Dame Harriett Baldwin
MP for West Worcestershire · Conservative · United Kingdom
“I did not think that the Minister could make things for people in Worcestershire even more confusing than they were. They just want their bins taken out, their roads maintained, enough school places, adult social care provision and a say in planning.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member has set out the issue, and many wish to speak in the debate, but I wanted to get that on the record. Whenever I write to Royal Mail about the issue, I never get a very convincing response.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker; I was not expecting to be called quite so early in the debate. I congratulate my Worcestershire colleague, the hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), on so ably setting out many of the problems that we also have in West Worcestershire.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will my hon. Friend thank the high number of my constituents who signed the petition, putting West Worcestershire at the top of list for the number of signers who brought it before Parliament?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Lady for her excellent report. Was she as shocked as I was to learn about the difficulty that defence firms in Scotland face in accessing basic banking services?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q8. The Leader of the Opposition has made her position on doing deals with other parties crystal-clear. Will the Prime Minister make it equally clear, following the Green party’s descent into the most abhorrent antisemitism, that he will rule out co-operating with it?”
House of Commons14 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
3,836 lines on record for Dame Harriett Baldwin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 1 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“I did not think that the Minister could make things for people in Worcestershire even more confusing than they were. They just want their bins taken out, their roads maintained, enough school places, adult social care provision and a say in planning. But now I understand that we will have to get councillors elected to district councils again next May, that we will have to get councillors elected to a new shadow authority the following May, and that this new entity in the south of Worcestershire will now not be created until 2029. I just cannot see how that is going to benefit my residents.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T9. Given the increasing evidence of hybrid attacks by Russia on British targets, will the Foreign Secretary rule out shaking hands with Sergey Lavrov at the upcoming G20?”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will my hon. Friend thank the high number of my constituents who signed the petition, putting West Worcestershire at the top of list for the number of signers who brought it before Parliament? Will he also praise the work of the Graham Fulford Charitable Trust which, working with the Worcestershire Ambassadors, brings so many free prostate cancer screening opportunities to people in my constituency?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Lady for her excellent report. Was she as shocked as I was to learn about the difficulty that defence firms in Scotland face in accessing basic banking services? Does she agree that the interpretation of ESG often does not recognise that, without strong defence, we would have no environment, society and governance in this country?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member has set out the issue, and many wish to speak in the debate, but I wanted to get that on the record. Whenever I write to Royal Mail about the issue, I never get a very convincing response. It often has to do with sickness in the sorting office or something along those lines, and that does not seem like a compelling reason for things going so badly wrong in the last 18 months or so. I welcome this opportunity that the Backbench Business Committee has given us to get these concerns on the record. I look forward to hearing from the Minister about how she will deal both with Ofcom, the regulator, and with the company itself. Clearly, we must all aim to get a better service for our constituents. It is a service that has been running in this country for hundreds of years, and it has gone wrong only in the last year and a half.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker; I was not expecting to be called quite so early in the debate. I congratulate my Worcestershire colleague, the hon. Member for Redditch (Chris Bloore), on so ably setting out many of the problems that we also have in West Worcestershire. Having been a Member of Parliament there for many years, I have to highlight the fact that it has been only in the last year and a half that this has become a big issue in my postbag, if I can call it that—probably, by and large, in my email inbox. It has become the biggest issue that I hear about from my constituents, whether in Tenbury, Malvern, Pershore, Upton upon Severn or any of the villages in between. It is causing huge frustration to my constituents; the hon.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q8. The Leader of the Opposition has made her position on doing deals with other parties crystal-clear. Will the Prime Minister make it equally clear, following the Green party’s descent into the most abhorrent antisemitism, that he will rule out co-operating with it?”
House of Commons14 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the Chancellor to his new role. I paid close attention yesterday to the long speech he made to reset the narrative and drive growth Britain. In paying tribute to his predecessor, will he recognise that she left the highest tax burden on record? Instead of postponing the words he could utter to my hon. Friend the Member for Havant (Alan Mak), could he make a short speech today from the Dispatch Box to say that he does not plan to increase the tax burden further?”
House of Commons8 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In Worcestershire, what has happened has thrown everything into disarray. Now that we are asking people to stand as district councillors next May, will the Secretary of State clarify whether that will be for a four-year term?”
