Mrs Elsie Blundell
MP for Heywood and Middleton North · Labour · United Kingdom
“Members have said, with much of the so-called enforcement action being toothless and ineffective. What consideration has been given to delivering a bold and transformative waste strategy that protects people in Heywood from living in such conditions—specifically one that factors in poorly performing sites that handle recycling waste?”
“It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing the debate.”
“Heywood Against Landfill has now designed an online odour complaint reporting log, which sends each instance directly to the Environment Agency. That is great, but the group would rather not spend its valuable time doing that.”
“That lasted about 18 months, demonstrating the scale of what local people had been forced to deal with. In my view, it would be legitimate to say—as we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood—that working-class communities such as mine are disproportionately bearing the brunt of these impacts.”
“I absolutely agree, and I would like to see more of that, not least in my constituency. The Environment Agency countenanced the site’s reopening, and it was adamant that it had the means to monitor the air quality and odour levels, yet less than a year down the line, we are back where we started, and my constituents, like many represented…”
“I take this opportunity to commend them for their enduring activism. The site also hosts a recycling centre, which I understand is also contributing significantly to the current issues.”
The complete record
Every one of 159 lines we hold for Mrs Elsie Blundell, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 4.
“That lasted about 18 months, demonstrating the scale of what local people had been forced to deal with. In my view, it would be legitimate to say—as we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood—that working-class communities such as mine are disproportionately bearing the brunt of these impacts. Despite the supposed remedial action that has been taken and the supposed monitoring of the site by the Environment Agency, this is something that my constituents are having to contend with yet again—truly, it is groundhog day for people in Heywood. Following the site’s reopening, the odour from it continued to affect the wellbeing of local people. The tireless campaign group met with Valencia on 1 June, but the company continues to say that no breaches are taking place.”
“I take this opportunity to commend them for their enduring activism. The site also hosts a recycling centre, which I understand is also contributing significantly to the current issues. Heywood Against Landfill has made it clear to Valencia, as have I, that the operation of the site has driven so many nearby to the point of utter dismay, with stark implications for their quality of life. Windows had to remain shut, people could not put washing out to dry, and many even began to question the elevated number of respiratory illnesses in the town. Heywood Against Landfill rightly urged members of the public to raise their concerns with the Environment Agency and lobbied for action to be taken. We eventually ensured that the site was closed while remedial action was taken.”
“It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing the debate. As parliamentarians, each of us recognises the necessity of waste facilities and the function that they perform, but local communities should not have to tolerate the conditions that residents of mine in Heywood have been forced to put up with in recent years. Due to the prevailing wind direction in my part of the world, my constituents continue to endure appalling odours emitted from the Valencia Waste Management site on Pilsworth Road. The landfill there opened over 50 years ago. As it has gradually filled, it has become increasingly unbearable for local residents, which has led to the creation of the Heywood Against Landfill group.”
“The people of Heywood should not have to put up with this any longer, and they should not have had to put up with it in the first place. My hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood is right: working-class communities shoulder the burden of regulators lacking the will or the means to engage with the lived experience of those affected by this sort of behaviour by operators. I hope that the Minister can offer some clarity on these points, and will make it clear to residents in Heywood that they are not without a voice, that the Government are listening, and that living in these conditions should not be a collateral consequence that those in power seem all too willing to accept.”
“Members have said, with much of the so-called enforcement action being toothless and ineffective. What consideration has been given to delivering a bold and transformative waste strategy that protects people in Heywood from living in such conditions—specifically one that factors in poorly performing sites that handle recycling waste? What assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the Environment Agency? I appreciate the point made about successive Conservative Governments cutting its funding and staff, but what consideration has been given to strengthening penalties for the executives of waste operators that pay no mind to the communities in which they function? What consideration has been given to making community engagement mandatory for operators such as Valencia, and the implementation of robust standards in this respect?”
“Heywood Against Landfill has now designed an online odour complaint reporting log, which sends each instance directly to the Environment Agency. That is great, but the group would rather not spend its valuable time doing that. The group’s efforts will highlight once again the scale of the issue in Heywood, but it remains clear that there needs to be enforcement action to match the level of ongoing outrage. I understand that the waste strategy is due for review in this Parliament. From speaking with local residents, it is clear that they are desperate for the strategy to give greater consideration to the impact of poorly managed sites that also take recycling. They want legislation to safeguard local people. In many cases, there seems to be no way of scrutinising the operations of these sites, as other hon.”
