Dr Jeevun Sandher
MP for Loughborough · Labour · United Kingdom
“We are helping businesses with the things that they require —roads, skills and investment in energy—and we are cutting rates to give them a bit of breathing space as we go into what we all know will be an incredibly difficult winter.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have also seen that Reform, which supports racist thugs and masked people on our streets, will use those kinds of tactics to distract from the fact that it wants to give its crypto-billionaire mates tax cuts. That is who we stand against and that is the ideal that we stand against on the Labour Benches. We choose a different path.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am going to give a slightly different speech today, because I think that what the Government are doing with this Budget shows both a material and moral difference between our two sides.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We face existential challenges, including an affordability crisis, a burning planet, war in Europe—and all of it coming at the same time. Underneath it all is a question that underlines our politics: will we stand strong together to meet this moment, or will we fall apart divided, weaker and poorer?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We know that it was Bevin’s alliance of labour and capital that helped win the second world war. We know that Attlee built common prosperity based on common sacrifice, all of it from common endeavour, and Blair and Brown renewed a nation.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is the choice that we have made in our history—in our greatest moments—that was the choice that helped us win a war and rebuild our nation afterwards and it was the same choice that saw us build prosperity in our past and, indeed, prosperity in our present.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
300 held · 297 searchable for Dr Jeevun Sandher. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 6.
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.
“I thank my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and Beckton (James Asser) for securing this debate. We have rightly spoken about those who died during the pandemic, but covid also did something else: it made it much harder for people to earn a decent living. Those who were already struggling—the low paid, the young and people in places outside London—suffered the most. First, covid hit low-paid people in jobs such as bartending, which could be done only in person because they required complex manual movements, while those in high-paid jobs could use Zoom to reach the office. The low paid were hit and far more likely to be laid off or placed on furlough. Secondly, the young fell behind while the wealthy baby boomers continued to pull ahead. In the two decades leading up to covid, house prices went up by 100% while wages grew by only 20%.”
House of Commons12 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed, huge numbers of people were hit so hard during the pandemic. We agree that although support was broad, it certainly was not perfect. On top of the suffering, the pandemic widened existing inequalities and divisions in our nation. Those who could not earn enough—the low paid, the young and people outside London—were hit the hardest. They were already turning away from us in this House; they are now turning away more quickly. We can bring them back only if we act to ensure that every single person can earn enough for a decent life, if we create a nation in which we recognise that our strength is founded in each of us doing well—a nation of unity, common purpose and connection. It is for us to build that nation, as my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and Beckton rightly noted.”
House of Commons12 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My constituency of Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages is in the east midlands, a region that has been overlooked for too long. That ends today, first with the changes to the Green Book, which we all welcome. There will be more money outside London; I hope my colleagues do not mind too much. Secondly, we have more than £100 billion of investment. Can the Chancellor please set out how today’s investment will get bills down and wages rising in my constituency of Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages?”
House of Commons11 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T4. Businesses in my constituency often complain about the shocking Brexit deal that the Conservative party gave us, with more costs, more red tape and more paperwork. That is why Labour Members welcome the new EU deal negotiated by this Government. Can the Minister set out how businesses in my constituency—in Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages—will benefit from our new grown-up relationship with the European Union?”
