Jack Abbott
MP for Ipswich · Labour (Co-op) · United Kingdom
“At Churchmans House, investigations revealed problems extending beyond external cladding—missing fire barriers and inadequate protection around structural steelwork. Leaseholders faced demands for eye-watering payments and the threat that they might have to leave their homes.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Some have considered bankruptcy just to get out; others have thought about handing back the keys and simply walking away. It is heartbreaking that anyone should reach that point through no fault of their own.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“People unknowingly slept in their beds every night—some for decades—without knowing how deeply unsafe their building was and how much of a threat to their lives it posed. No one ever never returned to Cardinal Lofts. The building is not fit for use.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Years of disruption were followed by the trauma of evacuation. My team and I worked with residents and the Government to secure funding for repairs in November 2024.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for the intent she has shown in the Bill that is before us. It is a privilege to be sat next to my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell)—I know that his mission in this place is to fight for justice for so many of his constituents who have been left alone for so long.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Building owners and others with repairing responsibilities must act. That means an end to indefinite delays as residents live with fear and financial uncertainty, trapped in unsafe buildings. Crucially, those who ignore their responsibilities may face substantial financial penalties, criminal prosecution and further enforcement action.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
377 held · 372 searchable for Jack Abbott. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 8.
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.
“It is true to say that the Conservative party has been right about one thing today: this is about choices, and I am incredibly proud to be making the one that we are making. The Conservative party did untold damage to our country, whether it was in hollowing out the criminal justice system, crumbling school buildings and hospitals, record NHS waiting lists or Liz Truss, but the most egregious part of its record was the harm it inflicted on our nation’s children. An entire generation was plunged into poverty. Poverty is not inevitable. The last Labour Government lifted 600,000 children out of poverty, but the Conservatives’ scorched-earth programme of austerity reversed that trend. Over their 14 years in power, the number of those in child poverty rose by 900,000, and 4.5 million children now live in poverty.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Tackling child poverty is in our Labour party’s DNA, and today I could not be prouder to be a Labour MP, because today this Labour Government are following in the footsteps of every Labour Government who came before them by lifting children out of poverty and transforming children’s lives.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am proud to support this Bill, because scrapping the two-child limit will have one of the greatest impacts on driving down child poverty. That one action will lift 450,000 children across our country out of poverty, including more than 3,000 in my town of Ipswich. Through this action, alongside an enormous package of other actions that our Government are taking, we will take over half a million children out of poverty—the largest reduction in a single Parliament since records began. The two-child limit is quite simply wrong. The number of brothers and sisters that a child has should never determine whether they go hungry or how well they do in school, and no child should be punished simply for existing.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Never mind huddling around a kitchen or dining room table trying to work, many families did not have a kitchen or dining room table. Indeed, many disadvantaged students in places like Ipswich were left without electronic devices, such as laptops, for many months. I had hoped that that would be a watershed moment in how we view the link between education and poverty. Instead, what I saw in opposition, as a county councillor in Suffolk, was more cuts to children’s centres and more than a halving of health visitors, yet we wonder why we have such problems now when young children enter education for the first time. It is an absolute disgrace that even now—even after the impact we have seen and all the evidence we have seen—the Conservatives cannot bring themselves to support measures that reduce child poverty.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The latest figures from the Education Policy Institute’s 2025 disadvantage report shows that, before kids even enter primary school, they are almost half a year behind their peers. By the time they finish key stage 3, as they choose their options, they are a staggering 21.7 months behind—that is nearly two full school years before they even begin studying for their GCSEs. The translation of this deprivation gap over every stage of a child’s education to their examination results is tangible and stark: disadvantaged students in Suffolk are 4.4 grades behind at the age of 16. I remember being a councillor during the pandemic, and I saw the enormous impact that this had on so many families, as many Members will remember.