Lizzi Collinge
MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale · Labour · United Kingdom
“The Minister speaks eloquently about the threat that the Iranian regime poses to the freedom of religion and safety of Jewish people and others in Britain. As I am sure he is aware, people in Iran do not enjoy freedom of religion or belief, such as Iranian Christians, some of whom I have met in Morecambe and Lunesdale.”
“These are very serious allegations. It is right that they are investigated independently, and I think all of us urge NESO to have full candour. Grid stability is really important, and the recent heatwave shows the challenges that climate change brings and the importance of our clean energy transition.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Alec. Despite countless studies showing gaping disparities in everything from employment to life expectancy, coastal towns are neglected in discussions about geographical inequality. There are a few reasons for that.”
“As adults, we cannot just go up to someone in the playground, like my daughter does, and say, “Will you be my friend?” Communities do not happen by accident. They need the social infrastructure such as parks, libraries, youth clubs and naval clubs.”
“There are areas of transience, but people have been there for generations. People know each other, and that social infrastructure is important. I am really concerned about the impact of short-term lets, such as Airbnb and others, on social cohesion. In my constituency, we are getting Eden Project Morecambe.”
“A couple of years ago, I went to Spain at the end of a severe heatwave, and what I saw devastated me. There were fields and fields of blackened crops. Now farmers in my constituency are increasingly experiencing drought, flooding, extreme heat, and a change in the seasons due to climate change.”
The complete record
Every one of 525 lines we hold for Lizzi Collinge, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 11.
“I will speak specifically to clause 2 and the duty of candour and assistance to inquiries, but my remarks are relevant to the Bill as a whole. I want to let the Committee and anyone watching know that I will be talking about the death of a child. I should have a six-year-old constituent called Ida Lock. She should be at school, playing with her siblings and running rings around her parents. But I do not have that six-year-old constituent, because she died in 2019 at just one week old, despite having been healthy in her mum Sarah’s womb. Ida’s death was preventable: the coroner described her death as caused by gross failures in her care. There were eight opportunities to save Ida, and after Ida’s death there were many more opportunities to make sure that what happened to her never happened again.”
“It is not a legal impossibility; you do have health and safety or companies law offences, where there are corporate offences and you prove the mens rea—mental state—through the directing minds, but that is an incredibly difficult complication, and it does not really work with the offences that we are looking at here.”
“Q I would just like a little more detail—thank you for your briefing—on the difficulty of proving intent and recklessness in a corporate body. For those of us who are not legally trained, could you explain a bit more about why that is difficult to prove? Pete Weatherby: We have set the standard very high indeed, because we are not interested in criminalising people and we are certainly not interested in scaring people. One example thrown at us during the discussions with the Government was that we might be criminalising junior civil servants who turn up late for work—absolutely not. Intent and subjective recklessness are high hurdles, but they are individual hurdles. A corporate body cannot easily act recklessly.”
“Q So there is no easy way to show corporate collective actions, which are obviously the sum of a number of individual actions. Pete Weatherby: The Bill creates some individual duties, so you can prove them against the individual, but on the corporate duty, the simple way of dealing with it is the one that we put forward. It is really simple: it is a couple of lines, as you can see from the amendments we have put forward. You make the head of the organisation responsible for the discharge of the corporate duty. There is no problem with that.”
“Q Professor Lewis, you spoke about the burden of proof lying with the prosecution. Have I understood correctly that if someone puts forward the defence of reasonable excuse—I think this is the phrasing—it would then be for the prosecution to prove that it was false rather than for the defendant to prove that it was true? Professor Lewis: Yes. I would phrase it slightly differently: I would say that the prosecution will have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that there was no reasonable excuse, rather than thinking about truth or falsity. But, yes, once the defendant introduces evidence that raises the defence of reasonable excuse, they will have met their evidential burden, and the persuasive or legal burden will then rest on the prosecution.”
