Blake Stephenson
MP for Mid Bedfordshire · Conservative · United Kingdom
“New clause 15 would amend the Modern Slavery Act 2015 to prevent information about people identified as potential victims of modern slavery from being shared for the purposes of immigration enforcement or removal. We oppose it.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. New clause 6 would require the Government to start negotiations to join the EU pact on migration and asylum within three months. Committee Members should not be surprised to hear that the official Opposition oppose this new clause. The hon.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member for Wimbledon has described the real pressures on councils across the country. When people are granted protection and leave asylum accommodation, many present as homeless, and local authorities across the country pick up the cost. However, in our view, a statutory taskforce will not solve that.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We would ban asylum claims by people who enter the country illegally and remove them within a week. We would seek returns agreements with countries of origin, backed by visa sanctions on those that refuse to take their nationals back, and we would support our allies in Europe to stop illegal entry with intelligence, policing and maritime…”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“New clause 11 would require the Government to restore refugee family reunion within six months, but I understand that it also widens definitions to include children up to the age of 25, which was not in the hon. Member’s opening remarks, so I hope I am not mistaken. We oppose this measure.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This group is about transparency, as the hon. Member for Wimbledon has just explained. New clause 14 would provide for regular statistics on asylum appeals, and new clause 22 for a report on decision making.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
733 held · 691 searchable for Blake Stephenson. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 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.
“To reduce the root causes of pollution, the Government have announced that they intend to implement pre-pipe solutions—which have been discussed in this debate—but have not yet provided any examples of how those will be implemented. Can the Minister provide further details on the implementation, and particularly how it will be integrated into the planning system? The Minister knows that since being elected, I have been calling for schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 to be enacted, first in my Adjournment debate on flooding in Bedfordshire, and also through the Environmental Audit Committee, which recently recommended doing so. The Minister at first seemed sympathetic to the arguments, but now seems to consider that there are other ways to achieve the same outcome. Could the Minister highlight what those other ways are?”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can the Minister confirm how many of Sir Jon’s 88 recommendations were accepted by the Government and included in the water White Paper? On water bills, what assessment has the Minister made of how smart metering may impact the average family’s water bills? Secondly, after the benefits of water metering, what additional hit to disposable income does the Minister expect that increasing bills will have on families, coming, as it will, on the back of record tax rises by this Government? Thirdly, can the Minister tell us how much taxpayer and bill-payer money has been allocated to their White Paper, and over what timeframe those taxes and bills will be used to pay for the work in it?”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The previous Government’s plan for water introduced the water restoration fund, which channelled environmental fines and penalties into projects that improve the water environment. Ministers in the previous Government also took action to ban water company bosses’ bonuses for illegal action. Sir Jon Cunliffe’s independent review was a serious undertaking, running to 460 pages and 88 recommendations, much of which His Majesty’s official Opposition have cautiously welcomed. For example, we know that, as it stands, the regulators are not working as they should, and that creating a single joined-up regulator is a sensible recommendation. However, I am concerned at both the speed at which the Government are moving and some of the proposals in their White Paper, which may see bills rise for families.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Environmental Audit Committee’s report, “Water quality in rivers” dating back to January 2022 provides a clear picture of the concerns, and the previous Government went on to help to identify the scale of the problem. When Labour left power in 2010, only 7% of storm overflows were being monitored; by 2023 it was 100%. That unveiled the severity of the situation facing the water industry, with water company storm overflows spilling into England’s rivers, lakes and seas for a record 3.61 million hours in 2024—although I take the point made by the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) about us needing to understand the volume, not just the hours. There is much more to do.