House of Commons7 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the new Prime Minister to the Dispatch Box. I note that in his statement he referred to the biggest issues facing the country as being “the economy and the cost of living crisis”. Will he accept that one of the things that has damaged our economy and caused prices to be higher is the tax-and-spend Budget in November 2024? He has cut taxes twice—two small tax cuts—since he became Prime Minister. Will he commit that in the Budget there will be no further searching for new things to tax? The biggest message of hope he could send to the country today would be to rule out further tax rises.”
House of Commons1 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Could the Leader of the House make a commitment that the new Chancellor of the Exchequer will come to the House on the first day we are back from recess? The current Chancellor has raised taxes on payrolls, and we have fewer payroll jobs; she has raised taxes on businesses, and businesses have closed; and she has raised taxes on non-doms, and millionaires have fled the country. The reality in the world outside is that, with a new Chancellor, we are going to have a whole summer of speculation about other tax rises in the run-up to the Budget. During that period, hiring and investment decisions are going to be put on hold, so I think the Leader of the House can see how important it is that we hear from the new Chancellor at the earliest opportunity.”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With a stroke of his Whitehall pen, the Secretary of State has just abolished Malvern Hills district council, Worcester city council, wonderful Wychavon district council and Worcestershire county council. He said in his statement that this is about making “real improvements to people’s lives and…communities”. Can he explain how it will help with the situation faced by my constituents, in which two major highways in west Worcestershire have collapsed and the council has no plan to repair them? This chaos is surely going to slow that down.”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In recent weeks in West Worcestershire, I have met local police and the police and crime commissioner; the police and crime commissioner is being abolished, and the police are being reorganised. I have met the local health commissioners; they are being reorganised, and Healthwatch is being abolished. I have met district councillors; they are being abolished, and their ability to make determinations on planning applications has been taken away. Can the Minister explain how any of this throwing everything up in the air is actually going to help my constituents, particularly the most vulnerable?”
House of Commons13 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Leader of the House confirm that, given that the other place is sitting next week, there is nothing to stop him tabling a business statement to enable this House to sit next week? Given the enormity of the events happening in the Government next week, does he not think that would be a good idea?”
House of Commons13 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The net zero costs that the Government have imposed on businesses have meant that the Government were required to introduce a £120 million subsidy for the ceramics industry.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For generations, the British ceramics industry has been recognised all around the world for its quality, craftsmanship and innovation, but it is clear that the industry faces particular challenges because it is particularly energy intensive. The high temperatures that kilns need mean that the industry cannot simply find, at short notice, alternative sources of energy, or switch on and off when prices fluctuate. The industry is uniquely exposed to very high energy costs, and the recent challenges facing some of its well-known firms should serve as a warning. The supercharger scheme is a sticking plaster on the damage that has been caused by the Energy Secretary’s net zero policies, which have driven up the cost of energy and piled that cost on to businesses.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have heard a range of valuable contributions from Members, and the importance of the industry, not just in Staffordshire but in many other parts of the UK, has truly come across. I was fascinated to hear about Scotland, Cornwall and Stroud, and about a number of businesses in the ceramics sector. It was very welcome to hear from my right hon. Friend the Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson), who made a powerful contribution on behalf of a sector in which he has first-hand experience of working. We have learned that the ceramics industry is not simply another manufacturing sector. It is a source of highly skilled employment, a proud part of our industrial heritage and a significant contributor to our economy.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is an honour to follow such an interesting speech about bricks. I congratulate Hayley and the other petitioners, the Petitions Committee and the hon. Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson) for bringing this important issue into Parliament; it has been a really interesting debate. It is fair to say that the efforts of the petitioners have made sure that the concerns of workers, manufacturers, suppliers and the local communities that depend on the ceramics industry have truly been heard in Parliament. It is clear that the ceramics sector faces several existential pressures including, in particular, high energy costs, as well as burdensome regulation and rising labour costs.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We would back the North sea and get Britain drilling again, unlocking home-grown energy and generating an estimated £2.5 billion in additional tax revenues each year.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not give way, given how tight we are for time. I hope Members will welcome the fact that the Conservatives have a clear and credible plan to cut energy bills, reduce regulation and lower taxes. We have a cheap power plan that will cut household energy bills by £200 a year and cut electricity bills for businesses by 20%. That could save ceramics businesses a large amount of money. It would save the average restaurant £5,500 and the average pub £1,100. We would achieve that by axing the carbon tax in full, including the UK emissions trading scheme and carbon price support. We would also scrap the renewables obligation certificate scheme, which would free up money that is currently used to fund the payments through general taxation.