Oliver Ryan
MP for Burnley · Labour (Co-op) · United Kingdom
“Unitary authorities have big benefits, but I am angry about the proposals. According to our own statistics, the new East Lancs authority—with Blackburn, and without the Ribble Valley—will create the most deprived unitary authority in the country, with an awful lot of debt already on its books.”
“I thank the Minister for her listening ear throughout this process. I know that she will make a bigger statement on Thursday, but while she is giving these matters consideration, may I make a last-ditch attempt to convince her to keep Burnley and Blackburn very separate?”
“Summer jobs are really important, as are summer schools. Will the Minister join me in welcoming students from the Burnley summer school, who join us in the Gallery today, and will he perhaps include in his speech the fact that over the Tories’ time in power from 2010 to 2024, 7,500 pubs closed across Britain—many of them in Burnley, Padih…”
“The hon. Gentleman talks about the types of assessment and the way in which the assessment is done, and he is right to talk about capacity. Just before the election, the previous Government signed new contracts that said 80% of new assessments would be done virtually.”
“As the Minister is reading out his list of achievements, may I add to it? Does he think it is a good thing that we have put nearly £1 billion into support for the sick and disabled? That will partly come from savings from this and other measures, which we hope will save £1.9 billion by the end of the Parliament.”
“The reassessment changes that we are introducing through this statutory instrument and other measures will save something like £2 billion by the end of the Parliament. I am sure we all agree that would be welcome, given the increasing size of the welfare bill. Why is the hon.”
The complete record
Every one of 228 lines we hold for Oliver Ryan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“Unitary authorities have big benefits, but I am angry about the proposals. According to our own statistics, the new East Lancs authority—with Blackburn, and without the Ribble Valley—will create the most deprived unitary authority in the country, with an awful lot of debt already on its books. We are going to need a lot of cash to make it work, and I cannot support it. Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield will not stand for being part of Greater Blackburn. The headquarters of the new authority must not be in Blackburn, and the accountable officer must not be a Blackburner. Our people, bondholders, culture, businesses and communities cannot be steamrolled and forgotten in this way, much though I like the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr Hussain). Does the Secretary of State agree?”
“I thank the Minister for her listening ear throughout this process. I know that she will make a bigger statement on Thursday, but while she is giving these matters consideration, may I make a last-ditch attempt to convince her to keep Burnley and Blackburn very separate? Will she prioritise devolution in Lancashire, so that we can have a mayor and enjoy the things that cities enjoy, such as cheaper buses and business investment?”
“Summer jobs are really important, as are summer schools. Will the Minister join me in welcoming students from the Burnley summer school, who join us in the Gallery today, and will he perhaps include in his speech the fact that over the Tories’ time in power from 2010 to 2024, 7,500 pubs closed across Britain—many of them in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield—meaning that those jobs just did not exist for people?”
“The reassessment changes that we are introducing through this statutory instrument and other measures will save something like £2 billion by the end of the Parliament. I am sure we all agree that would be welcome, given the increasing size of the welfare bill. Why is the hon. Member opposing that saving, and how would she fill the gap instead?”
“The hon. Gentleman talks about the types of assessment and the way in which the assessment is done, and he is right to talk about capacity. Just before the election, the previous Government signed new contracts that said 80% of new assessments would be done virtually. The changes to reassessment in these regulations will save money and move more of those assessments from being virtual to face to face, which will better serve people on PIP. Does the hon. Gentleman not support the introduction of more face-to-face assessments?”
“As the Minister is reading out his list of achievements, may I add to it? Does he think it is a good thing that we have put nearly £1 billion into support for the sick and disabled? That will partly come from savings from this and other measures, which we hope will save £1.9 billion by the end of the Parliament. As he says, the act of government is about making these difficult decisions and trade-offs in order to provide people with more support in the long run.”
“It is to get our NHS working again and to give people the hope of decent jobs, pay and financial security again. This work is not done with slogans or easy answers, but built considerately, constantly and carefully, after being so quickly dismantled over the years.”
