Tessa Munt
MP for Wells and Mendip Hills · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“I associate myself with the comments of the Secretary of State. I am sure that all of us on the Liberal Democrat Benches feel deeply sad for the Prime Minister. Tuition fees continue to rise, while the plan 2 repayment threshold stays frozen until 2030.”
“As the Leader of the House knows, it is World Suicide Prevention Day. Suicide is the leading cause of death among under-35s. After nearly 30 years, Papyrus, the national youth suicide prevention charity, went into administration two days ago. Its HopeLine, a 24/7 crisis service, ceased with immediate effect.”
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. I just wanted to highlight a case of exactly that. I have a constituent whose property has been on the market since 2022. The landlord chooses who the new owner will be.”
“When the Minister says managing agents, does she mean management companies, a bit like FirstPort, which provide a lamentable service? One of the retirement buildings in my patch has just been offered the repainting of its windows for £240,000. I think that works out at over £5,000 per flat. This is just for the birds.”
“Like others, one of my constituents inherited responsibility for a retirement property on the death of the resident. It has been on the market since 2022, incurring annual costs of about £14,000. It has a falling sale value, and there is ground rent, service charges, council tax and an exit fee.”
“May I encourage the Church Commissioners to support the Church in facilitating community events? Wells cathedral and Wells bishop’s palace are at the centre of an amazing programme of year-round festivals, fairs and markets, but the Church Commissioners have suddenly served a stop notice on the Phelps’ family at Palace farm in Wells, whic…”
The complete record
Every one of 597 lines we hold for Tessa Munt, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 12.
“It has taken centuries of careful management and regular maintenance of the local waterways to keep this land habitable at all.”
“I will give the Minister some context to the geography of my constituency, which matters enormously. Wells and Mendip Hills falls roughly in two parts. One part comprises the limestone Mendip hills and the rest, the majority of the constituency, is wetlands and coastal plains: the Somerset levels and the North Somerset levels. Fifty-one per cent of my constituency is less than 20 metres above sea level. I will send the Minister a map, on which he will see that the Somerset levels are a man-made landscape. The monks, led by the Abbot of Glastonbury, drained the land hundreds of years ago by digging what locally we call “rhynes”, which is why the map shows the waterways as straight lines in my part of the world. It does not take a PhD in geography to work out that low-lying coastal wetlands are prone to flooding.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of changes to the National Planning Policy Framework. I am pleased to see you in the Chair, Sir Desmond. I am grateful for the time to introduce this debate on the impact of the changes to the national planning policy framework. I called for this debate following a decision affecting the village of Yatton in the north of the Wells and Mendip Hills constituency, with 190 homes set to be built on a site known as Rectory Farm, Yatton Batch. Yatton Batch is in flood zone 3a, which is the highest level of risk, according to the Environment Agency. The consequences of this decision affect not just the people of Yatton, as I believe it sets a precedent for every other community living with flood risk across this country.”
“I mentioned that the current neighbours would also be affected due to the simple fact that the floodwater must go somewhere. If developers choose to build up the land on which they wish to develop, the floodwater may well not hit those homes precisely, but will cause the existing homes and businesses in the area to be flooded more greatly. I have a lovely set of photographs of the land I am speaking about, which I will send to the Minister, showing exactly how it floods every year.”
“The consequences for developers and those who have already bought the homes will be awful. And the Yatton decision compounds the problems with the NPPF in allowing the need for home building to override common sense. To press the point, it is very likely that residents of new homes built on floodplains, such as those in Yatton, will face flooding damage in the coming years. Not only will they not be able to make an insurance claim, but any new buyers will likely struggle to access a mortgage. Residents may well end up trapped, unable to sell a home that might cost them thousands of pounds in repairs every winter. The Minister knows the weather experts say that what we are experiencing now is the most stable weather that we are ever going to see.”
