Wendy Chamberlain MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 4 Jun 2025 · Higher Education · Hansard source

  More

  International students are hugely valuable, not just when it comes to sharing cultures and knowledge, but to our universities and local economies. In North East Fife in 2021-22, that value was estimated at £159 million. What discussions has the Minister had with the Scottish Government about the economic impact of the reforms relating to international students in the immigration White Paper? Can she update the House on whether an economic impact assessment has taken place?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Higher Education · Hansard source

  More

  4. What discussions he has had with the Scottish Government on support for the higher education sector in Scotland.

• 2 Jun 2025 · Strategic Defence Review · Hansard source

  More

  It was right that the Secretary of State recognised the military communities who serve across the UK, and that we recognise those communities that support them. The strategic defence review recommendations that the Government have accepted will have a direct impact on communities across the UK, but when we will know, so that communities such as Leuchars in my constituency are aware of the implications of the defence review when thinking of things such as education, transport, health and other infrastructure?

• 2 Jun 2025 · UK Visas and Immigration: Processing Times · Hansard source

  More

  This is not about call centre answering and application processing times; it is about the backlog in digital status becoming fully operational. A North East Fife constituent has settled status and has done all the steps in setting up her UKVI account, yet on both her recent trips abroad she was told that her passport was not linked to her e-visa. Is this a one-off, in which case can the Minister review what has gone wrong? Or is it a system failure, in which case what is the Minister doing to address it?

• 2 Jun 2025 · UK Visas and Immigration: Processing Times · Hansard source

  More

  1. What recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of UK Visas and Immigration processing times.

• 21 May 2025 · Broadband and Mobile Connectivity: Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  Half the areas in my constituency are considered to be among the worst 10% in the UK for broadband coverage. My community council raised the same issue as my hon. Friend in relation to updates, which are a problem for those who are home working and want to make payments online. I hope the Minister will reassure me, but does my hon. Friend agree—a bit like the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon)—that we need to work on a nationwide basis to resolve these issues?

• 20 May 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  In correspondence to the Business and Trade Committee earlier this year, the Government said that some of the reasoning for not stopping licences for F-35-related components was the need to maintain arms for Ukraine. What practical steps have been taken in the three months since that letter was sent to ensure that weapons manufacture and supply to Ukraine is separated from the supply chains to Israel and the occupied territories?

• 20 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Access to banking services is a particular issue in North East Fife, where the limitations of the access to cash legislation are becoming clear. Will the financial inclusion committee agree to look at the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 to ensure that we get the access to banking services that local communities need?

• 20 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source

  More

  I want to re-emphasise the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade). A constituent of mine runs an agricultural consultancy. This requires travel to the EU, which is especially frequent during seasonal peaks, and he has been hampered by the rolling 90-day rule. The issue is that EU citizens can come to the UK for 180 days in 365. We are asking for an equalisation of that scheme. Is the Prime Minister going to look at that?

