Sarah Gibson
MP for Chippenham · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom
“The Environment Agency has managed to trace the principal source to an open landfill cell, requiring permanent capping, improved gas extraction and changes to the type of waste being handled.”
“It is a huge pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison, as I know that much of what I am going to say will be familiar to you. I thank the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this debate.”
“The Government must start to properly enforce the existing retailer take-back duties, make return schemes more convenient and more visible, and ensure that producers meet the full cost of collection and treatment.”
“Residents have described an overpowering sulphurous smell entering their homes, disrupting their sleep and preventing them from opening their windows or using their gardens. Many have reported headaches, nausea, coughing and feeling unwell. When I visited the landfill site, I was left with a headache and felt unwell for several hours.”
“Although the operators are changing the way they handle those materials, it was extremely worrying that when I asked the Environment Agency, it did not seem to be aware of where the responsibility lies for testing how much of the wrong types of material go into the trommel fines as they go into the landfill site.”
“The issue seems to be that responsibility is completely fragmented. The Environment Agency monitors permit compliance and the UKHSA assesses the health risk, but the local authority considers statutory nuisance. Residents are having to navigate an institutional maze while the smell continues.”
The complete record
Every one of 244 lines we hold for Sarah Gibson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 5.
“The Government must start to properly enforce the existing retailer take-back duties, make return schemes more convenient and more visible, and ensure that producers meet the full cost of collection and treatment. Finally, drawing on my 20-odd years as an architect and my experience in local government, I believe the planning system must properly assess the risk of building our homes, schools and care facilities near to waste infrastructure, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western). Waste sites are necessary, but communities should not be expected to tolerate unacceptable odour and risk of pollution and fire. My constituents have shown extraordinary patience, but they should not have to fight to be heard any more than those of the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood.”
“Although the operators are changing the way they handle those materials, it was extremely worrying that when I asked the Environment Agency, it did not seem to be aware of where the responsibility lies for testing how much of the wrong types of material go into the trommel fines as they go into the landfill site. Will the Minister consider who is responsible for independent sampling and whether compositional controls can be better implemented? The second issue affecting the same constituents is lithium-ion battery fires. Recent fires have, in theory, been caused by the crushing of lithium-ion batteries, which sparks a fire that is very difficult to put out. That is putting waste workers, firefighters and nearby residents at risk.”
“The issue seems to be that responsibility is completely fragmented. The Environment Agency monitors permit compliance and the UKHSA assesses the health risk, but the local authority considers statutory nuisance. Residents are having to navigate an institutional maze while the smell continues. Will the Minister introduce a clearer joint response framework, with one lead body responsible for co-ordinating monitoring and health advice? We also need to understand why it is happening. The Environment Agency identified an issue with the trommel fines, which can contain sulphate-bearing materials and contribute to the production of hydrogen sulphide when mixed with organic waste.”
“The Environment Agency has managed to trace the principal source to an open landfill cell, requiring permanent capping, improved gas extraction and changes to the type of waste being handled. I welcome the completion of the capping works, but for residents it will be a question of whether they can breathe clean air and live normally, not whether the project is said to have been completed. The UK Health Security Agency found no evidence of actual toxic risk, but its monitoring site is not downwind of the site—it is to the west. Although its finding is welcome, it also found strong evidence of odour annoyance and acknowledged that people may experience headaches, throat irritation, stress and sleep disruption. That exposure, although perhaps not as toxic as we expected, is not acceptable, especially for people with respiratory conditions.”
“Residents have described an overpowering sulphurous smell entering their homes, disrupting their sleep and preventing them from opening their windows or using their gardens. Many have reported headaches, nausea, coughing and feeling unwell. When I visited the landfill site, I was left with a headache and felt unwell for several hours. Although that is only my experience, it gives me some understanding of what the residents have been repeatedly describing. I have pressed the Environment Agency and the operator for action, raised the issue at Prime Minister’s questions and written to the Environment Secretary. The sustained pressure has secured action for my constituents, but we now need evidence that it has actually produced results.”
“It is a huge pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison, as I know that much of what I am going to say will be familiar to you. I thank the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood (Lorraine Beavers) for securing this debate. Waste facilities provide an essential public service, but communities living alongside them must not be expected to bear the consequences of weak regulation or poor waste handling. Two problems are affecting residents in my constituency: the persistent landfill gas odour around Lower Compton, and the growing fire risk over the last few years caused by lithium-ion batteries entering the household waste system. The Environment Agency has received almost 4,000 odour reports over the last three months. As the hon. Member for Blackpool North and Fleetwood mentioned, the system is not working.”
