Lorraine Beavers
MP for Blackpool North and Fleetwood · Labour · United Kingdom
“Thank you for your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I also thank all hon. Members who have spoken and intervened, and the Minister for her response. I again pay tribute to the tireless campaigners who have never given up in their struggle against Transwaste’s disdain for our community.”
“Instead of the company bearing the burden to run a site properly, the burden has fallen on residents to prove that the operator has no such ability. That demonstrates that the weight of scrutiny in the system is in the wrong place. How does the Minister plan to address that? At present, the regulation is self-evidently ineffective.”
“I have dedicated much of my time as an MP to working out why. The children of Flakefleet primary school understand the injustice. A year ago, they wrote to the Prime Minister and handed a petition into 10 Downing Street.”
“My hon. Friend is correct, and I agree with him. I will address that point in my remarks. Communities across the country have found themselves trapped in the same nightmare that we have experienced: living beside waste sites, making complaint after complaint and discovering that the system is better at documenting their suffering than end…”
“I agree. I thank the Environment Agency, which has worked tirelessly despite massive staff shortages and everything else. It has worked with me and my community to resolve this problem. The passing on of responsibility while communities suffer cannot continue.”
“The central point that I wish to make is that this is proof of a broken regulatory system. Residents can make thousands of complaints, and people and businesses can be forced to leave an area because of an operator acting unlawfully, and still they are left breathing the same foul air.”
The complete record
Every one of 141 lines we hold for Lorraine Beavers, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“The central point that I wish to make is that this is proof of a broken regulatory system. Residents can make thousands of complaints, and people and businesses can be forced to leave an area because of an operator acting unlawfully, and still they are left breathing the same foul air. If our system cannot prevent that from happening, it is broken. If the regulatory system’s purpose is to record suffering, issue notices and hold meetings, but not to prevent suffering for the local community, its purpose and objectives are the wrong way around. In Fleetwood, it is as simple as this: a private company is making money from stinking out the entire town and damaging livelihoods, breaking the law in the process, while the British state appears too weak, too slow and too broken to stop it.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of waste management sites on local communities. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison. For nearly three years, the people of Fleetwood have been forced to live with an intolerable smell from the Jameson Road landfill site. They have complained, protested and reported the effects on their health to the council, the Environment Agency, the Government and to me, their Member of Parliament. Over the past two and a half years, the Environment Agency has taken increasingly severe action against the operator of the site. Each time, the operator has breached its permit and acted unlawfully in the process, and still the smell remains. At times recently, it has been worse than ever. In March of this year alone, more than 4,000 complaints were made.”
“I agree. I hope that we will get that done—or start the battle to do so—today. Absurdly, none of the waste is even from Fleetwood. It seems that waste can be transported from across the country to any landfill site that is happy to take it—a form of waste tourism. The waste comes from outside Lancashire, harming people and the environment in the process. Of course, working-class northern communities such as mine are allowed to be collateral damage. This is not just about Fleetwood; communities across the country have found themselves trapped in the same nightmare that we have experienced.”
“He too moved to Fleetwood for better air, but because of the landfill, he suffers with sore and itchy eyes, has difficulty breathing and feels worse than ever. He asked one simple question: why is this allowed? I ask the Minister the same question. I do not want to hear that it is not allowed, because the fact that the problem continues proves that it is. If a national Government cannot put a stop to it, will the Minister suggest who can? These are not isolated complaints.”
“She feels like a prisoner in her own home; when the smell is at its worst, she cannot leave her house for days on end. Like many in Fleetwood, she moved to the area for the fresh sea air. Instead, she says, it has ruined her life. Another wrote to say that their family had to leave Fleetwood because of the smell. One member of the family, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, found the additional strain impossible to cope with, and their adult disabled daughter experienced throat irritation and disrupted sleep. They could not put up with it any longer and had to move away. That meant leaving behind their daughter’s established social and support network, registering with a completely new medical team and changing her care package. Another of my constituents has emphysema.”
