Toby Perkins MP: speeches

Speeches

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  My right hon. Friend has once again pulled quite a rabbit out of the Chancellor’s hat, so I congratulate him on that. He is clearly her favourite Secretary of State. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we know what happens when we do not rely on renewables? The previous Government had to pay £44 billion to subsidise bills, at the same time that our constituents were struggling to pay them. I agree with the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), that we still need to be driving down electricity costs. What does the Secretary of State think are the key things we can do to address the skills shortages in the heat pump installation sector, and how many heat pumps should we expect to be installed by 2030?

• 19 Jan 2026 · Business Rates: Retail, Hospitality and Leisure · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that the Opposition have no credibility on this issue. We know that had they won the election, either we would have seen these increases quicker, or the black hole would have been even bigger. None the less, it is true that many pubs are really concerned, and are under the impression that further help is coming. They are trying to make accounting decisions right now. Can he say any more about whether their bills will be exactly what they are expecting right now, or whether further help will come before April?

• 7 Jan 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q5. The Prime Minister can keep the good news going. He has rightly made house building and economic growth key priorities for the Government. By giving the go-ahead today to the Chesterfield Staveley regeneration route, he will help us to deliver 1,500 houses and 5,700 jobs on land that was previously coalmining and brownfield industrial land. It is not just a road; it is a growth project. Will the Prime Minister keep the good news coming and tell us that he will support the Chesterfield Staveley regeneration route?

• 6 Jan 2026 · Energy Transition · Hansard source

  More

  There are many corporate customers who are keen to decarbonise but find that grid connection forecasts of five or more years stand in their way. Will the Minister tell us what he is doing to speed up business connections to the grid and to ensure that we prioritise those business customers who will make the biggest difference in decarbonising?

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

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way, and it is great to see him in his post. On economic growth, how has he sought in the Bill to balance the absolute need for a regulatory framework that businesses can have confidence in alongside the ability to attract continued investment, and to ensure that we do not end up with an over-regulatory framework that stifles investment? How did he find that balance?

