Mark Ferguson
MP for Gateshead Central and Whickham · Labour · United Kingdom
“I am happy to give a firm commitment in that regard. This is not a wider constitutional change, and the existing arrangements between the Crown, the Government and the established Church will remain. My hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling) talked about the wider role of religion in public life.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It reminds us of the scale and scope of what we do in this place, but we are here to talk about where we are in 2026. This Bill ensures that any Prime Minister, regardless of their religious beliefs, can advise the sovereign on Church appointments.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is an obvious problem with an obvious solution. The legislation is pragmatic, quick and will not detain the House long, despite the enjoyable history lesson that we have had today.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to close what has been a genuinely fascinating debate. I give thanks to hon. and right hon. Members from all parts of the House for their thoughtful contributions, in addition to their support for this worthwhile and historic piece of legislation. As we heard earlier from the Minister of State, my right hon.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The clause achieves that by repealing sections 17 and 18 of the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 and the Jews Relief Act 1858 in their entirety. It also contains some consequential repeals of Church legislation that cross-referred to some of these provisions.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that I will not detain the Committee for long in dealing with the two clauses. Clause 1 is the only operative clause of the Bill. Its purpose is to remove the restrictions that prevent a person who professes either the Roman Catholic or Jewish faiths from advising the sovereign on Church appointments.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
286 held · 273 searchable for Mark Ferguson. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 6.
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.
“The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has provided support for co-operatives in its Pride in Place strategy. Its new co-operative development unit will work closely with local and combined authorities to support the growth of local co-operative and mutual economies. Beyond those examples, Departments across Government, including the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, have been considering how the co-operative sector can support their priorities. This is a united, cross-Government effort that reflects our commitment to a diverse and resilient economy with a range of business models.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government look forward to reviewing the report when it is published, and will consider its recommendations closely. Of course, our commitment to doubling the size of the sector is an ambitious target that requires a cross-Government effort, as my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton rightly noted. The Treasury works closely with other Departments on achieving that ambition, and will continue to do so, and the Department for Business and Trade has also taken steps to support the sector. It has announced a call for evidence to explore how the Government can better support co-operatives, and has included co-operatives and alternative business models in its business support initiatives, such as the growth hubs and the business growth service.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have to make progress—sorry. Additionally, the Government asked the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority to produce, by the end of 2025, a report on the wider mutuals landscape, which is well under way. The Government are continuing to fund the Law Commission’s independent review of the legislation that governs co-operative societies in Great Britain, which is expected to be published later this year. That review will consider ways to update and modernise the legislation for co-operatives and community benefit societies, including on methods of raising capital, to ensure that those societies operate in a supportive regulatory and legislative environment. That is exactly the sort of access to capital that my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North referenced.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a fascinating return to the ’90s—like much about the Conservative party—but I think the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has missed the fact that there was an election last year in which the Labour party clearly won a mandate to deliver the removal of hereditary peers. What may or may not have been discussed in the 1990s is for the birds. There was an election. We won that election. We said we were going to do this. Let’s get on with it.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Father of the House for giving way. He makes a compelling point about other countries. Would he care to name some other countries that have people sitting in their legislature, able to introduce and vote on legislation, entirely by dint of their parentage? For the life of me, I cannot think of many examples.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is a fascinating argument. The hon. Gentleman has argued in favour of the Lords for their restraint, and now he is arguing in favour of the Lords because they allow radicalism. That does not make any sense.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Frankly, it is when monarchs have sought to obstruct this House that references to Cromwell are relevant. That is not what the Bill does; it is about removing the hereditary principle from the legislature that develops, scrutinises and delivers legislation. The King may sign it—that is his role.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The point has been made that if we do not want the hereditary principle in the House of Lords, perhaps that means that we no longer want the monarchy. Nothing could be further from the truth. As all Members in this place did, I swore an oath of allegiance to the King. I have not always been ardent monarchist, but I support a constitutional monarchy, and one of the many reasons I do is because the monarch has absolutely no role in introducing laws, in amending laws or in voting on laws. The monarch’s role is quite clear and simple: Royal Assent. They do not obstruct the work of this place—rightly so—and yet we have heard so many times today about the guerilla warfare that is being led in the other place against numerous pieces of legislation in retribution against this simple removal of an anachronism. That is not what the King does.