Al Pinkerton MP: speeches

Speeches

• 18 Nov 2025 · Reducing Energy Bills · Hansard source

  More

  13. What steps he is taking to reduce energy bills in Surrey Heath constituency.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Reducing Energy Bills · Hansard source

  More

  The National Audit Office recently reported that 98% of the 23,000 homes fitted with external wall insulation under the previous Government schemes are at risk of damp and mould unless they are swiftly remediated. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that homes in Surrey Heath insulated under those schemes are remediated in a timely and trustworthy manner, and what assessment has he made of the role that home insulation will play in our wider efforts to reduce bills but also protect climate and nature?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill · Hansard source

  More

  As my hon. Friend well knows, 94% of the UK’s biodiversity lies within the waters of our overseas territories. Just north of the Falkland Islands is the so-called blue hole, an area of unregulated fishing beyond national jurisdiction. It is an area where trackers are turned off and illegal fishing takes place. Does she agree that the ratification of the BBNJ agreement may provide the opportunity—the common cause—to tackle intractable geopolitical issues that have led to that lack of regulation, and may point to a way forward for the international co-operation of which she speaks?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Parkinson’s Disease · Hansard source

  More

  In advance of this debate, my constituent Tony contacted me to say that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2019 but has only seen a specialist three times in the six years that have followed. Does the hon. Lady agree that access to a specialist is vital, not least for quelling anxiety, but also to help those with Parkinson’s to develop plans to help them to live independent lives?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Budget: Press Briefings · Hansard source

  More

  I have had meetings with businesses and constituents in Surrey Heath who tell me that they have changed their decisions based on the speculation they have heard in recent weeks and months. We have heard about the rage that some people have felt; in my constituency, I have heard anxiety from people who have drawn down their pension pots and perhaps not pursued the house purchase that they were looking at. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, whatever the reality—whether speculation or leaks—this situation is deeply regrettable? If he can do anything at all, will he please ensure that this never happens again?

• 11 Nov 2025 · BBC Leadership · Hansard source

  More

  Earlier this year, as part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme, I had the great privilege of visiting the 77th Brigade—the anti-Russian disinformation brigade of the British Army down in Newbury. The experts on the front line of the information wars told us that the British population are being subjected to tens of thousands of messages every single day designed to seed distrust between Government and citizen and break our belief in our institutions. The United Kingdom is in an incredibly privileged position in that we have a state broadcaster that provides us with something that might resemble a national culture. If we were to lose that, we would be feeding the forces that stand against us. Does the Secretary of State agree that the BBC provides a vital connection to our past that unifies us and that, as well as being a source of education, information and entertainment, it is also a great source of national resilience?

• 11 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I have been contacted by a Surrey Heath resident who has not just endured and survived appalling domestic abuse but is now enduring and attempting to survive the family court process, with multiple hearings over child contact arrangements. Will the Minister commit today to implementing the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s recent recommendations to better protect children at risk?

• 11 Nov 2025 · Autistic Adults: Employment · Hansard source

  More

  My constituent John has experienced prolonged periods of unemployment —he has been employed for only four of the past 14 years—and I think his experience is redolent of that of many other people with autism who feel that they are not getting the support that they need. Does my hon. Friend agree that not only do potential employees need support, but employers need education to help them facilitate economic independence for adults with autism?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Mr Mundell. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I thank the hon. Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles) for securing this important debate, and other Members—most of them, at least—for their contributions. The Council of Europe is one of the post-war generation’s quiet triumphs. It was Winston Churchill, speaking in Zurich in 1946, who called for the creation of a Council of Europe to safeguard peace and freedom across our continent. Just three years later, the UK became one of its 10 founding members, and from the outset it represented something profoundly British: a belief that democracy, human rights and the rule of law should not stop at our own shores; they are international values. Of course, the Council’s crowning achievement is the European convention on human rights. For decades, the convention and the European Court of Human Rights, which enforces it, have protected the rights of millions, including our own citizens—defending free speech and fair trials, advancing equality for women, securing justice for our military veterans, the LGBT community and those with disabilities, and holding Governments of every colour to account. Today, the Council of Europe, membership of which is predicated on ECHR adherence, helps us to combat terrorism, cyber-crime, corruption and money laundering, as well as human trafficking and other forms of organised crime, yet there are some in this House who would turn their back on that legacy and those instruments. They would align us with Russia, a nation expelled from the Council of Europe in 2022 after its unlawful invasion of our close ally Ukraine. Russia, our clearest adversary—that is the company that some would have us keep.

