Ian Lavery
MP for Blyth and Ashington · Labour · United Kingdom
“Dr Anirban Bhattacharyya is a resident in my constituency. He has lived there for 60 years. He travelled to Kolkata only a couple of weeks ago, and it appears that he has been caught up in the horrendous flooding in Nepal. There have been numerous attempts to contact him, but they have been unsuccessful.”
“It has been nearly two years since the contaminated blood inquiry report was published. People think that the matter is finished, but it is not: some 18,000 infected and affected individuals still have not begun their claims. Will my right hon.”
“Q10. With tech billionaires driving the deployment of artificial intelligence, many of my constituents are concerned about job losses, misinformation and the infrastructure needed to support the technology.”
“I refer Members to my declaration of interests; I am secretary of the trade union group of Labour MPs, Mr Stringer. Does my hon. Friend recognise that these union-busting firms in America—Amazon, for example—paid up to $14.2 million to bust unions and refuse union access?”
“Before saying anything more than a sentence, people from Ashington, Blyth, Bedlington, Newbiggin-by-the-Sea, Choppington and Stakeford are judged. The people in my patch refuse to compromise their dialects, but they are judged every single day for them, and we have to tackle that.”
“That is very kind of the hon. Gentleman. My youngest son Liam speaks with a much harsher dialect than me, but he speaks five times faster than the hon. Gentleman. Imagine the problems that causes us when we travel abroad, or even to Yorkshire, for example.”
The complete record
Every one of 609 lines we hold for Ian Lavery, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 13.
“Member for Great Yarmouth (Rupert Lowe), are limited in how they can address workplace bullying by the owner; or perhaps it is because, while they masquerade as a party for the ordinary men and women of this country, in reality they are simply a Margaret Thatcher tribute act with a sprinkle of bigotry, determined to advance her destructive agenda at all costs, regardless of its impact on working people across our country.”
“This is a good Bill that should mark the start of a process. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister, who has done a fantastic job, understands that we are all just trying to strengthen the Bill through our amendments. While we accept those howls of derision from the Conservatives, it is worth reminding the House, and indeed the country, that the turquoise Trumpian Tories in Reform have also opposed the Bill at every step of the way. Perhaps it is because, as a company—for that is what they are—they want to ensure that their workers, such as the hon.”
“Solidarity action should be an important part of seeking the resolution of disputes. The Bill brings measures that aim to end discrimination and place equality at the heart of the workplace. It gives key workers in social care and school support more say in pay and conditions through their unions. It brings measures to tackle exploitative zero-hours contracts, gives protection against unfair dismissal from day one, and extends sick pay rights. It repeals minimum service level laws and the majority of the reactionary Trade Union Act 2016, provides greater rights for workers to organise collectively through their trade unions, and reduces bureaucracy affecting trade unions during industrial action processes. The howls of derision from Opposition Members show that the Labour Government are doing the right thing.”
“I want to support people in industrial disputes, and new clause 109 would put situations like that right by ending the ban on secondary action. It would remove the need to provide a ballot paper to the employer, remove the obligation on unions in long-running disputes to rerun the ballot every six months, and enable industrial action to achieve recognition for collective bargaining. Amendments 347 and 348 would change the requirements for notification about the results of a union ballot, meaning that they could be displayed online with easy access for the public. Amendments 345 and 346 would remove the restriction confining pickets to the worker’s workplace. The reason secondary picketing was banned in the first place was the fact that it was a tool that benefited workers and advanced their cause.”
“That is important, because workers currently have to take it in good faith that the union has managed to navigate the bureaucracy of taking action, and that unscrupulous bosses cannot summarily dismiss them if it has not. New clause 109 is wide-ranging. The UK’s ban on secondary action is almost unique in the world, condemned on every occasion when the International Labour Organisation has considered the position since 1989. When P&O Ferries flouted its legal obligations by not consulting over mass dismissals and by dismissing people unfairly, the unions were unable to react by calling on dock workers, lorry drivers and workers in other industries on the dockside to boycott the vessels in dispute. That was outrageous: we need to bring back solidarity action.”