“I absolutely agree, and I would like to see more of that, not least in my constituency. The Environment Agency countenanced the site’s reopening, and it was adamant that it had the means to monitor the air quality and odour levels, yet less than a year down the line, we are back where we started, and my constituents, like many represented here today, are suffering the consequences of the agency’s inability to address the core problems. That is because we do not have the means to handle nuisance concerns around recycling in the same way that we do for landfill. In such situations, lived experience matters. The executives of Valencia would not live anywhere near one of these sites themselves, but our constituents are expected to suck it up and put up with entirely unacceptable conditions.”
“The publication of Baroness Amos’s report on the state of maternity care in England was a sobering moment for many across the country, especially those who still live with the trauma related to failings in maternity and neonatal care. There were so many instances in which women were not listened to, heard or believed. Given those appalling findings, what steps will the Government now take to ensure that the voices of women are heard—including the voices of those in the north-west who have been historically overlooked—and how will that look in practice?”
“The diplomatic tide is with us, and the will of the House is clear. I urge the Minister to reflect on that and fortify his words with action.”
“Contemplating what children in Gaza and the west bank have gone through fills me, a relatively new mother, with sheer horror. I would appreciate clarity on whether a complete ban on trade and investment in illegal settlements will be implemented. There has obviously been considerable delay in moving forward in this area, and strongly advising against trade is clearly not enough. Advising against trade with the settlements and an outright ban are two different things entirely. What conversations have taken place between the Minister and his Israeli counterparts pertaining to the treatment of civilians—especially women and children—in the west bank? What was the outcome of those conversations? We cannot control Israel, but we can control our own standards of trade and commerce, especially on the enduring issue of illegal settlement.”
“To compound that, the expansion of checkpoints and roadblocks is precluding women and girls, as well as men and boys, from accessing health care, education, legitimate employment and connection to their communities. Nearly 350 children from the west bank are held in military detention for alleged security-related offences. That is children being held in military detention—we cannot countenance that. More broadly, the daily exposure to settlers and settler violence has changed Palestinian children. Save the Children reports that years of warfare, violence, arbitrary attacks and curtailed freedoms have led to hyper-vigilance, anxiety and trauma among children across the west bank, born from a pure desire to survive. One cannot qualify the suffering of the Palestinian people. What they have endured is beyond our comprehension.”
“That means that many women within the west bank are forced to seek employment in these settlements, where the work is exploitative and dangerous. Ninety-three per cent of workers report hazardous conditions, and 94% are without a written contract between them and their employers. The propensity for sexual and gender-based violence is spiralling and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) said, 70% of displaced Palestinian families identify the risk of sexual violence as a key factor in leaving their home. Such appalling treatment is designed to humiliate and punish Palestinian communities, and it is being conducted with impunity.”
“Many people across the country will be watching the debate with real interest. I welcome the thoughtful contributions of colleagues across the House, including my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed), who I thank for securing the debate. From the outset, I express my solidarity with both Palestinians and Israelis who want to secure a lasting peace that will ensure that generations to come do not grow up under the shadow of war. There is one angle that I would like to examine more closely in my remarks: the critical impact on the lives and livelihoods of women and children among these illegal settlements. Their rapid expansion has helped to push the Palestinian economy into its worst decline since records began.”
“The past week has been profoundly difficult for constituents in the communities I represent—communities that still bear the scars that Shabir Ahmed inflicted from takeaways in Heywood. Over the past week, I have spoken with the family members of one of his victims; they are understandably fearful and deeply let down by his release. For my constituents, any right that he had to walk our streets was forfeited when he committed those vile crimes. What reassurances can the Minister give to my constituents that nothing is off the table when it comes to the consequences faced by Shabir Ahmed and those who abuse children?”
“As the Chancellor will know, northern powerhouse has been spoken about since 2014, which is 12 years ago. If we are to get Northern Powerhouse Rail off the ground and delivered, we cannot let valuable land that could create tens of thousands of jobs and boost the northern economy be used as a cheap option. What recent conversations have there been with local leaders regarding the proposed underground station at Manchester Piccadilly?”
“I offer my full support to this crucial legislation, and I thank the Government for their continued engagement. Our regional leaders have an invaluable contribution to make in engaging with GBR; for that to be realised, we need to move beyond notions of consultation and towards equal and productive partnerships between mayoral strategic authorities and our rail network’s new guiding mind. That means making train travel and other forms of public transport better for passengers across the country, irrespective of where that may be, and ultimately driving economic growth. This ambition must be what guides us going forward, and that is how passengers nationwide will come to judge what we are doing here today.”