“They ask whether their kids will have to move away to get a decent job, whether their NHS will get back to working properly and why the old, derelict industrial sites have been left sitting empty for years, blighting our communities. They ask me whether they should have hope for the future; they ask whether they should be able only to look back with fondness, instead of forward with confidence. Now they are being sold a story of grievance, anger and easy answers by the poisonous bubble-gum politics of parties such as Reform. That is why today’s debate matters. To get Britain working is to get Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield working, too. It is to get our economy working for places like ours again after 14 years of austerity and decline.”
“It is a great pleasure to welcome this King’s Speech after the bumper legislative year we have just had. Acts such as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 and the Employment Rights Act 2025 are already making a difference to my constituents, and there are more than 5,000 children in my area with better supported parents because of the lifting of the two-child benefit cap. When I talk to my constituents in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield about their priorities, they talk to me about jobs and wages; about bills and rents; about our towns; about why, for a long time, Britain has not felt like it works for them; about why young people feel written off; and about how we grow and feel the heat of growth in the chilly hills of east Lancashire.”
“Although paying bar or shop staff might be more expensive for a business this year, the cumulative effect of an increased minimum wage across the constituency strengthens both consumer and retail spending, building a stronger economy in the medium term.”
“Businesses need reliable connections to Manchester and across the north to expand and create jobs locally. Northern Powerhouse Rail and stronger rail connectivity are not luxuries for constituencies such as mine; they are economic necessities. I will always be here asking for more, particularly on buses and rail connections to Manchester, Leeds and Preston. While I am on the topic of small businesses, let me say something about minimum wage increases, which seem to spur a bit of political conversation. In towns like Burnley, we either accept that we are in a race to the bottom and that only low wages will allow businesses to grow—a very Victorian take—or we follow the facts and figures and accept that in such places, where earnings are spent locally, a rising tide lifts all boats.”
“For a small business on a tight margin in Burnley town centre, that is not a minor detail; it is the difference between offering a young person a future and turning them away. Not every young person wants to go to university and not every young person should feel like they have somehow failed if they choose a different path. There should be real dignity and real ambition attached to practical skills, construction and practical trades in technical work. Burnley has a proud industrial history. We have skilled people and businesses with genuine potential; what we have lacked for too long are the investment and infrastructure to match that potential. Under this Government, that investment is finally coming, and Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield are ready for it. Infrastructure matters. Transport links across east Lancashire still hold us back.”
“Businesses that take on a young person who has been on universal credit for more than six months will get a £3,000 youth jobs grant. For the small and medium-sized manufacturers, engineering firms, construction companies and family businesses that make up most of Burnley’s economy, that kind of support genuinely means the difference between making a hire and not being able to afford to do so. I care deeply about apprenticeships. We are backing 50,000 new starts, after apprenticeships collapsed under the last Government, as the Secretary of State said earlier. We are introducing a £2,000 grant for small businesses that take on an apprentice. That rises to £5,000 if the apprentice has been out of work for six months.”
“Our youth guarantee is part of the answer, but I hope that the Secretary of State is looking to go further and faster in supporting young people. He is welcome to come to Burnley any time he likes so that I can show him what we can do for young people in our towns if we give them just a little support. At this point, I want to give a shout-out to Burnley jobcentre and all the staff there, with whom I was proud to host a jobs fair in Padiham earlier this year. I hope to host another in Burnley later this year. The youth guarantee that the Secretary of State has set out is excellent: a work placement for young people aged 18 to 24 who have been seeking work for 18 months, with employment costs covered by Government. That is not a pilot scheme but an actual placement with real employment behind it.”
“They are still looking for work, but know in their heart that they do not have the confidence or the knowledge to get into the jobs market, and feel that they missed their window to do so. That is how people get left behind, how their children get left behind. It damages the social fabric of our country. It is a disgrace that unemployment numbers shot up so high under the previous Government, because it was young people in towns like mine who suffered. Generationally, it is towns like mine that have always suffered—people have no hand up and no help; they are signed off, written off and politically demonised by the people who built the system that is trapping them there. I do not take a soft approach to welfare—of course, if someone can work, they absolutely should—but what has happened is not right.”
