Steff Aquarone MP: speeches

Speeches

• 24 Feb 2026 · Local Transport: Planning Developments · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship again, Sir Desmond. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins) on securing such an important debate; she has made a number of salient points that I wholeheartedly agree with, in particular about the impact of losing local voices in the planning process. As Liberal Democrats, we believe the Government should be doing things with people, not to them. Their planning reforms are another example of where we could gain the confidence of far more people in planning decisions if they were properly involved and consulted. I was pleased to hear the excellent speeches of my hon. Friends: my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) talked about housing growth pressure; my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) reminded us of the importance of doing the right things in the right order; my hon. Friend the Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) spoke about the importance of money; and my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) spoke about getting the balance right between different types of transport. Most reasonable people would think that decisions about transport and planning should go hand in hand. Planning decisions lead to transport requirements and transport provision will inform planning decisions. However, like so much of the creaking and archaic machinery of the state, the predetermined silos for those two areas sit separately and often work in conflict rather than in harmony. What people want is for decisions to be made with a focus on them. How do we best plan infrastructure and transport to support people? Even within transport, there are silos within silos. The different modes of transport and transport integration are not considered together, despite how interconnected they are. Those levels of bureaucracy and failure to deliver a working transport system are not what people want. They just want decisions to be made that help to get them where they want to go, when they want to go. If that is really beyond the ability of the state, we should all despair. Talking about alterations to the machinery of government might sound like wonkery, but in cases such as these it is clear to see where making the state work better would make our constituents’ lives better, too. Rarely am I desperate to give credit to the planning system, but it does succeed in taking a more holistic view of transport into consideration when making decisions. It can assess the needs and uses of a wide range of transport modes. It understands the interplay between housing, employment and transport, and it thinks about where people are going and when, and what steps might need to be necessary to improve their experiences. However, the planning system has little real power to actually make changes. The closest it can get is by creating a sizeable enough housing demand and hoping that the transport decision makers notice and deliver the necessary improvements. That means that many people end up in disconnected new estates or working in employment areas without any real accessibility other than by private car. There is a fundamental lack of an overarching strategy for too many of these decisions— and that could make the experience of people living in newly built areas and those seeing change in the ones they already live in immensely better. For Norfolk, I believe a key way for us to secure that strategy was through devolution, which I have been trying to deliver since my first county council campaign kicked off nearly a decade ago. Devolving transport powers to local areas means that decisions on wide-ranging strategy and aims can be made closer to the people they impact, with real local buy-in. The promise of seeing those powers in Norfolk made me feel that we might finally crack the rural transport problems that have held our area back for too long. Instead, we have seen a double whammy of let-downs on that front in recent months. First, the Labour Government pushed our mayoral election down the line to 2028, meaning more years without the power to deliver the change that my residents need now. Secondly, in the past week we have seen the Conservative leader of Norfolk county council launch a titanic tantrum over local elections and refuse to work with the Government on any further devolution discussions. Because she felt jilted by the Government, she has abandoned the opportunity for progress and money to pursue a personal vendetta against the Secretary of State, calling him things that I frankly cannot repeat in this Chamber. I have strong disagreements with the devolution process, but I want to put Norfolk first, not the ego of someone who is supposed to be a local leader. She tried to throw Norfolk under the bus—although, without any transport powers, it is unlikely that one would show up. To go back to the matter in hand, there are improvements that we Liberal Democrats want to deliver and could deliver at local and national levels. We want to see more buses with more people on them, and these need to work out alongside the planning of new developments. For young students and workers, we have proposed a bus fare discount, enabling easier access to work and education or just getting to socialise with friends. We want to expand walking and cycling access with a boost to budgets and a drive to create more active travel routes that get people out of cars and on to paths where possible. On our railways, we want to make the commuter experience better, back passengers with a new passenger’s charter and give people the confidence to move their journeys on to public transport. Now that the local elections are back on in Norfolk, I am sure many of my Liberal Democrat colleagues will find themselves at some point over the next few weeks lost inside a rabbit-warren estate with a dodgy phone signal and a bunch of undelivered leaflets, asking themselves the key question: was this place designed for people to live or for cars to drive? We have to make transport and planning work more cohesively, because they deliver tangible benefits to our constituents’ lives and could do so quickly. The Government can and must do more to restore faith in the planning and transport systems so that all our residents reap the benefits.

