Fleur Anderson
MP for Putney · Labour · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison, and a delight to be called first. I congratulate the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) on securing this important debate.”
“Hundreds of families have moved out and moved back, and they have just been told that they will all have to move out again in a rota system, all while fighting for remediation.”
“Although I recognise that developers have obligations under the developer remediation contract, my constituents are understandably asking what more can be done by the unit, by Ministers and by the Building Safety Regulator when progress stalls for different reasons.”
“The Bill will place stronger legal duties on landlords and freeholders to remediate unsafe cladding and other fire safety defects within clear timeframes. That is very welcome.”
“In other cases, residents are waiting for final fire risk assessments, EWS1 forms, remediation plans, contractor appointments, updated certifications, smoke extraction systems or the installation of cavity barriers. In all those cases, it is the people in the building who have to chase things up.”
“There are long delays, a lack of clear guidance and a lack of connection between the different bodies involved, as I will demonstrate. I would like to draw the Minister’s attention to several developments that are covered by the developer remediation contract with major developers such as Barratt Redrow and Taylor Wimpey.”
The complete record
Every one of 603 lines we hold for Fleur Anderson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 13.
“They included nearly 2,000 civilians and more than 1,100 members of our security forces. Nearly a third of those deaths remain unsolved, and a great many victims and families, some of whom I had the privilege of meeting when I was a Minister, are still seeking answers. Their questions remain with me. I will never forget sitting in the WAVE Trauma Centre in Belfast and talking to victims, who, so many years later, have so many questions and just want to know what happened to their loved ones.”
“Not a week goes by, in Northern Ireland and elsewhere, when we do not remember the victims. They are the people we should have in our minds when we talk about the troubles, and about legacy and reconciliation. Secretary of States do not often come to Westminster Hall, so I welcome the presence of the Secretary of State, who I know has taken a personal interest in righting the wrongs of the previous Government’s legislation, and in what that can do for society in Northern Ireland, both now and for future generations. It is important to remember what this is fundamentally about; I could see that it was on the minds of all Committee members throughout the inquiry. More than 3,500 people, across Northern Ireland and in towns, cities and military barracks across England, died in the troubles.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dame Siobhain; I wish you a happy St Patrick’s day. I thank the Chair of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi), for securing this debate and choosing this topic, and I commend her and the Committee for their solid work. Their useful report brings together many different aspects of the Government’s work on this issue, and gave a platform to so many victims, organisations and voices that are often not heard in this place to talk about the impact it has on them, what they think about the current work and what they hope for in future. This Friday is the anniversary of the 1993 Warrington bombing, when Tim Parry and Johnathan Ball—two children—were killed and 54 people were injured.”
“In November 2025, Sandra Peake—the chief executive of the WAVE Trauma Centre—wrote to all MPs, and she also gave very powerful evidence to the Committee for the report. In her letter to MPs, Sandra said: “The then Government wanted to draw a veil over the past but there isn’t a veil thick enough to hide the blood and bones of murdered loved ones or to muffle the cries of their families.” The arbitrary ending of troubles-related inquests, and closing the civil action route to justice, confirmed the belief that the interests of victims were not only not on the agenda, but had not even made it into “Any other business”.”
“We must ensure that those investigations can progress and deliver answers for families, and that all communities can have confidence in the commission, as trust was also a key element of the evidence given in the report. The last Government’s legacy Act had no support in Northern Ireland, and it is clear why that was the case. It shut down the right of individuals to pursue a civil case, whether against the state or perpetrators of terrorism. It cruelly stopped a number of inquests midway through, and it ended over 1,000 police investigations in Northern Ireland and England, including those into the deaths of more than 200 UK service personnel, as my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) highlighted. The Act was also widely opposed in Northern Ireland by political parties and victims and families.”
“Those include the deaths of Alexander Millar in 1975; Seamus Bradley, a 19-year-old; Rory O’Kelly in 1977; Kathleen O’Hagan in August 1994, who was seven months’ pregnant, and her baby also died in that attack; James and Ellen Sefton in 1990; and Judge Rory Conaghan in 1974. Those are just some of the people who died—their families have questions, and they are being investigated by the ICRIR. The commission’s caseload also includes the 1974 Guildford pub bombings, the 1974 M62 coach bombing, the 1976 Kingsmill massacre, and the 1979 Warrenpoint massacre, which was the deadliest attack on British forces during the troubles.”