• 5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source

  More

  It is truly shameful company for us to maintain, and there is nothing virtuous or patriotic about calling for our withdrawal. Indeed, those calling for withdrawal, in pursuit of a single policy objective—ending illegal migration—should heed a deeper warning. In “A Man for All Seasons”, the playwright Robert Bolt, through the character of Sir Thomas More, observes of England: “This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down…do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!” If we cut down the laws that shield even the unpopular or the accused, we will soon find that there is no shelter left for any of us. As authoritarianism rises and war returns to our continent, the Council’s role has never been more vital. Its expulsion of Russia was an act not of punishment, but of principle—a reminder that tyranny cannot co-exist with liberty. What becomes of Britain’s claim to moral leadership if we abandon the very human rights system we helped to build? What becomes of the rule of law, at home and abroad, if the United Kingdom decides that it no longer needs to be bound by it? Our rights—our particular British rights—have been formed over a millennium of conflict, struggle and reform. We surrender them at our peril.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Sudan: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing this important debate. I have been to Srebrenica, and I was in Sudan in 2022. As I travelled with my research team to the northern Nubian desert, our path was blocked by the presence of the Wagner Group, which was training the RSF militia and extracting vast quantities of gold. This is an internationalised civil war. Does my hon. Friend agree that an internationalised civil war requires an internationalised solution? Britain is morally bound to play a leading role in assembling a coalition of the willing.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Supporting High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way four times in such quick succession. Of the £40 million of business rates levied this year by Surrey Heath borough council, only £1 million has been retained locally. Given that borough councils levy business rates and that businesses have an expectation that the money is retained locally, does my hon. Friend agree with me that it is vital that the money gets put back into the local economy to improve infrastructure and to increase the sense of place? If that cannot be done, perhaps business rates should be scrapped altogether and replaced with a more just way of raising funds.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Houses in Multiple Occupation: Planning Consent · Hansard source

  More

  We also have the phenomenon of HMO properties in my constituency. If someone were to apply to build a block of six apartments, they would have to go through a proper planning process, with things such as parking being considered. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the licensing regime needs to be significantly tightened to give local authorities the power to think about things such as parking and bin storage prior to an HMO licence being issued?

• 3 Nov 2025 · “Soldier F” Trial Verdict · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his responses so far. We welcome the resolution of this trial and the clarity that the law has afforded. The Liberal Democrats extend our deepest sympathies to the families who still seek justice and answers. The legacy Act of 2023 may have been driven by the instinct to protect veterans, but it fails to comply with our international legal obligations and, through its conditional immunity, created a false equivalence between those who valiantly served in the British armed forces and those involved in acts of terrorism. That approach was both morally wrong and offensive to veterans and victims alike. The violence carried out by terrorist organisations during the troubles caused deep suffering across Northern Ireland, and we believe that the need to uphold the rule of law must apply to all without exception, but prosecution should never become persecution. This case focuses our attention back on the Government’s new attempt to deal with the legacy of the past. Is the Secretary of State absolutely confident that the Bill will deliver strong enough protections for British veterans? What has he done to try to secure support from veterans’ organisations? What has he done to ensure that victims and families can finally access the truth and justice that they deserve?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Army Recruitment · Hansard source

