Victoria Collins MP: speeches

Speeches

• 16 Jun 2026 · Thames Water · Hansard source

  More

  My very first letter as a Member of Parliament was to Thames Water, following the unacceptable fact that thousands of hours of sewage had been released into the River Ver, one of our precious chalk streams. Whatever the future structure of Thames Water, what guarantees can the Minister put in place that the environmental obligations will be strengthened rather than weakened?

• 16 Jun 2026 · National Planning Policy Framework and Tring · Hansard source

  More

  The people of Tring have spoken. This petition, signed by over 500 residents, rejects the top-down, developer-led approach to planning from this Government, which threatens to impose significant large-scale development on their community with little regard for its character, infrastructure or precious environment. That has been made even worse by the latest power grab from Whitehall, which will now take over large planning applications. Residents are not opposed to housing, but they are righty alarmed by the burden being placed on their town and deeply frustrated by the lack of a meaningful voice in shaping proposals that will define Tring for generations to come. Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Declares that Tring faces significant large-scale development proposals driven by top-down national planning policy, which is being imposed on local communities with insufficient regard for the views of residents or the detrimental impact on Tring ’ s character, infrastructure, and environment. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to schedule a debate in the House of Commons on the Government ’ s review of the National Planning Policy Framework and how communities like Tring can be better protected from inappropriate over-development, and how local residents can be given a genuine and effective voice in the planning decisions and infrastructure provision that shape their towns and affect their daily lives. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003209]

• 24 Mar 2026 · Government Review of the National Planning Policy Framework · Hansard source

  More

  The people of Redbourn have spoken loud and clear. This petition, which has been signed by 1,427 residents, rejects the top-down, developer-led planning approach by this Government, which could see the village of Redbourn increased by 70%. Residents are not opposed to housing, but they are rightly alarmed by the burden placed on their community, including on infrastructure, and they are deeply frustrated by the lack of meaningful voice in shaping the proposals that will define their village for generations to come. From top-down targets to grey-belt policy, community voices have been diminished. The petition states: “The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to schedule a debate in the House of Commons on the Government review of the National Planning Policy Framework and how villages like Redbourn can be protected from over-development, and local communities given real power over planning decisions and infrastructure provision that affect the lives of village residents.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of Redbourn and the surrounding area, Declares that Redbourn village faces large-scale development proposals driven by national planning law pushing development onto green and grey-belt land; further declares that government policy is having a detrimental impact on Redbourn village’s character and environment. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government to schedule a debate in the House of Commons on the Government review of the National Planning Policy Framework and how villages like Redbourn can be protected from over-development , and local communities given real power over planning decisions and infrastructure provision that affect the lives of village residents. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003178]

• 24 Feb 2026 · Online Harm: Child Protection · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. YouTube is everywhere. It is embedded in almost every website that has videos. The hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) asked about AI chatbots. In the proposals we put forward in the Lords, the user-to-user services are the AI chatbots. We have highlighted for a long time that potential harms from AI chatbots are not covered. That is absolutely the case, but Ofcom has clarified that AI chatbots are the user-to-user service. The harms, such as AI psychosis, which my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) alluded to, are not covered. That is why the harms-based approach we are putting forward is so important. As my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) said when she opened the debate, the Liberal Democrats have been leading the work on online safety in this Parliament. We were the first party to push a vote on banning addictive algorithms. We have called for health warnings and a doomscroll cap. Today, we are calling for a vote on the age for social media and online harms. We are calling for a ban on harmful social media based on a film-style age rating. That harms-based approach holds tech companies to account, sets a pioneering approach to online standards and prepares for the future of AI chatbots and games like Roblox, which has already arrived. In the offline world, anyone buying a toy for young children at this point would expect age ratings so that they know it is appropriate and safe, and films have had age ratings for over 100 years, yet we have not had that in the online world. The harms-based approach is backed by 42 charities and experts who work to protect children, stop violence against women and girls and make the internet a safer place. We are also calling for a reset, because enough is enough. That includes a minimum age of 16 for social media and real accountability for tech companies with film-style age ratings. We need to make sure that we get the best out of the internet for young people and protect them from harms. For me, it comes back to James, his friends and the young women and children I have spoken to around my constituency. We do not have time to waste—that is why we are pushing for these Bills. We are calling for action, and I call on MPs across the House to put children before politics, exactly as we did in the Lords. The amendment in the Lords could mean a blanket ban. We were uncomfortable with that approach—we much prefer ours—but we knew that the future of children came first. We must help the next generation to get the best of the online world—including those young people who have spoken out and shared their concerns and horror stories—and protect them from the worst of it.