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“England’s globally significant chalk streams, which make up 85% of the world’s total, are among the habitats most affected by pollution and abstraction, and I was pleased to hear many passionate advocates for our chalk streams in this debate. But what did this Government do when Opposition Members tabled amendments to the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 to restore and protect those habitats? The amendments were ignored, citing care for our environment and countryside as blockers against so-called progressive builders. That all illustrates, in the first 18 months in government, a level of arrogance that will do absolutely nothing to secure our future and clean up our waterways. The problems with the water sector have been known for a long time and are well reported.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Ensuring that we have a plentiful supply of clean water and waterways across England matters to us all, including my constituents in Mid Bedfordshire. Like many places across England, Mid Bedfordshire is having to adapt to a growing population, dry summers and increasingly wet winters, all with ageing infrastructure. Having grown up spending many an hour playing in my local river, a tributary of the River Test in Hampshire, I enjoyed a childhood that many simply cannot enjoy today, with the latest assessments showing that no rivers in England are in good or high overall health. Nature is also in grave danger. Freshwater habitats cover less than 1% of the earth’s surface but support more than 10% of global species. Since the 1970s, freshwater species have declined by 85%, far outpacing declines in terrestrial and marine systems.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy, on my first outing on behalf of His Majesty’s official Opposition. I congratulate the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) on securing this important debate, and I join Members who have welcomed the work of Sir Jon Cunliffe. I thank local action groups across England that are campaigning hard and cleaning up our waterways, and the employees in our water industry working hard, day in, day out, to make a difference within the framework that they operate in. I took note of the rivers that were mentioned during the debate: the River Lim in West Dorset, plus two chalk streams that I am afraid I missed; the Rivers Wharfe and Aire in Shipley; the River Wye in North Herefordshire; and the Rivers Ouse and Foss in York. We are all agreed that they need to be cleaned up.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend talks about fairness in relation to amendment 41 on uprating in line with CPI. Is it also worth considering the importance of certainty, particularly for people on fixed incomes who will benefit from this measure? Uprating by CPI would give them certainty into the future that they are not going to fall into fuel poverty.”
House of Commons29 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister says that the measures that the Government are using are appropriate, but can he explain, in response to the question from my hon. Friend the Member for North West Norfolk, why adjusted income was not used and why it is not appropriate?”
House of Commons29 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Like quite a few members of the Committee, I represent a rural constituency. We have a lot of villages that are not connected to our towns, and a lot of elderly people who need to get to appointments. There are also a lot of children with special education needs and disabilities who get to school via taxis. Does my hon. Friend agree that the increase in fares, which will be passed on to our vulnerable constituents, is unacceptable, and that a charge will be passed on to local authorities, which is not fair to our local taxpayers?”
House of Commons29 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that the Minister can give me some assurance that the Government recognise some of the technical problems highlighted by the amendments and intend to resolve them. I noted earlier that the Minister rejected amendments 1 and 2, giving a brief reason why, but given the representations, certainly by the Opposition, a more detailed response as to why the amendments have been rejected by the Government would be worthwhile. Much careful work has gone into the construction of amendments 1 and 2. Again in the spirit of co-operation, I am sure that Conservative Members would be happy to provide input to the Minister and officials as they consider how best to address the issues. With that, I commend the amendments to the Committee.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The advisers of such people are warning them to leave, but I know that the Government’s intention is not to drive them away. We need their taxes, fairly paid, to fund the renewal of our public services. That is why amendments 1 and 2 were tabled, in a constructive spirit of co-operation, as my hon. Friend the shadow Minister mentioned. Amendment 1 would stop double counting; and amendment 2 would ensure that retrospective and unfair action does not continue. Had amendment 49, which goes further, been selected for debate, I would have spoken to it as well, but I will resist doing so because it has not been selected. Amendments 1 and 2 would provide the needed certainty and make the TRF usable in practice, not just in theory.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Odd as it may seem, it is not because they are unwilling to pay more tax; it is because of the legal uncertainty in the Bill as drafted. Using the TRF as set out in the Bill exposes people to serious legal uncertainty. First, they are subject to double taxation through double counting of the same economic value. Secondly, they are vulnerable to retrospective taxation. Thirdly, they face allegations of tax avoidance simply for using a scheme that Parliament itself has created. Fourthly, they expose themselves and their families to potentially decade-long investigations into arrangements that were entirely lawful at the time they were entered into. That is why they are watching this Bill proceed with their bags packed, waiting to see if it will fix the problems.