Dave Robertson MP: speeches

Speeches

• 7 Jan 2026 · Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  People would be forgiven, when reading the motion put forward by the Opposition today, for thinking that all was rosy in the countryside before the election in 2024, but in Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages—a countryside seat that is 85% rural—people know that that was not the case. They know just how important it is that Government take the concerns of rural communities seriously. They also know that despite more than three decades of representation by a Conservative MP, successive Conservative Governments have treated them with disdain. There is perhaps no better example of the disdain that the Conservatives showed for communities like mine than the story of High Speed 2: Conservative Ministers asleep at the wheel while HS2 Ltd treated landowners in areas like mine like they were a completely and utterly ignorable sideshow. It has gone on for decades. I have spoken to farmers in my patch who have been dealing with HS2 for 17 years and still have not had final payments made to them. Delay after delay, disruption after disruption—it is an absolute disgrace. Years of roadworks have caused massive inconvenience, farmers cannot farm their land despite it not being built on and business planning has been put on hold for years. The Conservatives say they care about our agricultural communities, but what did they do when our farmers suffered under that project? Things got so bad at HS2 under the Tories that this Government had to bring in a new chair and a new CEO to clean up the mess that was left. In fact, Mark Wild, the new chief executive, has experience of cleaning up Conservative messes—we only have to look at Crossrail. Beyond that, there are further transport issues that affect farmers and rural constituents in my patch. Chetwynd bridge is a fantastic example. It is a bridge that crosses from my patch into that of my hon. Friend the Member for South Derbyshire (Samantha Niblett). It is the largest cast iron bridge left in the country. It is grade II listed. It is a wonderful piece of architecture. It is incredibly useful and very pretty. Unfortunately, Britain’s largest surviving cast iron bridge has been neglected for decades. Deterioration in the structure was first spotted in the ’70s, but Staffordshire county council does not have a plan for how to fix it. It knows that it will cost £27 million, but it does not know how to fund it. The council did not speak to me before the spending review and, in fact, waited until Reform UK was in control to get in touch, after which spending review decisions had been made. I am working hard to try to find that £27 million to replace the bridge, and I will be meeting the relevant Minister next week. These are real-world examples of where Conservative MPs, Governments and councils did not do the work. They said all the right things—they were quite happy to go out there and dance and make their statements—but they did not do the work. They did not go out there to actually defend communities like mine, and I will take absolutely no lessons from them.

• 6 Jan 2026 · Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My right hon. Friend is right to mention the impact on supply chains. In the west midlands, we recently had the cyber-attack on Jaguar Land Rover. That had a significant impact not just on that company, but on the supply chain, which has its roots right through the west midlands. That essential part of our economy was brought to a grinding halt by a cyber-attack. Will he confirm that this Bill will help prevent such instances from happening in the future?

