Matt Vickers
MP for Stockton West · Conservative · United Kingdom
“Clause 30 allows a court to adjourn proceedings on a slavery and trafficking prevention order at sentencing. If the defendant does not attend the adjourned hearing, the court may adjourn again, issue a warrant for their arrest or, subject to safeguards, proceed in their absence.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clear information can help with both, but a longer statement is not necessarily a better one, and paying someone to produce a polished document is no substitute for checking what is happening on the ground. Clause 44 and schedule 5 make reporting topics compulsory.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We made the same argument during the passage of the Crime and Policing Bill, to which we tabled amendments that would have put real penalties on registered sex offenders who failed to notify. An obligation with no teeth is no obligation at all. However, collecting information is only half the job.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the fact that those regulations will be subject to the affirmative procedure, but before we give the Minister this regulation-making power, the Committee should understand the gap it is meant to close. What can officers not currently find out through the orders, and how would that information help them to prevent exploitation?”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In July, the Government announced £25 million to extend the guardian service to the remaining 179 local authorities in England that do not have it yet. We welcome that, but a child in one of those areas needs a guardian now. Can the Minister tell us when the service will be available in every one of them?”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Who has asked how the workers are recruited, or whether a subcontractor is using labour supplied on terms that should ring alarm bells? Those questions need asking before a problem becomes a scandal, and the Government should lead by example here.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
2,063 lines on record for Matt Vickers, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 8 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.
“Lords amendment 333 offers a practical solution: it would extend the timeframe for enforcement, giving agencies the ability to take action that is thorough, proportionate and, crucially, effective. It is about ensuring that when action is taken, it delivers real results, not just temporary disruption. To uphold public safety, we must update the law to reflect the current nature of the crimes our society faces. Lords amendment 311 reflects the worrying growth in the number of protest groups that engage in serious criminal activity to further their aims. However, being organisations, they are often shielded from the full force of the law, as was set out in the other House. The designation in the amendment is not terrorist proscription.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is the crux of the problem: the system does not enable action that sticks. In the meantime, the impact is clear. Our high streets suffer as legitimate businesses lose trade, confidence declines, and responsible retailers who follow the rules and invest in their communities are left competing against those who operate with impunity. There is also a wider impact on our communities, particularly on young people. Premises linked to that kind of activity can become focal points for antisocial behaviour, drawing in vulnerable individuals and exposing them to harm. If we want safer streets and stronger communities, we cannot allow that cycle to continue.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If we are serious about supporting the police to do their job, we must ensure that they have the powers they need to tackle not just crime but the wider public nuisance and disorder that too often accompany it. A range of organisations, including the Chartered Trading Standards Institute, have been clear that stronger powers are needed to deal with rogue retailers. While the current legal framework does provide tools, in practice they are too often insufficient. The time limits attached to closure notices and orders simply do not go far enough. Instead, we see a revolving door: offenders wait out short closure periods, reopen under a different name and continue their activities, sometimes shifting location before enforcement agencies have the chance to complete proper investigations.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As Lord Hogan-Howe told the Lords, “we need to move on from the recording of non-crime hate incidents by removing them altogether from police systems.” —[ Official Report, House of Lords, 20 January 2026; Vol. 852, c. 173.] I am afraid that unless we agree to the amendment, we risk returning to this issue in the future. It is estimated that 660 hours of police time have been spent on non-crime hate incidents. We can change that and see that time invested back into policing our communities. On antisocial behaviour and illicit retailers, we hear repeatedly from businesses and local communities about rogue premises causing persistent problems on our high streets.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, the measures brought forward in the other place are not limited merely to the issue of fly-tipping. There are important proposals relating to non-crime hate incidents. In Lords amendment 334, colleagues in the other place wisely took the step of ending the investigation and recording of non-crime hate incidents and ensuring that any future incident recording guidance has “due regard to the right to freedom of expression.” That is a sensible, necessary measure, as the Government’s proposal appears to be a rebranding of the existing scheme with a more restrictive triage system. Reports would still be logged, personal data would still be recorded and disclosure rules would remain unchanged. Officers and staff would still be tied up monitoring incidents that do not meet the criminal threshold at a cost of time and resources.