Oral Answers to Questions
Wednesday, 4 November 2026
Contributions
The Prime Minister was asked—
Matthew Patrick (Wirral West) (Lab)Labour
Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 4 November.
The First Secretary of State (Louise Haigh)Labour
I have been asked to respond on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, who is accompanying His Majesty the King at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Antigua. This weekend, the whole country will fall silent to mark Remembrance Sunday. We pay tribute to the men and women who have served, and all those who made the ultimate sacrifice in defence of our values and freedoms. I wish a joyful and peaceful Diwali to everyone who will be celebrating. This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I will have further such meetings later today.
Giving people opportunity is the mission of our party, but for young people on the Wirral, Brexit means that they have been denied many of the opportunities that their parents enjoyed, such as the right to work, study or live anywhere across Europe. The progress being made on a sanitary and phytosanitary deal gives me real confidence and hope that we can strike a good deal with the European Union in our national interests. Can the Government go further, strike a deal for young people, and restore to them the opportunities that Brexit took away?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the Brexit deal we inherited damaged our economy, weakened our ability to control immigration and took opportunities away from young people. Negotiations are ongoing, but we know that an SPS deal could add billions to our economy, cutting costs for exporters, helping supermarkets offer better prices, and supporting British farmers. We are working with the EU to create a balanced youth experience scheme that creates opportunities for young people to live, work and study abroad. Meanwhile, the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart) has already said that the Conservatives would rip all that up, no matter the benefits; perhaps he would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight?
Mr SpeakerSpeaker
I call the deputy Leader of the Opposition.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)Conservative
I associate myself with the comments the First Secretary of State made about Remembrance Sunday, which I look forward to marking in my constituency of Brentwood and Ongar. This year, how much will the Government spend on working-age welfare?
Let me start by congratulating the hon. Gentleman on his elevation to deputy leader of the Conservative party. He recently said that it was now his job to tell the Leader of the Opposition when she is getting things wrong, which must make him the busiest man in Westminster. I am sure that the whole House is right behind him as he takes on such an important job. This Government are committed to bringing the benefits bill down and dealing with the mess left behind by the previous Tory Government, on whose watch welfare rose by £88 billion in a decade.
I think it is very telling that the right hon. Lady does not want to tell us the answer to that question. The answer is £183 billion. That is the highest figure ever. It is higher than anything during covid; it is higher than spending on defence, schools and policing combined. It is nearly £10,000 for every working household in this country. Will the Government commit to bringing that bill down in this Parliament?
The Government have been clear: the benefit bill will come down, and we are already taking steps to ensure that. We have rebalanced universal credit, increased face-to-face assessments, introduced a right to try work for disabled people, and introduced the youth guarantee for unemployed youth. Under previous Tory Governments—on the hon. Gentleman’s watch—the welfare bill soared by £88 billion. Nearly 3 million people were written off, with 1 million young people not in employment, education or training. That is the legacy of the previous Tory Administration. This Government are committed to tackling all of it.
The right hon. Lady has missed the fact that the bill is higher now than it has ever been. The Government are in a complete mess on this. On Thursday morning, the Chancellor went on the BBC and was asked whether there will be cuts in welfare before the next election. He said that there will be. Cue panic in Downing Street. The Prime Minister was sent out to clarify things. He said that the welfare bill needs to come down, but that this cannot be done by cutting the welfare bill. Then, at teatime, the Chancellor conceded defeat and said, “It’s not correct to say that we are going to bring this welfare bill down”. Will the First Secretary of State be clear: why is Labour not going to bring the welfare bill down during this Parliament?
The hon. Gentleman can continue reading out his questions, but he should listen to the answers. I have repeatedly said that the benefit bill will come down, and have set out the steps that this Labour Government are already taking to bring it down. The Milburn report will report shortly, as will the Timms review. Let me set out what further choices this Labour Government are making. Last night, the Opposition walked through the Lobby to vote against every change that this Budget will deliver. [ Interruption. ] They cheer, but they voted against a council tax cut for 20 million households. They voted against taking VAT off electricity bills. They voted against taking 70,000 small businesses out of business rates, and they voted against a tax on banks to fund it all. Perhaps he would like to explain why he did so now.