• 5 Jan 2026 · Length of the School Week · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 727514 relating to the length of the school week. It is a pleasure to take part in a debate in which you are presiding, Mrs Hobhouse, and to move this motion on behalf of the Petitions Committee, especially because I was a secondary school teacher for almost a decade before I came to this place. The petition calls on the Government to reduce the school week from five days to four, while making each of the remaining school days one hour longer. Ahead of these debates, I always try to speak with the petition’s creator to get a sense of why they started it, and I spoke with the creator of this petition before the Christmas break. He joins us in the Gallery with his mother, who is a teacher herself, and that is a central part of the reason why he began the petition. He had learned in school that almost a third of teachers leave the profession within five years. He hoped that a four-day school week would give teachers more time to spend with their families and encourage them to stay in the classroom—where we all want our best teachers to be—and he thinks that pupils could use their day out of school to do volunteering or other positive things in their local community The proposal attracted significant interest; the petition has been signed by more than 126,000 people. Unfortunately, I do not have a breakdown of the ages of those signatories— [ Laughter. ] However, I suspect—and the laughter tells me that colleagues do too—that, given that this issue affects so many young people, many of the people who signed the petition may well be of school age. I think it is important that we bring their views into this debate. Last month, I had the privilege of meeting secondary school pupils visiting Parliament, who were constituents of the right hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North (Caroline Nokes), and hearing their thoughts about this idea. I spoke to some Back Benchers before going, and they said, “Well, of course they’re going to support it; it’s another day off school,” but yet again, adults overlooked how seriously young people would take it. Before we dismiss their enthusiasm out of hand, there are some really important things to consider that underpinned their interest. Yes, they liked the idea, but more than 15% said that they thought it would reduce school absences, and more than a quarter thought that it would improve their mental health. That is a really serious point. The most recent NHS children and young people’s mental health survey found that one in five children aged eight to 16 had a probable mental health condition. We know that mental health concerns among young people have risen since the covid-19 pandemic, when many were so isolated. Factors such as climate change, extremism in politics and the cost of housing leave many young people feeling pessimistic about the future. The pupils I spoke to also had some serious questions about the proposal, and went straight for the logistics of how it would work. Three big worries came through. The main argument against the idea, particularly among the pupils we polled, was that a longer day would be too tiring and that, by the time people got to what I referred to as period 6 when I was in school and when I was teaching—the sixth hour of the day—brains would be overused and they would not be quite as productive. Some thought that they would get more homework, that it would be harder to do it on top of longer school days, and that that would mean a reduction in the face-to-face time they got with their teachers. Other pupils had questions about where the new periods would be added. Would they get extra breaks? Would the period go at the start or the end of the day? Older pupils, in particular, were concerned about the impact on their exams. Their school had six 50-minute lessons a day, and they were worried about where the lost hours would come from if they got 200 minutes back in four additional 50-minute lessons. The final concern that came through strongly, which is easy to overlook but is vital when we consider this issue, was safety. Many pupils pointed out that, despite attending a school on the edge of a major city and having much better access to street lighting than some in rural areas such as the one I represent, a longer school day would mean that they would go home or to school in the dark, especially in the winter. It would be even worse if they wanted to do an extracurricular activity for an hour after school, in which case it could well be 5.30 pm or close to 6 pm by the time they went home. As we see outside today, it can be very dark at 6.05 pm. A number of pupils expressed real concern about whether they would be safe walking home in the dark if the proposed change were made.

• 5 Jan 2026 · Length of the School Week · Hansard source

  More

  Again, I thank the petitioners and the petition creator for making sure could discuss this issue. I also thank all those who contributed to this debate: my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), who showed his support for pupils with additional educational needs; my hon. Friend the Member for Worthing West (Dr Cooper), who gave her views on the health and wider implications of how such a change might function and its place within the larger debate; and the hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden), who raised the important issue of teacher retention. The median length of a teaching career has been decreasing for years. When the treadmill is that short, it does not matter how fast people are shuffled on to it if they fall off the back just as fast. However, I caution her on one point: we have world-class teachers in our classrooms up and down the country. I also thank the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) for sharing a rare moment of policy agreement across all the major parties. I am sure normal service will be resumed very soon. We may have to agree to disagree on the simple idea that more education means better outcomes, because I am not entirely certain that it is linear—I think that a maximum can be reached, but I am sure that we can have that debate at length another time. I am also not sure that any robust evidence links school structures, academies and free schools to better outcomes on their own. It is teachers who make excellent education, not school structures. Finally, I thank my hon. Friend the Minister, who has first-hand experience as a teacher, for raising the importance of extracurricular activities as well as the impact that inflexible working has on retention and the ways that we can work around that to support teachers in the classroom. He may, however, have missed an opportunity to flag up Labour’s excellent Employment Rights Act 2025 as part of that. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 727514 relating to the length of the school week.