“Will the Minister join me in thanking and paying tribute to Carole Gould and Julie Devey from the action group Killed Women? They are constituents of mine and of my hon. Friend the Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), who unfortunately cannot be here due to ill health. Will the Minister pay tribute to the enormous dedication, persistence and courage that they have shown in trying to get changes to sentencing for domestic abuse?”
“It represents a threefold benefit: it decarbonises people’s homes; it reduces energy bills; and it improves quality of life. I would be delighted to meet the Minister to set out a plan for how we can make retrofitting viable and take it off that “too difficult” pile. For this carbon budget to succeed, we need a clear road map. We need those contingency plans, and we need to make sure that while this Government are leading internationally as an example to others, they are bringing the whole community with them.”
“However, so is retrofitting a home. That is why I am asking for technical support for those applying for Government funding, from an initial analysis through to installation support and final sign-off. We need people to trust in the decarbonisation process, or we risk alienating the communities necessary for its success. It takes only one horror story for the surrounding community to become nervous, and it takes only one media circus for that to spread. The warm homes plan is a fantastic opportunity to realise significant change in one of the stickiest and most difficult areas, but if the seventh carbon budget is to succeed, retrofitting our existing housing stock must be an essential part of that. It cannot be left on the “too difficult” pile.”
“The warm homes plan is a step in the right direction, but it already risks making some of the same mistakes that past Government-funded retrofit schemes encountered. I have a doctor in my constituency who, with the best will in the world, tried to put external insulation on her home, only to find that it was damp. Before she even sent me the photographs, I knew exactly what the cause was, but what was really worrying was that she did not, and neither did her installer. Without sufficient knowledge, neither contractors nor occupiers can make the right decisions for their homes. If you were having a knee replacement, Madam Deputy Speaker, you would not expect to need to source your own surgeon, book your own operating room and then decide which implant material is the most appropriate, because that is a complex and expert-led process.”
“I would like to draw the House’s attention to one particular area that has already been mentioned by colleagues, which is the decarbonisation of our homes. In 2022, emissions from residential buildings accounted for one fifth of greenhouse gas emissions in the UK, yet the Climate Change Committee has admitted that retrofitting existing dwellings is not going to be one of the easiest bits to shift. I speak on this topic as a member of the Environmental Audit Committee, as an officer on the future homes, skills and innovation all-party parliamentary group, and as an architect by trade. Decarbonising our existing homes is essential to achieving our carbon budget, and the public need incentives, clear information, consumer protection and accountable technical advice.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate, and I thank the Minister for the time she has given to such an important topic. In its report on this budget, the Climate Change Committee clearly stated that behavioural change is essential to achieving the carbon reductions we need. However, the seventh carbon budget prioritises emerging technologies and greenhouse gas removals, a strategy that courts failure if those technologies do not deliver. Equally as important, it runs the risk that large parts of the population will be left downstream. The public need to see direct benefits from decarbonisation, and they need to feel that it is something they can be part of—as the seas rise, there has to be space for everyone on the boat.”
“I take the hon. Gentleman’s point about the recent changes to the funding formulas for public transport. Does he agree that the recent review is very much weighted towards population and is therefore further detrimental to rural communities like mine? In Chippenham, it is not a case of when the bus comes; it is a case of if the bus comes. Does he agree that the Minister needs to relook at some of the funding formulas?”
“Farmers across Wiltshire, especially in my constituency of Chippenham, say that Government support is not working. They are disappointed that Labour is compounding the damage left by the Conservatives, with an underspend of millions in the farming budget. Shockingly, the Government’s own statistics say that in 2023-24, between 17% and 29% of farming families did not turn a profit.”
“On the subject of getting young people into farming, my local agricultural college tells me that when it tries to send students to help on farms, the farmers find it extremely difficult to find a use for them, because getting a licence to drive high-level agricultural equipment is so expensive that students from lower-income families are unable to get one. Therefore, when they arrive on the farms, there is not a lot they can do with them. Will the Minister consider looking at the cost to entry for people who do not have a background in farming?”
“I urge the Prime Minister to help me to get a response from DEFRA and the EA on what measures can be put in place to reassure my constituents that they are not suffering ill health.”
“Before we leave the House for several weeks, I feel it is absolutely necessary to raise an issue in my constituency, about which I have been trying to get an answer from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and from the Environment Agency. We have a landfill site in Calne that is producing a sulphurous smell that is causing residents to need to close their windows and leading to children with sore throats, but I am not getting answer except that the Environment Agency itself admits that “controls may not be working effectively”. Like my constituents, I find it really disappointing that we are not getting any serious response. This is not the kind of thing we expect in the UK—we do not expect the air that we breathe not to be safe.”