“There are 12,800 people on the Homefinder list in Somerset, which covers 66% of my patch, and a similar proportion on the North Somerset list. I am chair of the all-party parliamentary group on flooding and flooded communities. Many of our discussions centre on the Flood Re scheme, which was a great initiative that meant insurers could cover flooding claims and the premiums for home insurance in high flood risk areas were not astronomical. The scheme comes to an end in 2039, and the Government have been very clear that it will not be extended. As set out in legislation, homes built after 2009 are not covered by the scheme. As we get closer to that 2039 date, more and more homes built in high flood risk areas are not covered by the scheme and so risk becoming uninsurable and consequently unmortgageable.”
“It imperils not only the new homes—I should explain that the judge said that homeowners threatened by flooding had sufficient time to vacate their houses before the floodwater reached them—but the homes and businesses in and around the Yatton site. The impact of flooding does not disappear just because people can get away safely. This is about property as well as people. The damage to wellbeing and mental health takes its toll on those affected, as does the damage to property, which can take months and sometimes years to remedy and replace. I would not want the Minister to think that this is a case of nimbyism and anti-development sentiment by those in rural areas. My Lib Dem colleagues and I agree with the Government’s desire to meet the huge need for housing across the country.”
“I take the right hon. Gentleman’s point. I will suggest to the Minister that, if he wishes to pursue a policy of building on land that will almost certainly flood, we need to put those buildings on stilts. That is not impossible, and there is certainly one very beautiful house on the levels that sits on stilts. Yatton, the village subject to the decision, sits within the North Somerset levels, barely 2 km from the Bristol channel. On Friday 12 June, the High Court handed down its judgment permitting the development of 190 homes in this flood-prone area, on a site that failed the flood risk sequential test. The judgment follows the NPPF exactly, as the judge had to, and prioritised building homes over protection from flooding.”
“Ensuring that our farmers can produce the food this country needs is of critical importance in what is a very unstable world. Will the Minister consider the points that I have made and write to me about the population figures? I want to make absolutely certain that he does not misunderstand me; this is not a sentimental case for nature and green spaces. It is very realistic damage that is happening to Somerset.”
“That is no different from any other part of the country that has some sort of manufacturing. Farmers use fields, and they do not have roofs, so it is quite hard for people to spot the fact that they are food factories. In the interests of an honest debate, I acknowledge that many in the farming community welcome what is set out in the new NPPF, but that comes with real caveats. It is worth the House hearing what they are. A lot of our greenhouses are more than 40 years old and in urgent need of modernisation, yet large glasshouse developments are still routinely treated as major infrastructure projects, which triggers huge delays that again undermine our domestic food production. My colleagues will need no second invitation on this point: food security is national security. I am really glad that the Government recognised that in February.”
“The NPPF changes will affect much more than just flood risk—our area and its green spaces will be under pressure. It seems especially disproportionate when I look at Bristol, my local city, which I love dearly. Its population is projected to grow by about 10%, which is again above the national average. It seems that those in Somerset and North Somerset will be asked to take a huge number of new residents. I do not know where they are coming from, and I cannot quite see how the Government have come to those figures. I would be grateful if the Minister could write to me on how his team has come to that assumption. The last matter I would like to raise is that farmers run factories. Those factories are the agricultural land—it is just that we do not have roofs on them.”
“I am keen to know why the Minister and his Government believe that the population will grow by more than 75,000 people in the next 20 years. That is a 13% increase, when it has taken centuries to get to 560,000. It is a ridiculous population increase, and it is not realistic in the slightest. For context, the Office for National Statistics projects that the entire population of the United Kingdom will grow from around 70 million to around 72 million over the same period—a rise of just 2.8%. I am the first to recognise that Wells and Mendip Hills is a lovely place to live—actually the best—but, even allowing for that huge appeal, I struggle to understand why the Government believe that such a disproportionately rural area will see growth at almost five times the national rate.”