  More

  May I begin by associating myself and my party with the sentiments reflected by the Secretary of State about the terrible events in Huntingdon at the weekend? The Secretary of State’s ambition to reverse the outflows from our armed forces is absolutely right, particularly considering the damage the last Government did to our military, but it is far from clear that the Government are doing enough to achieve the necessary changes. There continue to be more service personnel leaving the Army year on year than are joining. In order to strengthen our defence, we need to give more people better incentives to join the armed forces. Will the Minister consider accelerating recruitment properly and tackling outflow rates by backing Liberal Democrat proposals for a £10,000 signing bonus to attract new recruits?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Property Service Charges · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) for securing this important debate. Across the country, and certainly across my constituency, leaseholders are trapped in a system that too often leaves them feeling powerless. They face spiralling service charges, opaque management practices and little or no accountability from the agents or freeholders who control their lived environments. In my experience, these problems are particularly acute for elderly and more vulnerable residents, many of whom live in retirement developments and depend on the professionalism of those entrusted with managing their estates. Far too often, what they experience is mismanagement, confusion and financial anxiety. To illustrate the scale of the issue, I want to draw on two cases from my Surrey Heath constituency that encapsulate the national failings: first, Mytchett Heath, a retirement complex managed by Cognatum Estates, a not-for-profit developer and operator based in the south and south-east of England; and secondly, the Courtyard in Camberley, a residential building currently undergoing cladding remediation—in effect, two scandals rolled into one. At the Courtyard, one of my constituents, Sharon, has seen her annual service charges rise by £1,394 between 2017 and 2025, and has paid a total of £22,727 over that period on top of council tax. In 2021 alone, her bill rose by 38% with no clear explanation. When she sought answers from Pinnacle Property Management, the managing agent, the responses were slow, incomplete and unhelpful. She has been left anxious, powerless and deeply mistrustful of those managing her building. At Mytchett Heath, residents face an equally troubling pattern, and I am grateful to the hon. Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare) and my hon. Friend the Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) for supporting me in my investigations of the organisation. Maintenance costs appear without warning or justification. Worse still, the managing fee at Mytchett Heath—the basic charge that residents pay for estate management—has increased by 75% since 2019, at an average rate of 10.7% per year. As all of us know, that far exceeds inflation, wage growth and pension increases, yet residents have been given no clear explanation of how those rises are justified, nor any transparent breakdown of where their money is going. There is no effective oversight mechanism for managing agents or freeholders. Although residents can, in theory, appeal to the industry ombudsman, many are deterred from that process because it is too long, too complex and often too costly. What is particularly concerning for my residents at Mytchett Heath is that the managing director of Cognatum Estates, Mr John Lavin, also sits on the board of the Association of Retirement Housing Managers—the very trade body that purports to regulate and uphold standards across the sector. That is a textbook case of marking one’s own homework. Elderly residents, meanwhile, are left financially trapped, emotionally exhausted and with nowhere to turn. The human cost of all this is immense: stress, anxiety, depleted savings and a complete loss of peace of mind. These are retirees spending their later years poring over spreadsheets and unanswered emails, when they should be enjoying the comfort and security they have worked for. Back in April, I met the board of Cognatum Estates to hear its side of the story. I was told that some residents were “encouraging others to protest”. In a recent letter from Cognatum’s chief executive officer, I heard that complaints were, in fact, part of a “co-ordinated campaign to…denigrate the organisation.” These are not political agitators—I should know, because I have met enough of them—but elderly homeowners who are asking basic questions about the bills they receive. They deserve answers, not accusations. In conclusion, I ask the Minister three simple questions. When can leaseholders—particularly elderly residents—expect to be able to receive clear, itemised explanations of how their service charges are calculated? Secondly, when managing agents fail to communicate or justify large increases, such as the 70% rise in Mytchett Heath’s managing fee since 2019, what meaningful sanctions might they face? Finally, will the Government review the governance of trade associations such as the Association of Retirement Housing Managers to ensure genuine independence and oversight, rather than industry insiders marking their own homework?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Support for Disabled Veterans · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Eastleigh (Liz Jarvis) for securing this debate. Where the state falls down, so often the charitable sector and amazing volunteers are there to pick up the pieces. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to some of the incredible charities in my Surrey Heath constituency, which, as she knows, is deeply connected to the military through the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Pirbright and the former Deepcut barracks? I think in particular of the recently reconstituted branch of the Camberley Royal British Legion, but also the Surrey Heath veterans hub and incredible volunteers such as Roy Sellstrom, who have for years given time and effort to rehabilitating and supporting our very well respected veteran community.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Gibraltar: UK-EU Agreement · Hansard source

  More

  Like the Minister, I had the pleasure of being in Gibraltar in the summer at the invitation of the Government, and I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I saw for myself the vital necessity of this deal to secure the economy and the social fabric of Gibraltar and, in particular, the movement of 15,000 people across the Spain-Gibraltar frontier every day. Can the Minister commit himself to bringing the treaty to the House at the first possible opportunity, so that the details can be given the fullest possible scrutiny?

