← LEADERSHIP TERMINAL

UK PARLIAMENT · SITTING

Laurence Turner

MP for Birmingham Northfield · Labour · United Kingdom

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

“We repeatedly heard that shortages in those key skills are holding back the UK’s ability to deliver major products, as well as raising costs for taxpayers. This statutory instrument is necessary to continue the provision of essential skills training.”

House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Members will recall when a former member of the Revolutionary Communist party—an organisation that acted as an apologist for the IRA’s mainland bombing campaign—was appointed to the other place a few years ago and has never disavowed those views.”

House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“It is difficult to imagine a role in the modern economy for the Wool, Jute and Flax Industry Training Board, but it is worth reflecting that, in the past, training boards oversaw some important skills transitions—particularly the Gas Industry Training Board’s role in the highly successful conversion from town gas to natural gas.”

House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“We cannot create the prospect of British citizens being tried in absentia by states they may never have stepped foot in and then effectively being barred from running for council or parliamentary positions.”

House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“It is worth pointing out that while it is right that we debate the petition’s important proposals, the people of Sparkhill rejected Mr Butt’s candidature. He lost decisively and two Labour councillors were returned. In that case, we needed good organisation and trust in the people of this country. I hope that my hon.”

House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“There is also a valid question to be asked about the effective five-year prohibition against standing for election that applies in practice for domestic convictions of terrorism but not for overseas convictions.”

House of Commons6 July 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

The complete record

740 held · 600 searchable for Laurence Turner. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.

This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.

  1. “I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for proving my point exactly. I will happily tell him that since becoming a Member of this House, I have not received a penny in political donations from trade unions. My constituency Labour party received a donation before the election, but that is an entirely different matter. I have only one matter to draw attention to in my entry on the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, which is my chairship of the GMB parliamentary group, which is an unpaid role. We are asked today to consider a number of amendments that directly contradict our manifesto commitments. Lords amendments 61 and 72 on political funds are a case in point.”

    House of Commons5 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  2. “May I invite the Minister to respond to two things? First, I was asked earlier how many times the word “maternity” appears in the Bill. The word “pregnancy” appears 16 times, “parental” 27 times, and “bereavement” 34 times, but we cannot restrict the debate to individual phrases. Secondly, this is not some abacus exercise; the real impact of the Bill is the change and improvement it will make for millions of working families thanks to day one rights.”

    House of Commons5 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  3. “I hope that represents a change in approach, and that Liberal Democrat Members will not again line up with the Tories and Reform when the Bill returns to the Division Lobbies tomorrow night.”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  4. “I am grateful to the Minister with responsibility for high streets, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Peckham (Miatta Fahnbulleh), for promising to visit the constituency. When she does, we will talk with local businesses about credible policies that will assist their current position. These are real measures that will help businesses, not the fantasies of Conservative Members, who broke Britain but have come to the House today with not a hint of self-criticism, with no credibility and with no shame. I will finish with a few words about the Employment Rights Bill—I draw attention to my connection with the GMB trade union. It is welcome that the Liberal Democrat amendment to the Conservative motion seeks to strike out the words about the Employment Rights Bill.”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  5. “I have had to spend too much time since last July chasing ghost trains, spectral station upgrades, and phantom tram lines, and that approach has continued today with the will-o’-the-wisp pledge to abolish rates completely. That will not convince a single business in any of our constituencies. That is why today’s motion is so risible: it is the political equivalent of returning once more to kick the cracked paving stones, the empty units, and the broken bus stops that the Conservative party left behind. I am glad that, under Labour, progress is now being made. Capital funding has been secured for infrastructure works on our transport network, which will mean more money in people’s pockets and greater footfall. Crucially, £20 million has been committed over 10 years to the Hawkesley estate through the pride in place funding.”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  6. “Our high streets are still dealing with the legacy of the hollowing out of West Midlands police in the 2010s, when the force lost 1,200 police officers and police community support officers. The local authority suffered the sharpest cuts to spending power of any unitary council over the past decade. Attempts were made to distract our constituents from the slow deterioration, with grand visions of schemes that were as solid as the wind. Five years ago, the then Conservative Mayor of the West Midlands, Andy Street, published a transport map of the region as part of his election campaign. It detailed a prospective new metro line down Bristol road and through Northfield high street, but that metro extension was not mentioned again after the election and, as far as I can tell, no serious development work was ever done on the idea.”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  7. “Northfield high street is home to some excellent and specialised vendors, but the street is tired in too many places, and problems relating to homelessness, addiction, shoplifting and other forms of crime stretch back many years. Three years ago, it looked as if the tide would turn, when great hopes—encouraged locally and nationally by the Conservatives—were raised over round 2 of the levelling-up fund. A bid was prepared for £11 million to regenerate the high street, but those hopes were cruelly dashed and not one penny of that funding was allocated to the city of Birmingham. Instead, much of that funding was redirected to leafier and more affluent parts of the country, as the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) so memorably boasted.”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  8. “I was initially surprised to see this motion on the Order Paper, given that it is essentially a resubmission of a motion previous submitted by the Opposition and rejected by the House in February, but I should not have been. After all, they do say that culprits often return to the scene of the offence, and when it comes to the current parlous state of many of our high streets, the Conservative party is especially culpable. But really we should be grateful: today’s debate has been an opportunity to talk about the high streets in many of our constituencies that were so badly let down under 14 years of Conservative administration.”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  9. “I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving way; he is being generous with his time. I wonder if he could clarify his party’s position on the Employment Rights Bill. The shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Andrew Griffith), said that a Conservative Government would seek to repeal what he called the most damaging elements of the Bill. Could he set out for us which measures they welcome and would retain?”

