← LEADERSHIP TERMINAL

UK PARLIAMENT · SITTING

Ian Sollom

MP for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

“Research is worse: universities now recover only two thirds of research costs. According to the Russell Group, universities put in £6.3 billion of their own money into research last year. For many years now, the funding gap has been filled by international students, but that income is now also falling away.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Later today the Chancellor delivers his first Budget; every signal is that universities should expect very little from it. We cannot continue to ignore the stark choice before us when it comes to university policy.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“A lot of the interventions that I have suggested on the university side are cost-neutral and would involve restructuring. I have three questions for the Minister.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Discussing potential rescues behind closed doors gives us all the moral hazard and none of the transparency. Liberal Democrats see universities as essential national infrastructure, not cost centres to be squeezed.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) on securing this debate. Sheffield is an excellent place to ground this debate because it has two great examples of the origin stories of many of our universities.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“The Committee recommended a special administration regime so that a failing university could keep teaching while its future was resolved, but the Government have said that they are “not currently persuaded” because legislating would be too complex. I would say that that is an argument for starting now, not for doing nothing.”

House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

The complete record

496 held · 484 searchable for Ian Sollom. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 10.

This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.

  1. “After 2030, the number of 18-year-olds will fall by 17%, yet 82% of the growth in priority occupations in the industrial strategy sectors will require a higher education qualification. Put those two facts together, and a model built around school leavers simply will not work in the long term. Many of those who will fill the jobs in that growth are already in work and will need to retrain as technology reshapes what they do. Universities need to open up to adults through modular lifelong learning, which we suggest needs to be through lifelong skills grants, not simply loans. Universities also need to work hand in hand with further education colleges, with credits that transfer between them, and they need to turn British research into businesses that stay in Britain.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  2. “Discussing potential rescues behind closed doors gives us all the moral hazard and none of the transparency. Liberal Democrats see universities as essential national infrastructure, not cost centres to be squeezed. That means a new settlement: in the short term, reform the levy before it reaches the statute book; reprofile student loan fee payments to ease the cash flow; offer low-interest loans for restructuring; and remove the VAT penalty that stops universities from sharing back-office services, so that they merge finance and HR rather than cut teaching. We need to fund the breadth of subjects in every region and make sure that public research grants actually cover the 80% of costs that they are supposed to. But this needs to come alongside obligations on universities. The money alone will not fix the problem.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  3. “The Committee recommended a special administration regime so that a failing university could keep teaching while its future was resolved, but the Government have said that they are “not currently persuaded” because legislating would be too complex. I would say that that is an argument for starting now, not for doing nothing. Further education colleges have had a special regime since 2019, and having no regime has its own risks. With no orderly way to fail, many simply assume that the Government will step in. Sir Philip Augar has said that a handful of universities are already getting secret bail-outs. When I asked Ministers about that, I was told that emergency support is not provided, but also that officials meet universities and their banks regularly in confidence.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  4. “For no other reason than institutional history, they are tied into the teachers’ pension scheme, for which employer contributions reached 28.7% last year—roughly double what many older universities pay, and about £8,000 extra a year for a typical member of staff. In July the Government ruled out any help, but part of solving this crisis in the sector must include working towards a single, fairer pensions framework. There is also the question of what happens when one of these institutions does not survive. The Office for Students told the Education Committee that 24 institutions could exit the market within a year.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  5. “This crisis does not simply affect an ivory tower elite who sit apart from our communities: in many towns and cities, the university is one of the largest employers and the source of the next generation of teachers, nurses, engineers and members of many other professions. Such universities produce graduates who are likely to stay and work locally and serve the students who are often least able to move away to study. When a nursing course or engineering department closes in such a place, it does not relocate; it disappears from the region. With it goes a route into a profession for everyone who cannot simply up sticks and leave. Post-’92 universities carry a burden that their older neighbours do not.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  6. “Research is worse: universities now recover only two thirds of research costs. According to the Russell Group, universities put in £6.3 billion of their own money into research last year. For many years now, the funding gap has been filled by international students, but that income is now also falling away. Visa applications in August—the peak month—were down by 17% on a year ago. Of course, education as a great British export is about much more than money, but the business model that has saved the Government from spending more on home students and research is being undermined. The Government have said that they intend, in the Finance Bill that will follow today’s Budget, to legislate for a £925 levy on every international student. Only a tiny sliver of that money will go to the maintenance grants put forward as a justification for it.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  7. “Later today the Chancellor delivers his first Budget; every signal is that universities should expect very little from it. We cannot continue to ignore the stark choice before us when it comes to university policy. Either we carry on with a managed decline—courses cut, talent lost, places left behind—or we can choose transformation with universities as engines of learning throughout life, as innovation hubs driving economic growth and as civic institutions embedded in the places they serve. The Liberal Democrats would choose transformation, and I hope the Government will do the same. At the moment, too many universities are fighting for survival. More than a third of English providers were in deficit last year. The Department’s own costing study found that universities lose about £3,000 on every home undergraduate they teach.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  8. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) on securing this debate. Sheffield is an excellent place to ground this debate because it has two great examples of the origin stories of many of our universities. The University of Sheffield is a civic university in the truest sense. When it sought its charter in 1904, steelworkers, factory workers and other local people raised over £50,000 in penny donations to support it. Sheffield Hallam traces its roots to the School of Design, which was founded in 1843 to train designers for the city’s industry, and became a university in 1992. One red brick, one post ’92: both serve the city and both embody the idea of universities as anchors of their community. That idea is now at risk.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  9. “A lot of the interventions that I have suggested on the university side are cost-neutral and would involve restructuring. I have three questions for the Minister. First, will the Government update their impact analysis to reflect this year’s fall in international recruitment and publish the effect by region and type of institution of the international student levy before the Finance Bill is debated? Secondly, will they think again about special administration before rather than after a university fails? Thirdly, will the Government commit to working with the sector to end the pensions penalty on post-’92 universities? Universities did not get to this position overnight and they will not recover overnight, but today’s Budget is a chance to stop the managed decline and start the transformation. I hope the Chancellor takes it.”

