Wendy Chamberlain MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 8 Jun 2026 · Mohamed al-Fayed: Alleged Abuse · Hansard source

  More

  Alongside the hon. Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson), I was present at the meeting with the Prime Minister last week. I welcome the Minister to her place and thank her for her time at the meeting. We have heard consistently from survivors that they were trafficked in many locations by many different people. Given that that partly fits the category of organised crime, what consideration has the Minister given to getting the National Crime Agency involved with this investigation, which would help build survivors’ confidence and trust in the ongoing investigation?

• 4 Jun 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I start by echoing the comments made by both the shadow Leader of the House and the Leader of the House in relation to the murder of Henry Nowak and the comments made by his family. As a former police officer, I would say to those seeking to protest, or indeed encouraging those to protest, that protests involve policing and they take away the very police officers who operate in our communities, trying to tackle the scourge of knife crime. It is important that we remember that. I also echo the comments in relation to the service personnel who have tragically died in recent days, the death of Sir Alex Younger, and the former parliamentarians who we all recognise and remember. This week, I draw the attention of the House to the Ebola virus outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. Already, more than 60 people have died as a result of the ongoing outbreak, and the head of the World Health Organisation said yesterday that it could have begun as early as January. I fear that drastic cuts to international aid have undermined the international community’s preparedness to identify and respond urgently to such outbreaks. Under the Conservative Government, aid was slashed from 0.7% of GDP to 0.5%; under Labour, it is down to its lowest levels as a proportion of GNI since 1999. We are responding to the Ebola crisis with one hand tied behind our back. International development is “important for Britain’s strength abroad”— not my words, but Tony Blair’s, in his much-commented-on essay last week. I believe it is important to our national security, too. Liberal Democrats enshrined the 0.7% international development target in law while in Government, thanks in large part to the dedication of the now Liberal Democrat leader in the Lords, Lord Purvis. That law has still not been repealed, despite successive Governments flouting it. Will the Leader of the House ask the Foreign Secretary to come before the House to update us on the Government’s compliance with the International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Act 2015?

• 2 Jun 2026 · Relationship between Social Security Scotland and the DWP · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for giving way again. Does he agree that the problem we have identified—and potentially the scale of the problem, given the number of unpaid carers receiving an entitlement to this allowance—should be looked at by that working group?

