Manuela Perteghella
MP for Stratford-on-Avon · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“In my constituency, the Shipston Area Flood Action Group has led a natural flood management project, working together with local landowners to slow the flow of the River Stour upstream. Does the hon.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Alongside the expansion of illegal settlements, as we have heard, there has been growing concern about violence perpetrated by extremist settlers against Palestinian communities in the west bank.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“From coastal Devon to rural Warwickshire, we have the same issues. My constituents are not receiving letters on time. They are missing NHS appointments—really important appointments—documents are getting lost, and letters informing people of fines to be paid are arriving too late.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How will farmers continue to deliver the environmental outcomes that the Government expect if access to the very schemes designed to support the work can disappear in a matter of hours? These failures come on top of cuts to DEFRA’s budget and ongoing uncertainty over the future of environmental land management schemes.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Farmers in my constituency and across the country have been left totally bewildered and deeply anxious by this Government’s handling of the SFI. The scheme, although flawed, was meant to reward good farming and environmental stewardship.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“One of my constituent farmers summed up the mood when they contacted me, writing: “Morale is rock bottom within the industry. Many farm businesses are on the brink… We need a sensible payment system to give us confidence”. We should also not ignore what this prolonged uncertainty means for farmers’ mental wellbeing.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
527 held · 510 searchable for Manuela Perteghella. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 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.
“Given the value of environmental conservation—the value of nature for its own sake, as well as its benefits for public health and mental health—we ask the Minister to consider including provision for considering environmental impact in assets of community value. It would be of huge value to my constituents to be able to ensure that measures are in place to protect the environmental value of, for example, Meon Vale woods, which they fought to save and which has become a local nature reserve. Depending on the Minister’s response, I will press amendment 34 and consequential amendments 35 to 37 to a vote.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The environmental impact is absent. We can only assume that exclusion is a protection against environmental considerations being used as a mechanism to prevent development. Perhaps the Minister can explain that in her response. This seems needlessly reductive, because the positives outweigh the negatives, and the negatives can be mitigated if there is a concern. There is widespread support for these amendments. We worked on them with Locality and the Community Land Trust Network, in conversation with them I heard about sites all across the country that could be protected. I am sure that Members can think of many examples in their constituencies.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These amendments are interlinked. First, I would like to speak in support of the Bill’s provisions to protect assets of community value under the new sporting category. Those are important, and we are all delighted to see them in the Bill. These are key community hubs, including for our grassroots sports clubs and particularly for our young people. They play a fundamental role in building local pride, building engagement and developing young people’s skills. I thank the Government for these welcome provisions. In that context, the Bill’s exclusion of environmental assets of community value seems stark. Social, economic and environmental impacts are often grouped together in legislation, and yet although sporting assets have been added to the group of possible categories for an asset of community value, environmental assets have not.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 373, in schedule 27, page 266, line 5, at end insert— “(c) it is land of on which there are buildings of historical significance.” This amendment would expand the criteria for a local authority classifying land as of community value to include land on which there are buildings of historical significance.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A permanent statutory fund would give councils and community organisations the power and financial support to ensure that assets of community value stay and are preserved for community use. By placing it on to a statutory footing, the clause will make community ownership funding a permanent part of local government support for community empowerment, and not just a pilot scheme.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Under this new clause, strategic authorities could apply for up to £2 million to support community groups or parish and town councils in buying assets of community value that are at risk of being lost; having been on the list for five years, they can be dropped without the community knowing. The regulations to create and run the fund would follow the negative procedure, meaning Parliament could annul them, but not amend them. The new clause would give the community real financial teeth, turning the right to bid into a right to buy, giving the tools so that the community can act. Communities, as hon. Members will know from experience, often identify assets worth saving, but they lack the up-front capital to act.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is an essential amendment, because not every community will have the resources or capacity to raise the funds, especially in disadvantaged communities; even if they want desperately to save it, there is no recourse. No community anywhere in England should lose its assets simply because local people cannot afford to buy it or act fast enough. The amendment would mean that councils could step in temporarily, for example holding the assets in trust or leasing it back to the community once funding or a long-term plan is secured. I will move on to new clause 51 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden). The clause would create a statutory community ownership fund, which the Secretary of State must set up within six months of the Bill becoming law.