“Too often, rural communities such as mine in Wiltshire have been overlooked by successive Governments and treated as an afterthought rather than as places with distinct needs, challenges and enormous potential. Decisions are far too often made on urban assumptions, leaving rural areas struggling with weak transport and fewer services. Does my hon. Friend agree that by embedding rural affairs at the heart of strategic authorities, the Lords amendment will ensure that rural communities are no longer overlooked or left behind?”
“The grid connections reform process was intended to improve investor confidence by removing zombie projects and prioritising shovel-ready projects, but repeated delays from NESO mean that many developers are still waiting for their gate 2 connection offers, even for projects that are due to connect in 2026 and 2027. This is extremely damaging for investor confidence. Given the importance of the connection reform to the Government’s clean power 2030 ambitions, will the Minister tell us how the Government are ensuring that NESO and the network companies are working at pace to issue those gate 2 connections as soon as possible?”
“Does the hon. Member agree that rural communities, such as mine and his, and villages such as Lyneham, which is famous for its serious airbase and is full of veterans, now find themselves with poor GP surgeries and no future for that? People in those villages are waiting longer and longer to get that care and feel completely left behind, as they have no access to any form of health service.”
“The question is not simply about constitutional mechanisms, but about the feeling that the Government are not delivering. Across the United Kingdom, families are struggling with the cost of living crisis and access to the NHS. Healthcare remains an uphill struggle. Businesses, particularly in rural areas like Wiltshire, are not being supported to grow. The petition is about a lack of trust. The Government’s official response to it and their ongoing failure to deliver do little to restore the faith of anyone who has asked us to be here today.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank the Petitions Committee for this important debate, and the 120,000 people across the country who signed the petition. I know from speaking to my constituents, from Lyneham to Corsham, that people feel frustrated, unheard and disappointed. People expect Governments to keep promises and deliver, even if they did not vote for the political party that assumes office, as the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) mentioned. People are crying out for action on the cost of living and the NHS, not for endless Westminster soap operas. Unfortunately, I agree with the hon. Member that the Prime Minister, like his countless Conservative predecessors, seems distracted by his own survival, leaving the rest of us to pay the price.”
“The latest NPPF makes it clear that transport planning and infrastructure should be designed in at the outset, but my rural constituency has seen continuous large-scale development outside towns, from which it takes 25 minutes to walk into a town centre. There are no buses. It is not like London where, after waiting five minutes, a bus turns up; a person can wait two hours and nothing turns up. Does my hon. Friend agree that the NPPF needs to allocate funding, on top of the commitment to make sure that transport is considered at the outset?”
“However, we risk pandering to those who can afford to put these measures in, while the most vulnerable are left exactly where they are, in damp homes. I assume my hon. Friend agrees with me.”
“As somebody who suffers enormously from the cold—as anyone can see from my hands, which are already white—I really appreciate my hon. Friend for bringing this point forward. The warm homes plan is incredibly welcome, but I am worried about the order in which it suggests interventions. The idea that we should be putting solar panels and heat pumps before insulation and air tightness worries me, having spent 25 years in the building industry. I am also very concerned about the focus on specific technologies rather than on aims. The real solution must be to cut the cost of heating our homes. There are innovative solutions, such as the Luthmore electric boiler, developed by an innovative firm in my own constituency; a gas boiler can be taken out and the Luthmore boiler plugged straight in.”
“I was aware that the Minister had seen the boiler I mentioned. I welcome the warm homes plan immensely, but I have a slight worry about it. There is the old saying that doing the same thing again and expecting a different outcome is a sign of madness. My hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Adam Dance) highlighted that the previous scheme failed to do the right things at the right time, due to a lack of scrutiny and accountability. I have not seen anything in the warm homes plan that talks of an overview to ensure that a heat pump is installed only when it needs to be, since airtightness and insulation would be more appropriate first.”
“The disasters involving South East Water in my hon. Friend’s constituency are frightening. In my constituency, Thames Water managed to put water in the wrong town, and the residents of the small town that was affected could not go and find it because they had no transport. Thames Water did not tell anyone that the water was there. In fact, had it not been for the local supermarket telling people that there was water in the car park, no one would have known. What I find really scary about my hon. Friend’s comments—I am sure he will agree—is that gangsters seem to be acting in my area as well, because Thames Water seems no different from the company he highlights. We need to look at this more seriously.”