“I appreciate that we are planning a national rail network, but that work must not run roughshod over local economic and transport priorities. I therefore urge the Minister and the Government to consider revising the language in clause 16 from “have regard to” to “act in accordance with”. I know that, in their response to the Transport Committee’s report on this matter, the Government were clear in their view that the current language is sufficient, but I am keen to stress that this Bill is about not just the next few years but the next few decades. We need to set an irreversible course for sustained devolution, and doing so means GBR not just regarding the plans, but fully aligning with them. I would welcome the Minister’s remarks on that.”
“We can never say with certainty how committed a future Government may be to devolution, so the Bill must enshrine a robust partnership duty to ensure that mayoral authorities have a decisive role in commissioning services, shaping specifications and influencing fares and performance outcomes. We cannot simply rely on a duty to consult. Local transport plans are critical, too. As the Bill stands, Great British Rail should “have regard to” local transport plans—forward-looking, multi-year plans developed by local transport authorities, each with a statutory basis, that promote safe, integrated, reliable and sustainable local transport policy. Simply having regard to them could lead to rail policy being delivered entirely by Great British Rail in a silo and in isolation from wider place-based policy.”
“Authorities need to be sufficiently empowered in relation to Great British Railways to get on and demonstrate that they deserve greater scope to plan transport alongside other policy areas—for example, by strategically aligning rail corridors and house building. Great British Rail cannot inhibit this kind of common-sense approach in the way that Network Rail sometimes has in the past. Great British Rail and our local rail networks must work in lockstep with spatial plans and the changes we see across our communities. That is the only way we can ensure benefits for peripheral towns as much as for the hearts of our city centres. We also need to think about the future.”
“I would welcome any assurances from the Minister that this provision will not be narrower than existing provisions set out in the Railways Act 2005. Essentially, can the Minister confirm that the amendment supports meaningful partnership with our elected combined authority mayors? As the Bill stands, engagement between Great British Rail and our mayoral authorities could be predicated on good will among officials negotiating on their behalf, with little codified in the way of a formal, statutory partnership between the two. Mayoral strategic authorities and mayors themselves are now integral to the delivery of housing policy, urban planning and regional economic development. For them to do that role without much of a stake in local rail networks is to proceed with one arm tied behind their backs.”
“Transport planning is a crucial competence of our elected mayors, and where mayoral strategic authorities are truly emboldened, entire city regions, local transport networks and whole communities are strengthened as a result. We must do as much as possible to support connections that improve economic density and therefore boost growth. Our achievements in Greater Manchester are a testament to that, and the absorption of rail into the Bee Network is the critical next step in delivering on the priorities of local people. I welcome Government amendment 136, which will enable local bodies to enter into certain arrangements with the Secretary of State, but concerns remain that it may not reflect the full capabilities of our mayoral authorities.”
“As I made clear on Second Reading, this crucial Bill is about undoing the immeasurable damage done to our rail network, to passenger confidence and to economic prosperity after decades of privatisation and woeful mismanagement. I will focus on rail devolution. I commend the Transport Committee on its incisive report on the topic, and I particularly thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for the amendments drafted in her name and her clear desire for us to get the most out of this legislation. I know how much is riding on the Bill for our regional mayors, strategic authorities and, most importantly, the passengers they serve. My appeal today is to ensure that the Bill supports the Government’s devolution journey.”
“I welcome the publication of the men’s health strategy, especially the measures in it designed to improve mental health outcomes. In a report that I recently sent to the ministerial team following an event I held with local charities and mental health service users, it became clear that the recommendations of the strategy need to be implemented quickly. What practical steps are being taken to implement those measures, especially in areas such as mine, where deprivation continues to affect the health of men and boys?”
“Pupils at St Cuthbert’s school are currently without teachers and support staff during their GCSEs. This follows prolonged industrial action at the St Teresa academy trust, where staff are opposing a potentially damaging restructuring of the school. As far as academies are concerned, the Department for Education appears to have little power to ensure that trusts engage meaningfully with parents. May we have an urgent debate on the Department’s ability to intervene in academy trusts, especially where trusts’ decisions are harming children’s attainment?”