    House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  10. “Can the Minister publish the model on terms equivalent to NICE, so that independent experts can test it and give a dated timetable for reconsidering the decision? Dave and other men campaigning on the issue would very much appreciate that.”

    House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  11. “The committee judged screening against a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life year, but since April, NICE can approve a medicine for advanced prostate cancer at up to £35,000. Analysis commissioned by Prostate Cancer Research showed that treating a man diagnosed at stage 4 costs roughly 10 times as much as stage 1, so the NHS will pay more to treat this cancer once it is incurable than it is prepared to pay to find it earlier. That does not seem consistent. The case against wider screening rests on harms, overdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment. I will not repeat what Members have said on the statistics for that, but I would like to ask whether the screening was judged as the NHS would actually deliver it today, with MRI scans, or as it was delivered 20 years ago.”

    House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  12. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Dr Murrison. I am particularly proud to have my constituent Dave Young in the Gallery today. Dave was diagnosed with prostate cancer without symptoms in 2024, following a PSA test, and he has since dedicated himself to helping other men catch theirs early. Around 350 men have been directly tested through his campaigning in and around St Neots, and at an event in September, 122 men were seen in a single day. Of the six investigated afterwards, four have had cancer confirmed, so I thank Dave. The best tribute that we can pay to Dave and other campaigners like him is to get the policy right. I challenge the Minister on whether the National Screening Committee’s modelling back in May actually did that.”

    House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  13. “On Monday, the Children’s Commissioner—a statutory role created by this House to protect children’s rights—launched a report that declared a state of emergency for children across England. I am disappointed that the Education Secretary has not come to the House to make a statement on that report. Will the Leader of the House ask the Education Secretary to do so, and also schedule Government time for a debate on the Children Commissioner’s recommendations, so that we can discuss them fully?”