“Again, you can have private investigations or police investigations. We at the CPS do not see a prospect of unmeritorious police investigations, and we do not see a present risk, although we see some risk, of unmeritorious private investigations. The DPP’s consent comes in at the point of asking, “Is this going to go into the court system or not?” At that point, we as the CPS are assessing whichever investigation has happened against the standard tests of, “Is there sufficient evidence to prosecute the suspect?” and, “Is a prosecution required in the public interest?” Whoever the suspect is, we will assess that against those standards.”
“Q Thank you. That is very helpful. Mr Guest, you talked about some of the guardrails against unmeritorious or vexatious prosecutions. One of the things that we have seen in previous cover-ups is that junior members of staff have felt the burden, either when they try to tell the truth or because they are punished when the truth has not been there. I have been told—although I disagree—that the Bill could create a fear of unreasonable prosecution, or could cause junior members of staff to take responsibility, rather than senior members of staff. Do you consider that a risk? Does the way the law is set out mean that it will work as intended? Tom Guest: When I mention that risk, it is to guard against the risk of unmeritorious prosecutions. Before there is a prosecution, there has to be an investigation.”
“As I said, it is two years today since my sister’s inquest, and it speaks volumes that I am still battling, frankly, just to try to prevent future deaths and to get Ofsted to do what it is necessary to make its school inspection system safe. I should not have to do that, There ought to be some independent objective body that makes sure that those recommendations happen, so that it does not happen again.”
“In the case of the Ofsted legal team, the coroner had to instruct them not to bring more than seven members of their legal team into the court, and we had Reading borough council and the NHS trust’s legal team up against us. Actually, balancing might mean reducing the amount of money that public bodies spend. May I say one more thing, if this really is the last question, because I know we both want to say it? Something else that absolutely needs to happen, whether as part of the Hillsborough law or something separate, is that there must be some kind of national oversight mechanism to make sure that the recommendations that come out of inquests and inquiries are acted upon.”
“It should mean that processes are shorter and less traumatising, and that they can deliver the answers that not only families need but we as a society need to learn, so that deaths are not repeated. Professor Waters: The characteristics you mention were absolutely mine and my family’s experience of the inquest, with Ofsted withholding information or providing redacted information. In fact, it was so heavily redacted that it required us to have a second pre-inquest review, so it extends the process and adds to the expense. I know there has been some discussion about the legal funding potentially being delayed because it might lead to a bigger budget, but parity does not mean more money.”
“These are grieving families who have experienced death, very often where the state has a duty of care; something has gone catastrophically wrong, yet they have to try to drag information out of the people responsible. It is utterly unacceptable. If the Bill actually lands on the ground, meaning that organisations have this duty of candour from top to bottom, and people are called to account if they continue to behave in the way you have had described, I feel that it will change the experience. The other thing to say is that there might be some suggestion that this is going to cause problems within the coronial system, which is our area of expertise. The Bill is trying to stop the battle to drag information out of people. There will be proper disclosure and open honesty from the outset about where things have gone wrong.”
“Q I will try to be quick, Mr Dowd. Families have told me that they have experienced during coroner’s inquests the following: information having to be dragged out of public bodies, hostile legal teams and a process that is meant to be inquisitorial becoming adversarial. Do you have any comments on whether the Bill will improve that situation? Deborah Coles: The first thing to say is that the legal aid provisions will quite clearly have a transformative effect, because families will no longer have to go through intrusive funding processes, crowdfund or represent themselves. In terms of a change in culture and the duty of candour, at the moment, as I explained, we see exactly what families have spoken to you about: a process that is adversarial in nature and victim blaming. Time and again, families describe their experiences as a battle.”
“It is a summary hearing, not a surrogate public inquiry. Increasingly, I tell coroners about the existence of the advocate’s toolkits, which have been designed specifically with inquests in process. I have encouraged coroners that if lawyers are seeking to turn an inquest into a public inquiry, they should pause, look at the advocate’s toolkits, remind the lawyers to look at those and remind them of the nature of the proceedings, because it is not the correct forum to make those sort of arguments.”