The right hon. Lady seems to have missed out the bit where the Resolution Foundation said that this Budget would be “catastrophic” for living standards, and the bit where the Office for Budget Responsibility said that the Budget would risk 215,000 jobs through tax rises. We know that Labour cannot bring down welfare in the next three years. It has been briefed, however, that the Prime Minister is preparing a 10-year plan. I am old enough to remember Keir Starmer’s 10-year plan, because it was six months ago. This is the only political party in history to have two 10-year plans in 10 months. Given that the Labour party is experimenting with planning, can it commit to reducing this record welfare bill—the highest welfare bill ever—in its 10-year plan?
The hon. Gentleman can ask me the same question four or five times; I will keep answering the same way. We are taking steps already to bring the welfare bill down, and we will take further steps. We have committed to legislating. Every week, the Conservatives bring here the same problems, and the same messes that we inherited from them—on welfare, defence, immigration and the economy. This Labour Government are committed to tackling it all. No matter what he brings, we are taking steps to deliver on all of it.
I am sure that the right hon. Lady was paying attention at the Budget, and to the figures that were published. Welfare spending will go up in every single year of this Parliament. I remember the Milburn review—a review so important that it was delayed until after the Budget. The Government are not going to fix welfare, and we know why, because the welfare Secretary told us. He said that every meeting he had with Labour MPs was about asking, “Who can we tax to pay for benefits?” It is very likely that the right hon. Lady was one of those MPs. We all remember that she led the rebellion against Keir Starmer’s very modest welfare policies. If the Government cannot reduce the welfare bill because of their Back Benchers and Front Benchers, can they at least promise that they will not put up taxes to cover these ever-increasing costs?
We have repeatedly been clear that we cannot afford to pay for failure and must invest in success. That is how we will bring the welfare bill down. We will make support more conditional on taking up opportunities, and ensure that young people get the help that they need earlier. We are tackling the long-term drivers of welfare spending, including high housing costs, and we will do all this in a Labour way. The hon. Gentleman told a gathering of Conservative party members that they should keep apologising for the many things that they got wrong in government, but I am not sure that his colleagues got the memo. The Leader of the Opposition claimed that she was not in the Cabinet when they made mistakes on migration, but she was there at the peak of the Boriswave. The shadow Home Secretary claimed that he was not responsible for immigration policy when he was a Home Office Minister, and the shadow Chancellor still does not want blame for the mini-Budget, which was written when he was in the Treasury. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would like to take this opportunity to apologise on behalf of himself and his colleagues.
We all know what the Labour way is: more tax, more welfare and more borrowing. There is no commitment to reducing welfare, and no promise not to put up tax. The Government know what needs to be done, but they do not have the bottle to do it. They are too scared to cut spending and too weak to do the right thing. They are too busy putting off until tomorrow what needs to be done today, and everyone else is paying the price—the millions of people on welfare, and the millions of people picking up the bill. If Labour does not want to do the right thing, why does it not just get out of the way?
Mr Speaker, I know— [ Interruption. ]
Order. Mr Rankin, we had a little eye contact earlier. I do not think that it looks good to try to shout down a woman. I call the First Secretary of State.
I know that the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar regards himself as the Tories’ resident historian. In fact, he once published a paper titled “Profile of a Doomed Elite”. I am sure that the House will be as surprised as I was to learn that it was not a study of the prospects of the current shadow Cabinet. As a student of history, the hon. Gentleman will be well aware that few Governments have delivered the scale and speed of change that this Administration have in our first 100 days; we are cutting business rates for 70,000 businesses, cutting tax for entrepreneurs, cutting VAT from electricity bills to helping 20 million households with energy bills, scrapping standing charges, capping bus fares, investing in our high streets, extending parental pay and tackling rough sleeping. He does not seem impressed. Perhaps that is because the only Government who had more of an impact in a shorter space of time was the one he served under: the one led by Liz Truss.
Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)Labour
Q2. I hope that the whole House will join me in congratulating Fleetwood Town on thrashing Arsenal last week. It was great news for the town and bad news for the Prime Minister, as Everton have been drawn to fight the mighty Cod Army in the quarter final. On a more serious matter, some of my constituents are living with the threat of contaminated land, fearing for their health and watching their homes lose value. Will the First Secretary of State work with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Environment Agency to ensure that soil testing is completed as soon as possible, so that my residents get the answers they so badly need?
I am very happy to congratulate Fleetwood Town with my hon. Friend. As a Barnsley fan, we live for those David versus Goliath moments. We published the UK’s first ever plan to better protect people and our environment from forever chemicals earlier this year. Just this week, the UK Health and Security Agency launched its first study into the levels of forever chemicals in the population. As we continue to build the evidence, we will consider the case for any appropriate measures, including national standards to manage the risks and protect communities. The Environment Agency is supporting a thorough investigation into the Thornton-Cleveleys site and I will make sure that the DEFRA Minister of State keeps my hon. Friend updated.
I call the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats.
Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)Liberal Democrat
May I associate myself with the remarks of the First Secretary of State about Remembrance Sunday, when we will join in honouring our service personnel and their sacrifices? May I also join her in wishing a happy Diwali to all those who celebrate? American voters have rejected Trump’s warmongering and the economic chaos that it has caused, unlike the Conservatives and Reform who cheered on Trump’s illegal war. Trump has renewed his threat of strikes on Iran—strikes that would be devastating for security in the region and devastating for the cost of living in the UK. Will the Government stand together with our reliable allies and send a clear message to Trump and Netanyahu that there must be no more strikes?
The US is one of our most important allies and our priority, absolutely, is de-escalation. The hon. Lady is absolutely right that the war in the middle east has been catastrophic for the cost of living crisis here at home, and the parties opposite, including the Tories and Reform, should consider carefully their judgment in calling for us to jump so readily into it.
I am grateful for the unequivocal response on that. The First Secretary has our backing in calling for de-escalation. As well as the economic turmoil, the American people have also sent a message that they are sick of Trump’s scandals, from his blatant corruption to his close friendship with Epstein and most recently, emerging from the Epstein files, an allegation of rape. Will the First Secretary of State join me in saying that in this House, we will not tolerate powerful men who abuse their position against women in this Parliament or any other? Will the Government also commit to assisting any and all inquiries that the new Democratic Congress may launch?
The hon. Lady raises an incredibly important point about the Epstein files and everything that they revealed. She is right to highlight the importance, always, of challenging power and standing on behalf of vulnerable victims.
Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)Labour (Co-op)
Q3. Manchester, Leeds, York, Bradford: you can get everywhere direct from Burnley Manchester Road station. You can get to London and even to beautiful sunny Chorley—if you go via Preston. The station is our gateway to the world and it is the world’s gateway to us. However, in 2026, the station is still not accessible, despite promises from the last Tory Government, who said that they would do something about “the ramp”, as it has become known. The First Secretary has visited the station with me, so will she back my long-fought campaign with Burnley council for a lift bridge connecting the platforms, so everyone can use the station accessibly and come to Burnley?
I vividly remember visiting the station with my hon. Friend. He has been a strong campaigner on this and I know just how important it is for his constituents. We have awarded over £640 million to the Lancashire combined county authority for its local priorities, which could help deliver schemes such as this one. I know that the Rail Minister will be happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss the campaign.
Chorley’s campaign has already started.