“Through further time, further discussion and further legislation, it will prove to be a great Bill, and I believe that the new clauses and amendments that I have tabled would strengthen and enhance it. Workers in the UK have never, ever had the right to strike, but since 1906 their unions have had protection against common-law liability, subject to the meeting of statutory conditions. New clause 108 would establish a positive right to strike, bringing the UK into line with most of the democratic world. It would also remove provisions that make strike action unlawful if it turns out, retrospectively, that the action the workers took was unofficial.”
“It is a pleasure to speak about a piece of legislation that turns the tide on decades of anti-trade union laws—laws that have restricted the power of workers and seen the wealth of those at the top grow exponentially. On a personal note, let me say that it is fitting that the Bill should be before the House this week. Last Wednesday marked 40 years since I—along with my father, who has sadly passed on, my brothers and thousands of my colleagues—marched back to work at the end of the miners’ strike. The fact that, although bruised and battered, I am still here today speaking about the Bill proves that while the party of vulture capital may have won a victory in 1985, they did not win the war. This is a good Bill, but it could have been a lot better.”
“It is a pleasure to speak in the debate, following the speech from the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith). I have to remind him that trade unionists are the bedrock of our communities. They are the producers of the wealth in this country. They are taxpayers, and they are ordinary, hard-working people. They should not be described as, basically, the dirt on the shoes of other people. The shadow Minister could hardly hide his disdain for ordinary working people; he could not hold himself back from opposing everything in the Bill. I begin by declaring my interest as a proud trade union member—a member of the National Union of Mineworkers and Unite the union, and an honorary member of the Prison Officers Association—and as the chair of the trade union group of Labour MPs.”
“T3. Last year, assaults on prison staff were up by 19% and serious assaults were up by 22%, yet the pensionable age of prison officers is still 68—it is simply too late. Can the Minister update the House on any discussions he may have had with officials regarding that industrial injustice and say when these loyal public servants might expect to see this long-standing issue corrected?”
“My constituency is on the north-east coast, probably about 150 miles from this horrendous disaster. Can the Minister say whether there has been an initial assessment on how it happened and where the pollution might move to? Is there a potential threat to the coastline of the north-east of England?”
“In each of the past two years, 40,000 teachers have left the profession owing to burnout and excessive workloads. What concrete steps will the Government take to address that, and how can we reverse the exodus from this fantastic profession?”
“Local councils manage mountains of sensitive data, deliver essential services and lead on emergency responses to critical incidents, among much more, yet 15 years of Tory underfunding has left outdated digital infrastructure, leaving them particularly vulnerable to cyber-attack. Does the Minister agree that improving cyber resilience in local authorities is of paramount importance if we are to protect our citizens’ data and continue to deliver essential services without interruption from hostile actors?”
“Blyth town in my constituency is definitely on the up and up, but the first impression for new visitors using the main gateway into the town is of a huge derelict garage in desperate need of demolition. Northumberland county council has been approached to address the situation, but here is the issue: the council says quite simply that, while it agrees it is in a complete and utter mess, it does not bring the overall amenity of the area down. What a slap in the face for the people in the local community! Does the Leader of the House agree that certain areas have been abandoned over 14 years of Tory rule? Can we have a discussion in Government time on the accountability of local authorities to determine what they can and should be doing with properties like this in different constituencies right across the country?”
“T2. Many families in my constituency live in new housing estates where the developers have made their profits, sailed off into the sunset, and left the roads and services in an unacceptable state and unadopted. What steps might the Government be able to take to push local authorities like Northumberland county council into action to accept their responsibilities and adopt those estates?”
“Banking habits have clearly changed, with many people now using internet banking, but the loss of high street banks is a bitter blow to many people, particularly vulnerable groups in our communities, such as the aged, the frail and people with disabilities, all of whom are at serious risk of financial exclusion. For example, according to the Royal National Institute of Blind People, in my Blyth and Ashington constituency there are 3,420 people living with sight loss. That is extraordinary. For blind and partially sighted people who struggle with online access, bank closures are—at the least—devastating, and that is just one prime example of the groups of people affected by the disappearance of banks from the high street.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered high street bank closures and banking hubs. It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I want to bring to the Chamber a really important issue: high street banking, which in my view, has been in absolute crisis with the precipitous decline in branches operating in communities up and down this country for the past four decades. Data from the British Banking Association shows that the number of branches in 1986 was more than 21,000; at the beginning of 2025, there were fewer than 5,000. Many smaller communities no longer have a high street bank.”
