Ian Sollom

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

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 4 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. “Some, alongside many others across the country, have struggled to find a local state secondary school place for their child and have been offered one many miles away. That has meant that they have had to resort to private school, while they sit on long waiting lists for places that will never become available, leaving them under considerable financial pressures. Many other parents have been failed by the school their children attended, which has not provided the support that they need. They have been forced to move to the private sector, again at considerable cost. That has not been a choice, but something they feel has been forced on them, because of issues with the school system. Any parent making that choice, however, for whatever reason, should certainly not be penalised with more taxes.”

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

   Check this claim →

2. “Our position applies equally to all independent schools, but I acknowledge that for many parents, choosing a faith school is not primarily a financial calculation; it is an expression of deeply held conviction about how their children should be raised, and about community and belief. The Government should be mindful of how the policy bears on those for whom a faith education is not a luxury but a matter of conscience. It must be the choice of parents to decide where their children are educated. We understand that the choices parents make have many reasons, and it is parents’ right to make such choices without being subject to further taxes. I have heard from several of my constituents on this issue, none of them wealthy but all of them working hard and wanting to do the very best for their children.”

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

   Check this claim →

3. “It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for bringing forward this debate. It is well established that the Liberal Democrats oppose taxing education, whether that is independent, faith or non-faith schools. We did not support the Government’s decision to end the VAT exemption for independent schools, nor them treating such schools differently from other independent education providers for VAT purposes. Neither did we support the Government’s policy to remove private schools’ charitable business rates relief of 80%, for those that are charities.”

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

   Check this claim →

4. “According to the Office for National Statistics, 3.8 million people report feeling lonely, with young people consistently among the loneliest groups. Is it any wonder when we have seen youth centres shuttered and libraries boarded up, and the very places that bring people together hollowed out? The Liberal Democrats have a plan to change this by creating a new wave of third spaces centred around something simple but incredibly powerful: shared hobbies. We want to bring people with shared interests together, creating places where they can thrive. What is the Minister doing to tackle loneliness through rebuilding community life and shared experiences? Will she seriously consider our proposals for a bold new wave of hobby hubs to help restore the social fabric of our communities?”

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

   Check this claim →

5. “Cutting student numbers accepts that failure as permanent, but that is a counsel of despair. It also fails on its own terms. Setting aside the inherent value of the creative arts—many have made that point—that sector contributes enormously to the economy and enriches all our lives. Arts and humanities courses are also cheaper to deliver, and help to support expensive, lab-based science, technology, engineering and mathematics provision. Cutting 100,000 arts places would not simply reduce the loan book; it would undermine the financial model of the very STEM courses that the Conservatives claim to prioritise.”

   House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

6. “Cross-party consensus with independent oversight of key parameters is the only protection against that happening again. I would like to directly address the suggestion made explicitly by the official Opposition that the answer to fiscal pressure in the student finance system is to have drastically fewer students, and to cut courses, close departments and focus support on degrees whose graduates earn enough to repay quickly. That gets the diagnosis backwards. The graduate earnings premium has declined in Britian, not because we have too many graduates but because we have too few skilled jobs. Many of our peers in the OECD have expanded graduate numbers while maintaining or even raising the earnings premium. We should be asking why those countries have generated skilled professional jobs in a way that Britain has failed to do.”

   House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

7. “We must build a system that also works for people studying flexibly and later in life, not just for 18-year-olds on three or four-year degrees. We are seeing more move to modular courses, so the system needs to be able to cater for that. Structural reform is needed, which is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for a cross-party royal commission on graduate finance reform. I anticipate that some will see that as a delay, but I do not think it is. We need action on the threshold action now, but the commission needs to address a different, harder question: how do we build a system that future Governments cannot quietly dismantle the moment that fiscal pressure mounts? Every change made retrospectively to the terms has broken a promise to people who made life decisions based on them.”

   House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

8. “The Government have reintroduced £1,000 grants for maintenance for certain subjects, but the full reintroduction of meaningful maintenance grants for the most disadvantaged students must be a priority. The most urgent action on repayments requires no review, but a decision: reverse the threshold freeze over the next three years and tie it to earnings, as graduates were originally promised. I hope the Minister can give graduates that commitment today. For the structural reform that the system genuinely needs, we need to go beyond any single parameter. We need to design interest and repayment structures that are genuinely progressive across the income distribution, including by ditching the discredited link to RPI.”