“Q Constituents of mine—such as the parents of Ida Lock, a baby whose death due to failings in care was preventable—have described inquests to me where the behaviour of public bodies made the inquest adversarial rather than inquisitorial. Information had to be dragged out of public bodies, and there were hostile legal teams. As a coroner, do you recognise that picture? What challenges does that behaviour give to coroners in their duties? Do you think that the Bill will change that situation? Judge Durran: There is certainly an impression that inquests are becoming more adversarial because lawyers seek to use them as some early form of litigation, with an eye to any consequential litigation down the line. My predecessor and I have done a lot to convey the message that an inquest is inquisitorial—it should not be adversarial.”
“Q Do you think that the Bill will help to improve that situation? Judge Durran: It is disappointing that the duty of candour has to be written into law. I hope that the Bill is a considerable step in the right direction, as a vehicle to enable a coroner, through conduct reports and compliance directions, to better get people to engage with the true intentions, which is to find out answers to the four questions and primarily how someone died. However, I cannot over-emphasise that the compliance directions and conduct reports add a burden to a strain that is already under strain and under-resourced.”
“I think it will be a big help and support that aim because, as I mentioned earlier, an open and transparent response right at the start has the best chance of not only avoiding somebody consulting lawyers or initiating a claim just to get answers, but avoiding that claim subsequently escalating into unnecessary and adversarial legal proceedings. We have driven down the number of cases that go into formal litigation by using alternative dispute resolution, which generally involves bringing clinicians and the organisation together with the family. But you can do that only if there is an atmosphere of trust and clear transparency as to the information that is being shared.”
“Q First, it is a matter of public record that my husband works for NHS England—for now. I ask these questions as a representative of constituents who have been harmed, including my constituent Vicki, who died, and baby Ida Lock, who died a preventable death. Her death was graded as “Moderate harm”, which was one of the many, many failings that came afterwards. NHS Resolution focuses on resolving issues and harm caused without resorting to legal processes. How will the Bill contribute to that aim? Helen Vernon: Those are incredibly sad circumstances and sensitive issues.”
“I recognise anxieties about people suffering harm as a result of exercising the freedom to speak up, but it has been very successful when we look at the number of people we have seen coming forward with issues, most of whom I would argue do not suffer detriment as a result. This is about psychological safety, training, encouragement, support, standardising and professionalising around safety. A lot of the work we have done around safety has been about the governance and organisational principles of how it is done, and underlying all of it is a clear statement about systems and culture.”
“Thinking about where organisations have not been sufficiently transparent, we see occasions on which it is a failure to understand. I was involved with some training for staff who had worked in an organisation—it is not appropriate to name the organisation—where they had seen considerable failings. They were in tears during this training about reporting incidents because they realised they had been getting it completely wrong. It is incumbent upon us to work with organisations to change culture, but also to educate, train and support people, and to professionalise the approach to reporting and openness that we want to see, but that has to be done in a way in which people feel psychologically safe to do so.”
“Q My understanding is that some NHS organisations currently view being transparent as the legal risk. Do you think the Bill will change attitudes, in that it flips the legal risk on to being non-transparent? I have struggled, in representing my constituents, with the fact that this is about not just processes, or even law, but culture. It is about changing the culture of a care organisation that responds to harm not by trying to find out what happened and stop it happening, but by trying to cover its own back. Will both NHS England and NHS Resolution speak to that? Helen Vernon: Just briefly, we hope that it will bolster transparency and the existing duty of candour, but perhaps Professor Fowler wants to come in. Professor Fowler: I certainly agree with that. We have had the opportunity to talk about the sad case of Ida Lock.”
“I have seen instances where what you have described is the case—as Helen said, it is inconsistent—and I have seen brave clinicians who have said, “Right, if it is not going to trigger the organisational statutory duty of candour, I do have a professional duty of candour, and I am going to raise it that way.” I hope the Bill will bolster that, as we have said.”
