Claire Young
MP for Thornbury and Yate · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“In the year to March 2026, only 75.7% of first-class mail arrived the next working day, against the target of 93%. Ofcom opened an investigation into that failure on 1 June. Nearly five months later, we are still waiting for the outcome.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The law allows Ofcom to fine postal services up to 10% of turnover, but its largest penalty is a small fraction of that, and every penny goes to the Treasury. Nothing reaches my constituent who missed a hospital appointment because the letter arrived a day after the actual appointment. Where is their opportunity for recourse?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If a constituent makes a complaint to Royal Mail and they are not happy with the outcome, they cannot go to Ofcom and make a complaint about the individual case. We have been told that Ofcom will not look into local cases and will look only at the picture across the country as a whole.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing this timely debate. I want to focus on Ofcom’s role as the regulator of postal services.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Either Ofcom’s postal powers and its approach must be fundamentally reset or its responsibility for postal regulation should move to a dedicated independent regulator that will take it seriously. Surely, that is what Ministers must now be considering.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Secondly, will the Government commit to a review of Ofcom’s postal powers, including whether those powers would be better held by an independent postal regulator? Too much time has been spent bringing Royal Mail’s failures to Ministers’ attention. They have heard enough. Will they now act?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
493 held · 470 searchable for Claire Young. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 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.
“Secondly, will the Government commit to a review of Ofcom’s postal powers, including whether those powers would be better held by an independent postal regulator? Too much time has been spent bringing Royal Mail’s failures to Ministers’ attention. They have heard enough. Will they now act?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Either Ofcom’s postal powers and its approach must be fundamentally reset or its responsibility for postal regulation should move to a dedicated independent regulator that will take it seriously. Surely, that is what Ministers must now be considering. If the Minister stands here today and again tells us that Ofcom is an independent regulator, and Royal Mail a private company, so nothing can be done, it will be utterly embarrassing. Where are the Government’s teeth? Are they seriously taking the same lacklustre approach as Ofcom? I have two direct questions for the Minister. First, do the Government accept the Select Committee’s conclusion that Ofcom is not effectively regulating Royal Mail’s performance?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If a constituent makes a complaint to Royal Mail and they are not happy with the outcome, they cannot go to Ofcom and make a complaint about the individual case. We have been told that Ofcom will not look into local cases and will look only at the picture across the country as a whole. We need a regulator with teeth, legally binding penalties that can actually change a business’s behaviour, automatic compensation and a proper complaints system. A regulator ready to use its powers could solve this problem. I have raised this issue in questions and letters to Ministers, but each time the response is essentially a regurgitated, “This is a matter for Ofcom.” However, Ofcom’s powers are set by this Parliament, and I do not believe they are working, so Ministers have a responsibility to intervene.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The law allows Ofcom to fine postal services up to 10% of turnover, but its largest penalty is a small fraction of that, and every penny goes to the Treasury. Nothing reaches my constituent who missed a hospital appointment because the letter arrived a day after the actual appointment. Where is their opportunity for recourse? At the moment, Royal Mail’s own complaints process is aimed at the sender of the mail and is all about compensating them for the cost of postage by giving them books of stamps; it does nothing to compensate recipients of mail for the consequential losses from that mail not arriving on time, which can be significant. Aside from missed appointments, there can be financial issues, and we had an example where someone had received a court summons too late, which obviously had very serious consequences.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the year to March 2026, only 75.7% of first-class mail arrived the next working day, against the target of 93%. Ofcom opened an investigation into that failure on 1 June. Nearly five months later, we are still waiting for the outcome. Meanwhile, the targets themselves have been lowered, to 90% for first class and 95% for second class, and second-class deliveries have moved to alternate weekdays. The public are being asked to accept a reduced service, measured against easier targets, from a company that has not even managed to meet the old ones in years. In May, the Business and Trade Committee concluded that Ofcom is failing as a statutory regulator, and that its approach has for years failed to deliver the step change in performance that the public deserve. Part of the problem is that fines are simply not a deterrent.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) for securing this timely debate. I want to focus on Ofcom’s role as the regulator of postal services. That is a different aspect from its work ensuring that news is impartial or keeping our young people safe online, and therein perhaps lies the problem—it is being asked to be a jack of all trades and, as a result, it is the master of none. Earlier this week, I spoke about the effectiveness of Ofcom during a debate in the Chamber on Royal Mail, and I have come here today to reaffirm that argument. Since 2022, Ofcom has fined Royal Mail £5.6 million, then £10.5 million, then £21 million for failing to meet its targets.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Millions rely on daily medication to stay alive and healthy. We know the concern shortages cause; the NHS does not allow people to stockpile prescription medicines, and some require refrigeration. Will the NHS therefore now allow people to keep a small amount of spare medicine, and how will the Government ensure access to essential medications during widespread disruption to supplies, movement of goods or power?”