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Government support the cheap power plan that would cut business energy costs, and therefore abandon the ideological policies that are driving proud sectors such as ceramics into decline? The future of a great British industry, and all the livelihoods that it supports, are too important to ignore.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It would mean we would have to import less from countries outside the UK because we would have our own supply. I do not want to intrude on arguments within the governing party, but I will call out the fact that it does not make sense to leave our own gas in the ground. The policies I have been outlining are precisely the ones that energy-intensive sectors such as ceramics have been calling for. If we are serious about protecting the British ceramics industry, we need to act now to cut the cost of industrial energy. I will ask the Minister a couple of questions. We have heard a bit about the challenge in respect of imports, so it would be interesting to hear from him what representations the industry has made to the Trade Remedies Authority.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to ask the Minister about the auction price that the Energy Secretary set today for offshore wind, which I understand is £120 per megawatt-hour. That sounds very high to me.”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is a bit of an end-of-term feel in the House at the moment. I heard the Secretary of State set out his answer to his essay question, but I point out that UK business confidence is at a four-year low, unemployment is up, millionaires are fleeing, and the Department’s own figures show inward investment falling by 26% this year to the lowest level in over a decade. I would say that is a failing mark. What does the Secretary of State plan to do differently when the new headteacher arrives?”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not know about you, Mr Speaker, but I did not hear a plan for improvement in that answer. I am afraid the mark is “must do better”. Let us turn to another bit of the Secretary of State’s coursework in this failing end-of-term report. Will he agree today to compensate all the Horizon victims, and to get Fujitsu to pay towards it, by the end of the year?”
House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In West Worcestershire we have the River Severn, the River Avon, the River Teme and many brooks, so flooding is a perennial issue. Over the years, we have built many new flood defence schemes. I thank the Minister personally for her role in the Severn Stoke scheme, which is currently under construction. Unfortunately, the Tenbury Wells scheme has been cancelled, and there will be individual property-level resilience in that town. Does the Minister have any advice for the town council, which is unable to get any insurance now? Will she consider changes to the Flood Re scheme to enable properties that have benefited from flood resilience measures to get access to Flood Re for their insurance?”
House of Commons1 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister gave us a timetable, but can she clarify it so that businesses can understand the timetable they are working towards and whether the measures represent a long-term policy of continued reliance on EU standards? The Committee should not be asked to proceed on the basis of incomplete analysis. I hope the Minister can provide clarity on costs, impacts and the Government’s longer-term regulatory direction, because while we await clarity on those matters, we will oppose the regulations.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How does the Minister intend firms that trade across both markets, particularly small and medium-sized businesses, to navigate that fragmentation? Fourthly, the Government suggest that many businesses already align with EU standards. If that is the case, why has there been no full assessment of the administrative burden of operating dual systems? More fundamentally, the regulations are politically and legally significant. They give practical effect, through enforcement, to legislation made outside the United Kingdom in a legislature in which the people of Northern Ireland are not represented. Whatever one’s views of the wider arrangements, that is not a trivial step and it deserves proper scrutiny. Finally, the Government indicate that similar measures may in time be introduced in Great Britain.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is a significant omission. It is impossible for the Committee to judge whether the measures will have a material effect on trade, as is required, without understanding the real costs imposed on Northern Ireland businesses. Secondly, what assessment has the Minister made of the comparative cost burden? Will the measure increase costs for Northern Ireland businesses relative to those in Great Britain, and if so, to what extent? How many businesses are expected to be impacted? Does the Minister believe that the £16.6 million UK internal market package will be sufficient to meet the costs? Thirdly, the instrument clearly deepens regulatory divergence within the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland will be subject to a new EU regulation, enforced through EU-aligned structures, while Great Britain operates under a different framework.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. As we heard from the Minister, the instrument makes two principal changes. First, it provides for the enforcement in Northern Ireland of the EU machinery regulation, including in respect of powers for regulators, offences, penalties and mechanisms for co-operation with EU authorities. Secondly, it amends the Great Britain regime by extending the recognition of CE marking beyond January next year. The Government argue that the changes will avoid a regulatory cliff edge and support trade. Although there are merits to continuity, the instrument also raises several serious concerns. First, there is no impact assessment. The explanatory memorandum focuses narrowly on the cost of enforcement, not the cost of the underlying regulation once enforced.