   House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

9. “I hope we do not lose sight of the plan 2 or plan 5 cohort in this debate, because any serious reform of the system must address both. Before I move on to what can be done about loan repayments, I want to say something briefly about students who are struggling right now. The abolition of maintenance grants after the coalition ended in 2015 loaded the highest debt on to the students least able to bear it. Those from the poorest backgrounds now graduate with significantly more debt, not from their fees but from the additional maintenance borrowing. The level of support has fallen 10% in real terms from its peak. Students skip meals, work hours that damage their studies, and are unable to participate fully in the education that they are notionally receiving.”

   House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

   Check this claim →

10. “RPI, the basis for the interest rate, exceeded 13%. There was a cap on interest rates during that period, which in principle was welcome, but it was implemented too late, and the cap was set too high to make a meaningful difference for most borrowers. Meanwhile, graduates’ starting salaries barely moved in real terms. Interest-linked to a discredited inflation measure running hot, while earnings stood still—that combination has been toxic and the system had no mechanism to correct it. Although plan 2 graduates suffered from the accumulation of damage caused by those political and economic circumstances, the last Government introduced plan 5. Plan 5 graduates face a lower repayment threshold and a 40-year repayment period before write-off—terms that in many respects are harder than those faced by their predecessors.”

    House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

11. “In 2016, the threshold was frozen when it was supposed to rise, not because the economy required that, but because it was a convenient way to extract more from graduates without the political difficulty of imposing a tax rise. The threshold jumped significantly in 2022, but it was then frozen again, then raised again. Now the Government have given in to the same temptation, budgeting to freeze it for three more years. What graduates have experienced is not a coherent system operating as originally designed, but a set of rules that keep getting rewritten by whoever needs to balance the books that year. That is a core injustice. To that political failure, though, we must add an economic failure. In the early years of this decade, inflation ran at levels that few foresaw when the system was designed in 2012.”

    House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

12. “When the plan 2 system was designed, graduates were promised something specific: that they would repay only when earning above a certain threshold, that the threshold would rise with earnings, and that whatever remained after 30 years would be written off—a mechanism to share the cost of higher education between the individual and the state. A higher interest rate for higher earners was a deliberate feature—a progressive measure. Those graduates earning the most would contribute more, to make the system sustainable for those who could not. For many graduates at the time, that deal, however imperfect, felt manageable. However, there is a problem: successive Governments have treated those promises as suggestions.”

    House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

13. “It is a pleasure to serve with you in the chair today, Ms Lewell, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) on securing this debate. As we have heard, there are many graduates in this country who make loan payments every month and yet they see their loan balances grow. They are young professionals whose loan statements bear no resemblance to the deal they thought they were signing up to. At the same time, there are students who cannot afford to eat and university finances are precarious across the sector. The systems feel broken, so this debate really matters, and those listening deserve a clear diagnosis of what has gone wrong and a credible path forward. Let me try to give both.”

    House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

14. “We face a choice: managed decline, fewer students, fewer courses, talent lost and regions left behind; or transformation—treating universities like the national assets that they are. Graduates and the country deserve better. I hope that the Minister can signal in his response that the Government are making a start on that.”

    House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

15. “I am not personally an architect of plan 2, but the former leader of my party did say sorry, and my party was appropriately punished at the 2015 general election. The decline in the graduate earnings premium is, at its root, a story about economic underperformance, and that points towards the solution. Universities are not simply places that people go to acquire qualifications; they are also research engines, regional anchors, training grounds for public services and drivers of the innovation that creates the skilled employment that graduates need. The answer to graduates being squeezed is not fewer graduates; it is more skilled jobs generated by the research, commercialisation and civic investment that universities are well positioned to deliver.”