• 2 Jun 2026 · Relationship between Social Security Scotland and the DWP · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Member, and it is important to remember that on many occasions we are talking about our most vulnerable constituents. No doubt there is an onus on us as MPs, and indeed on the Government in Westminster, but Administrations in other parts of the UK also have a responsibility to ensure that they are working as constructively as possible. I understand that the Department has recently recruited more complaints handlers, which I hope will go some way to improving things. I have a case that we raised in March, and we were told this week that it has not yet been assigned to anyone. I am deeply concerned about the state of the DWP, and by extension the welfare of the vulnerable constituents who the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) just referred to. There are two key issues with the carer support payment that the DWP needs to help address. First, DWP staff need to be trained in what that payment is, how it works, and why keeping the underlying entitlement to it is important. That includes early stage call handlers, in addition to the specialist teams to whom difficult cases are allocated. I hope that the Minister, and the Minister for Social Security and Disability, are fully across this, but let me put on the record that the carer support payment is the benefit that replaced carer’s allowance in Scotland—we know there have been major issues with carer’s allowance in other parts of the UK. Like carer’s allowance, earnings over a certain level remove someone’s eligibility to the payments. Carer support payment can also be awarded as an underlying entitlement that acts as a gateway for additional support. That should be a familiar concept. We see it with the DWP carer’s allowance, but also with other support such as child benefit. Parents are encouraged to apply for child benefit even if they are not eligible for the payment, because it is a gateway to the non-working parent getting national insurance credits. Madam Deputy Speaker, you can imagine how frustrating it is when DWP case handlers give advice, as they have done to us, that the issue with deductions would be resolved by asking Social Security Scotland to remove the underlying entitlement. It fails to demonstrate any understanding of how many benefits work, and frankly demonstrates a willingness to let people be worse off because the DWP’s own rules are complicated to apply. Secondly, DWP systems need to be set up to process correctly the information being provided to them by Social Security Scotland. I will not claim that Social Security Scotland is perfect by any stretch, and it is not within the purview of this place, but I would like to see more joined-up working from all sides. However, I have been assured, as much as I can be, by Social Security Scotland that its computer system is communicating properly with the DWP, and I have no reason to believe otherwise. However, from the DWP side I have been varyingly told that its system shows a claimant in receipt of a payment of carer support payment, despite them never having received it, and that it is DWP policy to deduct carer support payment as standard unless explicitly told otherwise by Social Security Scotland. Worryingly, while acknowledging an issue in March, the Minister for Social Security and Disability told us in writing that wrongful deductions “may cause confusion to customers and that they are exploring ways to make the process clearer”. My view is that yes, DWP mistakes can be confusing, especially given the communication issues that I have already outlined; but that statement misses the point by stating the problem is the claimant’s understanding. We need a system that does not make these systemic errors in the first place, and I would argue that that is very squarely for the Department, not claimants, to sort out. Just finally last week, the specialist DWP complaints team has either worked out, or come clean with us and owned up to, the systemic error impacting many Scottish carers. It wants to find a fix, but it does not have a timescale in which that will be achieved. Until then, it will be up to a claimant to realise that there is a problem and ask the DWP to correct the deduction each month. Let me repeat that: the DWP wants the claimant to ask the DWP to correct the deduction each month. We all know that unpaid carers are among the most overstretched groups in our society, yet the DWP is telling them to take on the burden of correcting its failures every single month. Carers Week is next week, and I do not think that that is the message that we want to be sending from this place, or indeed from the DWP. That may all sound a bit dry and complicated, but benefit applications, overlapping payments and underlying entitlements have a real human impact on the lives of our constituents. Having their universal credit payment reduced to nil when they have food to buy and bills to pay is very difficult. There is no buffer to help them out while they battle with the DWP to find out why. I have seen constituents relying on credit cards for basics, or going without, to the detriment of their own health. The stress and distress that this situation causes are immense. The DWP’s computer error is the reason one constituent has been suicidal, and it is causing extreme anxiety to another. They are not alone, and fundamentally this is not their fault. I will make a final addition to my remarks before I come to a conclusion. I had mainly prepared for this debate when we received an update this morning on one of the cases. My constituent had received a letter saying that he would be receiving a back payment of the best part of £3,000. He was confused—we were confused. My office had spelled out as clearly as it could to the DWP that he just needed his universal credit paid back for the period of December 2025 to February 2026, in which carer support payment had been incorrectly deducted. Being given a confusing payment of too much money can be just as distressing as receiving too little. I cannot stress enough the fear of relying on the DWP, spending the money and then being told that it has to be repaid—I am sure that we all, as constituency MPs, recognise that. As it turns out, the DWP had got it wrong again. Despite everything it had been told, despite the months of investigating the claim, it thought that my constituent had never received carer support payment, which he had until December, and had repaid him for the whole period of the deduction. Now a further investigation has to be carried out, and then my constituent will have to pay back more than two thirds of what he has just been paid, so he needs to keep that money until then. I am sorry, but I find that unacceptable. What on earth is going on? My constituents spotted the problem, came to my office and after months of back and forth we have understood it, but there are more than 30,000 carers across Scotland who have this underlying entitlement and could be missing out on universal credit as a result. It has been a battle to get to where we are today, and I would not be surprised if many carers in Scotland gave up their underlying entitlement to this payment if they were told by the DWP that that was the best thing to do—but there are consequences to that decision. I therefore hope the Minister can use his time to set out what the Department is doing to ensure that its staff properly know about and understand Scottish benefits. What engagement is the Minister’s Department having with the Scottish Government to ensure that we can get working together? As the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said, how will the Department ensure that that happens on a UK-wide basis? What is the current understanding of the underlying error? What steps are being taken to fix it? What will the timescale be for that? Crucially, what steps are being taken to identify carers who are being underpaid or wrongly advised to drop their entitlement, and to offer proper support while those errors are rectified?