“I take this opportunity to raise the case of my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns), who, unfortunately, cannot join us today as she is attending a Select Committee. Her constituents have also had to keep their windows shut and stay indoors because of the awful smell coming from a landfill site. My hon. Friend the Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Cat Smith) has constituents who can smell the landfill site in my constituency, as the odour blows across the Wyre estuary to Knott End and Preesall. Nobody should have to live like that, in Fleetwood or anywhere else. Let me share some of the experiences that residents have reported to me. One wrote to say that the landfill has affected her already severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.”
“My hon. Friend is correct, and I agree with him. I will address that point in my remarks. Communities across the country have found themselves trapped in the same nightmare that we have experienced: living beside waste sites, making complaint after complaint and discovering that the system is better at documenting their suffering than ending it. People have reported headaches, nausea, nosebleeds, vomiting and breathing difficulties, with some requiring hospital treatment. The prolonged stress is also harming my residents’ mental health. Children do not want to play outside, parents have had to keep the windows shut—even during the recent hot weather—and businesses are losing customers. Some residents are considering leaving the town they have lived in all their lives, while others have already left.”
“Either explanation demands Government action. If the Environment Agency lacks the powers to suspend activity before further harm is caused, Parliament must provide such powers. If existing powers are unusable because of legal tests, internal processes or fears of legal challenge, those barriers must be removed. The agency must also have the resources to enforce the law. The issues at Jameson Road have resulted in the Environment Agency needing to pull experts in from all over the country.”
“Instead of the company bearing the burden to run a site properly, the burden has fallen on residents to prove that the operator has no such ability. That demonstrates that the weight of scrutiny in the system is in the wrong place. How does the Minister plan to address that? At present, the regulation is self-evidently ineffective. As the local Member of Parliament, I meet representatives of the Environment Agency every Friday morning. My team and the wider community have pursued every possible avenue to stop the smell and get the site closed. Over the course of those meetings, I have concluded that one of two things must be true: either the Environment Agency does not have sufficient powers to intervene quickly enough, or it is not using the powers it has with the necessary urgency. Which does the Minister think it is?”
“As the Jameson Road debacle suggests, to make such sites profitable, companies are now operating them poorly, breaching the terms to their permits and ignoring planning conditions. Local people are left to bear the brunt of their corner cutting. The issuing and transferring of environmental permits needs to be more robust. Perhaps a new environmental permit should be issued with each change of ownership. If an economically unviable site has been closed, any prospective operator should surely be asked how they will overcome the financial issues. The way in which operators plan to make a site profitable without cutting corners should be scrutinised, and permits should not be carried over if operators cannot produce credible plans.”
“I agree. The problems began following the transfer of ownership from SUEZ to Transwaste Recycling and Aggregates, and the resumption of tipping in January 2024. SUEZ proved that sites like Jameson Road can be operated properly without a detrimental impact on the local community, but across the country more operators are cutting corners and operating outside of the law. Meanwhile, our enforcement framework has not kept up. It is designed around the assumption that operators will do the right thing, often with local authorities in mind. As we have learned in Fleetwood, we cannot afford to make that assumption any longer. The nature of waste management has changed. Small waste management firms are now operating sites that were previously considered economically unviable.”
“Fleetwood’s health, dignity and future cannot be treated as less important than the financial interest of the private waste companies. No community should be treated in this way.”
“I have dedicated much of my time as an MP to working out why. The children of Flakefleet primary school understand the injustice. A year ago, they wrote to the Prime Minister and handed a petition into 10 Downing Street. The smell from Jameson Road dominates their life at school, and those pupils believe that when something is clearly wrong, those in power will listen and act. That is why I invited this Prime Minister to come to Fleetwood, and I will be inviting the next one to do so as well. My constituents are tired. They feel ignored and forgotten. Many believe this situation would never have been allowed to continue for so long in a wealthy commuter town in Surrey, and I agree with them. Working-class communities should not be expected to tolerate lower standards because they have less political and economic power.”