“Last week, I held a meeting at the fantastic Burnside community centre in Langley with representatives from Royal Mail and constituents, including those who have had to deal with a substandard postal service resulting in crucial correspondence arriving weeks late, if at all. To many people in Heywood and Middleton North, that is a direct result of a national asset being sold off to a private company focused on profit rather than quality of service. If that level of service continues, what further options is the Secretary of State considering to hold Royal Mail to account, and where necessary will the Government step in and force the changes that my constituents need to see?”
“The tram is arriving in my constituency, with spades in the ground by 2028, and we are closing gaps in provision so that the whole of Greater Manchester can benefit, including Heywood and Middleton North. We are delivering through a responsive, integrated and affordable bus service that reaches all corners of the city region, having been taken back into public ownership. On rail, I also welcome the Government’s Northern Powerhouse Rail Bill, a clear reflection of our region’s ambition and a firm commitment from Government to decarbonisation and delivery across the north. In closing, I welcome the King’s Speech and what it could mean for my constituents in Heywood and Middleton North. That said, I want to be completely clear: the window that we have to demonstrate that there is another way is rapidly closing.”
“Challenges with the cost of energy are not a consideration only when it comes to how we heat our homes or power industry; as the sole Greater Manchester MP on the Transport Committee, I also want to consider how the cost of energy affects how we get from A to B. Giving local people the ability to reach employment and leisure opportunities both affordably and in a joined-up manner is something we have pioneered in Greater Manchester. We have made those arguments, taken on our detractors head-on and won, and we have done so through a vision-led approach and place-based delivery. The delivery of the largest light rail network in the country has completely transformed the prospects of tens of thousands of people in Greater Manchester.”
“It is abundantly clear that we need to view achieving energy security as an opportunity to right those historical wrongs. The inequalities they brought about have been eating away at communities and the values that once made them whole. Reframing energy security as a positive opportunity to reverse the fortunes of towns like mine is the only way to proceed. The poverty experienced by far too many in Heywood, Middleton and the other towns I represent will not be addressed unless we accept that we need to reindustrialise in a way that safeguards our energy security. I therefore express my full support for the provisions in the Government’s energy independence Bill, the next step in tackling the totally unmanageable bills for consumers and businesses and ending our overreliance on global energy markets.”
“I welcome last week’s King’s Speech and the Bills in it, which aim to put the UK on a stronger path for the future. My constituents have been clear with me: if we are to build a future that is fairer, in which they are not just getting by, but thriving, we need to do politics differently. It is not good enough to suggest that someday in the distant future things might get a little bit better. That is not going to cut it any more. Today our focus is on energy security, an issue that underscores perhaps more than any other how we cannot carry on with business as usual. Looking across the north of England, we can see the consequences of deindustrialisation, the hollowing out of local economies and the impacts of austerity.”
“Although I support this step and the Government’s work on national standards, we must acknowledge that the system at large will still be characterised by out-of- area operations. I commend what the Government are seeking to do, but if we are to bring about better enforcement processes, we need to incentivise or perhaps mandate drivers to license locally and therefore disincentivise drivers from taking shortcuts to obtaining a licence hundreds of miles away from where they wish to operate.”
“I previously tabled an amendment on this matter, which I believe would have empowered mayoral strategic authorities to require private hire vehicle drivers to licence within their region. That would have brought licensing, enforcement and monitoring closer to home and forged stronger ties between drivers and the communities they serve. I acknowledge the efforts of Baroness Pidgeon, who sought, as I did, to phase out out-of-area operations. I welcome the steps that the Government, in the form of Lords amendments, have taken towards enabling licensing authorities to take enforcement action against a PHV licensed out of area and to temporarily suspend licences. I especially welcome the steps that these amendments take to improve information sharing between licensing authorities on the conduct of individual drivers.”
“This Labour Government must be radical in their approach to devolution, bringing power closer to people and not hoarding it in this place, and we must future-proof this Government’s achievements from those who would seek to undermine and unravel our progress. We need to ensure that the transfer of power to our communities is permanent. From adding culture as a devolved competence to strengthening restrictions on gambling premises, there is much to welcome in the amendments. Today I will cover the amendments related to private hire vehicles, both in terms of national standards and Lords amendments 55 to 62 on enforcement powers for drivers operating in other areas.”