“That legislation has been in the ether, unimplemented, for nearly 16 years. It is telling that 66% of the public already say that they do not believe the country or their local area is prepared for future flooding. Ignoring the industry that pays out when floods happen is really not the way to change people’s minds. I put it to the Minister that Somerset council is required to deliver 75,000 new homes in the next 20 years, and I believe that North Somerset has to produce nearly 25,000 new homes in the next 15 years. To repeat something that one of my colleagues on Somerset council says, it has taken since the dawn of time for the population of the Somerset council area—not including the North Somerset council area—to reach 560,000.”
“Subsidence claims, often linked to the same extreme weather, rose 9% year on year to £17,820. Research commissioned by Aviva suggests that 11% of new homes built between 2022 and 2024 are already at risk of flooding, and that figure is projected to rise to one in seven by 2050, once climate change is factored in. That is why I believe the Association of British Insurers, together with UK Finance and flood campaigners, has written directly to the Secretaries of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and for Housing, Communities and Local Government to raise the alarm. The message is simple: rather than weakening the sequential test, the Government should mandate sustainable drainage systems, finally implementing schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.”
“The Association of British Insurers has been clear that, while it supports the Government’s ambition to deliver 1.5 million homes, it has serious concerns about allowing developers to bypass the flood risk sequential test in areas at high risk of surface water flooding, which is precisely the kind of decision we have seen play out in Yatton. The scale of the risk to which it points is sobering. The Environment Agency’s national assessment of flood and coastal erosion risk shows that 6.3 million homes in England are already at risk of flooding, 4.6 million of them from surface water alone. In just the first quarter of this year, insurers paid out £846 million in property claims, with the average weather-related claim reaching £6,040—the highest first quarter figure on record.”
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. The point I would like to make to the Minister is that, if developers choose to raise the level of the land on which they wish to build, we make a complete mockery of the Environment Agency’s work in relation to the LiDAR data that it uses to measure flood risk. There will be little pockets that are no longer in flood zone 3a, for example, but everybody else is then in a more problematic area for flooding. The current neighbours would be affected, because floodwater has to go somewhere. In the event of flooding, if the properties are lifted above sea level by raising the land, the displaced water goes straight into existing homes and businesses.”
“It is a very good idea to have development near railway stations. However, I have another application on the horizon in Yatton, which is the village I was discussing earlier, that involves a plan to build on the railway station car park. Does my hon. Friend think that that is a good idea?”
“I wonder how the High Court came to its decision over the site in Yatton. What the Minister says sounds good to me, but it can be swept away because the NPPF is what the judge decreed was the way to go and, because there is a need for homes, the sequential test can be completely ignored.”
“In Somerset alone—I am not talking about North Somerset—18,000 new homes have passed planning but have not been built, which all relates to phosphate stuff. Those homes do not seem to be taken into account at all, given that we have another 75,000 on top of those, which seems inappropriate. I note the Minister’s comments about station parking; I really hope that we do not build on station car parks, as that would be mad. There are a number of other points that I would have liked to make—”
“I am grateful to you, Sir Desmond, and to the Minister for everything he has said. I very much hope that he stays in his place because we would like to carry on the conversation; I want him to stay exactly where he is. I know that the Government are not in favour of leaving notes, but if in a ghastly moment the Minister decides that something is not right and moves on, will he leave a long note for his successor? I do not particularly wish to argue in the last moments of the debate, but as I understand it the national planning policy guidance permits surface water flooding sequential tests to be disapplied. I need to continue that conversation with the Minister, if I may. I point out that our local plans are up to date until such time as the housing numbers change, and then of course the local plans will not be in date any longer.”
“For many, rural bus services are the only way to buy food, to get to work, school or medical appointments, or to access services. A shuttle bus is meant to replace the 173 First Bus service during six months of roadworks on rural roads, but would-be passengers could not find any details or get through to the operator, and they were left standing in extreme heat at the roadside. Will the Minister ensure that when routes are disrupted, operators and local transport authorities provide clear, accessible and timely information so that passengers are not left stranded?”