“I agree. I thank the Environment Agency, which has worked tirelessly despite massive staff shortages and everything else. It has worked with me and my community to resolve this problem. The passing on of responsibility while communities suffer cannot continue. The regulators point to the limits of their powers; the operators point to the weather; Departments point to the regulators. Meanwhile, residents are told to make another complaint and keep filling in their diary sheets. That is how faith in Government is destroyed, especially when that pattern is so recognisable in other aspects of the way the country is run. A private company is making money from stinking out an entire town, damaging people’s health and livelihoods, and the British state has so far been incapable of stopping it.”
“How does she plan to address the scrutiny gap, whereby companies do not have to prove their ability to run a site properly before operating it? Fleetwood needs action, communities across Britain need protection and this country needs a regulatory system that puts people before polluters.”
“Does she acknowledge that the reality of the situation in Fleetwood is that a private company has made profit through unlawful activity at the expense of the health and wellbeing of an entire town, and that that is unacceptable? Will she commission a full review of the current waste management framework, taking into consideration the following questions. Does the Environment Agency have sufficient powers to take decisive action quickly enough? Is it not fully using the powers it already has? Does the Minister believe that the Environment Agency is adequately resourced, and if not, how will the Government increase its funding to deal with the scale of these challenges? Will she legislate to ensure that new environmental permits must be sought when the ownership of a site changes?”
“We were elected to show that government can work and that the state can protect people and stand up to private interests when they cause harm. Jameson Road is a test of that promise. It is also a test of whether we are prepared to fix a national regulatory failure. Reforming the system would show communities across the country that they will not be abandoned when the same failures occur on their doorstep. The next community to face this problem should not have to start from the beginning—keeping diaries, gathering medical evidence and begging regulators to act, while the operators continue to profit. The British state must prove that it is not too broken to stop this. With that in mind, I have several questions for the Minister.”
“I apologise for naming Surrey. The wider enforcement framework must change. Regulators need clear powers to suspend operators quickly, stronger tests of operators’ competence and the ability to consider the cumulative impact of sites on communities. Penalties must change behaviour, rather than become a cost of doing business. The financial consequences must fall on the polluters, and we must make sure that companies cannot take the profits while leaving residents and taxpayers to carry the costs when things go wrong. We need a system that learns from the crisis in Fleetwood rather than one that waits for the same crisis to unfold elsewhere. A Labour Government should not stand by while private operators profit from the suffering of working-class towns.”
“Social and environmental justice are part of the same struggle, and I will not stop fighting until we deliver both for the British people. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the impact of waste management sites on local communities.”
“Thank you for your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I also thank all hon. Members who have spoken and intervened, and the Minister for her response. I again pay tribute to the tireless campaigners who have never given up in their struggle against Transwaste’s disdain for our community. Over the coming months, I will keep pushing in Parliament for the closure of that site once and for all, and for the enforcement needed to tackle the epidemic of waste crime across this country. I will work with the new Prime Minister to ensure that working-class communities such as mine and his are no longer an afterthought for those in Westminster. Delivering on issues as fundamental as this is a mission of the Labour Government; it is a test of our ability to change things for the better. I came into politics to fight for justice at every level.”
“The lasting answer to poverty is good work that pays decent wages, and that requires the reindustrialisation of our coastal towns. In Fleetwood, we need a tidal barrage and the train line reconnected. Transport is not simply about getting from one place to another; it connects people to work, education and healthcare. We came here to rebuild our communities, build warm homes, restore transport links, create secure jobs and give young people a reason to live locally. It is time to give our coastal towns hope again. Let us all get on with delivering the future we promised.”
“When buses are unreliable, railway lines have disappeared and services have closed, geographical isolation quickly becomes economic and social isolation. Young people feel that they must leave to find decent work. The industries that once sustained reliable working communities like mine have disappeared with too little put in their place. This decline was not inevitable; it is a result of political choices, and it is now the duty of this Government to fix it. Without investment in towns such as Blackpool and Fleetwood, the Government cannot achieve their missions of growth, opportunity, health and clean energy. It is not good enough simply to pump more money into the major cities of the north and south; our towns need support too.”