Gavin Robinson (Belfast East) (DUP)Democratic Unionist Party
Political stability in Northern Ireland should never, and certainly cannot now, be taken for granted. A fundamental principle in our democracy is that Ministers who take up office uphold the rule of law and support the police, the courts and our rule of law, yet the lawless First Minister of Northern Ireland and three of her Ministers have shredded their pledge and, with it, the responsibility that comes with office. Do the First Secretary of State and our Labour Government believe in the rule of law and believe that where one errs it should not be that all are punished, that lawmakers cannot be lawbreakers, and that there therefore needs to be an amendment to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to ensure that, in circumstances such as these, the punishment applies to those who stepped outside all respected norms and their pledge of office?
The right hon. Gentleman will understand that I am not going to comment on a live police investigation. The major problem facing Northern Ireland right now is, as he will agree, the absence of a budget. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is looking at how we can ensure that there is more political and financial accountability, and he will continue engaging with all Northern Ireland parties about how we move forward. Ultimately, we want calm heads to prevail and power sharing to succeed, and we want to enhance the resilience of the political institutions in Northern Ireland. We are willing to work with all parties on that, and I know that the right hon. Gentleman will play his full part in getting a budget agreed.
Fred Thomas (Plymouth Moor View) (Lab)Labour
Q4. Satellite capabilities and AI are essential to our security and economy, yet Britain still relies on allies and a handful of extremely expensive sovereign satellites. With advancing technologies and growing threats, these are increasingly vulnerable to disruption, no matter who we contract to deliver them. There is another way: a British-owned constellation with hundreds of cheap, commercially built satellites in low earth orbit using AI to analyse data in space. This would support our space sector, add resilience to our national security and drive growth. Combining artificial intelligence with real-time satellite data, Britain could develop its own planetary intelligence. Will the First Secretary meet me to discuss this capability?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The UK can be a world leader in this industry, which is why our space strategy set out over £7.8 billion of investment to strengthen our national security and resilience. I can assure him that our decisions will always prioritise economic growth and jobs here in the UK and the enhancing of our sovereign capabilities, and I am sure that my hon. Friend the Space Minister will be very happy to meet him to discuss this.
Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)Liberal Democrat
Q5. After eight years of refusals by her local authority to support her autism, 13-year-old Eivie White took her own life. Six months later, Eivie’s best friend took her own life, aged 13. Eivie is one of 200 cases related to avoidable child suicide and 1,200 child testimonies of misconduct on special educational needs and disabilities by 134 local authorities. The police are now involved. As local authority misconduct has led to children’s deaths, do the Government still plan to weaken children’s legal protections, especially at tribunal, in the SEND reforms?
I am sure the whole House’s thoughts are with Eivie and her friend’s families and all who loved them. This is a tragic case, and one that absolutely highlights the importance of reforming SEND—I know the whole House is behind that—as we look to tackle the failures in this system that have been an issue for many years. My right hon. Friend the Education Secretary is leading the work to strengthen that system so that families do not have to fight for support, and education, health and care plans will remain part of the system. Parents will continue to be involved in decisions about their children’s support, and the tribunal will remain a key legal backstop. My right hon. Friend is more than happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss this issue and the very sad case he raises.
Dr Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)Labour
Q9. I wonder whether my right hon. Friend has ever had the opportunity to visit the beautiful town of Bury St Edmunds—a jewel in Suffolk’s crown. Haughley junction is a piece of crucial railway infrastructure that, if completed, would enable us to run direct trains from Bury St Edmunds to London, which of course would make it much simpler for my right hon. Friend to come and visit us. What advice would she give me in order that we might get this project back on track?
I am very grateful for that conditional invitation. We absolutely recognise the potential benefits that upgrades to Haughley junction could deliver for passengers and freight alike and that these must be delivered alongside rail upgrades in the Ely area. As my hon. Friend knows, both projects were cancelled by the previous Government in 2021, but I am pleased to confirm that both are now being considered for future funding, and I know the Transport Secretary will be happy to meet him to hear his case.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)Conservative
Q6. My constituent Nick started his business in his spare bedroom. He has grown it into a high-tech manufacturing business that employs 50 people. Surely the First Secretary of State does not agree with her colleague who said that employers like Nick are not “working people”, or does she?