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I share my right hon. Friend’s concerns—I think many people across the country share them—not only about the issue, however strongly people might feel about it, but about the way that it was added to this Bill after Committee stage, meaning that some of the scrutiny that might otherwise have happened did not, and no evidence on it was given at the evidence sessions. It was slipped into the Bill, and I do not think that there was adequate scrutiny of it. Lots of people across the country share that concern. Such a seismic change in the relationship between the state and individuals should have had more scrutiny in this place. On fly-tipping, I believe that removing the instrument of this crime is an effective tool, and it could extend beyond the legislative framework set out by the Government in the waste crime action plan.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Without the right powers, higher expectations mean little. Where disorder takes hold, it damages communities and undermines confidence, as we have seen in places like Clapham common. While parts of the Bill are welcome, there are still gaps. The Lords amendments to which I have spoken would strengthen enforcement and support officers. If we are serious about safer streets, removing them risks falling short of what the public expect.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The change has been introduced late in the legislative process, with minimal scrutiny, raising concerns about transparency. The Law Commission has warned in expert advice that including sex as a protected characteristic in that setting could be ineffective and even counterproductive, as it may complicate prosecutions and create hierarchies of victims. Overall, the amendment appears more symbolic than practical, adding complexity without clear benefit to crime reduction. The Government have before them amendments that would strengthen our legal system and better protect the public and the police, but we cannot ignore the reality on the ground. Officer numbers have fallen while demand continues to rise, and the Bill will add to that pressure. That is why it matters that, when the police act, they can use the full weight of the law.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Friend the Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns) to address the depiction of strangulation in pornography. I understand that, through discussions with Baroness Bertin on related subjects, the Government have undertaken to separately progress further measures to tackle pornography featuring 18-plus step-incest—in which one party is the family member of another—and the mimicking of children aged 16-plus, as well as on age verification in pornography. I would be grateful if the Minister clarified those matters further. I put on record my party’s opposition to Lords amendment 301, which unnecessarily expands the definition of “aggravated offences” to include certain characteristics, even though existing law already covers most of those factors at sentencing, and provides extensive hate crime protections.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The then Opposition told us that they had really strong views about it. They are now in government but are not doing anything about it. The hon. Gentleman need not worry about another day or another week; he has the opportunity today to set the process in motion by voting for Lords amendment 359. It is not enough that Iran is covered by the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme—we must go further. The IRGC is not a theoretical concern. As my colleagues have repeatedly stressed to the Government, it has threatened those in our country and supported armed groups that have killed British and allied troops. We welcome the Government’s adoption of the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage) and supported by my hon.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Chartered Trading Standards Institute and many of the agencies responsible for dealing with this issue talk about the need to extend—or potentially extend, depending on how tonight goes—not only orders, but notices. That is the 48-hour window, or seven days if we go with this amendment, so that papers can be put in place and the dodgy shops, as the Minister put it, do not have the ability to reopen before the order can be put in place. This does not seem to appear in the amendment in lieu. Will she be looking at notices, as well as orders?”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The alternative Lords amendment—the pushback from the Lords—relates to notices and orders. The reason there is a problem with the 72 hours for notices is that, because of court sittings and how that all falls, we end up not getting the order in place, and these shops, which the agencies have jumped through the hoops to close down, get to reopen. I do not think the Chartered Trading Standards Institute or many of the agencies dealing with that would agree with the 72 hours. I ask the Minister to go further still and to perhaps look at the seven days being put forward by the Lords.”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can the Minister tell me why the Government are opposing the Lords amendment that would allow police officers to seize the vehicles of the vile criminals who fly-tip in communities across the country?”
House of Commons14 April 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Knife crime and drugs are destroying too many lives in our country, and stop and search is the best tool we have to take them off our streets. Does the Minister agree that the only people who should have anything to fear from stop and search are criminals? If so, why will she not adopt our proposal to allow the police to act on a single suspicion indicator, so that we can treble stop and search, and take weapons and drugs off our streets?”
House of Commons23 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On 30 June 2024, 96,642 people were in asylum accommodation. Latest figures show that there are now more than 103,000, so despite the creative interpretation, that number has gone up, not down. There is a distinct lack of gang-smashing, crossings are up by 45%, and the Government’s new border security commander has already given up and quit. When will the Government accept that their approach is making things significantly worse?”