“It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. My constituency has enormous potential, but it has been held back by years of austerity, under-investment and managed decline. Coastal communities once stood at the heart of Britain’s economy: our ports connected us to the world, our fishing fleet fed the country and our industries sustained skills and secured jobs. Fleetwood was a thriving port, central to our national prosperity. Today, many coastal communities face deep poverty, poor health, lower educational attainment, insecure work and poor-quality housing, yet the deprivation is hidden. Severe need in one neighbourhood can be obscured by apparent prosperity only a few miles away, and broad funding formulas fail to reflect the reality of individual towns. Those problems are made worse by isolation.”
“Kiena Dawes was pushed into taking her own life by her abusive partner. Before she died, she said that he had killed her. With domestic abuse-related suicides on the rise and women in abusive relationships being more likely to take their own life than to be killed by their abuser, will the Minister commit to the Home Office working with victims and campaigners to ensure that the law fully reflects the role that domestic abuse plays in the deaths of people like Kiena?”
“Fleetwood and Lytham have been officially recognised as the two busiest coastguard stations in the UK, and I place on the record my thanks for their amazing dedication to keeping our people safe. Will the Minister reassure the House that the GMB union and volunteer coastguards will be fully consulted at all stages, and that communities like mine in Blackpool North and Fleetwood are not going to be put at risk?”
“My constituents have been treated appallingly by Capita. Some of them have died waiting for their pension—the inevitable consequences of outsourcing contracts on the cheap. I welcome the Government’s decision to hold Capita to account at last. Will the Minister ensure that no more Government contracts will be awarded to Capita and explain why, given its dreadful performance, anyone thought it was sensible to award it the Synergy contract?”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec, and I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for bringing forward this important debate. In 2024, Fleetwood and Lytham’s coastguard stations were officially recognised as the busiest in the UK. Only four days ago, Fleetwood coastguard rescue officers spotted around 20 teenagers out in the sea in Bispham. While some were able to get themselves out of the water safely, others were struggling. Coastguards then rescued three of the children, who were taken to hospital. Without our heroic coastguard, it could have been a lot worse. The Maritime and Coastguard Agency plans to maintain the legal volunteer status of coastguards by removing their remuneration. That will have a terrible impact on my community, and it cannot be allowed to happen.”
“I do. To make things even worse, according to the GMB, members were informed of the removal of the payment by a WhatsApp message. We all know that coastguards are not motivated by financial reward; they come into this role to serve their community, protect our residents and save lives. Coastguards in my constituency have told me that they already lose income from their main work, as call-outs are often late at night and during working hours. They also miss out on time with their loved ones because they are keeping our community safe. Removing their remuneration is unsustainable for our coastguards, and we cannot afford to lose them.”
“Secondly, how will the Government ensure operational resilience if large numbers of coastguards leave, and has an impact assessment of that happening been made? Finally, do the Government believe that it is sustainable to rely on volunteers who receive expenses only?”
“I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend and I am sure that the Minister will look at that suggestion—well, I hope so, anyway. One coastguard wrote to me stressing that removing this support risked affecting availability, recruitment and retention. They warned that we might lose capacity in people and in skills that would take years to rebuild. I have written to the CEO of the Maritime Coastguard Agency to express my concern and I call on the Government to ensure that a sustainable remuneration model is found. We owe it to our coastguards to get this right. I will be grateful for answers to the following questions. First, have the Government considered options that would allow for remuneration while complying with employment law?”
“Across the country, children’s football teams often do not have access to a toilet. This issue disproportionately affects girls, and I have been told that girls in my constituency have stopped playing football because they cannot use the loo. Will the Leader of the House make time in the Chamber to discuss my constituent Natalie’s campaign calling for the provision of these essential facilities?”
