Tom Hayes MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 13 Nov 2025 · Police Reform · Hansard source

  More

  Having sat on a police and crime panel, let me say that I am thrilled to see the abolition of the police and crime commissioner model. This will save £20 million a year, which is the equivalent of an extra 320 special constables. In my area, the Liberal Democrat council is introducing pointless town councils, which raises local taxes. We as a Labour Government will bring down local taxes by abolishing the PCC role, which is very good news. I want to put on record my thanks to Dave Sidwick, who has been an excellent police and crime commissioner. He is Conservative, and I am Labour, but it does not matter. We work together in service of the public, and that has yielded very good results. I must confess to having regularly experienced difficulties accessing my chief constable in Dorset. Could the Minister please set out what she thinks are reasonable expectations when it comes to a chief constable engaging with local Members of Parliament, particularly on important issues to do with policing and community safety?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Carbon Budget Delivery Plan · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to see another Hayes serving in the Chair, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) for securing this debate. When we talk about the carbon budget delivery plan, we are talking about progress towards a cleaner, fairer and more secure Britain. With COP30 getting under way properly, we know the consequences of breaching the 1.5° limit: there will be more people exposed to extreme heat, higher sea levels, increased food security risks, the extinction of species, a loss of virtually all coral reefs, and the spread of climate-sensitive diseases on a greater scale. We cannot allow that to happen. Although we are tackling this issue for global reasons, it is clear that there will be benefits at home. Clean energy is the route to faster and more resilient growth. Analysis by Oxford Economics for Energy UK shows that we can add up to £240 billion in value to our economy by 2050 if we increase our ambition. The faster we move now, the more our economy will work for working people and the more good, secure jobs we will create. I am particularly pleased that the Government are setting up Great British Energy with £8.3 billion of funding going into large-scale solar, offshore wind and grid-scale battery projects. I am also pleased to see today’s announcement by SSE of £33 billion of investment to unlock secure and affordable clean energy, and to support our economic growth. That is proof that when we invest in the green economy, we see investors returning that. Sprinting to net zero does not just boost growth; it also protects growth. We saw what happened when the last Government failed to plan for resilience. Volatile international fossil fuel markets sent our bills soaring and made our growth sputter. Typical household energy costs nearly doubled in a single year and all our constituents are still living with the cost of that. Millions of people were pushed into fuel poverty and energy bill debt remains at record levels. Indeed, when the last Government finally acted, they did so at huge cost, spending £94 billion of taxpayers’ money. That crisis could have been prevented with sustained investment in energy independence and efficiency. We should be going as fast as we can on net zero because another such crisis could be prevented with clean home-grown energy. The Office for Budget Responsibility has warned that a fossil fuel price shock could cost us between 2% and 3% of GDP in the 2030s. We cannot afford such a shock to be inflicted on our constituents all over again. The delivery plan faces several other challenges. We know that there are opponents who have chosen an anti-jobs, anti-science path that would spell disaster for our economy, our security and our planet. Too often, net zero has been treated as a political football. Deadlines have been delayed, targets have been softened and certain voices have claimed that our targets are “impossible” to meet. Indeed, there have even been threats to rip up green contracts, undermining investor confidence when our constituencies need investment in jobs in the green economy so that we can lead from the front. To all those who resist home-grown renewables or reject British-built nuclear, let me be clear: they are undermining our security, driving up our bills and holding back growth. That is bad for Britain and bad for our planet. Our national security is our energy security, so I do have to speculate about some of the opposition to net zero. When I see that 92% of Reform UK’s post-2019 funding is linked to or comes directly from donors tied to fossil fuel interests, polluting industries or climate science denial groups, it makes me wonder. Similarly, we know that the leadership of Reform UK’s pick for First Minister of Wales was a paid Putin propagandist. Why is Reform UK so keen for Britain to be addicted to Russian-dominated fossil fuel markets? Our energy security comes in many forms. We also know that despite all the political noise, the markets and the public remain firmly committed to clean energy. Among Fortune Global 500 companies, net zero commitments have risen from 8% in 2020 to 45% last year. Some 70% of the UK public support the net zero target, compared with just 18% who do not, and 65% of the UK public want more renewable generation, while only 7% disagree with increasing renewables. Polling by the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association found that 68% of people are uncomfortable with their pensions or savings being invested in companies that harm the environment. Let me be clear: the Conservatives and Reform UK will lock Britain out of the race for green economic leadership. People up and down our country will lose out. However, Britain can no longer be held back, because the race for the jobs and industries of the future is speeding up, so we must go all-in on clean energy. This is a critical moment. Global insecurity is driving insecurity at home, and many people feel ignored and left behind. While the world moves at speed, our politics remains stuck. People are hungry for change, but if this Government do not deliver it, others will—and that worries me. Our task as a country is to lead in this era. It is not to defend the broken ways of doing things, but to create new methods to give people the stability and pride that they crave, and a country that is on the up once again as it leads the global race for green investment. We cannot afford to leave our country to those who will cosy up to Putin by indulging the fossil fuel markets and volatile prices that come with them. That means taking on vested interests, and restoring control of our energy and our economy. The dividing line in politics must be between the disruptors and those who defend a status quo that is working in nobody’s interest. We know that net zero is the economic opportunity of a generation. Our net zero economy grew 10.1% in 2024. Net zero foreign direct investment was up 46% last year, reaching £20 billion, and 95% of major financial firms—representing over £1 trillion in turnover and £200 billion in green investments—say that they would increase UK investment with greater policy certainty, unlocking up to £100 billion. Is there policy certainty in scrapping the Climate Change Act or threatening to rip up the green contracts that the Government are delivering?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Carbon Budget Delivery Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I apologise. The capital is waiting, public support is strong and technology is ready. What is needed is yet more policy certainty, clarity and courage. We have seen so much already, but there is more to do. Net zero should not be a political football. It is a strategic national mission, the UK’s growth story and a foundation for jobs, competitiveness and resilience.