“I herald the passage into law of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, but many will be disappointed that the judge in Tuesday’s High Court hearing had to rule, under current legislation, that the Chinook families were out of time to challenge the Ministry of Defence, which has kept secrets and hidden the truth from them for decades. Will the Leader of the House ask the new Prime Minister and his colleagues to consider how victims of cover-ups might know or discover that they were or are victims of a cover-up, so that they can challenge in good time any Department that is doing the covering up, and to ensure that legislation associated with the Hillsborough Bill guarantees transparency for victims, not just time limits that protect Government Departments?”
“One of the hon. Gentleman’s former colleagues went to Downing Street just a month ago with a letter that says he believes he was misled by his own Department when he was the Secretary of State for Defence, so why on earth is the hon. Gentleman arguing this particular case? If Defence Secretaries are misled by their Departments, I do not really understand his faith in leaders of intelligence services and others not being able to hide the truth purely to defend their own Departments.”
“Can the hon. Member spot the irony in the fact that today, while the Government are considering this legislation, which is designed to prevent public bodies from obstructing the truth, the Ministry of Defence is in the High Court in London, trying very hard to silence the Chinook families by saying that they are out of time in seeking an independent inquiry on why their loved ones were allowed to board a Chinook helicopter that the Ministry of Defence knew was unairworthy, positively dangerous and not to be relied on in any way? There is surely an irony in that. It is absurd. I know that the hon. Member was talking about the intelligence services, but the Bill surely has to cover the Ministry of Defence and how it behaves, too, because it is utterly inappropriate.”
“My sense is that we could have some equity in the amount of legal aid given to families and individuals fighting big organisations, such as public bodies. If the rates of the specialists and professionals who are supporting the public bodies came down, and matched the rising rate of legal aid for the support of those individuals and families, we might be in a situation where could be some equity. That would make investigation much simpler for the courts and inquests dealing with such cases, because they would have people who understood the process better.”
“Last month, the High Court issued its judgment permitting the development of 119 homes in a flood risk area in the village of Yatton in Somerset. The site had failed the flood risk sequential test. The judgment prioritises building and development over protection against flooding and imperils existing homes and businesses in the area, and flies in the face of everything that insurers, lenders, Flood Re, the Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are trying to do. Will the Leader of the House ask his colleagues in DEFRA and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to assess jointly the likely impact of the judgment, which may set a national precedent whereby flood risk assessments shall be ignored?”
“Last month the former Defence Secretary said that he believed he was misled by his own Department while he was Defence Secretary. Former Scotland Secretary Baroness Liddell, who sat on the Philip review panel, said that she was misled. Given that, surely the Secretary of State must support the Chinook Justice Campaign families’ long-standing pleas for a fresh inquiry into why their family members were put on that particular flight?”
“I welcome the Minister’s statement. Has she considered the merits of establishing an office of the whistleblower, which would create new legal protections for those who declare wrongdoing and promote greater public awareness of whistleblowers’ rights? Will the Government ensure that there are criminal sanctions on officeholders who fail to whistle blow when they know or become aware of political interference or wrongdoing?”
“I am particularly keen that this matter is progressed at speed, because the fees for victims who want to get their transcripts are eye-watering. My constituent is a victim of domestic violence and her barrister needs transcripts of her hearing in the family court now to appeal against procedural irregularities and errors in the published judgment, but the transcripts will cost her thousands of pounds. Will the Minister address this gross inequality and waive court transcript fees as soon as she can for all victims, including for the family courts—with the requisite redactions to protect anonymity of the parties—to ensure robust justice, transparency and fairness for all?”
“Food security is national security, and I am glad that the Government recognised that earlier this year. It is critical national infrastructure. As the Government pursue their building of 1.5 million homes, with which I absolutely agree, can we make sure that the Minister’s Department talks to other Departments across Government so that we do not lose valuable agricultural land? We are already importing 55% of our food, and this house building could undermine the UK’s already fragile food sector.”