    House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  14. “Industry needs a long-term, stable plan from the Government, and I hope the Minister will tell us that it is coming.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  15. “Will the Minister commit to ensuring that the money raised for skills is spent on skills and is not clawed back by the Treasury? Secondly, will the review of funding bands address the shortfall of up to £8,000 per apprentice that employers face in engineering and manufacturing? Thirdly, will the Minister press Skills England to develop occupational standards for a wider variety of manufacturing roles, such as printed circuit board assembly, which the system currently cannot see? Nyobolt, a battery manufacturer in my constituency, put it well: the opportunity now is to make sure the skills pipeline develops at the same pace as the technology. Skills, like manufacturing investment itself, require multi-year, long-horizon decisions.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  16. “We would like Skills England to be a truly independent body with employers at its heart. Already in its short life, it has been moved from the Department for Education to the Department for Work and Pensions. It remains an Executive agency in that Department and is not the independent voice for skills that employers really need, so I urge the Government to look again at giving it genuine independence. I have three questions for the Minister. First, levy receipts are forecast to be £4.5 billion this year, but after the devolved nations’ share and England’s £3.3 billion budget, about £700 million will not be returned to the skills system but will stay with the Treasury. On the Government’s own spending predictions, that will rise to about £1 billion next year.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  17. “As a result, we have employers with skills gaps, young people who need good routes into careers, and apprenticeship funding that is not fully used. As hon. Members might expect me to say, there is a lot that the Government could take from Liberal Democrat policy. We would like to introduce skills tax credits with enhanced relief for priority sectors to reflect the fact that skills are an investment. We would also establish structures for skills co-operatives—I know the Prime Minister likes co-operatives—so that smaller firms can pool training resources and even rotate apprentices between them. We would also expand higher technical routes, such as higher national certificates, higher national diplomas, foundation degrees and higher apprenticeships, building on the investment already made in FE colleges and institutes of technology.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  18. “Employers tell me that the system needs to be straightforward for employers to use, responsive to changing industrial needs, and attractive to young people as a genuine alternative to university, but too often it is none of those things for smaller firms. The apprenticeship model may work for large employers, but a firm of 20 cannot easily release a young employee for two or sometimes three days a week to a college that might be miles away. It is also difficult for them to carry the paperwork that comes with. Another manufacturer in my constituency, Domino Printing Sciences, pointed out that employers pay into the levy but cannot use it to cover much of the real cost of employing and developing an apprentice, as the funding bands for many engineering apprenticeships simply do not cover the cost of delivery.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  19. “In 2024-25, there were over 46,000 starts in engineering and manufacturing in England, but level 2 manufacturing starts fell by 80% in the five years to 2023-24. That is a significant problem in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. The Liberal Democrats have long called for the apprenticeship levy to be replaced, so we welcome the Government’s move to a more flexible growth and skills levy, but we recognise that progress has been slow. Apprenticeship units have been available since April, yet the skills charity Enginuity found that a fifth of manufacturing SMEs have never heard of them, and only one in 10 think that they will fill their skills gaps. On the Department’s own forecasts, apprenticeship spending is due to fall after this year, even as levy receipts rise.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  20. “As Cap Air put it, “You cannot fund a course for a job the system does not recognise.” That is a national problem for Skills England, but lack of local provision is something places could fix for themselves. I hope the Prime Minister’s well-known enthusiasm for devolution extends to giving areas like ours the skills, powers and capital funding to do it. Another manufacturer in my constituency, ZEISS, which makes electron microscopes, makes a related point about the future. Advanced manufacturing now combines traditional mechanical and electrical engineering with automation, software, data and AI, and we need to build those capabilities now before they become critical shortages, not just fill today’s vacancies.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  21. “Skills England identifies advanced manufacturing as having the third highest proportion of skills shortage vacancies of any sector, and projects that 84% of the additional jobs in its priority occupations to 2035 will need qualifications at level 4 or above. The businesses in Cambridgeshire that kindly shared their insights with me in advance of this debate described problems that I suspect Members from every part of the country will recognise. One electronics firm, Cap Air, told me that although electronics is the largest manufacturing sub-sector in our region, the county is a dead spot for the sort of technical education it needs, with training necessitating travel outside the county. There is no occupational standard for much of the work the company does.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  22. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I congratulate the hon. Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) on securing this important debate. I start with some numbers we should celebrate: UK manufacturing produces output worth £220 billion and supports 2.6 million jobs, paying on average 8% more than the rest of the economy, and it accounts for 42% of our exports and almost half of all business research and development. It is a sector of skilled, well-paid careers that we are rightly proud of, but it is also a sector that could do more if it had more of the skilled people it needs.”

