Lewis Cocking
MP for Broxbourne · Conservative · United Kingdom
“What would the Secretary of State say to my constituents in Broxbourne, who never asked for this reorganisation and are concerned that it is just a waste of time and money that will leave them with higher council tax bills and less say over local planning decisions?”
“Businesses such as hotels, ice cream parlours and fisheries have been hit hard by the increase the employer national insurance and by burdensome regulations. Business rates have increased—in some cases massively and seemingly arbitrarily.”
“They include poor or sometimes non-existent transport links, unemployment and changes to a once-reliable and profitable seasonal trade, a lack of housing supply, and large disparities in income, which mean that many people cannot afford to live in the places where they grew up.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. It is a huge privilege to wind up the debate on behalf of the official Opposition. I thank the hon. Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing this very important debate.”
“I fondly remember trips to places such as Clacton, Bournemouth, Great Yarmouth and Southend. From my visits to many of our seaside towns, and from hearing hon. Members’ testimonies, it is apparent that those places face unique challenges. Unfortunately, many of them have experienced decline in recent decades.”
“Ultimately, our coastal communities and the whole United Kingdom deserve better. We need a Government who cut rather than increase taxes, reward rather than punish aspiration and success, prioritise quality housing for local people rather than HMOs for illegal asylum seekers, and put the interests of ordinary British people first, not lea…”
The complete record
Every one of 545 lines we hold for Lewis Cocking, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 11.
“My hon. Friend makes an excellent point, and she is right that infrastructure must come first. I will come on later in my speech to the fact that there is nothing in this Bill to make developers put that infrastructure in first. In Broxbourne, we have already had more than our fair share of development. Thousands of new homes have been built in the past few years, but new or expanded infrastructure to take the strain off our already overstretched services is nowhere to be seen, and it is having a serious impact on my constituents. A Health Minister has admitted to me that patients trying to see their local GP in my constituency are more likely than the national average to wait two weeks.”
“This Bill reveals that the Labour Government have their priorities wrong. Local people should have the largest influence over where new housing development goes and when it happens in their communities, not Ministers in Whitehall.”
“We really have to think about planning the communities, rather than just saying, “Oh, we will give in to the developers—they say it takes too long, so we’ll make it quicker and just rely on them to create places that people want to live.” As I said, I have sat on a planning committee, and I have seen developments come forward that are utter rubbish. We need to change the mindset of developers, and we must ensure that we have good design. The Government are not seeking to change that; they are embracing it by committing to a target that can only be achieved by rushing the construction of low-quality homes with no plans for those who will live there. The Government need to focus more on the communities that we are trying to build within this country, rather than specific targets and house building across the country.”
“I know my hon. Friend is a passionate advocate for urban design, and he makes an important point. Of course we must invest in urban design, because it is the council—and MPs through our casework—that picks up the pieces. If a development is not planned correctly, with the right number of car spaces, for example, there are issues when people try to park their cars. Our inboxes get clogged up with all of those issues and the council is put under extra pressure with antisocial behaviour and so on.”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wish to seek your advice. I have just been cited as saying something in my speech that I did not say. I was merely talking about developers and my time on the planning committee, when developers would come forward and propose utter rubbish. I did not say the houses my residents live in are rubbish.”
“Does the Minister not agree that it is the hypocrisy from the Labour party, which did not include this policy in its manifesto at the general election?”
“Last July, the hon. Lady stood on an election manifesto that did not include the removal of winter fuel payments to pensioners. Is she proud of the fact that she was elected on a manifesto that said something completely different from what she is supporting the Government in doing now?”
“When I was out on the doorsteps during the general election campaign—as I am sure every Member of this House was—I spoke to my electorate in Broxbourne. They said, “Look, Lewis, we know what’s coming. We know we’re going to get a Labour Government. We know they’re going to get into power and then they’re going to tell us how awful it is, and they are going to come for us. They are going to come after pensioners.” The electorate in Broxbourne already knew, so the British public are not fools. This argument about a £22 billion black hole and difficult choices that we are told the Government have to make will not wash with the British people outside of this Chamber, because they did not believe it in the first place.”