• 2 Jun 2026 · Relationship between Social Security Scotland and the DWP · Hansard source

  More

  I want to put on record that the Minister for Social Security and Disability has been very keen to work with me to understand the problems we have, and I have been very grateful for the support. We are looking at the fact that the issues are still happening, and I am grateful to the Minister for taking an interest in that.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Relationship between Social Security Scotland and the DWP · Hansard source

  More

  In addition to all your work in the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, and so much behind the scenes, you are also a constituency MP. Like me, like the Minister, and like the other Members here this evening, you will be written to by your constituents, and I am sure that you and your team will know how incredibly frustrating it is when we cannot get Government systems right. That is why we are here this evening, and I hope the Minister will provide some constructive responses about departmental improvements. The issue I want the Minister to address is the fact that Department for Work and Pensions systems are continually failing to understand and correctly account for Scottish carers who have an underlying entitlement to the Scottish carer support payment, but who do not receive the payment itself because of income—for example their state pension or part-time work. I am currently supporting two constituents who see continual wrongful deductions. One has passed state pension age, and the other receives employment and support allowance. They do not receive any payments for the carer support payment from Social Security Scotland, but the DWP continues to make those deductions from their universal credit—I hope colleagues are keeping up. I want to pause at this point and reflect on how long it has taken for us to know what is causing the confusing and distressing deductions from my constituents’ payments. My fantastic caseworker Neve has spent literally months trying to unravel payments and deductions, while being told different things by different DWP and Social Security Scotland caseworkers. I have met the Minister for Social Security and Disability in relation to one of those cases, and he is aware from previous correspondence of the myriad communication problems that we had in one particular case, with DWP officers calling my constituent and causing considerable distress. My constituent was inadvertently misled—I like to think it was inadvertent—about where and when voicemails could be left, and there was a general refusal to engage with my office, despite requests to do so because my constituent, in addition to having learning difficulties and being a carer for his family, was also going through cancer treatment. Those are all underlying issues within the Department for Work and Pensions and do not specifically relate to Social Security Scotland, but we see similar confusion with almost every case that comes through our office, and we need it to be sorted.

• 1 Jun 2026 · Defence Bonds · Hansard source

  More

  Building our military capability is vital in this world of increasing instability, where Putin continues to wage war in Europe—as we have heard—and Trump rips up the alliances that once kept us safe. Investment in deterrence is far better than fighting a war unprepared. Getting UK businesses access to the Security Action for Europe programme is vital, so will the Secretary of State confirm whether talks have restarted with the EU in that regard, and if so, what progress has been made?

• 1 Jun 2026 · Defence Bonds · Hansard source

  More

  8. If he will take steps with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to issue defence bonds to help increase funding for military capabilities.

• 21 May 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Hospitality businesses in North East Fife support the Lib Dem call for a VAT cut for hospitality, but the Government do not seem to be moving on it. Will the Minister consult with businesses on a lower national insurance contribution band for part-time workers? Part-time opportunities are so important to hospitality and for getting younger people into work.

• 21 May 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  My constituent Antonis Vradis is a much-valued and loved professor at the University of St Andrews. He is one of a number of British citizens who have been detained by the Israeli authorities in international waters and taken to Israel for processing. I have been in touch with his family, friends, colleagues and students in recent days, who are all deeply concerned about how he will be treated and when he will be released. The video that Members have already referred to seems to confirm their worst fears. Although I am pleased to see reports of those from the Israeli embassy being summoned to meet the FCDO, and I am grateful for confirmation from the Minister on the expected processing and release, were the actual calls of the Sumud flotilla raised in the meeting with the Israeli chargé d’affaires? We need those aid routes reopened and we need aid to come into Gaza under UN oversight.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  The Government have repeatedly pointed to the fuel finder website as the best way to keep prices low through competition. Yet in my constituency costs have gone up so much that there is basically no variation between the pumps. Those high prices are crippling for everyone, but particularly for local businesses such as the fish merchants from the East Neuk, who go far and beyond North East Fife to deliver to customers directly. Driving is not avoidable for a constituency such as mine. Obviously, the Government are not looking at the Lib Dem proposals, but why do they not offer meaningful support beyond red diesel in rural constituencies? What about EV charging, for example? Often, in constituencies such as mine, people have to charge away from home because they need their car to get about the constituency.