• 5 Jan 2026 · Length of the School Week · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an important contribution. So often the system has been designed in one way and within it there is huge complexity, particularly when it comes to pupils with additional needs or special educational needs and disabilities. Redesigning the entire school week would obviously mean redesigning many of the other support factors that go around it. That point could easily be missed if we looked at this issue without the required detail. My hon. Friend’s level of social media engagement shames me; I shall have a drink with him later to ask how he is getting on with it. In addition to meeting pupils from the constituency of the right hon. Member for Romsey and Southampton North, I spoke to the National Association of Head Teachers. It shared some of their concerns, especially around mental health, but ultimately did not think that this proposal was the answer. In the NAHT’s view, the best way to ease the strain on pupils would be to reduce course content and the number of exams at the end of courses. The NAHT had a number of other issues with the proposal. One was the impact it would have on extracurricular activities, which I have already mentioned. That is especially important, because pupils cited that as one of the main reasons for supporting the proposal: they wanted more time away from school to do volunteering or non-curricular stuff from which they get some value. The NAHT worried that the school day running later could mean fewer clubs for sports, music and similar things at the end of the day, and ultimately a less rich offer for pupils. A wealth of educational evidence shows that access to extracurricular activities is one of the things that helps to close attainment gaps right across the country. The NAHT also worried that an earlier start to the school day would have a bad impact on secondary pupils. Studies show that teenagers’ sleep patterns mean they are best prepared to learn when they have slightly later starts, not earlier ones. Overall, like the pupils who opposed the petition, the NAHT was concerned that a longer school day would be too tiring, especially for primary school pupils, who need breaks and shorter spells of concentration to learn at their best. Importantly, the NAHT recognised the impact on parents. For someone who works five days a week, suddenly needing to provide childcare on one of those days would be a huge challenge. I am a former teacher, and one of the things that always used to wind me up about debates like this was hearing people say, “But what about childcare?” I used to lose my mind, because teachers do so much more than childcare. However, it is a fact that if the kids are in school, their childcare is taken care of, and that taking kids out of school for one day a week would leave a huge void to be filled. Access to childcare is one of the major issues that affects young families, and this proposal would exacerbate that rather than solve it. However, the NAHT did agree with the petitioners, as I do, that there is a significant problem with teacher retention. Britain has the youngest teaching workforce in the OECD. Not only are teachers leaving the profession, but many are unwilling to take on leadership roles, because the work is just so heavy, especially in primary schools. The NAHT favours a four-day teaching week—five days of classes, but a day a week for teachers to focus on lesson prep and administration, which we used to call PPA back in my day—and making the job more sustainable. Before I conclude, I want to say something from my personal experience as a classroom teacher for almost a decade. I had the great privilege of working at the largest school in the country. We had a 15-form entry, so we had 15 classes in each year group; we had 2,500 kids on site every day and more than 300 staff. I was the school’s principal union rep during my time there. In 2015, we trialled something very similar to this proposal as a way of trying to push attainment up, to make sure that every kid who could just get over that grade got over that grade. We cancelled all staff meetings, we cancelled all staff time with other staff, and we did everything for contact. We put on a period 6—an additional hour at the end of every day. All of my members said, “You know what? If this is for the good of the kids and the school, let’s try it. Let’s give it a go and see what happens.” We all went for it, and it was such hard work to put on valuable sessions for that sixth hour of the day. When we came to do an analysis in the September, we could not find that it had made any difference, positive or negative. What we found from doing it—having to move all this stuff around and the additional workload that came with it—was that the reason why the school day is six hours long, and has been six hours long for so long, is that that is what brains are designed to learn in. Adding that sixth hour had almost no impact—certainly no measurable impact—on pupil outcomes, and we had a big enough sample size to give at least some credence to the conclusion. It is clear from the Government’s written response to the petition that they do not support the proposal, and there are clear reasons for that, but I would be interested to hear the Minister’s views on some of the themes that underpin the petition, because it is also clear that there were reasons for starting it that relate to children’s mental health, opportunities for hobbies and volunteering, and retention of experienced teachers in order to give our children the best start possible.

• 5 Jan 2026 · Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Government’s changes in their plans in relation to inheritance tax on farmers and family businesses. The current system does not work. We need a tax regime that protects genuine family farms but does not let the super-rich dodge tax by buying up land, and many farmers in my constituency have the same concerns about that, but they have also made it very clear to me that the £1 million threshold was too low and would have a significant and detrimental impact on farming in my constituency. Along with many other Labour Members in rural seats, I have made that case to Ministers directly, and I am very pleased that the Govt are raising the threshold to £2.5 million, because that will make a huge difference for farmers in my constituency. I am very interested to hear, though, what steps the Government will be taking—and what steps the Minister can take, with colleagues—to ensure that profitability is at the forefront of our work with farmers, particularly on things like—

• 5 Jan 2026 · Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief · Hansard source