House of Commons5 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Their hero Margaret Thatcher destroyed manufacturing in this country—the fastest deindustrialisation in western Europe. Non-graduates cannot get good jobs and are now turning away from democracy itself.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We know that a nation in which every single one of us can earn a decent life is a stronger nation. That is exactly the kind of country that the Government are creating. In this country today, too many people cannot earn a decent life. Our nation is weaker as a result. The task before us is to create a stronger nation, not the weaker and more divided one that some Members would like to see and speak about time and again. I take the Opposition’s motion in good faith, but each of its points, which I will come to in due course, is mistaken. We live in dangerous times. A third of us cannot earn a decent living, because the Conservatives left us with some of the highest energy, housing and childcare costs in the world. They left us a no-growth economy: wages did not grow for 14 years—the longest squeeze since Napoleon.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was a very young man then as it happens; it was rather a long time ago. I believe that the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O’Brien) wanted to intervene too. [ Interruption. ] Or perhaps not any more—he is busy tweeting away. That is okay.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Manufacturing has been falling in this country since Margaret Thatcher came to this place. The lack of manufacturing jobs, and the inability of graduates to get a decent job in this country, is precisely why they are turning away from democracy itself. More than that, the UK has suffered the fastest deindustrialisation in western Europe.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In a moment. On top of that, young people cannot move out: some 40% of 18 to 35-year-olds live at home with mum and dad. Each of them is now turning away from democracy.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What was despair and despondency is now becoming anger. We are now up against those whose only answer is to tear everything down, to blame someone else for all our problems. They seek to create division, and a divided nation is a weaker one. That division leads to anger and sometimes, as we saw last summer, to violence. We meet this moment with decency and determination. We meet it by creating a stronger nation, in which every single one of us can earn a decent life.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are creating good jobs for non-graduates—that goes to the point made by the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire (Mr Mohindra)—as well as building 1.5 million homes, establishing Great British Energy and implementing the warm homes plan. For young people—our generation—we are building homes so that they can move out of mum and dad’s. That is how we create a better and stronger nation in which each of us can do well—stronger because we produce more, stronger because we have a stake in each other’s wellbeing, and stronger because we have a shared sense of purpose. These are some of the most dangerous times in our country for almost a century. A third of people cannot earn enough to live, and non-graduates and the young see no prospect of being able to earn a decent life and are turning away from democracy.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A stronger nation is one where each person does well, and that is the country that we are creating—in stark contrast with what the Conservative party left us. To get everyone to live a decent life, we need to get costs down. Opposition Members have spoken about inflation. A third of today’s price increases come from energy costs. Why? It is because we depend on natural gas, which sets our price 98% of the time and is 50% to 75% more expensive than wind and solar. That is why we are investing in clean energy—cheaper and secure energy in the long run, not just for the next five or 10 years. We also have some of the highest childcare costs in the world. The Chancellor has put more money into childcare so that everyone can get the care they need and get their bills down.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Page 4 of the impact assessment of the Employment Rights Bill, of which we Labour Members are incredibly proud, states: “The package will be significantly positive for society (i.e., the benefits will outweigh the costs)”. It goes on to mention “a direct and positive impact on economic growth”. Pro-worker, pro-business, pro-growth—that is the record and legacy of this Labour Government. Where we differ entirely and fundamentally from the Conservative party is that we do not believe that it is simply business owners and entrepreneurs who create wealth and growth in this country. Every worker—ever nurse, doctor or teacher—creates wealth in this nation. It is a joint enterprise between capital and labour to produce more. That is where we are.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Luckily, I will come back to reindustrialising the economy and what the Labour Government are doing right now, but let me turn to the motion at hand, which does not really add up, taking each point in turn. The motion speaks of employment. Employment, including youth employment, is higher than it was at the July election. More people are entering the labour market, and fewer people are off sick. That is because we are getting waiting lists down. The motion speaks of business closing down. Over 230,000 businesses have been created—a net increase of 10,000. We have made a permanent 40% reduction in business rates for high street shops.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“You brought in a temporary reduction of business rates during covid, but as with so much else, you did not fund that beyond those years, so you made a permanent reduction of 40% for the future.”
House of Commons21 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I, too, wish the Veterans Minister the best of luck as he climbs Everest, and I am sure we all agree: rather him than us. In today’s world warfare is changing dramatically. Drones costing $1,000 can destroy tanks worth $10 million, but the innovation cycle for those drones is rapid; they are designed to become obsolete within months. We need a dynamic SME sector to produce those drones, but defence SMEs are struggling to get the finance they need, with a lack of long-term contracts and a lack of guarantees. A multilateral defence bank could help to ensure that those firms get the finance they need. Will the Secretary of State please set out the discussions he is having to help to found that multilateral defence bank?”
House of Commons19 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member’s amendment speaks of “severe pain and discomfort”, but there is a reason why the medical profession has not gone for that. How does she propose we assess severe pain and discomfort as opposed to medium pain? Is a fungating wound part of severe pain and discomfort?”