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is designed to encourage people to remain in the UK, to come to the UK and invest in the UK, and to bring historically offshore capital into the UK tax net. The TRF offers a reduced rate of taxation of 12% on all non-UK assets brought into the country as an incentive to do just that. We all want the same thing: we want the TRF to work, because if it does not, the money does not come here and the Exchequer and the public lose. The Government are relying on the reforms to raise very substantial sums—about £34 billion overall. The concern I express is not ideological or about the tax rate; it is about legal certainty and deliverability. The problem is that a number of the wealthiest people have left the country, and many more are doing so as we debate these amendments. Why?”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will speak to amendments 1 and 2 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor. The Government and those of us supporting the amendments are trying to achieve the same outcome. The aim of the amendments is simple: to enable the Government to achieve their goal of raising billions in tax revenues from former non-doms—money that is needed to pay for public services, as the hon. Member for Burnley said earlier. The Government set out the policy intention to replace non-dom status with a UK residency tax to raise more tax from those with the greatest capacity to pay, while simplifying the system. They introduced the temporary repatriation facility—or, given that we like three-letter acronyms, the TRF—as the central part of that strategy.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for securing the debate. He is making a thoughtful and important speech. He has spoken eloquently about the cumulative development in both our constituencies, which is putting central Bedfordshire and Bedford borough under significant strain from a planning perspective. Does he agree that it is important for the Government to support our local authorities, so that we think holistically about these developments and ensure that our landscapes are protected, our local communities are listened to, and that we secure the agricultural land that we need for future food security? The reason we have so many farmers in Bedfordshire is because we have fantastic agricultural land. Would it not be a waste to build on all that land, and in the case of East Park Energy, to do so on the altar of net zero?”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for his response. A recent Yale University report ranked Mauritius last out of 131 states for stringency in relation to its marine protected areas, and a woeful 173th out of 180 for the protection of biodiversity. Mauritius has even admitted that it does not have the capacity to patrol the area, and that it is open to commercial fishing. I recognise the response that the Minister gave, but Britain has kept the Chagos marine environment pristine for 50 years. Why do the Government not want to secure that legacy in law?”
House of Commons20 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Following the curriculum review, will the Secretary of State outline how the Government will support teachers to deliver financial education in the constituency of Mid Bedfordshire and, of course, right across the country? Will financial education form part of initial teacher training?”
House of Commons19 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The western world must remain united to keep us all safe from both Russia and China. Regrettably, we are far from united right now, and many of our constituents will be concerned about the risk to our country and critical infrastructure. At the same time as trying to reinvigorate our relationships with our NATO partners, should our worst-case planning assumption be that the USA may not be by our side if and when we need it in the future? If it was not clear before this week, surely it is clear now that spending on defence must rise immediately to at least 3% of GDP. Does the Foreign Secretary agree?”
House of Commons19 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Secretary of State support Conservative calls for funding for the listed places of worship scheme to be restored? That would give places of worship such as All Saints in Shillington in Mid Bedfordshire the certainty they need to protect our heritage and continue serving all our communities.”
House of Commons15 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When the Prime Minister first announced digital ID, it was to stop illegal working. It took most of us about a minute to work out that that was total nonsense. Flapping in the wind, the Government are now desperately trying to sell the benefits of limiting liberty and freedom for all our constituents. One thing the Government have failed to tell us is how much this will cost. Nothing in life is free; there is a cost to this. Do the Government dispute the £1.8 billion estimate that has been provided by the Office for Budget Responsibility?”
House of Commons15 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can the Secretary of State give a clear assurance that not a single offshore wind project procured in this round will be built with technology made by Chinese slaves?”