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“More than that, though, historical buildings are community assets in waiting. Many historical sites, such as disused chapels, mills, railway stations, schools and places that are part of our industrial heritage can be restored into vibrant hubs, cafés, arts venues and co-working spaces. They can have a community-based use, and protecting them buys time for communities to develop and put forward a viable plan to the authorities, rather than watching the bulldozers move in. With imagination, we can help these historical buildings to become community hubs. Amendment 374 is designed to support councils to buy land if there is no community buyer, by requiring the Secretary of State to provide financial support to the local authority to purchase the land itself.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We all have those in our constituencies: even if their current use is not community based, they are still part of our built heritage, and they shape our sense of place, so they are really important. While the current asset of community value system focuses mainly on social use, some historically important sites might not fit neatly into that community use test, even if they are locally important and of historical significance. Historical buildings are obviously important in their own right, of course, which is why we have the listed building system, but they also connect people to the story of their place and past industries—the movements that shaped their community. When those buildings disappear, communities lose part of their collective memory and character, and once they are gone, they cannot be replaced. That is really important.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Without these improvements to the legislation, the right to protect community assets risks being just words on paper. When it becomes a genuine tool for local and community empowerment, which is the welcome title of this important Bill, it will live up to the spirit of devolution that we all want to deliver. I turn now to the amendments in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney). Amendment 373 would include historically significant buildings as community assets, while amendment 374 would support councils to buy land if there is no community buyer; if no community group comes forward, the local authority can step in. Amendment 373 would expand the legal definition of what can be classed as an asset of community value to include land or property with buildings of historical significance.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Right now communities have the right to bid, but they are left on their own; this amendment would turn that right into success. Amendment 249 would ensure that community value is not ignored in the planning system. At present, even a listed community site can be granted planning permission for demolition or redevelopment; it is my understanding that there is nothing in regulations to ensure that consideration is given to the fact that a particular site is on a list of assets of community value. This amendment would require planning authorities to give special consideration to the community value of such land before approving development. It would not block development, but would ensure that community value is considered and that the community’s voice is properly heard. It is a modest improvement.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For the same reasons, amendment 41 would require adequate central funding for land valuations. If councils cannot afford them, communities face delay and uncertainty and opportunities are lost. Adequate central funding would make the process faster, fairer and more consistent across the country. With this financial support in place, more communities will be able to come together to make a bid for their grassroots sports clubs and other important cultural assets in their communities. Amendment 42 goes to the heart of community empowerment, requiring councils as far as is reasonably possible to support the preferred community buyer by guiding them through the process and helping them to gain access to expert advice and funding.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 40, which would make sure that local councils are properly funded when assessing whether land is a sporting asset of community value, is vital in identifying and assessing sporting assets. It must not be a simple tick-box exercise, because evidence has to be gathered and local groups have to be consulted, and competing claims between landowners and residents often have to be resolved. This can be done only with time, specialist knowledge, consultants and often site visits, all of which cost money. As we know all too well, and as the Minister has reminded us today, many councils are already stretched thin. Without additional funding, there is a very real risk that this new protection for sporting assets will be inconsistent or, at worst, non-existent.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendments 40 to 42 and 249 seek to improve how the assets of community value system works in practice. Amendment 40 would require the Secretary of State to ensure that local authorities are adequately funded to carry out assessments of whether land is a sporting asset of community value. Amendment 41 makes the same point on valuations, and amendment 42 would require local authorities, as far as reasonably practicable, to support the preferred community buyer in securing the purchase of land of community value. Finally, amendment 249 would ensure that community value does not stop mattering once a planning application is lodged by allowing the Secretary of State to issue guidance requiring the planners and His Majesty’s Planning Inspectorate to give special consideration to land of community value when making decisions.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not press the amendments to a vote, although my hon. Friends might table them again on Report, but I will press new clause 51 to a vote later on. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment , by leave, withdrawn.”
