Michael Wheeler
MP for Worsley and Eccles · Labour · United Kingdom
“A recently elected Reform councillor in my constituency believes that the best way to regenerate Eccles, which he described as a problem area, is to turn it into the UK’s Dubai.”
“I strongly welcome the steps that the Government have taken to bring down my constituents’ energy bills from the start of this month. However, the effects of the war in Iran are now beginning to feed through into higher food prices.”
“T9. This Labour Government have ensured that, as of this month, workers in Worsley and Eccles and across the country get sick pay from day one, including low-paid workers. As chair of the USDAW parliamentary group, and having campaigned for this, I welcome this so much.”
“T3. I welcome the upcoming drop next week in the energy price cap, which I know will help my constituents. With the Government’s focus on the cost of living, we are all concerned that events in the middle east will trigger a price shock in the market, making that work more difficult.”
“While cost of living pressures are affecting people across my constituency of Worsley and Eccles, young families face a perfect storm. Whether it is housing costs, expensive childcare or student loans, many young families are struggling, and research shows that the cost of living crisis is holding people back from even starting a family.”
“In my constituency of Worsley and Eccles, residents of Peel Green and the surrounding area, including the enthusiastic pupils of Salford City academy, are looking to get their hands on the Pride in Place money. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that they are at the forefront, they take the lead, and they decide?”
The complete record
Every one of 197 lines we hold for Michael Wheeler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 4.
“A recently elected Reform councillor in my constituency believes that the best way to regenerate Eccles, which he described as a problem area, is to turn it into the UK’s Dubai. It might surprise him to learn that the council has already brought the town centre into public hands and, during the consultation, not one single resident raised the prospect of “Dubeccles”. Our communities need regeneration led by genuine involvement of local people, like that being in delivered in Brookhouse and Peel Green through Pride in Place. Will the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time to ensure that local people lead in the regeneration of their towns?”
“I strongly welcome the steps that the Government have taken to bring down my constituents’ energy bills from the start of this month. However, the effects of the war in Iran are now beginning to feed through into higher food prices. Pressures on oil and fertiliser costs are likely to intensify, and I am concerned about increases in the price of my constituents’ weekly shop at a time when their budgets are already strained. Will the Chancellor outline what steps the Government have taken to protect my constituents in Worsley and Eccles from rising food prices?”
“T9. This Labour Government have ensured that, as of this month, workers in Worsley and Eccles and across the country get sick pay from day one, including low-paid workers. As chair of the USDAW parliamentary group, and having campaigned for this, I welcome this so much. Does the Chancellor agree that it is only Labour, with its trade union link, that is on the side of working people?”
“T3. I welcome the upcoming drop next week in the energy price cap, which I know will help my constituents. With the Government’s focus on the cost of living, we are all concerned that events in the middle east will trigger a price shock in the market, making that work more difficult. Can the Minister outline what further steps the Government are taking to reduce my constituents’ energy bills?”
“While cost of living pressures are affecting people across my constituency of Worsley and Eccles, young families face a perfect storm. Whether it is housing costs, expensive childcare or student loans, many young families are struggling, and research shows that the cost of living crisis is holding people back from even starting a family. Will the Chancellor outline what measures the Government are taking to alleviate the financial burdens on young families, in addition to their welcome moves to expand free childcare?”
“In my constituency of Worsley and Eccles, residents of Peel Green and the surrounding area, including the enthusiastic pupils of Salford City academy, are looking to get their hands on the Pride in Place money. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that they are at the forefront, they take the lead, and they decide?”
“That said, the focus of this debate is not on the legality of licences, contentious though they might be, but on what happens when even the limited legal protections are not upheld. In the current system, legally sanctioned animal suffering is compounded by systemic regulatory failure. On 12 December 2025, the Home Office Animals in Science Regulation Unit—ASRU—published its 2024 annual report, which provides a window into the shocking suffering that occurs when our animal testing safeguards fail.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered non-compliance animal testing incidents in laboratories. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. The uncomfortable backdrop of today’s debate is that animal experimentation results in legally sanctioned animal suffering. That is the fact that we must keep at the front of our minds, especially as we pride ourselves on being a nation of animal lovers. At the 2024 election, I was proud to stand on a manifesto commitment to work towards phasing out animal testing. The stark reality, however, is that more than 5 million animals have been approved for use in experiments over the coming years. Behind that large headline figure lie individual cases that are often deeply distressing, such as primates being subjected to invasive brain surgery.”