  More

  I will leave it there.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Indices of Deprivation: England · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for bringing the stories of real lives into the debate. When we talk about deprivation, indices and statistics, we can so easily forget that behind every number are people’s lives—lives that should have promise and that deserve the support of this Government. I place on record my thanks to my hon. Friend for making sure that we do not lose sight of what we are really talking about: people’s lives.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Christmas Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  People across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages are looking forward to a very merry Christmas. In the run-up to the big day, many will have enjoyed opening Christmas cards from friends and loved ones—well, they would have done if the cards had arrived. For far too many people across my area, the post simply does not arrive. The Christmas period is a busy time for letters, so let me be clear: this is not a seasonal issue in Lichfield and Burntwood. Residents have been telling me about serious problems with deliveries from Royal Mail for months. Constituents have gone weeks without mail before receiving a huge bundle of delayed letters all at once. Households tell me that they regularly receive mail only once a week or fortnight—and, in some cases, only once every three weeks. Constituents have missed jury service or court hearings because summonses have not come; they have missed hospital and GP appointments because the invitation and reminder arrived three days after the appointment; they have been fined for late payment of credit card bills that they had never received; or they are waiting for vital letters from their banks with debit cards or pin details. Royal Mail has clear delivery targets: 93% of first-class letters delivered by the next working day, 98.5% of second-class letters delivered in three working days and 99% of delivery routes to be completed six days a week. In my area, those targets are a joke—we are nowhere near that. I have been writing to Royal Mail about these issues for months and working closely with the Communication Workers Union. I want to take this opportunity to make it clear that none of this is the fault of hard-working posties. They are doing a brilliant job and doing as much as they can, and I want to thank them this Christmas. No, this is on Royal Mail. Royal Mail has been consistently slow in dealing with my requests and, when it has got back to me, it has batted away my concerns and claimed “There’s nothing to see here.” It has finally admitted that there is a problem, but I am eager to know what action it is going to take in the new year to fix it in the long term for the people of Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages. In my remaining 10 seconds, I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, all the House staff, and every right hon. and hon. Member for their support this year. I wish everybody a very merry Christmas.

• 17 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q7. People throughout Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages will be looking forward to a very happy new year, not least because of this Government’s commitment to the midland rail hub project, which will revolutionise rail travel across the west midlands and further afield. As we are all eager to see a better service between Lichfield and Birmingham as soon as possible, will the Prime Minister join my campaign for a more regular service on the cross-city line, and will he confirm that rail commuters will benefit from frozen fares because of this Labour Government?

• 10 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  indicated assent.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Railways Bill · Hansard source

  More

  After years of falling standards under the Conservatives, this Labour Government are investing in our railways. Anyone who commutes from Lichfield to London, as I do every week, will have seen for themselves how sorely needed that is. We have all had trains cancelled and re-routed, and been crammed in with standing room only. The Bill, creating Great British Railways, is the biggest overhaul to our rail system in a generation. GBR will run our trains, set the timetable, and control the track, stations and depots. It is about putting our railways back squarely in taxpayers’ hands—a public service under public control. GBR will be a step change compared to some of the difficulties that my constituents, in places such as Fradley, Handsacre and especially Streethay, have had with HS2—years of delay and disruption under the last Government. This Government are putting new management in place at HS2 to sort it out and I know my right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary will be holding them to account, just as she will be holding GBR to account. It is really important that we get this right, because the failings of HS2 Ltd have been so significant for so long. Continuing with the way that the previous Government ran our railways is clearly not the way forward, especially when we look ahead and at the wonderful project that is the midlands rail hub. GBR will give taxpayers control over the railways and projects such as the rail hub by investing record sums in upgrading the network. That project, almost £1 billion, will mean that the clogged Birmingham New Street will have its capacity significantly increased, allowing 300 more trains to run through the city each day. It will unlock huge increases in the number of services across the midlands and beyond. This is amazing news for people in Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages, especially those who use the cross city line, which links Lichfield to Birmingham and is the busiest commuter line outside London. Since covid, we have had only two trains an hour. The midlands rail hub will help us get that back to the four we need. Beyond that, Labour believes in our railways, publicly owned and run for people, not profit. No longer should shareholders benefit while passengers suffer poor service. I really want to see every single pound from tickets reinvested in great services and further expanding our rail network. In my area, the next stage of rebuilding our railways really does need to be getting a passenger service back on the line from Lichfield to Burton and Derby, and a new station at Alrewas for the National Memorial Arboretum. The arboretum is our national centre for remembrance, but public transport links to it are extremely limited. Opening that line up and reinvesting what we can from a publicly owned railway service will connect people to jobs and take pressure off our roads. My right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary has heard me make the case BEFORE and she will hear it again. I will keep pushing the business case for that line under a new publicly owned railway service.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Constituents across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages will be pleased to see the Government taking action on the cost of living by reducing energy bills, but they want the benefits to be fair and felt by all bill payers. What steps will the Chancellor take with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that reductions in energy bills are reflected in standing charges, not just in unit prices?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency, residents living near the B5013 at Blithfield reservoir have raised serious concerns about speeding and dangerous driving. There have been multiple fatalities on this stretch of road, and in August a man in his 20s unfortunately lost his life. May I ask the Leader of the House if we can find Government time for a debate on how we can hold local authorities to account for their responsibilities specifically on rural roads to protect communities such as mine?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. Mohamed Fayed, the former owner of Harrods, sexually abused hundreds of female employees over decades. Reporters tried to reveal his crimes, but it was only after his death that the true extent of the scandal began to emerge, because of media fears about strategic lawsuits against public participation. What steps will the Department take to ensure that rich and powerful men like Fayed cannot use SLAPPs to silence their critics in the media?