House of Commons23 March 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Public safety must be strengthened by evidence, not weakened by unnecessary and disproportionate bureaucracy. If the Government cannot clearly demonstrate that this proposal will make the public safer, then they should not proceed with the delays, costs and bureaucracy that it will create.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given that the Government have also floated broader reforms—including possible centralisation of firearms licensing—is there not merit in ensuring the system works properly before imposing any further structural change? There is fear that moving shotguns from section 2 to section 1 will disproportionately impact rural communities and law-abiding citizens who use their shotguns responsibly. Our firearms legislation has helped keep Britain safe. It must remain robust and prevent those who pose a danger from accessing weapons. However, it must also be proportionate, workable and grounded in evidence. At present, I have yet to see clear and compelling evidence that this proposed alignment would deliver any level of additional public safety that justifies the costs, disruption and impact on rural Britain.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Data from the National Police Chiefs’ Council shows that many forces struggle to meet service level agreements, even after the recent fees increase. A January 2026 inspection by His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services found “significant backlogs” in some collaborative licensing units, including cases outstanding for more than two years. Adding further complexity risks compounding those delays and placing additional burdens on our already stretched police forces. Some have suggested a compromise: that any merger should not proceed until the licensing system is demonstrably efficient and effective.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Wildlife management and conservation efforts are closely tied to responsible shooting activity. Surveys show that habitat management and conservation linked to shooting cover millions of hectares. Ground-nesting species such as curlew and lapwing are often cited as examples of wildlife that benefit from such management. We must also consider the wider economic impact. Research cited by the Gun Trade Association estimates that aligning the regimes could reduce gross value added in the UK shooting sector by £875 million, with a broader impact of over £2 billion across the wider economy. Protecting the economy carries costs, but those costs must be justified by clear, demonstrable gains in safety. There is also a practical point: the firearms licensing system is already under strain.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the Government now wish to remove that distinction, then they must explain clearly how doing so will enhance public safety in a way that is propionate to the hundreds of thousands of law-abiding shotgun owners who will be affected. We should also recognise that, for many, shooting is a legitimate and long-standing sport. If aligning the regimes increases cost, complexity and delay then the reality is that entry-level access will become harder. That risks pricing out younger participants and those from ordinary working families, making the sport less accessible at the grassroots level. The likely outcome of such a change will be fewer shotguns in lawful use. That will not be without consequence. In rural communities, shotguns are not simply a sport or leisure item, they are tools of work. Farmers and pest controllers rely on them.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can the Minister confirm when that consultation will be finished and give assurances that the voices of rural communities and shooting organisations will be properly heard? There is significant concern about the proposal among those groups, including the British Association for Shooting and Conservation and the Countryside Alliance, which have raised these issues directly with the Minister. Section 2 licensing, while distinct from section 1, is not lax. It involves robust checks and safeguards that are integral to protecting the public. The petition does not call for weaker rules, it calls for properly maintaining the current prudent framework. Shotguns and rifles are different, and Parliament has long recognised that distinction in law. The regulatory framework reflects differences in use, function and risk.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is not a reason for complacency—far from it. We have seen recent reporting highlighting the growing threat of more powerful weapons being smuggled into the country. That underlines the importance of robust enforcement against illegal firearms. It does not automatically follow that additional burdens on lawful, licensed owners will address that threat. In fact, as has been pointed out, it perhaps illustrates the better use of targeted resource. The question raised by the petition is whether merging section 1 and section 2 licensing will actually improve public safety or simply create more cost, delay and bureaucracy without delivering meaningful benefit. When the policy was first announced, the Government said that a consultation would be published by the end of 2025.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is also why the previous Conservative Government committed £500,000 to support the roll-out of a national training package developed by the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council in an effort to strengthen firearms licensing standards. Standards matter, as the Home Office has repeatedly made clear. The UK already operates one of the strictest and most effective firearms licensing systems in the world. Between April 2024 and March 2025, there were 522 homicides. Of those, 32 involved a firearm, but just four involved a licensed firearm—the same figure as in 2023-24. Every loss of life is a tragedy, but the data shows that licensed firearms account for a very small proportion of those crimes. The National Crime Agency’s 2025 report confirms that firearms crimes in the UK remain among the lowest in the world.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Public safety must always be the first duty of any Government, but when we legislate, particularly in an area as serious as firearms, we must ensure that what we do is proportionate, evidence-led and genuinely effective. If we are to change the law, we must be able to demonstrate clearly that those changes will actually make the public safer. Many such changes have been set out today, but the Government’s proposal is not one of them. The tragic cases that we have heard about in this debate are heartbreaking, and our thoughts remain with all those affected. Where there have been failings in the licensing system, and where improvements are needed, the Government must act. That is why previous changes were made following instances involving shotguns.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I thank the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) for so ably bringing forward this debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee, as well as the more than 121,000 people who signed the petition. It is clear from the turnout in the Chamber and the many valuable points made that the measures proposed are important and will have huge consequences for rural communities. A number of Members have been incredibly active in lobbying the Government on the issue, including my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns)—not known for being quiet, let’s be honest—who has been unable to contribute to the debate due to her shadow role. She is determined to ensure that the Minister knows about the impact on her constituents in the real world.”