“Can the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs urgently to knock some heads together so that we can get a supply of drinking water at community events, and ask her what steps she can take to ensure that where there is a potable mains supply and an approved standpipe connection—”
“My constituent Dean Collier chairs Priddy folk festival, a local volunteer-run community event that for 34 years has brought really good music to the village and raised money for the village facilities. For 20 years, campers and festival-goers used metered water in a tap on the village green. Bristol Water remove that meter last year so the organisers can no longer use the tap. The mains pipe to the village has a standpipe point in a perfect location, but Bristol Water has outsourced its supply standpipes to a company called Aquam, which refuses to fit a standpipe if people are going to drink the water. We have a mains pipe full of potable water, a water company happy for it to be used, a subcontractor that will not allow a metered standpipe, and 5,000 thirsty folk music fans coming in a fortnight’s time.”
“I thank the Secretary of State for her response. Wells Cathedral school is in my constituency, and it has 80 young people who are on the music and dance scheme. It is a fantastic scheme, and I pay tribute to the outgoing headteacher, Alastair Tighe, who has done his very best to ensure that the scheme reaches deep into the community and those from less advantaged backgrounds, including one of our local cleaners—she is able to pay just £200 a year for what is a £50,000 a year education. However, there has been a 10-year drift between inflation and the amount of the money that the scheme receives. Can the Secretary of State have another look at this issue and make it absolutely certain that pupils benefit from better funding—”
“I have to say, I am dismayed by the fact that there will not be humans in contact with young people. From my experience, I know that young people are really engaged when somebody turns up in their place, particularly in their school. At a time when we are trying to reduce the screen time of young people, I want to speak up in support of having people going into schools, especially when they are slightly more distant from London—it is something so very different. I shall certainly reply to the consultation when it comes along, if I have not missed the boat, and I will speak up for this particular scheme; it is fantastic.”
“I echo the comments about how disgusting these particular crimes are. Lady Casey has identified how, in quashing convictions, the Government have failed to take account of the whole picture. Quashing convictions for under-age prostitution is laudable, but there are other convictions such as for possessing the drugs given to those who are abused by their abusers or carrying them under coercion. The Minister referred to professional curiosity. Could she encourage people around her to engage in exactly that, and to look further than just the very first or main conviction to sort this out?”
“May I raise the matter of repayments of overpaid corporation tax identified by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs after a company has been dissolved? Businesses in my part of Somerset have had repayments, but they are not able to cash them; it is their money, but the business no longer exists, so effectively the cheque cannot be paid in, and the account has quite rightly been closed. Will the Leader of the House encourage the Chancellor to assess the current processes, including the transfer of such funds to the bona vacantia division, so that former shareholders of solvent but dissolved companies can recover funds in a way that is successful? That is particularly the case for small businesses.”
“I too voted for the minority report, mainly because I am particularly concerned that the Government are going much further than the Leveson report. On judge-only trials, if magistrates’ sentencing powers are increased to 24 months, it is not impossible that cases with sentences of up to two and a half years could be retained by the magistrates court, which might mean that there is little work for the Crown court bench division; it will only have a narrow tranche of cases. Does the hon. Gentleman feel that there is merit in looking at other jurisdictions, and seeing whether there are other mechanisms for allocating cases that might be fairer and more efficient?”
“I thank the Secretary of State for her statement—it was brilliant. May I raise concerns about historical data held by social media companies? Has she thought about what powers she, and parents and carers, might hold to invoke something like the right to be forgotten, in order to ensure that children’s records and data footprints are destroyed, if that is what is wanted, and the social media companies’ memories are wiped, with a real penalty enforced if they do not comply?”
“What action is the Secretary of State taking to prevent Russia using dual-use manufacturing; to boost the UK’s manufacturing expertise, so that it can identify potential dual use, and prevent Russia using commercial supply infrastructure to support its war; and to ensure sanctions are fully enforced?”
