Tom Gordon MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 17 Dec 2025 · Knaresborough Castle · Hansard source

  More

  I am pleased to present this community petition on behalf of Kathy Allday. Alongside it, there were over 2,300 online signatures. It calls to save Knaresborough castle, which is in a poor state of repair but is vital to our town’s history and our thriving tourism industry. The petitioners therefore request “that the House of Commons urge the Government to encourage North Yorkshire Council, which is responsible for Knaresborough Castle’s maintenance, to work with the Duchy of Lancaster to prioritise the maintenance of the Castle and its estate, by creating a comprehensive restoration plan and securing a dedicated funding stream to help preserve the integrity of the castle and its history.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of North Yorkshire, Declares that Knaresborough Castle is an important local asset, providing space for residents and visitors alike to discover local history, participate in community events and enjoy fantastic views of Knaresborough Riverside; and further declares that the Castle has been left to deteriorate, causing erosion of its structure and other signs of neglect. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to encourage North Yorkshire Council, which is responsible for Knaresborough Castle’s maintenance, to work with the Duchy of Lancaster to prioritise the maintenance of the Castle and its estate, by creating a comprehensive restoration plan and securing a dedicated funding stream to help preserve the integrity of the castle and its history. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003152]

• 16 Dec 2025 · House of Lords · Hansard source

  More

  Last week’s peerage list shows that the House of Lords is still used to reward loyalty, connections and convenience, all to the tune of £370 a day to the taxpayer. I am pleased to present this petition with the support of Liberal Democrat Councillor Graham Dixon. The petition states: The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Declares that the House of Lords, as an unelected second chamber, lacks the democratic legitimacy expected in a modern Parliament; and further declares that its continued reliance on appointments rather than elections undermines public confidence in the legislative process and weakens accountability within the UK’s democratic system. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to bring forward proposals to abolish the House of Lords in its current form and replace it with a fully elected second chamber, founded on clear democratic principles, accountable to the people it serves, and equipped to scrutinise legislation with transparency and legitimacy. And the petitioners remain, etc. [P003151]

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady makes an excellent point about the need to see the minimum wage increase—people who live in my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough simply cannot afford to live or work in the area, and that is a real problem—but does she accept that it is not just the minimum wage that is the issue for employers, but the combination of increasing employer NICs and business rates? When I go out and speak to people, that is what they are worried about. It is not necessarily about the minimum wage, but the cocktail of measures that the Government have introduced.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  I do not believe the hon. Lady has yet got one of these devolution mayors, although she can correct me if I’m wrong. We have one in York and North Yorkshire, who is now looking at how they might implement a tourist tax. Will the hon. Lady give her thoughts on the impact such a tax would have? When I met the Harrogate district chamber of commerce and spoke to the hoteliers in my area, they were concerned about how it would suck many tourists out of towns like Harrogate and pass them off to other areas. It would be an additional cost—I wonder what her thoughts on that might be.