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the hon. Member’s point about lack of clarity, my constituent Richard went to his GP with early symptoms of prostate cancer, but because he did not fit the screening profile his GP refused a PSA test. Does the hon. Member agree that Ministers could issue guidance to make sure that GPs are not misinterpreting the new situation?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Another weekly surgery, another Capita complaint—this time, a constituent was told on one of her many calls to Capita that she would have to wait while they accessed the spreadsheet because someone was already using it. When the Minister talks about some slow improvements in technology, one can only imagine that Capita’s starting point was a typewriter and abacus. Even with the support of officials, does the Minister really trust Capita to safely deliver an AI-enabled service to our constituents?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government themselves depend on Royal Mail for sending out passports, driving licences and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs correspondence. Our own offices use Royal Mail.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Like other Members, I want to recognise the hard work of postal workers in my constituency. They are not to blame for management’s continued ineptitude and poor delivery of changes. Many are quitting, as fed up with the Royal Mail as we are. Hundreds of my constituents in Thornbury and Yate have written to me about Royal Mail’s failures. One posted something to Australia and it ended up arriving at a neighbour’s house. Bundles of letters appear at their doors at once—weeks’ worth of magazines, NHS letters and post from friends and family. Mail is an essential service for some, particularly the digitally excluded, who rely on it for important correspondence like letters about their NHS appointments. One Thornbury constituent told me only this weekend that he got a hospital appointment letter the day after the appointment.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Either Ofcom needs more powers to investigate locally and tackle the issue, or we should remove its power altogether and give the responsibility of postal regulator to a whole new independent body that will focus on the issues properly. Why is Ofcom not performing its duties with vigour?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I asked what he had done to review Ofcom’s powers and why Ofcom cannot properly regulate at a local level. Disappointingly, he answered that Royal Mail is a private business and Ofcom is an independent regulator, so there is nothing really that the Government can do. I am not sure that is quite how regulation works. This is simply not good enough. In answer to my written questions, the Government stated that they have not assessed moving responsibility for postal regulation away from Ofcom to a new regulator. Why? Surely even Ministers agree that Royal Mail has been failing to deliver for years now and Ofcom has not changed that.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That brings me to the regulator. I want to use this debate to call again for Ofcom to properly regulate the Royal Mail or be replaced. In correspondence, Ministers have confirmed to me that currently Ofcom cannot investigate local failures. As a result, when Royal Mail does not deliver and its complaints team cannot provide an adequate resolution, my constituents have no one else to turn to but me. In essence, the public look to Members of this House to be the regulators, but we do not have the powers of a regulator. Too often, our complaints are met with dismissive template letters asserting that the service is improving when it blatantly is not. Where is Ofcom? What does a fine here and there really do to a failing business? I wrote to the previous Minister a few months ago, after I raised these issues in the Chamber.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I absolutely agree that is poor practice. I think it is a sign of the desperation Royal Mail finds itself in, with so many people quitting its employment. Royal Mail’s response has not been good enough. It has moved the goalposts, decreased delivery times, and fiddled around with its staff numbers, but none of that has helped. Reports suggest that it is axing its head office numbers, and posties are quitting in droves. Clearly, that is not sustainable. When I raised my constituents’ concerns with Royal Mail directly, the right people did not even attend the first meeting, and subsequent ones have been little more productive. I am told that the Royal Mail complaints forms have been removed from the building it shares with Yate post office. That is not the behaviour of a business that cares about its customers.”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not think we can say that regulation has failed at this point, when effectively what we have been doing is using the same battering ram again and again. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and wondering why it leads to the same result. I think there are other things that we can explore first. Last week during PMQs, the Prime Minister stated that if Royal Mail does not improve, further measures will be taken. Can the Minister now reveal what those measures are and assure the House that this company will face serious consequences for failing all our constituents?”
House of Commons26 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have dozens of cases of constituents who have waited months for responses from the Department for Work and Pensions, including Dionne who has spent 18 months being routinely ignored and sidelined by the Child Maintenance Service. Will the Leader of the House ask a Minister to come to the House to make a statement on what steps they are planning to take to improve response rates?”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does my hon. Friend agree with the point, made by Latteridge Green Farm in my constituency, that decisions about how public funding is spent should be made on the merits of an application and the benefits it can bring, rather than an ability to click quickly?”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Many of my constituents are off gas and rely on heating oil. They are once again writing to me about rising costs. With no price cap to protect them, the best way to cut their bills is to move to low-carbon forms of heating. Will the Minister confirm that the uplift in grants for off-grid properties will not be a victim of budget cuts?”