House of Commons14 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Constituents of mine have been reporting that they have been directed to hospital for regular blood tests, rather than having them at their GP surgery. Will the Secretary of State outline how he will ensure that blood tests are done in a community setting, which surely must be much better value for the taxpayer and much more convenient for patients?”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“London is a critical global financial centre; we all rely on it, as do all of our constituents. Does the Minister recognise the very serious risk that approving this Chinese super-embassy could, as my hon. Friend the shadow Minister said, pave the way for economic war—not just on our country, but on the western world, including by undermining the security of critical data travelling under the site to and from the City of London?”
House of Commons13 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They concentrate power in the single hand of a single state official. Did it cross anyone’s mind to pilot juryless trials in Crown courts? If not, why not? They remove the diversity of experience, the collective wisdom and the democratic legitimacy that juries bring. How many judges are under 40? How many are non-white? How many were educated in state schools? How many have personal experience of the issues? Now ask the same question of juries.”
House of Commons7 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To claim that reducing jury trials further will magically clear the backlog of tens of thousands of cases is just implausible. It defies logic and makes no sense whatsoever. This is a complete distraction. No hon. Member supporting the Government position has been able to explain how the decision will actually shift the dial on reducing the backlog. Concern goes deeper, however, as many of my hon. Friends have explained. Every time this Government face a crisis, their instinct is not to work out how sensibly to fix the system but to take things away from British citizens. We have heard examples including digital ID and Chagos, and now they are taking away people’s right to be judged by their peers because they cannot get a grip of the criminal justice system. Judge-only trials may be quicker, but they are not fairer.”
House of Commons7 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is the ordinary person’s shield against arbitrary power and yet, astonishingly, the Government now ask us to believe that that ancient protection must be curtailed just because Ministers do not want to do the hard work to reduce the backlog. The Bar Council, which represents the very professionals who keep our justice system functioning, is correct to raise alarm bells. There is absolutely no evidence—none whatsoever—that restricting jury trials will reduce the backlog. The Government have produced no modelling, no data and no analysis to justify that constitutional gamble. That work should have been done before the announcement was made, especially for something of such magnitude. Around 3% of criminal cases currently reach a jury.”
House of Commons7 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I start by saying how extraordinary it was to hear the Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services say earlier that she would be pursuing this policy even if there were not a backlog to deal with. That suggests that it was planned all along, but it is nowhere in the Labour party manifesto. Will the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards) explain in summing up why that is the case? There is no mandate to reduce trial by jury. It is a profound constitutional shift—one that strikes at the heart of the relationship between citizen and state. Trial by jury is a centuries-old safeguard designed to ensure that an individual can be judged guilty only by their peers and not by the machinery of the state.”
House of Commons7 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Nearly 17,000 companies licensed to sponsor worker visas have five or fewer employees, and over 3,000 of these have just one employee. Ministers have been unable to tell me how many inspections have been made of companies since the general election. How sure is the Home Secretary that these are not bogus companies offering a back door to Britain?”
House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With two dangerous offenders on the run, many of our constituents will rightly be very concerned and worried. Will the Minister explain what resources are being deployed to capture those offenders as soon as possible?”
House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In response to the question from my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp), the Minister said that he respected the views of the officers who had shared their concerns—so why does he think they are wrong?”
House of Commons5 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I welcome the focus on reducing deprivation in this statement? How confident is the Minister that deprivation in rural areas will not be missed in the funding formula? I should refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, because I am still a councillor on Central Bedfordshire council. That council is looking at having to find more than £20 million to balance its budget. That will be a real struggle in central Bedfordshire, which is a high-growth area with high needs and a lot of spending. Will the Minister commit to meet with me and local council leaders to discuss the unique circumstances in central Bedfordshire and what can be done to alleviate the financial pressures and to support them in balancing their budget?”