• 25 Nov 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls: London · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship this afternoon, Mr Stringer. Just before the debate started, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor) light-heartedly said, “You do know this is a London debate?” He was right to ask the question, because my constituency is about 120 miles away from this room, but I am here today to talk about one perpetrator: a man who is responsible for raping and sexually assaulting hundreds of women, and used his money and power to escape justice right here in our nation’s capital. The man is Mohammed Fayed, the former owner of Harrods and various other businesses. For years, he was known as a flamboyant businessman marked by personal tragedies. He was the father of Dodi Fayed, who died in the car crash that killed Princess Diana. Today, though, Mohammed Fayed is more rightly remembered as something else entirely: a prolific sexual predator. The scale of his crimes is staggering. Despite the excellent reporting that has blown the scandal open in the last eight months, it remains too little known. There are more than 400 known survivors of Fayed—I am proud that we are joined by some of them in the Public Gallery—and still more women are coming forward; the Met police is currently investigating almost 150 allegations against him. As well as numerous accounts of rape and sexual assault, he is accused of drugging women he planned to assault and trafficking women across international borders. His crimes are now rightly seen as one of the worst ever corporate sexual abuse scandals. This was abuse on an industrial scale. Fayed died in August 2023 aged 94. He escaped justice. However, he did not act alone, and his network of enablers can still be held to account. Who were the people who helped this billionaire to abuse hundreds of women? There was a security team led by John Macnamara, a former Metropolitan police detective who tailed and threatened women Fayed had abused to enforce their silence. There were lawyers who churned out non-disclosure agreement after non-disclosure agreement and failed to sound the alarm. There were doctors hired to carry out invasive medical exams, including sexually transmitted infection testing, without informing the women what they were being tested for; the results were delivered directly to Fayed, not to survivors. There were senior Harrods staff who at best turned a blind eye and at worst groomed young girls for their boss. The scale of these crimes raises serious questions about the Met and the Crown Prosecution Service. More than 20 women approached the Met with allegations against Fayed during his life. Survivors say that their concerns were brushed under the carpet. The force is now investigating its own conduct under the direction of the Independent Office for Police Conduct. Meanwhile, the CPS has admitted that it was twice handed evidence against Fayed by the Met and failed to prosecute him. Survivors need answers. They have already waited far too long for justice; the earliest known allegation against Fayed dates back to 1977—almost 50 years ago—and significantly predates my existence. Their wait must end. That is why I and the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) formed the all-party parliamentary group for survivors of Fayed and Harrods. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Sarah Russell) and the hon. Member for Weald of Kent (Katie Lam)—I am glad she is in her place today—for serving as officers for the APPG. My co-chair, the hon. Member for North East Fife, and I came to this appalling scandal in different ways. For me, it was through my constituent Keaton Stone, who is in the Public Gallery. He is the man whose research underpinned the documentary on Fayed’s abuse that blew open the story last year. Keaton, whose wife Sophia is a survivor, has spent years meticulously gathering evidence against Fayed. He has asked me to champion the cause in Parliament on behalf of all survivors. My co-chair is a former police officer with sexual offences training—the only woman in the Commons with that experience. She has used her platform to advocate for women and girls, making Parliament a safer place to work, and to oppose corruption in the police. She was approached separately to become a parliamentary champion. We are eager to work together with other Members to drive this agenda forwards. The first priority will be the Met’s ongoing investigation. It is an opportunity to pursue all those who enabled Fayed, and the force must cast the net as widely as possible. Given the trafficking allegations, and because some alleged offences were committed at his estate in Scotland, we urge Police Scotland to look again at this issue and ask that our forces work with international partners where appropriate. After decades of delay, that needs to happen fast; officers must bring charges swiftly. Survivors are understandably wary, given that they have been let down by the Met in the past. We will help to keep tabs on the investigation and ensure those questions are answered. Civil claims against Harrods are also important, with hundreds of women seeking compensation for the abuse they suffered. For survivors, though, this is not about money—no amount of money could make up for the trauma they underwent at this man’s hands. It is about recognition that their employer could and should have kept them safe, and failed to do so. Those cases should be being dealt with much more swiftly. Fayed’s businesses, the Met and the Crown Prosecution Service are all implicated in this scandal. That is why, ultimately, we must have a full inquiry. Survivors deserve answers and the public should know the whole truth. We must learn the lessons so that crimes like this can never happen again.