House of Commons16 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think today of Norman Ward, who in 2020 shot himself while terminally ill because of the terrible pain that he faced. Does my hon. Friend agree that under subsection (f) of new clause 16, Norman Ward would have been unable to access the choice that would have ended his suffering?”
House of Commons16 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was also one of the Members sanctioned by Putin yesterday for calling for this House to do everything we can to stop him. The lesson of a century ago is that dictators like Putin cannot and will not stop unless we stop them, and the only way to stop him is through strength—through strong armed forces, a strong NATO and a strong nation. How will we invest in our strength to stop Putin and keep ourselves safe?”
House of Commons24 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Potholes are a blight across my constituency and cost us £500 each time they damage our cars, and the reason is that our roads have not been maintained by the Conservative-run county council. Does the Leader of the House believe that on 1 May my constituents should vote to fix our potholes and vote for all the brilliant Labour candidates across Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages?”
House of Commons24 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Constituents across my community of Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages have been facing the scourge of offroad bikes, often ridden by young reoffenders. That causes havoc for residents, it is dangerous for pedestrians, and can be fatal for those who are on those bikes. Those young reoffenders often have little else to do, as there are few education, training or employment opportunities, so can the Minister please set out how this Government will end the scourge of offroad bikes and reoffending, and how they will once again be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime?”
House of Commons22 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. Keeping ourselves, Europe and Ukraine safe means that we have to produce more fighting forces than Putin can, but traditionally this country has focused on producing exquisite and expensive platforms. Clearly that trade-off is changing, and we are seeing $1,000 drones in Ukraine destroying $9 million tanks. The production trade-off between expendable and exquisite platforms has to change across our allies and ourselves. Producing those drones takes months; it will take years even to upgrade our own Challenger tanks. Will the Secretary of State set out how that changing trade-off in production will be implemented and introduced in the strategic defence review and the defence industrial strategy to keep ourselves, Europe and Ukraine safe?”
House of Commons22 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This review must not be like reviews of the past. Warm words about regional inequalities are not enough. We need to change a flawed methodology and appreciate the dynamic benefits of investment. For non-graduates in communities such as mine, it is far more difficult to find a good job than it is here in the capital. The jobs available to my constituents are less secure and lower paid, because we do not get the public investment we need. Our future has been held back by a flawed methodology and a system that does not work for my community, my region or indeed the country. When people cannot see a good future, their anger grows. We can end that anger, and rebuild hope and a better future, by changing the Green Book so that investment takes place outside London—in my community and in communities across the nation.”
House of Commons2 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Better transport allows businesses to attract more customers and workers. It gets economies growing and wages rising. But the Green Book does not account for those dynamic effects. Instead, it assumes that every single project is marginal to an area. It assumes that projects do not influence either growth or prices around the area in which they take place. The review is taking place precisely because the Government know that investing in our regions outside London will make us all better off. Getting the basics right—more investment outside London, and basic transport infrastructure—will do a lot more for growth than another infrastructure project in London. That is the change we need. To achieve all of that, we need to overcome the tyranny of the cost-benefit analysis. It has to be confronted and destroyed.”
House of Commons2 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is because the cost-benefit analysis set out in the Green Book to evaluate projects has a hardwired London bias. First, the Green Book prices the benefits of projects in a way that benefits places with higher wages—namely, London. Secondly, it does not estimate the wider impact of investment on growth. To take the first issue, hourly wages are higher in London, and the benefits of transport projects are calculated in terms of commuting time saved. That commuting time is priced in wages, so according to the current methodology, one hour saved is worth more in London than elsewhere. The projected benefits of investing in London become larger, more projects are built here and the logic because self-fulfilling. To take the second issue, economies are dynamic—they respond to investment.”
House of Commons2 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I represent a constituency in the east midlands—a region that has been left behind because of the decline of our great industries and chronic under-investment. The fall in industrial employment was one of the most rapid anywhere in Europe. Suddenly community centres were gone, jobs were lost and people’s sense of purpose and dignity disappeared. On top of that, and contributing to it, my region has the lowest transport investment in the country. We need to end this cycle of decline, because it is holding back our nation. We need to invest in communities such as mine to make the country a better place and to help create good jobs. For too long, investment has been biased towards London and the south-east. Someone living in London gets £800 more infrastructure spending per year than the national average.”