“I agree. I have already mentioned the number of closures; I am not sure whether a post office can act as a back-up, because we have seen closure after closure of post offices, until eventually a number of the constituencies up and down the country have no facilities whatever.”
“He was unable, at that stage, to confirm that a banking hub would 100% be recommended, but it was heavily suggested that that would be the preferred solution. I was absolutely delighted at that because, as I think everybody will agree, there is a great place for banking hubs. They are a good, progressive move forward. It is inflexibility that is the huge problem.”
“Immediately after that, Link contacted my office to apologise about the fact that a review had not been automatically triggered, as would be the normal process. We were told that the review had been fast-tracked through the initial stages and a visit was arranged by one of the Link community assessment managers. I met with the community assessment manager in Bedlington prior to the general election, following his assessment, and I could not have felt more positive about his reflections. He was an excellent ambassador for Link and, indeed, a good, intelligent man. He had been up Bedlington’s main street and spoken to the people there long before I arrived. He was gushing in his praise for Bedlington high street, describing it as a handsome high street that was well frequented, with a mixture of local businesses.”
“The town and its surrounding areas were once an exclave of County Durham, then it developed into an industrial centre, with its ironworks and multiple coal mines. The loss of heavy industry has left a huge legacy, similar to that in many other post-industrial communities. When passing through that lovely place, Bedlington, people might not understand that unique history, with its traditions and cultures, because it has got a picturesque high street. The town contains pockets of significant deprivation, and the erosion of services in Bedlington makes the lives of those who are struggling ever more difficult. Following the announcement that the final high street bank would close, my office triggered a review with Link into access to cash.”
“Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I want to use Bedlington as an example in my contribution, too. It is Northumberland’s fourth-largest town, and in May this year, it will be left without a bank, following TSB’s decision to close its branch on Front Street West. In recent years, bank branches in Blyth and Ashington, the two largest towns in my constituency, have also closed. While they are both currently served by banking providers, I can only wonder how long that will last. The case of Bedlington is particularly worrying. It is a proud community with a rich and in many ways unique history. During the flight northwards from William the Conqueror’s army, the body of St Cuthbert is said to have been rested at what is now St Cuthbert’s church.”
“That was the whole idea of bringing the debate to this Chamber. The issue is the inflexibility of Link and of the Financial Conduct Authority regulations, which means that even the smallest, most minute detail can mean that people are not going to have a banking hub. That really needs changing, for the sake of our communities. It impacts local businesses, which are also at risk of adverse effects as a result of bank closures, with reduced ability to manage their cash flows and, of course, reduced productivity due to time spent away while accessing banking services. In my constituency, the coastal village of Newbiggin-by-the-Sea was left without a bank in 1999, meaning that for more than 25 years, local people have been forced to travel in order to access banking facilities. That is the point I make to the hon.”
“That is absolutely reasonable, is it not? The decision by Link or the Financial Conduct Authority is basically transactional. It does not really look at the community factors—it looks at a lot of different factors, but those do not count as points toward the overall result or announcement that there will be the go-ahead for additional services. That must change. It must embrace everything that is happening; it cannot be because the banks are leaving, which they have been on pace because of the profit margins. We have to start looking after communities and vulnerable people—the frail, the elderly and the disabled—in places like that and we need to change the regulations.”
“I immediately applied to Link and, as advised by its parliamentary liaison officer, I submitted an appeal, which was summarily dismissed without much discussion. I emphasised that Bedlington, as the fourth-largest town in Northumberland, should not need to use facilities in other towns.”