• 20 Nov 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  This weekend, a very special service will leave the station at Chasewater Railway in Burntwood in my constituency. The hospital Santa special trains are a Christmas service for seriously ill children, and are offered completely free of charge. This year, 1,300 kids and their families are expected to attend. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Chasewater Railway, its trustees and its fantastic volunteers on their wonderful work to spread the festive spirit?

• 20 Nov 2025 · Transport Infrastructure Upgrades · Hansard source

  More

  The midlands rail hub project, which was funded at the spending review, will bring huge benefits to Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages, doubling the number of services to Birmingham per hour, but my constituents are wary about big infrastructure projects because they have seen the mess that HS2 has caused in our area. What reassurance can the Secretary of State give me that this Government have learned lessons from the previous Government and will make sure that HS2 Ltd acts swiftly and decisively to limit further disruption?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Costs: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  The ceramics industry across the country is foundational to every single part of the Government’s industrial strategy. Ceramics is an energy-intensive industry. Can the Minister confirm whether recent discussions about high energy costs for business have made mention of ceramics, an energy-intensive industry with deep roots in my constituency, where Armitage Shanks has been operating for over 200 years?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Clive Treacey Safety Checklist · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour and a privilege to lead this debate on Government support for the Clive Treacey safety checklist. I secured this debate in Clive’s name, and I want to start by telling the House a little bit about him. I did not have the pleasure of meeting Clive, so I am drawing here on the words of his family, who knew him best. Clive’s sister, and his father Michael, are in the Public Gallery this evening, and I am really glad that they are able to see proceedings. They have been tireless advocates for Clive, making sure that his voice is heard, and I hope that I can do their efforts justice tonight. Clive was born in Lichfield, in my constituency, in 1969. He was soon diagnosed with a learning difficulty, and, between the ages of 8 and 10, with epilepsy. I will cover both those factors today. Sadly, they are important to understanding Clive’s death and the failures in care throughout his life, but they do not define what Clive’s life was. I want to ensure that the House hears who Clive was. Clive was a talented artist and gardener, gifted with a brush and able to make plants spring seemingly from nothing. He loved music, especially Elvis Presley, and was often singing and dancing—his family remember him as the life of the party. He wanted to work in a garden centre, helping to raise plants; to have his own home, close to family; to own a cat; to learn to drive; and to go on holiday to Blackpool and Somerset. Clive was as devoted to his family as they were to him. He was known as the family calendar, never forgetting a card for a birthday, Christmas, Easter or any other reason. Clive’s sister Elaine says that her brother was “engaging, humorous, gentle, and loving”. His parents, Pauline and Michael, have said his heart “knew no bounds”, and describe their son’s “magical qualities” throughout his life. In all the accounts of Clive, his love and optimism shine through. Clive passed away in 2017 at just 47 years of age, after a seizure caused by his epilepsy brought on cardiac arrest. This is known as SUDEP—sudden unexpected death in epilepsy. Clive had been living in residential placements for years up until that point, moving often. Before he died, Clive’s family had become worried about his deteriorating health—and, tragically, so had Clive. He left a message on his dad’s phone, which was not received until some days after his death, saying that he was dying and needed an ambulance. Clive was not listened to, and his family were not listened to, and the consequences were devastating. After that terrible event, Clive’s family had to fight hard for answers. They had to fight to secure an inquest into his death, and later to secure an independent review. When that review was completed in 2021, four years after Clive died, it confirmed what they had suspected all along: the independent review found that Clive’s care fell far short of what should be expected for somebody with drug-resistant epilepsy, and it identified multiple system-wide failures in delivering his care and treatment, which put him at greater risk. It found that his death was potentially avoidable, and that he had been failed both in life and in death. What did that mean in practice? It meant that the management of Clive’s epilepsy was fragmented, and the link between his epilepsy and the sometimes challenging behaviours that he could exhibit when stressed, such as not taking his medication, withdrawing to his room, or not communicating, were often overstated. Those behaviours disproportionately impacted the generally held view that Clive required a hospital setting, and despite the fact that he had long expressed a wish to live in his own home, care in the community was discussed with him and his family only towards the end of his life. That is where Clive’s life was, and if we move on past his death, it is important to pay tribute to Clive’s family. Throughout all the suffering, they have been relentless in their focus on ensuring that other families do not go through what they had to. That is why we are here today, and for me, that is entirely what this debate is about.