“The Government have got in—secured a mandate from the British people—and have then said, “You know what? The manifesto we were elected on doesn’t mean anything. We can throw it in the bin and concentrate on things that we really want to do, rather than concentrate on putting British people first and lowering energy bills by £300.” I hope that when the Minister sums up, he will tell us about the progress that the Government are making towards bringing energy bills down. I suspect that it is very little, because they are too busy concentrating on things that they have not been elected to do.”
“No, I will not give way. The Government got elected on a manifesto. Within eight months, they have introduced significant policies that were not in that manifesto, including the family farm tax, the national insurance increase, and of course withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance. That is what my constituents in Broxbourne are really cross about—it was not in the Labour party manifesto. People went out and voted in good faith in the July election, and lots of the people I speak to in my constituency who voted for the Labour party now heavily regret it because of the choices that Labour and this Government are making. They were not honest about those choices with the British people. What was in the Labour manifesto, though, was a commitment to cut energy bills by £300.”
“My hon. Friend makes an important point. What the Government could do to lower energy bills is to secure North sea oil and gas investment in this country, so that we produce here more of the gas that we need to power all the industry in this country, instead of importing it.”
“The hon. Member makes a point that he is passionate about, but I do not agree with him. We need to produce more of our energy here at home, rather than relying on imports. That is why the Government should change their policy and issue new oil and gas licences. I urge hon. Members on the Government Benches —lots of them are honourable—to please support pensioners today and vote to keep the winter fuel allowance.”
“My constituents are confused about the Justice Secretary’s position. She says she believes that these sentencing guidelines are wrong in principle, and that they amount to differential treatment before the law, but she is in government; she has the power and the tools at her disposal to stop this and change it. Why has she not done so?”
“As the Minister knows, driving down antisocial behaviour is crucial to achieving that, and I will be watching the Government very closely to see whether they follow through on their promise.”
“What has been proven to cut antisocial behaviour is hotspot policing, and I am pleased to say that the fruits of this can be seen in my constituency of Broxbourne, thanks to the efforts of our fantastic police and crime commissioner, Jonathan Ash-Edwards, and our hard-working local police officers. In January alone, Waltham Cross saw more than 682 hours of additional police patrols being carried out, eight arrests were made, and two weapons were seized. That increased visibility is reassuring to residents and prevents crime before it actually occurs. In some hotspot areas in Hertfordshire, antisocial behaviour has been reduced by up to 50%, which I absolutely welcome. Our constituents, whether they live in social housing or are simply using their local town centre, expect and deserve to feel safe.”
“Previously in the House, I was told that “existing civil injunctions will be renamed as housing injunctions, which will deal with that more low-level antisocial behaviour between neighbours.” —[ Official Report , 27 November 2024; Vol. 757, c. 799.] The explanatory notes to the Crime and Policing Bill state that housing injunctions can be applied for in the same way as the previous civil injunctions. How exactly will renaming something that already exists help to deal with this type of behaviour in our communities, when my constituents are telling me that the current system does not go far enough? I look forward to clarification on that specific point from the Minister, when she winds up this debate.”
“That sort of behaviour ruins lives, and when it is happening in the vicinity of our own homes, there is often no escape. The situation is made even worse when the victim is vulnerable due to their age or a medical condition. Sadly, it is far too common for me to hear that housing associations responsible are failing to take this issue seriously. As I have said before in the House, it is clear that, as well as the police, housing associations must play a full role in dealing with antisocial behaviour. While I welcome the Government’s rhetoric on tackling the scourge within our communities, it remains to be seen whether their new respect orders will be fully utilised by housing association providers. From my experience, they are not always interested in hearing about antisocial behaviour problems in the first place.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate the hon. Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald) on securing this important debate this afternoon. Some antisocial behaviour problems can be extremely localised down a single street, in a block of flats or between neighbours, ruining the lives of individuals targeted but sometimes going unnoticed by the wider community. In recent months, many constituents have written to me and asked for help in dealing with antisocial behaviour problems caused by their neighbours in housing association properties. Research found that those living in housing associations are up to 30% more likely to experience criminal or inconsiderate antisocial behaviour compared with those who own their own property.”