“There was no assessment of the impact on that woman, on other residents or on local businesses of allowing high street banking to be lost with no banking hub provided; no assessment of the impact on people like her who are now travelling to a neighbouring town and spending their money there instead. On inspection, it appeared that we had been turned down because there was a bank in Cramlington located 0.1 km closer to Bedlington Front Street, as the crow flies, than the regulations suggested were appropriate. That is why we were declined—because of 0.1 km—and it is time that that sort of thing was addressed. We need to look at issues in the community such as deprivation, elderly people and those who, as the hon. Member for Strangford mentioned, are in desperate need of facilities on the high street.”
“Absolutely. It is essential and that is the whole reason behind this debate. I will get back to that. I was more or less guaranteed, unofficially, that we had qualified in Bedlington. I was dumbfounded to see, when Link’s assessment was published some months later, that it suggested no additional services—no action to support the elderly woman from Bedlington station who banked in person on a weekly basis on Front Street, used the opportunity to speak with trusted members of staff without worrying about falling prey to scammers, met her friend for a coffee on Bedlington Front Street and took the opportunity to visit some local shops and spend a few pounds in the process.”
“I fully agree with my hon. Friend from the neighbouring constituency to mine. Urban and rural areas face the same issues; we are being abandoned on the high street by these large banks. That is why we need to get the criteria changed to make sure that we allow Link—”
“The legislation cannot simply focus on access to cash and ignore the loss of banking services. I hope the Minister will agree that the current rules leave Northumberland’s fourth-largest town with no bank and no banking hub, and that they are too inflexible. It is within the power of the Government to change the regulations. Will the Minister consider asking Link to look at other community factors when assessing the suitability of a banking hub? Does he agree that all areas are unique, and should not be shoehorned into a rigid process that does not fit them? Does he agree that measuring the distance as the crow flies from the doors of the last bank to close is not reasonable, and takes no account of the distance vulnerable people already have to travel?”
“I agree totally about the transport hubs. We cannot say to an elderly, frail or disabled person, “Get that bus to the next town. It’s only three mile.” As my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) mentioned, is it reasonable to say to somebody, “If you can get there within an hour, that means you don’t need a facility.”? The criteria need to be changed. I will ask the Minister a number of questions that I hope he will consider. I am fully aware that 100 Link hubs have been set up already, 200 are in the system, and it is hoped that there will be 350. That is really positive, but it would still leave behind and abandon lots of communities such as mine in Bedlington. The dealings I have had with Link and the FCA have been perfectly cordial, but wholly and utterly transactional. It is, basically, “Computer says no”.”
“A wholesale, root-and-branch review is required, to make life easier, not more difficult, for those we proudly represent.”
“Unfortunately, my understanding is that high street banks want to centralise in much bigger places and make much higher profits, and do not consider the communities that the two of us serve. Does the Minister agree that the demographics of an area should be of paramount importance when assessing the need for a banking hub, and will he take steps to include that in the criteria? Does he agree that banks should commit to a local service before putting profits before communities? Does he agree that the Government should have the means to intervene in decisions such as the one I described in Bedlington and other Members described in their constituencies? If Northumberland’s fourth-largest town is being failed, something is sadly wrong. The current criteria are simply not fit for purpose. They abandon many of our most vulnerable constituents.”
“At the stroke of a pen, Tory-led Northumberland county council is about to wipe 9,000 people off the county’s housing waiting list. My office is beset by constituents in desperate need of secure and affordable accommodation, but even those in the highest priority bandings are often unable to get the housing they need. This is a simple, callous attempt to massage the huge housing list rather than deal with the issue. Can we have a debate in Government time on how to ensure that those in need of decent, affordable housing are not easily cast aside and thrown on to the scrap heap, as in the case of Northumberland county council?”
“May I first thank my right hon. Friend for the update? Despite his sterling efforts—I really mean that—the process has taken far too long. Victims are dying at the rate of two per week, never having seen the compensation they deserve. Victims are very much unaware of, and desperate to understand, what and how much compensation they might even be due under the process. Can the Minister say how many of the 5,000 infected victims will be invited to apply to the scheme during 2025? Has he considered, or is there potential to consider, allowing victims to take support scheme payments as a lump sum without any reductions?”