“I absolutely agree, and my hon. Friend makes a very good point: this also includes service families. No matter what family someone comes from, it is a huge loss. These are people missing from family tables, about whom there are still questions, and it is a trauma not to know what happened—that is what this legacy legislation aims to resolve. We are so many years on, and there is so much investigating yet to do. I understand that many people simply want to know how their loved ones died. The ICRIR is taking forward 100 investigations, some of which Peter Sheridan listed in his evidence to the Committee.”
“Slowly but surely—through the Government’s actions and the actions of organisations such as the South East Fermanagh Foundation, WAVE and so many others working in mental health across Northern Ireland—the trust of families has been built up. But they will need to see good outcomes. I welcome the increased funding for the commission and the PSNI, and the reiteration of the need for speed in this work. As has been pointed out many times, many of the family members are now elderly. They are seeing out the end of their days and just want the answers they seek in time.”
“Frankly, it is shocking that many Opposition Members disagree and would prefer to grant immunity to those who carried out the most heinous acts of terrorism on UK soil. The Government agreed information-sharing commitments with the Irish authorities under the joint framework announced in September. I welcome the fact that the Select Committee visited Ireland before and during the compilation of the report. The agreement is unprecedented and could be hugely significant in enabling answers to be found for families once the new legacy commission is established. I am glad that the report highlights the powers of the Secretary of State, the definition of a family member, and the need to listen to victims, listen again and keep listening. These are people who have lost trust in the system.”
“It will mean that legacy cases are dealt with sensitively and efficiently through a reformed legacy commission, with the fullest possible disclosure of information to families. Rather than making false promises to our veterans, as the legacy Act did, the Bill will put in place six genuine protections for any veteran who is asked to give information, and nobody who carried out acts of terrorism will be given immunity. We should be clear that it was terrorists—the IRA, the Ulster Volunteer Force, the Irish National Liberation Army and the Ulster Defence Association—who were responsible for the vast majority of deaths during the troubles. It is right that where there is evidence of criminality by anyone, those responsible should be held to account.”
“I absolutely agree; it was just too much even to ask or encourage more people to come forward—if they did come forward, there would be no justice. The families of victims often see those people in their local supermarket; they are living in their communities, but the families know that there is no hope of them ever having justice. That is too painful to contemplate. Like the report, I welcome the fact that the Government have taken a very different approach. I know that the Secretary of State engaged widely on the drafting of the Bill with victims’ groups, families, veterans and other affected parties, and I was pleased to play a part in those discussions. The troubles Bill will restore civil cases and enable the resumption of halted inquests.”
“I hope that future Select Committee reports will look at other aspects of reconciliation, including integrated education, which is an absolutely necessary part of bringing together communities, especially young for people. Just living and working together in a school all the time is so important, as has been reiterated to me so many times by parents and peacemakers in Northern Ireland. I am sure the Committee will consider that aspect too. Having made that recommendation for future reports, I congratulate the Committee on the report we are debating, on the work the Committee has done, and on how influential I am sure the report will be on the work done not only by the Government but by many organisations and people across Northern Ireland.”
“Some people do not want reconciliation; for some people, reconciliation means answers; for some people, it means the ability to live together in a community peacefully; and for some people, it means good jobs, education and opportunities, and hope for the future. With the world watching the peace process in Northern Ireland, this work could not be more important. It is a beacon of hope for people in other conflicts around the world, who look to Northern Ireland and say, “It has been possible in Northern Ireland,” and who look to the ways in which we continue to build that peace, bit by bit. It is hard, and we are seeing how hard it is, but the ultimate aim must be for communities to be able to live and thrive peacefully together, and to reduce the generational trauma—to reduce the amount that is passed down to future generations.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for mentioning Tommy Judge, the work he has done and all that he has lived with throughout his life. My hon. Friend and I have met many other people across England who are working to support victims and survivors in Great Britain, as well as in Northern Ireland. The report ends on a cliffhanger. It ends by talking about wider reconciliation, which is very important, because the legacy legislation is just part of a piece of wider work that needs to be done that is important for reconciliation. When I have been to Northern Ireland, I have asked many times: “What is reconciliation? What does it mean? What will be the outcome? What will it look like?” It means different things to different people.”