• 24 Feb 2026 · Local Transport: Planning Developments · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Sir Desmond. I want to draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a serving county councillor.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  Those facts are irrefutable. I will come on to some of the points that the hon. Member makes about the challenges of policing an area like North Norfolk, due to the unique characteristics of our shared county. We are lucky to have a lower than average rate of crime, but that does not mean that we should have our provision cut, or officer numbers reduced. Security and confidence in public safety are created by a well-funded and trusted police force, not by punishing us for not having enough crime. Maybe the Minister could listen to what her colleague and perhaps future leader, the Health Secretary, says about his focus on prevention. If we view much of crime through a public health lens, we can learn sensible and holistic lessons about stopping crime before it happens, rather than just responding as best we can. Rural crime across the country is at staggering rates, and that causes real fear for farmers and rural business owners in Norfolk, where our past Conservative police and crime commissioners left us with zero specialist rural crime officers—an unbelievable statistic for such a rural county. Latest stats show that after pressure from the Liberal Democrats, the numbers reached the heady heights of two officers in 2024. Clearly, we have a long way to go. I will work with our PCC and police chiefs to ensure that we can deliver more for tackling rural crime, and that the Government give them what they need to do so. I have said time and again that I am proud to have the oldest population in the country in North Norfolk, but that brings challenges for policing, and challenges to do with the way that my residents are targeted by criminals. Older people are seen as good marks for fraudsters and scammers. In Norfolk last year, £4.5 million was lost through investment fraud. In 2023, almost £100,000 was lost to pension fraud; some had their retirement savings ripped away. We have to crack down on this awful crime, which has serious financial and emotional impacts on its victims. It saddens me that the prevalence of fraud and scams could make our communities less trusting and confident in the goodness of others, all because of criminal groups out there who steal their hard-earned money. For all the benefits that artificial intelligence can bring, we need to accept, sadly, that this will be one of the ways in which it can be damaging. Scammers with access to AI can use it to make their scams more widespread and efficient; it will allow them to hit more people in shorter timeframes. When the long-promised AI Bill comes to the House, it would be great if steps were taken to address that. We Liberal Democrats have called for the establishment of an online crime agency to focus on fraud and scammers who prey on constituents like mine. I hope that the Government will look carefully at our proposals, and will take action to stop these criminals damaging our communities. I am not sure how many more police grant reports we will debate in this House that will have Norfolk as its own line item, as the Government’s White Paper seems to be strongly flirting with the idea of merging us with two or even three other counties. That is just another step taking us further away from policing in the community, and from an understanding of what an area needs. A lack of local leadership, making police chiefs even more distant, and the notion that policing priorities in Stalham could be dictated from as far away as Peterborough do not make sense to our constituents. The Government are returning to type. They are centralising power, and trying to sell it back to us with the promise of some meagre back-office savings. That is their approach to local government reorganisation, to devolution and now to policing as well. We want them to ensure that Norfolk can stop and solve crime, and to make our community safer, not waste time and energy rejigging structures without a promise of improved outcomes. North Norfolk is a fantastic community, which is lucky to see less crime than other parts of the country, but that is something we have worked hard to achieve. I am grateful for the hard work of Norfolk constabulary, which keeps my constituents safe and supported. It is time for the Government to listen to their needs and ensure that the money and resource needed to keep us safe is being delivered.

• 11 Feb 2026 · Police Grant Report · Hansard source

  More

  Before I delve into the issues facing policing in Norfolk, I have to discuss some of the simply incredible ways that funding allocations are decided in the police grant report that we are debating. This is just another example of government functioning in a way that is rapidly becoming unfit for purpose and not changing with the times fast enough. An array of complex sums, based on data from as long ago as the 2001 census, dictates how many police officers we can expect to see on the streets in my constituency over the next year. If we asked the average person on the street how their local police force funding was decided, few would guess that it was decided by a long formula that includes multipliers such as the daytime net inflow in 2001, a population projection for 2013, and the number of unemployed men between 2009 and 2012. The number of pubs and bars in an area is linked to the funding that a police force receives. Under police crime top-ups 1, 3, 4 and 5 and the “fear of crime” top-up, the greater the number of licensed establishment per 100 hectares, the greater the funding multiplier for the police force. That leads me to a key question that I hope the Minister can answer on this year’s report and next year’s funding settlement. The Chancellor’s ongoing war on pubs is leading to closures across rural areas like mine; can the Minister confirm that under her formula, if a community lost their local pub, their local police force would receive less funding the following year? Surely we can create a clearer, more up-to-date and more workable formula than this—one that uses better data and delivers more funding. I note that Members of the Home Secretary’s own party have called for reflection on this, and so I hope she will take it into consideration. People in North Norfolk want to be reassured that they are getting a fair deal. I am not sure that the system delivers that for them. Once upon a time, this formula may have delivered well, but given the evolving nature of crime, I do not think that it is well suited to the policing needs of 2026. Whatever logarithms and multipliers the Home Secretary chooses to use, the reality on the ground in my area is clear: our communities feel less safe than they once did. Community policing has been stripped back. Rural crime is not being handled with the seriousness that it deserves.