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They are more likely to be unemployed, earn less or be in low-skilled work than their peers, and they are more likely to experience homelessness and poor health. The shadow Secretary of State said that it is a trap for worklessness. No, this policy is a trap for worklessness, which is exactly what it has achieved over the previous few years. The consequences of poverty are severe and long-lasting, with children born into poverty ultimately having lower life expectancies. Life is shorter because of poverty, and poverty exists in its extreme because of this policy. For children growing up in a low-income household in my county of Suffolk, education disadvantage starts before they even begin school, and it compounds at every stage of their education.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was actually referring to the number of Opposition Members defending this policy here today. I do not think there is a single person in the country who will defend keeping hundreds of thousands more children in poverty. That is what we are getting rid of today, and that is what the hon. Gentleman’s party is defending. It is difficult to think of another policy in modern Britain that is so stark in its design and so devastating in its impact. This policy, for nearly a decade, has quietly and cruelly shaped and limited the life chances of children across this country. Poverty impacts children before they are even born, and its effects continue to be felt in myriad ways at every stage of life after that. Children growing up in poverty are more likely to experience mental and physical health issues and to do worse in school.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for his genuinely groundbreaking statement. It feels like a little while ago that he visited Ipswich to talk to local people about the building safety crisis and leasehold. He was a shadow Minister and I was a parliamentary candidate at the time. Now we are capping ground rents, making it easier to move to commonhold, and scrapping leasehold for all new builds. Is this a case of a Labour Government keeping their promises and making a real change for many people up and down the country?”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome this really significant additional support for pubs and music venues, on top of the £4.3 billion given to the wider sector at the Budget. I thank the Minister for all the conversations that he has had with me over the last few weeks, and I also thank Dan and Ness from the Greyhound, who have engaged so positively and constructively with me. It is fair to say that the business rates rebound inherited from the previous Government led to a mixed picture across Ipswich, but the Greyhound was particularly unfortunate. Could the Minister lay out his thinking behind the review of this process?”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will not solve every workforce challenge facing our NHS overnight, but it is a sensible and necessary reform that will go a significant way towards dealing with a deeply concerning and growing problem. If we care about the future of our NHS, we must care about the doctors in it and the doctors who will sustain it in the years to come. For the sake of the future health and viability of our NHS, I therefore urge all Members to support the Bill.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Prioritisation is not about exclusion; it is about safeguarding public investment and guaranteeing the long-term sustainability of our NHS workforce. It is about ensuring that the NHS remains an attractive place for young doctors to build a career, and that doctors in this country feel valued, which the previous Conservative Government failed miserably on. The Bill sends an important signal to young people in this country considering a career in medicine that we want them to build a long and fruitful career right here in the UK, in our NHS. It says to those currently picking their A-level options or deciding whether a medical degree is right for them that their hard work will be rewarded and we want them to succeed. The Bill is not a silver bullet.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If we are serious about building an NHS that is stable, resilient and fit for the future, we must also be serious about retention and recruitment, so we must ensure that those we train can stay, specialise and build careers here at home. What is the alternative? We train thousands of talented, hard-working young people at significant public expense, only for them to hit a wall, feel undervalued and leave either the NHS or medicine altogether. Every doctor we train in the UK who chooses to leave is an enormous loss for our health service and our country. It is such a waste of talent and money. We cannot afford to lose our next generation of doctors—the future of the NHS depends on it—yet that is where we are headed unless we do something now. It is urgent.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Bill does not diminish that contribution, and neither does it seek to close the door to international talent, but it does ask fair and reasonable questions. When we are spending almost £4 billion every year to train doctors in the UK, is it right that those doctors are increasingly unable to access the very training posts that they need to progress? Is it right that huge amounts of taxpayers’ money is spent training doctors, only for that investment to be lost when doctors are forced out of the system or choose to go overseas or into the private sector? If we are honest with ourselves, how progressive is it that we poach doctors from countries that desperately need them, while we have our own brilliant and willing recruits who cannot get jobs here?”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Maybe that was one of the Conservatives’ Brexit bonuses that they so eloquently talked about. This needs to be addressed, because otherwise we risk training doctors for a system that cannot support them. We are recruiting doctors from abroad at a time when there is already a substantial pool of eligible applicants who have trained in the UK or are already working in the NHS. That cannot be right. General practice is particularly reliant on international doctors, with half of first-year trainees having qualified outside the UK in 2024. Let me be clear, because this point matters enormously: international medical graduates have always played, and will continue to play, a vital role in our NHS. Many of our hospitals and services simply could not function without them.