“Fuel poverty simply means that people are not warm, but we live in the UK, one of the richest nations in the world. Why on earth are we not ensuring that everyone has a safe and warm home to live in? It is called decency. It is called respect. It is necessary and extremely important that the Government address this. I urge the Minister to consider the points that have been raised this morning about what the Government can actually do.”
“It is always the less well-off who suffer from fuel poverty and all other types of poverty. In my Blyth and Ashington constituency, according to the House of Commons Library there are 5,211 households in fuel poverty, but that increases to 14,500 using the pre-2015 definition. There is more fuel poverty in the east of my constituency in Newbiggin-by-the-Sea and Blyth itself. That is something the Government should be looking at as a matter of urgency. Who suffers because of fuel and energy prices? The less well-off, and people in fuel poverty using prepayment electric meters. Of those in fuel poverty, 63% are on some kind of benefit, and there are around 2.5 million pensioners suffering as a consequence of fuel poverty. We have got to keep people warm. There are lots of things the Government can do.”
“The preferred definition of fuel poverty used by the Government until 2015 and still by some parts of the UK, is a household that is “required to spend more than 10% of its income” to keep sufficiently warm. That definition has advantages; it links directly to the cost of energy prices and can still give credit to energy-efficient homes. If a low-income household in a very modern energy efficient dwelling still finds that it spends 10% of its income on energy, it is a clear reflection of the impact of energy price inflation. That is very important. We cannot get rid of poverty in this country by rewriting a policy. It cannot be done—whether it is fuel, food, child or pensioner poverty. We cannot get rid of poverty just by rewriting policies; work has to be done on the ground.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Normanton and Hemsworth (Jon Trickett) for bringing this timely debate to the Chamber. Fuel poverty did not start on 4 July 2024, for heaven’s sake. I am not going to take any lectures from anybody who suggests that it did, because let me tell hon. Members that under the last 14 years of Tory Government, tens of thousands—if not hundreds of thousands—of ordinary people died as a result of fuel poverty. That is the real issue. The Labour Government are now gladly and positively elected, and we look forward to seeing some changes very soon. What actually is fuel poverty? There are two definitions: the new one from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, and the pre-2015 definition. They are greatly different.”
“The communities had a thriving social scene, and if someone wanted to wet their whistle, there were plenty of places where they could have a pint. The clubs are gone—clubland has disappeared, miners’ welfares are disappearing, and we have to get something back. The communities enjoyed a whole host of pursuits, whether that was whippet racing, pigeon fancying, leek growing, onion growing, billiards, pigeon racing, jazz bands, brass bands—it was amazing what the miners were able to contribute to this country. That is why we need specific intervention from the Government into those coalfield communities that are dying on their feet. We should never forget the contribution that coalfield communities delivered to the country, often at a great cost, and they really need that levelling-up that is constantly promised.”
“I am talking about miners underground who taught the younger generation coming through about the value of work, the value of contributing to our local communities, and the perils of stepping out of line. The coalfields largely policed themselves, and if you got into trouble on a night out, you were in trouble when you went back to work. Employment at the pit gave miners and their families the security of a colliery house—good-quality terraced housing that stretched the length of the communities, and all owned by the coal board. With decent rents, those houses were kept in good order and gave the security of a home to miners. Those are basic things, and local communities, coalfield communities, are now suffering greatly because of the huge loss.”
“Following in the footsteps of our forebears, we felt like we were contributing to the wealth of the nation —we really were contributing to the wealth of this nation, and many paid the ultimate sacrifice in doing so. People were given the finest apprenticeships you could ever imagine—qualifications in working underground that could be transferred across the globe, and training in skills that no piece of paper could ever quantify. I learned from the very best. My education from the age of 17 was from miners with huge intellect. Most were without a single written qualification, and written off as uneducated by people who should know better, but these were absolute working-class geniuses, believe me. It did not stop at political debate. The men who we looked up to imparted to us many life skills. They taught us the value of work.”
“Friends, but I want to take the time I have to paint a picture and take people back to the proud past, because we in the coalfield communities are very proud of our past. The communities were built from the wage packets of the miners. What we have lost is something we have to describe today, as well as what we want back to fulfil that pride in our communities and the people we proudly represent. We were the people who fuelled the industrial revolution, and the communities were savagely destroyed by a Government driven by political ideology. There was little that the collieries did not touch, and when I left school there was pretty much full employment. When the schools opened their gates, the pits opened theirs.”