“The implications of this legislation will be significant for communities across the country. It is therefore crucial that we get it right. I pay tribute to Eamonn Boylan, who sadly passed away earlier this month—a pivotal figure for Greater Manchester’s devolution journey. During his time as chief executive of the combined authority, he understood that the more power we obtain, both regionally and locally, the more we can deliver. Eamonn certainly helped Greater Manchester to deliver, following the progress made by the likes of Sir Howard Bernstein and Sir Richard Leese. We in Greater Manchester have been at the forefront of progress in this area and we have been focused on one thing: making tangible improvements to the lives of those who elect us.”
“Too many people affected by eating disorders are not receiving the help they need—help often comes too late, with serious physical symptoms overlooked or misattributed. It is clear that those on the frontline must have the training they need to identify early warning signs. What further steps are being taken to ensure that people are supported before they reach crisis point, especially in areas such as mine, which were on the receiving end of significant cuts to public services under the Conservative party?”
“I commend the bravery of the constituents I have met who have endured decades of anguish as a result of this harrowing chapter in our country’s medical history. The Minister will know that there are those across the country with legitimate claims under this scheme, but because some NHS trusts are claiming that their loved ones’ medical records have been destroyed, those affected are still having to fight for recognition and compensation. Will he address how we can overcome this seemingly insurmountable obstacle and give my constituents the closure and compassion that they deserve?”
“As the Minister knows, since my election I have been campaigning for an express bus service from my constituency to Manchester city centre. Following key improvements to the network across Greater Manchester, a consultation that I did across my constituency shows that we still need the introduction of that express bus service. What conversations are taking place between the Department for Transport, the Treasury and our transport authorities specifically to prioritise closing gaps in bus provision and to ensure that there is sustained, long-term funding for buses to make that possible?”
“The majority of businesses on our high streets add great value to our communities, but there are some where criminality takes place, and that is putting people off visiting their local town centres. Where premises are host to illegal activity, councils can issue closure orders prohibiting access, but those orders can only be made for a maximum of three months before dodgy businesses are allowed to open and operate again. Would the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time on how we can ensure that local authorities have additional means, set out in statute, to bear down on illicit activity that really harms our high streets?”
“With landmark changes coming to national and regional transport policy in the coming years, we must finally ensure that everyone is part of the journey, and that, in legislation and in practice, no one is left behind.”
“I wholly welcome the steps that are being taken to advance the rights and protections of disabled passengers, which include the Law Commission’s review of transport accessibility law—a direct result of one of our Committee’s recommendations —the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s publication of guiding principles for accessible transport, and an equalities impact assessment for the Railways Bill, which is something else the Committee has called for. That being said, I conclude by saying that however significant these reviews, principles and assessments are, we must ultimately ensure that they lead to effective enforcement, accountability and the empowerment of regulators to challenge the operational orthodoxy that has left disabled passengers denied the access that they deserve.”
“This selfish behaviour makes things difficult for disabled individuals and people pushing buggies alike. I understand that the Government, rather than imposing a blanket ban on pavement parking, as there is in London, first intend to introduce secondary legislation to ensure that local authorities can act against serious cases of obstruction caused by pavement parking. How does the Minister envisage this legislation being meaningfully enforced by local authorities? Will additional funding be provided to enable local authorities to act? I would welcome answers to those points from the Minister. I reiterate my thanks to the Chair of the Transport Committee, our Clerks and my colleagues for their work in producing this crucial report, and for their advocacy on this important issue.”
“The Railways Bill represents a significant moment of reform for the rail system, and we must not miss the opportunity to embed strong, enforceable, long-term protections for disabled passengers. To achieve this, duties should be explicit and binding. I hope that the Minister can speak to this issue specifically when concluding the debate. As the Committee’s report highlights, and as my hon. Friend the Transport Committee Chair mentioned, pavement parking is another widespread problem, especially for people with mobility or visual restrictions. Constituents rightly tell me that this is an issue of safety. When people park their car in a way that leaves no space on the pavement, there is no way that the wellbeing of those who use wheelchairs, walking frames, guide dogs or canes can be assured.”
“We have also seen the appalling media reports of disabled passengers being left to alight from carriages with no support whatsoever. We need to seize every legislative opportunity to improve this dire landscape. Indeed, one of the crucial elements of the Railways Bill is the introduction of a passengers’ council. However, as the Bill stands after Committee, clause 36, on the general duties of the council, stipulates only that the council “must have particular regard to the interests and needs” of disabled passengers. The Bill needs to go further by enshrining the voices of disabled passengers on the council, and by giving the council a role as an enforcer, not just an adviser. This passenger watchdog will have a tangible impact on the experiences of disabled passengers only if we codify in legislation what we need to achieve.”