House of Commons2 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Pritchard. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Mrs Russell) for securing the debate. The current design of the Green Book holds back communities such as mine in Loughborough, and by doing so holds back our country. Due to a flawed methodology, it overestimates the benefits of investment in London, and by doing so underestimates the benefits of investing elsewhere. It is one of the reasons why we have the most economically centralised nation in the OECD, and the reason why places that have been locked out of investment and growth are turning away from us in this place and away from democracy. I am so glad that the Chancellor is reviewing the Green Book at last to help spread investment across our nation, so that we can all reap the gains.”
House of Commons2 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Young people in my constituency, and indeed across the country, have had an incredibly difficult time growing up: austerity saw their further education budgets cut by 14%, then there was a pandemic and now war in Europe. Will the Chancellor please set out how her plans to get Britain building again will help my young constituents get the good, non-graduate jobs they need in Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages?”
House of Commons26 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Leeds tram, upgrading the line from Cardiff to Swansea, electrifying the midland main line—all were rejected by the last Government, who put London first and everywhere else last. They spoke of levelling up, but as my dad likes to say, talk is cheap. Now is the time to stop talking and start building. That means fixing the planning system so that we can build the homes, wind farms and, yes, pylons that we need. If we change our approach to infrastructure projects, we can also build the roads and rail we need outside of London, making it easier to transport goods and for my constituents in Loughborough, Shepshed and the villages to get around.”
House of Commons24 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is why it is harder to get a good job. For too long, investment has flowed to London and the south-east. That is because the benefit-cost ratio in the Green Book has a hardwired London bias. Wages are higher in London, so the estimated benefits of spending are also larger in the capital. With more projects built here in London, the logic becomes self-fulfilling. That London bias is why the gap between London and the rest of the UK is larger than the gap between west and east Germany. The Treasury, to its credit, does understand the problem, but the tyranny of the benefit-cost ratio is sadly still with us. We must end this bias and build prosperity in the places that need it most. The Opposition spoke about levelling up but did nothing to deliver it.”
House of Commons24 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What do these prices tell us? Not enough homes, not enough rail, and not enough clean energy. Infrastructure is being held back by our broken planning system. Our infrastructure projects are among the most expensive and slow to build of high-income nations. The Bill lifts the constraints and helps get us building, but it can go further. The NIC states that the largest increase to planning timetables is at pre-application stage, adding over two years on average. It is delaying critical infrastructure. I hope that the Minister will address this in his remarks. We must also ensure that the benefits of the Bill are felt across our nation. My constituency is in the east midlands, where transport spending is the lowest in the country, private rents are rising faster than anywhere else, and productivity is the lowest in England.”
House of Commons24 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to speak about how the Bill will allow us to invest in our communities, benefiting every part of the country and not just London. I have spent my entire adult life in a no-growth economy where costs rose because we did not build enough. The rent we pay, our rail fares and our energy bills have all soared because we could not build the homes, rail or wind farms we need—higher costs caused by a planning system whose default answer is no. The Bill changes that answer to yes. The Bill targets constraints that have stopped us from growing. Prices are information. Where prices are high, we can see that we desperately need more supply. Rents as a share of income are up by 20% since 2020. Our transport costs are 26% higher than in peer nations. When Putin invaded Ukraine, we had the highest electricity bills in the G7.”