“In 1998 immunity was in the Good Friday agreement, and the whole population got to vote on that, and on whether or not they agreed with that immunity—it was very controversial. There was no vote on whether the population agreed with immunity in the legacy Act. In fact, all the democratically elected parties lined up to oppose that immunity.”
“It just shows the strengths and abilities of our embassies across the world, and how important they are. I am delighted that after years of weakness, isolation and decline in our international standing under the Tories, Britain is firmly back on the international stage, leading on the international response to Ukraine, making the forgotten war in Sudan a priority, and transforming our relationship with Europe—worth mentioning on the day that the FAC released our report on the UK-EU reset.”
“I am honoured to speak in this debate. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) for securing the debate. I worked in international development for many years, specifically on water sanitation and hygiene, so I also appreciated the remarks of the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew). I echo the remarks of my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury about our strong support for the BBC. I would like to thank all the FCDO staff currently working very, very hard on behalf of my constituents who are in the middle east. The very quick response we have been able to put up, with flights coming in straight away, is commendable.”
“Will he confirm that we are committed to working with the poorest countries, not using the move towards investment as a move towards working only with middle-income countries? Lastly, will he confirm that all these commitments will be backed up with funding and our fantastic staff in our embassies on the ground?”
“Cuts in conflict prevention programmes that have been built up for years, which are locally led and are working, are dangerous. The 0.7% target was not a vague aspiration, but a manifesto commitment that this party stood on. It remains important for our security. I know that these are difficult times for development spending, but we need to keep talking about that as an aspiration. I am concerned that the official policy of His Majesty’s Opposition is now to reduce spending to 0.1% of GDP. I do not know where that will leave our country. Will the Minister confirm that this Government are committed to the soft power superpower we have in the BBC, to conflict reduction, to the education of girls, to water, sanitation and hygiene, and to global health?”
“It leads to development and resilience against insecurity, which stops conflict. That is what we should be seeing. However, £550 million has been cut from global health programmes. Let us not forget the lessons from covid. Some £206 million has been cut from education, gender and equality programmes. There is a 25% reduction in women, peace and security funding, despite a feminist foreign policy being a stated priority. I am glad that the proposed cuts to the BBC World Service have been highlighted as well. We have a huge benefit in our BBC World Service. Trust in this service has built up over decades, and any reduction in that gives space to China and Russia. Cuts to development leave room for the Chinese Government to step in, as I have seen in countries across Africa. Cuts in poverty reduction fuel instability and conflict.”
“In the past year, £500 million has been cut from the ODA budget. Aid to Africa, at the time of the Africa strategy being released, has fallen by £184 million. Support to Sudan has been reduced by roughly 18%, at the very moment it faces the worst humanitarian crisis in the world, despite it being a stated priority. Global health is also a priority for this Government, and rightly so. As I said, I previously worked in water and sanitation. I went to work for WaterAid before I was an MP because, when I had worked with other aid agencies, I had seen the impact that conflict and water have on a community. With action on both those things, a community can have peace—if a community has the water needed for crops and its health, it frees up girls and women from having to go off to get water; instead, they can go to school.”
“We are not given the answers that we need to scrutinise this very big change in our country’s priorities, and at a crucial time in international relations that are so important for our security. It is important for my constituents to know what our foreign affairs priorities are and whether they are being matched in terms of staffing and budgets. This is called an estimates debate for a different reason, but estimating is all we can do as a Committee—if MPs cannot see that the priorities given by Ministers are being backed up by spending and action, we cannot properly scrutinise their work. It is also a real concern for development agencies and local organisations on the ground in the countries where we are working, which are not able to plan their work as they do not know what the spending will be.”
“Our development budget is one of the most effective tools we have for sustaining British influence. Defence and development should not be seen as competing priorities, but I fear that they are seen as such. Defence responds to crises; development works to prevent them. Development underpins our conflict prevention around the world. A defence posture without sustained development investment risks becoming permanently reactive to events. Good development is good defence. I am very concerned that the FCDO’s workforce faces reductions of up to 25%. The FAC has repeatedly asked where those cuts will be made. Which staff? Which programmes? Do the cuts match the priorities given by Ministers? I am concerned that they do not.”