• 28 Oct 2025 · Gibraltar: UK-EU Agreement · Hansard source

  More

  5. What progress she has made on implementing the UK-EU agreement on Gibraltar.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Connected and Automated Vehicles · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) for securing this important debate. To the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), I say: automated vehicles— “It’s life, Jim, but not as we know it”. Connected and automated vehicles offer the prospect of a safer, more efficient and more sustainable public transport system. They hold particular potential for areas such as my constituency, Surrey Heath, where public transport remains inadequate, with slow, disconnected bus routes, poor rail links to London and limited options for those without a private vehicle. If implemented effectively and securely, this technology could transform mobility by giving greater independence to older residents and—as the hon. Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) said—to those with disabilities or medical conditions. That would reduce isolation and improve access to essential services. It could also help us to meet our net zero goals by cutting reliance on private cars and encouraging cleaner, shared modes of travel, while improving road safety for all users, including cyclists and pedestrians. In semi-rural areas, connected and automated vehicles could link villages where bus services are unreliable, while easing congestion. Congestion is a major issue in Surrey Heath, which has the second-highest car dependency rate of any in the country, with 1.64 cars per household. However, the transition will only succeed if the public’s trust in the digital infrastructure that underpins it is enhanced. Connectivity must go hand in hand with security. Our vehicle identification systems—our number plates—cannot be the weak link in an otherwise forward-looking transport agenda. In the past, I have raised concerns about the fragility of automated number plate recognition technology. In an age of connected technology and digital identifiers, it is troubling that we still rely on what is largely an analogue process for our security on the roads. Number plates should be the cornerstone of road safety, yet they have become a point of vulnerability: easily cloned, exploited and poorly protected. When ANPR fails or is undermined by cloning or ghosting, that is not a minor inconvenience but a failure of public protection. One Surrey Heath resident was fined thousands of pounds after criminals cloned her number plate. She faced bailiff threats and months of stress with little support. Another resident received 42 penalty notices for the same reason. Both spent many hundreds of pounds replacing their number plates, not because of any wrongdoing on their part but because the system meant to protect them failed. Those are not isolated cases. A recent parliamentary written question revealed that in 2024 the DVLA received over 10,000 reports from people across the country disputing responsibility for private vehicles that they did not recognise when they were challenged—a 42% increase since 2020. To realise the potential benefits of connected and automated vehicles, our security infrastructure and legislation must evolve in lockstep with advancing technologies. The Government should legislate for tighter registration controls, stronger supply verification and a digital audit trail to prevent tracing and cloning. Transport innovation must not outpace regulation; as vehicles become smarter, the systems that identify them must become smarter, too. Only then can we protect motorists, build and maintain public confidence, and ensure that connected and automated vehicles deliver safer roads, lower emissions and greater mobility for all.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Trade Union Workplace Access · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for bringing this debate to the House. I commend the University and College Union, which was incredibly supportive to me and my colleagues in my former life as an academic. It was only because our employer was decent that it was able to have access to our campus site. I join the hon. Gentleman in condemning those organisations who refuse access for the vital work of unions.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Korean War: 75th Commemoration · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right to pay tribute to the extraordinary bravery of British and international forces in the Korean war, as other right hon. and hon. Members have. Will he join me in also paying tribute to the extraordinary journalists who bravely sought to bring news of Korea to international and, indeed, Korean audiences? They include René Cutforth, for the BBC overseas services, who was one of the last journalists to leave Seoul in 1950, and Marguerite Higgins, an American journalist who won a Pulitzer prize—the first woman ever to do so—for the courage of her journalism in the Korean war. Will he also join me in paying tribute to the continuing work of the BBC World Service, which continues to broadcast in Korean to North Korean audiences today?

• 20 Oct 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will speak in support of seven amendments tabled in my name. For too long, decisions about the Chagos islands have been made without the consent of Chagossians. My grave concern is that the treaty to be given effect by the Bill fails to rectify that historical and ongoing injustice. Not only does it fail to provide adequate protection of their rights, it fails to establish a legally binding right to return or a binding programme of resettlement of the islands for Chagossians. Turning to amendment 9, we recognise and support the importance of abiding by international law and believe that the UK was indeed right to open a process of negotiation with Mauritius—especially so given the risk that a judgment against the UK in any court could threaten our sovereignty over and security interests in Diego Garcia and the wider Chagos archipelago. However, the treaty that has emerged not only falls short in addressing past injustices, but introduces new injustices of its own. At the very core of the United Nations charter—a document that this country helped to shape—lies the right of all peoples to self-determination. Article 1(2) could not be clearer: one of the purposes of the United Nations is to “develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”. Yet for the Chagossian people that right has been denied for more than half a century. They were exiled from their homeland in the Chagos archipelago, scattered across the globe, and left without the means or permission to return. It was, and remains, a moral stain on our modern history.