“In Gaza, the west bank and Lebanon, Israel continues to violate international law with total impunity. I welcome the Secretary of State’s actions against individuals and networks that enable settler violence, but it just does not go far enough. Why will she not at least commit to banning all trade with illegal Israeli settlements, and introduce a comprehensive sanctions regime against the Israeli state?”
“I welcome the Government’s announcement to select Blackpool and The Fylde College as a defence technical excellence college, which will build a skilled workforce and offer stable employment and opportunities in my constituency. But without a Typhoon jet order of our own, we risk losing the ability to build our own fast jets. This is about our national security. Germany, Italy and Spain—”
“Despite Capita’s horrendous administration of the civil service pension scheme, it was still awarded the Synergy shared services contract. We still do not have a reason why—and I am not the first person in this House to ask. Will the Minister finally confirm who was responsible for the decision and whether the Cabinet Office signed it off?”
“Finally, I want to place on the record how proud I am that I played a small part in helping Katie make today happen, and to thank the Government for listening. Twenty-eight days was not enough. Victims and bereaved families must be properly informed, and a better system is being brought forward as a result. For Katie Brett, for Sasha Marsden, and for so many other families, the changes will not remove the grief, but they will make the system fairer, more humane and more just. There is of course always work to do on the criminal justice system, but victims should not have fewer rights than perpetrators. These changes go some way to correct that injustice, and I will be proud to vote for them today.”
“I am pleased that this Labour Government have heard the arguments and are acting to put things right. They have listened to campaigners and to families. I thank the Minister for her constructive engagement to ensure that the Government get the change right, and for ensuring that victims have been listened to at every stage of the process. This change will make a real difference to people at the worst moment of their lives. Crucially, the injustice that Katie suffered would not have happened had these changes been in place. It shows what the Government can do when we put victims first, and when we believe that justice must be matched by decency and compassion. The justice system should reflect the reality of trauma, grief and loss.”
“In Sasha’s case, her family heard all the awful details of what she had endured in the final moments of her young and precious life, and no one in that position is ready, within a matter of days, to get to grips with a complex legal process and start to fight again. Twenty-eight days is not long enough. It is not a real right for any family; it is a barrier. That is why Katie has shown extraordinary courage. Through her campaign for Sasha’s law, she has spoken not only for her own family, but for many others who felt shut out by the system. Katie’s campaign was clear: more time for bereaved families and victims to challenge sentences that they believe are unduly lenient, and clear information so they know that that right exists in the first place.”
“The stronger protections for children, especially in cases of sexual violence, are also badly needed, but I want specifically to welcome the changes that the Government are proposing to the unduly lenient sentence scheme. Katie’s little sister, Sasha Marsden, was just 16 years old when she was brutally murdered, raped and set on fire. It was a crime as horrific and evil as it is possible to imagine, and the pain her family have lived with ever since is something most of us cannot even imagine. After everything they had already been through, Katie and her family then faced another injustice: they had only 28 days to challenge the sentence, and they were not even told that they had the right to do so. That was so very wrong. A trial like that would be deeply traumatic for any family.”
“I stand here today proud of my constituent Katie Brett, who joins us in the Gallery. These changes to the unduly lenient sentence scheme are being brought forward because of her campaigning, following the most traumatic ordeal for her and her family, and I am proud to welcome the fact that this Labour Government have listened and acted. For too long, victims and bereaved families felt that the justice system was not on their side. Measures to force offenders to attend sentencing hearings are right. Families should not be denied the chance to see justice simply because an offender refuses to face up to what they have done.”
“T6. I recently met the Rail Minister, who agreed with me that the reintroduction of the Fleetwood to Poulton rail line would be transformative for the many people in my constituency, but it cannot happen without the support of Lancashire county council. Will the Secretary of State join me in calling for the Reform-led council to put the reopening of the rail line at the top of its transport plans, so that we can finally see this happen?”
“The children with SEND in my constituency are being let down and ignored by the too-large Lancashire county council. Those of my constituents who are also served by Blackpool, a much smaller unitary, are getting the SEND services that they deserve and need. Does the Minister agree that making things smaller and getting away from the two-tier system helps our constituents by making services better, and looking after our children and our elderly?”