House of Commons17 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. This morning I received a notification via the Facebook page of the hon. Member for Bedford (Mohammad Yasin) that the planning for the Universal UK theme park, which is located wholly within my constituency of Mid Bedfordshire, has been approved. The hon. Member for Bedford shared a letter that he had received from the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government. Subsequent to notifying the Secretary of State about this point of order, I received a letter. Madam Deputy Speaker, could you advise whether it is appropriate for Ministers to provide notification of a planning approval in a Member’s constituency to the neighbouring Labour MP but not to the Member themselves?”
House of Commons16 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q12. Digital ID is intrusive and fundamentally un-British. The Government have no mandate for it, and no sensible person believes that it will tackle illegal immigration or illegal working. It is an attack on our open society and a staggering waste of taxpayers’ money, isn’t it?”
House of Commons10 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“About 1,200 people in my constituency are not in education, employment or training. With two job-destroying Budgets and the Employment Rights Bill on the horizon, does the Minister really understand the concerns of my constituents, who feel that this Government are simply making it so much harder for young people to find work and get on the career ladder?”
House of Commons8 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My communities are desperate for new infrastructure to ensure that housing growth does not mean growing waiting lists for local services. That particularly includes a GP surgery for the new town of Wixams, for which I have campaigned since I was elected to Parliament.”
House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Junction 13 of the M1 desperately needs to be upgraded. It is a key point of access for Cranfield University, Millbrook Proving Ground, Amazon, the future Marston Valley development and so many other local employment centres, but without an upgrade, we risk the only sustained growth in Mid Bedfordshire unfortunately being the time stuck in traffic jams. To ensure that our rural lanes are not overwhelmed by traffic as our areas grow, we need Government assistance to unlock the long-promised M1 to A6 link road. That project will alleviate the growing problem of HGVs using rural lanes as a cut-through, and support the delivery of central Bedfordshire’s local plan. At this point, I declare an interest as a councillor on Central Bedfordshire council.”
House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That includes potential to contribute to the Government’s growth agenda, and potential to connect the growth corridor through East West Rail, which will run along the Marston Vale line and the midland main line, providing easy connectivity to the soon-to-be-expanded Luton airport, to London and right across the region. Our local economy already benefits from easy access to the M1, with major multinationals such as Amazon calling Mid Bedfordshire home. The Millbrook Proving Ground in my constituency is one of the largest vehicle testing centres in Europe, and we are a hotspot for defence technology, with the Lockheed Martin site at Ampthill delivering the next generation of equipment to keep Britain secure. To fulfil our potential, we need the Government to support Mid Bedfordshire’s role in the growth corridor.”
House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy. I congratulate the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner) on securing this important debate. Many today may claim the same, but my constituency sits right at the heart of the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor. We are home to Cranfield University, world renowned for cutting-edge research and technology and some of the most innovative companies in Britain, growing our economy and delivering high-value jobs for our communities. Subject to planning approval—I do not seek to influence the Minister’s decision in any way—we will soon be home to the Universal UK theme park. Universal will welcome more than 8 million visitors to our part of Bedfordshire every year, bringing in £50 billion to the UK economy. Mid Bedfordshire is a constituency full of potential.”
House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I know that Members representing Milton Keynes and Bedford might comment on that. Finally, my communities need to be assured that rail infrastructure on East West Rail and the midlands main line is fit for the needs of a growing economy—the heart of our growth corridor. That means delivering step-free access at Flitwick and Harlington stations and on the Marston Vale East West Rail line in time for Universal to open. I would welcome an opportunity to meet the Minister to discuss how we can work together on a cohesive plan that delivers for my constituents and the Government.”
House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That was a very helpful intervention. Local councillors in our area are crying out for Government support to deliver the growth that the Government want in our area. It would be very useful if the Minister could respond to that. To take the most advantage from Universal, our county needs to join the majority of others in establishing a local visitor economy partnership. Without an LVEP, we risk missing out on the level of local expertise needed to direct growth and reap the rewards that the significant new tourism will attract. It cannot be right for one of the largest tourist attractions in Europe to be opened in one of the only places without a tourism strategy. We also have the opportunity to deliver another fantastic local tourist attraction—the Bedford to Milton Keynes waterway park—but we need Government investment to unlock it.”