“This is not a party political issue. We have led on Ukraine for many years and we still are doing so. I am very proud of the role we have played, under both Governments. The Labour Government are now moving forward far further and far faster. I am also proud that we recently signed the global ocean treaty. This debate is on the spending in the Department. I am concerned about the continuing cuts in aid, and that they are undermining our strong, and growing, international position and undermining our security. I am concerned about the false division that has been put up between defence and development. It is not defence or development. Defence and development are important for our strategic interests and security. Development spending is not charity; it is strategic investment.”
“Q4. Given the recent challenges to the Equality Act 2010, will the Prime Minister commit to protecting laws that prevent discrimination at work and in society, make sure that women are not fired for being pregnant, and ensure that everyone is treated fairly, regardless of their sex, race or disability?”
“I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement, her visit and her announcement about new money and the sanctions. Children are being deliberately and systematically targeted by both sides in this conflict: boys are being forcibly recruited, girls are subject to sexual violence, and even infants have been raped. Will she confirm that what we have seen during this conflict are not spontaneous acts of violence by the warring parties, but the orchestrated, industrial-scale use of rape as a weapon of war, deliberately designed to strike fear into the civilian population? Will she confirm that she will ensure that women are at the table during the peace negotiations?”
“I congratulate the Minister on this excellent plan and invite her to congratulate Young Lives vs Cancer, which has long campaigned for the travel fund for children and young people with cancer. I have joined the charity in its campaigning and am absolutely delighted to see the travel fund in place. Can she confirm that she will continue to work with Team Margot and Anthony Nolan to increase stem cell donation from people from ethnically diverse communities, where there is a shortage, in memory of Margot, who died from leukaemia aged two?”
“Palestinian civilians—Palestinian children—have endured extraordinary suffering, displacement, hunger, trauma and loss. They are entitled to not only charity but the protection guaranteed under international law. A ceasefire alone is not enough. The absence of bombs is not the presence of justice. Without reconstruction, accountability, justice and a viable political and economic path, the suffering will continue. I would be grateful if the Minister could outline whether the UK will now support the collection and preservation of evidence of war crimes that will be needed for the justice system to do its work, and when the Government will introduce the legislation that is needed—perhaps secondary legislation—to stop trade with illegal settlements on the west bank, in line with the UK’s stated policy and international legal obligations.”
“More than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed there, and economic activity linked to settlements risks undermining the UK’s long-standing position on their illegality and on the viability of the Palestinian state. The Minister has been clear that settlements are illegal, and I thank him for meeting me to talk about this previously. The mechanism exists to do this. The UK-Israel trade agreement already differentiates settlement goods, denying them preferential tariffs—postcodes are already provided to show exactly where goods come from. The Government should now consider moving from differentiation to prohibition, using legal tools already available under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, as we have done in relation to Crimea. There is legal precedent, and there is the technical ability to do it.”
“Questions of genocide are among the gravest that Parliament must consider, and I thank the many constituents who have written to me in advance of this debate. In the case of Gaza, the International Court of Justice ruled two years ago that there is a “real and imminent risk” of genocide. The Court is still deliberating, with a final judgment expected next year, but in the meantime, this risk requires action. In the short time I have, I would like to focus on one of those actions. There is a strong case for the Government to ban trade with illegal Israeli settlements on the west bank. No further legal judgment is needed to do that. Although global attention has focused rightly on Gaza, settlement expansion, land confiscation and violence have continued on the west bank and in East Jerusalem.”
“On recent developments, my grandfather fought for our country in Palestine. There are reports that the IDF has destroyed a cemetery in Gaza containing graves of allied troops from both world wars. Would the Minister condemn that?”
“It will change whole disadvantaged communities in my constituency, across London and across the United Kingdom, who all currently pay the price for the high numbers of children in poverty, whether those children are in their own family or not. The Bill is part of this Government’s wider mission to build a fairer country; to support, not penalise, families; to support parents into secure and better paid work; to deliver more affordable homes; to cut the cost of living; and to give every child the best possible start in life.”