• 28 Jan 2026 · Youth Unemployment · Hansard source

  More

  I have carefully read the Opposition motion on this hugely important issue, and I am rather concerned that transport is not mentioned once. Transport is a massive barrier to employment and training for young people in North Norfolk, but the Conservatives do not seem to realise that it is an issue. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that poor rural public transport is trapping young people in my area in unemployment, and that the Conservatives should apologise to those young people for the state that they have left us in?

• 21 Jan 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation: Referendums · Hansard source

  More

  Not only do I cynically agree with my hon. Friend, but I think that is precisely why it is so important to have local elections, because of not just the time that will have elapsed but the very important the decisions that authorities will make as part of the local government reorganisation that, as she pointed out, has already been legislated for. I thank the Minister’s colleague in the Lords, Baroness Taylor, who made the picturesque journey all the way to Cromer to meet local leaders in North Norfolk, and who also made time to meet me and hear my concerns. Frustratingly, her considered approach does not seem to be reflected across Government. On much of the devolution agenda, the left hand does not seem to know what the right hand is doing. The Government are giving councils new statutory responsibilities and costs, which must be delivered ahead of LGR, but without providing any certainty about how to ensure that capital investment and budgetary decisions will be well suited to the set-up in a couple of years’ time. There are valid reasons for, and drawbacks to, having referendums around the programme of local government reorganisation. I can understand sympathetic arguments from both sides. However, I fully understand why, given the track record of Norfolk Conservatives, my constituents are very worried about the blank cheque that the Government handed to them to work on LGR and devolution. Our devolution was delayed for years under the last Government, while the Tories in Norfolk fought among themselves as to who would be coronated as the elected leader. Our devolution was then pulled entirely, before being redrawn by the Labour Government. When we look at how the Conservatives have run Norfolk since 2017, is it any wonder that my constituents might find the prospect of a referendum on their work appealing? The Conservatives rode roughshod over the views of local residents, threatened to evict people with bailiffs, and acted like playground bullies because people in Sheringham dared to oppose their plans to bulldoze the bus shelter. They are denying children in Holt a long-promised primary school, despite being given the money by the Government and the site being there to build on, and they have allowed our transport system to crumble, spending millions on shiny new buses in Norwich rather than embarking on a much-needed rural transport overhaul. The Conservatives in Norfolk are also allowing the loss of vital convalescence care beds in Cromer and Cossey, which is worsening our healthcare crisis. They have driven our council to the brink of bankruptcy and are now having to go cap in hand to the Government to get bailed out after blowing £50 million on the white elephant that is the Norwich western link road, without an inch of road to show for it. Now, to the shock of nobody, the Conservatives in Norfolk want to chicken out of elections for a second year running. They do not even have the guts to admit it: the letter from their administration to the Government was so unclear that they were asked to write it again and explain what they meant. Their assessment of whether our election should be cancelled read like a letter from Vicky Pollard: “Yeah, but no, but—”. I made the point to a previous Secretary of State that the Conservative administration in Norfolk is totally unfit to preside over Norfolk’s future, and I remain steadfast in that opinion. Failing Conservative administrations have been propped up by the Government and allowed to do this across the country— [ Interruption. ] Sorry, Ms McVey.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation: Referendums · Hansard source

  More

  Oh—I haven’t.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation: Referendums · Hansard source