• 12 Nov 2025 · Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  I would like to quote the chief executive of the CBI, who says: “Scrapping the Climate Change Act would be a backwards step in achieving our shared objectives of reaching economic growth, boosting energy security, protecting our environment and making life healthier for future generations.” The chief executive of Energy UK says: “Treating the Climate Change Act as a political football is a surefire way to scare off investors.” Does the hon. Gentleman support his party leader’s objective of scrapping the Climate Change Act 2008, given that these two respected authorities say that doing so would damage investment in our economy?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Energy · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Energy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for giving way. On that same website, he talks about the deep emissions cuts that result from the Climate Change Act’s emissions targets. Does he agree with the website that were it not for the Climate Change Act, those emission reductions would not have happened?

• 12 Nov 2025 · Energy · Hansard source

  More

  Will he give way?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Curriculum and Assessment Review · Hansard source

  More

  I was delighted to bring the Chancellor of the Exchequer to my constituency to visit JPMorganChase; soon after, it announced £350 million of investment. One of the questions of the global chief executive officer was: how do we retain local talent? Financial education was a critical answer. I therefore welcome the Government’s announcement. I am also pleased that the Secretary of State visited Bournemouth East and met 12 heads of primary and secondary schools. This was among the things that they were crying out for. Will she let me know what I can tell the heads of my schools about how the new curriculum will improve the lives of the children they teach?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for securing this debate. I recognise that there are many British overseas territories that are trying to do the right thing, but as we have heard today, some are magnets for dirty money and safe havens for the wealth of autocratic aggressors, laundering billions under the British flag. We must put a stop to that now. Let us be clear about what the offshoring of dirty means here at home, in my constituency of Bournemouth East. It is money stolen from the public purse. Billions are being siphoned away that could go directly into our hospitals and schools, and into lower tax rates. This is about our housing crisis. When the super-rich pour their ill-gotten gains into luxury property in our towns and cities, homes sit empty while families cannot afford a roof over their heads. Young people tell me all the time that they have to move away to get on in life because they cannot afford a home in Bournemouth. This is about our high streets, where there are trust-owned properties, hidden behind secrecy, lying empty and untouchable. Enforcement officers cannot act because they cannot trace the owners. Our high streets lie empty, robbed of vitality. Indeed, where there is activity, it is in the form of candy or vape shops that are so brightly lit they can be seen from space, themselves a front for money laundering. This is about money being stolen from workers’ wages and from the Treasuries of the world’s poorest nations. Twenty years ago we said, “Make Poverty History”; let us make dirty money history too. Where does the trail lead? Time and again to the British Virgin Islands. After investigation, I can share that the total number of properties in Bournemouth East reported as offshore entities stands at 82. These are owned through entities based in the Crown dependencies or the overseas territories, and unsurprisingly the BVI figures prominently. Where entities are required to declare their beneficial owners, the choice of jurisdictions appears to be selected for their secrecy. Fifty-seven have not reported the price paid—just 25 have done so. Even when beneficial ownership is shared, details about the person benefiting from the property are not always available to the public.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more. In Dorset, we have constituents who want to play by the rules but are routinely let down by the lack of tax transparency. For the 25 properties that have reported the price paid, the combined total is £7.2 million. With the 57 shrouded in secrecy, the total sums involved will clearly be significant. The BVI should be supporting action to track down crime. Instead, as we have heard, it is giving criminals a head start, tipping them off when there is an investigation under way. Because half the entities exposed in the Panama papers were linked to the BVI, Parliament acted decisively. A deadline was set and the will was clear. However, here we are years later, and Parliament’s will continues to be flouted by the BVI. My question to the Minister, who I know is an excellent tax transparency campaigner of many years, is: when the remedy exists, are the Government open to using an Order in Council if progress is not made in the next year? Without transparency, we cannot follow the money, and if we cannot follow the money, we cannot truly fund our public services. Without action to correct tax secrecy, we cannot claim to stand for integrity, and without integrity, we cannot truly say that democracy works in the interests of everyone.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  How will the Government help to fund the green infrastructure that we need, as through the coastal energy partnership that I helped to set up in Bournemouth, with Great British Energy taking on early stage project development and the National Wealth Fund making those critical long-term investments?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Infected Blood Compensation Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  So many lives have been scarred or ended by this betrayal of trust, cover-ups, denials and delays, and my constituents have waited for up to decades for justice. Many are concerned that they will not see it in their lifetime. Can the Minister outline how he will ensure that my constituents and the infected blood community find the consultation accessible, and can he say when the third set of regulations that have been published will become law?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I am concerned about antisocial behaviour on Colonnade, Somerset, Parkwood, Gladstone, Shelley, Wolverton and Haviland Roads as well as others nearby. I welcome the Labour Government’s roll-out of dedicated, visible and contactable officers and the requirement that police respond to all antisocial behaviour complaints within 72 hours. What more are the Labour Government doing to keep my constituents safe?