• 10 Dec 2025 · International Human Rights Day 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I congratulate the hon. Member for Penrith and Solway (Markus Campbell-Savours) on securing the debate. This year marks 75 years since the European convention on human rights, and 25 years since the implementation of the Human Rights Act in UK law. The longevity of these institutions can make them feel permanent and secure, but history teaches us the opposite—rights endure only when they are actively defended. One of the great privileges I have in this place is serving as a member of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. I see frequently how human rights shape real lives—not just in high-profile cases, but in decisions about housing, healthcare, liberty, safety, family life and the right to protest. That is why the theme of this year’s International Human Rights Day, “Our Everyday Essentials”, matters so deeply. Human rights are not abstract legal theories; they are the foundations of ordinary freedom. As the hon. Member for Penrith and Solway outlined so eloquently, Britain has helped to lead the world on human rights. After the devastation of the second world war, it was the British Government who helped to create the European convention, and the UK was its first signatory. We should be proud of that legacy, but today, in a more unstable, polarised and authoritarian global climate, the legacy is under direct strain. We have heard from many hon. Members, from across the Chamber, about many examples of human rights abuses and horrendous situations happening in Palestine, Sudan and other places. I will pick up just a couple of those. In Sudan for the past two years, there have been repeated warnings about the re-emergence of the pattern that had been seen there before. Whistleblowers inside the Foreign Office have revealed that explicit warnings of impending genocide were removed from official documents as early as 2023, despite the assessments of the Government’s own analysts. That is not just a failure of foresight; it is a complete lack of responsibility. I would like to hear from the Minister what more could be done to understand how that happened. The Joint Committee on Human Rights has already published major reports in this parliamentary session, including on transnational repression, the impact of slave labour in global supply chains, and the failure to prosecute British nationals for the crimes of genocide against Yazidis and others. I encourage and invite Members to read them if they have not already done so. The JCHR report on transnational repression documents how authoritarian regimes extend their reach into Britain, placing bounties on dissidents, harassing families, issuing threats and, in the most severe cases, making attempts on lives on British soil. In our work on slave labour, we have exposed in further detail, from lived experience and evidence, how Uyghur Muslims and children in the DRC are trapped into forced labour that is linked directly into western supply chains. Let us be clear: human rights abuses are not a distant history; they are embedded in the modern global economy. We know that China has sanctioned several British parliamentarians and we know that Chinese-linked espionage has penetrated the Palace of Westminster. We know about the mass repression in Xinjiang, yet the Government appear willing to approve a vast new Chinese embassy in central London regardless. What I would like to know, as I am sure many Members would, is: what will be said when the Prime Minister goes to Beijing? Will he raise concerns? Will he raise those cases? The House of Commons had previously placed on the record—it is logged in Hansard — its recognition of the genocide in Xinjiang at the hands of President XI. Will the PM demand an end to transnational repression and slave labour, or will he simply hand over the deeds to a new embassy as a reward for repression, espionage and sanctions against British MPs? If we are serious about the theme of human rights as everyday essentials, it is important that we look at home, too. We must be serious about defending the rights of trans and non-binary people. Trans rights are human rights, full stop. They have the right to live with dignity, the right to safety, the right to healthcare and the right to exist without fear. Yet trans people have been relentlessly targeted by culture war politics, hostile media narratives and irresponsible rhetoric by politicians of all parties. Their healthcare has been politicised, their identities turned into ideological battlegrounds, and the result is not abstract. It is rising hate crime, worsening mental health and people driven out of living lives as they would wish. I have recently had a number of trans people reaching out to my office. They have experienced horrendous situations and even ended up with suicidal ideation. It is clearly happening and should not be hidden or ignored. A society that picks and chooses whose rights deserve protection is a society that has already abandoned the universality of human rights. Across the world and here at home, we are witnessing the rise of populist movements that deliberately seek to weaken human rights. We hear that the rights protect the wrong people, that judges are the enemy, and that international law is a foreign imposition. This is a textbook strategy: undermine the courts, discredit the media, erode democratic institutions, and then hollow out the protections that restrain power. History tells us exactly where that path leads. Human rights were not created to be convenient. They were created to protect people when it is most inconvenient, when fear runs at its highest and minorities are most vulnerable. The assault on rights is no longer confined abroad. The Government have failed to repeal repressive protest laws and are now proposing to restrict jury trials. They are even flirting with diluting the European convention on human rights as we speak. It took the Liberal Democrats to stand up to Reform in October when it tried to scrap the UK’s participation in the convention with a 10-minute rule Bill, while the Labour Front Bench abstained. Ministers claim they want to confront the far right, but the surest way to fuel extremism is to concede the ground of principle. Undermining protections for the vulnerable is not strength; it is surrender. This is not reform; it is not responsible scrutiny. It is a systematic attempt to weaken the architecture that shields every one of us from the abuse of power. Human rights are not a gift from the Government. They are not conditional and not a political favour. They are the bedrock of a free society protecting the protester, the journalist, the minority, the prisoner, the refugee and ultimately the citizen. On this International Human Rights Day, the challenge before us is stark. Either we defend those everyday essentials—imperfect, hard won and absolutely vital—or we allow them to be dismantled in the name of short-term politics. I know which side of that choice I am on, and so does my party. I urge this House and the country to choose human rights not just in words today, but in action every single day.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Village Schools · Hansard source