House of Commons13 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Talk of an energy ceasefire shows once again how central energy security is to national security, so will the Prime Minister reassure the House that the rumoured cuts to the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero budget will not undermine his Government’s ability to protect our critical energy infrastructure, or indeed to protect our constituents from the high energy bills that undermine society’s cohesion?”
House of Commons12 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given the ongoing risk to our energy security illustrated by this latest incident, should the Government prioritise EN-6 sites, such as Oldbury in my constituency, supplying the grid, rather than private wire arrangements that do not support local industry?”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to be clear that low-volume fracking—as a form of fracking—is something entirely different.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Reform Mayor of Scarborough said, “frack ahead”, although the local council voted unanimously against the plans, and the Secretary of State did not choose to overrule that. However, I am concerned about the direction that this is taking. Before I move on, I want to insert a small caveat: I am supportive of the geothermal sector. Geothermal is a genuinely renewable source of energy. A small number of geothermal cases employ low-volume hydraulic simulation. My case for a permanent ban asks for fracking to be classified by intent, and would therefore ensure that geothermal was not under threat. This is important because the geothermal industry has great potential in this country that has yet to be realised, despite being extensively used in other European countries.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Stay below those figures and the moratorium simply does not apply. The intent is identical to fracking, and the technique is identical—a company injects fluid at high pressure to fracture rock and release the gas inside—but because the volume is lower, the law treats it as something else entirely and waves it through. At Burniston, on the edge of the North York moors, Europa Oil & Gas has proposed exactly that—a so-called proppant squeeze—at volumes designed to sit just under the threshold. In correspondence obtained under freedom of information, the company itself referred to the operation as fracking, yet in its planning material it insists that it is not. The label changes, but the drilling rig does not.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me begin with the point that matters most: we do not have a ban on fracking in this country; we have a moratorium, and the two are not the same. A moratorium is a pause, and a pause can be lifted. The previous Energy Secretary told the Labour party conference last autumn that this Government would legislate to ban fracking for good. This Government have been in power for two years, yet I see no indication that a full ban is due. Maybe the Minister will care to correct me, but it seems that this Government are not taking decisive action to stop all fracking activity. The reason this activity continues is because of a legal loophole, and it is worth being precise about it. The Petroleum Act 1998 defines fracking by the volume of fluid injected: more than 1,000 cubic metres at any single stage, or more than 10,000 cubic metres in total.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the potential merits of a full ban on fracking. I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for selecting this debate and giving me the opportunity to lead it. In December 2025, the Minister for Energy told this House that: “the evidence base is not there at the moment to suggest that low-volume hydraulic fracturing activities have the same associated risks as fracking for shale gas.” —[ Official Report , Westminster Hall, 10 December 2025; Vol. 777, c. 151WH.] I am leading this debate because I want to challenge that statement and bring the Government’s attention to why I and many others believe that the understanding of fracking that the Minister referred to is not suited for purpose. I want this House to consider the evidence for that argument.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would like to clarify that. I am not suggesting that we should measure and judge these things by seismicity, because that is not something that can be predicted in advance. The point is that in one case fossil fuels are being extracted, but that is not the effect with geothermal—it is a different process with a different effect.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We would be more exposed, so I question their intentions.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Every new source of onshore gas means more methane, more emissions and a direct collision with the carbon budgets that this House has voted for—not to mention our net zero ambitions. There are voices—Reform Members among them—who say that the answer to high bills is to return to fossil fuels and to frack our way out of trouble. I understand the appeal of a simple answer, but it is the wrong one. Gas is priced on an international market. Drilling a handful of wells in the English countryside would not move that price, and the companies doing the drilling would sell at whatever the market pays. Fracking would not take a single pound off a family’s bill. What it would do is divide communities, tie up local councils in years of planning battles and lock us into the very fuel whose price swings caused the crisis in the first place.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The then Oil and Gas Authority concluded that it was not possible to predict the timing or size of these events. The volumes proposed at Burniston were higher than the volume that caused that earthquake. This matters well beyond seismicity. It matters for our countryside and for the rural communities and protected landscapes that would host this drilling and gain almost nothing in return. It matters for our waters, as has already been mentioned; parts of Yorkshire were under a hosepipe ban in 2025, yet we are asked to pump scarce water deep underground and accept the risk of contaminating the aquifers that families and farms depend on. It matters for the climate, too.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I quite agree. The hon. Gentleman better explains the point that I was trying to make, which is that other issues, such as the potential for groundwater contamination, are different in the situation of fracking for fossil fuels. Ministers tell us that the evidence base is not there to show that lower-volume fracking carries the same risk as fracking for shale gas, but I say gently to the Government that the evidence is there, and it is sitting in their own records. The earthquake at Preston New Road that triggered the 2019 moratorium did not follow some enormous injection, but a series of lower-volume stages, every one of which was below the legal threshold. The tremor that shook Lancashire, felt across the area at a magnitude of 2.9, came in the days after a stage that used just 142 cubic metres of fluid.