Sean Woodcock MP: speeches

Speeches

• 23 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Briefly, I want to put on the record how much I value the protection of sporting assets. I have already mentioned Chipping Norton in my constituency, and how the football club there lost its land to a rather unscrupulous developer the best part of a decade ago and ever since has not been able to play in the town itself; it has to play almost 10 miles away. The protections are very close to my heart and I very much support them. The hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon talked about pubs. I have numerous pubs in my constituency with active campaigns—the Fox Inn and the Bell Inn, for example—where the community is very active and keen to take on the pub to save it so that it is not lost to the community. I rise to speak, however, because sometimes pubs close down and, with the best will in the world, are unable to reopen, despite the efforts of the community and people nearby. There is a real danger of unintended consequences if the amendment puts in too much protection and removes the flexibility that is necessary to allow historical buildings to survive. I offer an example from my constituency, where massive efforts were put in to retain a particular pub. The brewers who owned it put it out to all sorts of people. Unfortunately, the amount of money required to bring it back up to standard made it totally unviable, not only for other brewers or people wanting to take it on, but for the community. The pub was in a historical village, and the real danger is that we wrap it up so much in protection and regulations that, in trying to save the pub, we will lose the historical building. If the landlord is not able to do anything with it, it can fall to rack and ruin, and even with the best will in the world we can end up losing that historical building. That pub ended up becoming a house; granted, it is no longer a pub or a community asset, but the building is retained and is no longer a dilapidated ruin in the middle of a village. Although the amendment comes from a really good place, I cannot support it. I support the Government making it easier for communities to get involved, giving them more time and granting them more powers to take on historical pubs that are important parts of the community, but there is a real danger that the amendment could have an unintended consequence: a historical building being lost purely because it is so wrapped in regulation and protection that nobody is able to do anything with it. I would therefore vote against it.

• 23 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  They were going bankrupt.

• 23 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 23 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Like the hon. Lady and councillors in my area, I too get casework, and one of the frustrations that people have in areas where there are two levels of local government—district and town councils—is that they sometimes go to one council and are told, “Sorry, we can’t do it. You need to go to the other one.” The priority for residents is surely getting things fixed and sorted. Does she not see benefit in having all services under one roof, so that the councillor knows that he can go straight to his officers and get it fixed, without having to say, “Sorry, it’s not my department”?

• 23 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is great to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain. I refer the hon. Member to a point I made to his colleague in Committee a couple of weeks ago. Ten years ago, the district councils of Northamptonshire were dismantled by his party and forcibly put into unitary authorities. Where was his umbrage then? If district councils are so good, why did his Government not reform them, give them more money and reconstitute them? Clearly, his Government felt there was a reason why they worked better as unitary authorities. So what is the problem?

• 21 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 21 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is great to see the coalition back in action. To use the hon. Member’s phrase, does he not agree that any mayor worth their salt would naturally have consideration for remote coastal and rural areas in those growth plans, considering that those are the people they are meant to represent? If they do not, they will find out at the ballot box what people in those areas think about it.

• 21 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for finally giving way. He has been very generous, as always, with his time. Does he accept that the danger with inserting the consultations that have been proposed in so many Opposition amendments is that the only growth we will see is in the number of officers in the strategic authorities sending out consultations, and the number of people in parish councils responding to them?

• 21 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady has been very generous in giving way many times on all her amendments. I understand the spirit in which she has tabled them—to make sure that parish and town councils are acknowledged for their work—but one of my concerns about this amendment, as with many of her others, is the amount of work that it would put not just on the strategic authority, but potentially on the parish and town councils. They will be given a blitz of things and asked to respond to them, but many will not have the capacity to do so. Does she not accept that that is a potential challenge to this being done properly?

• 21 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is being generous with her time. I do not think it was suggested that the mayor could or should not engage; the question is about putting mandatory engagement in the Bill. Does she accept that is very different from what she has just stated?

• 16 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  To clarify, the suggestion in the new clause is that town and parish councils will meet the mayor once every 12 months. My constituency, which has 80 parish councils, would be part of a Thames valley mayoralty—let us call it that—that would have even more constituencies. How many days of not meeting parish councils will there be for the mayor?

• 16 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  As a Cherwell district councillor I was very keen on promoting citizens assemblies for the purpose of discussing climate change, but that is not the only thing that people might want to gather to talk about. Is the assumption that the subject would be prescribed by the mayor, or would it be okay for a citizens assembly to get together to discuss the death penalty, immigration or whatever? Could the hon. Lady clarify that?

• 14 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is talking about localism and the importance of things being done with communities, not to them. I was a Cherwell district councillor when we were involved in joint working with South Northamptonshire. I remember clearly that the leaders of South Northants district council were distinctly unimpressed by the level of consent that they were given when the Conservative Government told them that Northamptonshire county council, which the Conservatives bankrupted, was being disbanded and that joint unitary authorities were to be created in Northamptonshire. Was he so exercised about local consent at that point?

• 14 Oct 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady and her party seem to be proposing that every single potential devolution should come before this House for scrutiny. That would take up a considerable amount of the time of the House, as well as incur the costs picked up on by the hon. Member for Hamble Valley. Is her amendment just about kicking devolution into the long grass, rather than being serious?