• 15 May 2025 · Gavi and the Global Fund · Hansard source

  More

  It is a particular pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship for the first time, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington) on securing this important debate. It is just six months shy of five years since I had my own Backbench Business debate on global vaccine access—albeit in the context of the global covid-19 pandemic. I look back on what the then shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy), said with interest. I found in her remarks a consistent emphasis on working bilaterally to tackle global health crises, and through those efforts, to tackle poverty and inequality. She said that this was not just the practical but the moral thing to do. I hope that we have not forgotten what we should have learned from the covid pandemic about how fast a disease can turn into a global threat, about how good health produces sage and secure countries, and about how terrifying it was to reckon with the realities of the pandemic in all aspects of our lives. I do hope that the Government will think about that as they approach the spending review. Gavi and the Global Fund have been an incredible success, and we ought to celebrate that. The UK has been a leading force in these efforts on the international stage, and that is something to be proud of, because it bolsters our reputation and our standing and forms part of our global soft power. We will not need to fund such programmes forever. Fifteen years ago, lower income countries were able to fund, on average, only 10% of the costs of their vaccine programmes. Over the next five years, it is estimated that they will cover up to 40% of the costs on average. Some countries are already there, with Indonesia now a donor to Gavi rather than a recipient. Let us not forget that we need the world to be vaccinated. Disease knows no borders. Disease leads to poverty, which leads to global instability. We also have seen the more immediate and direct effects of global vaccine and treatment availability, through the demand and growth of our life sciences sector here at home—will the Minister tell me that that is not the sort of growth that this Government are looking for? At best, these investments benefit us up and down the UK. In my constituency, the University of St Andrews reported just last month that its infection and global health division had been awarded early career funding to identify new therapeutic strategies for infectious diseases. I have almost reached the end of my remarks, but I must mention the elephant in the room: the shrinking ODA budget. I have read the statistics, as others have, that show that spending on Gavi and the Global Fund gives some of the best financial returns. Just a few weeks ago, I attended a meeting in Parliament with the chief executive of the World Bank. He was clear that his role and that of his organisation is to create opportunities in the global south to develop their economies and reduce emigration from there. Given the Government’s other priorities, such as immigration, investing in multilateral ODA activities makes sense. I really urge the Minister to look again at that cut and how long it is needed for, and to engage openly with the ONE Campaign’s pre-action letter questioning the legality of the current cut to 0.3%.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  I start by thanking all the Members who have taken time to participate in the debate. There are several Liberal Democrats present, which says a lot about the position my party takes on carers and the recognition it gives to unpaid carers, for which I am grateful. I also thank the Department for Business and Trade and the civil servants who supported me during the passage of my private Member’s Bill, now the Carer’s Leave Act 2023, in the last Parliament—they did excellent work. The real purpose of this debate is to ensure that excellent work is not lost and is seen by the people who need the help and support. I am encouraged by the response from His Majesty’s Opposition and their approach to paid carer’s leave, and by what the Government are saying. However, I am very conscious that if we are moving forward on paid carer’s leave, we need to make sure that the current carer’s leave legislation is available to as many people as possible. I am also encouraged to hear from the Minister that there is a ministerial working group on unpaid carers. The last time I discussed carers on the Floor of the House it was to ask for a carer’s strategy; it sounds like the working group might be the beginning of one, which I am pleased to hear. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett), our carers spokesperson, will be following up on that with the Minister and the Government. We all recognise what unpaid carers do, and we all recognise how much they do. What we are saying is that, if we really want to see growth—which is what the Government say they want, and everyone in the Chamber would agree—then we need to allow those carers who can work, to work. There will always be circumstances where unpaid carers cannot work because of the severity of the condition that their loved one is experiencing. My hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) brought one of those cases to light. But where carers can work, they should be given the opportunity and support to do so, because economic inactivity is causing real issues in our economy. That is why carer’s leave is an issue that all MPs should care about. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered carer’s leave.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered carer’s leave. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairpersonship, Mr Stringer. I declare my interest as both an honorary vice-president of Carers UK and a board member of the Fife Carers Centre, which celebrated its 30th anniversary last week. It is now just shy of two years since my private Member’s Bill, the Carer’s Leave Act 2023, received Royal Assent, and a little over a year since the necessary regulations were passed to enact the legislation. It came after years of work by dedicated campaigners both within and outside Parliament, and I had the pleasure of meeting some of them at an event to celebrate the law passing. I said then what I say now, which is that by passing the Act, I stood on the shoulders of many who came before. But the job is not done just because the law is passed. Employment rights are useful only if they are known about and enforceable, and if they solve the policy issue that they intend to. I want to use this debate to look at how the law has been working for unpaid carers over the past year. The myriad problems and hurdles faced by unpaid carers, or indeed anyone, are not solved by the magic of one private Member’s Bill, as much as I wish they were—as politicians, I think we all wish they were. According to the latest census data from all four nations, there are at least 5.8 million people in the UK providing unpaid care for an ill, older or disabled family member or friend. Of those people, 2.8 million were recorded as balancing that caring responsibility with work.