“I welcome the Defence Secretary to his position and thank him for his statement. Sanctions are ineffective unless they are fully enforced, and I join the Lib Dem spokesperson, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (James MacCleary), in pointing out that we cannot allow loopholes to undermine our sanctions regime against Putin’s war machine. Numerous shell companies, as well as flags, are used as shields to disguise operational control of Russia’s shadow fleet, but Russia is also making extensive use of non-military, dual-use manufacturing and the global commercial supply chain to support its war.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and my hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) for securing this debate. I welcome the fact that the Government have decided to tie in newly qualified dentists so that they work in the NHS for three years, but does my hon. Friend agree that since that only starts next year, and the crisis is now, we should be starting that measure in September 2026, not waiting until September 2027?”
“I cannot understand why we have to wait an extra year to introduce that provision. It will take three years, while those students are in college, for it to actually kick in, will it not? I am wondering why the Minister does not introduce the measure in September this year, with the new dental students.”
“My constituent Sophia is 35, has cerebral palsy and numerous other difficulties and spends her life in a wheelchair as a result of poor NHS care when she was born. Her parents have a mobility wheelchair-accessible vehicle and take her to daycare four days a week, 13 miles away, for 48 weeks of the year, clocking up 49,920 miles for daycare alone every five years. She has numerous hospital appointments, which is a trip of 58 miles, and trips to the dentist and other specialists punctuate every single month. Under the Government’s new legislation, Sophia’s parents—her carers—will have to pay 25p for every mile over the new 50,000-mile threshold, which is likely to cost them several thousand pounds. Will the Minister impress on her colleagues the need to adjust that threshold for life in the country—”
“Could he also arrange for my constituent and me to have a meeting with the relevant Minister to resolve the matter of this outstanding bill?”
“A constituent of mine who runs a small specialist defence and security business in my patch carried out £250,000 of work on a nationally significant submarine disposal programme for the Submarine Delivery Agency during a contract renewal period. The work was accepted and used, as has happened at contract boundary times on seven occasions in the past four years, but this time payment has not been made on the grounds that no purchase order was issued. Would the Leader of the House ask the Defence Secretary to look into the agency’s failure to pay for this work, which was delivered and accepted, even though it is the agency lead and all operational stakeholders have said that the work was of value and should be compensated?”
“While we recognise the need for a proportionate and workable regulatory framework, it will be important that these exemptions are kept under review and do not undermine effective environmental oversight as activity in areas beyond national jurisdiction develops over time. While we support the implementation of this treaty and this statutory instrument, we remain clear that the Government must ensure the new licensing exemptions do not become loopholes and that regulators are properly resourced to enforce the agreement effectively.”
“It is a pleasure to serve with you as Chair, Sir John. The Liberal Democrats support the implementation of the biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction agreement, and welcome the draft order, which enables the United Kingdom to meet its international obligations under the global oceans treaty. We have long campaigned for stronger protection of the marine environment and support international action to conserve biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, including the global goal of protecting 30% of the world’s oceans by 2030. We note that the statutory instrument introduces a number of licensing exemptions for activities that the Government consider to pose a low environmental risk.”
“We will therefore support the draft regulations, but we urge the Government to move more quickly to deliver their replacement registration model and provide long-term certainty for businesses, regulators and consumers.”
“The Liberal Democrats support the principle of reducing unnecessary bureaucracy and avoiding costly duplication for businesses in the UK REACH regime. We recognise the challenges that businesses face in complying with post-Brexit chemicals regulations, and we understand the need to develop a more proportionate and workable registration system. The draft regulations will provide businesses with additional time to compile and submit complex chemical safety information while the Government develop their alternative transitional registration model. Given the significant costs and administrative burdens that the current system can impose on businesses, we support measures that avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens while maintaining existing environmental and public health protections.”
“Whether it is being shared or not, I do not know, but we certainly need to make sure that the CPS, judges, magistrates, teachers and lecturers, schools generally, health staff, council staff—particularly those in adult social care and children’s social care, and housing officers—as well as the police, are absolutely required to collect data and share it. There should be compulsory training for all those in the positions that I have just listed. Coercive control should not be viewed as something that applies only in a situation of domestic abuse. Victims of coercive control need to be heard. We need to recognise the signs of coercion and people need to be trained to recognise them.”