• 21 May 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean), who is usually here for business questions, is probably very glad not to be here, given Arsenal’s success. It has been very good to see teams succeed in English football who have not succeeded for some time, but it was a different case in Scotland at the weekend. I congratulate Celtic on winning the league again, but as the wife and mother of Heart of Midlothian supporters, it has been a very difficult week. I congratulate the club on its amazing season. I thank the Leader of the House for providing us with the certainty of the business for the next sitting week—it seems to be the only certainty that we have. Who knows where we will be after that? The Prime Minister may well still be in post, but there is no doubt that his fading authority is doing the country no favours. We have seen how the bond markets have reacted to the uncertainty and chaos. I fear that this Government are becoming a little like HS2: they are moving more slowly and making things more expensive for people in this country. While the Government lay out their vision, we on the Liberal Democrat Benches believe that a crucial piece of the economic puzzle is still missing. We will continue to make the case for closer ties with our closest allies and trading partners in the European Union, but the Labour party cannot quite make up its mind about that policy. I note that the former Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), has made his pro-EU stall abundantly clear, whereas Labour’s candidate in Makerfield seems a little more unsure, despite his previous representations. The Prime Minister’s trade deal with North Korea is impressive—I trust that he misspoke yesterday. We Liberal Democrats think that a UK-EU customs union is the single best way to start fixing the profound damage done to the British economy since Brexit, so I was disappointed that Labour MPs joined forces with Reform and the Conservatives yesterday to vote down our plans for a customs union. Those red lines are deeply damaging to our economy. Will the Leader of the House impress on the Prime Minister that, whatever his potential leadership rivals think, the Government’s EU reset Bill must include steps to negotiate such a customs union? We on the Liberal Democrat Benches will keep coming back to that issue whenever we have the opportunity to do so.

• 21 May 2026 · Humble Address: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister has so far given us two reasons why the statement he has just given at the Dispatch Box is different from the one that was sent, embargoed, an hour ago. If it is the same as the written statement, why was it sent out as embargoed? I should also say, dare I say it, that transparency should not be trumped by time limits in relation to the business of this House. It has been three months since the House passed the Liberal Democrat Humble Address to release the files showing how and why Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was appointed as a UK special representative for trade and investment, and until today the Government have published only one written statement, which told us very little. The Minister has not previously come to the Dispatch Box at all; I note the difference from the response to the Humble Address, in the name of the official Opposition, relating to Peter Mandelson. The files that we have seen show that there was no vetting by the Government and that, even then, no questions appear to have been asked. The lack of documentation provided is itself concerning, as is the time taken to get this far. The Minister has said that he is not sure whether there are more documents. When will he be sure, and when will he release any remaining documents? The documents we do have clearly show concerns about the potential for conflicts of interest. It started with golf, but we all know what came next. Why did that not lead to any scrutiny or vetting, not just at the start but at any stage during Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s tenure as an envoy? The guardrails were not in place. The appointment came into effect more than a year after Ministers said that they were happy for it to happen, and the files also show that the then Prime Minister had been aware from the start and did nothing. There was time for the warning signs to be taken seriously. Why were no questions asked at all in that period? In his written statement to the House today, the Minister excused the lack of vetting and oversight because Andrew was a royal replacing a royal. Does he agree that safeguards must be put in place for any future such appointments? Can he tell the House whether officials or Ministers were aware at the time of Andrew’s connection to Jeffrey Epstein, which had already been established when the appointment was made? Was this connection monitored? Finally, can the Minister confirm, given their absence from this release, that there are no documents pertaining to communications with Peter Mandelson about the appointment?

• 19 May 2026 · Banking Facilities in Cupar · Hansard source

  More

  A recent petition in Cupar calling for face-to-face banking services has now been signed by 585 local residents—a sign that there is a real strength of feeling in Cupar about its banking services. The petition “Declares that everyone should be able to access cash and banking advice when they need it…that this should not be restricted by poor mobile or broadband connectivity” or by “not having easy access to a phone, or preferring to do transactions face to face; further declares that although…14,000 people live in the area surrounding Cupar and the town serves many more” in the villages around it, “Cupar is served by just one building society following the closure of multiple local bank branches…The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to work with the banking industry to deliver a cash or banking hub for Cupar. And the petitioners remain, etc.” Following is the full text of the petition: [ The petition of residents of the constituency of North East Fife, Declares that everyone should be able to access cash and banking advice when they need it; further declares that this should not be restricted by poor mobile or broadband connectivity, not having easy access to a phone, or preferring to do transactions face to face; further declares that although almost 14,000 people live in the area surrounding Cupar and the town serves many more in the surrounding villages, Cupar is served by just one building society following the closure of multiple local bank branches; further declares that it is not feasible for many people to travel outwith Cupar to neighbouring towns such as St Andrews in light of cuts to bus routes; and further declares that a cash hub would allow consumers and businesses to access and bank cash safely and a banking hub would provide vital face to face services and advice for the community. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to work with the banking industry to deliver a cash or banking hub for Cupar. And the petitioners remain, etc. ] [P003199]