• 24 Feb 2026 · Online Harm: Child Protection · Hansard source

  More

  Apologies. Does she think that the fact that the Leader of the Opposition tried to water down that Bill and said that we do not legislate for feelings has anything to do with the can being kicked down the road and us not having made the necessary progress?

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Although there is much that I welcome in the Budget, overall I cannot help but be disappointed by a botched Budget that raises taxes to a record high and increases costs for businesses, while avoiding using tax levers on the largest, highly profitable corporations and ignoring our biggest lever for growth: a better deal with the European Union. The Chancellor insists that this Budget ensures that everyone pays their fair share, yet it seemingly allows the biggest tech giants, such as Elon Musk, off the hook through the absence of a digital services tax announcement. Freezing income tax thresholds continues the Conservative tax legacy of hitting people with years of stealth taxes, together costing 10 million taxpayers an extra £67 billion a year by 2030. Behind those numbers are families and individuals still struggling as costs go up and earnings do not catch up. One constituent from Gaddesdon Row told me that this Budget is “disconnected from the reality that families are under pressure today”. Earning just too much to qualify for targeted support but not enough to absorb rising costs, this constituent is being both overlooked and penalised by frozen thresholds. Another constituent, Harriet, a single mother from Berkhamsted, feels “unheard, unrepresented and unsupported” by the Chancellor’s Budget. Despite the fact that she is working harder than ever before, this Government keep squeezing her financially from every direction. This does not sound like a fair plan for working families. This Labour Government were elected on the promise of lowering the cost of living and stimulating growth, yet for the second consecutive year they are targeting businesses and employment, the very engines of growth. Richard, from Brash Solutions in Berkhamsted, shares the view of many by saying: “Once again, the Autumn Budget risks disincentivising entrepreneurs and small business owners by increasing taxes and eroding rewards for those who take daily risks to employ staff and drive economic growth.” For Hugh, a business owner in Potten End, this Budget is “another kick in the teeth”. Charlotte from Gatwards says: “The government appears to have completely abandoned their growth ambitions”. Angela from HJP Chartered Accountants says that their clients feel that the Government are treating them like a “cash cow” and warns that if this continues, investment in the people of the United Kingdom will reduce. Daniel, a general manager in Berkhamsted, warns of the tens of thousands in pre-profit costs yet again being placed on businesses such as his. The Government have done nothing to improve the situation for family farms. Also, last year we warned about the negative impact that the rise in employer national insurance contributions would have on jobs. Since then, I have seen charities and businesses in Hertfordshire let go of staff and establish hiring freezes. The Office for National Statistics has confirmed that fewer jobs are in the economy over the last quarter. We are ringing those alarm bells again. The Federation of Small Businesses has warned that nearly one in three small firms expect to shrink, sell up or shut down in the next 12 months. I recognise that this Government inherited a difficult economic landscape after a decade of Conservative mismanagement. However, I still cannot get over the missed opportunities for a fair and growing economy. If the Government were serious about growth, they would back Lib Dem calls to boost high streets with a 5% VAT cut for hospitality, accommodation and attractions, something that the Robin Hood pub in Tring would very much welcome. They would also follow Lib Dem policies on reducing energy bills, which would go beyond the three years and look to halve energy bills by 2035. They would tax the big banks and social media giants properly, with a new windfall tax and digital services tax. They would also back Lib Dem calls for a better trade deal with Europe to repair the £90 billion Brexit black hole in tax income. That is how we would tackle the cost of living crisis, bear down on inflation, revive our high streets, grow the economy and deliver for our communities, with the fair autumn Budget that this Government have failed to provide.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Draft Online Safety Act 2023 (Priority Offences) (Amendment) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. The Liberal Democrats support this statutory instrument, which updates the Online Safety Act’s priority offences to reflect changes in intimate image abuse law. It is absolutely right to tackle the non-consensual sharing of intimate photographs and films, and to tackle self-harm. However, this is also an important opportunity to say that the Act must go further still. The Internet Watch Foundation reminds us that it is not currently illegal to retain, re-upload or trade abusive intimate image material long after initial distribution. The Molly Rose Foundation and Samaritans have raised the issue of self-harm, and I am pleased to hear that being addressed today, but the point about AI chatbots is really important. As I mentioned in DSIT questions, the legislation on user to user and search seems pretty clear, but what about one-to-one chatbots when there is a single user? It is not clear who is accountable when self-harm content comes through chatbots that are not user to user. I appreciate that the Minister said the Department is looking into that issue with Ofcom. The Act must also go further to address emerging online threats. The Internet Watch Foundation also reports that intimate images online are increasingly generated by deepfake AI, and that expert analysis now struggles to distinguish AI-generated content from real images or videos. At the beginning of this year alone, the IWF found 1,200 photorealistic videos of child sexual abuse material online. The Online Safety Act must do more to hold big tech companies to account, and to protect users from intimate image abuse at source, both real and AI-generated. Importantly, it must also tackle self-harm that is linked to AI chatbots, which are increasingly used by people of all ages. Although this statutory instrument is a step forward, we need regulation that keeps pace with the rapidly evolving technology, not just changes in statute. We must ensure that Ofcom is sufficiently equipped and resourced to deal with emerging technologies. Will the Minister confirm what assessment has been done of the adequacy of Ofcom’s resourcing to ensure that this statutory instrument and the Online Safety Act can be applied and enforced in this fast-moving environment? When can we expect updates on AI chatbots and the scope of regulation? Will the Minister also confirm what the Government are doing to effectively regulate deepfake intimate content? What steps are being taken to hold tech companies to account for the continued harm facing children, vulnerable people and, given that experts can no longer differentiate between deepfake and real images, all internet users?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Costs: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  Businesses across my constituency, such as Redbournbury Mill and Total Cow Burger in Redbourn, have written to me about the crippling increases in energy costs. Coupled with the increased cost of national insurance and business rates, that means they are struggling to keep going. Ahead of the autumn Budget, will the Government commit to break the link between gas and electricity prices, as the Liberal Democrats have called for, to provide much-needed relief for businesses and families?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Costs: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  5. What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on support for businesses facing increased energy costs.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Illegal Waste: Organised Crime · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency, a 200-tonne illegal dump has left a farmer with a £40,000 clean-up bill and the risk of criminalisation if he cannot afford to clear it quickly, yet a cross-agency meeting clarified that no single agency takes responsibility for investigating these large-scale incidents on private land. When perpetrators are caught, the fixed-term penalty is a pitiful £1,000—that is for a crime that costs the economy £1 billion. Does the Minister agree that the enforcement gap, where victims shoulder the costs of organised crime while the penalties remain pitiful, is completely unacceptable? Will the Government help to establish a single accountable authority to investigate waste crime on private land and ensure that penalties reflect the true cost of these offences?