    House of Commons25 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

16. “We want a rigorous, transparent confirmatory process for all significant public appointments, with proper parliamentary involvement from the outset, not as an afterthought, and not after the damage has already been done. We want an end to government by WhatsApp, with all official business on the record, all lobbying published, and no more deals done in the dark. Deference is not respect, silence is not discretion, and secrecy in public life is not safety—it is the condition under which misconduct flourishes. The documents we are asking for should have been in the public domain years ago. This House has the power and responsibility to require their release, and it should do so today.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

17. “The question of how Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor came to be appointed, against objections reportedly raised from multiple directions, and how he was then allowed to operate for a decade with expenses rubber-stamped and minimal oversight, is not ancient history. It is the context in which every subsequent failure of public appointment standards must be understood. Beyond this motion the Liberal Democrats are calling for structural reforms that match the scale of what has been revealed so far. We want a genuinely independent ethics adviser who is able to initiate investigations, not to have to wait for permission from the Ministers they are supposed to scrutinise. We want an office of the whistleblower, with real legal protections, so that the civil servant who was overruled when they tried to question an expenses claim has somewhere to go.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

18. “That is not because the rules prevented it; it is because the cultural gravitational pull of deference was so strong that to too many people the sustained rigorous scrutiny of a public figure who happened to be a member of the royal family felt simply not the done thing. The unwritten convention was as powerful, if not more powerful, than the written rule. That is not a procedural failure; it is a failure of political culture, and it is precisely that culture that the motion challenges today. I came to this place with a background in science, and in any field of systemic inquiry there is an important principle: we cannot correct a failure that we refuse to examine. Institutional failures do not disappear when we look away from them; they compound.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

19. “Members for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O'Hara) and for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry)—she is no longer in her place—have said, the historian Andrew Lownie has spent years attempting to access those files through the proper channels. When asked what he made of that, he said simply: “Every single reason has been deployed to stop those papers getting out…You have to ask why”. Madam Deputy Speaker, we are asking why. Some may ask why, if Parliament has had the tools to scrutinise this issue through a substantive motion, it is happening only now. That is a fair question. No party in over a decade successfully used the parliamentary mechanisms available to force this issue properly.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

20. “All the while, his relationship with Epstein deepened—a relationship that the Epstein files now suggest may have been entangled with his official duties in ways that potentially breach both his duty of confidentiality and even the Official Secrets Act. The documents that might answer those questions should by now be in the national archives under the 20-year rule, but they are not. Every available exemption has been deployed to keep them sealed—national security, international relations, and more. Some, we are told, have been locked away until 2065, and most of us in the Chamber will not be here to read them if they are. As the hon.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

21. “That duty did not disappear when Thames Valley police opened their case files, so let us ask the question that this House should have been asking for years: how did Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor come to be appointed as Britain’s special representative for international trade and investment in 2001, and what did those responsible for that appointment know? Here is what we do know. The appointment was, by multiple accounts, controversial from the start. Concerns were raised within Government, within the Foreign Office and, reportedly, within the royal family itself, yet he was appointed. For a decade he travelled the globe on the public purse, meeting Heads of State and billionaires, on expenses described by former officials as lavish and poorly scrutinised. He was effectively given a rubber stamp.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

22. “By any measure, this past week has been an extraordinary one in British public life. Within five days, two people have been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office: one a former member of the royal family, and the other a veteran Labour politician who we now understand to be the man who championed the first’s appointment to his public role. This motion is not an attempt to prejudice a police investigation. We are clear that we must let the police do their work. That investigation must proceed on its own terms, free from political interference. Criminal law and parliamentary accountability are not the same thing, and they have never been mutually exclusive. Parliament has its own duty to scrutinise public appointments, to follow public money, and to ensure that the institutions of state are answerable to the people they serve.”

    House of Commons24 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

23. “T3. The B1050 between Earith and Willingham in my constituency is one of many peat-affected roads in Cambridgeshire. Such roads cost up to four times more to repair than others, and repairs last just a fraction of the time. The Secretary of State will know that the funding formula for highways maintenance is based on road length and does not take account of geological conditions. These roads are really dangerous to drive on, and my constituents are really frightened. Will she consider creating a special budget for peat-affected roads, or at least adjusting the formula to take account of geological conditions?”

    House of Commons12 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

24. “It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Edward. I am grateful to the petitioners for bringing this important matter to Parliament, and to the hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan) for leading the debate. The Government are right to say that settlement should be earned through contribution—few would dispute that principle. The consultation documents point to a system that contradicts those stated goals. I am sure the Minister will say that no final decisions have been made, but the direction of travel is clear. A 10-year baseline for most routes—15 years for care workers, as many Members have mentioned—with complex reductions based largely on salary, fundamentally misunderstands what settlement is for.”