• 14 May 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  May I start by associating myself with the remarks of the Leader of the House in relation to Brighton and the elections? It is not easy to stand for elected office, particularly if you are not successful, and it does take a toll, so I thank him for those remarks. I also thank the Leader of the House for providing us with the first set of business for the new Session, but I have to note that at the beginning of the previous Session the new Government made a virtue of the fact that they would be putting an end to the incessant chaos of the Conservatives, yet we find ourselves again with a Prime Minister who appears to have lost all authority. We all know that changing Prime Minister over and over again is deeply damaging for our economy and our place on the world stage. I heard us described in recent days as, “Italy without the cuisine.” When we look at the content of the King’s Speech, we see the reason why this Prime Minister has run out of road, despite having such a large majority: there is no real change offered by this Government’s policy agenda, just a tinkering around the edges. There is an EU reset Bill that offers no reset and no attempt to boost growth by moving beyond the Government’s red lines. There are no measures to boost national security by introducing a programme of defence bonds, and there is nothing to fix the crisis in social care that plagues so many of our constituents. Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate in Government time on how to stop this continued chaos of successive Conservative and Labour Governments? Perhaps some of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet colleagues might want to come along and make contributions. After last week’s results, one of the solutions that should be discussed in that debate is the need to move to a system of proportional representation for general elections, as well as for local government elections in England. That need has never been greater. We Liberal Democrats will always support calls for making every vote count, and that is despite results in Richmond upon Thames and some of the Scottish constituencies—including my own, I have to say—that would make Kim Jong Un blush. Will the Leader of the House speak to the Prime Minister and try to persuade him that if he wants to leave some form of legacy that he can be proud of, he should make time for a Bill on fair votes?

• 29 Apr 2026 · Agriculture: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with my hon. Friend about sustainability. We are in a cost of living crisis, but also a cost of producing food crisis. It took the Government seven weeks to respond to my written question about fertiliser costs. Does he agree that the Government need to be much more on the front foot on these issues?

• 29 Apr 2026 · Agriculture: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister talks about profitability, but there is no doubt that the Government’s failed family farm tax has had a huge impact. She also talks about building resilience for the future with schemes, but does she accept that we need next generation schemes to attract young people into the industry, because from a family perspective many of them are leaving?

• 23 Apr 2026 · Allied Health Professionals · Hansard source

  More

  I am conscious that this debate is on a devolved matter, but I thought it worth mentioning that the Allied Health Professions Federation held a hustings for the Scottish Parliament elections earlier today. Topics included having input from health professionals during primary care and the crisis in vacancies. On rehab, does my hon. Friend agree that we need to ensure that allied health professionals get the access they need to, for example, care home patients, so that we can get those people out of hospital and into the right setting to receive the care that they need?

• 23 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  First, I am grateful to the Leader of the House for bringing my previous concerns about the management of visa cases in the Home Office to the Department’s attention. However, at the moment I have a very acute issue with immediate support needs. A constituent of mine is in the USA, where his baby was born through surrogacy. Unfortunately, the baby has been very unwell, and he has not yet been able to complete the formalities for a British passport, although they do hold a US one. My constituent’s ESTA—electronic system for travel authorisation—is running out, and he desperately wants to get back to Scotland with his baby, who needs further medical care. In the absence of any remaining Home Office questions, will the Leader of the House advise me who could urgently offer some support to bring this case to a conclusion?

• 23 Apr 2026 · Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is illustrating the challenges really well. I look forward to the Minister’s response, because I think, given the nods I have seen, that Government Members agree. I have a constituent—a councillor, in fact—who wants to be a driving instructor, and he has experienced the same delays. Does my hon. Friend agree that we want to hear an update from the Minister on the work to put those systems online so that they run parallel with everything else?

