Amanda Martin MP: speeches

Speeches

• 8 Jul 2026 · NHS Corridor Care · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) for her service and for securing this debate. There is no clearer sign of the failure of the NHS under the Conservatives than the fact that corridor care was allowed to become normal. Only a few weeks ago, I was in the Queen Alexandra hospital in my constituency watching my dad being cared for in a corridor. It brought home just how far standards have fallen and no family should have to experience that. Corridor care has real consequences. As we have heard, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine estimates that in 2025 alone there were more than 15,000 excess deaths associated with long waits in emergency departments. It is not just the physical impact on patients that is damaging, but the emotional impact on patients, loved ones and the NHS staff who come to work every day wanting to provide the care that their patients deserve, yet are too often forced to do so in impossible conditions. It is degrading, undignified and should never have become an acceptable norm. Before I go further, I want to thank the incredible staff across Portsmouth’s NHS and care services. From those working at the Queen Alexandra hospital, to our ambulance crews, GPs, pharmacists, community teams and carers, they continue to deliver outstanding care despite extraordinary pressures. Last winter, it was an absolute privilege to spend a night shift with Nigel and Sam from our local ambulance service. Seeing at first hand their professionalism, compassion and resilience only strengthened my admiration for everything they do, often in incredibly difficult circumstances. I recognise the work already being done across Portsmouth to help people access the right care. Strengthening general practice and supporting people who arrive at A&E with non-emergency conditions to receive care elsewhere helps to ensure our emergency department is there for those who need it most. That work matters and deserves recognition, so I thank Linda Stead and her team at the Portsmouth Primary Care Alliance Ltd, and the team at the Southern Hampshire Primary Care Alliance. I welcome the decision of the previous Health Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting), to ensure NHS England has finally introduced a clear definition of corridor care and begun publishing trust-level data. We cannot solve a problem if we refuse to see it and measure it. Sadly, the first set of figures makes difficult reading for Portsmouth. In May this year, Portsmouth hospitals university NHS trust ranked eighth worst for corridor care on hospital wards and ninth worst in emergency departments. That is simply not good enough. I welcome the Government’s commitment to shift more care into communities. Preventing unnecessary admissions is essential if we are to reduce pressure on our hospitals, because corridor care starts with a lack of community services. However, I remain deeply concerned by my integrated care board’s approach and its failure to engage meaningfully with me. The initial discussions on health hubs focused on potential sites, yet astonishingly, although not surprisingly, the proposed locations were all in Portsmouth South. That is simply unacceptable. If we are serious about reducing health inequalities and improving access to care, these services must be available across the whole city. Yet, as with so many decisions affecting Portsmouth, residents in Portsmouth North are neglected and overlooked. To help me change that, will the Minister outline what expectations have been placed on integrated care boards to work constructively with local MPs? Of course, reducing admissions is only one part of the answer. We must also improve patient flow through our hospitals, so I welcome today’s announcement about a 10-year capital plan for health and social care. Buildings and modern facilities are important if we are to move people from corridors to beds and from A&E to GPs, but too many people remain in hospital because the social care support they need is simply not available or because the pharmaceutical system is not fit for purpose. Will the Minister update the House on what further action is being taken to improve hospital discharge and tackle the pressures in social care and pharmaceutical services? I am proud that this Government have already begun to turn our NHS around. We have seen the fastest ambulance response times in five years, the shortest A&E wait for four years, and the biggest fall in dissatisfaction in the NHS since 1998, but none of us should be satisfied while patients are still receiving treatment in corridors. People in Portsmouth deserve dignity when they need care, NHS staff deserve the resources and conditions to do their jobs, and together we must ensure that corridor care becomes not the accepted reality of our NHS, but a thing of the past.

• 8 Jul 2026 · NHS Corridor Care · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that often this is compounded when somebody has been arrested and police officers are sitting for hours? I was recently in A&E, and there were two police officers there for the duration that a member of the public was there. They may also need somewhere else to deal with that situation.