“Q Do you think it is accurate that some organisations in the NHS still see being transparent, and admitting harm and problems, as the legal risk? Helen Vernon: They should not, but as we mentioned, there is inconsistency. Part of our collective role is to make sure that people understand its importance, how to do it well and how to deliver candour in practice. Professor Fowler: You mentioned closed cultures. I spent six months recently working as an interim in the CQC in the gap between chief inspectors. One of the things we recognised is that where we saw organisations with challenges, there was often also a closed culture. To be clear, that is a minority of organisations, but I think the two go together. Dr Chopra: I recognise your questions, and I agree with what Aidan said.”
“Could the right hon. Gentleman remind us which Government led to that 11% inflation and which Government crashed the economy? Could he also speak to the estimated 1,970 children in Morecambe and Lunesdale who will benefit from the lifting of the two-child benefit cap and tell them why they should continue to live in poverty?”
“I know that my hon. Friend is aware of the report from North Lancashire Citizens Advice about child poverty in our area. Its top recommendation to combat child poverty was to scrap the two-child limit. Will she join me in thanking North Lancashire Citizens Advice for its fantastic work to help local people? Will she continue to work with me, as she often so generously does, to tackle child poverty in our area?”
“On energy security and ensuring a diverse range of clean energy sources, does my hon. Friend welcome, as I do, the Government’s commitment to responding to the nuclear regulatory review within three months, so that we can change the way that nuclear is regulated and ensure that it is kept safe and up to date, and can get building new nuclear?”
“The objections to global and national action on climate change frankly baffle me, not least because of the climate emergency, but also because of the opportunity it brings to our country. My constituency has had good clean energy jobs for decades through Heysham 1 and 2 nuclear power stations—I keep pushing for Heysham 3. Does the Secretary of State agree that the agreements at COP30 and the Government’s actions on climate change are an opportunity to not only fight climate change and create good jobs, but improve living standards in our country and across the globe?”
“The Israeli Government must abandon the stranglehold they have on Palestinian aid. Despite their pledge to allow in humanitarian relief, they are still blocking desperately needed supplies. Aid must reach Gaza, alongside the restoration of critical infrastructure, such as electricity and water treatment, and public services. Only then can the larger task of reconstruction move forward.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. Gaza is in ruins. Almost everything needed to sustain life—homes, businesses, farmland—has been reduced to rubble. The international responsibility is clear: provide aid, restore essential services and help Palestinians reclaim control over their future. For peace to last, we cannot just focus on the absence of violence; we also need to rebuild the foundations of long-term stability. Gaza’s people need long-term support and the opportunity to rebuild their lives, even when global attention has shifted. That means enabling Palestinians to play a central role in rebuilding their lives and institutions, because reconstruction must include both physical infrastructure but also civic systems that ensure that Palestinians can govern themselves freely.”
“The de-Ba’athification of the Iraq Government decimated the state bureaucracy and hollowed out civic infrastructure. Any holder of a Ba’ath party card was dismissed. That included teachers and low-level functionaries, who needed the card to work.”
“I absolutely agree. The Palestinians must be in the driving seat. A solution should not be imposed on them. Palestinians know best what is right for them and their country, and that has to be central. Any moneys that go in have to be properly accounted for, and any reconstruction done properly. As I have said, civic infrastructure is key. It is right that Hamas play no role in the governing of Palestine going forward. It is an horrific organisation, and its extreme ideology and violent actions have caused immense harm, both within and without Palestinian borders. It cannot be allowed to control Gaza’s future. However, history offers crucial lessons on how to shape post-war civic society. For example, in the wake of the Iraq war, the restoration of essential services was strained by the absence of administrative and management personnel.”