“I have talked before in this Chamber about the great social ill of generational worklessness and how communities like mine, scarred from the closures of the mills and the mines, have never been given the chance nor the foundational support to properly recover. Some young people have no parent who can tell them how to do a CV or an interview, so when they leave school they feel abandoned in a scary and increasingly expensive world where there are no opportunities for them. In the short term, a young person may turn to the benefit system, because their mate has. Next thing they know, they are in debt. Then they might have a family and get responsibilities—and change looks scary.”
“I am glad to see that this Government are committed to getting the balance right. The issues facing young people are one of the sharpest challenges in towns like mine. In 2024, we inherited nothing short of a national disgrace: nearly a million young people—under-25s—were not in employment, education or training, and we had just had the worst Parliament on record for falling living standards. The number of NEET young people went up by a quarter of a million in the final years before the 2024 election, and youth unemployment was at a record high. Once someone does not get their first leg up, the drift sets in and it becomes harder and harder to reverse. The human cost of that—the lost confidence, lost years and lost social impact—is real and lasting, especially in towns like mine.”
“They are people with expertise in their own lives, people with needs and ambitions. The principle of “nothing about us without us” has to run through the design and implementation of this policy, and I will be considering this through my work as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for multiple sclerosis. Genuine consultation and involvement backed up with an extra £3.5 billion to support disabled people and those with long-term health conditions into employment represents serious money and a serious commitment. Good welfare policy has to do two things. It has to protect people who cannot work and who need support—the safety net—and it has to genuinely support people who can work back into employment and independence. It must not label them, park them or give up on them, but give them a hand up to get back on the horse.”
“That was not a welfare system; it was a trap and a cycle of insecurity, worklessness and despair that the Tories perpetuated, while at the same time demonising these people. They talked tough while their system was doing the exact opposite. I welcome what this Government are doing to change that. The right to try is exactly the right approach: it gives disabled people the legal right to try work without the immediate fear of losing their benefits if things do not go perfectly. That might sound straightforward, but for constituents I have spoken to in Burnley—people who want to test for themselves part-time work and gradual return in order to rebuild their confidence—it could be transformative. The fear was real. Disabled people are not a problem to be solved or written off.”
“Under the Tories, the benefits bill ballooned by billions. They have no credibility on welfare reform. They talk tough, but it is this Government who are fixing the mess. The previous Government built a system that classified 2.8 million people as unfit for work and left them there. They built universal credit in a way that actively penalised people for trying—where taking on a few extra shifts could leave someone worse off than before. They left disabled people and people with long-term health conditions in an impossible position, wanting to work and contribute, but terrified that if they tried to do so and it did not work out, they would lose the support that kept them afloat.”
“In my constituency, wages are up, employment is up, public and private investment is up and funding for our schools, colleges and local councils is up, while our local NHS waiting lists are down and access to care is going up. As a point of fact, one in seven people were on NHS waiting lists when we took office in 2024, including in my constituency. That is not Britain working. I am glad to say that the lists are coming down at a historically fast pace. For too long, over the 14 years of the Tories, through austerity and cuts, too many constituents felt written off. Indeed, the numbers support that analysis. A big part of that came from a welfare system that the Tories built, which I believe was broken by design, with people signed off and written off, and young people and graduates left on the scrapheap.”
“I absolutely agree. My hon. Friend is an ardent campaigner for community spaces like the one he mentions, and I am sure he is taking that fight to his local council on behalf of his residents and the users of that facility. I am completely onside with him. I am not sure how much work my endorsement does, but I wish him all the best in his campaign. Getting Britain working has to mean something real in places such as Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield; it has to mean decent work, proper wages, real skills and investment in our towns to give a decent future and hope to our kids and grandkids. I am proud to say that this Labour Government are delivering on all those metrics, not in an overnight big bang, but through considered and substantial progress.”
“Regeneration is not just about buildings; it is about whether people believe their town is moving forward. It is about whether a young person growing up in Burnley can look around and see the future there for themselves—right there, close to home, without having to pack up and leave to find it. For too long, people have felt like leaving is the only option. This Government’s job is to change that. This King’s Speech points in that direction with real intent and real investment behind it. After years of towns like mine feeling overlooked, I am proud to stand here trying to change that, because if we get this right, the people I represent will feel it, and they deserve to.”