“In 2024 alone, there were 146 recorded cases of non-compliance in British laboratories. Although that figure represents a modest but welcome decrease from the previous year, the incidents still involve more than 22,000 animals. Analysis from Animal Free Research UK suggests that at least 542 animals either died or were euthanised as a direct result of those failures.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention, and of course I agree. ASRU is tasked with licensing animal experiments and, importantly, ensuring compliance with the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The reason for the Act is to protect animals and to require the use of non-animal alternatives wherever scientifically possible, yet the report shows far too many incidents in which animals were harmed, injured or killed because licence conditions were breached or basic standards were not met. These are not minor administrative errors. As my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) said, we are talking about animals drowning, starving to death, being left to die without veterinary care or being accidentally disposed of as waste.”
“Given the gravity of the incidents, we should expect robust enforcement. Instead, we see a regulatory regime that is alarmingly weak. In three quarters of non-compliance cases, the only response was “inspector advice”.”
“Animals were reused, in second experiments, without proper authorisation. Others were kept alive past what most people would consider a humane end point. They were left to suffer as tumours grew too large, or body weight fell dangerously low. In one case, misidentification of sex led to regulated procedures being performed on seven pregnant mice. The failures affect a wide range of animals. Primates suffered injuries from faulty equipment, had tails trapped in cage doors or were left without food overnight. A freedom of information request revealed that in one case an incident deemed by ASRU to be a “minor breach” involved a dog being kept alive despite having suffered severe swelling of the parotid salivary glands as a result of the procedures that it had been through, before eventually being euthanised.”
“Of course. It will surprise my hon. Friend not at all that I agree. I will come to the wider context and wider solutions, but at this time, although we can look to improve the situation, we must absolutely look to make sure that current regulations are enforced as we speak, and not let slide, because there have been hundreds of animals whose suffering breached the current legal framework and should have been prevented. Some of the most disturbing incidents involve something as basic as access to food and water. In 2024, there were nine separate cases in which animals were not provided with adequate food or hydration, and 24 animals died as a result. In another case, a mother was removed from her cage and killed, leaving seven unweaned pups to starve to death. The report catalogues a litany of serious failures.”
“In one example, animals were being used as an intermediary step in heart disease research, despite well-known anatomical differences that limit the relevance of that research to humans. It is time for us to find another way. More than 92% of drugs that succeed in animal tests do not end up being used by patients. That is primarily due to poor efficacy and safety issues that were not predicted by animal testing. We are now at the point where human-specific technologies, using human cells, tissues, artificial intelligence and advanced modelling, offer faster, safer and more relevant results. Pioneering work projects have been taking place for decades, leading to breakthroughs such as mini-hearts that accurately model human cardiac disease without harming animals.”
“Licence summaries reveal the severity of authorised suffering: thousands of animals undergo painful procedures without analgesia because pain relief might interfere with the results. Equally concerning is the failure to uphold the core legal principle at the heart of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Section 2A is clear that scientifically satisfactory non-animal methods must be used wherever possible, yet an expert report commissioned by the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research identified a “system-wide failure” to replace animals where alternatives already exist. Home Office summaries show that licences have been granted even when non-animal methods are clearly available.”
“In 2024 alone, 2.64 million scientific procedures were carried out on animals. That scale of activity cannot be meaningfully overseen through marginal staffing increases. The wider issue is that we continue to allow legally sanctioned animal suffering. For instance, some licences permit deliberate deprivation. Primates’ entire daily food intake can be restricted so that food can be used as a reward for correct task performance during sessions lasting up to six hours. Rats, meanwhile, can go without water for up to 22 hours a day, over a week, to encourage them to consume liquids containing potentially aversive substances. Thousands of procedures still rely on controversial tests such as LD50 toxicity testing and the forced swim test—an outdated model that the Government acknowledge has limited scientific value.”
“I of course agree, and I have some information that will illustrate the point and the importance of inspections. In 2024, just 68 establishments were audited across Great Britain. Only 10 of the inspections were unannounced. That represents just 15% of inspections, which is down from 63% of inspections in 2018. The issue is further exacerbated by some elements of those audits being carried out remotely. Nearly 70% of non-compliance incidents were self-reported, which raises a troubling question about how much more is going undetected in the absence of regular, independent spot checks. ASRU’s current regime of regulatory reform includes increasing the number of inspectors by March to 22 full-time equivalents, up from 14.5, but incremental tweaks to oversight will not solve the underlying problem.”
“I think it will come as no surprise to my hon. Friend that I do agree with him, and I will be making that very call. We are in a good place when it comes to the development of alternatives. I therefore welcome the publication of the Government’s “Replacing animals in science” strategy in November.”