The hon. Gentleman raises an excellent example of the kind of people this Government are behind and trying to help. Working people are the millions of people who put in every day and do not get back what they deserve, people who do not have savings they can dip into and pay their way out of problems, and people who rely on good public services. Those are the people who this Labour Government are delivering for and who the Budget served last week.
Connor Naismith (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab)Labour
Q10. I welcome the Government’s ongoing commitment to tackling violence against women and girls and the significant steps the Government have already taken in that regard. But I have become aware of several cases in which constituents seeking to leave abusive relationships through divorce proceedings and custody disputes are unable to access legal aid because of equity in the family home that they share with their abuser. That equity exists on paper but cannot be accessed in practice. Will the First Secretary of State work with Cabinet colleagues to look at whether the legal aid system is adequately supporting domestic abuse survivors, so that no victim is denied access to justice because of assets they cannot realistically access?
I congratulate my hon. Friend on campaigning on this important area and highlighting some of our most vulnerable constituents. I absolutely agree that victims and survivors of domestic abuse deserve proper and timely legal support. In recognition that individuals might not be able to access certain assets or funds, we have already updated legislation to improve the availability of legal aid for survivors of domestic abuse, which includes ensuring that £100,000 of the value of a home will not be considered in the legal aid means test. However, we will always work to ensure that victims and survivors have the support they need, and Ministers will be happy to hear any further proposals.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)Liberal Democrat
Q7. Last Friday, I met a group of farmers from my constituency who told me about their experiences at the hands of a company called Green GEN Cymru, which has been sending its workers on to their farms at 4 am, wearing dirty wellies and showing no regard for biosecurity. Several Members of this House have raised concerns about Green GEN Cymru. Will the Government urgently look at revoking its Ofgem licence?
I am happy to take that case away and raise it with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)Labour
Q11. Hatfield has a proud history, but our town centre is not the destination it could or should be. We need to unlock public and private investment in a regeneration programme. Labour is the party of new towns, so will my right hon. Friend build on that legacy and support me and my borough council on an ambitious regeneration programme, so we can play our part in delivering good growth in every postcode?
I thank my hon. Friend. At the Budget, we made clear our commitment to creating good growth in every postcode, driving regeneration in every part of Britain. That commitment was backed by £80 million of new funding for the local renewal fund to support projects that create jobs, invest in local economic regeneration and boost growth. His proposal is a very good fit for that funding, and I will ensure he meets the relevant Minister to discuss.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)Liberal Democrat
Q8. Last night, President Trump took one hell of a beating. Now that the shine is coming off him in America, I wonder whether this Government will start to take a tougher stance in relation to him, too. Next week we have the Financial Services and Markets Bill returning to the Commons, and the Government have the opportunity to insert a clause that will make US tech giants pay their fair share of compensation to victims of online scams. This is something that the previous Prime Minister had committed to but this Government have yet to deliver on. Will the right hon. Member make it happen?
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising this important issue. Ofcom recently introduced a draft advertising code under the Online Safety Act 2023 that, when implemented, will require major tech platforms to take robust action on online scams. Non-compliance could lead to fines of up to 10% of global revenue. We believe it is for big tech platforms to tackle those issues and, where they are failing, we will not shy away from taking firm action.