    House of Commons4 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  10. “I draw attention to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests in respect of the GMB, a defence manufacturing trade union. Defence is an engine for growth, but skill shortages remain. What steps are being taken to increase the number of high-quality apprentices? If I may, Mr Speaker, can I also ask the Minister to join me in congratulating my constituent Andy De Comyn, whose design has just been chosen for the proposed national memorial to all members of the parliamentary community who have fallen in conflict?”

    House of Commons3 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  11. “I am grateful to my hon. Friend for securing this important debate. I draw attention to my chairship of the GMB parliamentary group. I am glad that he mentioned GMB’s frustrations with Amazon. Another sector in which that union and other unions have been frustrated is social care, which has been fragmented for three decades now. Does he agree that having a strong general statutory right of access must be complemented with an enhanced right of access under the forthcoming fair pay agreement in social care?”

    House of Commons22 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  12. “I draw attention to my chairship of the GMB parliamentary group. As someone who worked on this issue the last time around, I was astonished to hear the Opposition’s flight of fantasy when they accused others of delay. On their watch, the airports commission was artificially delayed until after a general election, with three more years spent producing the current NPS and a further two years tied up in the courts. Can the Secretary of State assure the House that the lessons have been learned from those eight wasted years?”

    House of Commons22 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  13. “The people charged with the protection of public safety carry a heavy burden, and not all the information that they consider has yet been laid out in the public domain. However, I have deep concerns about the principle of block-banning entire groups of opposition fans—some of whom, let us not forget, may be UK residents or nationals—and about some of the descriptions of Birmingham in parts of the press and other areas of our political life that are not a true account of our city. Does the Secretary of State agree that Birmingham overwhelmingly remains a diverse and welcoming place, and will she join me in commending the calm leadership that the council leader, John Cotton, has brought to bear by calling for a review?”

    House of Commons20 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  14. “On the question of whether Ada was a true programmer, the fact that the first and famous note G contained a very small bug, and that her periods of intense concentration were followed by occasional intense frustration, will resonate with anyone who has engaged in programming. As my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale said, we should imagine what might have been accomplished if Ada Lovelace, and uncounted millions before and after, had enjoyed the same formal and informal advantages as men. How many great discoveries in the fields of medicine, manufacturing and technology have been delayed or are still undiscovered because there were not women in the room? Towards the end of her life, Ada Lovelace hoped that she would leave a mathematical legacy; the inspiration that she has left means that that hope is fulfilled. As my hon.”