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

  More

  The Conservative party’s position on the green economy is now to remove some of the support for it. Figures show that the green economy is growing by around 10%; it is fuelling job creation and often provides better-paid jobs. Does the hon. Gentleman believe that it is in the economy’s interests to cut the legs out from underneath the green economy?

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  When I hear the hon. Gentleman speak, I listen to what he is saying—I think he could be a very good replacement for the shadow Minister on the Front Bench. The question I want to ask, though, is this: what is his view on the relationship of the UK to China? Ought we to engage and, if so, on what terms, or should we be economically decoupling? What is his view about the nature of that relationship?

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I put on record my anger at the collapse of the case. Colleagues have talked about the particulars of the case, so I will use the short time that I have available to broaden the lens and look again at the foundations of our security. When the Conservative party brings Opposition day debates to the House, I attend because I am interested to hear the development of thinking in the party as it seeks to become a future Government. I also think about the party’s record in government and where it is going. I will make two points that I think the Opposition will disagree with, but I hope some Members will agree with my third point. First, any Government, from whichever party, have a duty to invest in the institutions, infrastructure, capabilities and knowledge that enable our long-term advantage and security. Those are not built in five minutes, but they can be built in 14 years. It is my view that in the 14 years that the Conservatives were in power, they gave insufficient regard to building those things that can shore up our security. Secondly, in cases where the Conservative Government did bother to build or pursue infrastructure, they opened the door to Chinese firms. While the Conservative leadership pretend to know what they think about China now, in truth they did not know what to think about China when they were in office, and that is an important reality to stare at. When it came to Huawei and 5G, the Conservatives were in, then they were out. When it came to nuclear, the Conservatives were in, then they were out. We are still unpacking George Osborne’s mistake on that front. That contrasts sharply with the position of the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). I rediscovered his 2020 Hudson Institute speech, and I thought it was a very good insight into the situation at that time. Looking back at it five years on, it had considerable foresight on what has occurred. I am very sorry and saddened that he has experienced what he has at the hands of the Chinese leadership—other colleagues have experienced the same—but he is in a minority in his party in standing up on these issues. I do not believe that the Conservative leadership have been as clear in their thinking or as forceful in their condemnation, and for the leadership of the right hon. Gentleman’s party to now pretend that they were is inaccurate and does him a disservice. We should contrast his position with the words of the Leader of the Opposition when she was in Cabinet. As the Business Secretary pursuing business, she said: “We certainly should not be describing China as a foe”. We should contrast his position with that of one of the nine Conservative Foreign Secretaries, who said it would be “impossible, impractical and—most importantly—unwise” to sum up China in one word as a threat. As a leadership team, the Conservatives need to stop throwing mud and to come to terms with what happened on their watch. We must also look reality in the face: we cannot shy away from engagement with China. I bet that most Opposition Members have an iPhone in their pocket that was made in China; I bet they have other things in their home that were made in China. We must engage, but all of us in this Parliament must do so with our eyes wide open about the risks that that involves. Some of us in this Parliament have prophesied about that for many years and for longer than others, but we must be aware of that.