House of Commons23 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They judge it not by the tone of a statement, but by whether they see officers on the streets, whether the police answer the telephone and turn up, and whether crime is dealt with when it happens—and on those measures, too many of our constituents feel that policing is being stretched to breaking point. This debate cannot take place without us confronting the central fact behind it: Labour promised more police on our streets, but since it entered government, police officer numbers have fallen by more than 1,300. That is not a minor adjustment, or an accounting quirk; it is 1,300 fewer police officers available to respond to crime, protect victims and patrol our communities.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I join the House in thanking our frontline police officers and staff for their incredible commitment, and the contribution and sacrifices that they make to keep our streets safe. I am grateful to the Minister for her statement, though I must say that it has the familiar quality of a Government announcing success, while the public are left wondering where exactly it has occurred. The Minister has come to the House today to present this police funding settlement as a turning point—as if police numbers are not actually falling, and as if criminals across the country are now packing up their tools and reconsidering their life choices. However, outside Westminster, the country looks rather different. The public judge policing in a far more old-fashioned way than Ministers.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is the net number of police officers making the difference out there on Britain’s streets. There were 149,769; there are now nearly 2,000 fewer—that has a real impact. We hear all this noise about neighbourhood policing. Neighbourhood policing has a huge part to play in the policing model, but we cannot take away the police who respond to 999 calls. Should we badge police up, redeploy them, and leave people waiting longer for a 999 response when they really need one?”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I could not agree more. That is why the number of robberies against businesses has surged, shoplifting is up, and people feel less safe on our streets. Between September 2024 and September 2025—entirely on this Government’s watch—the number of officers fell by 1,318, compared with the year before. More broadly, 3,000 fewer people are working in police forces across the country to keep us safe.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Back in 2010, I was deeply concerned about lots of things—the damage to our economy, the number of people without a job, the challenge of the difficult choices that the Government had to make—but the previous Government left office with record numbers of police on our streets.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It relies heavily on the police precept, pushing more of the burden on to local taxpayers, while forces face rising costs and rising demand. In 2023, an MP told this House that the then Government’s approach was to “put up local taxes, put up council tax, push the problem on to local forces”, and that “Ministers have chosen to heap the burden on to hard-pressed local taxpayers through the precept.” —[ Official Report , 8 February 2023; Vol. 727, c. 935.] Any idea who that might have been? [ Interruption. ] Yes, it was the current Policing Minister. Given the Government’s fondness for U-turns, I am not surprised by the Minister’s change of view.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Durham’s Labour police and crime commissioner has been even more direct in her criticism. She said that the Labour Government have “consistently demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of policing and community safety.” The Minister will no doubt point with great enthusiasm to headline figures. Such spin fails to acknowledge inflation, pay awards and the ongoing cost of the Government’s jobs tax. Many at home will be stunned that our police forces were subjected to hundreds of millions of pounds of costs by way of the national insurance increase, and that the Government have actually taxed the police off our streets. This settlement is not the straightforward increase that the Minister claims it is.