John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)Labour
Q13. The poison of racism and religious prejudice is spreading throughout our family of nations, with violent attacks on people because of the colour of their skin or their type of dress, and people abused when going to pray. We need robust action on this issue: education in schools and workplaces, strong policing and strong enforcement against online hate. Will my right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State outline the steps our Government are taking to combat this, and confirm that the Government will work with the Scottish Government on it?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise this issue. There is no place for hatred and violence of any kind in our society, whether on our streets or online. Our action includes investing in stronger protective security for faith communities, using the recommendations of the Bell review to tackle antisemitism in schools and universities, and delivering our social cohesion plan. For the first time, this Government have chaired a National Security Council on tackling antisemitism, to demonstrate our commitment to rooting out that evil. We will always be happy to work with Governments across the UK, including in Scotland, to share best practice, because we all have a role to play in strengthening our society.
Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)Liberal Democrat
Q12. In September, the First Secretary rightly said that “local leaders will have the power and resources they need to invest in the things that matter most to their communities.” —[ Official Report , 2 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 174.] I agree with her; yet this Labour Government are about to slash more than £100 million of funding from Richmond council over the next four years. That is almost 60% of the council’s budget. My vulnerable constituents will suffer the most as a result of those devastating cuts. Will she agree to meet me, the leader of the council and my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), so that we can find a sustainable way forward?
Cuts made over the previous decade severely impacted the most deprived communities, and we inherited an outdated, unfair funding system that no longer reflected where pressures are greatest. The final settlement for Richmond council makes available more than £223 million, but I will ensure that the relevant Minister meets the hon. Lady to discuss how we take this matter forward.
Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)Labour
Q15. St Mary’s hospital in Paddington has a proud, near-200-year history, from the discovery of penicillin to becoming one of the country’s first major trauma centres, but the estate is now old and crumbling, with the highest maintenance backlog across the entire NHS. The Conservatives put St Mary’s at the back of the queue, delaying funding for construction. Can the First Secretary reassure my community that innovative financing models will be considered, including the potential to realise new fiscal devolution powers, to get the construction of a new St Mary’s under way as soon as possible?
I begin by wishing my hon. Friend a very happy birthday—I am sure there is nowhere he would rather be celebrating. My hon. Friend is right to highlight that under the Conservatives, his constituents were let down by unfunded spending commitments that were never deliverable. We have reset the programme and are investing in our NHS, delivering more appointments and lowering wait times—his local elective waiting list is down by almost 27,000. We are working closely with trusts to accelerate progress wherever possible, and a Health Minister will be happy to meet him to discuss his innovative financing proposals.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)Liberal Democrat
Q14. The hospital estate at Epsom and St Helier is failing, and the recent Care Quality Commission report said that that is impacting the safety, privacy and dignity of care. My constituents deserve a hospital that they can rely on now. At St Helier, the re-ablement unit building literally broke in two and 13 beds had to be closed. Legionella and Pseudomonas were found in the pipes of the maternity block. At Queen Mary’s hospital for children on the St Helier site the lifts broke, meaning that staff had to carry children up and down the stairs post-operation. Surely in 2026, staff and patients deserve better, so will the First Secretary of State commit to urgent action and to delivering the specialist emergency care hospital to ease pressure on Epsom hospital? The time for dither and delay is over.
The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise those critical issues and I absolutely understand the concerns over the services at St Helier. I know that the Minister for Secondary Care discussed these issues with MPs earlier this week. We have allocated £5 million to fund critical repairs at the hospital. We are keen that as many women’s health services as possible remain there while the essential work is carried out. The trust is committed to taking a decision on plans for the maternity and women’s unit in December. I know that the Minister would be happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss next steps and how we will address these really important issues.
Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Gateshead South) (Lab)Labour
Today I met Braelyn Hollensbe, along with her mum. At 16, she was given just three months to live because of a brain tumour. Braelyn travelled to the UK for cutting-edge treatment. She is now 19, with scans showing no evidence of disease, and she is in the Gallery with her family today, thanks to our NHS. The drug DCVax-L is manufactured here in the UK. It is the first treatment in decades that has been shown to extend survival in recurrent glioblastoma patients, yet it is available to only a tiny number of patients on a compassionate use basis. Will the First Secretary join me in welcoming Braelyn, congratulate the NHS on playing a role in helping to develop this treatment, and agree that we should help to get it into widespread use to save more lives?