“The Transport Committee’s report reinforced this; more than a third of disabled respondents asserted that they avoided making journeys more than once a week because they believed it would be too complicated. When things go wrong on journeys, it can feel as though disabled passengers and transport users stand entirely alone, without recourse or representation, and they are left with the burden of taking action against operators and transport authorities that fail in their duties. Looking at the rail network, we have all been on a train where it is apparent that there is no available space for wheelchair users in any of the carriages, and some operators are doing absolutely nothing to make the necessary improvements.”
“I thank the chair of the Transport Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), for her leadership on this crucial issue, and for securing this debate on the important matter of transport accessibility for disabled people. Since being elected to this place, I have reiterated that transport is one of the most crucial drivers of opportunity. Reliable, suitable and adaptable public transport for all should be a right, not a privilege. I will begin by touching on the precarious landscape facing disabled users of public transport. In a report published by Transport for All, 56% of disabled people reported being “unhappy or extremely unhappy making journeys”.”
“I am proud to represent a diverse constituency, but I fear the power that those online have to direct actions and attitudes in real life. I hope that the Minister will touch on that pertinent topic. I welcome this Government’s efforts to curtail online harms. Indeed, I welcome the work of any Government in doing so. Things, however, are moving at a staggering rate. We therefore cannot view the Online Safety Act 2023 simply as a job well done; rather, we should see it as another rung on a growing ladder. To keep our constituents—especially children—and our communities safe, we need to ensure that our thinking is consistent with the expanding nature of these digital spaces. Ultimately, that means recognising that, for all their utility in connecting us with one another, these platforms also have a near unlimited capacity to do people harm.”
“Following the Manchester synagogue attack last year, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate identified a troubling rise in antisemitism online, where violence against the Jewish community was celebrated and further encouraged. We only need open X, Facebook or other platforms to see a disgraceful barrage of abuse levelled at our Muslim community too, with platforms giving previously fringe far-right voices the means to amplify their dangerous and divisive rhetoric to millions. The harm that these actors can inflict on the capacity of our communities to come together is being played out each and every day. All too often they can hide behind anonymous accounts, and real people—my constituents and people across the country—are having to face the consequences.”
“Despite the prevalence and seriousness of these crimes, there is an over-reliance on non-custodial sentences across our judicial landscape, with magistrates courts dominating outcomes, and gaps in the unduly lenient sentencing scheme. Online or technology-assisted child sexual abuse has profound and lasting impacts on children for their whole lives, comparable to that of physical abuse. Digital regulation and our justice system must reflect the insidiousness and seriousness of such crimes, and I would welcome the Minister’s comments on that when he concludes the debate. Finally, I will briefly touch on how discourse in digital spaces is increasingly affecting our communities.”
“From stopping companies like X, or AI tools like Grok, generating vile, sexualised images of children and non-consensual, intimate deepfakes to the commitment to ban nudification apps and to introduce a legal duty requiring tech platforms to remove non-consensual intimate images within 48 hours of being posted, it is clear that the Government stand firmly against those who would do our children harm. That being said, TACSA also has further dimensions that warrant serious consideration. It can take many forms, such as the distribution of child sexual abuse material, sexual harassment, exposure to sexually explicit materials and grooming, to name a few.”
“I am pleased that the Online Safety Act has provisions to capture myths and disinformation where they are illegal or harmful to children, but we have much further to go in curtailing the weaponisation of online platforms to spread lies, conspiracies and harmful falsehoods to millions across the country. Secondly, I would like to speak about the protection of children. I have raised the issue of technology-assisted child sexual abuse on several occasions in this place. It needs to be tackled from both sides—the judicial and the digital—so I wholly welcome the Online Safety Act and the Government’s wider work in this area.”
“This week—of all weeks, when we have seen a deeply concerning outbreak of meningitis in Canterbury and east Kent—we see misinformation and blatantly anti-science positioning rear its ugly head once again, as we saw in the covid-19 pandemic and have seen countless times since. It is a really obvious thing to say, but the onus is on us to speak with one voice as MPs on such a critical topic as public health and to confront those harmful narratives at their source. A great deal more thinking needs to be done in digital spaces when it comes to misinformation, whether medical or otherwise. That requires strengthened regulation and real intent between the Government, Ofcom and the platforms.”