• 21 Oct 2025 · Mandatory Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely, and I was about to say that while frontline services are crumbling and people are needing those billions of pounds, we are seeing here is billions being spent, millions being excluded and freedoms eroded—and for what? How much taxpayer money are the Government prepared to waste on this scheme, for which they have no mandate and no public support? While those frontline services are bursting at the seams, the Government have squandered the opportunity to use technology to improve services by instead undermining trust, seemingly flip-flopping on this patchwork policy. On 26 September, the Prime Minister announced digital ID with promises to control borders and tackle irregular migration. Last week, that narrative had all but vanished, with a shift to talking about anything from handling daycare to buying a drink. The Secretary of State herself admitted that digital ID would not be the “silver bullet” to end migration as initially promised; as the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) highlighted, as did many others, we know it will not solve the problem. Meanwhile, the Foreign Secretary defended extending digital ID to 13-year-olds—something that the Government have still not ruled out. Why are this Government so determined to press ahead? I support improving digital services on a voluntary basis, but we can modernise without mandating and must leave room for non-digital choice. Allegedly, this is about easier access to Government services, but surely we should be working on improving what we already have. The gov.uk One Login, the voluntary gateway to digital Government, needs much improvement. As the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis) highlighted, there are many concerns about security as well. Should we not fix those services, rather than create new ones?

• 14 Oct 2025 · Reducing Energy Bills · Hansard source

  More

  Carol from Harpenden is one of many constituents who are worried about energy costs. At 70, she stressed that she never imagined that she would have to scrimp and save in the way that she does just to get by. The warm home discount is a temporary lifeline, so will the Government commit to long-lasting solutions to end fuel poverty, including an emergency home upgrade programme that will include incentives to install heat pumps that cover real costs?