• 17 Dec 2025 · Palliative Care: North Derbyshire · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome tremendously what the Minister said. It is important to get on record the 55% increase since 2022 because many people contact me to say, “Why have you made cuts?”. Actually, though Ashgate has a £250,000 a month shortfall in what it is spending, there have not been any cuts—it is important that people understand that. I welcome the Minister’s intention to broker a discussion; I am keen to take him up on that offer. Neither staff nor fundraisers are sure of what they know on this issue. They would welcome someone independent coming in to provide that space between the ICB and the hospice. I welcome what the Minister said about the neighbourhood funding model and his recognition that the sector is in crisis, but right now we need, on a local basis, to address the matters that he has raised. I thank him for his commitment to do so.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Palliative Care: North Derbyshire · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. It is important to say that a half-hour debate is primarily an opportunity for a single Member to raise something with the Minister, and to get a ministerial response, but as my hon. Friends the Members for Derbyshire Dales (John Whitby) and for Bolsover (Natalie Fleet) made clear, it is an issue that is felt incredibly passionately right across the north Derbyshire community. My hon. Friend the Member for North East Derbyshire (Louise Sandher-Jones) would also have been here if she was not on Ministry of Defence duty in Gibraltar. It is an issue that many of us feel passionately about. It is important to get across that, in those meetings, we wanted to establish what exactly the ICB’s current funding was paying for and how that benchmarked against the overall level of funding that hospices were receiving in other areas, and to get an agreement on an interim level of funding to enable the hospice to continue providing the current level of care while a more detailed investigation into the current cost of care was commissioned.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Palliative Care: North Derbyshire · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. One of the frustrations that many of us in Derbyshire have felt is that there is no clarity on what a reasonable level of funding is and what the expectation is. There are rumours flying left, right and centre. In the middle of all this, the staff, the patients and the fundraisers are left wondering who to believe and what the situation is. I hope that, when we hear from the Minister, we will learn more about that. In the summer, the ICB produced a comparison with NHS-funded care in the south of the county in an effort to show MPs that Ashgate hospice was too expensive, but has now disowned that comparison. After several months of pretty unsatisfactory discussions at which the two sides never reached a settled position even on what was currently being spent, the move from Derbyshire to a three-county ICB model saw a sudden withdrawal by the ICB of any suggestion of interim funding, forcing the hospice to go ahead with plans to make redundancies. Our hospices receive an average of just a third of their funding from Government via the NHS and are reliant on fundraising for the rest. The Government contribution fell dramatically under the 14 years of the previous Government, leaving the gap for charitable hospices to make up even larger. Year on year, hospices such as Ashgate have expended any fat in reserve and are now faced with intolerable financial pressures. In today’s debate, I am seeking to make the case for a more equitable funding settlement for all hospices to gain greater clarity about the particular situation in Derbyshire and see whether anything can be done to stave off these terrible service closures and nurse redundancies in an institution that provides outstanding palliative care. Let me touch on the national context. Hospice UK published research last month showing that 57% of hospices ended the last financial year in deficit, with 20% recording a deficit of over £1 million. That is actually a slight improvement on the staggering 62% of hospices that recorded a deficit a year before, thanks to the emergency £100 million of additional funding provided by this Government. A health system that relies on a sector so chronically underfunded that 57% of hospices are in deficit to provide care is simply not functioning. The Government are right to make it a priority to assist hospices such as Ashgate to get back on their feet. Although it is true that this crisis evolved under the previous Government and sat there on the ballooning list of things to do when this Government came to power, many hospices like Ashgate had spent year after year dipping into their reserves and had no fat left to cut when the Government’s welcome increase in funding was accompanied by the rising employer’s national insurance, the minimum wage increases and the NHS pay increase, which is obviously relevant to the wider health community. Many hospices are on the brink. I join the call of many other MPs from across the country for a more generous funding settlement that recognises the crucial role that hospices play in our health system. Turning to the local situation, it is immensely frustrating to all the Derbyshire MPs, to staff, to unions and to local fundraisers that even at this stage there seems to be a lack of clarity about the current cost of care and how that benchmarks against hospices nationally. A letter I received yesterday from the ICB repeats the suggestion that it has offered to commission an independent review and provide some financial mitigation linked to specific and agreed service mitigations, funded up to £100,000. Indeed, the ICB repeats its view that those financial investigations will be necessary if sustainable solutions are to be found to funding palliative care. Ashgate’s view is that there is no lack of clarity about what money is being spent on, and that it demonstrated that to the ICB’s director of finance at a recent visit. The situation seems largely unchanged since late October, but many staff face the threat of redundancy, and in the run-up to Christmas some have reluctantly and heartbreakingly chosen to leave the hospice. For any member of staff in any profession, a job being under threat before Christmas would be deeply worrying, but it is important to stress that nurses in the in-patient wards at Ashgate hospice are not just any members of staff. As we have heard from my hon. Friends the Members for Bolsover and for Derbyshire Dales, they provide support for patients and families at their very darkest hour, when all else is lost and all that remains is the comfort provided by the knowledge that a dying loved one is comfortable and cared for in a beautiful, high-quality and caring environment. The emotional strain on those nurses is