Nesil Caliskan
MP for Barking · Labour · United Kingdom
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. This is the second or third time we have been in the same debate this week, so Members are in competition with me. I thank my hon.”
“There has clearly been a reduction in the speed of provision across the country—I am not in the business of rejecting the evidence in front of us—but the Government’s important spending review included a record spending settlement for local government, and spending decisions should be taken locally. The 2021 regulations were significant.”
“My hon. Friend is right to highlight the important point he made earlier. I was coming on to say that of course I absolutely welcome a dialogue with him, but also with the consortium that has been referenced in the debate, which does such good work already.”
“The Government want people to be able to live well, work, enjoy days out, shop and socialise, and we recognise that access to appropriate public facilities can be an important part of enabling that. Reasonable adjustments, as has already been mentioned, are instrumental to changing lives and allowing everybody to live fulfilled lives.”
“It is absolutely right that MHCLG has that engagement and I am confident that it will going forward. I am happy to discuss with my hon. Friend any letters, correspondence or meetings that we need to have as a Department in the coming weeks and months to make sure that we can continue to make the case for these facilities.”
“However, for some individuals with profound and multiple disabilities, or other conditions that severely limit mobility, standard accessible toilets might not provide the support they need.”
The complete record
Every one of 310 lines we hold for Nesil Caliskan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 7.
“Although that programme closed last year, changes were made in January 2021 to the statutory guidance accompanying building regulations.”
“The Government want people to be able to live well, work, enjoy days out, shop and socialise, and we recognise that access to appropriate public facilities can be an important part of enabling that. Reasonable adjustments, as has already been mentioned, are instrumental to changing lives and allowing everybody to live fulfilled lives. As hon. Members have acknowledged, in recognition of the importance of the issue, the Government delivered over £30 million for the Changing Places toilets programme, and I am delighted that the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) joined the debate. The programme has supported the targeted installation of well over 400 new disabled toilet facilities in areas where they were most needed across England.”
“However, for some individuals with profound and multiple disabilities, or other conditions that severely limit mobility, standard accessible toilets might not provide the support they need. Such toilets might lack essential features such as adult-sized changing benches, hoists and enough space for a disabled person and one or more carers. As hon. Members have highlighted, that is exactly why Changing Places toilets are so important. They provide the space, equipment and dignity that standard provision simply cannot provide. I know that from my own experience as a Member of Parliament who has visited a lot of special educational needs provision and spoken to many parents about their own lived experience and the need for the gap to be fixed.”
“I thank all Members, including the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth), for their contributions and their thoughtful, emotional and challenging speeches. Often these are the sorts of debates that have a real impact on policy change. As Members have pointed out, for many people the availability of an accessible public toilet that is clean and safe can be the deciding factor in whether they feel able to visit a town centre, a high street, a local attraction, their park, or just something they want to do that weekend. Such facilities support dignity and independence for people with disabilities and accessibility needs. There is also an impact on the families that support those with a disability.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. This is the second or third time we have been in the same debate this week, so Members are in competition with me. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) for securing this important debate and for his ongoing efforts to speak up for issues that matter not only to him but to so many of our constituents across the country. He has been a committed advocate for Changing Places toilets and so many issues that others find difficult to talk about. He is the voice of many constituents around the country. I welcome the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Government to this important debate, which comes on the back of another important debate about public toilets for people with stomas, which some Members in this debate took part in.”
“I acknowledge the calls for a new capital fund pot for Changing Places but, as Members will appreciate, it is a little beyond my ability to make a spending commitment, although I am reminded that Ministers in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government have gone on to hold offices that have the power to make such commitments. Members will take the point that I am making. The Government believe that local authorities are best placed to understand where facilities need to be, so our approach to funding them is important. We encourage them to allocate the funding necessary to deliver public toilet provision. Decisions are best made locally.”