“Does the hon. Member agree that when police set up patrols to catch people who speed, the news quickly gets on to apps to tell people coming down the road that there is a policeman standing there with a speed gun? Does he think the Government should explore whether to ban apps that do that, so that we can catch people who speed on our roads?”
“I remind the hon. Member that the last Conservative Government recruited 20,000 police officers across the country and the only force not to meet that target was the Metropolitan police under Labour mayor Sadiq Khan.”
“The Minister mentions a multi-agency approach. I think the public get frustrated with us when we have meeting after meeting about the same issue. What assurances can she give us that this multi-agency approach will lead to action taken on the ground to solve some of this antisocial behaviour in our communities?”
“T7. The Government say that foreign national offenders make up 12% of the prison population. Can the Secretary of State tell me when that number will be zero?”
“I draw the attention of Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I have a school in my constituency that is very good at helping students with education, health and care plans—so much so that it is struggling with the number of students who have EHCPs. Will the Minister meet me to discuss this issue and wider SEND issues in my constituency?”
“I believe there is cross-party support among all who have spoken today that we need to go faster to solve the issue, and hopefully save future generations coming through the education system and wider society.”
“By the time the proposal comes back within 12 months, I hope—I do live in hope—that social media companies might have solved some of the issues and worked harder and faster in the fear that legislation is coming, and I hope that legislation will come. I think we all have skin in the game. My sister has recently given birth and I am now an uncle, so I do have skin in the game. We have to act. If we do not, I fear not only that we will let down generations coming through the education system now, but future generations, including my niece, who have not even started in the education system. I fully support a lot of the comments in the House today. I urge the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington to keep going and to help the Government to come forward with some stern proposals.”
“Friend the Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) said. I will not often call for Government intervention, but this issue has become so great to lots of members of our society that we do need to legislate in this area. It is quite clear that, over the short to medium term, social media companies have failed to step up and do more. They could do so without legislation—they could be more proactive—but they have failed in that. The time is right for that. I hope we can take away from today the fact that we have had a debate and aired some of the grievances around the harms that social media does to younger generations.”
“Rather than publishing a plan for research in the next 12 months, would it not be better if the Government came forward with a proposal, for example, to increase the digital age of consent, so that Parliament could debate that? The Bill mentions consultation with Ofcom and the Information Commissioner. It should be Members of Parliament representing families in our constituencies who ultimately make a decision on the right course of action. If the Bill does pass, I hope that Parliament will be consulted before any changes are made. We can all agree that there is a serious problem affecting society and younger generations as a whole, but, because we can all agree on that, we need to see firm proposals from the Government coming forward, and not just more research. I completely concur with what my hon.”
“Among those who have spoken, there is also consensus about the need to go further and faster on the issue, which I would certainly support. The Bill contains just a feeble instruction. Would parents and kids who are struggling now be comforted merely by the publication of a plan for research into the topic as far away as the middle of 2026? As we have heard, the Government have established a research project that is due to report its findings in May. Do we really need to add to the statute book to ask the Government to do that? I also fear that the Bill will simply outsource decision making to others rather than allowing our elected Parliament, parents and children themselves to contribute to a policy solution.”
“I do, however, have some concerns about the proposals before us. While I fully respect the intentions of the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister) for the Bill, and his passion for the issue, I am frustrated that the Bill does not seek to make any changes to the current situation. It places a duty on the Secretary of State to publish a plan for research into the impact of the use of social media within 12 months. In general, the public get really frustrated with Parliament and politicians when we say, “We are going to do some research,” or, “We are going to have a meeting.” They want to see action in lots of the areas that we speak about in this place. There is massive consensus from all parts of the Chamber for the hon. Member’s Bill and the work that he has done to introduce it.”
