2.2 billion on temporary accommodation. There are 174,000 children in temporary accommodation, 80 of whom died in that temporary accommodation last year. We have to spend money on relieving poverty for our poorest children and households, because that is the only way that these shameful figures will change. Our children are becoming shorter compared to their European counterparts, because of malnourishment in our communities. There is a moral case to do this, and in all likelihood there will be savings from this investment as well. I know that local infrastructure concerns many of my constituents. Some of the figures I will give have been provided before, but they bear repeating. We are spending over £1 billion on rebuilding Leighton hospital. We are spending £60 million on rebuilding Sandbach school. We are spending £740,000 on improvement’s to the Ashfield Medical Centre. We are spending the best part of £1.5 million across three local hospices that serve my community, following lobbying from me and other Labour MPs in the Cheshire East area. I am extremely proud of the things that this Budget and the previous one are delivering for my constituents. On local high streets, we all value our independent businesses, so I was proud to see the permanent reduction in business rates for small independents, whether they are pubs, restaurants or shops. I was also pleased to see that small and medium-sized enterprises, of which there are many in my constituency, will get the training costs fully reimbursed for their apprenticeships. That is good for local young people and for businesses. I am also extremely proud of the British industry competitiveness scheme, which will allow businesses in energy intensive industries, such as Diamond Electronics, which I visited in Smallwood, and CLD Systems in Sandbach, to be able to reduce their energy costs and improve their competitiveness in the long term. There is a consultation now open on how we do that, and I encourage local businesses to engage with it. Lastly, I alongside other colleagues called for a gambling tax, and I was very pleased to see it included in the Budget. I have spoken to constituents who are really struggling with online gambling problems. That industry needs to pay for the problems it is creating. I also very much support the mansion tax—this is the way to a fairer society. The Budget has brought economic stability, fair taxes and high-quality public services, and I truly believe in it.

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Asylum Policy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Home Secretary for her statement. There is currently a loophole in UK employment law that means that people who are self-employed are not subject to right-to-work checks, which means that many people work illegally in the gig economy, with no potential risk to their “non-employer”. Will the Home Secretary discuss how we can close that loophole while simultaneously ensuring that we uphold rights for British workers, but also the rule of law and the remainder of our rights within the UK?

• 4 Nov 2025 · Economic Growth: Congleton · Hansard source

  More

  3. What steps she is taking to help increase economic growth in Congleton constituency.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Economic Growth: Congleton · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Chancellor for her answer. In my constituency, Dane Valley Community Energy, a marvellous group of volunteers, has raised hundreds of thousands of pounds for solar panels on schools and other local buildings, including Daneside theatre and Havannah primary school. Unfortunately, recent Government guidance has suspended applications in respect of solar panels for schools. Will the Chancellor look at that guidance and work with Ministers in other Departments to review that outcome?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Defence Industrial Base · Hansard source

  More

  I recently visited Avocet, an innovative manufacturing company based in Holmes Chapel in my constituency. It is looking to grow its business by diversifying into supplying components and materials for drone battery production. However, it has expressed to me the potential for improved support and guidance from the Government in order to break into and thrive in this competitive international market. What steps is the Department taking to support British manufacturing businesses such as Avocet? Does he agree that helping these organisations will unlock vital opportunities for economic growth?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Sentencing Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The members of the judiciary that I have spoken to have very genuine concerns about their personal security, particularly immigration judges. They are genuinely frightened of doing their jobs, and that will be affecting judicial recruitment. We need immigration judges to be able to stand up and serve the judiciary. Many judges take a pay cut to become a judge, and they deserve our genuine respect. They work very hard in a system that has been grotesquely underfunded for 14 years. Lastly, I would like to mention new clause 40, which was tabled by the Liberal Democrats. I have referred to cross-party working elsewhere. I understand that it might not be in the exactly right format for the Government to it take forward today, but I hope that the Minister will consider how we will deal with the fact that people are not receiving training when they are on remand and are often released at the end of that time. It is a serious issue that deserves serious consideration. I have asked previously in the Justice Committee about what work is done with people on remand, particularly in respect of domestic abuse offences. In my opinion, we are missing an opportunity for people, without accepting any sort of guilt, to engage in services that many would benefit from, considering their general behaviour, irrespective of whether their original offence was related to domestic abuse. In fact, all of us could benefit from those opportunities for reflection. People spend a lot of time in prison, and at the moment it is not being used as effectively as I and many others would like it to be. That brings me back to my original point. Government Members absolutely believe in punishment, but fundamentally we also believe in rehabilitation, and the emphasis on that in this Bill is very much to be welcomed.

• 14 Jul 2025 · Condition of Roads: Cheshire · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Lady—she is being very collegiate, as she always is. Does she agree that it is incredibly important in our beautiful Cheshire towns that our roads are maintained in good condition? I am thinking in particular of a stretch of road in Alsager, which is lovely and has a fantastic local café, but it is a major part of the town centre, and the degeneration of the road is making it look less attractive than it otherwise could be. Does she agree that those are important points, not simply for the state of the road, but for the whole local economy?