“We continue to provide 100% mandatory business rates relief for separately accessible toilets. I accept that that is a slightly different conversation, but I want to give a sense of the Government’s broader commitment to ensuring that there are accessible toilets for everybody in our communities. Taken together, those measures are intended to increase the availability of these vital facilities over time and ensure that accessibility is treated as a mainstream consideration as we plan and build our public spaces. I hear and accept the powerful cases that hon. Members have made.”
“There has clearly been a reduction in the speed of provision across the country—I am not in the business of rejecting the evidence in front of us—but the Government’s important spending review included a record spending settlement for local government, and spending decisions should be taken locally. The 2021 regulations were significant. I remember them well; as a council leader, I followed building regulation changes, which have an impact on local government budgets. As a result of the 2021 regulations, all building works must meet the functional requirements of the 2010 building regulations, including part M, which addresses accessibility. In addition, at the 2025 spending review the Government committed more than £5 billion in new grant funding over three years for essential local services, including public toilets.”
“I thank the hon. Member for her passionate advocacy. Since the fund was allocated, we have had a significant spending review through which moneys were allocated to local government. I will make the case for why decisions around spending are best made locally, but that does not mean I do not recognise the important cases that have been made. I also recognise that the moneys that had been allocated to Changing Places toilets delivered change on the ground with facilities across the country. I also absolutely accept the important point that my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford made about the speed at which additional facilities are being provided.”
“We will support you and encourage you to make the right decisions.” It is a balancing act, but debates like this give us an opportunity to reinforce the important message from Government that access to facilities and public toilets for all who need them is a crucial part of what local government should be doing.”
“I thank the hon. Lady for making that point. My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford and I have spent a long time in local government, so we know all too well that statutory services are under huge pressure and that choices have to be made. I accept the argument that if funding is not ringfenced, things sometimes do not get done. However, this Government are committed to funding local authorities well, and we have done that through the spending review. We are also committed to saying to local authorities, “You are best placed to make decisions for your area and assess what is needed.”
“I saw that for many years in local government, when he got things done, and he gets things done as a Member of Parliament too, but nobody who knows him will say that he is a soft touch in any way. He is formidable and effective. He is my hon. Friend, but he will tell me if we are doing something wrong as a Government, as he has.”
“A needs map, if you will, feels like quite an obvious thing that we could do, which would really make a difference to constituents across the country who simply do not know if there is a facility. An ability to map out the gaps could also give the necessary encouragement to Government and local authorities to allocate the moneys that are required to set up facilities. I recognise the strength of feeling across the House in this very important debate on ensuring that public spaces are accessible, inclusive and supportive of people’s dignity and independence. I pay tribute to my good and hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford. The very best of politics are people who just get things done.”
“I am very happy to take that away and speak to colleagues in other Departments; I think they, too, will be surprised. It is a good example of where we need cross-governmental working, and I welcome the input from Members on how we might be able to do that. I recognise the important points made about transport. The Government’s commitment to accessible transport is demonstrated in the spending that we have committed to the railways. Because of that, there is an opportunity to make sure they are accessible, and our transport hubs will play a key part in that. I will take those two specific points away. I recognise the point that my hon. Friend made on modernising software and maps.”
“It is absolutely right that MHCLG has that engagement and I am confident that it will going forward. I am happy to discuss with my hon. Friend any letters, correspondence or meetings that we need to have as a Department in the coming weeks and months to make sure that we can continue to make the case for these facilities. Let me address the point about specific Government Departments and the opportunities that we face now because of Government initiatives and changes, which we do not want to lose, so that we can improve facilities for those who have needs. I was shocked to hear that so many NHS hospitals do not have the provision that we are talking about. That is not acceptable, and I think that all our constituents would be surprised to hear that.”