“I urge the Government to strengthen enforcement, ensure the law is upheld in practice, and deliver a clear, timeframed road map to phase out animal testing.”
“It would set a clear ambition to replace animal experiments in medical research over the next decade. It would establish expert oversight and support scientists through the transition. It has been carefully drafted by legal experts, is backed by more than 155 of our colleagues here in Parliament and enjoys strong public support. The non-compliance incidents detailed in the ASRU report and the fact that those incidents regularly cause serious animal suffering in this country should shock us and prompt reflection and action. Ultimately, the only way to eliminate those incidents completely is to end animal testing once and for all. We need a research and innovation system that is scientifically excellent, ethically robust and animal-free.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for another valuable intervention. I agree with her. The Government’s strategy contains a range of positive measures, such as increasing funding for human-specific technologies, but we can move faster—more, we have an opportunity to grow the strategy by supporting cutting-edge, world-leading new technologies that are developed right here in the UK. I urge the Government to go further. I urge them to commit to the replacement of all animals in medical research in the UK by 2035. As colleagues have said, that is known as Herbie’s law, after a beagle bred for the laboratory but saved before he was used. Herbie’s law would provide a practical, collaborative pathway to deliver the Government’s manifesto commitment to phase out animal testing.”
“I wonder whether the hon. Member accepts that, as a number of colleagues have drawn to the House’s attention, the current system has a perverse incentive that pushes people towards a more complicated tribunal system that seeks to identify discrimination, rather than a simpler system of unfair dismissal, because of the cap. This measure is more likely to keep claims within the simpler, more streamlined and quicker system of unfair dismissal, thereby helping with the very problem that we all accept is real.”
“I am perplexed and confused by what I am hearing. Does the hon. Member appreciate that by moving the goalposts once again, and delaying this crucial Bill once again, she is leaving an open goal for unscrupulous employers?”
“As we debate this Bill, it is incumbent on us all to remember where we have been and just how fragile progress can be. Let us get this right and provide justice for grieving families and protections for those who served.”
“I genuinely believe that, as a package, the Bill’s six measures to protect veterans should provide significant reassurance to those who served. There can be no equivalence drawn in this or any other process between those who served in our armed and security forces to protect life and promote security and stability, and terrorists, whether loyalist or republican. The thing that was too often forgotten during the troubles were the ordinary people—those who found themselves caught in the middle and who, on too many occasions, lost their lives because of it. We must not forget them now. I thank those who served to protect people —our veterans, who found themselves in communities not too dissimilar from the ones they grew up in, having to do an immensely difficult job. I also thank those who saw that peace was the way forward.”
“The streets of Belfast are a fundamentally different place compared not just with the stories my mum tells of her youth, but with what I remember from mine. However, progress is not finished and peace should never be taken for granted. We must make sure that we get this right, so I welcome the measures in the Bill to build a clear, robust and fair system with which justice and closure can be sought. Creating a reformed Legacy Commission with strengthened governance, giving the Legacy Commission the powers that it needs so that answers can be provided to families— including those of servicemen and women—and taking a new approach to inquests and coronial cases will all help to provide answers that are sought and needed by grieving families. However, we must also ensure that the system itself is not used as a weapon.”
“I will keep my remarks brief, because many valued voices are yet to be heard in this debate. I welcome the Bill. Northern Ireland has a special place in my heart. It gave me my mum and treasured memories of time with family, and it will always feel part of me, but it also left the younger version of me with many questions, such as why kerbstones were painted red, white and blue in some places, and why the police had guns and their cars looked like tanks. As I said after the Secretary of State’s statement last December, “Nothing can be allowed to jeopardise the progress that has been made in Northern Ireland.” —[ Official Report , 4 December 2024; Vol. 758, c. 425.] I have seen that progress at first hand.”
“Many of my constituents use the Warburton toll bridge to get to work, visit family and go about their everyday lives. However, residents in Irlam and Cadishead have been arbitrarily excluded from the local resident discount scheme, meaning that they have to pay the full price while many who live further from the bridge receive a 50% discount. To date, Peel Ports has not responded to inquiries I have made on constituents’ behalf. Will the Leader of the House consider a debate in Government time on the need to ensure that where essential infrastructure is in private hands, appropriate oversight is in place and local needs are properly considered?”
“My hon. Friend is making an incredibly powerful point. Does she agree that for Sara and for my constituents who are on short or zero-hours contracts, the meat of the amendment, which would introduce the bureaucratic farce of an offering of an offer, instead of a right, would ruin the meaningful change in the Bill and that the introduction of an ability for workers to opt out would open up a loophole with detrimental effects in the real world, where people could be rewarded with overtime if they agreed to opt out?”