“What people in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield want is not unrealistic. They want decent jobs and opportunities for young people; they want a welfare system that opens doors, rather than closes them; they want wages that stretch far enough to actually build something; and they want investment in the towns that have waited long enough to feel confident about the future again. I think of all that derelict land in Burnley that I started this speech by mentioning—the old sites behind fencing and weeds that have been sat there for the best part of 20 years while people walk past and wonder if anybody in power has noticed. Those sites would be a good place to get Burnley working, to get Britain working, and I look forward to progressing my campaign with the Minister on these issues.”
“I am yet to meet a large exporting business in Burnley, Padiham or Brierfield that has been better off since Brexit. In fact, they report to me that they are losing business to European competitors every week. None of that can be separated from what people in Burnley are dealing with financially right now: energy bills, food bills, fuel costs and rent. That comes up in almost every conversation I have. People want to work— they do work—but they want that work to pay enough to build a life. Cutting energy bills by up to 25% for manufacturers, driving forward on clean, home-grown energy, and investing in warmer homes and lower bills are not abstract policy objectives; they make the difference between a family building something and a family just about holding it together.”
“As I say, the increase has its limits and should not be a shock to business, but a downward drive on wages in towns like Burnley hits the whole economy, even if businesses initially want it. That is why real wages have grown more in the past 18 months of this Government than in the last 10 years of the Tory Government. Our economy is stronger because of the decisions we have made and defended. I hear regularly from local businesses about the practical difficulties of trading with European markets since Britain lost unfettered access to those markets. They want fewer delays, lower costs and less uncertainty. They want to get on with it. The European partnership Bill needs to deliver practical answers for businesses like theirs.”
“I am coming on to say, in fact, that of course the increase has its limits and should not be a shock to business. I have heard, if not similar stories, then certainly experiences in the same vein. We had the debate on the national insurance increase in this place, but a good chunk of that increase, if not all of it, was allocated to NHS spend, which had a historic record increase under this Government, with £28 billion or £29 billion committed in the last financial year. A good chunk of that came from NI on employers. When we are looking at strengthening the national health service, asking employers to make a slightly bigger contribution to their employees’ healthcare is probably preferable to increasing the general tax take, which this Government pledged not to do in the election and have not done since.”
“Q12. Thank you, Mr Speaker—and a happy St George’s day for tomorrow too. In Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield, we have a large number of ex-industrial, derelict land sites crying out for regeneration and redevelopment. They are blighting communities and many are a fire risk. Our area of Britain needs housing—social, affordable, family, aspirational. We have the sites if the Prime Minister has the will, so will he back my campaign for a new regeneration house building programme for Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield, tackling these derelict sites to get us building, growing, and housing local people?”
“T4. I am worried that, despite this Government’s historic recognition of a Palestinian state, there will never be one if the west bank is annexed further, which Netanyahu knows. Some 56 new illegal west bank settlements were approved by Israel in 2025, and since the Iran war began, 78 violent attacks have occurred in more than 148 west bank Palestinian settlements; people are being killed, thousands are being displaced and families and children are being attacked and threatened. What more can the UK do to pressure, sanction and stop this annexation and violence?”
“Will the Minister give a commitment to campaigners such as the women in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield who have approached me that because of this strategy, they will now be heard?”
“I so welcome this strategy. I am quite ashamed to say that before being elected to this place, I did not know enough about women’s health issues, and in particular the issues with pelvic and vaginal mesh—the wait for treatment and the struggle to be heard—and endometriosis; people with that condition face a wait for diagnosis and a struggle for recognition. Since I was elected, I have been contacted by tens of women across Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield, who are fighting the fight for recognition of these topics on behalf of women across the country. It is because of that that I am educated enough to stand here today. Those women feel ignored and abandoned by a health service that does not care enough about women’s health issues.”