    House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  15. “Her insights into the possibilities of computing speak to us 200 years on—they seem sometimes to be more of our time than of her own—yet she was also unbound by today’s boundaries between arts, humanities and other subjects. As she wrote in one early letter: “give me poetical science”. Perhaps it was Ada Lovelace’s combination of science and poetry that allowed her to see, in a way that no contemporary did, the true potential of the analytical engine and general purpose computing. As has been said, Ada Lovelace’s comments on the creative potential and limitations of computing, and her foresight about the power of general purpose programming for the common betterment of mankind, speak in a remarkable way to the debates that we have in this House today.”

    House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  16. “I am truly grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge) for securing this debate and for her powerful speech. One of this debate’s origins was a question raised by a pupil at St Thomas Aquinas school in Kings Norton. They wanted to know what more could be done to improve the share of women and girls in STEM subjects and employment. I hope the fact that we are asking ourselves these questions today will be taken as proof that representations to us as MPs make a difference in Parliament. If more time was available, I would love to talk about the work going on in my constituency to sustain and improve those shares. Many women other than Ada Lovelace have made foundational contributions to the development of science and mathematics, but there is something that draws us back to Ada Lovelace in particular.”

    House of Commons16 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  17. “I thank the Foreign Secretary for her statement and for her recent decision, when she was Home Secretary, about the Ukraine permission extension scheme. Does she agree that when Putin probes weakness we must respond by demonstrating strength? Does she further agree that the post-war development of Ukraine’s significant energy resources, which may require British technical expertise, would serve the dual purpose of helping to reconstruct Ukraine’s shattered economy and increase Europe’s security of energy supply?”

    House of Commons15 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  18. “I warmly welcome the £20 million pride in place funding for the Hawkesley estate in my constituency. It stands in stark contrast to the hopes and expectations that were allowed to be built under the last Government for £11 million for Northfield’s high street in the second-round bid for the levelling-up fund, which were cruelly dashed when not one penny was allocated to the city of Birmingham. Does my hon. Friend agree that this will not be, and cannot be, some lengthy bureaucratic process? Of course our councils must be essential partners, but will she confirm that the priorities will be set in the communities themselves?”