  More

  The home-to-school transport issue has affected people across North Yorkshire. One of the campaigners, Jo Foster, has been leading and working with the School Transport Action Group and has highlighted the inconsistency in the local authority’s approach. It used to be catchment-based, which makes sense in big rural areas that follow dales, rather than insisting that children must go to the nearest school geographically as the crow flies, which does not make sense. Will the Minister commit to ensuring that local authorities listen to parents on the ground and ensuring that children can get to the schools their siblings go to, on the routes that they used to be able to reach by public transport? That simply does not exist under these new provisions.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Village Schools · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend has mentioned those involved in making sure that schools function. For village schools across my area, such as in Scotton and Burton Leonard, parent teacher associations are having to fund the bare minimum and basics. Temporary classrooms that are not fit for purpose are now being used permanently. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need a better funding model for village schools?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady comment on the polling around digital ID? This summer, there was net support: over 30%. When the Government announced that they were picking it up, that collapsed to minus 14%. Will she give her thoughts on why that might be?

• 8 Dec 2025 · Child Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  One thing that really concerns me is that I have met a number of parents who have had to leave work because of the unmet need of their children with special educational needs and disabilities. Children who are already really vulnerable are ending up being forced into poverty because there is not the support from schools and local authorities. What conversations has the Minister had about assessing the impact of SEND and how that leads to the unemployment of parents?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T8. Last month, I met Anoosheh Ashoori and opened his exhibit “Surviving Evin” at a Harrogate district Amnesty International branch event at Ripon cathedral. Given the continued use of arbitrary detention and state-sponsored kidnapping and hostage-taking by Iran, what steps are the Government taking to strengthen protections for British nationals when abroad?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Driving Test Availability: South-east · Hansard source

  More

  As ever, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) on securing this important debate. The availability of driving tests is a subject of growing concern for families, young people and businesses in every constituency across the south-east and beyond. We have heard many fantastic interventions from Members representing areas ranging from the highlands of Scotland, down into the south-west and beyond. For many young people, learning to drive is not a luxury; as we have heard, it is a key to independence. It is the ability to reach a job, attend education or training, support family members and participate in society. I know this myself, having passed my test just before I turned 18. Fortunately, I passed first time with only a few minors. However, I lived in an area surrounded on three sides by North Yorkshire, so I had to cross the boundary into a different county to get to college. Rural public transport is poor, so driving really was necessary. Today, across the south-east and the whole country, that independence has been put on hold, limiting people’s opportunities. Driving test waiting times are at some of the highest levels in memory, and the effects are being felt deeply. I will reinforce some of the points made by my hon. Friend about the impact of long driving test waits on individuals across the country. Although this debate focuses on the south-east, it is undeniably a national problem that affects all corners of our United Kingdom. Learners and instructors—from my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough, down to Cornwall, up to Cumbria and beyond—are all reporting the same patterns of delay, frustration and rising costs. I recognise that the Department for Transport is committed to tackling the issue and that steps have been taken over the past year to bring the system back under control. Progress is welcome, but there are still real concerns about the timelines for implementing these changes, as well as about the unforeseen challenges arising from some of these decisions. We know the Government will not meet their commitment to return test waiting times to seven weeks by the end of this year, as originally promised. In fact, they have not been able to commit to meeting the target even by next summer. That is unacceptable, and it leaves those waiting for tests with little reassurance that there will be real, meaningful improvement in the short-to-medium term. We need clarity for learner drivers, so can the Minister tell us when the target will be met? Last year’s seven-point plan promised the recruitment of 450 new examiners, but a year later, we have seen a net gain of only about 40 examiners. That is a remarkable shortfall, so I would appreciate reassurance from the Minister about what additional steps will be taken to recruit and retain examiners. Recent retention payments are welcome, but it is a late intervention that does not address the structural issues of high staff turnover for test centre workers and examiners. We need a credible workforce strategy, not simply an emergency patch. The redeployment of MoD examiners is also welcome; every extra pair of hands makes a difference. However, it will only provide about 6,000 additional tests in a system that needs to deliver about 2 million tests in any given year. Frankly, it is a drop in the ocean. It will not meaningfully shift the national average waiting time, which is over 22 weeks, with many test centres already booked out to the maximum booking limit of 24 weeks. We have already heard much about the deeply unfair use of bots and third-party selling sites, which push up the price of tests. Let us be clear—such behaviour is entirely exploitative, undermines trust in the DVSA, and blocks genuine learners from accessing the transport they need to get around and have more opportunities. Recently, the Government have promised action and tried to beat bots in the ticketing industry. If we can combat profiteering for concerts and theatre bookings, we must ensure that we are doing the same for a core public service, such as the provision of driving tests. There must be a clear and enforceable ban on the resale of test slots, combined with tools strong enough to prevent bots from hoovering up appointments. Unless this issue is confronted head on, every other reform risks being undermined. A driving instructor in my constituency recently wrote to me describing the very real impact on her livelihood of long waits for tests. She is not in the south-east, but her experience mirrors those across the country. Students wait for months on end, blocks of lessons continue for far longer than necessary, and the financial pressure mounts for both learners and instructors. Driving instructors have also raised some serious concerns about recent proposals to prevent them from selecting test slots for their students. Although I understand the reasoning, namely to prevent manipulation of the booking system, the proposals risk having the opposite effect. Instructors play a vital gatekeeping role; they ensure that learners only book a test when they are ready to take one and an instructor is available to accompany them. Removing instructors from the process would risk making more learners book prematurely and consequently failing their test, which would add further pressure to an already strained system. It also increases the likelihood of cancellations when instructors are unavailable because they were not part of the booking process. The removal of a test swap function is another area of concern. Instructors often use this tool to correct honest mistakes or to allocate unused slots to other suitable learners. Removing it while bots remain rampant would simply give profiteers more opportunities. Until bots are under control, the Department should proceed cautiously in this regard.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Driving Test Availability: South-east · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister elaborate on whether there will be further input from driving instructors? Has there been an impact assessment of the effect that removing their ability to book tests will have on the system overall?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Driving Test Availability: South-east · Hansard source