• 14 Oct 2025 · Reducing Energy Bills · Hansard source

  More

  21. What steps he is taking to reduce energy bills.

• 22 Jul 2025 · Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I join the House in thanking you for your work as Chair. It is an honour to speak in this debate, held in memory of Sir David Amess. His legacy reminds us what it is to be an MP—to show up and champion the concerns of the people we represent. That is the spirit I have carried with me throughout my first year as the Member of Parliament for the brand new seat of Harpenden and Berkhamsted. Over this year, access to health and social care has remained one of the most pressing challenges. I have heard from a constituent in Berkhamsted who faces an eight-month delay for their NHS appointment; from Katie from Aldbury, an expectant mother who could not get an NHS dentist appointment within 50 miles; and Clare from Harpenden, who cared for her mother with dementia while juggling newborn twins and has been pushed to the brink with little support. It was an honour to welcome the family of Ed Holderness, who sadly took his life at the age of 24—they are campaigning on the importance of mental health care. Locally, I congratulate organisations such as Hector’s House and Youth Talk on their work. We have seen movement on the NHS, which I welcome, but we urgently need proper reform, including prioritisation of mental health and social care work. As I have done throughout this year, I again urge the Government to start cross-party talks on social care sooner rather than later. The environment demands equal attention. My constituency has four of the world’s rare chalk streams, which are beautiful places—the Ver, the Bulbourne, the Gade and the Lea—yet Markyate sewage treatment works has dumped sewage into the River Ver for almost 5,000 hours in the past 12 months, and around 3,000 of those hours were non-stop. It was an honour to secure my first Westminster Hall debate on tackling sewage in chalk streams. I have met Thames Water to push for action on upgrading Markyate’s sewage works, and I welcomed the Government’s proposals yesterday. I look forward to meeting the relevant Minister to see how those changes can be used to prioritise the upgrading of those sewage works. I thank organisations such as the Ver Valley Society, the Friends of the River Bulbourne, Sustainable St Albans, EcoBerko and Sustainable Tring, which will not let me stop campaigning on these important issues. Moving on to our high streets and families, small businesses are still struggling, and as someone who grew up helping my mum on the shop floor, this issue is close to home. Many businesses, such as Temptation in Berkhamsted, Threads of Harpenden and Almar in Tring, say that they are still struggling, and many are questioning how they can cope with the rise in employment costs, national insurance costs and rents, as well as other costs. They are struggling, and they are asking, “Will we stay open?” These businesses, as Members from all parts of the House have said, are the lifeblood of our local communities. I urge the Government to rethink some of those proposals and think about how we can support our high streets and small businesses. Transport is a growing concern in my constituency. We have seen continued cuts to vital services, including to the X5, which connects constituents across Tring and Berkhamsted. While I am pleased that the frequency of Red Eagle services has increased to every 30 minutes —we have worked hard with local campaigners—many communities remain isolated. I will continue that work, but we need more support from Government. Unfortunately, local authorities are struggling to deliver under the current financial constraints. Hertfordshire county council recently outlined grave concerns about the fair funding review, which sees the council face a reduction of £45 million to £55 million in its grant. That is not just a budget squeeze, but a direct threat to those social services and transport services that are delivered to our communities. On a positive note, I have been excited about the work we have done on science, innovation and technology, especially closer to home. A safer screens tour has allowed me to bring the voice of young people to that work nationally. It was a real proud MP moment when, after I had visited and spoken to two of my local schools—Ashlyns school and Berkhamsted school—they decided to get together and students themselves wanted to campaign on online safety. I urge the Government to listen to those calls for change. Throughout the past year, my team and I have handled more than 10,000 pieces of casework. It is some of the most enriching work that we do. I have held more than 300 local meetings and raised questions and issues more than 500 times with the Government. Every one of those has been on behalf of residents of Harpenden and Berkhamsted. I thank colleagues across the House for their support, and I especially thank my team, who have helped deliver for local residents as I have found my feet in my first year as an MP. I hope that my time as an MP reflects the principles I put forward in my maiden speech: to be guided by the values of community, tolerance and perseverance. Most importantly, I thank the community organisations that deliver for Harpenden, Berkhamsted, Tring and my beautiful villages, including the Harpenden Trust, the Swan Youth Project, Open Door, food banks, the Harpenden Money Advice Centre and many others. I wish everyone a fantastic recess as we go back to our constituencies to be refreshed for when we come back in September.

• 21 Jul 2025 · Independent Water Commission · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome the proposals. Today’s announcement is a step forward in tackling the sewage crisis, but of course the details will be in the delivery. That is important, especially as the River Ver, a precious chalk stream in my constituency, has received nearly 5,000 hours of sewage in the last year—some of that was 3,000 hours non-stop. We do not know the volume, but we know it is terrible. Will the Secretary of State meet me to see how the proposals can help to prioritise the desperately needed upgrade of the Markyate sewage works?