“As the Minister knows, in Wiltshire, speculative development is often approved without consideration of access to active travel routes, health provision, school places, and access to public transport, so that our residents can reach work or education. This leads to areas of extreme deprivation, caused, according to the Government’s own statistics, by a lack of skills and job opportunities. Rural housing can work, but only when it is genuinely plan-led, and when infrastructure keeps pace with housing. Will the Minister ensure that rural development is supported by its communities, and is for its communities, rather than villages being left to absorb growth without the services that they so desperately need?”
“In my constituency, there are two local village schools—one in Laycock and one in Lydiard Millicent—that provide a fantastic opportunity for working families. Without them, those children would not be able to get to school via public transport, because it is so poor. That would mean that the parents would have to give up work. Does my hon. Friend agree that children’s education should not be penalised simply because of where they live and the lack of access to good transport so typical of rural areas?”
“My constituency is in Wiltshire, and the northern part is served by Thames Water. In Lyneham we seem to see outages almost every week. Thames Water is wasting water and pouring it down the streets of Royal Wootton Bassett, but cannot supply tap water to Lyneham or to parts of Bassett. On top of that, the company gives residents no information about when supply will be reinstated. Would my hon. Friend agree that water companies should be making better use of their assets, but also giving residents information when they fail?”
“On the subject of flooding, which is slightly off the point, I have just received information from the Environment Agency to say that Chippenham is flooding again this year. The Minister will remember that she and I spent some time mopping out in wellies, and we are at that point of flooding again. Does my hon. Friend agree that funding for flood resilience is vital? The fact is that areas not within mayoral authorities seem to be unable to secure any funding for anything.”
“I represent a rural constituency in Wiltshire. Our local college has had to reduce the timetable for its 16 to 18-year-olds, given that they can no longer rely on trains that are constantly delayed. That causes issues related to deprivation, which was highlighted in recent Government statistics as being caused by lack of access to work and skills.”
“I will be very brief. My constituency is in rural Wiltshire, where a huge number of residents have taken part in this petition. Does the hon. Member agree that digital exclusion is a reality in areas like mine?”
“In addition, I represent a rural constituency in the west of England, which has no university, but does have an outstanding college of further education, Wiltshire college and university centre, with strong apprenticeship programmes. A recent Government assessment identified acute areas of deprivation across all four towns in my constituency, driven in large part by limited access to education and skills. For many young people in rural areas, apprenticeships are the only realistic route.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered level 7 apprenticeships. In the interests of transparency, I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Before entering Parliament, I taught architecture at the University of Bath and I ran an architectural practice. As my entry states, I still hold an advisory role with the university and I am in the process of winding down the business. I have additional connections in that I was a Wiltshire councillor on planning committees. It will therefore come as no surprise that I am deeply committed to both education and the built environment.”
“I absolutely share my hon. Friend’s congratulations to Yeovil college. The option to study while earning is crucial to reduce barriers, particularly for those from disadvantaged backgrounds. That is distinctly the case for architecture—an industry that historically has been run by a narrow, predominantly male, section of the middle class, and where the apprenticeship route has begun to make a real difference. Benchmarking by the Royal Institute of British Architects shows that apprenticeships have achieved a far better gender balance than the wider profession has ever seen, with level 7 entrants last year almost at parity.”
“This decision simply removes the apprenticeship route altogether for architecture. The consequences for the country are quite serious. Skills England has estimated that more than 250,000 additional workers will be needed by 2028 simply to maintain current construction output. Architects are explicitly identified as essential to delivering the Government’s own target of 1.5 million homes.”
“I absolutely agree with the hon. Member. For underprivileged children, apprenticeships are a fantastic route into higher education. Certainly, in architecture, apprenticeships mark genuine progress in opening the door to a profession that has been closed to those from lower incomes or from under-represented backgrounds. The Government’s decision to restrict apprenticeship funding to those aged 16 to 21 threatens that progress. A level 6 architectural assistant apprenticeship takes four years, meaning that anyone starting after school will be at least 22 before progressing. Others complete a three-year undergraduate part 1 degree first. In practice, almost no apprentice reaches level 7 before the age of 21 —in fact, in all my years in the business, I have never met anyone who completed the entire course before the age of 25.”
“What assessment has been made of the impact of restricting level 7 funding on the future diversity of the profession that requires this level as part of its final qualification? What impact will this restriction have on the ability of the profession to deliver the homes and infrastructure that the country desperately needs?”