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for that update on the progress of the Employment Rights Bill in the other place last night. My party’s policy is for paid carer’s leave, and I am conscious that my Act only formalised some of the less formal arrangements that many people undertake, but it hopefully prompts conversations with the employer. I hope the Government review will look at paid carer’s leave and introduce it sooner rather than later. I would be more than happy if my Act were superseded. One year on, the question is whether the policy is working. What do we know so far? It is clearly far too early to see an impact on poverty or even net employment rates, and I do not think the legislation that was passed is significant enough for that. Even if the statistics were available, there are too many moving parts to isolate cause and effect, but by now we should have a feeling of how well the Government are communicating advice about carer’s leave to businesses. Are businesses updating their policies and systems for requesting and recording leave? Are they training their managers? Do their employees know about their rights? Would they feel comfortable using them? Has the dial been moved at all towards more carer-friendly workplaces? My big worry in the first few months after the regulations passed was that the Government were not doing enough to tell businesses about the new rights and what was required of them. I accept that at that time we obviously had a general election and a new Government. For too long, the main advice on gov.uk was on a webpage for new businesses setting up for the first time. I am happy that that seems to have been remedied, and that using the search engine to look for carer’s leave makes the right page pop up, but I am less comforted by the lack of resources on carer’s leave, or on unpaid carers at all, on the Department for Business and Trade’s website. Yesterday, my team searched for “carer’s leave” and found no results under “guidance and regulation”, no results under “research and statistics”, one result under “policy papers and consultations” and three under “news”, two of which were from when the law was passed two years ago. It appears that the Government’s only interest in carer’s leave is in announcing a review into how it is working. Given that I secured this debate, I am clearly happy to see how things are going and how we can improve them, but I venture to say that the Government risk abandoning their responsibilities to working carers if they do not take an interest in promoting the leave that is available right now. What are they doing to ensure businesses, big and small, know about the rights of their employees and are supported in implementing them? How is this information getting out to business owners and busy managers, who simply do not have the time to look up a right that they might not even know exists? The Department for Business and Trade and the Treasury have more power to reach companies than any other organisation. If the review finds later this year that companies did not know about the leave, and therefore that it has been ineffective, DBT will need to look at its own failings and at the fact that it did not do more. The enforcement of legal rights is not the only way the Department can encourage carer-friendly workplaces. Businesses could be signposted to a whole range of resources, including guidance from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and the Employers for Carers network. Carer Positive in Scotland is done with the Scottish Government, and I am pleased to say that my office is a Carer Positive employer. There is no reason why similar initiatives could not at least be encouraged down here. As to what is happening with businesses, we can get something of a snapshot from an employer survey report published by Carers UK in January. I say “something of a snapshot” for one big reason: the employers answering the surveys are those already tapped into the networks and already alive to the issues facing carers, so low levels of reform could indicate that less reform is needed because policies were already in place, and high improvements could be because the self-selecting group is motivated to go above and beyond. But there are some really promising findings in the responses. Almost 90% of responding organisations reported no challenges in implementing the Act. More than half have a dedicated carer’s leave policy, compared with less than a quarter before the legislation came in. Some 23% of organisations saw an increase in uptake of their internal networks or support groups for employers. Many responded in free text that the law change had prompted greater understanding about what it means to be a carer, and about how people can move in and out of that status. But there are a number of factors that I am worried about. The Government should be worried about them too, and should be looking at fixing them immediately, as well as in the longer review. Only three quarters of organisations told their employees about the new right—remember that these are the ones more likely to take action. That tallies with other research, which found that only two thirds of working carers know about carer’s leave. Hundreds of people become carers every day, and most people do not pay attention on their intranet or in their work emails to things that are not relevant to them, so unless that information is easily accessible and reiterated regularly, the chances are that salience among working carers will continue to lessen as time passes. Even for employees who know about the right, there is a reported reluctance to be open about caring responsibilities or to request time off: 15% of respondents to the State of Caring survey said that they were worried about a negative reaction to taking time off for caring. It is deeply worrying that some respondents said that even though their organisations had policies in place, their line managers blocked requests for support. We should never be hearing reports such as: “I work for a large public sector organisation, how you are treated all depends on that one single manager”, or, “My employer offers flexible working but my line manager doesn’t and says carer’s leave is for emergencies only which it isn’t.” Given the integral need for line managers to implement carer-friendly policies, it is vital that businesses offer internal training and guidance. It is therefore worrying that of the organisations that responded to the survey on carer’s leave, only a quarter had specifically raised awareness or provided training to managers on implementing the right to leave. If the kind of organisations that are already tapped in to Carer Positive networks are not doing that, it is not hard to imagine what is happening in areas where there is low support for carers. There is a role for the Government to make sure that rights for working carers are a reality, not just a piece of paper. Finally, there is the elephant in the room that is paid carer’s leave, which has already been referred to, and whether people can afford to take time off. I have always said that I want to see the legislation amended and upgraded. Last year, I worked with the Minister for Employment Rights, the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders), on the Delegated Legislation Committee considering the then draft Carer’s Leave Regulations 2024. I recall that he, too, wanted it to be paid. He might reflect on his own frustrations with how long it took to see that law through, and ensure that the can is not kicked down the road. I will leave it to colleagues to look to the future, but today, I urge the Government to take steps so that the current law—the Carer’s Leave Act 2023—can reach its potential, is known about, talked about and accepted in our workplaces, and that it sparks conversations on what it means to be a carer and how work can be made to work for the unpaid carers that we all rely on.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to point that out. I occasionally use my husband as an example in this debate. He cares for his elderly mother who is in her 90s, but he would not call himself a carer; it is just part of what he does as a son.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend has anticipated some of my speech. There is no doubt that many unpaid carers want to care for their loved ones, but when they need respite or when the caring responsibility becomes too much, they need a social care service to support them. That is one of the challenges that many of them face.