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Finally, may we have an update on the negotiations the Government are having in this area with the US and India, because it seems that whenever the UK Government negotiate on behalf of our steel industry, the industry loses out? This is all shaping up to be a disaster for steel, and we would appreciate an update.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Businesses have been warning us for months about the damage that these proposals could cause, and they are now expected to adapt in a matter of hours, not days. Will the Minister publish the full impact assessment and communicate properly with the affected sectors? He mentioned a few ways in which he is going to communicate with them, but I cannot stress enough the urgency of getting clarity for every business across this country in the upstream steel industry. Have any Northern Ireland businesses specifically lodged applications with the Trade Remedies Authority? I know that the Minister for Industry, the hon. Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald), has kindly let us know that he cannot attend oral questions on Thursday as he will be visiting businesses in Northern Ireland. Is that to do with the serious concerns over steel tariffs?”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I congratulate the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) on securing this urgent question. The Conservatives have made clear for a number of weeks how concerned we are about the incoming steel tariffs that will take effect tomorrow. We have heard from businesses, not just in Northern Ireland but across the country, that the 50% tariff on steel imports above the quota will do great damage to upstream British manufacturing, our defence and aerospace sectors, and those who construct the nation’s infrastructure. We acknowledge that on Thursday the Government brought forward some changes to the quotas after reflecting on concerns raised by industry, but we have now heard at the last minute that the EU has cut a significant chunk of the UK’s export quota.”
House of Commons30 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for giving way. If everything is so great, why has Lord Robertson described the Government’s situation as one of “corrosive complacency”?”
House of Commons23 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the Secretary of State for giving way. He mentioned parental consent—what would happen in a situation where the child was in the care of the state? Would they be included or excluded from this trial?”
House of Commons23 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On 1 July, the Trade Minister is slapping a 50% tariff on steel from many of our allies, much of which goes into the aerospace and defence supply chain. That will affect the cost of the defence investment plan. Will the Minister urgently review those tariffs and their impact on our defence spending? I am sure he will agree that he wants to get the most bang for his money when funding defence.”
House of Commons15 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich and Evesham (Nigel Huddleston) and I have a hope, which is that parking at Worcestershire Parkway station can expand. We have been told by Great Western Railway that it can no longer do that, because it is now the responsibility of Great British Railways. Can the Secretary of State reassure my hon. Friend and me that the wonderful entity she is creating through this legislation will expand the parking, so that my constituents can hope for a parking place at Worcestershire Parkway?”
House of Commons10 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is not fair that hard-working taxpayers should be forced to pay for a potential failure of Ministers who think they are able to defy the realities of this market. Amendment 22 would cap the amount of financial assistance that could be provided to a steel undertaking to £1 million per worker over a five-year period. It would also fix the employee count at the point that support begins, with “employee” being defined by section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The amendment would ensure that financial assistance is targeted, proportionate and provides value for money. If the Government believe in this intervention, as they clearly do, they should be willing to set limits on it, because without such a cap we are simply asking taxpayers to sign up to an unlimited liability.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yesterday we discussed amendments in which we sought to rein in some of the unfettered powers that the Secretary of State is taking for himself in this legislation. Today’s amendments are about trying to rein in the unfettered liability and financial risk that this legislation puts on the taxpayer. For example, amendment 20 would allow the Secretary of State to provide financial assistance if the National Audit Office has concluded that it would secure value for money for taxpayers. The amendment is obviously about making it clear that these powers are not a blank cheque, that they must be constrained, justified and used only when strictly necessary. We cannot have industrial improvisation when the British taxpayer is being asked to pick up the bill.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are suggesting in these amendments that reports about financial assistance should come every three months. We are talking about substantial and significant sums of public money, so we do not think that annual reporting would be sufficient. Quarterly reporting would ensure that Parliament can properly scrutinise how much money is being spent and how much is being done in closer to real time. It is essential that financial exposure is monitored closely and transparently. We do not want costs to escalate without people being able to notice them, and we want Ministers to remain accountable for public spending.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I take issue with where the hon. Member is coming from on that, because by putting a sensible and finite limit on the amount per employee—and I will speak later to another amendment where we propose an overall limit—we are talking about the amount that has been set by the Chancellor through the spending review envelope. I do not think she really wants to say to the Committee that there should be completely unlimited budgets for this intervention. She herself would know that in any intervention we ought to go in with a wise idea about what is a reasonable spending limit. Amendments 10 and 11 would increase the frequency with which Parliament is told about the amount that has been spent. Currently, as it is framed in the legislation, the Secretary of State must make a report to Parliament only every 12 months.