    House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  23. “A 2021 report from the Victims’ Commissioner noted huge gaps in our understanding of the demand for and supply of special measures and recommended that the Ministry of Justice and the Home Office develop a national protocol for data collection. That protocol has been in place since 2024, and I would appreciate hearing how the data is being used to make improvements in the provision of those measures. Victims need to be put first at every stage, and in every bit of guidance, through real measures to protect them both in court and outside it. The Government have committed to updating the controlling or coercive behaviour statutory guidance before the end of 2026, and I hope that they will keep that promise, for Paris and the thousands of others who are being and have been failed by the system.”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  24. “It was welcome that automatic eligibility for measures such as protective screens and curtains, support persons and private testimony was expanded to domestic abuse victims in 2021, but that counts for little if those measures are not actually in place on the day. In much the same way as we have discussed in relation to a last-minute guilty plea, the continual failure to put appropriate protections in place for victims when they attend court is simply allowing their abuse and emotional distress to continue. Has the Minister considered making special measures standard in courtrooms in order to ensure that no victim will ever be without them, and what does he think to recommending that proceedings be suspended where promised protections have failed to be put in place?”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  25. “Will the Minister ask the Sentencing Council to look specifically at how those circumstances are assessed in controlling or coercive behaviour cases and whether tactical delay by a perpetrator should reduce the discount or remove it altogether? Paris’s campaign speaks to wider concerns about the lack of support in place for victims of domestic abuse, including controlling or coercive behaviour, throughout the judicial process. This goes beyond the criminal courts. Several constituents have contacted me about serious problems in, for example, the family courts, where victims are failed by irregularities in the provision of special measures.”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  26. “In most cases, that holds—even a late plea spares a victim the witness box—but coercive control is different because the wait itself is part of the harm. Every month for which a perpetrator maintains a not guilty plea is another month in which they shape their victim’s life. A guilty plea on the morning of the trial does not undo that; it is often the final act of control. The guideline’s assumption that a late guilty plea still benefits the victim simply does not fit these cases. The law already gives courts room to recognise that. Section 73 of the Sentencing Act 2020 requires courts to consider not only the stage at which a guilty plea was indicated, but the circumstances in which it was given.”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  27. “There is a huge court backlog, which has worn away public confidence in the criminal justice system and has allowed criminals to get away with their offences. A graduated system of sentence reduction provides little reward to the offender for waiting to change their plea and speeds up proceedings where a guilty verdict may have been reached anyway, but in Paris’s case and in so many others, the unique and insidious nature of domestic abuse means that what should be a way of clearing the case backlog for simple cases has been repurposed by abusers into a tool to maintain control over their victim until the very last minute. We cannot let that continue. The Sentencing Council’s guideline is clear about why a discount exists: a guilty plea normally reduces the impact of the crime on victims and spares them from having to give evidence.”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  28. “Particularly pertinent to today’s debate is the number of high-risk cases that are repeat issues. In Cambridgeshire, 38% of cases are repeatedly discussed at multi-agency risk assessment conferences, compared with 29% nationally. Our area has been consistently above average in this regard for the past five years. It may be that higher repeat referrals reflect agencies getting better at spotting repeat victimisation—I hope that that is part of it—but those figures also suggest that too many of the most serious cases are coming back around and that something in the system is allowing the cycle to continue. The idea at the centre of the debate—sentence reductions for guilty pleas—is good in theory.”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  29. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Mr Mundell. My constituency has one of the highest numbers of signatures on today’s petition, showing a clear desire to support Paris Shears’s campaign. I am pleased to be here to show my support and urge the Government to put victims at the heart of every stage of their approach to tackling domestic abuse. In Cambridgeshire last year, 16% of all recorded crimes were related to domestic abuse. There were 59 arrests per 100 such crimes, and 31 cases of domestic abuse per 10,000 females were deemed high-risk enough to be discussed at multi-agency risk-assessment conferences. Those are deeply concerning statistics. We all want to reduce those figures to zero, so it is alarming that virtually none of them has significantly reduced in Cambridgeshire in the past five years.”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  30. “On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Today the Children’s Commissioner has published a report indicating that children in England face a state of emergency. Has the Secretary of State for Education given any indication that she intends to come to the House to give a statement and allow Members to question her on the Government’s response?”

    House of Commons19 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  31. “My constituent Maxwell has spinal muscular atrophy and needs a significant amount of personal care. He has just started a graduate job, but because of the frozen £23,250 capital limit, any savings he builds up go on care charges, so he cannot save a deposit for a home or for the safety net that his disability demands. The right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) said that we assume this to be the case, but will the Minister confirm that free personal care will be included for working-age disabled adults such as Maxwell? Until it arrives, would she unfreeze and raise the capital limit so that we are not placing a limit on his aspiration?”

    House of Commons15 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  32. “Fraud is growing, and artificial intelligence is making it easier for it to be committed at scale. While cases can be complex, all too often victims tell me that they feel abandoned by the system. The CPS strategy folds fraud into organised crime and national security issues, and none of its seven priorities is actually about victims; in that regard, it differs from the previous economic crime strategy. How will the Solicitor General ensure that fraud victims are not lost in the CPS’s new approach?”