• 22 Apr 2026 · Pension Schemes · Hansard source

  More

  Like other MPs here, I have constituents who have dedicated years to public service. One, a prison officer, was stabbed and assaulted in his work, and then had the privilege of being at Camp Zeist to supervise the imprisonment of the Lockerbie bomber while they were on trial. I have another constituent who is caring for her mother, who is the beneficiary of a pension and is having palliative care for stage 4 cancer. The Minister has given a very good overview of what is happening, and he talked about the changes that have been made to call times, but one of the themes coming through is about accessing the portal. That issue is leading to a real erosion of trust. If people cannot even get access to the system, it is a real problem. Could he give us an update on that?

• 16 Apr 2026 · Modernisation Committee Report: Access to the House of Commons · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak, on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, both as a member of the Modernisation Committee and, at one point during this inquiry, as a witness. That is also true of the Leader of the House, who gave evidence to the Committee before he became its Chair. The work we do in this place is complicated, but sometimes it is more complicated than it needs to be, and sometimes we revel in that. I am very conscious that we are having this debate during the final stages of the parliamentary Session and ping-pong, and I as an opposition MP have been leading my colleagues to vote No because we disagree with a Government motion to disagree with a Lords amendment, so we sometimes make this place overly complicated, and the whats and whys of how we do things do not often make sense externally. I maintain and agree with the shadow Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Hereford and South Herefordshire (Jesse Norman), and indeed the Leader of the House, that once we are here, we see that while there are definitely things that could be done better or differently, that is absolutely not the case for all things. We must always be aware of the need not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when considering what we should do. I came into Parliament in December 2019, and over the last two Parliaments—in both 2019 and 2024—we have had a huge turnover of legislators, and understanding why things are the way they are, and what needs to be improved, does take time. I want to make my remarks in line with the three sections of the Modernisation Committee’s report, and I echo others in commending the House Administration for its constructive response. The reality is that in many circumstances, but particularly in relation to accessibility more generally, it knows fine well what the issues are in this place, and it is as keen to ensure that it makes visible progress on those issues as are we on the Committee and parliamentarians more widely. However, the report summary talked about clear and prompt action, but we need to acknowledge that it will not be quick. I want to mention our experience yesterday. I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on PANS PANDAS, a paediatric condition—have I mentioned that I am running the London marathon for it a week on Sunday?—and yesterday some young people came in for a roundtable in advance of the Backbench Business debate we are hoping to have in a few weeks’ time, because it was important to hear directly from those young people about their experience of the condition. However, one of them was using a wheelchair. My fantastic team in Westminster, Kathryn and Claudia, incorporated a tour into those young people’s experience as part of their day, but the reality was that the one young person in a wheelchair had a completely different experience from everybody else. There is no access to St Stephen’s Hall or the top of the Westminster steps, which meant she could not see that part of the tour. A moveable ramp for the few steps from Central Lobby to St Stephen’s Hall, which could be used when needed, would be an option. The lift on the accessible lift route is really small. The young person yesterday had one of those quite mobile wheelchairs, but I have been doing bus journeys with wheelchair users in my constituency recently, and the technology is advancing significantly, but the necessary space and access are not. There are also very simple things like the fact that the carpet outside the accessible lift has a really deep pile, which makes it difficult to move across. Among the evidence that the Committee heard, what we heard from people working on the estate, about the difficulties they face, was pretty arresting. There is the Clerk who cannot progress in his career because he is no longer able to sit at the Table in front of you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and therefore his development opportunities are restricted. There is the member of staff for an MP who started on a Speaker’s internship for 12 months—a way of getting people from different backgrounds into Parliament—and was fortunate enough to go on and work for the same MP afterwards, but it took 15 months for the nearest wheelchair accessible toilet to be accessible to him, because he could not open the door before that point. As a Committee, that was shameful for us to hear and it shows that we have so much more to do. It is important that we remember that Parliament is a place of work and a place of democracy, and when we consider the restoration and renewal proposals—I agree with the shadow Leader of the House—we need to keep accessibility at the forefront, regardless of what our overall opinions on R and R might be. On procedure and processes, I remember meeting the previous Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), to discuss the Committee when the Government were looking at setting it up. On how I thought about the Committee, the equivalent that I came up with, from my time in the police, was a tasking and co-ordinating group. The remit of the Committee is wide and our make-up is unique, with the Leader of the House as Chair. The decisions on some elements of the work that we have looked at belong to other Committees, so we should be able to task and co-ordinate with them accordingly. It is right that decisions and inquiries on call lists, electronic voting—we had issues with that this week—and proxies are being led and reported on by the Procedure Committee. Our Committee also recently looked at virtual Select Committee appearances. The evidence we heard from disabled MPs demonstrates that there is absolutely more that can be done to accommodate them. Also—this has been my own experience of late as a Chief Whip—there are practices that we have utilised in the past that in some ways we have forgotten about, such as nodding through. I am not suggesting that we go back to what is depicted in the James Graham play “This House”, but there are accommodations that can and should be made. We should be constantly challenging ourselves in that regard. Certainly, I see it as part of my role as Chief Whip for my group to make those challenges and ask those questions. On reading the report, I also thought about my own reflections on covid. As I said, I was a new MP in 2019. There is no doubt that there was an impact on how relationships were built here in Parliament as a result of the practices we had during covid. We participated in the Chamber virtually, which gave no opportunity to learn how to intervene, or to just have those conversations in the Tea Room and the Lobby. It was quite easy to become siloed in our parliamentary groups, and I think all of us here know well that this place is at its best when it works in a constructive, cross-party way to make things progress. The last section is on communicating what the House does. Generally, the recommendations attempt to strike the right balance between the traditions of the House— I say that as a trustee of the History of Parliament Trust—and the need for Parliament and its processes to be understandable to the wider public. There is clearly more to do, but it is important that we continue to assess whether that balance is being struck correctly. I want to highlight the work of the Education and Engagement Team. I recently attended an event here in Parliament. Sarah Donald, the headteacher of Dairsie primary school in my constituency, is on the UK Parliament teacher ambassador programme, which will give her the opportunity to be an accredited partner of the Education and Engagement Team. That education and understanding of our democracy and how it works is really important. We are currently having Scottish Parliament elections, so knowing the difference between what an MSP can do and MP can do is important. Indeed, last week I visited Busy Bees nursery in Strathkinness to talk on the topic of “People who help us”. It transpires that it is really quite difficult to explain to four-year-olds what the job of an MP is. I have to say that when I visited my child’s nursery school a number of years ago in the unfirm of a police officer, I was much more popular. To conclude, the Modernisation Committee is an important feature of this current Parliament. We can and should be in a position to continue to review progress and we should continue to do so as this Parliament progresses. I am very pleased that the House Administration has engaged with the report so constructively and I look forward to revisiting this topic in due course.