“Across Wandsworth, the picture was even starker, with 1,820 households affected, 2,330 children denied support and a total of 6,540 children living in households impacted by this cruel rule. It is a rule based on the fiction that families in poverty plan before they have children—that they plan ahead to be in poverty for the long term and decide on the number of children they will have in their loving family on the basis of that—rather than a policy that is there for families whenever they are in real need. We have got those parents’ backs and we have got those children’s backs, no matter what number they come in their family. Scrapping the two-child limit will be transformative for those families and for their communities.”
“I am proud that our strategy also brings in many other ways in which we can support families. We know who is being hit the hardest by this policy, with 68% of the families affected having a child under five. The early years shape everything that follows: health, education and life chances. Inequality in childhood becomes inequality for life. This Bill gives us the chance to break that cycle. The latest universal credit data shows the scale of the damage. In April 2025, 700 households in Putney were denied a child element for at least one child because of this policy. That meant that 900 children received no support and 2,490 children in total were living in households hit by the two-child limit.”
“Every single day since the Conservatives forced this two-child benefit cap through, 109 children have been pushed into poverty, not because of anything they or their parents have done but because an arbitrary policy denied them the support they need. It was always indefensible. Because of the failings of the Conservative Government, child poverty in the UK has risen faster than in 37 other high-income countries over the past decade. That is a national disgrace. Removing this limit will lift 450,000 children out of poverty by 2029. That is what real, measurable change looks like. I was on the child poverty taskforce for over a year, and we really drilled down into what could make the most difference. Scrapping the two-child benefit cap was always at the top of the measures.”
“I am glad that we are dismantling this cruel and unfair policy today, and that we are continuing the job of fixing a broken system, set up by the Conservatives, that has led to children not having the basics or the opportunities that everyone in our country should have. Six months after this policy was brought in nine years ago, the UN special rapporteur on extreme poverty, Philip Alston, visited the UK and produced a report on the poverty levels that he found here. He said that we had a “punitive, mean spirited, and often callous” benefit system and that the high levels of child poverty were not inevitable but a “political choice”. That was back in 2018.”
“I am very proud to support the Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill. It will tackle child poverty and restore basic fairness to our social security system. I, like many other Labour Members, have been campaigning on this issue since I became an MP. I thank the Child Poverty Action Group and the Trussell Trust, as well as the food bank volunteers who have been in to lobby me about this issue for a very long time. This win is for the families in my constituency who I see in my surgeries and in their homes. I think of one family who literally move a light bulb around from room to room because they are so scared of the cost of using additional electricity. That is just one example of the real impact that poverty has on a family.”
“The hon. Member highlights one of the many painful decisions that people have to make on the back of this policy, such as decisions about heating or eating and about what to do in their families. She also highlights the fact that the whole of Northern Ireland will benefit from this Bill as well. We need to bring every child across the whole of the United Kingdom up, and lifting this policy will do that. It is fair across every part of the United Kingdom for all the families who are affected. I thank her for raising a different aspect that this policy has introduced. I am proud to support the Bill, and I urge Members across the House to do the same.”
“I commend the Secretary of State for the careful and thoughtful work that he has done to bring the House to this place today. Does he agree that, with this remedial order, he is doing the right thing for victims? That means ordinary people, including veterans and the wider armed forces community, all of whom were injured or lost loved ones. They are the people we have in our minds today. It was the Conservatives’ bad legislation that led us to have to pass a remedial order, for only the 11th time since the second world war. Does he agree that—”
“The conflict in Sudan is affecting millions of people, including thousands of women affected by horrific sexual violence. I have been hearing from aid workers on the ground who are working with those women. Will the Minister assure the House that, despite aid budget cuts, support for the women victims of sexual violence in the conflict in Sudan will not be cut?”
“Commuter services are extensively disrupted in Putney by the six-year closure of Hammersmith bridge. I will be holding a bus crisis taskforce again tomorrow to look at the impact that the closure of the bridge is having not just on bus services, but on active travel and commuting through Putney. Will the Secretary of State confirm that she supports the reopening of Hammersmith bridge to vehicles, and when the next meeting of the Hammersmith bridge taskforce will be? It last met on 30 January last year.”
“I welcome the decisive leadership of the Defence Secretary and the Prime Minister in supporting Ukraine. When the Foreign Affairs Committee met the Ukrainian Government, it highlighted the necessity of a strong sanctions regime that is joined up internationally. The actions taken today show just that: a sanctions regime with teeth that is joined up to stop the loopholes Putin uses to keep funding his illegal war, so I welcome the action taken today. Will the Secretary of State assure the House that the Government will continue to increase the stranglehold of sanctions and action to freeze and seize the assets? What will be done with those assets to enable them to be used to rebuild Ukraine—both now and in the future, when peace comes?”