“My hon. Friend is right to highlight the important point he made earlier. I was coming on to say that of course I absolutely welcome a dialogue with him, but also with the consortium that has been referenced in the debate, which does such good work already. I am happy to meet with the consortium myself, but I am also confident that MHCLG and all current or future Ministers would welcome that engagement and dialogue. My hon. Friend is right that these sorts of facilities are successfully delivered only if there is a cross-governmental commitment. Regulation and funding are part of that challenge, but we also need a joint recognition of the challenges in our communities to be able to see things delivered. The consortium is clearly playing a valuable role in articulating those challenges.”
“That is very generous of the right hon. Member. I again thank all Members for their contributions and provide my reassurance that MHCLG will be committed to doing everything it can to meet the challenges that our constituents face.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. May I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), for his generous words? I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon); he and I are competing for appearances in this Chamber this week—”
“Where providers fall short, there is usually a complaints process and an ombudsman. In addition, the Government have also committed to introducing social tenant access to information requirements from this October, which will make it mandatory for providers to give information about property management in response to information requests.”
“Timelines for estate renewal are complicated, but it is important that engagement takes into account the instability caused by estate renewal. My hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke asked a valid question about whether the process for decision making should be through a ballot. I led a local authority that had a ballot for an area. It is hard work to say the least, but it is perhaps one of the most important things a local authority can do to secure community buy-in. However, to say that ballots in themselves are what secured that engagement would be to do a disservice to the engagement that the ballot provided. Ballots in and of themselves do not solve trust issues among residents. They can force developers to do the meaningful engagement that they should be doing anyway, but they do not mean that we will get the outcome that we want.”
“It is difficult to set out realistic timelines, because each estate regeneration is different and unique due to their different sizes and ambitions, and good engagement with existing residents may further change those ambitions. Timelines for estate renewal are also highly dependent on viability, phasing, planning permission conditions, and ground and infrastructure prep, but I accept that families who live on an estate face huge anxiety when they do not know when their home is going to be knocked down. Indeed, there are examples in my constituency of families who have been told their estate has been earmarked for renewal; they can see their community being hollowed out, yet they do not know when they will need to move on.”
“Good regeneration puts communities in the driving seat. That does not just mean being transparent with decision making; it also means allowing those who live in the community to have a real say in shaping proposals. Decisions on property size, building height, materials, amenities and timelines for delivery are important for getting community buy-in. That approach is not new. Good developers, of which there are many, do that anyway, and the regulatory standards are clear: registered providers must communicate with tenants, provide information to them and take their views into account in decision making. That extends to providers undertaking estate regeneration.”
“I have to say, though, having been a council leader in and now a Labour Member of Parliament in London, that it is a great shame that Conservative and Lib Dem councils, councillors and MPs frequently object to house building. Of course, brownfield sites are a really important part of the solution; but the idea that we can meet housing need in London or the rest of the country only by using brownfield sites or doing infill on existing estates is, I am afraid, misleading. That does not mean that we look at only one aspect of house building. I recognise that the picture is complicated, and it will take a multitude of approaches to make sure that regeneration delivers the number of homes to the decent homes standard that we need, but I also know that regeneration must be delivered in partnership with communities.”
“I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson), who spoke so passionately and accurately about the importance of the facilities that make a community, whether that is a youth centre or much needed GPs. I pay tribute to her long-standing campaign, which reflects the need to build neighbourhoods with homes that are more than just the buildings that house people. In my view, the simplest, most powerful thing we can do to lift people out of poverty and improve life chances in this country is to provide more decent homes. First and foremost, we must recognise that the supply of homes is the foundation for everything. Indeed, we will only address the housing crisis by building more homes, period. I listened with great interest to the shadow Minister, who made important points about house building and getting on with it.”
“In that context, it might make more sense for an entire estate to be regenerated than to take a sticking-plaster approach, particularly when some buildings reach the end of their life. In other cases, estates are the best places to build more affordable homes, particularly in our towns and cities, where there may be fewer development sites available, but more social infrastructure in local areas. The people often forgotten in housing debates are the 1 million families on council housing waiting lists and the thousands of people trapped in temporary accommodation. I know that there are something like 4,000 on the housing register in my hon. Friend’s local authority area, and the figure is similar in my borough of Barking and Dagenham. Everyone deserves a decent home—a safe home, in a clean neighbourhood, with decent social infrastructure.”