“I absolutely agree that Israel must release prisoners, particularly those who are there for their non-violent actions against the occupation. The Palestinians will need all talents, and the Israeli Government must take action on that. I was speaking about the aftermath of the war in Iraq. Obviously, the situation in Gaza is not a carbon copy of what happened there; that was simply an example of where thoughtless implementation of a reasonable headline policy had an impact that went far beyond the stated intent.”
“I absolutely agree that we need to use the people on the ground, who know the area best, in rebuilding. The international community would be foolish not to look at previous post-war measures in other conflicts and learn the right lessons, because the people of Gaza cannot afford for preventable mistakes to be repeated. With an economy in ruins and a population traumatised by years of conflict, Palestinians need international help to rebuild.”
“I absolutely agree that our recognition of a Palestinian state earlier this year is crucial to ensuring that Palestinians can rebuild fully. As my hon. Friend said, it is not simply the stopping of violence that counts; it is all the next steps. Efforts must be led by Palestinians across the whole of society. In particular, women need to be actively included throughout reconstruction. They need to be guiding it throughout and not simply be an afterthought. This window of time could not be more important. Recent history should remind us that what is meant to be temporary can often become entrenched. Israel’s occupation of the west bank has lasted 50 years.”
“Our responsibility is to ensure that the people of Gaza emerge from this horror with the tools, support and autonomy to shape their own future.”
“The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Although the international focus has been on Gaza, horrific acts still continue in the west bank and the people there are living in fear of settler violence. That is why I very much welcomed sanctions on some settler organisations, although I think we could have gone further. The right hon. Gentleman makes a very good point. For Palestine to live freely, we have to talk about the whole of Palestine. It cannot be divided; it cannot be carved up piecemeal, and the illegal occupations absolutely must stop now. Too many Palestinians fear that the destruction, displacement and suffering that they have endured will become permanent. We cannot let that happen. So much has been lost and so many lives have been destroyed, but those who survive need urgent aid and the chance to rebuild.”
“The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to make representations to Lancashire County Council to protect users of adult social care in Lancashire, and encourage the Council not to close Vale View Day Centre. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003132]”
“The petition states: “The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to make representations to Lancashire County Council to protect users of adult social care in Lancashire, and encourage the Council not to close Vale View Day Centre.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the United Kingdom Declares that Vale View Day Centre provides care and activities for older adults and supports their carers and families by giving carers time for themselves; further notes Lancashire County Council is running a consultation on the future of this service; further declares that this service is deeply valued by local residents across North Lancashire as reflected by comments in local media.”
“I present a petition in the same terms as my hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Cat Smith), who has worked so hard to protect care facilities in our area. My constituents really value the services provided by Vale View day centre, which provides a safe and caring space for adults who live at home but have care and support needs. Constituents have told me about their spouses, siblings and elderly parents who find joy and friendship at Vale View.”
“My constituency hosts Heysham 1 and 2 nuclear power stations, and provides the cleanest energy of any UK constituency, so obviously I am keen that Heysham continues to be part of our golden nuclear future. Is the Minister, like me, eagerly awaiting the report of the regulatory review—particularly on the outdated semi-urban population density criteria—and will he work with me to ensure that the benefits of the Heysham site are known across the industry?”
“My constituents are quite rightly appalled by fly-tipping. It is a particular problem in the west end of Morecambe, but it also affects the beautiful countryside in my area. What action are the Government taking to tackle this appalling crime?”
“I represent a partly rural constituency, Morecambe and Lunesdale, so my constituents rely on the universal service obligation. They also rely on regular mail deliveries for vital information such as hospital appointments. But my constituents, particularly in villages like Endmoor, are suffering with irregular and delayed deliveries. Does the Minister agree that my rural constituents deserve a good postal service, and that Royal Mail should focus on delivering one? What steps is the Minister taking to secure that service?”
“What my hon. Friend is saying really resonates with me. Does he agree that the fact that pride in place is a 10-year fund allows us to be really strategic about the regeneration of our high streets? Instead of them receiving bits and bats of money for six months with really tight frameworks, local people will be empowered by the fund to regenerate their own area.”