“I commend the Secretary of State for the care that he is taking to work as fast possible for the victims, survivors and veterans families, who need to hear answers, while making sure that this is legally correct. I echo the comments about the South East Fermanagh Foundation quilts, which remind us of the need to get those answers for families. Can he confirm that he is as concerned as I am that the Opposition are just interested in making political points rather than really building peace, which is what we need to do together as Members of the House? Will he confirm that the remedial order removes what would have been immunity for terrorists?”
“I welcome the change of approach that the Minister has outlined—a change from a paternalism to partnership—and I welcome the listening way in which it has been done. I am concerned that poverty reduction was not mentioned in the statement—neither were sustainable development goals, or working with local organisations on the ground that know best. Will the Minister reassure the House that poverty reduction is at the heart of our strategy in working with local organisations across the many countries in Africa to achieve the real change that Africa needs?”
“I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. I have also met Hilary, Clarissa’s mum, and heard about her death and the fact that a simple electrocardiogram test can save lives. It is chilling to think that my daughters could face this. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is shocking that exercise can triple the risk of sudden cardiac death, but 80% of cases show no symptoms at all? The Government could act now to issue clear guidance, as we have done on concussion, and encourage and enable more young people to have the simple test that could save so many lives.”
“I thank the Minister for giving way and for the good news about looking into the possibility of rolling out screening across the whole country, especially bearing in mind the evidence from Italy, where the good has been shown to outweigh the potential downsides. I look forward to getting involved in that consultation. The amount of training on CPR and the use of defibrillators has been extensive. The choice of song to sing along to, to get the rhythm right, is really important. Will the Minister share with us whether she would use “Stayin’ Alive” or “Pink Pony Club” as her defibrillator singalong song?”
“It will make a huge difference and will result in the largest expected reduction in child poverty over a Parliament since comparable records began in 1997. That kind of dramatic change in our country is the reason I became a politician—this is what I want to see. The change will be welcomed not only by the families who are directly affected, but across our whole community. It will mean that more children have a better start in life and that wealth will be more fairly distributed in communities. So many measures in the Budget mean that wealth distribution is going in the right direction, which is what our country needs after 14 long years of austerity. We are now seeing an end to that, and families will see the change and the benefit.”
“I have been on the child poverty taskforce for over a year, championing the work done by the Government to really drill down into what can make the most difference—and it is scrapping the two-child benefit cap. Children must be able to thrive no matter where they are born in the UK, and scrapping the cap will allow them to do so. The policy drove families into severe hardship, as I saw for myself in my constituency. Its removal is not only a moral imperative but an economic necessity. It makes sense in every way. The Trussell Trust’s latest figures have exposed the scale of the crisis. In Putney alone, 5,991 emergency food parcels were distributed between April last year and March this year. That is a 7% rise on the previous year, so there is real need to scrap the two-child cap.”
“Across my constituency, we look forward to having more conversations about that with the Secretary of State for Transport and the Chancellor. I will focus my remarks on welcoming the change to the two-child benefit cap. The change will lift 450,000 children out of severe hardship across the UK and will directly benefit 2,310 children in my own constituency. As the Chancellor said, the cost of leaving the cap in place is to the child, but it is also to the public services that they use and to our wider community, and there is a future cost to the economy. It has been eight long years since this cruel and unnecessary policy was brought in, and it has punished families and increased poverty ever since.”
“I welcome that we will be getting back £400 million from the dodgy covid contracts, and a cut to the cost of living with £150 off energy bills. I also welcome that £18 million will be spent on playgrounds, which are vital because they are places where so many children spend so much time. The increase in plastic packaging tax is good for the environment and for reducing our reliance on plastic, which is made from and uses fossil fuels. I also welcome that £29 million in fines taken from water companies will be spent on cleaning up rivers, lakes and seas—this is all really good news. I note that the lower Thames crossing is being paid for, but my constituents will ask, “When will the reopening of Hammersmith bridge be paid for?” The bridge is a major London crossing that has been closed for six years.”