House of Commons23 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 352, in schedule 19, page 200, line 17, at end insert— “(d) include an overview of the views of town and parish councils in the local authority area about the plan.” This amendment would require information about the views of town and parish councils in the area about a mayoral combined authority’s local growth plan to be included in the plan.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendments 353 and 356 would go further, requiring active engagement with those councils by, for example, sharing draft proposals and the evidence behind the proposals for local growth plans, and giving councils a real opportunity to provide feedback before local growth plans are made. By requiring consultation at a parish level and genuine involvement in devolution decisions, and by valuing local voices, these provisions resist the top-down approach. In my constituency we have brilliant parish and town councils. When the district councils are abolished and a new unitary council is made, it is likely that towns and parishes will be asked if they wish to take on more services and assets, including possible development sites.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Local growth plans are rightly a key part of the devolution agenda, because the plans guide inward investment and set priorities for economic growth, as we have discussed, as well as development and regeneration in combined authority areas. We have already heard from the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion about the importance of inclusive economic and growth plans. Inclusivity is necessary. Consultation and engagement are necessary. Currently, however, there is no statutory requirement for mayoral combined authorities to formally record or engage with town and parish councils in the creation of these plans. These amendments aim to address that gap, increasing local accountability and inclusivity. Amendments 352 and 355 would require any mayoral authority making a local growth plan to include the views of local town and parish council.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am hearing a lot from the Labour Benches about there being 800 or 350 parish councils, so we cannot engage with them, but there are different ways to engage, such as online consultations or parish fora to which representatives and clerks can be invited. That the mayor cannot engage because there are so many parish councils is not a factor; I am sure that the mayor will be able to.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, I do not accept that. We are saying that there have to be minimum standards for engagement. In fact, amendment 354, reinforced by amendment 357, would allow the Secretary of State to create guidance on minimum standards for engagement. It would then be up to the mayor, but at least the engagement with our first tier of local government would be meaningful and consistent across all mayoral combined authorities. Setting minimum standards for engagement would provide a baseline for consultation across all mayoral authorities, but that consultation can be in different formats. Let us not forget that two-tier local authorities with county councils often have lots of parish councils and they already consult them on local plans, for example, so there are ways to do it.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will press amendment 353 to a vote, because the changes are about the principle of genuine devolution and about giving real power to local communities, not concentrating it on the mayors. The amendment is essential to make the promise real, so I will press it to a vote.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. If a district council is to be abolished, parish and town councils are asked to take on assets or sites that could be development sites, so they become stakeholders in the local growth plans. They will be the landowners, so not to engage with the parish and town councils that take on those assets will be damaging in the long term. Our amendments raise the quality and legitimacy of decisions by reflecting broader community input and inclusivity. They would, again, prevent a top-down approach. Crucially, they would set consistent standards nationwide, so that engagement is not left to the whim of individual authorities or mayors.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On country parks and forestry, charities that plant forests are providing apprenticeships because the number of our forest rangers has declined. After hearing about the post-16 education and skills strategy yesterday, it is really important to provide these apprenticeships and jobs in rural areas so that our young people can continue to thrive.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 359, in schedule 19, page 200, line 17, at end insert— “(2A) In preparing a local growth plan, a mayoral combined authority must make specific reference to the proposed benefits of the plan on areas which are rural, remote, or coastal.” This amendment would require local growth plans to make specific reference to the proposed benefits of the plan on rural, remote and coastal areas.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Combined authority areas can be very different—there could be a very populous urban cluster of unitary councils, and there could also be rural councils, which have completely different needs. The amendments are fair to rural communities and advantageous to urban areas, because we know that when our rural areas thrive, so does the whole country. There are opportunities across our nation as a whole. Rural and coastal areas need focused attention—for example, supporting infrastructure such as transport networks, energy infrastructure and digital connectivity. There are families in my constituency who do not get any broadband connectivity, and their children have to go to cafés in towns to revise for GCSEs. Not having that connectivity also makes it very difficult for businesses to thrive, so we face unique challenges.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These amendments were tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke), and they focus on ensuring that rural, remote and coastal areas are properly considered in the Bill. At present, the Bill largely focuses on urban centres and large population areas. There is a bit about rural areas, but not about the differences between these often isolated geographical areas, and there is little specific recognition of rural or geographically isolated communities, despite their unique challenges and contributions to the economy. Both amendments would require local growth plans to make specific reference to the proposed benefits for those areas. In that way, we would ensure that the growth strategies are inclusive, balanced and relevant to the communities within the combined authority area.