House of Commons3 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Just like last year, she has launched a calculated assault on all our constituents; they are now paying the price for spiralling welfare and higher debt costs with their jobs, all to save the Chancellor’s own. The simple truth is that this Government are backing benefits Britain, not alarm clock Britain, and with broken promise after broken promise, the Chancellor is slipping into a black hole of her own making—one that cannot come quick enough for most of us.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for allowing me to nip out to my Delegated Legislation Committee without missing my spot. I met with businesses this morning, and it is clear that the people who take risks, invest, create jobs and drive tax receipts are busy scratching their heads to find some positive from this Budget. The truth is that it is a disaster for everyone in Mid Bedfordshire and right across the country—for young people looking for their first job, for hard-working families, and for aspirational business owners and job creators. Our country does need investment and renewal, but to pay for it, we need strong businesses and a strong business environment. The Chancellor is delivering the absolute opposite.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It makes absolutely no sense to do this at a time when the market can least afford it. Unemployment is through the roof; some 1 million 16 to 24-year-olds are not in education, employment or training, and that number is rising. That is an absolute scandal that this Government’s economic plan does nothing to fix.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is an attack on our ambitious small business owners—on our constituents who leap out of bed at the sound of their alarms, work hard, play by the rules and create jobs. Is it any wonder that many of them are now asking themselves, “What’s the point?” Business rates for retail, hospitality and leisure businesses must be abolished, and that is exactly what a Conservative Government will do. Who is paying for the price for this Budget? It is the very working people whom this Government pretend to support, especially young people starting out as I did—washing dishes in the pub, waiting on tables and working in local shops. Labour Members pat themselves on their backs with smiles all around for increasing the minimum wage, but they are doing so while crushing jobs.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They did it last year; they will do it again this year when they vote this Budget through; and if the Chancellor comes back for more, as she will, they will do it again. Let us look at the damage being done to a typical high street pub in Bedfordshire. Charged £7,448 in business rates by the last Conservative Government, that figure increased after the last Budget to £24,309. While local authorities are yet to publish the charge for next year, after the three-yearly business rates revaluation and the abolition of retail, hospitality and leisure relief, the charge is likely to be around £45,000 when transitional relief ends. That is a whopping tax increase of roughly 500% over the course of this Parliament before a single penny has been taken in sales. That is an absolute disgrace.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think everybody in this House wants to bring children out of poverty. The way to do that is to get more families into jobs, so that they can afford to bring their children up and take responsibility. Conservative Members know that it is business that invests, creates jobs and grows our economy, which enables investment in our public infrastructure. The backbone of our economy includes our high streets. Labour Members may visit their local pubs and cafes and post on social media expressing how much they back their high street—even posting about visits to businesses that have since closed—but the truth is that they have been standing idly by while the Chancellor has thrown the local businesses they rely on and claim to champion under the bus.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right—it makes it worse. The benefits of an increased minimum wage are meaningless for those who do not have a wage. We should be investing in a brighter future for young people, one of aspiration, hard work, investment and wealth. Only the Conservatives have a plan to do that, by bearing down on welfare spending, cutting taxes, and repealing every job-destroying, anti-business, anti-growth measure in the Employment Rights Bill. We will kick-start young people’s working lives with a £5,000 first jobs bonus.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have no time. We will back young people to buy their first home. We will not stifle the chances of a good job, punish people with higher taxes when they do find employment, push graduates into higher student loan repayments or make it harder to save for retirement, which is what this Government are doing. The appeal of fleeing socialist Britain has never been more obvious, nor has it ever been so easy, and the exodus has already begun.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the hon. Lady agree that while Labour in government pretends that it is the party of fairness, this Budget is deeply unfair to both her constituents and my own constituents?”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