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

    Check this claim →

25. “The moral stakes are clearest when I hear from Hongkongers in my constituency. While they may be exempted from the extension to 10 years, the consultation leaves unclear what “earned settlement” actually means for them—higher English requirements, income thresholds, whether any exemption is permanent. That is for people who fled political persecution based on our word to them. When we create uncertainty for people who follow the rules and contribute, it damages trust in British commitments. By all means, use the visa system for selection—we can have many separate debates on that—but settlement terms should enable the people we decided to welcome to commit to staying. The current direction undermines both our economic interests and our reputation for fairness, and I urge the Government to change course.”

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

    Check this claim →

26. “He is a skilled engineer; he chose the UK based on the clear five-year pathway. He tells me that had a 10-year route been the policy, he would never have come. That is the reality when we are competing for talent. The Government also claim that the changes will improve integration, but uncertainty is the enemy of integration. Someone who knows they can settle after five years will invest fully in their future here; someone facing 10 to 15 years of uncertainty will keep their options open elsewhere. Another constituent who has been in touch is an orthopaedic surgeon, a professional serving our NHS. He has three children in British schools. He tells me that if the rules change, he cannot wait for another six years. He will leave, and our NHS and our country will lose him and his talent.”

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

    Check this claim →

27. “I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and will shortly cite an example of that from my constituency. The key distinction to make is between selection and settlement. Our visa system is the selection mechanism; we judge whether someone has the skills we need, meets the thresholds, and fills a genuine vacancy. Settlement is about whether people can actually plan a future here and commit to staying. Five years of working, paying taxes, learning English and staying out of trouble is earning it. Extending it to 10 or 15 years does not raise standards; it just makes Britain unattractive to exactly the people our visa system should be welcoming. I will give a concrete example. I have a constituent who came in on the high potential individual visa, which is a route explicitly designed to attract the world’s best talent.”

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

    Check this claim →

28. “The Foreign Secretary has talked a lot about military co-operation today, less so about economic security co-operation. She will remember that the Prime Minister abolished the National Security Council sub-committee on economic security. I was pleased that the Minister with responsibility for economic security was here for a time, but he is not part of the National Security Council. How are these economic security questions and co-ordination with partners being handled and managed in Government?”

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

    Check this claim →

29. “The student mental health agreement, which facilitates the sharing of information, with consent, between universities and NHS services, must be implemented consistently across all institutions. Finally, the area that is perhaps hardest to address is the cultural change required among students, families and staff across universities. It is vital that students who are suffering feel comfortable and safe to disclose any issues they may have in order to seek and access the support and services they need. We can only do so by continuing to talk. We owe it to the families of those young people who are no longer with us to ensure that we adopt a system-wide approach to providing the best access to support and services at universities, as well as bringing about much-needed cultural change to prevent further tragedies in the future.”

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

    Check this claim →

30. “Importantly, the university’s approach is not just about counselling; it is about co-ordinating work across the institution to ensure that students with mental health conditions receive appropriate academic adjustments where necessary, that assessment practices are flexible when needed, and that support wraps around the whole student experience. As others have said today, it is important to recognise that universities cannot solve this problem alone. We need much stronger partnerships between universities and NHS mental health services. Students should not fall into gaps between university counselling and clinical NHS provision when they most need support. When students move away to university, they often lose the continuity in NHS services that may have supported them at home.”

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

    Check this claim →

31. “Universities must not only sign up to the charter, but demonstrate that they are adhering to a full strategy, with clear standards, regular independent assessment and consequences for non-compliance; providing details and evidence of direct signposting of services to students; dedicated individuals responsible for ensuring that well-structured welfare checks are carried out; and timely delivery of services when needed. I was going to give a couple of examples from the University of the West of England, as I have been really impressed by its leadership on the issue. It does not have a one-size-fits-all solution, which is food for thought for other institutions and the Minister. However, in the interests of time I will just encourage the Minister to look into that.”

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

    Check this claim →

32. “All universities are being asked to sign up by the end of this year. That should be encouraged, to ensure a base level of support for all students from the start of their higher education experience. To address universities’ duty-of-care responsibilities, a voluntary aspiration must evolve into a rigorous accountability mechanism. That means not just mental health services, but ensuring that institutional policies and practices properly support student wellbeing.”