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We want those needs to be reflected in the provisions on local growth plans in the Bill. A one-size-fits-all approach will lead to not only rural deprivation but missed opportunities for our nation as a whole. In conclusion, the amendments are about equity, opportunity and smart growth. Rural, remote and coastal communities must not be left behind. Ignoring them would be a missed opportunity for the sustainable and inclusive growth that would power the whole region. Amendments 359 and 360 would ensure that all mayoral authorities plan meaningfully and strategically for every part of their area. For that reason, I will push amendment 359 to a vote.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That goes back to what my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole was saying. We should not rely on the kindness of mayors to care about the whole of their communities; we need to ensure that local growth plans—which is what the amendments are about—include the needs of coastal, rural and isolated communities such as mine, where we do not have buses to take elderly residents to the nearest hospital. It is important that we make provision for local growth plans to consider the needs of rural, coastal and remote communities. Obviously, rural areas are not homogeneous. We know that they have different industries—for example, agriculture and the visitor economy—and the demographics are different. Lots of people come to my constituency to retire, for example, which tells us about the health provision that we need our area.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For such an important Bill, I do not think that we should wait four years—my community will be left behind by then. I do not want to wait for the ballot box; I want to give the mayor the tools to have inclusive local growth plans that take areas into consideration. That means they will be empowered to lobby the Government for transport networks or broadband connectivity in isolated areas and coastal communities, which are also, by the way, vulnerable to storms and flooding because of climate change, so they have very different needs.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(1C) In exercising powers under subsection (1) the relevant authority must publish a report summarising the authority’s engagement with town and parish councils which includes— (a) form of engagement used; (b) the views of town and parish councils on the authority’s exercise of powers under subsection (1); and (c) the role of town and parish councils in exercising powers under subsection (1). (1D) The Secretary of State may issue guidance regarding requirements for engagement under subsection (1A).’” This amendment would require local and/or strategic authorities exercising powers to encourage visitors to their area to engage with town and parish councils.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 358, in clause 40, page 40, line 31, at end insert— “(2A) In section 144, after subsection (1) insert— ‘(1A) In exercising powers under subsection (1) the relevant authority must engage with town and parish council within its area. (1B) Engagement under subsection (1A) must include— (a) consulting town and parish councils on tourism strategies, policies, and investment priorities; and (b) creating opportunities for town and parish councils to contribute to activities relating to the exercising powers under subsection (1).”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 358 would require a strategic authority to engage with town and parish councils when using its powers to encourage tourism. Tourism is a vital part of the economy for many local areas, supporting jobs, local businesses and community services. The Bill allows strategic authorities to exercise powers to encourage visitors, but with no statutory requirement to involve town and parish councils in the process, as we explained before.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I said strategic authority—this is at the strategic authority level. Parish and town councils are different, of course, and so they have different needs. Some areas depend on the visitor economy. My town council is represented in arts and culture and in the tourism strategies for the town.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the case of unitaries, yes. The district council in the town of Stratford-upon-Avon is still in charge of the visitor information centre, but that will probably go to the town council when our district council is abolished.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I said, we need to ensure that the strategic authority has the tools to consult town and parish councils. In an area such as mine, which is to go through reorganisation and devolution, we do not know what will happen to many smaller parish councils.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Towns and cities across the country are proud of the role that they play in supporting the visitor economy, both domestic and international, but the system needs to be made fairer through a recognition of the costs, as well as the benefits, of such a high degree of tourism. The new clause would compel the Government to conduct a review into giving local authorities powers to introduce visitor levies. Scotland introduced the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024, which gives councils direct powers to apply tourist taxes. Wales followed suit with the Visitor Accommodation (Register and Levy) Etc. (Wales) Act 2025, and now Manchester and Liverpool have introduced a voluntary levy. Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole has introduced a levy.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That would promote sustainable tourism, because the authority, by consulting on the views of parishioners through parish and town councils, would be able to balance visitor growth with the needs of residents. That is very important for areas such as my constituency. In short, the amendment would empower local communities, strengthen democracy and make tourism strategies more effective and inclusive. New clause 41, which was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse), would require the Secretary of State to review the idea of giving local authorities the power to introduce visitor levies in their areas. This is an important power for strategic authorities.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is important, because town and parish councils know the attractions, infrastructure needs and growth opportunities of their areas best. If a theme park is proposed, the town or parish council will know exactly whether, for example, a bypass is needed. Engaging with them will ensure that tourism plans are grounded in the reality of each community. I repeat that the onus to engage should be on the strategic authority. The amendment would also ensure inclusive planning. We talked this morning about inclusivity. Small towns, villages and rural areas are often overlooked in broader strategies, but they are vital to our economy. By considering them, we support equitable growth across both urban and rural areas. The authorities would also have to report on how councils are engaged and what input they have provided.