• 14 May 2025 · Carer’s Leave · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Stringer. I am grateful for the intervention and I think the hon. Lady is absolutely right. In St Andrews in my constituency I met a group called the CRAP Carers—which stood for caring, resilient and positive. There is no doubt that the network of support that unpaid carers can access is really important. We estimate that the value of the support that unpaid carers give to our economy equates to over £160 billion per year. That is to say that our care force is massive, and it needs valuing and supporting alongside every other industry. We also know, as Members have already touched on, that statistically being an unpaid carer makes someone worse off. Early this year I hosted a policy breakfast with the Centre for Care at Sheffield University. Although the Minister could not attend, I am grateful that the Department for Business and Trade and the Department of Health and Social Care sent civil service representatives. We heard how the Centre for Care has been doing some important research on the impact of being an unpaid carer on income, which was published last year. Staggeringly, the research finds an average relative income gap of up to 45% for those informal carers providing the most hours of care. I recommend that the Minister read the research; it is quite heavy on statistical analysis, but I am sure that the Centre for Care would be happy to meet with him, if it has not done so already. The academic research confirms what we already know from the surveys carried out by organisations such as Carers UK: unpaid carers are more likely to live in poverty, and doing something altruistic for the people you love makes you worse off. The state of caring survey carried out by Carers UK for 2024 found that 40% of respondents had had to give up work, finding the juggle unmanageable, and of those still in employment, 44% had reduced their working hours, while a quarter had moved to a more junior role. That leaves the vast majority of unpaid carers with less money in their pockets every month. That is at a time when they may be living with the person they care for, and we know that there is a significant disability price tag. The personal independence payment down here, and the adult disability payment in Scotland—now a devolved benefit—are vital, but they are not enough to make up that difference. The issue is not just immediate poverty although that is a very real issue, but about tackling poverty among pensioners, especially women, who are still more likely to be unpaid carers and to subsequently reduce or stop working as a result. We have a gender pension gap because we have a gender pay gap. The latest Government data sets that gender pension gap at 35%, but other organisations put it much higher. We know that caring plays a large part in that. Responding to Carers UK last year, over two thirds of carers who had given up work said that they were worried about managing in the future, while over half of those who had reduced their hours said that they had cut back on savings for their retirement. All of that matters, not just to the individuals and their families who are struggling or to those who have promising careers that never reach their potential, but to this Government, who need to respond to the rising rates of poverty among older people while trying to reduce the benefits bill. The struggles that lead to people stepping back from work are entirely understandable. Caring is hard, tiring, stressful, time-consuming and does not neatly fit into our free hours of the day. Flexible working does make up some of that picture, which I am sure the Minister will acknowledge, but there will always be pinch moments when care arrangements need changing, extra hospital appointments need attending or where all the tiny acts of care and admin for a loved one cannot be fitted in and around work. The risk is that people use up their holiday, which is something that all the evidence tells us is bad for their health—as the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) referred to in her intervention on respite. The Carer’s Leave Act 2023 was aimed at solving that—or at the very least, helping with it. It was the first legal right for carers to take leave from work for caring. It was an acknowledgment of how hard it can be, aimed at prompting a conversation about support in employment.