    House of Commons15 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  19. “Does the hon. Member agree that fair notice may be relative to the industry we are talking about? What is fair notice in, say, the retail sector may be completely different from what is fair notice for someone working on an offshore oil rig.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  20. “At the start of this debate, I could not believe that that was the intention of the Liberal Democrats, but now I am not so sure.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  21. ““Employees” is, of course, a more restrictive category than “workers”; indeed, clause 148 of the Bill as drafted makes it clear that for the purpose of the interpretation of this Bill, “workers” and “employees” mean two different things. Many of the people who are classed only as “workers” are precisely those who may benefit the most from these protections. Some 5 million people who are nominally casual workers in sectors such as social care, construction, hospitality, security and retail could be excluded from these protections if the amendment, which stands in the names of Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers, were to be carried. I hope it is not the intention of those on the Conservative Benches to exclude those 5 million people.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  22. “Lords amendment 1, which stands in the names of both Liberal Democrat and Conservative peers, seeks to amend clause 1. However, the Liberal Democrats supported that clause in Committee and only voiced concern, which was reasonable, that timely guidance to employers must be issued to accompany it; indeed, they voted with Labour Members when it was put to a vote in Committee. I fear that this amendment, too, could have serious unintended consequences. The clause that it seeks to amend puts a duty on employers to offer regular-hours contracts to “workers”—that is the language used in the legislation as it stands at the moment—but the amendment seeks to convert that duty into a right to request by employees.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  23. “I am at a loss to understand how the radical change in approach has come about among the Liberal Democrats in this House between Committee stage, Report, Third Reading and the debate that we are holding today. In fact, listening to the hon. Lady, I felt an uncomfortable sense of déjà vu: it was like watching the Rose Garden press conference all over again. After all, her Front-Bench colleagues—the hon. Members for Chippenham (Sarah Gibson) and for Torbay (Steve Darling)—were at all times appropriately critical in Committee, but they were essentially supportive of the principle of enhancing workers’ rights. Lords amendment 11, which was originally a Conservative amendment in the Commons but now stands in the name of a Liberal Democrat peer, was not supported by the Liberal Democrats in Committee.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  24. “That is what the restoration of the school support staff negotiating body will achieve. We have debated the official Opposition’s amendments many times at various stages, but I want to comment on some of the Lords amendments that stand in the names of Liberal Democrat peers, either in whole or in part. When I entered this Chamber at the start of the debate, I did not presume that those amendments necessarily enjoyed the support of the Liberal Democrat Front Benchers in the Commons, but I am afraid that impression was dispelled by the contribution from the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney).”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  25. “The effect of the somewhat loose wording in the amendment may be to encourage local attempts to make unilateral variations to contracts and terms and conditions. Members who support this amendment might say that only improvements could be made under it, but both “improvement” and “detriment” are subjective terms. They are in the eye of the beholder, and I believe that if the amendment were to be carried through, the actual effect may be to increase the number of court cases concerning school support staff. I urge the Opposition not to push a point, and to reconsider their wider opposition to the school support staff negotiating body. School support staff undertake essential roles, and they deserve the same professional standards and professional respect that is afforded to teachers.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  26. “Given my experience as a former trade union officer representing school support staff, I know the contractual issues that need to be addressed are so complicated that they cannot be satisfactorily resolved on the Floor of the House. That complexity is a result of 14 years of drift, dither and political disinterest in the 800,000 support staff workers in England who keep our schools going, and it is a damning indictment of the decision to cancel the original SSSNB. Finally, Lords amendment 121 risks creating confusion at a local level. The amendment states that employers must not be restricted from introducing “improved terms and conditions”, but changes to contracts are not merely introduced; they are consulted on and agreed, either individually or collectively, under existing statutes.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  27. “First, the amendment states that employers may introduce new terms and conditions of employment that “meet or exceed any minimum standards set by the SSSNB.” In legal terms, however, the SSSNB will not set or determine those standards; it is a statutory forum for negotiation. The actual conditions of employment will be set through regulations drafted by the Secretary of State and approved by Parliament. Secondly, the actual parameters of a future pay and grading structure will be negotiated by the relevant parties: the representatives of employers, and the representatives of employees. That was the spirit of the original 2008 Act and the actual operation of the SSSNB in its original incarnation.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  28. “This would be a weaker and lesser Bill without him, and those of us who support the Bill and its principles owe him a debt of thanks. I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden), who brings a real depth of knowledge and understanding to the role of Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, is now guarding the Bill’s passage to Royal Assent. I know that she will be both pro-worker and pro-business in her approach. I believe that Lords amendment 121 contains significant drafting weaknesses and would fundamentally alter the nature of the proposed and restored school support staff negotiating body.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  29. “GMB is the union that represents the majority of people who work in support of us as Members of this House. I am sad to say that they are perhaps uniquely vulnerable to some of the abusive practices that have shamed our democracy for too long, and I am at a loss to understand how the relevant Lords amendments were ever brought forward from the other place. I wish to speak specifically against Lords amendments 121, 11 and 1, and in support of the Government amendments that seek to strike them out. Before doing so, I want to say a few words about my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders), who is not in his place at the moment. As a former shadow Minister and latterly as the sponsoring Minister for this Bill, he unfailingly and characteristically brought graft, industry and good humour to the brief.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  30. “I am grateful for being able to contribute to this debate. It is a privilege to follow so many powerful speeches, and the speech delivered by my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) was the most powerful I have heard in this place. Her words rose to the moment; mine are inadequate by comparison. I can only thank her for speaking so powerfully about an issue that affects so many of us. I welcome the new Secretary of State to his place, and thank him for the way in which he opened this debate. At the outset, I draw the House’s attention to my background as an officer of the GMB union and my current unpaid role as chair of the GMB parliamentary group. In that capacity, I thank the hon. Member for Dundee Central (Chris Law), as he leaves the Chamber, for what he said about Members’ staff in this place.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  31. “Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough said, the Labour manifesto committed to “implementing ‘Labour’s Plan to Make Work Pay…’ in full…and introducing basic rights from day one to parental leave, sick pay, and protection from unfair dismissal.” Yet in front of us are Lords amendments that would either obviate many of those commitments or reduce their potency to homeopathic levels. As he also rightly said, there can be no question of nodding through amendments that contradict the clear mandate we first received a year ago, and which commands broad support among voters of all parties.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  32. “Throughout all the debates on this matter in the other place and here, it has been discussed purely in theoretical terms. The contention has been that the 1920 Act has had a chilling effect on the of operation heritage railways across the country. I do not think, but I would be glad to be corrected, that any actual examples have been brought forward of either court cases being taken or legal advice being received from those organisations, but it certainly feels like an issue that the Transport Committee may wish to consider. I have tried to limit my comments only to the details of the Lords amendments, but if I may, I will make two general comments. As my hon.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  33. “I pay tribute to USDAW’s “Freedom From Fear” campaign and the work that has been done to extend the same protections to retail workers. These are exactly the sort of valuable campaigns that, sadly, Members from both the official Opposition and the Liberal Democrats are looking to restrict. Finally on points raised, I had not intended at the start of the debate to talk about heritage railways. Indeed, it must be said that during those long years in opposition, when we were looking closely as trade union officials at the potential future issues that would be covered by trade union legislation, I think it is fair to say that that issue never once came up, but perhaps we were guilty of tunnel vision. [ Interruption. ] Sorry, I will not do that again.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  34. “It was a shame to hear during the debate the number of references to trade union political funds only in the context of party funding. Of course, the great majority of trade union political funds are operated by trade unions that are not affiliated to any political party. Furthermore, the political funds even of Labour-affiliated unions in practice often support meaningful and consequential campaigns that are supported by Members across the House. One example to which I would draw Members’ attention is the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018—sometimes called the protect the protectors legislation—which began as a result of trade union campaigning that was not party political in its nature, and that legislation has since been broadened.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  35. “After all, they are derived from the Office for National Statistics labour force survey, which has had well-advertised and well-understood problems with response rates that have wider implications for both the current Government and the previous Government. It is well known that the number of people who identify as being on a zero-hours contract corresponds to changes in the wording of that particular question. In addition, the labour force survey has well-understood limitations when it comes to reaching people who are employed in what might be called the most marginalised parts of the economy. I therefore urge Conservative Members not to have too much confidence in those estimates, but to look instead at the surveys of workers undertaken by many organisations, such as the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and trade unions.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  36. “I thank my hon. Friend for raising a very powerful and relevant point. She is absolutely right that those are the groups of workers who would enjoy greater protection as a result of this legislation being carried. I want to respond to a couple of points that have been made in this debate. It was a shame that the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds), who is not currently in his place, did not have the self-confidence in his arguments to take interventions on his points. He referred repeatedly to the validity of estimates of the number of workers employed on zero-hours contracts, but there are good reasons for not having confidence in these estimates.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  37. “My hon. Friend speaks about care workers. Does he agree that one issue so brutally exposed during the pandemic was the fact that many thousands of care workers were classed as workers, not employees? As a consequence, they could not get full access to sick pay. One consequence of that was that the fatality rates among both residents and workers were much higher in the care homes that did not make that provision available. If the provisions in the Bill were in place then, many thousands of lives could have been saved.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  38. “My hon. Friend is making a very powerful case. I rise merely to support what he is saying. About a decade ago, the University of Manchester published research that found that being in forms of insecure employment may be more damaging to health than being unemployed.”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  39. “My right hon. Friend is rightly talking about the contributions made in the debate by hon. Members of various parties. I am always reluctant to criticise individual Members who may not attend a debate, because they often have good reasons, but there has now become a pattern: at no point in the Bill’s passage has any Reform Member spoken to justify their stance of scrapping thousands of laws, including employment laws. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a democratic deficit in not one Reform Member ever having spoken to defend their stance?”