  More

  I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a Norfolk county councillor. I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford) on securing the debate. Might I say how welcome it is that, unlike the Norfolk Conservatives, he is a Conservative who thinks that local government reorganisation requires more democracy, not less? The Labour Government’s novel approach of centralised devolution has put an enormous strain on local authorities and caused a great deal of concern for my local residents. North Norfolk is an area with unique characteristics, and we have been well served in recent years by a Liberal Democrat-led district council that is well armed with local knowledge to deliver for my constituents. We have the oldest population in the country, an economy that relies heavily on tourism, and unique environmental factors ranging from England’s largest seal colony to the fastest-eroding coastline in north-west Europe. It beggars belief that the Government, and Norfolk county council’s Conservatives, think that all that could be easily handled by one local authority that also has to contend with the needs of a further 800,000 people and 1,700 square miles of county. Whitehall’s demand to arbitrarily find populations of 500,000 or more for authorities proves that they have not taken the reality of rural areas into account. Across the Government’s programme for local government reorganisation, little consideration has been given to the specific needs and characteristics of rural and coastal communities. Trying to bundle us together with inland areas completely misunderstands the unique challenges and opportunities we face, and risks worsening both. Furthermore, lumping in our rural economy to compete for funding and resources with an urban economic centre in Norwich and the surrounding area risks pulling support from our local businesses and preventing us from unleashing the rural powerhouse that North Norfolk can be. That is why I, and the vast majority of Norfolk’s councils and MPs, support the Future Norfolk proposal for three local authorities, and I strongly urge the Minister’s Department to go ahead with that. I know that similar concerns and challenges are felt across the country, with Whitehall trying to dictate devolution and fundamentally misunderstanding much of how the world works outside SW1. It was deeply disappointing to see the Government delay our mayoral election for two further years. Devolution is important in Norfolk and Suffolk to deliver a brighter future for both counties and seize upon the new powers and funding from Government to drive change forward. We are left behind yet again. I am concerned about the financial black hole that the decision has left, not only in Norfolk but for many authorities with delayed elections. We have heard today about the end of the shared prosperity fund, which was set to coincide with the arrival of combined authority funding and allow for a smooth transition to continue funding for important work done by local authorities. However, the delay means that we now see a cliff edge in September this year, with no support until we elect our mayors in May 2028. Will the Minister confirm what consideration the Department gave to that issue when it delayed our elections? What support is she going to provide for the stretched local authorities that have seen their balance sheets take yet another hit from the Government?

• 21 Jan 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation: Referendums · Hansard source

  More

  As I said, I remain steadfast in the view that failing Conservative administrations have been propped up by the Government and allowed to do this across the country. It is simply not right—they should be facing the voters in their areas and held accountable for their years of failure. Although referendums are one of the means for getting democratic legitimacy for local government reorganisation, I would far prefer for that legitimacy to be sought by councillors facing their electorate. I apologise for being out of breath—I ran back here quickly on your instructions, Ms McVey. Local government reorganisation is too important for the Government to get wrong. It cannot be done to people; it must be done with them. A more collaborative approach from the Government that fully considers local character and issues and does not do this work at the expense of democratic legitimacy would be greatly welcomed. I finish with a straightforward challenge to the Norfolk Conservatives running scared of an election: we are ready to face the ballot box in May. Are you?

• 14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Mr Dillon) on securing this debate and his long-running championship of the issue. He is a true champion of rider safety; the riding community could hope for no better advocate in this place. Our transition to cars has hugely changed the role that horses play in human society, but they are still a treasured species. The pursuit of riding is beloved by many of my constituents. North Norfolk has a proud community of horse riders who enjoy riding through our beautiful countryside and rural landscapes. I have heard from a number of riders who have great concerns for their safety when riding on roads in rural North Norfolk. It is clear that the status quo does not do enough to protect those riders. The contributions by my hon. Friends the Members for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella), for Horsham (John Milne) and for West Dorset (Edward Morello), and others, are testimony to that. Riders are vulnerable road users, just like cyclists and pedestrians. Many of them will have been understandably disappointed not to have received greater attention in the Government’s recent road safety strategy. That strategy, however, is not the only thing that lets down riders. In Norfolk, our road safety policies are painfully unfit for purpose. We have seen this play out in all-too-serious reality with injuries and deaths along the A148 in my constituency. That road has a number of stables along it, meaning there is a high chance that riders find themselves on a stretch of road proven to be dangerous. We have to make sure that they are better protected, along with other vulnerable road users, to prevent future tragedies in our rural community. That is why the Bill that my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury is proposing is so important. It makes very modest changes to the current wording around horse riders in the highway code, but would kickstart a change in behaviours around riders and encourage far more responsible driving when sharing the roads. It would also ensure that education around equestrian safety is improved in driving tests, meaning that people will begin their lives as drivers with a stronger awareness of how to drive in a way that best supports riders and keeps drivers themselves safe. Many riders would find it far preferable to be able to ride off the roads away from the level of risk that many have described in this debate today. Unfortunately for them, the lack of available bridleways and safe paths forces them on to the highway. This is an area on which we Liberal Democrats are pleased to propose solutions: we want communities to be better supported to turn abandoned rail links without the prospect of reopening into safe, active travel footpaths and bridleways, giving vulnerable road users more options to travel away from roads. Furthermore, in rural Norfolk, aspects of our network are seriously outdated, and narrow and almost unsafe routes into villages have seen most of their traffic replaced by newer, larger roads. We can transform some of those into bridleways and active travel routes, reducing the burden on local authorities to keep almost abandoned roads to a drivable standard and widening opportunities and access. We can do so much better for horse riders and for drivers, too. There are big opportunities to deliver brighter outcomes for the horse riding community and allow them to feel safe and seen while enjoying their pursuits. What helps them helps so many others: we can improve paths, bridleways and access to nature at the same time. In that spirit, I hope the Minister can reflect on the proposals we are making and fully engage with the riding community about their concerns. I hope that we can move forward with safer roads, happier riders and an end once and for all to the accidents, injuries and tragedies we have heard about today.