  More

  I recognise that that is part of the problem, but we need a comprehensive solution in the round that does not simply add to the backlog and the other pressures on the system, which I have outlined. I would be grateful to the hon. Gentleman if he could come up with any solutions: I am sure the Minister would be all ears. I would be grateful if the Minister could outline what discussion he has had with instructors and professional bodies. Although the public consultations were rightly open to learners, there was concern that the voices of experienced instructors were overshadowed. Those professionals understand the system in a way that few others do. Their insight should be central to meaningful reform. Rural areas also face additional pressures. Limiting learners to booking at only two test centres disproportionately affects learners in remote areas. For places such as north Yorkshire, where test centres are sparse and over- subscribed, those restrictions can make securing any driving test at all nearly impossible. Rural test centres also experience greater disruption during severe weather. As we enter winter, the Department must now set out how it will prepare for and mitigate weather-related delays or cancellations, because otherwise the backlog will worsen further as we go into the depths of winter. In conclusion, the Liberal Democrats are campaigning to ensure that, especially in rural areas, more test centres are allowed to close the black market for bots, so that they are rooted out. We also want to ensure that more tests are delivered by increasing the instructor workforce and offering greater flexibility in scheduling, including out-of-hours tests where appropriate. We also want to see a clear plan for how test centres will operate during bad weather, which is an issue of growing importance as our winters become more severe and unpredictable. This issue is not just a procedural problem; it is a matter of fairness and opportunity. People’s lives have been held in suspension because of endless delays. Families are paying the price, rural communities are being left behind, and young people are being denied the independence they need to build their future. The Government must act with urgency, ambition and clarity. Learner drivers deserve nothing less.

• 24 Nov 2025 · Sale of Disposable Barbecues · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. During the course of the previous debate, I waited over four hours to speak. In the Minister’s winding-up speech, she did not acknowledge any of my contribution or the amendments. I believe I was the only Yorkshire MP to speak in the debate, and this underlines the point about how decisions are made about Yorkshire people and how they might be better made by a Yorkshire Parliament. What advice would you give me, Madam Deputy Speaker, on how I might pursue a response from the Minister?