“I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman got to his point, kind of. He mentioned hospitality workers. I was a hospitality worker for many years, so I know how hard work it is. I also know about the people who will benefit on the shop floor from the Government’s Employment Rights Bill. Could the right hon. Gentleman say more about how regulation is supposedly harming workers, because as a former hospitality worker I see the benefits of the Employment Rights Bill for all my former colleagues.”
“I thank the right hon. Member for his generosity in giving way, because I am finding this debate very interesting. In the rural areas of my constituency, businesses are struggling to hire workers not because of the cost but because local workers cannot afford to live in those areas because there is no affordable housing. Does the right hon. Member agree that it is very welcome that the Government are focusing on the practicalities that ordinary workers need in order to be employed, which will help rural businesses like those in my area that are struggling to recruit?”
“Families, instead of grieving their loss, are forced to fight for the truth. My hope is that the Bill will protect victims and their families—like Vicki’s, like Ryan and Sarah Lock and those who lost loved ones at Hillsborough—from this prolonged trauma. They deserve honesty, accountability and humanity from the very start, because that is how we rebuild trust.”
“The pain is compounded because the family had felt that she was in the right place to be cared for. They trusted the hospital to get it right. We know that no one goes to work in healthcare to do harm, but doctors and nurses are humans; they will make mistakes, and it is difficult for them to admit that they have harmed someone, so we need to create institutional cultures in which people feel able to speak up and raise concerns. Mistakes are often one-offs, but what is not is the institutional response to these tragedies. The institutional response of cover-up is part of a wider, long-standing pattern of poor culture and weak accountability. What harmed families tell me in the wake of these tragedies is that it is not necessarily the mistake itself that causes so much harm to them but the cover-up and the denial.”
“If the hospital had listened to Vicki and done a bone marrow test earlier, that HLH could have been identified, and it is possible that it could have been treated successfully. But once the decision to do the test—it gives results in only 10 minutes—was finally made, it took 18 hours for it to be done. The bone marrow test confirmed that Vicki had HLH. Twenty-four hours later, she died. Vicki knew that she was having a flare-up, and she said so, but she was not listened to. From her hospital bed, she had written a letter of complaint to the patient advice and liaison service; then, just a week later, she was dead. Her family just want the truth to be recognised, because, in their experience, it has not been. Their experience echoes that of Ida’s parents.”
“She was treated with antibiotics but not given any steroids. Her care was fraught with errors: her lipids were scored incorrectly; the right tests were eventually requested but not carried out in a timely way; and a pharmacist spotted that she had missed crucial medication, but nothing was done. According to her family, the doctors got caught in a loop of circular thinking—they focused on sepsis and covid—even when there was another possibility, particularly with her history of autoimmune problems. There is a rare but known complication of autoimmune disease called hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, which is a massive overreaction of the immune system that causes hyperinflammation, damaging vital organs.”
“The Hillsborough law we debate today is not an historical problem; it is something that my constituents need right now. I have already spoken in this place about baby Ida Lock, who died after failings in her care, and the incompetent investigation and lack of transparency that followed. Today I want to talk about another constituent of mine. Vicki had autoimmune diseases, and she had regular treatment for them, often needing steroids. In 2021, Vicki fell pregnant and had a flare-up, which was treated with steroids. Not long after she tragically suffered a miscarriage. Days later she was admitted to hospital with severe abdominal pain and an increased heart rate, and she began to deteriorate. The differential diagnosis was either an infection or a flare-up of her autoimmune disease. Vicki kept getting more poorly.”
“My colleagues have already asked about the current horror in Gaza, so I will pivot to the longer term. Before this crisis, we saw decades of illegal settlements on Palestinian territory, so I welcomed the Government’s sanctions on extremist settlers and Israeli Ministers. I do not want us to lose sight of that issue, so will the Minister consider what further steps he can take, including trade restrictions, to combat illegal settlements?”