“I thank my good and hon. Friend for giving way. Millions of workers, including those on zero-hours contracts, stand to benefit from the measures in the Bill. Does she agree that the amendments tabled by Liberal Democrat peers on the right to guaranteed hours are an unworkable bureaucratic mess that opens up scope for abusive practices in the workplace and removes the Bill’s meaningful protections from far too many workers?”
“Throughout the year I have been working with residents in Astley in my constituency. Four large warehouses, each measuring up to 60 feet high, are being built close to hundreds of houses and a primary school. Although they have planning consent from the local authority, residents are rightly concerned that the consultation process was not adequate. Will the Leader of the House consider a debate on the consultation requirements for large developments to ensure that the voices of residents, such as my constituents in Astley, are heard?”
“We must deliver greater security, stability and dignity to people in their working lives. The right to a guaranteed-hours contract, and the increased financial security that brings with it, is central to achieving that. It will be transformative for living standards, productivity and the economy. I urge colleagues from across the House not to undermine this essential provision and to reject Lords amendment 1. Working people are counting on all of us to do the right thing by them.”
“As working people know from bitter experience, a right to request often means no right at all. Unfortunately, it is clear from the comments made by the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) that either Liberal Democrats do not understand or they are wilfully misrepresenting the amendment. Lords amendment 1 creates a loophole, enabling unscrupulous employers to use pressure or coercion to deter employees from making requests. It also puts that crucial protection out of reach of those who simply are not aware of their rights in the first place. Far from delivering a new right, it reopens the door to workplace conflict, insecurity and exploitation, something of which I am sure the Liberal Democrats would not be proud. It is completely at odds with the spirit and purpose of the provision, and it must be rejected.”
“The right to a guaranteed-hours contract is at the heart of the new deal for working people because, as I said on Report, the rise of one-sided flexibility has been one of the most damaging labour market developments of the past 14 years. Such contracts leave workers—often the lowest paid—vulnerable to sudden changes in income, with weekly working hours varying unpredictably. It is an unstable, precarious life that many are forced into, and it is long past time that this exploitative practice was brought to an end. Lords amendment 1, a throwback team effort from the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives, seeks to replace the Bill’s right to a guaranteed-hours contract with a far weaker “right to request”. At just five words long, the amendment may seem minor, but it is anything but.”
“For well over a decade, working people have been calling for the protections that this landmark piece of legislation will introduce. It is our duty to deliver them, and to deliver them in full. Last year, people voted for change. They are crying out for change, and this Bill delivers real, meaningful and positive change. It is therefore immensely frustrating, although sadly not surprising, to see the old coalition band get back together in the other place, to have one final go at obstructing this Bill through changes, like Lords amendment 1, which will be the focus of my remarks. One of the defining aims of the Bill is to end exploitative short and zero-hours contracts.”
“I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, and to my proud membership of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers and the GMB. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders), who has just popped out for some well-earned tea, for his hard work steering the Bill through the House. I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my equally hon. Friend the Member for Halifax (Kate Dearden), to her place; we both know that she has big shoes to fill. Today, we finally arrive at the concluding stages of this historic Bill’s long journey through Parliament. It is a moment that has been many years in the making.”
“On accessing the rights in the Bill, does my hon. Friend agree that, for people going about their busy daily lives at work and possibly struggling to make ends meet, there is a fundamental difference between a right to a contract with guaranteed hours and a right to request one?”
“I fully agree with my hon. Friend that the probation period is the core of the answer to the question from the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox). Does my hon. Friend agree that a large part of the fear we see is due to scaremongering and misinformation spread by Opposition Members?”
“Last week I had the privilege of visiting the outstanding Red Watch at Eccles fire station, where officers’ professionalism and dedication were plain to see as they talked me through their lifesaving work. The station is home to one of only two specialist water incident units across Greater Manchester, which can often be called upon as a national asset, and officers raised the challenges posed by surging demand for water rescue services during the hot weather. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to their service, and will she consider a debate in Government time on the importance of properly funded water rescue services, including whether it should be a statutory service?”
“Alongside the Government’s actions on increasing the provision of affordable, available and accessible childcare, I strongly welcome this review as a real step forward. Does the Minister agree that, for many, the complexities of the system form a real barrier to accessing it, and that for low-paid workers in particular the provision of unpaid leave makes it simply unaffordable? Will he give a commitment that the review will have at its heart true system accessibility so that people can take proper advantage of it and benefit along with their children?”