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They are forced by a system that has become so congested that getting a training post in something that they are passionate about and trained in is completely unattainable. Every time a doctor leaves the NHS, there is no guarantee that they will come back. The Secretary of State is incredibly committed to increasing medical school places, and we desperately need more doctors, but we have to be honest with ourselves: we cannot expand medical school places without addressing the growing crisis of competition for training places. It is within that context that the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill must be understood. There has been a direct correlation between the lifting of visa restrictions in 2020 under the Conservatives and the dramatic rise in competition for foundation and specialty training posts.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There are now more than 30,000 applicants, and over 12,000 UK-trained doctors and nearly 21,000 overseas doctors compete for fewer than 10,000 places. That is an enormous and unsustainable change. For some specialties, the competition is much fiercer. Aspiring neurosurgeons, for example, had to compete against 26 others to secure a place, and there were 737 applicants for just 10 cardiothoracic surgery training places. Those are not abstract statistics, and behind every number is a person who has spent years training, often at great personal and financial cost, only to find their opportunities for career progression drying up. Some take time out, some seek experience abroad and some leave medicine altogether. Many do not have a choice.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to speak in support of the Medical Training (Prioritisation) Bill. This Bill goes to the very heart of the future of our national health service—the doctors on whom our health service depends. It is about fairness, protecting taxpayers’ money, and building a home-grown NHS workforce that is sustainable in the long term. It is about making sure that those who have trained here have the opportunity to become the next generation of doctors working in our health service. Every year, it is becoming harder for graduates of UK medical schools to find a place on a foundation or specialty training programme. Since 2019, competition for postgraduate training places has increased by a staggering amount. In 2019, there were about 12,000 applicants for 9,000 places, but in 2025 the situation became even more stark.”
House of Commons27 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T8. This week has been an incredibly good one for jobs, investment and opportunity in Ipswich. Halo, one of the biggest tech firms in the UK, is moving its global HQ into the centre of town and creating 1,000 jobs, many of them for graduates. Sizewell C has unveiled plans for a new bus depot, which will create 400 jobs, some 75% of which will be from the local area. It has been a brilliant week, but there is much more to be done. Will the Secretary of State outline what extra steps he is taking to get young people back into training and employment?”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I warmly welcome the Home Secretary’s statement. I would like to highlight two Government initiatives—Clear, Hold, Build and Operation Machinize—with our hard-working police force that are making a real difference in Ipswich. I can see parallels with some of the proposals that the Home Secretary has laid out for local policing. Although we received a welcome multimillion pound uplift in police funding, we have been majorly short-changed over the years, as one of the worst funded local authorities for more than a decade. Can the Home Secretary assure me that these changes will result in extra resources that we desperately need to continue the good progress that we have made in Ipswich and Suffolk?”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For families posted in Suffolk, that will mean homes that meet modern standards, transparent complaints processes and a system that recognises that housing is not a perk but an operational necessity.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“and gallant friend the Armed Forces Minister is a highly decorated individual, but should he so wish, I am sure he would have the title of chief barista. Housing is also critical. The establishment of the Defence Housing Service through the Bill is long overdue. For decades, defence housing has suffered from under-investment, fragmented responsibility and a “fix on fail” culture that has eroded trust among service families. Last year’s defence housing strategy represents the biggest change in military housing in half a century. The Bill gives that strategy institutional form. The new Defence Housing Service will be responsible for improving quality, increasing availability, regenerating defence land and, crucially, placing a service ethos at the centre of housing provision.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That recognition reflects not only the scale of their impact, but the depth of their understanding that mental health is not a niche issue but a continuum, and that early community-based support saves lives. During Armed Forces Week, I was proud to attend Combat2Coffee’s “Bigger Breakfast” in Ipswich, alongside the Armed Forces Minister and the former Ipswich Town and England captain, Terry Butcher. Terry has long been a passionate advocate for veterans’ wellbeing, informed by his own family’s experience, and his support for this work underlines why strong, compassionate mental health provision for veterans truly matters. Hundreds of serving personnel, veterans and cadets came together not for speeches or ceremonies, but to talk, connect and support one another. My hon.