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“At the moment, the way the Bill is phrased means that it is a completely open-ended financial commitment. We think that a cap of this nature, which would ensure that Ministers had to prioritise their spending decisions rather than continue to inject funds without clear limits or outcomes, is a very sensible thing to do, and I urge everyone to support it.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I know the Minister to be an extremely reasonable man, so I am sure he will agree with our amendment. New clause 12 would place a firm cap on the total financial assistance that can be provided under the Bill, limiting it to £2.5 billion. As I am sure the hon. Member for Motherwell, Wishaw and Carluke (Pamela Nash) and other Members know, that is the limit that has been set for the steel strategy, so to reach that limit would mean that this intervention used up the entire amount allocated to the overall steel strategy. The new clause would set the limit up to a specific date in 2029. As our explanatory statement makes clear, the purpose is simple: to limit the total financial exposure under the Bill.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are looking at a Bill that the Government’s own impact assessment says might have a bit of a “chilling effect” on inward investment into the sector. We should all want to have inward investment into our economy. If someone who we regard as an excellent owner of this business should come in and make an offer that is attractive to the Government, I absolutely think the Government should be prepared to take that seriously. We do not want this to be a permanent state of affairs; we want it to be a journey to a thriving steel sector, which may well involve investors coming in from overseas.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman seems to be conflating two issues. Last year, when the emergency legislation was introduced and Parliament was recalled on a Saturday for the first time since the Falklands war, we did not stand in its way, but what we are asking for in the new clause is for Parliament to be kept informed. Let us agree that we all want to be kept informed about how the discussions are going and to find out what the Government are thinking about their exit plan. I made the point yesterday about the public interest test that it is very unclear whether, once the Secretary of State determines that it is in the public interest for this particular site to be owned by the taxpayer, there will ever be the potential for it to change to different state.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the Government are serious about supporting the steel industry, they should also be serious about accountability, value for money and a credible long-term plan, and these amendments are designed to deliver exactly that.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Without this safeguard, there is a real risk that nationalised entities could receive preferential treatment, whether through subsidies, contracts or regulatory advantage, undermining fair competition within the domestic steel sector. If private firms believe they will be placed at a disadvantage compared with state-owned competitors, that risks deterring further investment in UK steel and related supply chains. To conclude, these amendments are about bringing discipline, transparency and balance to a Bill that, as drafted, risks being too broad, too costly and too unconstrained. They would ensure that any intervention was properly assessed, carefully limited and consistently scrutinised, while protecting taxpayers, competition and investor confidence.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The new clause would ensure that Parliament received a regular, transparent analysis of how these interventions were affecting investor confidence and capital flows into the UK economy. We all hope that they would not be adversely affected, but we would want Parliament to know, and this new clause would ensure that any damage to our reputation was identified, understood and addressed early. New clause 11 would prevent the Secretary of State from using the powers in the Bill to grant any selective advantages through state resources that could distort competition. It would ensure that nationalised steel undertakings were not unfairly advantaged over privately owned ones.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“New clause 10 would require the Secretary of State to report to Parliament every six months on the impact that nationalising steel undertakings has had on inward investment into the UK. I mentioned earlier that the Government’s own impact assessment worries about the potential for a “chilling effect” where Government are taking assets into public ownership in the way that this Bill allows. During its history, the UK has very much relied on being seen as a stable and predictable environment for inward investment. Expropriating and nationalising private businesses sets a precedent that could deter future investors, not just in the steel sector but across the wider economy.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I actually think the hon. Gentleman is also agreeing with me on this point. I yield to no one in my admiration for the Minister and his expertise in this industry, but I heard the hon. Gentleman say that he too thinks that it will take business nous and investment into this business to bring it back to a state where it is making money. I also heard him say that he would therefore not object to hearing a report to Parliament every six months about the progress being made, so I look forward to him supporting this amendment in the Lobby later. We want our Ministers to actively work towards returning the business to private ownership, so we want to hear in Parliament about that ongoing progress and to be able to hold Ministers accountable and ask them questions on exactly that from time to time.”
House of Commons9 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