“Q14. Burnley Manchester Road station is a key driver of growth. It is Burnley’s link to Manchester and Leeds and, more importantly for them, it is their link to Burnley. There were more than half a million journeys from the station last year, and yet it is inaccessible. Despite big, empty promises from the last Tory Government, we are no closer to fixing that. A promise of funding was made, but it never came. Will the Prime Minister help me to get this delivered and back my campaign to make Burnley Manchester Road an accessible, modern station, fit for Burnley’s ambitions?”
“I am glad to hear that the employer NI exemption for staff under the age of 21 is staying in place. The new £3,000 hiring bonus for businesses taking on young people will make a real difference. How will the Secretary of State ensure that it is taken up by businesses and young people in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield? Does he agree that the 40% drop in youth apprenticeships that we saw under the 14 years of the Tories left 1 million young people as NEETs and many without the opportunities and life expectations that they deserved?”
“The Secretary of State is right to say that, because of our reliance on oil and gas, we are a price taker, not a price maker. We are exposed, and families in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield are worried. Will he continue to strengthen our home-grown sovereign energy supplies and production to keep driving down energy bills? Given the potential for future wholesale price volatility, will he look at getting suppliers in the room again to reduce standing charges, which people see as unfair, regressive and unrelated to their energy use?”
“T7. The brilliant Burnley college has bid to become one of the UK’s four new advanced manufacturing technical excellence colleges. Its bid is the only one from Lancashire. It is backed by the North West Aerospace Alliance and the Northern Automotive Alliance, our big local world-class manufacturing employers, neighbouring colleges across the north-west and Yorkshire and—of course—me. Will the Secretary of State do her best to look fondly on the bid, and will she back Burnley’s technical excellence?”
“Those were exactly the words of my constituent Arshad Khan when he came to see me at my constituency surgery this weekend; he made that point about indentured servitude and visa licences, and how these employers operate. I just want to add to the hon. Gentleman’s argument, because this is a serious point. People are living with the power of their employer over their head. Sometimes, they are held on poor rates of pay and poor shift patterns, and they cannot challenge it because their employer has all the power in the relationship.”
“I have a great deal of respect for the hon. Gentleman, and I know he is trying his best, but I am surprised at the tone that he is taking and at his language around the winter fuel allowance. He can correct me if I am wrong, but the 2017 Conservative manifesto outlined stripping this benefit completely—and that was from the Government in which he served as a special adviser to the Deputy Prime Minister. Why does he not tell us what he really thinks?”
“Could the shadow Minister reflect on the fact that this clause has more amendments tabled to it than any we have dealt with so far? It deals with non-resident non-dom individuals who have previously tried to get away with paying certain levels of tax in this country. I know that he will take us through some of the details of that, but I would like to go back to the macro of his party position. If he talks about ordinary people, surely he should agree with the benefits of these changes. They would not only simplify the system but bring in much-needed tax revenue from those previously non-dom individuals who did a good deed for so long under the previous Conservative Government.”
“It is clear from the evidence pack that the Chartered Institute of Taxation, the Association of Taxation Technicians and other taxation professionals have quite a lot of comments to make. If submissions on the clause were opened to my constituents, I am sure that there would be mass evidence from the public saying how much of a good thing it is. Does the Minister have any comments on that?”
“As ever, Sir Roger, it is a pleasure to make a short contribution while you are in the Chair. On clause 20, I will not echo the point that has just been made, but the Minister will have seen the written evidence submitted by the Association of Taxation Technicians, which discussed potentially widening the new initiative of including flu vaccinations in expenditure deductible from employment income, so that it also includes covid vaccinations. Has the Minister given that any thought? On clause 22, it is a pleasure to see the Employment Rights Act being enacted and to address shifts being missed by people on zero-hours contracts, such as those in my constituency. It probably takes us into a wider debate that the Opposition have raised about having oral evidence sessions.”
“The Minister makes a very good point about the expansion of exemptions and the fact that the Government are minded to look at this in future Budgets. I welcome clause 29, which talks about the leasing of plants and machinery and affects many businesses in my constituency. I think it will have a genuine impact and, much as the Opposition might say, “This is a very good thing,” and welcome it, I hope they will vote with us today. However, the question has to be asked why, after 14 years in government, they did not bring this in. For various businesses in my constituency that lease large equipment, this would have made a massive difference. Unfortunately, it is being brought in by us later in the day because it was not done by the Conservatives.”