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Combat2Coffee exists to improve the mental health and wellbeing of the armed forces community and their families. It does so through something deceptively simple: connection. Through coffee mornings, outreach, volunteering and employment pathways, it rebuilds the sense of belonging that many veterans lose when they leave uniform. In 2025 alone, Combat2Coffee supported more than 200 veterans through outreach activities, with more than 2,000 people attending armed forces community coffee mornings. Earlier this year, the organisation’s volunteers were awarded the King’s award for voluntary service, which is the highest honour a voluntary group can receive.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For far too long, that promise has been honoured inconsistently: veterans have struggled to access healthcare, families have faced disruption in their education, and housing standards have far too often fallen short of what is acceptable. By strengthening this legal duty, the Bill moves the covenant from an aspiration to accountability, it embeds fairness in decision making, and it ensures that public bodies right across our country take responsibility for delivering it. That legal framework is vital, but legislation alone is not enough. Covenant delivery also depends on strong community institutions. In Ipswich, one such institution is Combat2Coffee, a community interest company, founded by ex-soldier Nigel Seaman, that has become a national model of veteran-led support.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He was just 19 years old. His mother, Lorraine, was right when she said that President Trump’s comments were an insult to his legacy and that of his colleagues. Turning to the armed forces covenant, the Bill fulfils a clear manifesto commitment by fully enshrining the covenant in law. It extends the covenant’s legal duty beyond local authorities and public bodies to include central Government Departments and the devolved Administrations, and it broadens the range of policy areas to which due regard must be given. This matters deeply. The covenant is a promise from the nation that those who serve or have served and their families will be treated with fairness and respect, and will face no disadvantage because of their service.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“From Bawdsey on our coast, where the world’s first operational radar station became a decisive force in the battle of Britain, to the air bases that have hosted generations of service personnel, our county has quietly but decisively shaped Britain’s security and, indeed, our history. The innovations developed in Suffolk saved lives, shortened the war and changed the course of our history. That legacy reminds us of the fundamental truth that our national security is rooted in people, places and communities, and this Bill recognises that by placing people, service personnel and their families at its heart. At this point, I would like to reflect on President Trump’s comments last week. Ipswich’s Aaron McClure, of 1st Battalion, the Royal Anglian Regiment, died alongside two colleagues on active service in Afghanistan.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a privilege to speak in this debate on the Armed Forces Bill. Every five years, Parliament is asked to renew its consent for the maintenance of our armed forces in peacetime. That constitutional requirement, dating back to the Bill of Rights in 1688, is more than a procedural necessity; it is about Parliament renewing the contract between the nation and those who serve it. This Bill reflects the changing nature of warfare, the evolving needs of our service personnel and their families, and our duty—collective and enduring—to ensure that those who defend our country are supported not only in uniform, but throughout their lives. As the Member of Parliament for Ipswich, I represent a town and a county deeply entwined with the story of our national defence. Suffolk’s contribution to the armed forces is profound and long-standing.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“From the radar pioneers at Bawdsey to the volunteers roasting coffee for Combat2Coffee in Ipswich and across Suffolk, our local contribution to the armed forces reminds us that defence is not simply confined to bases or battlefields; it lives in innovation, in service and in community. For those reasons, on behalf of the many serving personnel, veterans and families in Ipswich and right across Suffolk, I am proud to support the Bill.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“By increasing the maximum age of recall, enabling seamless transfers between regular and reserve forces, and granting the Secretary of State power to authorise recall for warlike operations, the Bill strengthens our ability to respond to emerging threats while respecting the voluntary nature of reserve service through appropriate opt-outs. The provisions on uncrewed devices are similarly necessary. The threat posed by hostile drone activity around defence sites is real and growing, so granting defence personnel the power to use approved equipment to detect, prevent and defeat drone-related offences is not an expansion of power for its own sake, but a proportionate response to a changing and growing threat environment.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is completely right. What I was just about to say encapsulates what my hon. Friend says: stability at home underpins readiness, retention and morale. Readiness itself is another core theme of the Bill. In an increasingly uncertain world, with evolving threats, rapid technological change and heightened global instability, the measures relating to reserve forces reflect the reality of modern defence—that experience matters, that flexibility is essential, and that the boundary between regular and reserve service must be more permeable.”