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is where the jobs are, and that is where the investment should be flowing. That is the future. My ask of the Minister is a single, clear one. I feel as if this Government may need some clarity. I ask the Minister to commit today to defining fracking by its purpose and effect, not by an arbitrary measure of fluid used, so that every form of hydraulic fracturing is captured, the loophole is closed and the permanent ban that this Government have promised is written into law rather than left in a conference speech and forgotten. Our countryside, our water and our climate deserve nothing less.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Absolutely, and I was just about to come to that point. In many cases, the very same people who would argue for fracking would argue for fewer wind farms, solar farms and other renewable energy sources due to their blighting of the countryside. I ask those voices, how is fracking supporting the upkeep of our countryside? How is it better than those other uses of countryside, which would produce clean energy, and how is contaminating our water supply helping anyone? The honest route to lower bills and real energy security is the one that this country is already capable of taking: cheap, clean, home-grown power. By that I mean renewables, but also low-carbon generation; the prospect of new nuclear at Oldbury in my own constituency shows the part that low-carbon generation can play alongside renewables in a secure system.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He seems to think that the recognition of the need for climate action is new, when it was in fact recognised back in the 1980s, including by such left-wing icons as Margaret Thatcher. He seems to have forgotten about the decades of testing on fracking that have already taken place. He either refuses to admit or does not realise that the geological situation in America is vastly different as well. Shale gas in the UK is deeper, is faulted and is contained in much more complex geological settings. Fracking will never shift a price set on global markets and it will never be worth the earthquakes, the polluted water and the broken trust it leaves behind. This country was promised an end to fracking—it is time to deliver it. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the potential merits of a full ban on fracking.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would like to thank all the Back Benchers who have spoken in this debate. When the hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) talked about how proppant squeeze is being used for fracking, I was minded to say “a rose by any other name”, but fracking is certainly not sweet. My hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) and the hon. Members for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) and for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns) all made good arguments about climate change and other environmental concerns, and the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) set out the need for a green industrial revolution. I do not have time to dissect in detail the speech made by the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice). I am concerned that he may be suffering from amnesia.”
House of Commons15 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government rightly want to speed up housing delivery, but indiscriminate housing built by big developers with no regard for the environment or the people living nearby is not the answer. Ironically, far from increasing the speed of housing delivery, as the Government claim it will, in my area the grey belt changes the level of risk, creating more delays by distracting planning officers from the planned sites and from the Government’s new town proposal. Time will be wasted arguing with speculative developers about what constitutes grey belt, when it could be spent delivering local housing need through the local plan. I urge the Minister to listen to hon. Members across the Chamber, who are rightly raising concerns, and to advise the new Cabinet and the incoming Prime Minister that rural voices must be heard, and the NPPF revisited.”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The danger is that pockets of land will be considered in isolation and be judged only to contribute to purpose C. Indeed, the 2022 West of England combined authority report, in the local plan evidence, showed that the primary reason for just about all the land in the local green belt is purpose C. However, the cumulative impact of developing those pockets of land would degrade the green belt as a whole. Some of our green belt is very narrow, and it will only become more so if this is allowed to happen. Our towns and villages will slowly be swallowed up by Bristol, and the distinctiveness of our communities will be lost. My constituents do not want that, and I suspect that the good people of Bristol do not want it either, although some hon. Members may think otherwise.”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“More than that, the council recognises the importance of homes for social rent and has been punching above its weight in their provision. With around 0.6% of the population of England outside London, it delivered 1.6% of total new social rent completions last year. However, there is an implicit deal with local people in that local plan, which delivers homes while protecting the remaining countryside from speculative development. The Government’s grey belt policy fundamentally threatens that. Green belt land will now be parcelled up into cells for assessment, and it will be difficult to show an individual cell’s contribution. The changes to the framework around the grey belt essentially make purposes C and E void, and particularly C, which protects countryside from encroachment.”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Wells and Mendip Hills (Tessa Munt) for securing this debate. My constituency is large and rural, containing the towns of Thornbury, Yate and Chipping Sodbury, as well as numerous villages and hamlets, and stretches from the internationally designated Severn estuary all the way to the Cotswold escarpment. A large part of the countryside that surrounds those communities is designated green belt, with all the protections that that used to bring, but now that protection is under threat. Before I go further, I will provide some context. Under the current administration, South Gloucestershire council recognises the need for new housing and has developed a plan to deliver its housing need, which recently went through its examination in public.”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Families in rural communities may spend the next six weeks finding out that the Government’s “kids go free” scheme is not designed for them. In Thornbury and Yate, the Government are funding First Bus, but not the rural local bus companies, so the combined authority has had to foot the bill. I am sure that we are not the only rural community affected. I have written to the Transport Secretary about this, along with more than a dozen other MPs. Will the Leader of the House ensure that we receive an urgent response?”