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

    Check this claim →

33. “The question is how we ensure that support services are available, timely and fit for purpose, and that students know how to access them. Also, how do we ensure that institutional practices, from assessment methods to accommodation standards, properly support student wellbeing? Support can come in a number of forms, catering to different student populations and localities, among other things, but I hope we would all agree that there should be a consistent approach across all universities to ensure that support is available when and where it is needed. That is where the university mental health charter, devised by the charity Student Minds, could have an important role to play. Signing up to the charter is currently voluntary for universities, and just over 100 of the 165 have signed up.”

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

    Check this claim →

34. “It encompasses physical safety, appropriate academic adjustments, protection from harassment and ensuring that institutional practices do not place unreasonable pressure on vulnerable students. The Liberal Democrats believe that universities should be held accountable for the support that they provide to their students as part of those duties. We have heard a lot of numbers and statistics about students’ mental health challenges. In the interests of time, I will not dig into those further. From the many meetings that I have had with universities and student organisations, it is clear that many care deeply about those studying with them and want to provide the best support to all who need it, but we also know that demand is rising and not all institutions are meeting what we might expect.”

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

    Check this claim →

35. “It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I thank the hon. Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing this important debate. I acknowledge the families who have suffered the devastating loss of their loved one at such a young age. In particular, I recognise Natasha Abrahart’s parents for their campaigning to prevent other families from enduring what they experienced. I am grateful for the time that they spent with me to share Natasha’s story and their concerns about how universities support students in crisis. It is because of families like theirs that we are having this debate today, and we owe it to them to get it right. Although much of this debate has rightly focused on mental health support, universities have a broader duty of care to their students.”

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

    Check this claim →

36. “As such, I urge the Government to act as a matter of urgency to tackle the very real and evident harm gambling can cause to families, children, young people and communities across the country.”

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

    Check this claim →

37. “A related concern, and one which is shared by leading support charities, is that the introduction of the statutory levy on gambling firms must not mean gambling support services being disrupted during this year’s transition period. We call on the Government to ensure that interim funding is available, so that vulnerable people do not fall through the cracks during that transition. Although most people who regularly gamble do so without a problem, it is evident that for some, it is a slippery slope that leads to a host of financial, personal and health problems. We have a duty to prevent that from happening in the first place, and to help those who are already struggling.”

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

    Check this claim →

38. “With that in mind, we have been calling for gambling advertising to be restricted, to tackle the gambling adverts that bombard people through their TVs and radios as well as marketing via social media; for a gaming ombudsman to be established, one with real power to protect consumers and resolve complaints; for affordability checks to be enforced and implemented by mandating financial checks and data sharing to stop gambling beyond means; and for tough action to be taken against black-market gambling. Access to a range of support services is also vital. Anyone worried about their gambling or anyone close to them should be able to seek help easily in their local area, and gambling firms must pay their fair share towards those services.”

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

    Check this claim →

39. “That would enable local authorities to introduce cumulative impact policies to prevent clustering and saturation of gambling premises in areas deemed more vulnerable to harm. It is also important that local public health bodies can make statutory representations, and that public health evidence is given full weight in those licensing decisions. Additionally, we believe that more decisive action is needed to combat the harms caused by problem gambling.”

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

    Check this claim →

40. “More than one in 20 of those aged 18 to 34 who had gambled in the last 12 months reported a severe impact on their life. Liberal Democrats have long been calling for gambling reform, and we are pleased that the Government have listened to us in one key area. We campaigned for many years for the remote gaming duty to be doubled, and the Government have done exactly that. That was the right decision, but on the high street—the subject of this debate—much more action is needed. Liberal Democrats support removing the “aim to permit” principle, that statutory presumption under the Gambling Act 2005, giving local authorities the same power to refuse applications for gambling venues as they have for pubs and other licensed premises.”

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

    Check this claim →

41. “According to last July’s “Gambling Survey for Great Britain” an estimated 2.5% of adults have struggled with problem gambling, equating to over 1 million people. The proportion of people with severe problem gambling was nine times higher for those using in-person slot machines and six times higher for those using online slots. More than one in 40 people who gambled in the last year experienced severe harm to their life, such as turning to crime to finance gambling, experiencing a relationship breakdown or losing their home, and Public Health England estimates that, tragically, there are more than 400 gambling-related suicides a year. Gambling affects all ages and genders, but the rates are particularly high among men and young people.”