• 16 Apr 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I start by wishing my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Bobby Dean) all the best for his parental leave. Sadly, and particularly for his wife, I have no news to update the House with, but I hope to be able to do so in due course. I draw the House’s attention to the devastating civil war in Sudan, which sadly entered its fourth year yesterday. This is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, with over 29 million Sudanese facing acute food insecurity. Earlier in the parliamentary Session, the Prime Minister said in response to a question on Sudan from the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), that he does “not think we discuss it enough in this House.” —[ Official Report , 30 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 806.] Will the Leader of the House act in the spirit of those words and ask the Foreign Secretary to give a statement on the conflict next week and include an update to the House on her discussions at this week’s Berlin conference? We continue to reel from the news emerging from the Oval Office. I must confess that I did not have the President of the United States labelling the Pope as “weak on crime” on my 2026 bingo card, but given recent events, perhaps I should have done. His latest AI image released last night of him embracing Jesus Christ reminded me of the immortal words of Brenda from Bristol in April 2017: “Not another one!” In all seriousness, Trump’s chaos is having real impacts here in the UK and in my own constituency of North East Fife. His reckless war in the middle east is hitting families up and down the country in the pocket and at the fuel pumps. Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate in Government time on the economic impact of Trump’s war and include a consideration of Liberal Democrat proposals for a 10p fuel duty cut? Other countries are providing that certainty on fuel duty now. Is it not time that the Government did likewise?

• 15 Apr 2026 · Energy Prices · Hansard source

  More

  3. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help reduce energy prices for people in Scotland.

• 15 Apr 2026 · Energy Prices · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome what the Minister has said, but the challenge is that the Government have yet to correct the challenges from the ECO4 scheme, which in North East Fife has blighted houses with not only a lack of insulation but poor installation of inappropriate heat pumps and so on. Can the Secretary of State advise me when the Government will start inspecting these properties and consider a compensation scheme for constituents such as mine?