House of Commons16 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Fewer than half of the children in my constituency have seen an NHS dentist in the last two years, exacerbating health inequalities. The supervised toothbrushing programme is being evaluated for its effectiveness, but I hear uptake is low. What other measures does the Minister plan to introduce to tackle oral health inequalities for children? Will she commit to reviewing NHS dental provision in my constituency?”
House of Commons14 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Some schools in my constituency were forced to close during the recent red alert heatwave, causing disruption and loss of learning, so could the Minister explain what discussions she has had with the Department for Education about preparing our schools for more frequent and more extreme weather events, and about improving outdoor learning spaces, as advocated by my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), to ensure that the citizens of the future feel more connected to nature?”
House of Commons13 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We support this statutory instrument and remain clear that the Government should prioritise accelerating renewable generation, electricity storage and emerging nuclear technologies such as small modular reactors, enabling a fleet approach, rather than deepening the UK’s reliance on large-scale, expensive and slow-to-deliver one-off nuclear projects.”
House of Commons7 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. The Liberal Democrats support the justification for the Rolls-Royce small modular reactor, or RR SMR, and the development of SMRs in general. We recognise their potential to strengthen energy security and reduce reliance on imported gas when they can provide a safe and cost-effective contribution to a decarbonised electricity system. We believe that the best way to cut bills is to invest in home grown clean power, creating well paid jobs across the UK, improving energy security and supporting economic growth. The development of the RR SMR will help towards that goal.”
House of Commons7 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Private companies looking to deploy new nuclear at Oldbury will need to address skills shortages, particularly around roles such as welding. When assessing proposals for the site, how will Ministers ensure developers invest in skills so that local people can benefit from the jobs created?”
House of Commons7 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“One of my hard-working caseworkers attended one of the virtual surgeries that have been mentioned, but every single update they received was wrong. Lump sums, quotes, paperwork and complaint responses were all said to have been sent out, yet not one case had actually moved. My constituents feel lied to and my staff feel disrespected. Will the Minister tell the House what further action will be taken to hold Capita to account for those false assurances?”
House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Freeholders on private estates currently face unregulated service charges and have no meaningful recourse if managing agents are incompetent. In January, the Minister of State for Housing committed to tackling these so-called fleecehold schemes by the end of this Parliament. However, with a new Prime Minister likely to reset the legislative agenda, affected constituents will be worried that that promise will be quietly dropped. Will the Leader of the House request a written statement on delivery from the Minister?”
House of Commons25 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the Government really believe that food security is national security, that must mean shortening supply chains and increasing local food production. The Secretary of State referred earlier to field to fork, but what new concrete steps will be taken under this plan to increase the proportion of food eaten in the UK that was grown here?”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On seeing a new development recently, I was dismayed that the developer said they were not putting in heat pumps because the cost of electricity meant that people would rather have gas boilers. Does my hon. Friend agree that if we removed the renewables obligation levy from electricity, so that we were fairly pricing electricity—currently, electricity is unfairly disadvantaged—we would incentivise far more heat pump installations?”
House of Commons24 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When I met Chipping Sodbury chamber of commerce recently, business owners told me that the business rates system is broken and unfair, in part because it is based on turnover, not profit. In response to a letter, the Exchequer Secretary promised to bear in mind the points that I had raised ahead of future Budgets. Does he now accept that the business rates system is broken, and that rather than being reformed it should be abolished and replaced with a fairer system?”
House of Commons23 June 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