    House of Commons15 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  40. “Half the bus sector’s funding now comes from public sources, but during the summer, National Express announced changes to bus services in my constituency with just two weeks’ public notice, which will have a really negative effect on residents in New Frankley, Allens Cross and Bournville Gardens Village retirement home. Does the Minister agree that when regulation is brought in—which is welcome—consultation must be included?”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  41. “I welcome the Minister to his place. The life sciences sector is helping to regenerate parts of south Birmingham’s economy, from the new Waters pharmaceutical factory on the old Longbridge MG Rover site in my constituency to the University of Birmingham’s life science incubator. The Minister has been extremely generous in agreeing to meet Members today, so continuing in that spirit, would he be willing to meet south Birmingham MPs to discuss what more can be done to support this very important part of our local economy?”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  42. “In the interest of time, I will only say how grateful I am that Ministers listened; I hope that we can make progress on restoring that service’s frequency. Finally, we must be ambitious. Birmingham Corporation Tramways once ran services to my constituency. The original 1984 vision for a revitalised metro included a loop serving Northfield, Longbridge, Frankley and Rubery. That vision was right, and I hope that we can find funding for a feasibility study for a south Birmingham extension. Regional transport inequality hinders economic growth and denies opportunities to my constituents. I am glad that the House has had the chance to debate this issue. I think this is my stop, so I will.”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  43. “Most public transport journeys are by bus and half the industry’s income now comes from public funding, yet public accountability lags behind. This summer, National Express announced major changes to the X20 and 61 routes. People in Allens Cross and parts of the New Frankley estate lost their direct connection to Birmingham, and some older residents no longer have direct bus access to the Queen Elizabeth hospital. I am grateful to the hundreds of people who signed petitions, including one that I organised. I have met National Express and Transport for West Midlands, and I hope that we can find a way forward. Significant investment has been announced for commuter rail. I have spoken frequently in this House about rebuilding Kings Norton station as part of a midlands rail hub.”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  44. “The rail line between Birmingham and Nottingham is slower, mile for mile, than that between Manchester and Leeds. The west midlands has the lowest share of public transport journeys of any English region, followed by the east midlands. That fuels congestion, road safety problems and potholes. Birmingham’s roads are a special case. We have one of the last private finance initiative contracts in the country. When originally issued, local government austerity and the high inflation of the early 2020s were not foreseen. The previous Government tried to withdraw support for the PFI contract without a clear plan, which was ruled unlawful. I know that the new Minister will be looking at that closely, and I look forward to working with him to get a fair deal for Birmingham.”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  45. “I will do my best to speak at high speed, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to say a few words about my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood): she was an outstanding Minister and the Department’s loss is the Whips Office’s gain. She will be much missed on the Transport Front Bench. I am grateful, too, to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this debate. She and I represent constituencies in the squeezed midlands—regions home to 10 million people that have historically been denied a fair share of funding and political attention. As has been noted already, the east midlands receives the lowest transport funding per head of any region, although the west midlands held that unhappy status until recently.”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  46. “Does the shadow Minister agree with his predecessor—the last Conservative Rail Minister, Huw Merriman—who said this: “Whilst it’s legitimate to debate the terms of the deal, the demonisation of train drivers and those onboard and at stations, who carry out a difficult and skilled job for the safety of passengers, is completely unfair. These people work hard and should be shown more respect.”?”