• 8 Jul 2026 · Draft UK-EU Agreement on Gibraltar · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John, in this important debate. For more than six years, the people of Gibraltar have lived with uncertainty. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Gibraltar, I have had the enormous privilege of visiting the Rock several times since Brexit. I have met businesses, politicians, officials and residents. Wherever I have gone, I have heard the same message: people want certainty, so that they can get on with their lives, grow their businesses and plan for the future. I want to put on record my thanks to the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) for not only securing this debate but producing a full and thorough report, alongside Baroness Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, after their visit in May. As he noted, after years of determined negotiations we finally have an agreement that delivers certainty. I congratulate the Minister and his team on that, and I pay tribute to the Government of Gibraltar, whose steadfast commitment was instrumental in securing this outcome. I also recognise the constructive engagement of Spain and the European Union. Agreements of such significance are only possible through patience, dialogue and a shared determination to find a way forward. This matters because every day more than 15,000 people cross the frontier to work, trade and support their families. Removing unnecessary barriers will make a real difference to people’s lives, give businesses greater certainty and confidence, and help Gibraltar look to the future with certainty. However, the practical benefits need to be seen and felt, so I would be grateful if the Minister could say a little more about when people can expect to begin seeing them. The economic case is compelling. Gibraltar estimates that the agreement could unlock around £200 million a year for its economy, without costing the UK taxpayer a penny. The agreement is good for Gibraltar, good for British business and good for our wider economy. More importantly, it changes nothing about sovereignty. Gibraltar remains British. The treaty is clear, the Government of Gibraltar’s independent legal advice is clear, and the right of the people of Gibraltar to determine their own future remains untouched. Chief Minister Fabian Picardo said in one of his national day addresses: “We are an integral part of the British family of Nations. And no one can or should try to untie the knot that binds us and Britain.” Those words capture exactly what the treaty has achieved. It provides certainty for Gibraltar’s future while protecting the enduring bond between Gibraltar and the United Kingdom. It is also important to remember that this is the agreement the people of Gibraltar wanted. It was backed by a Government elected on a mandate to deliver, approved unanimously by the Gibraltar Parliament and supported by every former Chief Minister. As we heard from the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham, it was backed by the many stakeholders that he met during his visit in May. Alongside the constitutional protections come real practical benefits: easier movement across the frontier, improved trading opportunities for Gibraltar businesses, and simpler travel for British and potentially European visitors. The agreement gives Gibraltar the opportunity to thrive while remaining proudly British. However, I hear the concerns that have been raised with regard to the retail sector, security, health and access to the university. Along with the Gibraltar APPG, I look forward to supporting and raising any concerns where possible with our Government. As the Member of Parliament for Portsmouth North, I also welcome the protections for our national security. Gibraltar has stood alongside Britain for more than 300 years and remains one of our most strategically important overseas territories. The strait of Gibraltar is one of the world’s most important maritime gateways, and the ability of the United Kingdom to operate freely from the Rock is fundamental to our national security. I particularly welcome the clear guidance that the movement of UK military personnel and equipment will not be impeded. That was an essential principle throughout the negotiations and I am pleased to see it so very clearly protected. National security is the first priority of any Government, so I would welcome anything the Minister can say about how those defence interests were protected throughout the negotiations and the close work undertaken across Government to secure that outcome. The agreement is about more than protecting and resolving the legacy of Brexit. It gives Gibraltar certainty, protects sovereignty, strengthens our security and creates the conditions for long-term prosperity. For generations, Gibraltarians have shown extraordinary loyalty to the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom has stood firmly with Gibraltar. The treaty honours that relationship, safeguards its future and allows Gibraltar to look ahead with confidence. As the chair of the Gibraltar APPG, I warmly welcome it.

• 8 Jul 2026 · Rearmament and Warfighting Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 8 Jul 2026 · Rearmament and Warfighting Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  We live in an increasingly unstable world. From Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine to the conflict in the middle east, the threats to our national security have grown, and families across the country have felt the consequences through higher bills and rising prices. We cannot afford to ignore the reality of the world we face, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Selly Oak (Al Carns) so eloquently put it, the question we need to address is this: “What does warfighting readiness actually mean to this Government, to our forces and to our country?” It is worth reminding the House and our constituents—as it would not have been thought from the opening speeches today—that this Government inherited armed forces that had been hollowed out by years of under-investment, overstretch and a failure to keep pace with modern warfare. Let me point out to the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) that this destruction was a result of initiatives such as the coalition Government’s 2011 defence basing review, which reduced the number of times our Type 45s were serviced, thus giving us this challenge. Ships, aircraft and tanks, and indeed personnel, are not built overnight, so I am proud that this Labour Government are beginning to put that right—and to put it right across Government, because this is not just the role of the Ministry of Defence. This Government deserve credit for changing course. Over the next four years, we will invest £298 billion in defence. The defence investment plan will help us to modernise our armed forces by investing in drones and autonomous systems, building at least six new warships, and strengthening the capabilities that our services need to respond to today’s security challenges. It reflects and learns from the lessons of recent conflicts, and ensures that our defence capabilities will keep pace with the changing nature of war. Although I do not agree with the hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells that this is too little too late, I do agree that we need to move and ensure that the sector is more rapidly equipped for national security and for growth. We know that increasing defence spending alone is not enough. We also need stronger industrial bases and a system that allows for swift procurement, and that means backing British defence manufacturers and innovative small and medium-sized enterprises with better access to finance so that they can grow and create skilled jobs and apprenticeships and strengthen our national resilience. In my constituency, for instance, defence jobs and national security go hand in hand. That is why I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government will look again at joining the Defence, Security and Resilience Bank. Spearheaded by Prime Minister Carney in Canada, the DSRB could help unlock private investment for the defence sector and support the industrial capacity that our armed forces really need. We should seize every opportunity to work with our allies to strengthen our defence industrial base, and we should seize every opportunity to ensure that we can not only have research and development here, but have the opportunity to scale up British companies so that they choose to invest and grow here and not abroad. Defence is about far more than equipment and technology. Our greatest strength is the people who serve this country. That is why, as well as improving defence design and manufacturing, we must continue to improve the support that those people receive. When we extend the armed forces covenant across Government, we must ensure that our people know about it, and we must continue to deliver the £9 billion defence housing strategy to improve service homes. As I have constantly argued, we should also seek to improve paternity service leave for fathers and families. If we are serious about national security, we must also be serious about recruiting, retaining and supporting the people who keep our country safe. Britain faces significant security challenges, and meeting them requires sustained investment, a strong defence industry, and a firm commitment to those who serve our country. It also requires—as my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) so brilliantly argued—an open and honest conversation with the public, so that citizens in the United Kingdom can really understand what warfighting readiness means; so that they can understand the challenges and the very real threats that we face in the UK, the priorities that we may need to make, and the misinformation and dangers that the cyber world holds out there. These are conversations that we know are happening in our allied countries, such as Norway and Finland—conversations that will make us all warfighting ready. This Labour Government are rebuilding our armed forces, they are backing British defence jobs, and they are strengthening our national security for the future. Much has been done, and there is still much more to do, but I have every faith that we as a Labour Government will rise to the challenge.