House of Commons24 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Today, we are discussing raising national insurance contributions from the largest employers to fix our broken public services and invest in our prosperity. Three quarters of that £23 billion of investment is from the richest 2% of businesses, while we are reducing contributions from the 250,000 smallest businesses.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for allowing me to rise to speak to Lords amendments 1 to 19. I want to speak about what makes a good tax system and, in particular, optimal tax theory, which is a topic that is as thrilling to me as it is no doubt to the entire Chamber. A good tax system is defined by neutrality, simplicity and stability, as set out in the Mirrlees review. A tax system designed along those three principles will raise the maximum revenue with the minimum economic impact. Each of the amendments in isolation might seem reasonable, but together they introduce individual exemptions that make our tax system less neutral, less simple and less stable. The amendments would make our tax system worse.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can tell the House that a good tax is one that raises revenue and does not introduce perverse incentives. A good tax ensures that resources go to activity because there are higher levels of productivity. A good tax system introduces three principles. The first is neutrality: it treats similar activities in similar ways. The second is simplicity: it is straightforward and easy to implement. The third is stability: it is predictable.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pretty well established introduction to the tax system to have both employee and employer NICs. The point about simplicity is about where the tax is levied. I will come to the specific point that the hon. Member raises later in my speech and hopefully provide some illumination. The revenue we are raising will be used to invest in our nation’s prosperity: insulating our homes, rebuilding our crumbling schools and hiring more nurses to care for our loved ones. It is about getting costs down and creating good jobs. It is about rebuilding this country after, frankly, more than a decade of despondency and despair. The amendments before us represent bad policy that puts that at risk. As I may have mentioned in this House once or twice before, I used to be an economist.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“First, there is more funding going into the early years, but I will deal with the tax side as I speak to the specific amendments. Each amendment seeks to carve out an exemption for something, and I am sure that Members across the House identify with and, indeed, support some of those individual exemptions. However, if we were to pass the amendments, they would give specified sectors advantages not enjoyed by others.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not, because that would introduce exemptions and perverse incentives and make the tax system less clear. It would make the tax system as a whole less efficient. I will come to the specific ways shortly. Let us start with non-neutrality. Lords amendments 7, 12 and 16 would create non-neutrality between small charities and non-charities. That would incentivise more social enterprises to be charities instead of businesses. Lords amendments 8, 10 and 14 would create an additional NICs band for small businesses, thereby disincentivising them from growing. Under those amendments, if a business saw its revenue go over £1 million or it employed more than 25 people, all of a sudden it would incur a NICs charge. That is a cliff edge. It would introduce a perverse incentive and reduce productivity and economic growth.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have a duty to make policy that works, and that involves distinguishing the whole from its parts, ensuring we do not introduce loopholes and carve-outs that weaken our tax system, and governing responsibly.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Raising rates is accepted policy; introducing special rates for specific sectors or establishments is not. It would make for a less efficient tax system that is complicated to govern, expensive to enforce and more prone to fraud. This is not a predictable way of making tax policy. It is not neutral, it is not simple, and it is not stable. It is bad policy that all of us in the House should oppose. All this may sound dry, but it matters to our constituents. Bad taxes do not just harm economic growth, but bring in less revenue. That means fewer appointments in the NHS, it means fewer new teachers, and it means less insulation in our homes. We are elected to this place as legislators.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I think I have set out, the question is not about carving out an exemption for this establishment or that establishment; it is about how we create a tax system overall that is simple and efficient. It is about ensuring that businesses and other organisations are operating more efficiently. I say this to the hon. Member: when the Conservatives were in government, they did not propose abolishing national insurance for all hospices. They should follow their arguments to the end of the line. I will move on, as I am conscious of the time. The amendments would also reduce simplicity in the tax system. We are not exempting specific sectors or, indeed, specific establishments from this tax. Overall, Lords amendments 1 to 19 would complicate the tax system and reduce stability.”