• 13 Jan 2026 · Iran · Hansard source

  More

  I am appalled by the actions of the murderous Iranian regime, but I am deeply concerned that the financial secrecy of our overseas territories is enabling sanctions dodging. Will the Foreign Secretary assure me that she is doing everything she can to secure greater transparency in the overseas territories, uphold effective international sanctions and end any complicity in the flow of blood money fuelling this regime?

• 6 Jan 2026 · Less Survivable Cancers · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) on securing the debate. He is a truly committed campaigner on cancer care. Over previous decades, we have managed to achieve great progress on cancer care and survival. Many cancers now have high survival rates and straightforward detection and treatment, and survivors live long and happy lives. However, that is not the case across the board, and the less survivable cancers are the prime examples. Survival rates remain stubbornly low, treatment rates are shockingly low and the situation facing someone who is diagnosed with a less survivable cancer is often unacceptable. I want to describe how these deadly cancers, and access to care for them, impact people in rural communities such as mine. Every day that such cancers go undetected reduces the likelihood of survival, but too many constituents either struggle to secure a GP appointment or have difficulty navigating our ailing transport system to attend one. Those who have been diagnosed and are receiving specialist treatment are likely to have to journey outside North Norfolk to Norfolk and Norwich University hospital, or to Addenbrooke’s in Cambridge. I warmly welcome the fact that Cromer hospital delivers chemotherapy to more than 30 patients a day in its new cancer centre, but there is still only one cancer treatment available within my constituency. Additionally, the loss of convalescence care beds in my area means that there are fewer opportunities for people to recover from major treatments closer to home. Looking to the future, I am pleased to see new diagnostic tools and treatment options being brought forward by talented researchers across the country. The revolutionary breath test for pancreatic and other less survivable cancers could be a real game changer. However, I have real concerns that when those new and revolutionary tools and treatments are rolled out, rural areas such as North Norfolk may wait longer to receive the benefits. I hope the Minister can reassure me that her Department is working to ensure that any newly approved treatments and diagnostic tools will be just as easily available in rural communities as they are in the big cities. I am grateful to all the charities that make up the Less Survivable Cancers Taskforce for their hard work and advocacy for patients, survivors and loved ones who have felt overlooked for too long. They also do vital work in making us all aware of the symptoms we should watch out for, and when to speak to our GP if something does not seem right. I hope that as we come to Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week, people in North Norfolk will take the time to learn the signs and symptoms, because when we catch these deadly cancers early, lives can be saved.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Christmas Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  I come here in the Christmas spirit, with both my nice list and my naughty list. On the nice list are, of course, you, Madam Deputy Speaker, Mr Speaker and the other Deputy Speakers for your work over the past year; all the House staff who support us, feed us and keep us safe; and the rest of the parliamentary community, including my own team. On the naughty list, which I have made and checked twice, are those who, despite my efforts, are letting down my constituency. Top of that list is Norfolk county council and its Conservative administration. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a serving councillor on that authority. The county council spent the early part of December trying to wage all-out war on the residents of Sheringham, as the it tried to knock down their historic bus shelter in the face of dogged opposition. But residents of Sheringham do not give up a fight easily, and for nine straight days the bus shelter was occupied by local protesters day and night. The council employed bully-boy tactics, wasting taxpayers’ money on bailiffs sent to intimidate and attempt to evict protesters without the adequate legal authority to do so. Any popular support for the council’s approach faded away rapidly, with the local paper, local councils and many local people turning against it. I was delighted when, last week, Sheringham town council voted to deny permission for the demolition, forcing the county council to back down. This protest drew widespread national media attention, from The Guardian to The Telegraph , GB News and “Have I Got News for You”. It even had the Prime Minister and the Transport Secretary weighing in. The intervention from the Transport Secretary was most enlightening, as she confirmed that the Government funding for bus stop improvements in Sheringham was still very much available if the scheme was altered to retain the existing shelter. That blows a large hole in the council’s attempt to throw its toys out of the pram and refuse to support investment in Sheringham’s transport infrastructure. The Conservative council leader has spouted lies and misinformation about me and fails to see the complete and utter mess she has created. Once again, I call on Norfolk county council to come to the table to agree a compromise. The story continues. Merry Christmas and a happy new year!