    House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  47. “I understand why the Minister has set out that the Government’s focus is on ensuring that companies are better protected and report these kinds of incidents, but can he assure the House that all steps are being taken to identify areas of critical national vulnerability in both the public and private sectors, so that we can try to avoid these attacks in the first place?”

    House of Commons9 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  48. “I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) for securing this urgent question, and welcome the Minister to his new role. JLR employs hundreds of people directly in my constituency, and many more indirectly. This is an extremely concerning time for them, and I hope that the Department will consider providing information directly to local MPs, in addition to engaging with the company. As has been said, this attack follows attacks on Marks & Spencer, the NHS, the British Library and other public institutions.”

    House of Commons9 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  49. “There are other important issues that we could talk about today, such as the need for progress towards greater UK recognition of Hong Kong qualifications, but, on the substantive issue—the subject of the petition—the Government have said that they will set out their approach to particular visa routes over the coming months. While I do not necessarily expect the Minister to pre-empt that announcement today, I do ask that he acknowledges the strength of feeling shared by so many Members in this debate, that he makes sure that the arguments made today are given full attention by the Home Office, and that our constituents will be given that certainty as soon as possible.”

    House of Commons8 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  50. “Some Members of this House will have heard him speak at the conferences of the TUC, the GMB and other UK labour organisations. He was forced into hiding here in the UK under the protection of the Home Office after a bounty was issued for his arrest. I have spoken to a number of my constituents who share the concern that they may themselves be targeted and subjected to surveillance. They deserve to have that fear lifted—the fear of return to Hong Kong or relocation to another country that may offer lesser levels of protection.”

    House of Commons8 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