I congratulate my hon. Friend on raising this incredibly important point, and of course I welcome Braelyn and her family today. I will ensure that the Health Secretary looks at this issue urgently. I know that the Prime Minister has taken a personal interest in it and will want to ensure that action is taken as soon as possible.
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)Conservative
Will the First Secretary confirm that it is still Labour Government policy that employers are not working people?
I answered that question earlier in the session. Rather than take the Whip’s question, perhaps the hon. Gentleman could confirm why the Conservatives voted last night against every measure in the Budget that will help his constituents.
Irene Campbell (North Ayrshire and Arran) (Lab)Labour
In my constituency, the coastal towns of Largs and Saltcoats were badly flooded by Storm Boelo, with much damage caused to local businesses, as well as damage to constituents’ houses and gardens. Does the First Secretary agree with me that to avoid that happening again, there has to be joined-up working with the Scottish Government and all relevant authorities and agencies to ensure that our vulnerable coastal towns and communities have coastal defence preparedness plans in place?
I know that this is an issue my hon. Friend has been raising, and I met her yesterday to discuss this very issue. Flooding is devolved to the Scottish Government, but we have set up a floods resilience taskforce to ensure that we can work across borders, share best practice and address exactly the issues she raises.
Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)Liberal Democrat
On Saturday night, five teenagers in my constituency were stabbed while at a party. I would like to offer my thanks to the emergency services for their prompt response, and I extend my best wishes to the families, the victims and their friends. What reassurance can the First Secretary give my constituents that the Government are taking the issue of violent crime seriously and treating it as a public health emergency?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right to raise this issue, and to do so in the way that she has. I know that Members from across the House will send their thoughts and best wishes to the victims, to their families who will be incredibly worried about them and to the community at this time. We urge anybody with information to bring it forward to the police, so that any perpetrators can be brought to justice, and we remain committed to halving knife crime over the next decade. I will ensure that a Minister meets her to discuss the particular issues she raises about this crime and how we should address these issues going forward.
Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)Conservative
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I wish to for ask your advice about the First Secretary of State having potentially inadvertently misled the House on two occasions during Question Time. She said that the Conservatives voted against every change in the Budget. That is not true—we voted against six specific measures. She also said quite specifically that the Conservatives voted against a council tax cut for 20 million households. We did not—we voted against increasing council tax by opposing resolution 86—
Order. When I stand up, please do me the courtesy of sitting down. Look, we cannot continue the debate. I am not responsible for the answers. What you have done, Mr Stafford, is to correct the record by putting down what you believe to be the facts. I do not want to continue a debate at this time. Bills Presented Energy Independence Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57) Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh, supported by the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, Secretary Angela Rayner, Secretary Dame Angela Eagle, Secretary Chris Bryant, Secretary Mr Douglas Alexander, Secretary Stephen Kinnock, Michael Shanks and Martin McCluskey, presented a Bill to make provision about the regulation of the energy sector; about energy schemes; about heat networks; about the Independent System Operator and Planner; about the North Sea Transition Authority and activities relating to petroleum; about the Mining Remediation Authority and coal-mining operations; about hydrogen power; about employment rights for offshore workers; about the energy efficiency of properties in the private rented sector; about radioactive waste; about fees relating to the assessment and certification of fuels and fireplaces; and for connected purposes. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Tuesday 10 November, and to be printed (Bill 176) with explanatory notes (Bill 176- EN ) . Visitor Levy (England) Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57) Secretary Angela Rayner, supported by the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary Louise Haigh, Secretary Lisa Nandy, Jim McMahon and James Murray, presented a Bill to make provision for and in connection with the imposition, by strategic authorities, of a new local tax in respect of stays in residential accommodation. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Tuesday 10 November, and to be printed (Bill 177) with explanatory notes (Bill 177-EN).
Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 5432173.