“Burnley’s local bus operator Transdev has increased the price of an under-19s bus ticket from £13 a week to £20 a week, which is a huge increase for kids, students and families. It has now been lowered to £18 a week, thanks to our campaign, but that is not enough. More than 1,000 people have backed my campaign to bring down fares and reintroduce a local Burnley bus ticket. Will the Leader of the House allow a debate in Government time on the price of bus tickets in Burnley, and will he back my campaign?”
“Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth said, but people spending years of life in uncertainty and distress—years when people put their lives and careers on hold, delaying their education and questioning whether they will even survive long enough to be seen. Where care is delayed, it is denied, and 48,000 trans people are currently on waiting lists. Many are pushed towards unregulated overseas routes, not because they want to bypass safeguards but because the alternative feels unbearable. Families make decisions out of love and desperation, often fearing self-harm or suicide if they are left without support. That is not a failure of those families; it is a failure of an outdated system, which apparently is unfortunately questioning its duty to these individuals.”
“I am sure that all Members present would agree that healthcare is not a privilege to be earned; it is a right grounded in dignity, compassion and evidence-based care. It is an inalienable right of every citizen of this country. To get to the nub of this debate, that means transgender people too, such as constituents who have come to see me in my surgeries. They are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for the same thing as any of us would expect: timely, safe and respectful healthcare, and dignity. I am sorry to say, however, that healthcare falls short for them. Thousands of transgender people are waiting years for first NHS appointments. Those are not just statistics, as my hon.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) for securing this important debate. She is the champion we all deserve, and she almost brought me to tears with her passion in opening the debate. I commend her work and her advocacy. She is a modern-day LGBT icon, and I feel privileged to serve with her. In a world that feels increasingly divided, debates like this matter because they force us to confront and test a simple but critical principle: the great, objective universality of our healthcare system—who gets access to healthcare, and who is treated? My gut, my politics and my experience as an LGBT person say everyone.”
“I am not transgender, but I believe in fairness and the principle of good, timely, effective, universal access to healthcare, which applies to transgender people as much as anyone else, because at its core, this is about whether we meet people at their most vulnerable moments with care or with closed doors, and I know which side of that choice I stand on. I hope to hear the Minister take up the points my hon. Friend has made, and I hope to see a more dignified approach to this debate from all concerned in future.”
“Taking this away from silly social media debates, evidence-led medicine, properly funded services and clear clinical guidance do not harm patients; they protect patients. In a world where there is still so much hostility, we have a responsibility and a duty to work harder to ensure that everyone has a place. I know that this Labour Government, at their core, believe that. This House has a responsibility to speak up for those individuals who are too often drowned out by fear and misinformation and by the madness of the online space because we owe it to the sort of country we want to be, where we consider everyone in a mature, dignified and rational way to be worthy of healthcare.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for that very relevant point. He took the words right out of my mouth, to quote Meat Loaf. We must also recognise that the wider picture, though, is that transgender people face questioning or even denial of their very existence as people. They face barriers not just in specialist gender and transitioning services, but across society as well as our healthcare system, including GP surgeries, maternity care, cancer screenings and mental health support. Too many avoid seeking help altogether not because they are disengaged, but because they fear being misunderstood, judged and discriminated against, or turned away, as unfortunately they are, as the evidence tells us.”
“I welcome the £50 million or £60 million that the Government have provided to Lancashire county council to provide good roads for my constituents. On the Minister’s point about business investment, I welcome the three-year holiday from the stamp duty reserve for new listings, which we are not talking about enough. That will be a huge benefit to newly listed companies in the UK and manages our competitiveness very well.”
“I am so angry. I am sorry to say this, but I feel that by its actions today, the BMA is killing our NHS, and quite possibly my constituents and patients over the Christmas period, and it has become almost the midwife for privatisation under Reform. The Secretary of State has been robust in his role as patient advocate in chief, and more power to him in that, but will he go a step further and join me in appealing to resident doctors in my constituency and elsewhere, and say, “Go back into work and look after my constituents.”?”