• 13 Oct 2025 · Baby Loss · Hansard source

  More

  It is a real privilege to have the opportunity to speak in this debate, particularly after so many powerful and profound speeches and interventions from Members across the House. I want to share the testimony of a constituent who has endured an experience that affects many families, yet receives very little attention: hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, or HIE. Her son survived a HIE event during his birth. HIE is a brain injury caused by a lack of oxygen or blood flow, which can lead to developmental delays, intellectual and physical disabilities and—tragically—in one in five cases, death. Some of these complications can remain hidden until school age. My constituent had never heard of HIE at the time, nor had I prior to her contacting me, but it is an all-too-common condition that affects three to four births out of every 1,000. In her son’s case, it resulted in mild cerebral palsy. She was supported by a wonderful charity called Peeps, which highlights that families affected by HIE often feel that they do not belong in a baby loss space. Many of those families experience birth trauma, PTSD and complicated grief. While charities such as Peeps offer support to anybody affected, NHS mental health support can often be restricted to just the mother. This leaves fathers and partners—who are also deeply affected—to cope alone. Support must and should be for the whole family. Peeps also emphasises the significant gaps in long-term support, especially for families whose children survive but face lifelong, severe disabilities. They are left to navigate complex needs for years after the initial intensive care ends. The trauma is compounded for families whose event may have been avoidable. A study in Finland between 2005 and 2024 suggested that a fifth of all such cases could have been prevented, or at least could have benefited from preventive measures. This compounds the trauma of affected families and underscores the importance of absolute honesty and systemic learning in our NHS services. Additionally, HIE is not always recorded consistently in NHS systems or statistics, making it harder to advocate for policy change and obscuring potential disparities in outcomes, which we know exist for stillbirths and neonatal deaths. We must listen to brave parents such as my constituent and fantastic charities such as Peeps and ensure that HIE is no longer misunderstood or unheard of in conversations about baby loss. We owe these families recognition, compassionate care, and a commitment to address the lack of consistent data that makes it so hard for them to advocate for change.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Russian Drones: Violation of Polish Airspace · Hansard source

  More

  For many years Banbury has been home to thousands of Polish citizens, who will understandably be very concerned at events over the past 24 hours. Can the Minister reassure them not only that our relationship with Poland is steadfast but that this Government are taking steps to strengthen it in spite of Putin?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source

  More

  We have heard a lot from opposition parties about the taxes they are not happy to see go up, but we have heard very little about the spending or investment that they would cut as a result of taxes going down. Does my hon. Friend not agree with me that this is a case of opposition parties having their Banbury cake and eating it?

• 8 Jul 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. When we talked about rogue owners, I was only surprised that the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe), with his years of experience in this sphere, decided to walk out of the Chamber. But we will leave that for now and move on. As I have said, the previous Government strutted on to the pitch full of promise, but when the whistle blew, they passed sideways, ran down the clock and then bottled it at the big moment. In contrast, this Government have shown intent and are driving the ball forward. I am proud to support this Bill in the Lobby tonight.

• 8 Jul 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. I also congratulate Crystal Palace on their FA Cup win and, as a Liverpool fan, I look forward to their receiving their runners-up medal in the community shield in a couple of weeks’ time. As I said in my intervention earlier, this has the support of 80% of fans, so I find it simply staggering that Conservative Members have decided that, having put forward this legislation, they are now against it for who knows what reason. Too many clubs have been left vulnerable to reckless ownership and financial mismanagement, and it simply cannot continue. The Bill is a vital step to ensuring that football is sustainable for the benefit of fans and their community—both now and into the future. It will promote financial stability, prevent rogue owners and directors from causing harm and give supporters a stronger voice in how their club is run, safeguarding both the game and the strength of community that it fosters.

• 8 Jul 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to have the chance to speak in this debate on an issue of such importance in legislation—one that goes to the heart of our national identity—which is the future of the beautiful game. Football, like Shakespeare, the Beatles, and James Bond, is one of this country’s greatest contributions to the world. Not just a fantastic sport, but a global phenomenon and, arguably, our most successful cultural export. English football is watched by billions globally, with some of the most exciting players, clubs and stories of any league. However, we must not allow that success to disguise the underlying fragilities in the English football pyramid. Too many clubs have collapsed in recent years, with consequences rippling through entire communities. In my constituency, while it has not collapsed, the football club for Chipping Norton has been away from the town for more than a decade. Its ground was bought and sold off by what I shall refer to as a rather unscrupulous individual with little regard for the club, the town or its fans, and that loss is still deeply felt. However, there is also hope. Down the road at Banbury United, supporters, fed up with mismanagement, took matters into their own hands. They have transformed the club, taking it over and turning it into a community benefit society, with revenue from shirt sales and matchday tickets now going back into supporting local groups and good causes. After two successive promotions, they have proved that this model is not a barrier to success on the pitch. I know that the Secretary of State and the Minister have many calls on their time, but I can assure them that they would both be given a warm welcome should they choose to grace the hallowed turf of the Spencer stadium in Banbury, and I once again invite them to my constituency to do just that. While neither Chipping Norton nor the Puritans are within the scope of this legislation because they are not high enough up the football pyramid—not yet, anyway—their stories and those of countless others up and down show why this reform is so necessary.

• 8 Jul 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a great speech. Apparently, 80% of fans support this Bill, but recent polling had the Conservative party at 16%. Does she agree that these facts alone should give Conservative Front Benchers pause for thought before they oppose the Bill?