• 18 Dec 2025 · Jane Austen · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman may know that in “Emma” Jane Austen said that Cromer in my constituency was “the best of all the sea-bathing places.” Does he agree that if Jane Austen were around today, she would be delighted by the recent news that a record seven North Norfolk beaches have excellent water quality, making my whole coastline excellent for all sea bathers?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Local Government Reorganisation · Hansard source

  More

  I draw the attention of the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, as a serving county councillor. Why has the Minister given Norfolk Conservatives a route to chicken out of their impending electoral doom? Will she tell me why the Government did not support my amendment to the English Devolution and Empowerment Bill, which would require her to win a vote in this place in order to stop elections? Does she not believe that elected Members here have a right to stand up for their constituents?

• 16 Dec 2025 · Grassroots Cricket Clubs · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Andrew Lewin) on securing this debate. I am pleased to wind up for the Liberal Democrats. In place of my hon. Friend the Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), I am acting as our 12th man on this occasion. I am pleased to be the opener for the Front-Bench speeches; I hope to put in a good innings, something of a rarity for English openers at the moment. I must warn hon. Members that my speech takes a Bazball approach to cricketing puns: I am trying to score as many as I can as fast as possible. I know that Norfolk is a first-class county in every way, and I still remain hopeful that the ECB will see us that way as well. I could use this speech to lobby strongly for a new Hundred franchise based in Norfolk, or for a 2027 Ashes test to be played at Cromer cricket club. I hope hon. Members will indulge me in a brief journey through the proud cricketing heritage of Nelson’s county, and how much of that is rooted in North Norfolk. Of the handful of first-class matches that Norfolk has played, our first was in 1820, when a team took on Marylebone cricket club at Lord’s. It is believed that that team was primarily made up of Holt cricket club, based in my constituency. We also have a strong heritage of cricketers hailing from Norfolk. Recent England internationals Olly Stone and Emily Arlott hail from Thorpe St Andrew and King’s Lynn respectively. Perhaps most famously, the legendary cricketer and commentator Henry Blofeld was born in Hoveton, in my constituency. Grassroots cricket is a much loved part of North Norfolk’s culture. I am reminded particularly of the village of Aldborough, with The Cricketers pub sitting next to the traditional village green pitch, and the houses behind the stumps aptly named First Slip and Second Slip cottages. Grassroots cricket is beloved across many Liberal Democrat constituencies, with an array of great clubs: South Petherton cricket club in Yeovil and its All Stars programme for five to eight-year-olds; Sherborne cricket club in West Dorset, which dates all the way back to 1837; Bradford on Avon cricket club in Melksham and Devizes; and Malmesbury and Sherston Magna cricket clubs in the South Cotswolds. There is also all the work that Hampshire county cricket club does across its county, based in Eastleigh; Lansdown cricket club, which we have heard about; and, obviously, all seven grassroots clubs in Surrey Heath—as well as many more that are pillars of their local communities. For many young people, a grassroots cricket club is their first encounter with the game. It is where they learn to play in a setting that is safe and supportive. Those teams are where the next Ben Stokes or Nat Sciver-Brunt are currently learning their craft. Without support and investment, the bright sparks of the future of English cricket could fizzle out—and after the first two tests in Australia, it is clear that we could use some hope for the future. Looking at the root of the issues, it is clear that access to cricket must be widened. Of the 11 players starting the next Ashes test, only two were not privately educated. The dream of being an England cricketer must be equally accessible to all the young people growing up in my constituency, not only those with the ability to attend a fee-paying school. I want to reassure the Minister that she should not feel stumped, as the Lib Dems have ideas to help. One way to take easy action is to look again at the amount of free-to-air international cricket available in this country. Before the general election, the Lib Dems sought to amend the then Media Bill to allow for one ODI and one test match to be free to air every year. Sadly, the Conservative Government voted that down and the Labour party abstained, but I hope that this Government might consider looking at that again. Inspiring more young players through their TV screens, who may then seek out their local grassroots club, is a sure-fire way to support the long-term existence of those teams. It is a simple change that can deliver broad benefits. Those benefits are wide-ranging. We know the power that sport has to support community cohesion, bonding people over their shared passion and bridging divides that may otherwise exist. We also know that sport is a key tool for battling health inequalities, which is a huge issue in coastal communities such as mine, where health outcomes and life expectancy are poorer. When the Government consider the support they can give to grassroots clubs, I hope they see it as an opportunity to tackle health inequalities around our coastline. I remain hopeful that there are future Ashes winners playing in Aldborough, Holt, Ashmanhaugh, Bradfield and the many other clubs across the towns and villages of North Norfolk. Cricket is an icon of our country, a sport recognisable as truly British the world over. All Governments have a responsibility to ensure that it has a secure future, and it is vital that this Government do not duck it. They should take inspiration from England’s bowling attack in Perth and deliver this at pace—although hopefully with a little more success. Grassroots cricket clubs will want them to play a straight bat and cut out the spin. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Thank you. Despite that being tongue in cheek, I hope the Minister recognises the passion for our grassroots cricket clubs displayed across the Chamber today. I have been bowled over by the breadth of contributions this afternoon; Members have really hit for six in supporting their local clubs. I wish all Members a merry Christmas and a happy new year. I hope that we will return in 2026 to the sight of an England comeback and a 3-2 Ashes victory.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T9. Whatever changes the Secretary of State is seeking to make to juries, they will make not one bit of difference in my constituency if people cannot get the legal advice they need. Can he assure me that the recent funding announcement will be targeted at legal aid deserts such as North Norfolk? At the third time of asking, will a Minister please meet me and legal aid professionals to discuss their challenges?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer · Hansard source