House of Commons19 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have to act to make it so. The Bill and the amendments do exactly that by giving social care workers the power to speak with one voice to negotiate higher wages, better training and better conditions, benefiting employee and employer—pro-worker, pro-business and pro-growth. That is what the Bill stands for. That is what I stand for. That is what we stand for.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Adult Social Care Negotiating Body will mean more social care workers speaking as one voice, gaining higher wages, better conditions and more training. Those benefits do not just appear on payslips; they mean less time spent worrying about paying the bills, and more time with our families and reading to our children. They make workers more productive and benefit employers—they make life worth living. Those on the Opposition Benches say that life cannot improve. They have talked a lot of fear instead of hope and the change we can achieve. They will likely vote against our amendments and against the Bill. In doing so, they would deny their constituents better wages and, indeed, a better life. We cannot simply sit back and hope that wages rise, that training will magically appear, or that conditions will get better on their own.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Before entering this place, I was a trade union rep, and I worked with my colleagues to help stop a 33% pay cut in my workplace. Workers speaking with one voice meant a happier and more productive workplace—one voice to set out what it means to increase productivity. That is why this is a pro-growth Bill. Social care workers are among the lowest paid in our economy. One in six are legally paid less than the minimum wage. Little proper certification, reward or recognition for skills means that there is little training. Poor conditions mean that almost half suffer from work-related stress. Low pay, little progression and poor conditions are the reasons why a third of social care workers leave the sector each year. That is what this Bill and these new clauses will fix.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What a speech to follow. I cannot quite claim to be Peggy Mitchell, but I will try to live up to that brilliant remark. I rise as a proud member of the GMB. I happily refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I will speak to new clauses 37 and 38, which relate to part 3 of the Bill. They will strengthen the bargaining power of social workers and, by doing so, create a stronger working relationship between employees and employers that both sides will invest more in. That means higher wages for those who look after our parents, more training and a healthier social care workforce. Both sides will invest more; both sides will benefit more. Pro-worker, pro-business, pro-growth—that is what these amendments and this Bill will achieve.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The defence sector contributes £3.2 billion to the Scottish economy, and Scotland’s contribution keeps us all safe. The Prime Minister has announced increased spending in our country, which also means more investment in Scotland, higher industrial production and higher incomes. Does the Secretary of State agree that this shows the difference a Labour Government make—both south and north of the border?”
House of Commons5 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I put on the record my thanks to the Prime Minister. I know that the entire House thanks him for the leadership that he showed over the weekend. In his statement, he talked about stepping up the economic pressure on Russia. As things stand, we know that Russia is circumventing the oil price cap. Its oil is being sold above $60, and around $190 billion flowed to Putin from oil sales last year. We in this country are in a unique position to enforce the cap because the insurance that the tankers depend on is written in London. Will the Prime Minister assure us that he will strengthen the oil price cap as much as possible, and may I request a meeting with a Minister to discuss in more detail how we might strengthen it?”
House of Commons3 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“First, across high-income nations, top earners have seen their pay rise far faster than the rest. Technological change destroyed manufacturing jobs and led to a divided labour market of high-paid and low-paid jobs. High-paid workers benefited from new technology—computers, Excel and PowerPoint—and they saw their wages increase 50% faster than the average. We are fixing that in this Budget by investing in the skills of non-graduates, with more money for further education colleges and apprenticeships. Secondly, older generations have benefited from cheaper homes, while younger renters cannot buy a home because we have failed to build enough houses in this country. Twenty years ago, house prices were three times the average wage. Today, they are more than eight times the average wage.”
House of Commons3 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As Members may know, my PhD was on the causes and consequences of inequality and particularly why, since the 1980s, people and places have not shared equally in growth. In my adult life, I have never known a growing economy, and now my beard is turning grey— [ Interruption. ] I will soon look like Gandalf. I want to see the dotted line on the GDP chart finally go up, but that is not enough. We have to ask whether all are sharing in that growth. Growth for where, and growth for whom? The only way to ensure that all share in growth is for this Government to act. When people do not share in growth, when their incomes do not rise and when life becomes worse, hope turns to cynicism, happiness turns to anger and peace turns to riots. There are four ways in which growth has not been shared by all, and we are fixing all four in this Budget.”
House of Commons3 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Economic growth is the ability to produce more with less. It is the foundation of all human progress. It is why we are not all scratching around in the dirt, desperately hoping something will grow. However, there is no economic law that says that when the economy grows, all must share in it. In decades past, it has not been shared. Growth has gone to high earners over everyone else, to the old rather than the young, to capital over labour and to London over everywhere else. This is tearing our democracy apart, and it is tearing other democracies apart. That is why I am so proud to speak in favour of this Finance Bill, which will help to ensure that economic growth is shared among all people and all places. I worked as an economist before entering this place.”
House of Commons3 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