“In some cases, years of neglect from a Conservative Government that failed to invest in existing estates and mandated council rent reductions, which meant even less for housing revenue accounts, has left many estates in dire need of regeneration. I know that only too well, having led a local authority that felt the burden of pressures on the HRA account. Social housing was the tenure most affected by damp and mould issues—my hon. Friend correctly highlighted the impact that that has on many of his constituents, and I know that many other Members have cases involving the same problem. An ageing housing stock not only impacts life chances, but costs the taxpayer more in the long term, because disrepair has a bigger impact on communities and also on the stock itself.”
“Yes, and I have a long way to go. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) for securing this important debate and thank all Members for their contributions. Each one has provided an important perspective on the challenges of estate renewal and the need generally to build homes in a way that works for communities. My hon. Friend spoke powerfully about the difference between good regeneration and poor examples in his constituency. The Government recognise that good estate regen is critical to delivering our housing target and to providing decent homes for everybody to live in. There are many reasons why estate regeneration might be the best thing for existing tenants or for a local area.”
“I welcome the debate secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke. I pay tribute to his passionate campaigning and advocacy on behalf of his constituents. I recognise the huge amount of casework that he gets on repairs and maintenance, as well as his commitment to see more homes built for his area. He knows, like I do, that home building will change people’s life chances in this country.”
“I recognise the important points made about place making. I welcome local authorities being place makers. Where a local authority has decided to be the master developer, it is a tough task. I would welcome more local authorities acting as the master developer, with support from MCHLG. A local authority could perhaps be a developer, but in my view, the master developer bit is what helps to build trusted relationships between communities, ensuring buy-in for long-term housing delivery. More than any housing delivery, estate renewal requires brave local political leadership and a long-term commitment to engaging and shaping. It also requires money. I am proud that the Government have already allocated almost £40 billion for affordable homes, but none of that matters if we do not have buy-in from the local community.”
“If, throughout that time, they have a leak in the roof or damp, or if there is antisocial behaviour or basic things just need to be fixed on their estate, that will have an impact not only on their life chances, but on their trust and confidence in the ability of those who are responsible for fixing the basics in their home now to also deliver homes for the future, where they may live for the rest of their lives. I take the point very seriously, and I would welcome any further discussions that Members might want to have with Ministers in MCHLG, so that we can strengthen existing the guidance and build, not erode, trust and confidence to ensure an endorsement for further house building in this country. Estate renewal programmes are possibly the most difficult thing that local authorities can do.”
“On more effective statutory routes for better estate regeneration, some important steps have been taken by the Government, but I recognise that we need a longer-term commitment and a culture change, supporting local authorities to develop estate regeneration in a way that works for communities. Let me address the point about lack of trust on repair issues. Too often, people talk as though estate repairs are a task separate from long-term estate renewal. The truth is that estate regeneration for an existing area is a project that may last decades. Five years is a relatively short period of time in terms of estate renewal, but that is how long a young person spends in secondary school.”
“I agree with Members who stated that it is vital that estate regeneration schemes demonstrate transparency, particularly when they involve public land or public money. Estate renewal can actually be quite easy, if all the land is sold off. Particularly in places like London, an estate will not be short of interest from developers. Estate regeneration is much harder if we are committed to delivering affordable homes and ensuring the amenities that make an estate a community. The estate regeneration national strategy guidance helps to set out a framework from Government to achieve what is needed. The Regulator of Social Housing works to improve standards and the ombudsman provides routes for readiness.”