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This has been a suitably fascinating debate. I do not plan to speak for too long, because the points have already been well made. We have had 10 hours here and 52 flippin’ hours in the House of Lords on this concise, four-clause Bill, and now we have a number of amendments. I will address Lords amendments 1 and 2. Lords amendment 1 is fairly straightforward up and down. We know what it is. It is a wrecking amendment, pure and simple. It is nothing more than an amendment designed to preserve the hereditary principle in the House of Lords—a principle that is an outdated anachronism that has no place in 2025 or any modern democracy. The only other comparable democracy is Lesotho. I do not know much about Lesotho, but I would quite like not to share this unenviable record with the good people of Lesotho for any longer.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I delighted to inform the right hon. Member about the parliamentary Labour party’s Back-Bench committee, which meets the Prime Minister weekly when Parliament is sitting. I see at least one of my hon. Friends from the committee here— [ Interruption. ] In fact, there are two here. Staffordshire is well represented at the moment on the committee, and that is quite right—oatcakes all round for them, and of course for the Prime Minister.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will happily take a point in a second from my hon. Friend, which I presume will be on the Lords amendment and not on oatcakes, but I wish to respond fully to the point made by the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) before I got so distracted. I apologise for that self-distraction, Madam Deputy Speaker. The role of the Lords in our legislature is quite clear, as is the role of the monarch. In fact, I spoke this morning to students from Emmanuel college in my constituency about the three distinct parts of our Parliament: this place, the other place and, of course, the monarch. But the principle under discussion is the ability to introduce, amend or vote on legislation. The King does none of those, so I see no contradiction on that important point of principle. I will now happily accept an intervention.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I dare say there is a—probably dwindling—proportion of the electorate who wish to see the hereditary principle enshrined within those crucial aspects of our legislature in the scope of our discussions, but no Opposition Members appear willing to make that argument. I am afraid it is an act of constitutional contortion for them to say they merely wish to allow some people to serve out their time. If that is the case, why do we have elections? Many wonderful public servants on both sides of the House lost their seats at the last election; but in this place we believe that, at the will of the people, any of us could be gone—and that is quite right.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend, although I do not think that will help me with my diet. However, I am doing the great north run on Sunday so I will probably need the calories. I am happy that we are having the debate, but I am somewhat surprised by its tenor, which runs contrary to the Salisbury convention—its correct name, of course, is the Salisbury-Addison convention; we too often neglect the Labour Member of that important duopoly. It has been surprising—particularly so on Second Reading, when the former Deputy Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Hertsmere (Sir Oliver Dowden), led for the Opposition—that there has not been a more straightforward argument from the Opposition in favour of the hereditary principle, because it seems fairly clear that that is what they are arguing for.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As Conservative Members well know, there is a limit on the number of Ministers who can be paid. I think that is right and I do not believe that now is the right time to expand the cost of our politics with more paid Ministers. However, if the Conservative party believes, genuinely and deep down in its soul, that it needed to have more paid Ministers, it had 14 years of Government in which it could have done that, rather than tacking it on as a distraction from the issue at hand here, which is incrementally but crucially reforming our constitution. I support the Government’s position on all the amendments. Let us get on with this. We have had 62 hours of debate—and counting. Let us crack on. It has been 1,100 years; I think it is time to cut it short.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My long-standing views on reform of our Parliament can be looked up by any Member if they so wish. I very much welcomed, both on Second Reading and from the Front Bench today, the comments on the future reform of the Lords and what that might look like. However, I dare say to the hon. Gentleman that we might agree on some specific aspects more than he imagines. There has not been much discussion of Lords amendment 2, on Ministers’ pay. I welcome the Conservative party’s stout defence of working people and of ensuring that people are paid what they are owed. We have also heard references to equalities law from the Opposition Benches, and I welcome that. I just think it is such as a shame that it is only being applied specifically and uniquely to hereditary peers.”
House of Commons4 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is wonderful to be back for another Opposition day debate, as I am sure we can all agree. It is another debate about imagined proposals. It must be a difficult time for Opposition Members, because for so many years, this was the time of year when they were preparing for their conference and for the Budget, but this year, scant attention will be paid to them—and, of course, they are not writing the Budget anymore.”
House of Commons3 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are all still living with the results of those actions. That is not imaginary; that is the real consequences of their Government, and it is what we are trying to put behind us.”