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There are real funding challenges, here and now, with real consequences for forces and communities across the country. The Association of Police and Crime Commissioners says that this year’s settlement leaves police forces with a shortfall that could be as high as £500 million. Labour’s own police and crime commissioners across the country have spoken out on the challenges. In my own part of the world, Labour PCC Matt Storey has said that Cleveland police have to operate with “one hand behind their back”, and that funding has “failed to keep pace with the level of inflation, while other funding has been removed and re-allocated”, making it impossible to maintain current levels of service. I understand that he has written to the Minister on three occasions and is still awaiting a response.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The number of officers in the British Transport police and the number of staff in the National Crime Agency have also decreased, all while the Government announce a national police service that will be created from organisations such as the NCA. The staff who will make up that service are leaving. That is critical because the grant that we are discussing comes against the backdrop of many forces warning about their long-term financial stability. As the chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council said: “The overall financial picture remains challenging. Many forces are planning service reductions, with consequences for officer numbers, staff capacity and overall resilience.” That is a direct consequence of the Government’s decisions.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When the Conservatives last left office, we had record numbers of police on the streets. I do not know how many police officers we had on the streets when the Liberal Democrats last left office. [ Interruption. ] I will make some progress. In terms of headcount, the picture is starker. In March 2024, under the previous Government, there were 149,769 officers—the highest number since records began. As of September 2025, that number stands at 147,621—a decrease of more than 2,000. When the Minister speaks about supporting the police, the House is entitled to ask a simple question: how can the Government support policing while presiding over fewer police? Worryingly, the bad news does not stop there.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They are also dealing with public order demands, which have become increasingly routine. This is a modern landscape of threats that requires modern capacity, and it cannot be met with funding settlements designed for ministerial speeches rather than frontline realities. This settlement will ultimately be judged not by the Minister’s tone, but by its results. This debate comes down to the difference between saying and doing. The Government can say that they support policing, but too many see numbers falling. They can say that they support victims, but too many see no justice. And they can claim to be tough on crime, while quietly introducing early-release schemes that put offenders back on our streets sooner. Until the Government’s actions match their words, the public will not be convinced—and nor should they be.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yet under this Government’s model, two communities can face the same crime pressures but receive very different policing capacity simply because one can raise more money than the other. Perhaps the Minister can tell us what changed her mind about increasing the burden on local taxpayers for funding the police. Given the articulate case made by my hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty)—and by the Minister when in opposition—will she tell us when the funding formula review will take place? The pressures on policing are not diminishing; they are growing. Forces are dealing with county lines, drug gangs exploiting children, organised crime operating across borders, cyber-crime and fraud expanding at an industrial scale, and domestic abuse cases that require extensive time, safeguarding and specialist capacity.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“An increasing burden is being put on local taxpayers. Members can say one thing in opposition, but then they enter government and have to make real choices. Labour’s choices have meant cuts to police numbers, increases in the burden on local taxpayers, and spiralling levels of retail crime and robbery against businesses. The consequences of that approach are as obvious today as they were then. The reliance on the police precept entrenches a postcode lottery in policing. Areas with strong council tax bases can raise more; areas with weaker council tax bases cannot. Yet the need for policing does not neatly align with local prosperity. Criminals do not check council tax bands before committing burglary. Nor do they decide where to operate based on local authority revenue forecasts.”