• 28 Oct 2025 · China Spying Case · Hansard source

  More

  I apologise if I misrepresented what I was saying. I was saying that throughout his time on these Benches, the right hon. Gentleman has been forceful in his condemnation. Whoever was in government, I believe that he would have done that, but I do not believe that the Conservative leadership either on the Opposition Benches or in office did the same. That is the point I was trying to make. The Opposition called this debate to throw mud, but it is an opportunity to think about the wider security context in which we operate. As the months go on, I am intrigued to see what the Conservative party’s posture will be as it contemplates the security and intelligence environment we are in. Will it shy away from engagement with China—a significant market and economic opportunity for us—or seek to engage with China with its eyes wide open? The Conservatives need to accept that they did less than they could have done in office to create the foundations for our security and economic growth. In so doing, they made us more vulnerable. Until they accept that and apologise for it, it begs the question: why should any of us in this Chamber and in the constituencies we represent listen to them ever again on the subject of keeping our country safe?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Connected and Automated Vehicles · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) for securing this debate. In this debate, I want to talk about place and the role of connected autonomous vehicles within it—but before I do, I want to follow on from my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher), who talked movingly and importantly about the role of accessibility. This year marks the 30th anniversary of the campaign for civil rights by disabled people, which culminated in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, and a key part of that campaign was for accessible public transport. Thirty years on, as we look to the future, we must think about how we can have accessible transport with all these technological changes. I am thinking about what Bournemouth’s future roads will look like. Will we see self-driving cars going anywhere anytime soon? By what date this side of 2050 might a majority of driving miles in Bournemouth be completed by machines and not humans? At what point in the future might the Minister’s car become a museum piece? When we talk about technology, we think about novelty in the future. Bournemouth has not just lived a sense that technology is advancing faster than society can keep up; it has even helped to engineer the feeling. Bournemouth University has published important research into topics such as cyber-security and connected autonomous vehicles. We are a town with remarkable scientific minds and technological innovators, and we want to contribute towards that new future. Indeed, the future is usually with us for a long time before society sees the recognisable breakthrough of a certain technology. With the onset of motorisation, early cars were referred to as horseless carriages and many shared features with horse-drawn predecessors, while others used technology from the bicycle industry. With the onset of electrification in the early 20th century, the petrol-powered car was briefly less common than either steam or electric-powered ones. The electric car disappeared by the 1930s, reappeared in the 60s, slipped back and then reappeared with gusto in the last decade. Thinking of autonomous vehicles, General Motors sponsored Norman Geddes to design the Futurama exhibition at the New York World’s Fair in 1939, where he depicted the first driverless car. In the 1960s, the Slough-built Citroën DS19 was trialled in the UK as an autonomous vehicle. This issue has been with us for a while and we politicians have a duty to think about what that means. We have a duty to make choices before the disruptions that such technologies cause reverberate throughout our daily lives—the good, the bad and the ugly. Issues such as how we get around will affect our lives and the future prosperity of the communities that we represent—and we are often behind the curve: it was only compulsory for rear view mirrors to be fitted to cars from 1 January 1932; driving tests were only introduced under the Road Traffic Act 1934 and were made mandatory in January 1935; driving licences were introduced by the Motor Car Act 1903, yet cars have been around since 1895. Are we keeping pace with change? We must also think about some of the negative side effects. In 1894, The Times estimated that by 1950, every street in every British city would be buried nine feet deep in horse manure because of the horse’s dominance of transport. That did not quite turn out to be the case, but it brings me to the point with which I want to close in a couple of minutes: are the Government looking properly at how technology is changing? Where in Government are we thinking about those changes? How are we developing laws and policies that are as smart as the cars that are going to be on our roads? Do we have a Parliament filled with people who have the knowledge, the experience, the expertise, the access and the contacts to shape the laws that will ensure that our prosperity is secured and that our roads are being cared for? When we look at polls, on balance, British citizens tend to lack trust in autonomous vehicles—partly because they have a lack of knowledge. That is unsurprising, given that AVs are theoretical and elusive; only a small number of self-driving vehicles are on our roads today, mostly test vehicles unavailable to the riding public. As AVs become more commonplace, they could become more popular as people become more educated. As MPs, we clearly have a role in helping to achieve that. I will close by considering a few ways that we must think about AVs, because of the impact they will have on how we use our streets. Pedestrians will discover that AVs can halt when they detect human movement, and many may feel confident to cross the street anywhere. What might that mean for the smoothest flow of traffic through our streets? I recently discovered that, because of people’s tendency to look at their phones at traffic lights, some places are installing silent light-emitting diode strips on the ground so that people can see when a traffic light is being indicated, because they are often not paying attention to the noise. Technology is already changing. How do we think about that with AVs? An AV can drop a person off, circle around Bournemouth, then come to pick them up wherever they want. If people think that Bournemouth’s roads and streets are choking on congestion—and they are—just wait until somebody goes to a meeting in the town centre, tells their AV to drive around continually and then calls for it to come and pick them up. AV use will free up space currently reserved for parking for entirely new purposes, which will prompt local authorities to think about how they will generate income from the parking they provide. What do we do with the space that is made available? Do we turn that into housing, playgrounds or green space? How does that change our urban landscape? Wider use of AVs could risk increasing traffic congestion by drawing people out of other types of transport and into private car use. What does it mean for cycling, which we know helps people to get around their towns and cities and enhances their physical health? What will it mean for bus travel? Pool shuttles might become more important in order to avoid single-passenger AVs congesting our roads and fixed-schedule services could become a harder thing to sustain. There may be a move to on-demand services. Park and rides will become more important, because AVs could arrive at the outskirts of towns or cities and people could disembark to board shuttles that will take them to work. Indeed, AVs could communicate with park and rides or even public shuttles, relegating waiting around to the history books and ensuring non-stop journeys. Just as we relied on a mix of horses, trams, bikes, buses and cars during the first half of the last century, we could see a similar rivalry again during the first half of this century—a rivalry between human-controlled cars, semi and fully automated vehicles, bikes and buses. What is the new hierarchy of transport? How society draws the balance will be critical. The Government and Parliament have a critical role to play because we cannot leave it to councils, even though councils cover geographies larger than our constituencies. We need national laws and frameworks that provide consistency across all the places we represent. We need foresight and we need to pre-empt potential future disruption. We must continue to improve the machinery of Government so that it can look to the future and make changes in response to technology. If we maximise the benefits, we minimise the costs and when our grandchildren look back on our decisions they will be able to believe that we made them with future generations in mind.