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The onus would be on the strategic authority to consult, not on the parish or town council to respond. The argument that there are 300 parish or town councils, so we will not bother to ensure that their voices are heard, really disappoints me. The amendment would require strategic authorities to consult town and parish councils when developing “tourism strategies, policies and investment priorities”. The amendment also asks the Secretary of State to issue guidance on minimum standards of engagement. Again, we must give the strategic authority the tools to engage with town and parish councils, which, I remind the Committee, are going to take on a lot of assets and services when district councils are abolished. Overall, the amendment is about giving local communities representation in tourism planning.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank my hon. Friend for the example from her council. As she said, it is important that the levy is ringfenced for the strategic authority to reinvest in the local area, so that it could provide, for example, additional regional funding streams for arts and culture and for residents themselves. I hope that the Government will at least commit to conducting a review into visitor levies, so that we can safeguard our hugely valuable tourism industry.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not press new clause 41 to a vote, but I would like to do so with amendment 358, which concerns consultation with parish and town councils on tourism strategy. Question put, That the amendment be made.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They also would encourage authorities to make evidence-based decisions across transport and planning, and also about the siting of heavy industry in an area, so we would like to hear the Minister’s views and assurances on these important issues.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As we have heard, poor air quality causes thousands of premature deaths every year and leaves many others with chronic illnesses, but these are preventable. We also know that pollution hits deprived communities and those near busy roads or industrial estates the hardest, yet without action, their voices will be ignored. By explicitly including air quality, we can create healthier communities, which will translate into fewer hospital visits and a better quality of life for everyone. By explicitly including air quality in the duty of combined county authorities and combined authorities to reduce health inequalities, amendments 253 and 254 would ensure that environmental factors are considered alongside social and economic ones.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would like to speak to amendments 253 and 254. These are simple amendments, but they can make a meaningful impact and save lives. We want to add nitrogen dioxide levels and general air quality as a factor that combined authorities and combined county authorities must consider in their work to reduce health inequalities. That would ensure that environmental health risks were treated as core determinants of health, not as an afterthought. We have heard a moving speech by the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion. We know that nitrogen dioxide pollution and poor general air quality are major contributors to respiratory and cardiovascular disease, and they disproportionately affect vulnerable communities. Including air quality as a health determinant would protect the most vulnerable.”
House of Commons21 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I declare that I used to work as a university lecturer before being elected. One of my constituents has already paid nearly £500 for their French visa, just to be able to undertake their year abroad as part of their degree. These costs will exclude students from disadvantaged backgrounds from vital international opportunities. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss the excessive visa costs faced by British students undertaking international placements?”
House of Commons20 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government say that they want to simplify the post-16 system, but the reality is that funding for further education remains chronically low. Will the Secretary of State look again at further education funding streams—for example, letting colleges reclaim VAT, as schools with sixth forms do, and extending the pupil premium to post-16 levels?”
House of Commons20 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Mayors should include these important councils as partners and consult them on a range of issues. We must create a regular, structured forum for dialogue between all the key players in local government and public services.”
House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For example, a town council in my constituency has been fostering important community projects. One of the initiatives is working with local businesses to make Alcester a neurodivergent-friendly town—a town for all. These councils are invaluable partners for combined authorities and mayors in the shires. Engaging with such bodies means that the combined authority and the mayor have direct insight into local issues. Put simply, the new clause would ensure that mayors regularly bring together local authorities and public services to co-ordinate on shared priorities and improve co-operation across the region. In rural areas such as my constituency of Stratford-on-Avon, parish and town councils, as we have already discussed, are the first tier of local government.”
House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. New clause 42 would make it a legal duty for mayors to hold regular meetings with local councils in their area; with service providers such as the NHS, police or transport bodies; and with town and parish councils. The power to convene would become a mandatory duty to convene. In particular, parish and town councils are included on the list of bodies that local mayors are required to convene meetings with. I used to be a parish councillor, so I know the important role that these rural councils play and the many services that they deliver. They also stepped up socially during the covid pandemic, including setting up food-share schemes and referring people to food banks if they lost their job. Town councils are also important.”
House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These councils need to have a voice at the table of decision makers. The hon. Member has also been a parish councillor, if I remember properly from our last debate, so he knows how important they are as stakeholders in their local communities. There is a way of making this convening duty less cumbersome on the mayor. To be fair, though, if someone stands to be the mayor of 1.2 million people, they have a responsibility towards all of their communities.”
House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