huge, and the public empathy and affection for them is widely felt. Their professionalism and compassion is renowned, and the effect of the threatened job cuts on them has been devastating. Although in-patient wards deal with far fewer patients than out-patient and at-home services, many see them as the front door of Ashgate hospice, but they face the biggest cuts: there is a plan to reduce palliative care beds from 15 to six. In response, there has been an outpouring of support for Ashgate hospice from the community. Nearly £250,000 was raised in just two weeks, including an incredible £50,000 from the owner of a Chesterfield-based business, Peter Kelsey. Those funds will allow the hospice to keep open two additional beds for another six months, and care for perhaps another 25 patients near the end of their lives. Hundreds of my constituents have contacted me and my colleagues to voice their concerns about the situation at Ashgate hospice, and many have also written directly to the ICB to make the case. Despite the claims and counter-claims, there is now widespread distrust that urgently needs clearing up. The ICB continues to imply that Ashgate services are too expensive, although there has been no formal update following the director of finance’s visit to the hospice on 1 December. Staff and unions have been left confused and concerned about the implication that the finances are not straightforward, and remain frustrated about the process. They have questions about whether every step has been taken to reduce costs. Staff at Ashgate have been alarmed at communications coming out of the ICB, which they believe undermine their reputation for professionalism and financial prudence. If trust in Ashgate’s ability to run its operations is diminished, it will have grave consequences for future fundraising. What is not in question is that the care that Ashgate provides is outstanding and that, as of this new year, dozens of north Derbyshire’s most gravely ill patients, who would previously have been able to obtain a bed at Ashgate, will die either at home in less comfort, with family members put in intolerable situations, or in an acute bed in the local hospital sector, possibly at greater cost and in less comfort than was the case last year. I want all my constituents to receive the best end-of-life care possible, so it is hugely disappointing that palliative care patients in north Derbyshire will lose access to those beds, and that nurses at the hospices will be worrying about whether they still have a job. I want to shed light on the distressing and unacceptable situation of service cuts and redundancies at Ashgate hospice, and I seek further clarity and transparency about the funding situation for palliative care in Derbyshire to see whether anything can be done to hold at bay cuts to services at Ashgate. Although charitable income will always play a vital role in hospice care, allowing hospices to deliver holistic care that goes way beyond NHS provision, hospices need fair and consistent Government funding, which needs to be transparent and clearly linked to contracts. Crucially, it must reflect local need. Whether a person lives in Chesterfield, across wider north Derbyshire or elsewhere in the country, they and their family should have access to quality palliative care when they need it most. I would therefore appreciate hearing the Minister’s response on several points. First, will he join me in lamenting the devastating cuts at Ashgate hospice? Does he agree that this situation, whereby in-patient palliative care services in north Derbyshire are being reduced, is unacceptable? Will he or his office intervene to ensure that Ashgate hospice and the local ICB reach a transparent and agreed position on the current funding situation, and examine how that position compares with national expectations about funding of palliative care? More broadly, will the Minister set out the Government’s plans to ensure sufficient and sustainable funding for hospices in the future? Can he confirm whether he has any concerns about the cost of care at Ashgate hospice? If he cannot, will he get this matter on the public record, so that people across north Derbyshire can be confident that the money they have raised through fundraising—hard-earned money—is being prudently spent? Does the Minister agree that, six months after the beginning of discussions locally, it is completely unacceptable that there is still a lack of agreement about exactly how much is being spent on care by the ICB and how much commissioned care the ICB is funding? Can he do anything to provide clarity about this situation? Since 1988, Ashgate hospice has provided exemplary care to thousands of dying patients in north Derbyshire. It must go on. Its nurses deserve better than to lose their jobs and to worry about whether something else could have been done. I implore the Minister to ensure that the hospice sector is given the support it needs to play its crucial role, and that locally in north Derbyshire every avenue is explored to save jobs and beds at this wonderful institution.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Palliative Care: North Derbyshire · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Ashgate Hospice and palliative care in north Derbyshire. In late June of this year, my fiancé Amanda and I found ourselves, along with 3,000 others, dressed in bright-pink t-shirts, wearing flashy-pink bunny ears, setting out from Chesterfield football stadium on the annual Sparkle Night Walk, a fundraiser for Ashgate hospice in north Derbyshire. Fundraisers raised over £385,000 that night—another reminder of the precious place that Ashgate hospice has in the hearts of the people of north Derbyshire. It is often said that everyone in north Derbyshire knows someone who has been helped by the hospice. It is impossible to overstate the affection for it, or the commitment that local people demonstrate to raising funds for it. Ashgate is a charitable hospice providing specialist palliative and end-of-life care for about 2,600 people each year across north Derbyshire. In October came the devastating announcement that Ashgate was consulting on making as many as 52 posts redundant, and planning to close 60% of its in-patient beds.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Palliative Care: North Derbyshire · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is a reason why Ashgate holds a dear place in people’s hearts. It is because at the lowest ebb, Ashgate has been there to provide love, care and support when all else is lost. This is a story that we hear so many times. While the announcement caused shockwaves across the community, it did not entirely come as a surprise to Derbyshire MPs, who had for many weeks been attempting to get clarity between the then Derbyshire integrated care board and the hospice on a number of issues.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Planning Reform · Hansard source