“Architectural practices are overwhelmingly small and medium-sized enterprises. They rely on the growth and skills levy to train apprentices; without it, they simply cannot take them on. The engagement that the Architects Registration Board has had with trailblazers, employers and the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has led it to conclude that the removal of funding for level 7 apprenticeships could close off this route entirely. The benefit of being able to learn while you earn, in a profession that takes seven to 10 years to qualify for, cannot be stressed enough. Extending the date until which those over 21 can receive funding would help to reduce the cliff edge and would give universities, learners and employers time to adapt. I therefore ask the Minister the following questions.”
“Although a full-time part 2 student may receive up to £46,000 in support, a level 7 apprentice progressing to part 2 would receive only £10,000. The very pathway that has enabled young people without family wealth to enter the architecture profession risks becoming a dead end. The Architects Registration Board has been undertaking major reforms of the initial education and training of architects. It has stated that a key plank of those reforms has been to increase access to the profession for those taking non-traditional routes and, in particular, those from disadvantaged backgrounds or minority ethnic groups. The apprenticeship route in architecture is still in its infancy, but it is a very important part of the wider strategy that the Architects Registration Board is trying to achieve.”
“Absolutely. Right across the built environment, careers take a long time, and therefore we need to be supporting different types of people into those careers at a later age. If we want to meet housing targets, we need planners, architects and surveyors. Otherwise, we will not meet our net zero commitments and we will not be able to unlock the large-scale retrofit of existing homes that is needed and that, as we know from experience, requires technical support to get right. We cannot meet those ambitions while simultaneously shrinking the pipeline of qualified professionals across the built environment. In addition, the Government’s proposal is prejudicial to those already in the system. Level 6 apprentices cannot access the same undergraduate student finance as their full-time counterparts.”
“Extending the date until which those over 21 can receive funding could at least help to reduce that cliff edge that the Government are preparing to shove the apprentices off, giving universities, learners and employers time to adapt to the new model. These are modest, practical steps with widespread support from across the built environment sector. Without them, we risk losing the first real breakthrough, one that opens the door to the architectural profession for those from disadvantaged backgrounds, in the past 30 years.”
“I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. I am a strong believer that apprenticeships are a way to make further education open to a wider group of people, particularly in rural areas. Will the Minister consider raising the eligibility age to 25, extending transition arrangements and enabling level 7 apprentices to access full undergraduate student finance for the built environment professionals? Finally, if the Minister is unwilling or unable to do that, would he at least consider extending the current date for the funding withdrawal for those over 21, to minimise the disruption while new apprenticeship models are developed?”
“My specific point earlier was about some of the built environment professions being different from big engineering firms; they are not Jaguar Land Rover. A large architectural firm—even the largest ones in London—probably has no more than 50 to 60 employees. They are small businesses and, in the same way that local authorities are constrained, they are not in a position to finance their apprentices. They rely on the levies because they are just not big enough as businesses. That makes a difference to the sector, as does the fact that it is one qualification, not a separate thing. The constraints in the profession are quite acute because of the size of the business. That makes a difference—it is not the NHS.”
“These children deserve our support, and I hope that this House will share my view that the Government need to step in to provide a small memorial so that these families can have a focus for their grief, and some acknowledgment that these children existed. I would be grateful if the House shared this call, which I have tabled as an early-day motion. I know the Minister has kindly offered to meet these families, and I am extremely grateful for his support.”
“My constituent’s sister was stillborn many years ago, in a situation in which my constituent’s mother was simply told, “Don’t worry, dear, you’ll have another one next year.” There was no bereavement counselling and, more importantly, no marked grave. My constituent found out some years later—quite recently—that his sister had been buried in a communal unmarked grave. It appears that, because this practice went on until the late 1980s, there are some 89,000 such children. These families have had the lifelong pain of not knowing where to grieve, how to grieve or where to focus their attention, with no chance of finding it.”
“Our new clause would ensure that any such change, whether a continued alignment or a divergence, is scrutinised and made the subject of a statement to the House. I would be grateful if Members supported the new clause, which I feel offers a compromise between the two positions.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. This is only my second Bill Committee, so please accept my apologies if I fail in any of the protocol. I want to make a small point on our new clause 9, which interestingly, being on the subject of the EU, is grouped with amendments tabled by the official Opposition. I feel that new clause 9 provides a certain compromise between the two positions. It is important to recognise that the EU continues to be one of our biggest trading partners. Currently, a lot of product legislation is aligned, and therefore divergence is a concern for business. A lot of our small enterprises find that exporting to the EU is an important part of their business, so they need clarity and certainty if any legislation or product safety regulations are going to change or diverge.”
“It is about ensuring that as regulations evolve, we do not compromise the public interest in the name of flexibility and deregulation. I therefore urge the Committee to support the amendment.”