• 23 Oct 2025 · Black History Month · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to speak in the debate. I am proud to be the son of an Irish immigrant. My dad Richard came over to the UK with his family when he was a young boy. They were looking for safe accommodation and paid work. I remember him sitting me down when I was a young boy, and telling me that his family, when in search of those things, would often come across two notices: “No Irish” and “No Blacks”. To learn that at such a young age, and to understand that prejudice was so built into our society, fired in me a desire to fight racism. It also continues to shock me, because that was not the distant past, but very recent indeed. This Black History Month, we celebrate the black men and black women who shaped Britain’s history—Bournemouth’s too—but we must also remember what many of them were forced to endure. I am proud to represent Bournemouth East. Bournemouth is a young upstart—we can compare it with Christchurch, which is 1,200 years old, and Poole, which is 800 years old—that was really built from scratch only about 200 years ago. It was made by people who came from London and the home counties. It is, and has always been, a melting pot, and it is proud of that. It is a beautiful place to live, work and be, and I am proud that it is such an inclusive place. Because Bournemouth is such a young town, black history is built into what Bournemouth has been. I think of Thomas Lewis Johnson, who was born into slavery in Virginia in 1826 and experienced slavery’s full brutality—physical punishment, harsh labour, the denial of basic human rights, and the mental trauma that will have gone with all that—but eventually he found his freedom. He became a minister and travelled the world preaching hope and equality. In the 1890s, he made Boscombe in Bournemouth his home, and he named his house Liberia in tribute to African independence. He became a British citizen in 1900 and, supported by a local community who recognised his courage, was able to do such things as write his autobiography, “Twenty-Eight Years a Slave”, in Bournemouth. It tells a story of faith, resilience and humanity. In it, he wrote, “Though my body was confined my spirit remained free, and it was faith that guided me through the darkest hours.” I am also thinking about Lilian Bader, who broke barriers of her own decades later. When racial discrimination kept people of Caribbean heritage out of the armed forces, she refused to accept it. In 1941 she became the first black woman to serve in the Royal Air Force, training as an instrument repairer and rising to acting corporal. After the war, she earned a degree, became a teacher and settled in Bournemouth with her family, and that legacy of service continued through her sons. She said, “Father served in the First World War, his three children served in the Second World War. I married a coloured man who was in the Second World War, as was his brother who was decorated for bravery in Burma. Their father also served in the First World War. Our son was a helicopter pilot, he served in Northern Ireland. So all in all, I think we’ve given back more to this country than we’ve received.” That legacy of service and that history—that Black history—is British history, and it is Bournemouth’s history. Their contributions call us to keep on building a town and a country where everyone’s contribution is seen, valued and celebrated. I want to pick up on a point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy). It is absurd that we cram black history into a month, and that we do not have a requirement for it to be taught in our curriculum. We rely on teachers—who are already frazzled by their heavy workload, and who have been looking for light at the end of the tunnel for so many years—to do the research, and to find the resources and time to teach black history, as well as other history, such as that of the civil rights campaign that led to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, the history of gender equality, and LGBT+ history. We need to entrench the struggles of our country in the teaching of our curriculum, so that the children we raise know fully, as citizens, what our country has been through, and what its story will be. That is particularly true because, unfortunately, those contributions are being erased. Nobody in Bournemouth should feel uncomfortable, unsafe or undervalued, yet I know all too well just how many black and Asian members of my community have felt targeted and excluded. I am thinking of a recent surgery appointment; a young black medical professional came and talked about his desire to live in Britain all his life. He said he would finish his shift, and on leaving the hospital, he would have to look over his shoulder, because he was concerned about being attacked. I heard the same story from an employee at Bournemouth university. I also think of an email that I received recently from the mum of a lovely young lad I know in Bournemouth called Dan. The message said: “Lots of us out here silently vibrating on an axis of vigilance—anxiety, powerlessness, anger—wondering when the violence will touch us and our loved ones.” That woman describes herself as a London exile. She moved to Bournemouth for a better life and a more tolerant society, and now, in this day and age, she is worried about her young boy having to experience the violence that she fled when she left London. She says that in London, she saw the British National party rampaging in the streets where she lived, and she worries that is coming to Bournemouth. It should be no surprise, and no shock, that I, as their Member of Parliament, will say that black lives matter. Before it was a political movement or a social organisation, it was a statement of fact, and it remains one. Black lives are important, yet some, in their actions and words, seek to cast doubt on that truth.