  More

  On the same topic, the way this Budget was handled has undermined public confidence in North Norfolk in many ways, few more so than the fact it produced radio silence on our long-pledged dental school at the University of East Anglia. Does the Minister agree that if the Treasury had spent a little less time on its fiscal fandango and more time on delivering dentistry improvements in North Norfolk, this Budget might have gone down better with many of my local residents?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Village Schools · Hansard source

  More

  Schools are not only at the heart of village communities but make living in rural villages in North Norfolk viable for young families. Without village schools, working-age parents simply cannot live in these areas and will leave for towns and cities, but the current funding formula does not recognise the importance of these schools to communities as a whole. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government must review the funding formula and ensure that rural village schools have the protection of a funding floor before, for many, it is too late?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Water Scarcity · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) on securing a debate on this vital issue. The fact that I previously secured a debate in this place on flooding in Norfolk and our problems with too much water, and now I am complaining about the places with not enough, just highlights the range of challenges that North Norfolk faces. In a rural community such as mine, there is an ongoing battle with a range of environmental factors just to keep livelihoods and businesses functioning as they are. Water scarcity is a big issue for the farming community, which is large in North Norfolk. Farmers I speak to tell me of the significant challenges they face with water abstraction, and how it is impacting our food production and, importantly, our food security. As with greater flooding, the root cause of greater water scarcity is the climate emergency. Climate change is making our rivers and watercourses more unpredictable, leading to changes in the patterns that have served farmers well for decades. As a result, many farmers want to build small on-farm reservoirs to give them greater surety of access to water, which would also ensure that our rivers do not become over-abstracted. However, for many farmers, that is incredibly difficult to do. Permitted development rights in this regard are outdated and unhelpful; they need to be urgently reviewed to assess how we can make it easier and simpler for farmers to secure access to water. This issue was raised as part of the discussions on the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, and an amendment was sent back to us from the other place to ask us to consider it again. The Minister in the Lords told the other place that “We recognise the need to look at those permitted development regulations, and we will return to them.” —[ Official Report, House of Lords, 20 October 2025; Vol. 849, c. 520.] In the debate on those Lords amendments, I raised the concerns of my farmers with the Minister for Housing and Planning, and asked him whether we could expect a timeline for the Government to return to and review the regulations. Hansard reported that he “indicated dissent”, which is a rather diplomatic way of describing the fact that he shook his head vigorously. I hope that the Minister responding to today’s debate will be slightly less dissenting than her colleague. On matters of water, I know that she is well respected in the House and in my community, too, so we look to her for some clarity and guidance. Water attenuation also helps us to manage the other end of the spectrum, flooding. It is farcical that some of the same farmers who struggle with abstraction are then also hit by floods in other parts of the year, but cannot do anything about them. Attenuation on farmland also prevents floodwater from running off into the residential communities nearby, reducing flood damage to homes and businesses. We could tackle two great issues here, but the Government will have to act. Farmers already face many challenges in keeping their businesses afloat and keeping our communities fed, but this is a burden that can be relieved, and it is in the power of the Government to do so. For once, I am not even asking for money—I am just asking for the Government to look again at the current regulations to see what they can do to help our farmers out. However, it is not only farming businesses who find water scarcity limiting their development. Over the county border in Suffolk, we have seen some areas slapped with a ban on new non-domestic connections due to water scarcity, and we are incredibly fearful of the same thing happening in Norfolk. I have spoken at length about the steps that we need to take to unleash the rural economic powerhouse; such limitations are so damaging to expanding businesses in rural communities, and yet another challenge that drives a wedge between rural businesses and urban businesses. That challenge would not present itself to someone expanding their business in London or Manchester, but in rural areas we are subjected to draconian restrictions on free enterprise because of years of water sector mismanagement. The situation cannot be allowed to continue—or, by the time restrictions are eased, there simply will not be any more rural businesses trying to expand. As a rural and a coastal MP, much of my community is built around water: our precious coastline, the chalk streams running through our villages and the beautiful broads that attract so many visitors to Norfolk. Climate change now threatens to turn that water from an asset into a struggle. I hope the Government recognise the severity of the issue we face and take the necessary steps to protect my community in the years to come.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend and I both represent rural constituencies that face similar challenges. Businesses in North Norfolk already face extra struggles to stay afloat, including training and retaining staff, finding affordable premises, and even things as simple as getting a strong and reliable phone and internet connection. Does she share my frustration that rather than tackling those problems, last week’s Budget has just lumbered rural businesses with more tax, more costs and more stress for the future?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  The real-world experience in North Norfolk is very much like that. It is a struggle to secure the care that people need. We have a shortage of specialist care and Parkinson’s nurses, and those are just some of the things that our rural health system struggles with. Does the hon. Member agree that those living with Parkinson’s in rural communities such as North Norfolk need support and care provided in a way that is equally accessible to them?