“At Jameson Road landfill site, the stink is only getting worse. It is making the lives of my constituents unbearable, yet the crooks responsible at Transwaste still have not gone back to Yorkshire, and have set up a new company called Transwaste NW, presumably to hide their dodgy activities. Will the Leader of the House assure me that this Government will not allow firms like Transwaste to evade accountability for their crimes?”
“Fleetwood stinks again today, but the Jameson Road landfill site still has not been closed. After 14 years of Conservative cuts to all our public services, bodies such as the Environment Agency are on their knees. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Environment Agency desperately needs more boots on the ground to take on the criminals who care nothing for our communities or our planet?”
“The Bill takes important steps forward, but it must not be the end of the conversation. It must be the beginning of doing better for Katie and Sasha, and for every family forced to navigate grief and injustice at the same time. Let us make sure that our justice system delivers not just outcomes, but humanity, fairness and the time that victims need to truly seek justice.”
“I understand the Government’s concern that an end date must still be placed on this longer deadline, which is why Lords amendments 5 and 6 cannot be supported, but I urge them to listen to Katie and the many other families who have suffered at the hands of the status quo, and to ensure that the issue is revisited as the Bill continues its progress. Offenders are afforded multiple opportunities to appeal, and they are given time, process and support. However, victims’ families are given just one chance, with very limited time for it. This cannot be right. It does not reflect the values that we say our justice system is built on and the values that the Labour Government were elected to put into action. If we are serious about putting victims at the heart of the justice system, we must ensure that their rights are real.”
“This is not a meaningful right; this is a barrier. Katie has shown extraordinary courage in turning her grief into action. Through her campaign for Sasha’s law, she is asking for something perfectly reasonable: more time for victims’ families to seek a review of sentences that they believe are unduly lenient. The Government are absolutely right to be looking at ways to improve communications with victims’ families to ensure that they know their right to appeal under the unduly lenient sentence scheme, but I must make this point to the Minister: 28 days is not enough, even if people are informed of their right to appeal. The period of 28 days is how long someone has to return a T-shirt. The families deserve longer to consider whether they wish to appeal.”
“The pain her family lives with every single day is unimaginable to most of us, yet after enduring the traumatic trial and the devastation of their loss, Katie and her family were faced with another injustice: they had 28 days to challenge the sentence that they believed did not reflect the severity of the crime. What is worse, they were not even told that they had this right. For the family of a victim, the trial of the perpetrator is always traumatising, but in such a case—Sasha’s family heard the brutal details of her murder for the first time at the trial—most of us would not be emotionally ready to fight another fight and to understand the complex legal processes within 28 days of hearing the sentence. That is 28 days to grieve, 28 days to understand the complex legal system and 28 days to find the strength to fight once more.”
“I welcome the progress that has been made on this Bill. It is right that we are taking steps to rebuild trust in a system that for too long has left victims feeling invisible and unheard. The measures to compel offenders to attend their sentencing hearings are welcome. No family should be denied the chance to see justice simply because an offender refuses to face what they have done. The protections for children, especially in cases of sexual violence, are long overdue. I will speak specifically about Lords amendments 5 and 6, and about my constituent Katie Brett. Katie’s little sister, Sasha Marsden, was just 16 years old when she was brutally murdered, raped and set on fire. The sheer horror of that crime is beyond words.”
“I am grateful to the Solicitor General for her meeting with me on Monday about the failures of the unduly lenient sentence scheme. It is not enough simply to ensure that families are informed of their rights; they should have longer than the current 28 days to use those rights. For families who have been put through traumatic trials, that is just not long enough. Will the Solicitor General update the House on what plans she has to ensure that families and victims have every chance to see justice done?”
“My constituents in Thornton-Cleveleys have been shocked to learn that their homes are at high risk of contamination due to the presence of the forever chemical PFOA. Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the need to ensure that polluters pay for the clean-ups needed in cases like this?”