House of Commons11 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Rural communities fear that mega-police forces will suck resources into cities, and police officer numbers are already down by 1,318 under this Government. How does the Minister expect police forces to protect rural communities when the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners has confirmed that it is facing a £500 million funding shortfall this year?”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Anybody listening to that garbage would not realise that there are fewer police on the streets now than under the last Conservative Government. Research done by the National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society shows the huge scale of crime affecting rural retailers. Since this Government came into office, shoplifting and robberies against businesses have surged. Does the Minister think this is because the Government have cut 1,318 police officers, or because they refuse to mandate tagging, curfews and bans for serial shoplifters and those who assault retail workers? Which is it—fewer police or weaker consequences?”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thriving town centres are not just about economics; they are about safety. Communities with busy, successful high streets are more likely to report crime, look out for one another and defend what they value. That brings me—”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I thank the hon. Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker) for securing this important debate. Town and city centres are the lifeblood of our local communities. They are crucial for people, local businesses and our economy, yet under this Labour Government it increasingly feels as though our town and city centres are being not supported but attacked—attacked by a jobs tax that raises the cost of employing people, by surging business rates that punish employers and enterprise, and by relentless pressure on pubs and small businesses, the very places that make our high streets sociable, welcoming and safe. The result is plain to see: businesses are closing. And when businesses are closing, confidence drains away.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will she commit today that no police force will lose yet more officers as a result of the Government’s next spending review, or should communities prepare for even fewer police on the streets? That leads me to a second, unavoidable question: does she expect communities to feel safer when there are fewer police, criminals are being released early and Labour councils refuse to use the powers they already have to tackle antisocial behaviour, or is managed decline now official Government policy? Fewer police, early release and unenforced laws are not unfortunate side effects; they are policy choices, and our town centres are paying the price.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government tell us that crime is under-reported; if that is true, it only strengthens the case for more police, not fewer. The Government point to measures in the Crime and Policing Bill, but targets mean little if officer numbers are falling. Warm words do not patrol streets. Conservatives believe that safety is not a luxury, but a foundation on which everything else depends. That is why we back our police. That is why we are committed to recruiting 10,000 more officers. That is why we support visible, proactive policing in the places that need it most. Before the Minister tells us once again that a strategy is in place, may I ask a very simple question?”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Since the Labour Government came to power, there are 1,318 fewer police officers on our streets and more than 3,000 fewer people working in policing overall. That is not an accident: it is a choice. Police chiefs warn of a funding shortfall of £500 million. In my local force, the Labour police and crime commissioner says there is a £2.4 million gap—the equivalent of 40 police officers. Even when offenders are caught, punishment is increasingly optional. Labour’s early release policies mean that criminals are back on the streets sooner—sometimes within weeks—so shopkeepers see the same faces returning, residents see the same behaviour repeated, and police officers see their work unravelled by decisions taken far from their communities. The consequences are clear: shoplifting is rising and the robbery of business property has surged.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For many years, Stockton has had one of the highest ratios of asylum seekers to residents in the entire country. Those asylum seekers are largely housed near the town centre, placing pressure on accommodation, public services and integration, and leaving large numbers of lone men congregating in the town centre, causing understandable concern for residents and businesses alike. The situation has been compounded by the council’s permissive approach to housing. It has allowed large numbers of houses in multiple occupation, bedsits and bail accommodation to cluster around the town centre. The result is predictable: people stop visiting, businesses close and crime goes unreported. That creates a doom loop, and Labour councils across the country have perfected it. What we now see nationally is Stockton scaled up.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It has recently emerged that Stockton-on-Tees borough council spent £15.8 million on recruitment consultants in just three years. Money that could have gone into keeping the town centre safe was instead swallowed up by consultants and questionable spending decisions. Councils have a duty to spend public money wisely, and in Stockton that duty has too often been neglected. At the same time, instead of using all the powers available through public space protection orders to clamp down on antisocial behaviour, the council’s soft approach has allowed far too much of it to go unchallenged. Worse still, Stockton’s Labour council volunteered itself as an asylum dispersal authority, taking on a completely disproportionate number of asylum seekers.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That brings me to Stockton, which has a great high street and incredible local businesses. I always encourage people to support Stockton, but I would be negligent in my duty if I did not acknowledge the challenges it faces—challenges that did not arrive overnight. Over decades, Stockton’s Labour council has allowed the town centre to decline and become home to unacceptable levels of crime and antisocial behaviour. When disorder grew, enforcement weakened. When problems became visible, excuses multiplied. The council’s priorities tell their own story. Instead of employing more civic enforcement officers or street wardens—the people who provide visible reassurance—the council has expanded layers of management on six-figure salaries.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the years either side of that, with the exception of 2010—the last year of the previous Labour Government—they were never more than 200,000.”
House of Commons2 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We believe that this is a perfectly reasonable alteration to the existing system that puts more robust measures in place to ensure that settlement is based on the long-standing contribution that many of us would expect. Even though we have seen reductions in net migration, with the Office for National Statistics stating that “decreases in work-related and study-related immigration” continue to follow policy reforms from early 2024, the immigration figures remain historically and exceptionally high, and far greater than before the pandemic. The Government must take action to reduce immigration, and they must do so imminently, recognising that the timeframe for these changes is dictated by a significant cohort. Between 2015 and 2020, total grants of settlement were never over 100,000.”
House of Commons2 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