House of Commons3 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would call that Budget a bombshell, but bombshells go off only once, and that bombshell is going off in homes and communities across this country every single day. Families on mortgage rates that were fixed for five years or longer would have had lower interest rates now if it had not been for that Budget. Despite the five admirable and welcome interest rate cuts made under this Government, those families will be paying hundreds or thousands of pounds more a year. Opposition Members express concern today for those in valuable homes. Many of those in valuable homes will understandably have significant mortgages, and many of them will have seen their mortgages go up by hundreds or thousands of pounds, thanks to the actions of the previous Government—actions that Opposition Members were cheerleading at the time.”
House of Commons3 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“All the Opposition parties—again, this is the nature of the easy early years of opposition—want the benefits that result from our difficult choices, but they are unwilling to say how they would pay for them. I am sick and tired of listening to the never-never from those on the Opposition Benches. They are confident and comfortable with the imaginarium of the Budget that they believe will happen, but they are unwilling to come up with real, meaningful proposals—incapable of doing so, perhaps. Proposals floated by the Conservatives include cutting maternity pay, means-testing the state pension and attacking the minimum wage. We know the impact of a Conservative Budget: the grotesque chaos caused by Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng.”
House of Commons3 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed. Thank God the Conservatives are not writing the Budget, because we have seen what their Budgets led to. I understand Opposition Members’ frustration. It is nice to see that they have settled into the most comfortable aspect of being in opposition. As I have said before in these debates, as a Labour party member of many years’ standing, I have a huge amount of experience of the comfort of opposition; you start to create straw men, talk about what the Government might be doing and your fears, rile your supporters, and spark up a bit of concern among them. However, the Opposition are not willing to set out their actual plans for the country. [ Interruption. ] An hon. Friend makes a good point: they do not have any.”
House of Commons3 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The shadow Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp), has spoken passionately about crimes in this country—including, I dare say, some by a number of individuals who entered the country on his Government’s watch when he was a Home Office Minister. As other Members have said, when Opposition parties take that position while voting against tagging asylum seekers who are perceived to be a threat, and against barring from the country those who have been convicted of sexual crimes, it damages not only confidence in our communities but the life chances of asylum seekers who have committed no crimes and have a legitimate claim to be here. Does the Minister agree?”
House of Commons21 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What role, if any, was held by the two Secretaries of State for Defence over that time, one who served until August 2023 and one who served from August 2023—to my mind, either side of the information coming to light? If we do not get to the bottom of those questions, we will do an immense disservice to the British people and, worse, to Afghans, who have been let down once again.”
House of Commons15 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I am sure many Members do, I feel a sense of anger that once again the Afghan people have been betrayed. I thank the Secretary of State for his candour and his response, and for lifting the super-injunction, which will allow proper parliamentary scrutiny, but will he assure me that the following three questions will be answered? First, how was a year allowed to pass between the initial leak and it being uncovered? Secondly, how was an email with a spreadsheet attached considered a serious way to send around what effectively amounted to a kill list of Afghans for the Taliban? Thirdly, the role of James Heappey in overseeing this has been mentioned.”
House of Commons15 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I think Members across the House would agree, Alex Chalk, the former Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary, was taken seriously in this place, as were his opinions. He recently said that some cases “could conceivably be dealt with by a judge and two wingers, so reserve the Crown court for the most serious cases… It is helpful to look at which cases should be triable either way and which should be summary only.” Does the Minister agree that it is worth taking note of serious voices like Alex Chalk, rather than the opportunism of the shadow Justice Secretary?”
House of Commons9 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State and the Minister for the Future of Roads will be surprised that I am going to break the habit of a lifetime and not talk about the Gateshead flyover for a change. But I am very interested in the structures fund, and I look forward to engaging further with the Department on how we can deliver this vital infrastructure for Gateshead. Instead of the flyover, I want to talk about the delivery of the signalling system for the metro—slightly less exciting for some perhaps, but it is incredibly important. That comes on top of new trains and £1.85 billion of investment, including in a new metro line. Does the Secretary of State agree that investment in the north-east is being delivered because we have a Labour mayor in Kim McGuinness working with Labour MPs and a Labour Government?”
House of Commons8 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have exciting plans for Gateshead town centre, but we have more work to do on antisocial behaviour. Northumbria police’s Operation Shield has brought down antisocial behaviour significantly, but more powers and more officers are needed. What are the Government doing to ensure that the police have both the powers and the resources to tackle persistent antisocial behaviour?”