• 23 Oct 2025 · Black History Month · Hansard source

  More

  I found my hon. Friend’s words very moving, and I appreciate his testimony. That will have been hard to share in the Chamber, but it is so important that he did, and I am sorry that he is going through those experiences. I agree with him entirely. I sometimes hesitate to contribute to these debates, because I do not want to take time from colleagues who have first-hand, direct experience of what it is like as a black person, but my hon. Friend has picked up on a really important point: allyship at this time is crucial. I will do everything I can to stand up for both my hon. Friend and the black people I represent, and I know that colleagues in this Chamber will do exactly the same. We must stand against racism. On that point, it concerns me deeply that we have had a summer of such discontent, which promises to be a longer period of unfortunate hatred. Flying the flag should unite us, not divide us. One of my earliest memories is seeing Linford Christie draping the Union flag around himself after winning the Olympic gold in 1992. It was a wonderful moment, yet at present, there are people whose intention in flying the national flag is to exclude. When the intention behind flying the flag is to cheer on our national sports team, it brings pride and belonging; it creates the joy and happiness that our country strives for. But when the intention is so deliberately to intimidate, and so consciously to exclude some people in my town of Bournemouth and across our country, it can only ever fuel the rising tide of racism that I know we all in this Chamber and across our country wish to reject. It makes no sense to me—indeed, it feels not just wrong and unfair but illogical—that, in some cases, the flag is flown in celebration of black and Asian footballers, and in other situations, it is flown to make their communities feel unwelcome. We should stop that. We should come together. We should unite as one country. Let us not merely honour Black History Month in words and speeches, perhaps with the announcement of a statue, and with a further debate next year and the year after, in which we commit to doing things. Let us take action. Let us build a future in which equality is our shared legacy. I say that particularly to my constituents in Bournemouth, because we have been rocked by a summer of discontent, with frequent protests, which seem to have coincided with many years of feeling lost and hopeless. Bournemouth is a young town, but over the course of its history, it settled into who it was. It was a seaside town, and people knew what our industry and our sectors were about. In recent years, with austerity and the loss of key employers, the town has lost its way a bit. It is looking to tell a different story. It is looking to tell a story of inclusion, hope and happiness. Just as black history has always been key to Bournemouth’s history, the contributions of black boys, girls, men and women will be key to Bournemouth as it finds its new story. We will move forward together, united against racism, and determined to build an equal, fair and just society under one flag.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Heathrow: National Airports Review · Hansard source