House of Commons26 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Conservative party’s new-found aversion to postponing elections is quite remarkable, not least because, as Local Government Minister, the Leader of the Opposition postponed elections in Cumbria, while the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), also made the decision, as Local Government Minister, to postpone all-out district elections before reorganisation in Buckinghamshire in 2019. And Robert Jenrick—remember him? I was going to say he was the latest recruit to Reform—”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The issue is that when people were asked whether they would like a mayor, every city—bar one—said no, but only a few years later, they got one anyway. They did not seek to repeat that exercise. The referendums the Conservatives held were, in truth, little more than lip service. I think that most people here will think that mayoralties in the main—with honourable exceptions—have been a successful endeavour: they give power and autonomy to the places that have often been forgotten in the past. Of course, in recent years many places underwent local government reorganisation with no referendum at all. It is worth mentioning an elephant in the room when it comes to the postponement of elections by a year in places such as Suffolk, which I represent, until all-out elections in 2027 and mayoralty elections in 2028.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms McVey. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford) for securing this debate. It is always right that the House has the opportunity to discuss how local government works, how it can work better and how we ensure that it delivers for the people we represent. Although I do not believe that referendums are necessarily desirable in the context of the current local government reorganisations, for reasons I will come to shortly, I do believe that there is real value in debating these issues openly and transparently. Local government reorganisation is complex, consequential and long lasting, so it deserves serious consideration. It is true that the Conservative-led coalition Government conducted a round of referendums in 2012 across a huge swathe of our major cities.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Newark, who, up until last week, was agitating to be the next one, so I will take with a pinch of salt the Conservatives’ new-found desire for referendums or postponements—not least because one particular referendum was arguably the start of a psychodrama that continues to envelop them nearly a decade later. We did have a referendum in 2024: we had a general election. Local government reorganisation was a clear and explicit part of our Government’s manifesto. I know that, under the Conservative party, delivering on manifesto commitments fell out of fashion—they were little more than vibes, at best, by the end. But we were elected on a mandate of change, and that included rebuilding and reforming local government as the foundation for meaningful devolution.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Gentleman for that correction from a sedentary position. The right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick), while Secretary of State for Local Government, when talking about postponements in places such as Cumbria, North Yorkshire and Somerset, said that elections in certain circumstances “risk confusing voters and would be hard to justify where members could be elected to serve shortened terms.” —[ Official Report , 22 February 2021; Vol. 689, c. 24WS.] It is an interesting volte-face for both Reform and the Conservative party. That is the previous Conservative leader, the current Conservative leader, and the right hon.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are sitting here with a parliamentary party of more than 400 MPs. That is an overwhelming mandate under the electoral system that we have been operating under for centuries. The Conservative party can probably reflect on that, if we are talking about numbers.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Our Government are embarking on the biggest transformation of local government in a generation. This is not change for change’s sake, but because the status quo has been failing far too many communities for far too long.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I have already laid out, and as the hon. Gentleman will know from when he was a member of the Conservative party, postponing elections where a local government was undergoing reorganisation happened a number of times. I was not here, so I cannot remember whether he spoke out against his Government at the time for doing so. A number of local government Ministers decided to postpone those elections, and I presume that he fully endorsed those postponements at the time—although I am happy for him to correct the record on that point. The Government were elected on a mandate of change, and that included rebuilding and reforming local government as the foundation for meaningful devolution. The British people endorsed that programme at the ballot box, and it is our responsibility to deliver it.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Our county council has put forward an option for a single unitary authority, and all the district and borough councils have put forward an option for three unitary authorities, so there has been significant consultation at local level. Parties of all stripes, although they may disagree on which outcome they would like to see, have all engaged constructively in this process on the whole. We are looking to transfer power out of Westminster and into communities, and to give local leaders the tools to drive growth, create jobs and improve living standards. This is about rebalancing decades-old divides and, as I said, we have not seen this sort of reorganisation in my part of the world for more than 50 years.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I said, a do-nothing approach is not a neutral option, but a decision not to change how local government is structured and empowered. It would simply condemn communities such as mine to more of the same. That is why the Government are choosing to devolve and not dictate through the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill. We are rebuilding local government so that it has the strength, scale and capability to deliver— [ Interruption. ] We hear chortling on the Conservative Benches, but the Conservative Suffolk county council requested this process and has also consulted with the public. People were able to put their views forward.