• 14 May 2025 · Glass Packaging: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  I should declare an interest, as chair of the Scotch whisky all-party parliamentary group. My hon. Friend mentions independent brewers. Independent distilleries in North East Fife and elsewhere in Scotland face a real challenge, because they often do not produce separate bottles for hospitality and for other consumers. Does she agree that the Government need to look at that in their consultation, because those businesses will end up being taken into EPR through both household waste and hospitality?

• 14 May 2025 · Glass Packaging: Extended Producer Responsibility · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way?

• 13 May 2025 · Churches and Religious Buildings: Communities · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member gives an eloquent account of how churches active in communities can have an impact. Another point concerns those buildings no longer being used for religious purposes. The Church of Scotland is divesting itself of a number of churches, including in East Neuk in my constituency. Does she agree that, even if those buildings are not being used for religious purposes, they need to continue as the community hubs she describes, with Government support?

• 13 May 2025 · Speaker’s Statement · Hansard source

  More

  Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I have to admit to shedding a tear last night when I heard the news of Sir Roy’s passing. Within nine months of joining the House in 2019, I became the Chief Whip of a small group of 11, and he treated me and my party with the utmost respect. He was the first person to refer to me as “chief”—sadly, my family have not picked up that term—which showed the respect he had for the House, MPs and the parties they represent. I valued his counsel. We sometimes take the daily business for granted, but it is testament to the work of the usual channels and the Government Whips Office that we end up with the business and debates we have in this place. My right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) is sitting with me. When Sir Roy left his role and the House in 2021, we took him for dinner at the Liberal Club. I will just say that the club’s standards of service were exactly what my right hon. Friend and I expected them to be; I will say no more on that. Sir Roy was the epitome of the best of the civil service. We had good conversations, but it is fair to say that no confidences were betrayed. I am very saddened to hear of his loss. My thoughts and my party’s thoughts are with his family.

• 12 May 2025 · Young People not in Education, Employment or Training · Hansard source

  More

  Struggling to make ends meet, paying bills, buying work appropriate clothing and paying for public transport all affect someone’s ability to get and keep a job. That is just as true for under-25s as it is for anybody else, but the Government continue to maintain a lower rate of universal credit for young people when there is no guarantee that they have financial support from their families. In looking at universal credit, will the Government consider that?

• 8 May 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Last week the Permanent Court of Arbitration allowed the UK to uphold the ban on sand eel fishing around the UK, including around the Isle of May in my constituency. The ban is doing so much to support the native puffins there. It also affirmed that policies banning sand eel fishing are based on scientific evidence. However, the impact of the remainder of the judgment is unclear, with different rulings in relation to English seas that muddy the waters considerably. Will the Government bring forward a debate in Government time so that the House can fully hear and consider their response to this ruling?

• 7 May 2025 · Draft Finance Act 2021 (Increase in Schedule 26 Penalty Percentages) Regulations 2025 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I want to take a short period of time—much shorter than the time that many of our constituents wait to get through to HMRC—to echo the remarks of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Grantham and Bourne. HMRC plays a crucial role in the tax system, but recent statistics show significant challenges in its customer service. I am aware of constituents who wish that they could give up waiting on the phone line, but they know that if they do, penalties are potentially waiting for them. Although what we are debating here is limited in its changes, it is a challenge. I want to cite briefly a statistic from the 2022-23 tax year: taxpayers collectively spent over 7 million hours—equivalent to almost 800 years—on hold to HMRC. In 2023-24, only two thirds of calls to HMRC were actually answered by advisers, falling far short of the 85% target. I note the limitations of the changes, but my question, in addition to those of the shadow Minister, is whether an inability to get through to HMRC will be considered a reasonable excuse for not paying fines.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I have been contacted by several constituents who have experienced failed ECO4 scheme installations. What support is there for constituents when installations go wrong? Are rogue installers getting paid for work that is not completed properly? What steps are being taken to address such failures?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Intellectual Property: Artificial Intelligence · Hansard source

  More

  I very much agree with the hon. Gentleman. The problem is not copyright law, but transparency and enforcement. My constituent Marion Todd, the author of the Detective Inspector Clare Mackay novels, found herself subject to LibGen, which the hon. Member for Neath and Swansea East (Carolyn Harris) referred to. Does the hon. Member for Bury North (Mr Frith) agree that we need a full response from Meta, and that the new clauses that the Lib Dems have tabled will address future compliance?