“My constituents regularly contact me about the need to improve dementia care. I remember the impact that dementia had on my grandparents and my family, so I sympathise profoundly with everyone impacted by it. I was therefore delighted when my constituent Joy Watson was awarded the British empire medal in the King’s birthday honours in recognition of her inspiring work as a dementia champion. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Joy on her fantastic achievement, and send the best wishes of this House to Joy and her husband Tony, and will she consider a debate in Government time on how we can enhance dementia services?”
“Across my constituency, grassroots sports clubs do an incredible job of promoting physical and mental wellbeing. Eccles RFC does wonderful work to deliver parity for its girls’ team, ensuring that rugby is an open and inclusive sport, and Boothstown FC has done a fantastic to enable boys and girls to benefit from football. Will the Leader of the House join me in commending Eccles RFC and Boothstown FC for their efforts to promote women’s and girls’ sport, and will she consider a debate in Government time on the centrality of physical activity, both inside and outside school, to young people’s wellbeing?”
“Failure to comply carries serious consequences for the worker, including disciplinary action or prosecution. We in this Chamber put that duty on them, we hold them accountable, and we need to give them the protection that they deserve. The new stand-alone offence will provide a clear deterrent, give prosecutors better tools, and send a powerful message to offenders that abuse will not be tolerated.”
“The sacrifices made by retail workers during the pandemic were quickly forgotten, and given that the latest figures from USDAW show that one in 10 retail workers and one in eight delivery drivers have been assaulted at work in the past 12 months, it is well past time for us all to remember that these are frontline workers providing a vital service. That is why the introduction of a new stand-alone offence of assaulting a retail worker is so vital and so welcome. Too many workers have suffered life-changing injuries while simply trying to enforce the law or provide a service. Upholding age-restricted sales is a key part of their role, bringing with it unique challenges. It is not a small responsibility, but a legal duty that often acts as a flashpoint for abuse.”
“I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, and my membership of the trade union USDAW. I rise to support new clause 48, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley (Anneliese Midgley). Before becoming a Member of Parliament, I was proud to campaign for many years alongside retail workers as part of USDAW’s Freedom From Fear campaign, which successfully highlighted the epidemic of abuse and violence faced by retail workers and brought together workers, employers and sectoral bodies. For years there has been consensus outside this place that something needs to be done, but here there has been no consensus. Warm words did not lead to the necessary action from the last Government.”
“It is only right that delivery workers in England and Wales receive equal protection, which must not stop at the shop door. We should never underestimate the important contributions of retail workers. They serve our communities, bring essentials to our doors and keep the nation fed. Without them, the country would grind to a halt. New clause 48 provides the opportunity to give retail workers the protection they so obviously deserve, and I urge hon. Members to take that opportunity and to send a clear message from this place that abuse is not part of the job.”
“I welcome my hon. Friend’s intervention, but I do not need to interrupt my speech, because I am about to deal with exactly that point. New clause 48 would create a specific offence along similar lines to cover delivery workers, which is incredibly welcome. These workers deserve protection just as much as in-store staff. They, too, are required to enforce the law and conduct age checks, and this Bill places additional requirements on them regarding the delivery of knives. But unlike in-store staff, they carry out their work without the safety net of colleagues, security or familiar surroundings. As is the case in Scotland following the passage of the Protection of Workers (Retail and Age-restricted Goods and Services) (Scotland) Act 2021, home delivery drivers must be included.”
“Does the Minister agree that, far from being a skeletal Bill, this legislation provides an adaptable framework for product regulation and consumer safety?”
“The reform of section 136 will ensure that those in crisis receive appropriate care and are not treated like criminals. These reforms represent a meaningful change in how we support people at their most vulnerable, and will make a real difference to thousands of lives each year. People experiencing a health crisis deserve dignity, respect and far better treatment than the system provides for them. Society has made great progress in de-stigmatising mental health, and it is time that our laws reflected that. Through this Bill, we can move closer to a modern, compassionate healthcare service.”
“Just as importantly, this Bill recognises the vital role of support networks, replacing the “nearest relative” rule with the right to choose a nominated person. That will ensure that no one faces the system alone. However, alongside that welcome increase in support, we must ensure stronger safeguards, because no one should be detained unless absolutely necessary. That is why I welcome the Bill’s move to raise the threshold for detention, and to more clearly define what constitutes a mental disorder; that will ensure that detention is always a last resort. Additionally, there are vital new protections for people with autism and learning disabilities, which so many of my hon. Friends have spoken about so eloquently. The provisions ending the use of police and prison cells as so-called places of safety is a positive step.”