  More

  We urgently need to modernise and expand British airspace—it is at capacity, and our growth depends on it. I was at Bournemouth airport last week. We are close to a bus service and a public transport interchange, but Bournemouth airport cannot easily connect with European airspace, as most traffic joins it at a single space. That is particularly problematic, given that I hope the Cherries, who are contesting for European football, get to play European teams next season. Will the Government review and modernise our airspace and back regional airports such as Bournemouth’s?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Co-operative Sector: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon), who was a superb Labour council leader and a superb Labour Government Minister. He is a fantastic advocate for the Co-operative party and the co-operative movement. I also thank Joe Fortune, the general secretary of the Co-operative party, who has been a fantastic supporter of the movement. If someone is a co-operator, it is in their blood; it is who they are. It is an instinct to trust others, create ideas, craft projects and co-operate. It is about building stronger communities and holding the faith, knowing that life is to be enjoyed and made the most of, and about ignoring the voices of division and misery that feed us the message that life is something to survive and to get through. To be a co-operator is to live with hope; it is about striving for better, never accepting second best and always putting people first. Politics is about choices, and we know what the choices made by the Conservatives were. The Conservatives showed us whose side they were on: they sold us out and they wrecked our country. Labour wants to put money and power back where they belong: into our communities. With the co-operative movement at the heart of that mission, I believe that we will be successful. In my constituency of Bournemouth East, we have many co-operators, and across Dorset we have many co-operatives. Indeed, the movement dates back to 1862, with the Parkstone and Bournemouth co-operative. I want to see many more co-operators and co-operatives, and I want to do a few shout-outs, if I may. I want to shout out to Christchurch Housing Society, which provides housing for older and vulnerable people; Great Western credit union; Bournemouth East Allotment Society; and Cherries Trust, a community mutual that supports the local football club, AFC Bournemouth, which was top of the league for all of half an hour at the weekend—I hope to see it return there soon for much longer. I also want to do a shout-out to Hengistbury Head Outdoors, which has been supported by a Labour Government investment of £668,000 to refurbish and repair its outdoor centre. It now has a 99-year lease, and the co-operative has helped it through the process of issuing shares for community assets and offering a percentage of match funding too. If any constituents are watching, it has a share offer on at the moment, and I would encourage them to invest, because that will help to get the project open in time for April. Co-operation is in the DNA of Labour. The Labour and Co-operative parties have been sisters since 1927, and the centenary will take place under a Labour Government. Back then, the first electronic TV had just been invented and Parliament was still debating the introduction of traffic lights. We have been sisters for a long time and our partnership has endured, but the Co-op party can at times get lost in and swallowed up by the Labour party. We co-operators need to keep in mind that most fundamental question: what is uniquely co-operative about what we are trying to achieve? The co-operative model may have been born here in the UK, but Germany’s sector is four times larger than ours, France’s is six times larger, and South Korea has doubled its in just five years by creating the right conditions. We should be no less ambitious now that we have a Labour Government. Over 7,000 UK co-operatives now employ 240,000 people, serve 16.6 million members and generate £42 billion each year. Owned by the people who use them, co-operatives keep wealth rooted in communities and reinvest for the common good. They are proven to be 8% to 12% more productive than traditional firms, twice as likely to survive their first five years and four times less likely to fail during crises. Co-operatives narrow pay gaps, promote equality and strengthen local economies. To deliver on the Government’s pledge to double the size of the co-operative and mutual sector, we need action that will match our ambition. First, we need a modern legislative framework, acting on the Law Commission’s review, to unlock co-operative growth. Secondly, we need a regulatory system attuned to co-operatives, with the Competition and Markets Authority joining the Prudential Regulation Authority and FCA in supporting their unique role. Thirdly, we need better access to finance, adapting existing funds, such as community development financial institutions and Better Society Capital, to include co-operatives. Fourthly, we need stronger business support, provided through the new co-operative development unit and co-ordinated across Departments. Lastly, we need greater visibility and education so that more entrepreneurs see co-operatives as a viable route to business success. In the time remaining I want to focus on one specific area of policy where the co-operative sector has played a crucial role and can play a further crucial role. To tackle the climate and ecological emergency, we must do more of what works. We must rapidly expand clean, affordable solar and wind energy so that everyone benefits from a sustainable, secure energy supply. When that energy is community-owned, society is fairer and more resilient. As a councillor for 10 years, and as deputy leader of the council, I was proud to back the co-operative movement, including by funding the UK’s largest community-owned solar park with nearly £4 million of council investment. It now generates enough clean power for 6,000 homes each year, and the council receives £177,000 annually, with the loan fully repaid, plus an additional £606,000 to reinvest in local services. Over its lifetime, the project will return £10 million in community benefit, and local people have a direct say in how that money is used. That is just one project of many in our constituencies. That is what co-operation looks like in action: clean energy, local ownership and shared prosperity. We could do so much more with the support of our Labour Government, and I am pleased to see Great British Energy prioritising community energy with a Great British Energy community fund that provides feasibility funding of up to £40,000 and project development funding of up to £100,000. I thank Barbara Hammond, Mish Tullar and Tim Sadler for their role in developing the solar park project, and thank the Co-operative Councils’ Innovation Network for sharing the news of the project across councils, as well as news of all the good projects across our constituencies. The Rochdale pioneers built their movement in the hungry forties, when profit and power were concentrated in too few hands. They offered a fairer, more democratic way to do business, and that vision still matters today. Let us achieve a golden twenties; let us make this a co-operative decade. Co-operatives show us what businesses can be when profit serves people, not the other way round. Let us match ambition with action. Let us build an economy that is more productive, more resilient and fairer for all.