  More

  No Minister could be doing more than my hon. Friend to try to drive forward the house building that we need, and that will be greatly welcomed by many of those who are struggling to get hold of a property. I am also pleased about what he said in response to the question from the hon. Member for Woking (Mr Forster). However, many of us are concerned about developers who sit for years on planning applications without bringing them forward. Planning permission was given to the former North East Derbyshire district council site in my constituency more than four and a half years ago, but nothing has been built, and the building is running to rack and ruin. Can my hon. Friend say any more about the powers enabling councils and central Government to work together, so we can ensure that the errant developers who will not get on and build are brought to book and that they pull their weight as well?

• 4 Dec 2025 · Digital ID Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  4. What recent progress his Department has made on implementing a digital ID scheme.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Digital ID Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  Britain has a proud track record of providing refuge for people fleeing persecution and war, but when tens of thousands of people are travelling across many safe countries to get here, it is clear that the criminal gangs’ sales pitch—that Britain is an easy place to find illegal work—is working. Can my hon. Friend tell me how digital ID will help us smash those criminal gangs and tackle the scourge of illegal work?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

• 2 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I associate myself with the Foreign Secretary’s comments. The UK has shown global leadership on international climate finance over many years, both in the £11.6 billion we are providing over the five years to 2026 and in encouraging other major nations to recognise their responsibility to those nations most in the firing line from climate change. Following last week’s Budget, will the Foreign Secretary confirm that Britain remains committed to that and will include inflation increases?

• 25 Nov 2025 · COP30 · Hansard source

  More

  Meeting international colleagues at COP30, the extent to which the UK’s track record and the policy of this Government are hugely respected was absolutely clear. In fact, while many of the steps this Government have taken received huge support, there was also great respect for the steps that the previous Government had taken. I share my right hon. Friend’s despair that the current version of the Conservative party not only opposes his policies, but trashes its own history, which—in this area at least—should be a proud one. While I absolutely believe that we would not have got the statement that we did get without his work and the work of his colleagues over there, does the Secretary of State agree that it is disappointing that the road map towards the eradication of fossil fuels was not agreed? On that basis, what more will he be doing to try to bring that coalition together to get greater agreement when we get to Turkey next year, or even before that?

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

  More

  The hon. Gentleman has not actually answered my question. He is talking about the policies of the last 15 months, but the problem he is alluding to of developers sitting there with planning permission and not building has been going on for 15 years or more. Can he be realistic about what his solution is to get developers to build the developments they have planning permission for?

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

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

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

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend for that contribution. The Lords amendment is sensible and well-intentioned. Even if it is rejected, as the Government are minded to do, he makes an important point: we need to get clarity that, in the majority of cases, the approach would be of this narrower type. The Minister has given us some assurance that, in the event we start seeing certain EDPs misused, we will be able to scrutinise that process, so it will be interesting to hear what he has to say in response to my right hon. Friend’s point. I welcome the Government’s package of amendments during the Lords stages, including one that specifies that robust scientific evidence must be used by Natural England to develop an EDP. These improvements largely address the original concerns of the Office for Environmental Protection. However, I urge the Minister to consider proactively providing a list of environmental issues that might be considered suitable for EDPs. That would provide reassurance that this new and powerful tool will be directed only towards diffuse pollution issues such as those set out in amendment 40, where EDPs will have environmental benefits and provide the most value for development. Amendment 39 would embed a brownfield-first approach in the new SDS. Building on brownfield land can help to revitalise towns and cities, as well as avoiding developing greenfield land. However, it can be more expensive: there are often clean-up jobs to be done on site. In large urban centres, brownfield development is often still profitable, but, in smaller towns such as Chesterfield, the additional factors in developing brownfield land can make development unprofitable, so sites sit undeveloped, as the Robinsons site in my constituency has for more than 20 years now. It would therefore be good to hear from the Minister what more the Government can do to promote development on brownfield land. Both nature and safe, secure housing are enormously important to people, and our constituents deserve both: they deserve to breathe clean air, to live in safe and healthy homes, and for their children to be able to play in a local river, free from pollution, but they also deserve to have affordable housing in the communities in which they live. That is the balance that the Government must strike. Although the EDPs introduced by the Bill are an important tool, they are only part of the answer to solving the housing crisis and to improving our natural environment. This is an important Bill and is much improved. We need to ensure not only that we get it passed as soon as possible but that the work of protecting nature does not begin or end with this Bill and carries on long after it.