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

    Check this claim →

42. “I thank the hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) for securing this debate and for all her hard work on this issue. What she has been doing is impressive. Gambling can be a light-hearted pastime that many would describe as fun and harmless. As a Liberal Democrat, I support an individual’s right to choose, but, as we have heard, gambling comes at a very high cost for some people —some of the stories shared by the hon. Member for Brent East were very moving. That is true not just for those who are directly affected by gambling, but for their friends, their families, and all those who have that emotional burden and—in some cases—shared financial burden. I will delve into a few of the statistics—some have already been mentioned, but they are worth emphasising.”

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

    Check this claim →

43. “The Secretary of State will know that the NATO Secretary-General said in September that we must “prevent spreading” NATO forces “too thinly”. Could he provide some reassurance to the House on the implications of this potential deployment for the Joint Expeditionary Force and our leadership of that in Estonia?”

    House of Commons7 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

44. “At the weekend, Donald Trump invoked the Monroe doctrine. From her statement, the Foreign Secretary seems to accept that in some cases, the UN charter is secondary to great powers’ spheres of influence. What criteria does she use to decide when the charter is trumped by 19th-century thinking? She has talked a lot today about alliances; the great game of alliances in the 19th century ended very, very badly.”

    House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

45. “Employers across the construction, care and manufacturing sectors have warned that Skills England’s dumbed down reforms mean that apprenticeships will not be recognised by professional bodies. Today’s announcement of 50,000 apprenticeships is meaningless if employers will not recognise those standards, so will the Secretary of State guarantee that reformed apprenticeships will still meet those standards? That is a particular concern in the construction industry—”

    House of Commons8 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

46. “We need to ensure that communities such as St Neots can actively participate in and benefit from growth, rather than simply absorbing its pressures.”

    House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

47. “Will the Minister assure my constituents that he is actively working with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to pump-prime healthcare services for new developments, ensuring that services are built to grow sustainably alongside the new communities they serve? I had much more to say about skills and education—which have already been talked about—and about the environment. The Fens 2100+ programme is grappling with the reality that parts of Cambridgeshire are below sea level and face increasing flood risks. That should be considered. The growth corridor project is a genuine opportunity, but it will be realised only by genuine cross-governmental working. No single Department can deliver what is needed.”

    House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

48. “There is some understandable uneasiness about the Tempsford proposal. There are worries about local schools and GP practices being stretched, and concerns about water scarcity and flooding issues. How healthcare infrastructure grows is a particular concern, and one with which my constituents are well familiar. Northstowe in my constituency is said to be the UK’s largest new town since Milton Keynes, with 10,000 homes by 2040. Its first residents moved in eight years ago, yet there is still no permanent GP surgery. That places enormous strain on surrounding village practices. The pattern has been clear: houses get built, but the health infrastructure lags behind.”

    House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

49. “St Neots is a genuinely strategic location, at the intersection of the east coast main line that runs north to south, the planned East West Rail connection, the A1 running north and south, and the new A428 running east to west. The new towns taskforce has identified the Tempsford area just to the south for a new settlement of potentially 40,000 homes. That area sits at the confluence of multiple local authority boundaries—different authorities with different, overlapping responsibilities. The complexity I have outlined makes integrated transport planning in particular essential from the outset. Sustainable transport connections between existing towns and villages and new railway stations at Cambourne and Tempsford on East West Rail need to be a key focus from the very beginning of planning. I hope the Minister can commit to that.”

    House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →

50. “It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy. I congratulate the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner) on securing the debate. The Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor has had something of a tortured history. For nearly two decades, various iterations of the vision have promised transformational change, only to be shelved, rebranded or, as was reported in 2022, flushed down the toilet in mime by a previous Secretary of State, who is fortunately no longer here. As we discuss the growth corridor, I hope that the knowledge and experience of constituencies such as mine and others represented in the debate, which are already living with rapid growth, can inform a better approach this time. This really does matter in my constituency, sitting as we do immediately to the west of Cambridge.”

    House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

    Check this claim →