    House of Commons14 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  33. “The Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor is one of the Government’s flagship regional growth priorities, with a ministerial champion in Lord Vallance to ensure joined-up delivery, yet if reports that option D is being taken forward for Cambridgeshire are correct, the Government will be choosing a structure with no realistic path to viability, right at the start of that corridor. Will the Minister confirm what assessment has been made of option D’s viability within the corridor, and whether Lord Vallance was consulted before the decision?”

    House of Commons13 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  34. “I will be voting against the order today, not because I oppose growth in Cambridge or the principle of strategic intervention where it is justified—I hope the Minister appreciates that I try to engage constructively with him on growth and infrastructure in my constituency; there are lots of brilliant opportunities there and it is a great part of the country to grow—but because establishing a body of this scale and duration, at 25 years, with this level of democratic cost before the purpose has been defined is the wrong way to proceed. I hope that at the very least the Government come back with a powers and functions order that sets out what the corporation will actually build, where and by when, and a clear, evidenced rationale for why planning powers are necessary to deliver it.”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  35. “That work has been years in development and is already at an advanced stage. Thirdly, will he guarantee that any decision to activate those powers will be accompanied by published reasons and an opportunity for further representations before it takes effect? Fourthly, can he confirm that the powers and functions order will be subject to the same affirmative procedure as the order we are considering today, giving Parliament a proper opportunity to scrutinise the planning powers before they come into force, rather than having them take effect without oversight?”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  36. “The functional economic geography of Cambridge extends well beyond Cambridge city and South Cambridgeshire district, as the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough independent economic review established back in 2018. The boundary drawn here does not follow the task; it follows two administrative areas. If the Government intend to proceed with planning powers in the autumn, as I am sure they do, will the Minister make four specific commitments? First, will he publish a clear, evidenced rationale for why removing local plan-making powers is necessary—something that I do not think has yet been provided? Secondly—I think he said this in his opening remarks, so this is more for clarification—will he commit that those powers will not be transferred until the existing draft greater Cambridge local plan has been adopted?”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  37. “The greater Cambridge area already has planning permission for 37,000 homes that have not yet been built. The evidence is clear that planning is not the barrier at that level. Water, sewerage and transport—those are the barriers, and none of them is fixed by changing who determines a 250-home planning application. I am also concerned about the boundary. We have had some discussion about that already. Lord Lansley has tabled a regret motion in the Lords specifically on this point, arguing that the geographic scope should correspond to the functional economic geography of the Cambridge economy and that any planning powers should be focused on very large new sites rather than applications on the 250 scale. I share both his concerns.”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  38. “We are establishing what will be the largest urban development corporation of its type, covering an area almost double that of all 17 previous urban development corporations combined, and the specific infrastructure it will deliver has not yet even been outlined, never mind detailed. The powers and functions order will also bring forward planning powers for which I find it difficult to see the justification. In the medium term, the corporation is expected to take over determination of planning applications above 250 dwellings, as the Minister said, and in time it will replace the local plan process entirely. I heard what the Minister had to say, but I would argue that 250 dwellings is not a strategic site; it is a medium-sized development.”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  39. “When I asked the Minister recently at departmental questions what infrastructure the corporation would have responsibility for delivering, and by when, he replied that further details would be set out in due course. I do not highlight that as a criticism of him; he has been very constructive in his engagement with my area, and I really appreciate that. In fact, I think one of his first acts as a Minister was to give me a call on the Sunday night after the election to tell me about an intervention in Northstowe in my constituency. However, his answer to my question was telling.”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  40. “The powers and functions order, which will determine what it actually does, including any planning powers, comes later in the autumn. We are being asked to vote on an institution before we know what it will be for. That is not just a procedural quibble; it goes to the heart of whether development corporations actually work. The historical cases that genuinely justify optimism—London Docklands and the Olympic Delivery Authority are really good examples of development corporations working—succeeded because they had a clearly defined task, a timeline and a funding commitment to match that ambition. That clarity is what gave them the authority and legitimacy that made the democratic trade-off arguable, at the very least, and worthwhile for those who agreed.”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  41. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Huq. I would like to be clear at the outset that the diagnosis behind the idea of the corporation is one that I and many in the area broadly share. Cambridge’s growth is constrained by water supply, wastewater capacity, and transport and energy infrastructure. They are real problems with real consequences, and not just for the current residents that I and others in the area represent, but for future residents. Nobody disputes that. However, the Lib Dems cannot support establishing a corporation whose purpose remains undefined at the point at which we are being asked to approve it. This order does one thing: it creates the Greater Cambridge Development Corporation in name.”