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

  More

  My hon. Friend is right that there are examples of where species should not be able to be moved, but Lords amendment 40 does not relate to some cases but to all cases, and it sets out in statute that species should never be moved. Does he agree that the Government’s approach, which will prevent species from being moved in many cases, is better than setting in statute something that could block so many opportunities?

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

  More

  Many people are concerned about this issue, which the shadow Minister’s party also faced when in government. Why does he think that developments do not get built despite their planning applications getting approval?

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

  More

  Building 1.5 million homes to tackle the housing crisis at the same time as protecting British wildlife is an issue that the general public are rightly passionate about, and one that Government must get right for people, for nature and for the economy. The Environmental Audit Committee, which I chair, initiated an inquiry to explore that exact question last November, and we will shortly be able to share our conclusions and recommendations to Government. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill is a central plank of the Government’s plan to unlock the planning system in order to deliver the housing and infrastructure that Britain needs. I was interested in the contribution of the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds), who rightly identified the issue of developers sitting on land. I have to say, as someone who has been in local and parliamentary politics for 23 years, that that has always been the case, so it was unconvincing that, having identified the issue, he did not seem to have any solutions. He listed a number of things that the Government might consider, without enlightening us as to whether he supported any of them, so it is clear that the Government will have to crack on alone if they wish to address this important issue. The Bill has been significantly improved during its passage, and my original concerns about part 3—which were shared by many others—have been allayed. I have been through enough debates on legislation in this Chamber where people have accused Ministers of not listening to give credit to my hon. Friend the Housing Minister for having listened to criticisms and skilfully clarified how the Government will respond. I thank him for that. Unfortunately, the Minister’s work has been made more difficult by briefings that characterise nature as a blocker to development. In fact, research from the Wildlife Trusts found that bats and great crested newts were a factor in just 3% of planning appeal decisions. I think these anti-nature narratives are at best lazy, and often unhelpful; they distract from some of the more significant challenges in the planning system, such as the lack of resources and skills in local authorities to support good planning applications. Tackling those genuine planning barriers, alongside this Bill, will be essential to building the homes that we need. Lords amendment 40 would limit environmental delivery plans to only certain environmental impacts, including water pollution, water availability and air pollution. Addressing environmental impacts at a strategic level, as enabled by the EDPs introduced by the Bill, has the potential in some circumstances to deliver more benefits for the environment and faster planning outcomes. In some circumstances, this strategic approach would absolutely not be appropriate—for example, as my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) alluded to, harm to a site-loyal species would often be impossible to redress in a different location. I do believe, though, that it is reasonable to steer clear of stipulating on the face of the Bill which environmental issues EDPs could be developed for in future, as Lords amendment 40 would do. If guided by current robust scientific evidence, or evidence that might come to light in future, it is possible to imagine that a strategic approach for addressing environmental impacts could be found to be appropriate for issues beyond only water and air pollution.

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

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the housing issues that we all see in our constituencies, so it is interesting that there are so few advocates for building. Whenever there is a new housing application in Chesterfield, we get people who live nearby saying, “I’m a bit concerned about this.” We get lots of people saying that there are not enough houses around, but they never come to us and say, “Please can you support one of these new applications?” Maybe we should give some thought to how we do more to build for the huge number of people who are inadequately housed. We need more housing developments in order to actually create some movement in favour of these developments.

• 13 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the water Minister for meeting me recently to talk about the issues on Tapton Terrace and on the River Hipper in my constituency. We are grateful for the money she has found for the plans to look into this, but can she tell us how we can speed this up? There is great impatience about getting people on Tapton Terrace protected.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Stamp Duty Land Tax · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman wonders why this might not have happened. It might be something to do with the 14 billion quid that he has not worked out how the Government will find. If it was so easy, why, in all those days before covid, did his party never do it in 14 years?