“I refer Members to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I was a miner from the age of 17 until I came to this place—a period of over 30 years—and I also have a connection with the National Union of Mineworkers. It will be crystal clear from this debate that there is an absolute need to continue with support for the coalfield communities, whether that is the Orgreave truth and justice campaign, the pardoning of the sacked miners, CISWO—a fantastic charity that needs a complete and utter overhaul—the MPS, or whether it is looking again at the BCSSS scheme, the general social deprivation and poverty in the communities, or the Coalfields Regeneration Trust. Those issues will be covered in much more detail by my hon.”
“T6. Many people with mental health conditions rely heavily on personal independence payments so that they can continue in work and remain active in their communities. Can the Minister provide advice to the many constituents of mine who have contacted me terrified by the rumours that the Government are about to scrap this vital support for those who already have mental health issues?”
“Yesterday saw full-throated Government support for projects across the UK, but not so much for the north-east. The region was decimated by 14 years of Tory Government, and that cannot be repeated. I accept what the Minister says about what has happened, but what will the Government do to ensure that businesses in my Blyth and Ashington constituency can play their part in the cutting-edge technologies of the future and, crucially, see improved investment, which will create much- needed jobs with good wages and terms and conditions?”
“T7. This week saw DeepSeek throw the global tech market into utter meltdown, with the Chinese AI app spooking investors, to say the least. With huge national infra- structure projects required to underpin the UK’s place in the AI revolution, what does this turmoil mean for projects such as the Blackstone AI data centre in Cambois in Bedlingtonshire, in my constituency?”
“Flexible Engineered Solutions International in my constituency is an excellent example of a strong and successful business. It delivers projects in oil and gas, and in renewables. Last week, it hosted clients from Rio de Janeiro, and the Brazilians travelled on the newly reopened Northumberland line. They travelled 5,600 miles, and the new line was the last leg. It was fantastic. Can we have a debate in Government time on the strategic importance of good local transport infrastructure that allows people from places like Brazil easy access to constituencies such as Blyth and Ashington?”
“Friend the Member for Normanton and Hemsworth (Jon Trickett) said about the legal presumption of in-house employment, because the reality is that we cannot control what we do not own.”
“I pay tribute to the many workers who have worked tirelessly. Many of those in privatised companies are claiming universal credit. The company directors are trousering fortunes, while the workers are losing out on the rights that I have just mentioned. It is horrendous. Some of them cannot make ends meet. Many of them are going to work when they really should not be there, because of sickness, for example. It is just wholly unacceptable. We have got to get to grips with this privatisation. We have got no other option. We need to protect people in this country from the abuses and the exploitation by privateers, who are making fortunes at the cost of those in the industry. I urge my hon. Friend the Minister to listen to what my hon.”
“How obscene is that? It is not about socialism or about even left-wing ideology; it is about decency and respect. It is about ambition and giving people a fair deal. That is what we should be about in a prosperous country like the one we live in. Who suffers under privatisation? I was one of the people who worked in a nationalised industry that was privatised over a period of time, so I have got experience of this. Who suffers? It is the workers. It has been mentioned: reduction in pay, sacking of the labour force, lack of trade union recognition—even trying to fight back—nae sick pay, nae holiday pay. It is absolutely absurd. It served them! We need to be saying what it really is, and the Government Departments are ridden with individuals who are working under the most horrendous of conditions.”
“I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald) for bringing this timely debate to the Chamber. As ever, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I want to dispel some myths in the few minutes that I have got. I want us to wake up and smell the coffee, because this is not “outsourcing”. What is outsourcing? It is privatisation. One hon. Member said it is privatisation by the back door, but it is not; it is just privatisation. We have got to get to grips with how privatisation in this country is getting out of control. Who benefits and who does not benefit? The reality is that the companies are making fortunes and the workers are struggling to make ends meet. There are some private companies that are actually providing food banks in their places of work for the people they employ.”