House of Commons7 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Charlie Rogers was a unique chronicler of my community. He was a friend of L. S. Lowry and the pitman painter Norman Cornish, and his paintings and illustrations of working-class life in central Gateshead and central Newcastle are incredibly powerful and deserve a wider audience. My constituent, Brian Rankin, is hoping to bring his work to a wider audience with this fantastic collection “Pursued by Bulldozers”, which it will be possible to view next week. Will the Leader of the House provide Government time for a debate on the art and culture of Gateshead, which we are incredibly proud of?”
House of Commons3 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not know about the rest of the House, but I am slightly baffled. The Leader of the Opposition has made a virtue of her blank slate and her blank sheet of paper, but is she in favour of more or less? Is she in favour of the actions of her Government or not? This complete lack of taking responsibility is exactly what got us into this mess in the first place.”
House of Commons1 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T3. Nothing matters more than home, so I welcome the huge progress that has been made on forces housing over the past 12 months, especially for forces families. Does the Minister agree that the Opposition’s half-baked reprivatisation plan would be a huge threat to those in the armed forces and their families?”
House of Commons30 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Labour party is defined by work and by the dignity of work, and so is my community in Gateshead and Whickham. People have the belief that they should be able to work to provide for themselves, their family and their community, but too many in my community have been let down by successive Governments of all parties who have not created the jobs we need and by a failed system. Not one person who has spoken today—not one—has defended the existing indefensible system. What will the Secretary of State do to ensure that communities like mine, where work or a lack of work is the problem, receive the support we need?”
House of Commons30 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My constituent Danielle Wiseman is desperate to pass her theory test, but she was recently told that she cannot get a theory test in Gateshead until 2026. Will the Leader of the House make time for the urgent debate needed on access to theory tests and driving tests—an issue that bedevils people in Gateshead and across the country? Also, if she will allow me, will she congratulate Danielle and her partner David on the upcoming birth of their child?”
House of Commons26 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement, especially on defence. Politics is about priorities and, as I know he knows, the most important responsibility of Government is the defence of the country and its people. I echo the sensible points made by the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak)—sadly, they were not made by those on the Opposition Front Bench—and in particular his point about our intelligence services, who are the finest in the world. There are those whom we will never know and never see, but who have kept this place, our democracy and our communities safe. Will the Prime Minister assure me that, as we seek to invest more in defence, there is a particular focus on supporting our intelligence services?”
House of Commons26 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and for the speech he is giving. I am very proud that the Royal Naval Reserve is based in part on the banks of the Tyne, on Gateshead quays. Does he agree that visible representations of armed forces bases in our communities is incredibly important in encouraging people to know that such careers are available to them?”
House of Commons25 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“While the Minister commends the work of cadets, will he join me in commending 361 Gateshead air cadets for the critical role they played in remembrance services by leading the parade through the centre of Gateshead last year? Does he agree that the role of the cadets in remembrance is incredibly important in building a sense of community and a sense of the role that we all must play in remembrance, alongside the cadets?”
House of Commons25 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“From speaking to my local NHS trust in Gateshead, I know the value it places on driving costs down, but it still faces financial pressures. Key among those are issues related to the digital capital gap. We are really keen in Gateshead to improve that situation and to allow more people to access the NHS remotely. Will the Secretary of State meet me and Gateshead NHS trust to talk about how we can tackle that?”
House of Commons17 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T2. This week, the Government have announced £86 billion for research and development. Recently, I visited PROTO and Digital Catapult in my constituency. Does the Minister agree with me that this sort of investment is exactly what Gateshead, the north-east and our country need?”
House of Commons12 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A Labour Government, a Labour Chancellor, and a Labour plan. We have half a million children getting free school meals, huge investment into our national health service, jobs and opportunities closer to home, and £39 billion for affordable housing. This is fantastic for my community, but does the Chancellor agree that people in Gateshead and Whickham may benefit the most from the changes she made to the Green Book, and that it gives communities like mine huge opportunities for the future?”
House of Commons11 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As a child, Sizewell was an important word to me, like Wylfa, Hunterston, Dungeness, Dounreay and Hinkley, because they were places where my father, based in Gateshead, went to work. Will the Secretary of State assure me that the announcement is part of bringing back those fantastic safe jobs, which are so important for Gateshead and the nuclear industry?”