“I often say that I would not like to be a teenager growing up today in an environment dominated by social media. It was bad enough that by the time I got to secondary school everyone had a phone, and by the time I left everyone had a smartphone. There is no doubt that the threats to children have been utterly transformed in just the last decade, so we need to transform how we address those issues in this place. I certainly support the thrust of the Bill. The Government must treat children’s use of digital devices and social media as a health issue. Children are spending more and more of their lives on social media at younger and younger ages. Those aged 12 to 15 spend on average 35 hours a week on their smartphones, and we know that poor mental health has spiked among young people in the last 15 years.”
“The hon. Lady is making an impassioned speech. Does she agree that in some cases social media has made bullying 24 hours a day, because it means that it can happen at any point, even when a child is no longer at school?”
“They are taking an incredibly risk in saying, “Do you know what? I’m going to take that jump. I’m going to make an offer to someone and employ my first employee.” We should be creating the environment for people to be able to do that. The more family businesses we have, and the more family businesses that upskill, create local jobs and invest in their business, the more money the Treasury gets to spend on our public services. We should not be hampering businesses. The Minister was making a ludicrous point.”
“We have heard good speeches in this debate from Members on my side of the Chamber explaining how it is business that creates economic growth, not Government. A Labour Member alluded to the £25 billion national insurance increase and £5 billion employment regulation not mattering to family businesses, because they are small and do not employ many people. That is no way to treat family businesses in this country. We should be telling them that the sky is the limit. We should be saying, “Invest in and grow your business, and we will help and support you. We will create the right environment for you to take those risks,” because it is a massive risk when people put their life savings and their blood, sweat and tears into a business that they want to grow, particularly when it is from their home.”
“I am proud to represent a constituency with so many fantastic small businesses, and employers in Broxbourne are more likely to be small businesses than under the national average. Entrepreneurs in the towns and villages I represent are working hard and taking risks day in, day out, growing our local economy and creating jobs. Earlier this month, I was told by a Government Minister standing at the Dispatch Box that I was “sort of right” that private business creates growth. Let me gently tell the Government that it is not the Government who create economic growth in this country; it is the thousands of business owners outside of this place who work hard day in, day out, creating jobs right across the country, investing in their companies and investing in their supply chains.”
“My hon. Friend makes an important point. I go out and speak to farmers and small business owners, as he does in his constituency, and I have met not one who thinks the Government are on the right path. I do not know who Labour Members speak to in their constituencies because—”
“What my hon. Friend says from a sedentary position is probably correct. Businesses and farmers in my constituency think that the Government have sold them down the river and led them up the garden path—they are doing things that they did not think they would do when they were trying to get into power. We have not heard from the Government what they are doing to support businesses and family businesses.”
“I hope the Minister will tell the House how he will unlock the next generation of entrepreneurs and how we will support people to take what is, as I said, a massive risk.”
“Someone who has run a business could come in and say, “Right, we’ve got to do your accounts now. You’ve got to see how much you are going to pay people and how much tax you will pay.” We could get people in from the creative industries. They could say, “Right, now you have to design your logo. How are you going to do that? You’ve got to design a TV advertisement for your product, for what you are going to sell.” We could be doing that. We could be thinking outside the box. I have not heard what support the Government are giving to create the next generation of entrepreneurs. If we do not unlock their aspiration and continue to allow people to take risks and invest in their ideas, there will be no taxes coming in or money for public services. We must do this, and we must do it more regularly.”
“Businesses in my constituency are putting off investing and employing local people because of the jobs tax and the Government’s proposed new regulation. I hope that when the Minister winds up, he will say what the Government will do to create the next generation of entrepreneurs. We could turbocharge the education system. There are lots of fantastic teachers in my constituency and across the country who do a sterling job for young people. We could say to people who have created businesses, “We will give you some money off your tax bill if you go back to your secondary school and teach not from a textbook, but from real life experience about how to create growth, jobs and businesses and enthuse those students about creating their own businesses.” People do not have to go to a maths class to understand maths.”