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak to new clause 28. I thank my Liberal Democrat colleagues who tabled a similar amendment in Committee. New clause 28 would effectively allow a new form of regional governance. One thing that frustrates me at the moment—it is quite bonkers from a fairness perspective—is that Yorkshire has almost the population of Scotland, the economy of Wales, and a strong sense of identity, but unlike those countries, we do not have anywhere near the level of power. For too long, Westminster has handed Yorkshire crumbs and called it a settlement. There has been lots of talk this evening about regional mayors and powers, but Yorkshire was technically chopped into four different constituent components. Westminster has taken our ability to build across the region and be the real powerhouse that we could be. My new clause would allow the creation of a Yorkshire regional body, on a par with Scotland and Wales, and empower it with provision of health, education and transport. That would stop holding Yorkshire back and give us Yorkshire folk the tools to do what we know we need to do for our areas. Put simply, it would give Yorkshire solutions to Yorkshire problems. Currently, the mayoral arrangements across the area are disparate and vary wildly. The Labour Mayor of West Yorkshire, Tracy Brabin, has been elected twice on the promise of delivering a franchising of buses, which is yet to happen. We recently got a new mayor for York and North Yorkshire, but we are yet to see any meaningful investment on the ground for local people. I do not want mayors who are empowered to be glorified lobbyists in Westminster and Whitehall; I want to see real regional forms of government that empower people on the ground. Compared with other European countries that have meaningful forms of devolution and regional governance, we have a democratic deficit, so why not think big? On transport, we need to integrate across the entirety of Yorkshire—a transport for Yorkshire that does not simply stop at the borders of West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire. Investment in mass transit for Leeds, for example, involves the West Yorkshire area. People who live in my Harrogate and Knaresborough constituency commute, work and learn there, so giving a new regional body that power over transport would make sense. If Yorkshire had those powers and funding already, and people on the ground were in the driving seat and had a stake in the project, a Leeds mass transit system might have actually happened, rather than being endlessly promised, kiboshed, re-promised and then knocked on the head again. Devolving health powers to a local region such as Yorkshire makes massive sense. Yorkshire Cancer Research, which is based in my constituency, talks endlessly about the poor life outcomes of our region compared with places in the south of England. Why not have people who know best make the key decisions about what health interventions would make sense for our area? All those points about transport and health seek to fix something that has gone wrong in our system: Whitehall brings us to this place when we would be better off empowering people in our communities to take them forward. The naysayers will say, “It’s just a new form. There’d be more elections and more people involved.” We have seen that in the creation of combined authorities and mayoral authorities. What worries me is the fact that we have ended up with endless strategic directives and chief executives of new organisations. They often kowtow to diktats from Whitehall anyway, so where is the devolution? I want Yorkshire answers to Yorkshire problems. I hope that other people support that too.

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I tabled new clause 28, which would make provision for a new form of regional governance. The explanatory statement specifically mentions that it would make provision for a Cornish assembly. I understand that when the hon. Member was on the Bill Committee, he might have abstained on such a measure. Can he elaborate on his thoughts about what he would like to see at a Cornish level?

• 19 Nov 2025 · Suicide: Reducing the Stigma · Hansard source

  More

  One of my constituents, Steve, founded the Jordan Legacy after he lost his son to suicide. Its work involves outreach to schools, universities, employers and community groups. I echo the point that the hon. Gentleman is making. Does he, like me, think that there should be more support for the fantastic work of such charities and organisations?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Efficiency Schemes: Consumer Confidence · Hansard source

  More

  6. What steps he is taking to improve consumer confidence in energy efficiency schemes.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Efficiency Schemes: Consumer Confidence · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the response that the Minister has given. He will not be surprised to hear me banging on—

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Efficiency Schemes: Consumer Confidence · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister will not be surprised to hear me talking about spray foam insulation once again. One of the biggest frustrations that people have is that they do not have faith or trust in Government schemes because of the failure of the installation of spray foam insulation under the previous Government. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that mortgage lenders do away with the blanket ban on providing mortgages to people with spray foam insulation, what steps has he taken to reform TrustMark, and what consideration has he given to fixing the problem once and for all?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Land Use Change: Food Security · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Lady has talked a lot about housing and development infringement upon the green belt. An issue in my area, around the village of Scotton, is the proposal for a huge solar farm. While I completely agree and want to see that the targets and net zero are reached, does the right hon. Lady agree that rather than using prime agricultural land, we should be looking at the roofs of distribution warehousing and other alternatives first?