• 13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am getting an indication that he will not do so, which is a shame. I support the development of more homes in North Norfolk; there are 2,400 households on our housing waiting list who demand that provision. I am delighted that new residents in Walcott and Bacton will be moving into dozens of new affordable homes in the coming months, supported by our Lib Dem-led council. I want everyone living in North Norfolk, though—in new homes or in old—to be able to cherish our ancient chalk streams for the decades and centuries to come, and I urge colleagues across the House to vote to protect them.

• 13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to speak today in full support of Lords amendments 38 and 40. I would also like to take the opportunity to press the Minister on the Government’s response in the other place to Lords amendment 32, which I will come to shortly. First, on Lords amendment 40, I am pleased that the Lords altered the uses of environmental delivery plans to better protect species. North Norfolk is proudly biodiverse, and it must be protected. We should all see the shocking decline in our rare swallowtail butterflies—an icon of the Norfolk broads—as an indicator of the nature emergency we face. Protections for wildlife and biodiversity are crucial, and I hope the Government will retain this amendment. On Lords amendment 38, I welcome the Minister’s statement of future intent, but I am nevertheless in full support of protecting North Norfolk’s chalk streams. I thank my local bishop, the Bishop of Norwich, for tabling that amendment in the other place and for his admirable support for and defence of chalk streams in Norfolk and across the country. He is a great champion for the environment and I thank him for it. Over the summer I went to Letheringsett in my constituency, with volunteers from the River Glaven Conservation Group. The Glaven is a much loved chalk stream locally, and one of many in North Norfolk that we hold dear. As one local councillor told me, in North Norfolk, “we cherish our chalkies.” I saw the work undertaken to renew and revitalise the river and its floodplain, made as part of the Norfolk Wildlife Trust’s nine chalk rivers project. A 1.2 km man-made channel was dug to reconnect the river to its original path and restore its natural flow after years of human interference. A new wetland near Glandford ford has also been created, generating a vital new habitat for the native crayfish and water vole that can be found there. I also heard of the challenges, from construction silt run-off to sewage discharges. Allowing a unique and precious natural environment to be treated this way in recent years is nothing short of scandalous. Sadly, this is the situation not only for the Glaven or even Norfolk’s chalk streams; we have heard shameful tales of those historic habitats across the country being trashed and abused by profiteering water companies, without a shred of care for the environment that they are damaging. That is why I believe that Lords amendment 38 is a perfectly sensible and much-needed addition to the Bill. Of course those of us with chalk streams in our local areas want spatial development strategies to take account of them and ensure their ongoing protection. I am yet to hear a convincing argument from the Government as to why this amendment is being so strongly opposed. Clearly, the status quo is not working, and we cannot embark on a new age of development and infrastructure building without making sure that those aspects of our environment that are already being failed are not damaged beyond saving. There has been a lot of talk in recent months about national pride and the St George’s cross. Well, I am proud that the St George’s cross flies over 85% of the world’s chalk streams. Out of only 200 in the world, the majority are right here in England. We are the custodians and guardians of the vast majority of this special habitat. We have to take that responsibility seriously, and Lords amendment 38 is an important step towards proving that we will. I have been critical of much of what is included in the Bill, but almost equal amounts of criticism can be levelled against it because of what it lacks. Today we can plug one more gap in it by agreeing with the Lords in their amendment. I said that I wanted to press the Minister on Lords amendment 32, which may have been unfortunately worded with a slightly predetermined outcome when it was tabled in the other place. In North Norfolk, we have real issues with water abstraction licences. Food processors and farmers need water, and attenuation is the answer. The current permitted development regulation is clearly not working. The Government responded in the other place by saying that they needed to look at PDRs and would return to them. I wonder if I can press the Minister to indicate a few more steps and some timelines.