“But I have not heard that from the Government—I have not heard that we will take on the utility companies; I have not heard that we will unlock the aspiration of this country’s next generation through the education system. Labour Members said in their manifesto and during the election campaign that they were the party of economic growth. I gently say to them that that is not working because fundamentally they do not understand that it is private business and our hard-working constituents in family businesses who create economic growth—not this disastrous Labour Government.”
“The hon. Gentleman’s party is actually cutting the capital budget for transport. I have made this point time and again, but the Government could take on the utility companies that endlessly dig up the roads so that my constituents and many others across the country have to sit in traffic. That costs the taxpayer and the economy billions of pounds. If we get people to the shops and to work quicker, and traders, electricians and builders get to their sites quicker so that they can do their jobs, that will unlock growth, put more pounds in their pockets to spend on local high streets, which we need to protect, and enable them to take risks and employ people.”
“I draw the Committee’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a local councillor. The Minister proposes to increase fees, but from my understanding they will not go to full cost recovery. Will he set out why they are taking a leapfrog approach and not going to full cost recovery, if that is indeed where the Government want to get to?”
“We need to produce more energy at home from renewables and oil and gas, as we need a diverse energy mix in the UK. That will help us to deal with the volatile global energy markets. When will the Government change course and support the UK’s oil and gas industry, including the cluster based in north-east Scotland, and issue new oil and gas licences to help bring down bills for residents across the country and in my constituency?”
“The Home Secretary mentions asylum hotels. The Government have actually opened more asylum hotels since they have been in office. Can she give us a date when she will have met her manifesto commitment to close the last asylum hotel?”
“It certainly has not tackled the threats to our border security; as I have said, small boat crossings are up by 30% since July. My constituents want to see immigration, both legal and illegal, under control. As their MP, I will vote for measures that reduce net migration numbers to avoid the situation recently forecast by the Office for National Statistics. This Bill fails to do that.”
“Citizenship and permanent residency should not be handed out freely. The ability to access that status should be heavily restricted. It must not be available to those who have a criminal record, have claimed benefits or have accessed social housing. We must be clear that individuals who enter the country illegally should never be granted indefinite leave to remain or citizenship, and I am disappointed that the Bill does the exact opposite. Clauses 1 to 12 provide a framework to enable Border Security Command to fulfil its role as an effective border security system and set out that the commander must minimise threats to our border security. The commander has been in place since September—what has this new organisation been doing in that time?”
“The Illegal Migration Act 2023 placed a duty on the Secretary of State to remove illegal migrants to their home country or a safe third country and ensured that those entering this country illegally would never be eligible for British citizenships. No ifs, no buts: someone entering the UK illegally should never be able to claim citizenship. British citizenship is a privilege, not a right. What message does repealing those measures send to our constituents or those considering the dangerous crossing? Frankly, it shows that if someone manages to get to the UK illegally, this Labour Government will let them stay for good. I fully support what the shadow Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp) has set out this afternoon and support the Conservative amendment.”
“We must bring migration numbers down. They have simply been far too high for far too long. My constituents say that to me loud and clear, and I completely agree with them. Unfortunately, despite the Home Secretary’s words, I am not convinced that the Bill will go far enough. The Government have ignored the National Crime Agency, which has stated that a deterrent is essential to prevent small boat crossings. They are now repealing the legal basis of the deterrent that the last Government introduced, ignoring the fact that there has been a 30% rise in small boat crossings since they took office. The Government are ignoring their own Back Benchers, who just last week were calling for a stronger stance on immigration, by repealing the laws introduced by the previous Government to toughen up the system.”
“I draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Hertfordshire currently receives the third lowest SEND funding in the country, despite the number of children in the county with education, health and care plans growing by 223% in the last decade. What steps is the Minister taking with her Cabinet colleagues to create a fairer funding system that ensures that all children, wherever they live across the country, can have the funding they need to support their education?”
“We received terrible news from AstraZeneca over the weekend. It is businesses across the country, such as those in my constituency of Broxbourne, that create economic growth, not the Government. The Government have increased red tape and employer’s national insurance contributions. Can the Minister outline how he is promoting businesses and encouraging them to invest in the United Kingdom?”