• 18 Nov 2025 · China Espionage: Government Security Response · Hansard source

  More

  I have previously mentioned that the Joint Committee on Human Rights report on transnational repression specifically singled out China for having the most comprehensive TNR campaign in the UK of any country. The report called for China to be on the enhanced tier of FIRS. If all the actions the Chinese Government are taking—the espionage, the bounties on people’s heads and the clear attempts to subvert democracy—do not qualify them to be on that enhanced tier, does that not undermine the scheme?

• 13 Nov 2025 · Rogue Builders · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) on securing this important debate. Over the last year, I have been campaigning on behalf of homeowners affected by faulty spray foam insulation installed under the previous Conservative Government’s green homes grant scheme. The aim was to improve the energy efficiency of homes across our country by offering households help to make their homes warmer, greener and cheaper to run. Many homeowners used the scheme to fund the installation of spray foam insulation. However, in a number of cases the installation was done incorrectly, causing moisture to become trapped, creating structural issues such as roof timber decay. Under the green homes grant, as with other Government retrofit schemes, homeowners were told that only TrustMark-approved contractors could carry out the work, yet we have seen substandard and unqualified contractors admitted to the scheme, carrying out poor-quality work and then disappearing when problems emerge, leaving homeowners to deal with the consequences. These cases have exposed a growing problem: the rise of rogue builders and traders operating under the banner of Government assurance. Although spray foam may seem niche, that case is not isolated. It is a symptom of a much deeper failure in oversight and consumer protection. The Government’s own quality assurance mechanism, TrustMark, as the hon. Member for Wyre Forest mentioned, is administered by the Department for Business and Trade, and it has failed in its most basic duty. TrustMark was established to ensure that only qualified and competent contractors were permitted to carry out work under Government-funded schemes, yet here we are with hundreds, if not thousands, of homeowners left with defective installations. Recent announcements about improper installation under the Great British insulation and ECO4 schemes have further highlighted this failure. To put it simply, TrustMark is not fit for purpose. If the Government are to tackle the issue of rogue builders, they must start with those that they endorse under their own schemes. The Department for Business and Trade must work more closely with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to ensure that future schemes are properly monitored, contractors rigorously vetted, and consumers protected. That must include a thorough evaluation of TrustMark’s capacity to deliver the effective consumer protection that it ought to offer. At present, it is failing to provide meaningful quality assurance or to keep rogue builders out. What is worse is that these failures have created a second wave of exploitation. Rogue traders are now targeting households that had any form of spray foam insulation and offering to remove it, at great cost, even where the insulation is properly installed and functional. In many cases, these removals, which are completely unnecessary, cause further damage to the property, leaving homeowners with even greater costs. These vulnerable consumers have been exploited not once, but twice: first by unfit contractors operating under a Government-endorsed quality scheme, and then by opportunistic builders and traders exploiting the chaos that that failure has created. As my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) mentioned, often the companies are then wound up, leaving people without a mechanism or a person to seek redress through. This is precisely why stronger oversight is needed. The Department must work with TrustMark to ensure that contractor vetting, auditing and enforcement are properly co-ordinated, leaving no room for unsuitable contractors to operate under the banner of Government assurance. Secondly, there must be clear and accessible routes to redress. Homeowners should not be left to navigate complex complaints systems or take costly legal action against builders who may already have vanished. While TrustMark offers a dispute resolution service, those who have tried it will know how difficult it is to access and how rarely it delivers meaningful outcomes. I therefore urge the Minister to take up this issue seriously. TrustMark must be reviewed, consumer protections must be strengthened, and we must clamp down on rogue builders who exploit public funds and private households. Rogue builders are not just a nuisance; they are a serious threat to consumer confidence, public spending and the integrity of the housing sector. It is time we treated them as such.

• 11 Nov 2025 · Autistic Adults: Employment · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure the hon. Gentleman is highlighting some fantastic work. I completely agree; there are great examples out there. What we need is a system that holds those up and champions them, and encourages people to do the same and do better across our country. That brings me to Access to Work, a system that is currently shutting people out. This is another part of the broken pipeline, and I want to be really clear: it is not fit for purpose. Everyone I speak to tells me that it is failing them. It was designed to support people but simply falls short. It is also failing the employers who want to do the right thing but cannot navigate the red tape. I have heard examples of businesses that reached out to try to secure training for staff, but that fell on deaf ears and was never taken up. And it is failing the economy by wasting talent that we desperately need.