    House of Commons8 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  42. “I therefore ask the Minister for an update on the progress of the Hillsborough law and stress once again the urgency of getting it through this place. In closing, I pay tribute to every victim of this awful scandal and reiterate calls from across the House for IBCA to work faster to ensure that justice is served for all.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  43. “We Liberal Democrats would mandate integrated care boards to include patient voices at board level through organisations such as Healthwatch, and we share the disappointment of many impacted by the infected blood scandal that the Government have consistently, it seems, listened to the advice of the technical expert group over the lived experience of hundreds of victims. We need to end the culture of cover-up exposed by the infected blood inquiry and other scandals by immediately introducing that legislation to impose a statutory duty of candour on all public officials and establishing a patient safety taskforce to improve data sharing, analyse patient risk and co-ordinate safety responsibilities.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  44. “Can the Minister clarify whether he is still considering where there may be broader structural differences within the scheme and how they might be addressed? My final, broader, point is that there are very few accountability mechanisms in place for infected and affected people to genuinely hold both IBCA and the Cabinet Office to account. Both have been responsive when I pass along letters from my constituents, but that does prompt the question of why they were not so responsive when the constituents made contact themselves. Victim and patient voices matter, and they must be listened to at every level.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  45. “I appreciate that some of this was only raised with the Minister very recently, but I do wonder if he might tell the House what steps he has taken to urgently investigate those reports and what steps he is taking to ensure that no victim is retraumatised and prevented from being served justice by having to provide impossible evidence. I have on several occasions raised my constituents’ concerns about disparities in compensation for different diseases. One of my constituents has lived without his mother for 25 years after she died from hepatitis C in 1998, and he questions why claiming in her case involves complex severity bands whereas claiming for a living infected person with HIV is done through one single band.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  46. “Also missing from the regulations are measures to remove the impossible evidentiary demands currently in place, such as requiring victims to produce non-existent records, forcing elderly and grieving parents to go through complex online verification processes, or parents of children who died as a result of infected blood products being asked to prove that they lived with their child at the time. By way of example, I have a constituent whose father received blood transfusions following a severe car accident in 1989. He contracted hepatitis C and subsequently died from leukaemia in 2007. The records of his treatment across two hospitals have been destroyed, and his daughter has reached a complete impasse in trying to claim compensation for this incredibly traumatic series of events.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  47. “To possibly pre-empt the Minister’s response that care awards can be applied for through claims made as an infected person, I would argue that this method only works if it is performed at pace. We know that the speed of compensation is not what it should be. My constituent tells me that it is “painful to contemplate” that she “may not receive compensation in time to meaningfully support or repay” her elderly mother “after a lifetime shaped by…infection.” I would be interested to hear from the Minister what consideration the Department has given to calls for a dedicated care award paid directly to eligible living affected persons, and why, while simultaneously promising to speed up compensation, he is continuing to compensate carers only through this complex existing pathway.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  48. “Unfortunately, the experience of too many of those impacted is that that is not currently happening. Today I would like to draw attention to some significant omissions still missing from the legislation, and I hope that the Minister will take them on board in his efforts to achieve justice for everyone impacted by this scandal. I will share some stories from my constituents by way of example. The first is the lack of a dedicated care award for living affected persons. One of my constituents infected with hepatitis C 30 years ago has repeatedly raised with me her concern about elderly affected carers who are still alive and providing care. Three decades on from her infection, her mother continues to live with her and provides care daily, yet there is no separate pathway for her to claim compensation for this.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  49. “I thank the Minister for his continued commitment to improving the compensation scheme and for keeping the House up to date on its progress. I know that he takes this matter seriously, and I hope that we will see him continue to do so after the summer recess. We Liberal Democrats welcome many of the changes being made today, as we welcomed the previous changes made in April. The infected blood scandal is the biggest treatment disaster in NHS history, and such a disaster should never be allowed to happen again. The suffering inflicted on infected and affected people was, and still is, immeasurable. It was compounded by a cover-up that no amount of compensation will ever truly make up for, but it can go some way. After all this time, it must happen quickly, fully and fairly.”

    House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  50. “The Milburn review puts a number on it: an average of £29,000 a year for every person who is not in education, employment or training, rising to a lifetime cost of £240,000. We spend £7,900 a year on a further education student—that is not a close call. This is a false economy on a national scale. There is a missed opportunity on our doorstep to prove that it does not have to be this way. I hope that the Minister will tell us how the Government plan to address those barriers to access.”

    House of Commons2 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