House of Commons10 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This change will make a difference to the lives of thousands of children in my Gateshead constituency, and may I say it would have been hugely welcomed by my grandmother who was a Gateshead dinner lady? Does the Minister agree that through 30 hours of free childcare, a limit on the number of branded school items, free breakfast clubs and lifting 100,000 children out of poverty, Labour is the party for children and families?”
House of Commons5 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will he work with me and the Mayor of the North East to deliver these additional critical infrastructure projects for the north-east?”
House of Commons4 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It has been good to hear so much talk about left-behind communities today, but I have always hated that phrase, because my community was not left behind by the last Government; it was wilfully abandoned by them. The £1.8 billion for the North East combined authority region is hugely welcome. I welcome the campaigning by my hon. Friend the Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson) for the extension of the Metro to Washington, and the world-class Angel network that will be built by Mayor Kim McGuinness, but does the Minister agree that it makes no sense to have a fantastic new train line with fantastic new trains on it if they have to run under a crumbling flyover in the middle of Gateshead, and through an interchange that requires work?”
House of Commons4 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Members have tried to reach for the right words to describe what the Palestinians are facing. It is incredibly difficult to convey that within the constraints of parliamentary and diplomatic language. I will not go over any of the ground that colleagues have covered, but does the Minister agree that it is completely unacceptable on every level to pair aid with military objectives? Will he assure the House that when we as a Government consider where next we go on Israel, the unacceptability of those tactics will be taken on board?”
House of Commons4 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T8. I am sure that hon. Members from all parties will be looking forward to Olivia’s law, in memory of Olivia Pratt-Korbel, coming into force, thanks to a huge amount of support from my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley (Anneliese Midgley), Olivia’s family and other families. What else can be done to ensure that murderers, rapists and other violent criminals are forced to answer in court for their crimes?”
House of Commons3 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“America backs the deal. Canada backs the deal. Australia backs the deal. New Zealand backs the deal. Our relationship with the Five Eyes countries is our most crucial intelligence relationship, so does the Secretary of State agree that it would have been a dereliction of duty to our country and those four countries to have failed to do this deal?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way—that roar from Opposition Members is no doubt enthusiasm for what I am about to ask. This week, the Government signed a deal with the European Union that includes, among other things, the ability to find out if someone has been arrested in another European country for people smuggling and the ability to use facial recognition technology. Does she agree that those are exactly the tactics one would need if one wanted to smash the gangs, and yet the Conservative party opposed the deal?”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement and this deal. Perhaps most important to people in Gateshead will be the downward pressure on food prices, so I ask the Prime Minister, when it comes to food prices and to this deal, would he rather listen to Asda, Morrisons and M&S, or to the Leader of the Opposition, who does not think that sandwiches are food?”
House of Commons20 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Our plans for the renewal of central Gateshead are by far the most exciting investment opportunity in north-east England, with £1.2 billion of inward investment, thousands of new homes and public transport infrastructure, meaning 15,000 construction jobs over the next few decades. Gateshead college, right at the heart of the development zone, is rapidly increasing places on its superb construction course, but much more is needed. Will the Secretary of State meet me and Gateshead college to discuss super-charging construction skills to deliver our plan for growth?”
House of Commons28 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“At the FSAs’ 2023 annual general meeting, the shadow Minister said: “Despite the phenomenal success of football at home and abroad, we have seen too many examples of the devastating impact the failure of a beloved club can have on a local community.” My local club in Gateshead was nearly wound up in 2019. Is he really content to maintain the grotesque status quo, which allows too many of us to lose our clubs, to score political points on this matter?”
House of Commons28 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman mentions UEFA and FIFA. Would he categorise those as organisations where politics is kept at arm’s length and where there is no place for cronyism?”
House of Commons28 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He did not care—he would not have it any other way. He was a defender; that is what he did. In his later years, he began to forget things. I once found him driving around the village where I grew up, unable to remember how he got there or even how to drive his car back. It has a profound impact. I will never be able to prove that it was anything to do with heading footballs in the 1950s, but it is what I have always suspected, so I think it is important that it is part of our debate. I thank the Secretary of State for bringing forward the Bill, which will be a huge benefit to teams like Gateshead.”
House of Commons28 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