• 20 Oct 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I am aware that he has a long history in advocating for this particular cause, but I am relentlessly surprised by the position he takes on this point. He would seek to effectively reinscribe the colonial construction that was British Mauritius and in doing so ignore the right of Chagossians as a people to self-determine their own future. I do not see the colonial convenience of administration as anything other than overwriting a people’s right to determine their own future. On that point, in 2019 the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion that concluded that the decolonisation of Mauritius had not been legally completed and that the United Kingdom should end its administration of the Chagos islands as rapidly as possible. The General Assembly subsequently endorsed that same view. But I say to this House that the ICJ opinion, however well intentioned, poses a profound problem. It proposes to hand sovereignty not to the Chagossians themselves but to Mauritius, without consulting those who were born of the islands or who are descended from them. That is not self-determination but the transfer of sovereignty over a people without their consent. The right to self-determination belongs to peoples, not to Governments. It is not and should not be a device for tidying up the diplomatic ledger of empire, but a recognition that every community has the right to shape its own future. To remove the Chagossians once was a horrific wrong. To barter away their sovereignty now without their voice compounds that wrong. If we truly honour the UN charter and the principles that this country has long championed, the Chagossians themselves must be placed at the centre of any future settlement. They must have a say over their citizenship, over the governance of their islands and over the prospects of return. The commitment to a referendum that sits at the heart of amendment 9 seeks to address that long and burning injustice by providing Chagossians with the opportunity to exercise their right to determine their own future.

• 20 Oct 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It gives me no pleasure to say that this Bill fails the Chagossian people. For decades, decisions about the Chagos Islands have been taken without the consent of those most affected. The treaty continues that injustice, offering no guaranteed right of return, no legally binding resettlement plan and no meaningful protection of Chagossian rights. The Liberal Democrats support negotiations with Mauritius and support respect for international law, but never at the expense of Chagossian dignity. The treaty, as it stands, lacks transparency, environmental safeguards and accountability for the substantial public expenditure that it entails. That is why we tabled seven amendments to inscribe parliamentary oversight, to protect the marine environment and to uphold Chagossian rights to self-determination. That includes provisions for scrutiny of ministerial decisions, mandatory environmental reporting and a referendum of the Chagossian people themselves. We also called for full financial transparency and a review of the welfare of Chagossians living in the UK, many of whom continue to face hardship as a direct result of their historical displacement. This is not merely a matter of geopolitical assets or territorial claims; it is about justice, belonging and moral responsibility to those who call the Chagos islands home. I thank the Minister of State at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), for the numerous conversations that we have had during the passage of the Bill—he has been generous with his time. I am disappointed, however, that he did not feel able to accept some of my amendments and suggestions during that process. I will finish with words lifted from the UN charter, a document that this country helped to shape: “The Purposes of the United Nations are…to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”. That right has been denied to the Chagossian people for more than 50 years, so I urge Members across the House to think carefully when voting this evening about whether they wish to compound that half century of injustice or embrace the foundational principles of the UN. [ Interruption. ] If this House wishes to do the latter, we cannot allow the Bill to pass without ensuring that Chagossians themselves are sovereign over their citizenship, the governance of their islands and the prospect of return. [Hon. Members: “How are you voting?”] I ask Conservative right hon. and hon. Members on my right-hand side, who have lauded the efforts of the Chagossian people but sat on their hands when they had the opportunity to give Chagossians the right to a referendum, whether they wish to keep chuntering from a sedentary position. In direct response to the Minister, who challenged this in Committee, I say that the forced displacement of a people does not and cannot annul the identity or the rights of the Chagossians as a people. To suggest otherwise perpetuates the disgraces of the past and, as a sentiment, that is unworthy of this Bill and of this House.