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Nowhere is that failure clearer than in my home county of Suffolk. In a past life I was a county councillor, and I do not believe that the current status quo is working—I do not think many people living locally do, either. Although I accept that that is due to severe hollowing-out of funding over 15 years, a do-nothing approach is clearly not an option for us either. Those sorts of issues—pot holes left unrepaired, special educational needs provision in crisis, children and families passed from pillar to post and adult social care under unbearable strain—are not abstract problems. They affect people’s daily lives, their dignity and their trust in local democracy. The truth is that the current system is not working, and we needed to do something radical.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am afraid the hon. Gentleman is slightly mistaken. In my own patch in Suffolk, for instance, the devolution proposed under the previous Government meant handing out a few more powers for a tiny bit of extra money. We are proposing unitarisation of places such as Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk, plus a mayoral candidate for the elections in 2028. What we are seeing is far more radical and significant; in fact, for my part of the world, it is the most significant change in local government for more than 50 years, so it is a big step change from what the previous Conservative Government proposed. For decades, power has been hoarded in Westminster and Whitehall while local councils were stripped of capacity, fragmented in structure and left struggling to meet rising demands after having their funding hollowed out.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In my opinion, the proposal for three unitary councils put forward by all the district borough councils of Ipswich, Mid Suffolk, Babergh, East Suffolk and West Suffolk clearly shows that this is not a partisan project, but a set of proposals put forward by politicians of all stripes. It is a collaborative effort across political parties, grounding in evidence and focused on outcomes. I believe it would be simpler for residents: there would be a single point of contact, as mentioned earlier, and more accountability, ending the confusion over who is responsible for what. Anyone who has knocked on doors will have heard residents say, “I don’t care who it is—I just want the council to fix it.” That is a sentiment that is shared quite widely.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Absolutely. I agree wholeheartedly that unitarisation or local government reorganisation alone is not a magic bullet. The things the hon. Member describes are due to severe underfunding. Pothole and road maintenance funding fell to around £17 million a year, down from £20 million, although it crept up again. We are putting much more money into that. We saw bus services shredded in the previous 14 years, but we now have the biggest upgrade to bus services since 1998. Some of those things will help; I believe that unitarisation will help to deliver better public services, and provide more of a single point of accountability for voters, but change also comes down to leadership, culture and investment. In Suffolk there is a credible, detailed and ambitious alternative to the status quo.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It certainly cannot be about the preservation of power, status or the status quo. It must be about improving services, strengthening accountability and restoring trust. The Government have set the direction. We were elected with a mandate for change and we are delivering on that. Devolution is fundamentally about people, ensuring that communities such as Ipswich and Suffolk have the resources, powers and trust to determine their own futures. That is why referendums are not needed to delay or derail this progress. What we need is leadership, honesty and the courage to build a system that finally works for the people it serves.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Nearly £50,000 of taxpayers’ money has reportedly been spent on social media advertising for its own single campaign, with further tens of thousands earmarked for so-called “Alice in Wonderland” leaflets, which seek to ridicule all alternative proposals. That is not engagement; it is propaganda, and I urge the Minister and the Department to look at it carefully. At a time when potholes are going unfilled and children with special educational needs are being failed by that same county council, voters and residents in my area are entitled to ask why public money is being spent on spin, rather than services. The council’s behaviour betrays a lack of confidence in its own case and a disregard for local people. Local government reorganisation must be about the future. It is about not just tomorrow, but the next 30, 40 or 50 years.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Funnily enough, that leads me directly on to my next point: crucially, the three unitary councils proposal strikes the right balance: it is big enough to deliver but local enough to care. A greater Ipswich council, alongside strong East and West Suffolk authorities, would allow each area to play to its natural economic strengths, make faster decisions and champion its communities with strong local voices. Although this has been a constructive debate in my part of the world, the conduct of the county council has at times been deeply disappointing. Rather than making a positive case for its own proposal, it has repeatedly resorted to misleading and aggressive tactics.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman makes a valid point; there is a balancing act to be achieved, ensuring that we have the size and scale of councils to deliver public services efficiently, while also rooting them in their local communities. That is why I am backing a proposal for three unitary councils over the proposal from the Conservatives at Suffolk county council for a single unitary council. As part of the local government reorganisation, places such as Ipswich, which I hope will turn into a greater Ipswich authority, would still need to retain a town council, and the parish council element would be really strong. I used to be a parish councillor, so I recognise the value and importance of those communities and having that very local representation as part of this.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What the right hon. Gentleman describes is already happening. Suffolk county council represents the entire county. The argument he is making is already playing out at the moment. We are having these conversations. This has already happened. We have rural councils making decisions about urban issues and vice versa. I do not think it is either/or.”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I asked earlier, when the hon. Member did not correct me, did he have an issue when his former leader—either his current former leader or the one before—delayed elections as Local Government Minister? Considering his recent conversion, did he also speak out when the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick) postponed elections when he was Secretary of State for Local Government? Does he liken those individuals to dictators as well?”
House of Commons21 January 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