• 8 Jul 2026 · Rearmament and Warfighting Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  rose —

• 6 Jul 2026 · Employment and Training · Hansard source

  More

  The levy proposals may sound technical, but at their heart they are about investing in people and in Britain’s future, because, let us be honest, everything we touch and see is supported, repaired and built by these industries. As the Labour MP for Portsmouth North, this debate matters deeply to me. Portsmouth is proud of its industrial heritage. Our city once helped to build and maintain the ships that defended our country. Skilled engineering and trade shaped our communities for generations, but many people in my constituency also know what it feels like to be left behind.

• 6 Jul 2026 · Employment and Training · Hansard source

  More

  Too many of those skilled industrial jobs have disappeared and too many young people today do not see the same opportunities that previous generations had. When we talk about levies like this, we are really talking about whether today’s young people will be given the opportunities that their parents and grandparents had. It is about creating the next generation of engineers and skilled workers who will build, maintain and modernise the infrastructure our country depends on. For many young people, particularly those who do not choose the traditional university route, apprenticeships offer a pathway into secure, highly skilled and well-paid work. By supporting the levy, we are investing in those opportunities and in the workforce our economy will need for decades to come. We need to ensure that the levy enables maximum opportunity and flexibility, for example by supporting those in the construction industry to use the levy creatively for transport by maybe providing driving lessons, as it is not easy to get public transport to building sites at the hours and times that people need to be attending. Will the Minister work with me to consider how we can use the levy flexibly across the sector? The truth is that our ambitions for clean energy, advanced manufacturing, industrial decarbonisation and major infrastructure projects will succeed only if we have the skilled workforce to deliver them. No single employer can solve the skills shortages alone. A collective approach allows industry to invest together in training, ensuring we develop not only the workforce we need today but the workforce for tomorrow. We need to find a way to ensure that larger businesses who do not use their full levy work to support the smaller businesses that need it. Earlier today, the all-party parliamentary group for tradespeople held a roundtable with Checkatrade, presenting new research into young people’s attitudes towards careers in the trades. The findings were encouraging. Almost half are considering becoming a plumber, builder or electrician, while 40% of under-25s now say an apprenticeship is more appealing than a degree. Just 10 years ago, that stood at 3%. An apprenticeship is slowly becoming their first choice. That is a remarkable shift, but it also creates a responsibility. If more young people want to pursue skilled trades, we must make sure the training and opportunities are there. That is particularly important when more than 1 million young people are currently not in education, employment or training. Will the Minister support cross-party, cross-Government working to ensure that this opportunity is available in Portsmouth, where it is much needed and much wanted? I also know there has been a consultation taking place on the future of the ECITB and the CITB. I ask the Minister to engage with the APPG for tradespeople on those discussions and on the progress that will be made. Finally, there is a wider national interest at stake. Engineering construction underpins our critical national infrastructure, from our energy networks to defence facilities. In an increasingly uncertain world, Britain cannot rely solely on importing the skills we need. We must develop the home-grown talent, and indeed the city-grown talent, that strengthens both our economy and our national resilience. To do that, we must recognise the barriers to taking up and completing apprenticeships, and ensure we remove them. For communities such as Portsmouth North, this is about restoring opportunity. It is about giving young people the chance to learn a trade, earn a good wage, build a rewarding career and take pride in contributing to Britain’s future, as they once did in my city.

• 6 Jul 2026 · Employment and Training · Hansard source

  More

  As someone who studied STEM—science, technology, engineering and maths—subjects at college, I agree with the hon. Member. We need to ensure that our young people have the maximum number of opportunities to give our country resilience, whether that is in defence, farming or maritime—also something close to my heart—so I whole heartedly agree with him. For those reasons, I am pleased to support the proposals.

• 6 Jul 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T6. Two weeks ago, alongside colleagues, I met a network of families and parents from all three armed forces. I heard from serving personnel about the real strain of starting a family while serving our country. A recent snapshot survey by the Dad Shift of over 450 serving forces members found that 90% believed that two weeks of paternity leave is not enough. Does the Minister agree that increasing paternity leave for those who serve in the armed forces would boost retention, strengthen resilience and give our children a better start in life? Does he agree that our armed forces deserve better?