“Of course I will. The Department welcomes any engagement about that. I have to emphasise that the engagement process requires more than just a “yes or no” tick box, and the best regeneration and estate renewal programme demonstrate a long-term commitment to engagement with residents and to giving residents the opportunity to shape the outcomes of the programmes. In the best programmes, local leadership also demonstrates political bravery in saying, “We have to have some homes built, so let us go on this journey together.” Too often, we see examples where it has become too easy to say no to everything, and that is how we have ended up with a housing crisis. A good question was asked about the governance of regeneration schemes.”
“The Social Mobility Commission found that coastal communities have some of the least favourable conditions for childhood in our country—a disproportionately high number of their children are eligible for free school meals, for example, with parents who have relatively low qualification levels. The Isle of Wight demonstrates the strengths and the challenges found across many coastal communities. Its economy was worth more than £3 billion in 2020. Health, education, retail, manufacturing and, of course, tourism all play a major role in the island’s strengths. At the same time, like all coastal communities, it faces a number of economic and social challenges. The Government are committed to ensuring that no community is left behind—there is no hierarchy when it comes to deprivation.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I also welcome the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking), to his place—although neither of us represents a coastal town. He and I have known each other a long time. The Government recognise the importance of coastal communities. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing such an important and well-attended debate. Places such as the Isle of Wight are often thought of as postcards of national pride, as they should be, but as Members have said so well, behind the postcards, they face a distinctive challenge: geographical isolation, poorer connectivity, deprivation and barriers to opportunity.”
“I will address that point later in my speech. More than 5 million residents live in 169 coastal towns across England and Wales, and they deserve a voice and a future. The Government’s commitment to doing that goes well beyond rhetoric. That is why I am particularly proud that the Government support the Pride in Place programme—just one programme, but an important one—through which £6 billion has been allocated for long-term investment in communities across the United Kingdom. I recognise that not every constituency among the coastal communities has secured funding, but the 50 coastal communities that have benefit collectively from more than £1 billion in investment. Those communities are not simply receiving the funds but being given greater voice in how that money should be spent.”
“The Pride in Place plan sets clear criteria: the first tranche of funding focused on deprivation, and the second focused on deprivation and community cohesion. I am happy to provide more information to the hon. Member. I recognise that not every part of the country has Pride in Place funding, which is why I have always been clear that Pride in Place alone will not see the transformation that coastal communities need.”
“The Government are already acting through initiatives such as Mission Coastal, working with schools, academy trusts and local partners to improve outcomes in disadvantaged coastal areas. Through the local regeneration fund, we are providing local authorities with greater flexibility to deliver projects that support local growth and respond to local priorities. I recognise Members’ frustration about local government funding, and I know that councils deliver valuable services. The Government settlement strengthens the relationship between deprivation and funding. That is a good thing, and coastal communities will benefit from that. By 2028-29, the top 10% of most deprived areas will receive 45% more funding per head than the least deprived.”
“I will make a little progress. Pride in Place funding is important, because £20 million, including for 50 coastal communities, is not nothing. Alongside that, the Pride in Place impact fund is delivering up to £143 million to 93 local authorities, almost 40% of which are coastal communities. Coastal communities also benefit from a range of wider Government interventions, as I said, and we recognise that improving education is a key part of that. I thank Members for making so many important points relating to education and the challenges that coastal communities face in respect of the isolation of educational facilities and, in many senses, their viability.”
“I am happy to give way, but I will just say that after 14 years of austerity imposed on us by Conservatives and Lib Dems, Members should reflect on the multi-year settlement that local authorities are benefiting from.”
“I gently say that the challenges that coastal communities face have not emerged in the past two years because of Government fiscal policy. They are long-standing challenges that multiple Governments have failed to properly address. There is always a balance to be struck when it comes to taxation, how much money we can generate for frontline services and the long-term investment that coastal communities need. We have to constantly review that, but I welcome the £100 billion of additional investment that has been generated by increasing employer national insurance contributions. Half of those who pay national insurance contributions are paying the same as they did previously and, because of the changes to the employment allowances, over 800,000 employers pay no national insurance at all.”