• 16 Oct 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  On Saturday morning, I met residents concerned about persistent antisocial behaviour, drug dealing and under-age vaping. I am trying to get the solutions they need by arranging a community meeting with the police. How can I use the Government’s new powers to limit vape shops and barbers in particular areas so that the residents of Warwick Place, Wickham Road, Hannington Road and York Place, and the surrounding streets, can finally feel safe?

• 16 Oct 2025 · Health and Social Care Committee · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the statement and the important work of the Select Committee. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Erdington (Paulette Hamilton) for her leadership. It is striking that in England black mums are twice as likely to die as white mums. In Dorset our NHS is really eager to get this right. We have a new maternity, neonatal, early pregnancy and emergency gynaecology unit at the Royal Bournemouth hospital in the new BEACH building, and there is a plan to make records available in accessible languages and formats. Can my hon. Friend speak a little about what Dorset could do more of to make its healthcare more accessible?

• 16 Oct 2025 · World Menopause Day · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to speak in this debate marking World Menopause Day. My mum taught me well; she taught me lots of things, but in particular, normalised the menopause. It is as simple as that. I used to run services that employed in the majority women, and having open conversations and flexible working, as we have just heard, is critical. I want to be a conduit for the women in Bournemouth East who have shared their experiences of the perimenopause and menopause. It is a privilege to speak in a debate called by my hon. Friend the Member for Neath and Swansea East (Carolyn Harris), for many reasons but especially because she visited Bournemouth a short while ago to meet me and Viv Galpin at BH Live at the Littledown centre. Viv runs a brilliant local initiative called Beat the Pause—a programme supporting women through community-based exercise and wellbeing sessions that help to manage menopause symptoms, build confidence and strengthen social connections. I think Viv will be pleased to know that I have just had a conversation with Mariella Frostrup, the chair of Menopause Mandate, who is here today at the invitation of my hon. Friend the Member for Neath and Swansea East, in which I spoke about Beat the Pause and Viv’s work. Beat the Pause sessions are running locally in Bournemouth, and the women who attend describe them as a lifeline—a place where they can find community, consistency and compassion. As Viv puts it: “When you hit peri-menopause, you can feel completely lost. Your mind and body feel like they belong to someone else. You lose all reason and have no idea where to start. We trust our doctors and the NHS—but this is where the biggest amount of work needs to be done.” That experience of confusion, frustration and being left to navigate symptoms alone is far too common. That is why the women of Bournemouth East have been clear about what needs to change. They have developed a community wish list that is both practical and achievable. First, every GP practice should have at least one member of staff trained in perimenopause and menopause care—someone responsible for upskilling colleagues and ensuring consistent advice across the surgery. Secondly, monthly menopause health talks should be held in GP surgeries, including evening sessions for working women, to improve access to accurate, trusted information. Thirdly, GPs and pharmacists should routinely promote the HRT prepayment certificate to help to ease the financial burden of ongoing prescriptions. Fourthly, there should be greater consistency across GP practices and primary care networks, so that support does not depend on where a woman happens to live. Fifthly, GPs could partner with local wellbeing providers, such as Beat the Pause, to signpost trusted services and build a joined-up approach between medical and community support. Finally, local councils such as Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council could do more to support exercise and wellbeing sessions in public spaces, using our beautiful beaches, parks and leisure centres to host accessible activities tailored to menopausal women. Although Beat the Pause began with Sport England funding, which was to last for only a short time, it has kept going because of the commitment of people like Viv and the women who support one another. It is a shining example of how local wellbeing initiatives can complement clinical care, but also of the changes that we know need to happen in employment, combining exercise, education and peer connection into a holistic model that truly works. I will close by giving a few further shout-outs: to Join the Meno-Make, a creative group for women who experience the menopause and perimenopause, who meet together, share stories and make art about their experiences at Re-imagine on Belle Vue Road, and to the Southface dermatology clinic, which, in addition to further events, will host the Kickass Menopause event today—it sold out twice and had to move to a larger venue at the Village Hotel. Lastly, I thank Arts University Bournemouth, which has just completed an important research project looking at creativity in the menopause, organised by Pauline Ferrick-Squibb. In this World Menopause Day debate, I pay tribute to every woman in Bournemouth East and here in Parliament who has spoken up about her experience. Together, they are breaking down stigma, building community and showing us what menopause support looks like in practice. I want women in Bournemouth East to know that I, as their MP, have their back, and agree with them that women deserve consistent, informed and compassionate menopause care in every GP surgery, every community and every part of our town.