“The hon. Lady and I have worked well together on Select Committees, and she advocates for her area incredibly well. Others across the political divide will agree with her important point. Rural communities are being addressed through a number of different funds, but I recognise the general point about fairness through the local government settlement. I have spent much of my political career advocating for that, so I certainly will not diminish it. The shadow Minister raised employer national insurance contributions. The Government had to make a difficult decision in order to boost public services spending by £100 billion. That was the right political choice that is ultimately helping coastal communities.”
“The Government have announced, through our child poverty strategy, that we will develop a new transport poverty tool to help national and local bodies in England to identify areas of poor transport connectivity and affordability. Access to services depends on connectivity, as does a local economy, and individuals need to be able to use transport and go to work. I agree with Members that transport infrastructure investment is a key part of economic growth, and I am also pleased that 11 of the UK’s 12 freeports, which I think have been mentioned as an important part of our economic growth, are in coastal locations, supporting the Government’s drive for economic growth.”
“Gentleman’s point, but I am confident that the Act provides not only rights for employees, but the flexibility that coastal towns need in respect of seasonal work. On the points about transport opportunities that were so well put by Members of all parties, and the particular challenge for coastal communities that find themselves isolated, we know that convenient, reliable and affordable transport is essential for giving people access to education, training, employment and jobs. I was particularly shocked to hear about the cost of ferry travel from the Isle of Wight, which is extraordinary. It is particularly shocking when we think about the transport necessary for a local economy to keep going.”
“It is as though the hon. Gentleman has read my notes; I was just about to come to that. I welcome the opportunity to address that point, which has long been debated in both Westminster Hall and the Chamber. Flexible working is of course important for a labour market, and that is particularly the case for coastal towns, but the truth is that it has too often been used as a reason for employers not to give people their fair share of payment. I recognise the seasonal nature of work in coastal towns, but there has to be a balance. The Employment Rights Act includes powers to ensure that zero-hours contracts and the needs of seasonal industries are accommodated. It allows for further regulation and scrutiny, but there is already provision in the Act itself. I recognise the hon.”
“The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has a role to play in making sure that services are joined up, as does the NHS. The Government have made reducing health inequalities a central part of our mission.”
“Alongside that, the Government have abolished the furnished holiday lets tax regime, so landlords will no longer be incentivised via the tax system to make their properties available for short-term lets. I believe that will make a tangible difference for coastal communities. Members spoke powerfully about the need for a more joined-up approach to the delivery of health services, and about the particular challenges coastal communities face because of their isolation. I pay tribute to Members who spoke about social isolation as well as the healthcare challenges for coastal communities. It is distressing to hear that constituents are not receiving the healthcare treatment they need. Someone’s access to healthcare cannot depend on whether they are a car owner. That is not right.”
“I apologise but I am going to make some progress because I have very little time. Some coastal communities face the same housing crisis challenges as areas elsewhere in the country but, of course, particular characteristics of that crisis impact coastal towns. The Government’s £40 billion for building more affordable and social homes will benefit coastal communities as well as the rest of the country, but I know there are challenges around short-term lets. The Government are making changes to the tax system to ensure that housing is seen primarily as about people having a home, rather than as an investment—an important point made not only made in this debate but in the main Chamber too—and those taxation changes will be important for coastal communities.”
“I am of course very happy to pick that up separately with representatives from the devolved nations, especially in relation to health, because some of the principles obviously go beyond England. I thank Members for highlighting the challenges. I particularly thank my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) for highlighting the acute challenges of domestic abuse in her constituency and her region; “There’s not much help we can give you” is simply not a good enough answer to anybody. That is the wrong message to give, and I believe there is help. I thank Members for an excellent debate on important issues. Coastal communities are important to the Government, and the potential of the whole country can be achieved only if coastal communities’ potential is achieved too.”
“That is why decision making on how those funds are spent sits with local neighbourhood boards. They will decide how to spend that money, whether it is on local arts, culture, heritage, sports, parks or something else that they think is important for their community.”