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Clive Treacey Safety Checklist · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman. That is my first intervention from him. He raises an important point, and when he asked that question, I thought back to a couple of weeks ago, when I was asked at a community event, “What gives you hope, Dave?”. I thought for a while. So often, we hear in this place stories of people who have gone through unimaginable hardship, but who somehow find the strength within themselves not to turn that into anger. They do not turn inwards; they turn outwards, and campaign to make sure that the same does not happen to other people. That is an example of what we have here. It is the very best testament to the human spirit that we see so many people who are able to do that. Like a quarter of people with a learning disability, Clive had epilepsy. By contrast, one in 100 of the general population has epilepsy. Coupled with that, epilepsy is the second most frequently reported preventable cause of death for people with a learning disability, so not only are people with a learning disability more likely to have epilepsy, but the risks they face from their epilepsy are higher. The risk of SUDEP—that is what killed Clive—is more than three times higher for those with epilepsy and a learning disability than for those with epilepsy and no learning disability. Tragically, Clive’s case is not an isolated example of these failures; this is a story that is far too common across the country, but there are things that we can do to change the story. Research suggests that annual health checks can significantly reduce the chance of premature death in people with a learning disability and autism who have epilepsy. Indeed, the chances of death were reduced by 84% for people with a learning disability and epilepsy who had a review of their epilepsy in the past 12 months. That brings me to the Clive Treacey safety checklist. The checklist is a tool developed after Clive’s death, and an important part of his legacy. I place on record my thanks to Professor Mike Kerr and Professor Rohit Shankar for their work on the checklist, alongside the charity SUDEP Action, NHS England Midlands, and the Cornwall partnership NHS foundation trust. The checklist was designed for commissioners and service providers, whether the care is provided in a specialist hospital setting or out in the community, and it outlines the steps that should be gone through annually, as well as whenever a patient moves between services or has a big change in their care, such as a new team looking after them. It recommends up-to-date health plans, genuine consultation with parents and families—not box ticking, but genuine consultation—and proper epilepsy training for staff. The Clive Treacey safety checklist is not a document that should be put in a drawer somewhere in an integrated care board, left alone and looked at once every so often when someone asks a question about it. It is a practical tool and the accompanying guidance, at just 24 pages long— for the NHS, a short story at best—is packed with information, and it is a document that can save lives. Since Clive’s death, a number of NHS regions have reviewed the way that they care for patients with learning disabilities and epilepsy using the checklist. That includes the NHS in the midlands, where 11 integrated care systems carried out a detailed appraisal using the self-assessment tool developed by the charity Epilepsy Action, based on the work of Professor Shankar, to find the weaknesses in their services and take concrete steps to improve them. More recently, six integrated care boards in the north-west, north-east and North Yorkshire have done the same. It is detailed work, bringing health and care services together, and using joined-up thinking, which we do not hear enough about in Whitehall, to tackle the problem and normalise best practice. That best practice, like the Clive Treacey safety checklist, should be more widespread. I again pay tribute to Elaine and to Clive’s family more broadly for the work that they have done to drive this entire piece of work forward. The problem is that we still have a postcode lottery. Different parts of the country do and do not follow the checklist; different parts of the country have and have not gone through that detailed work to update their practices. In this House, we cannot tolerate a situation where local outcomes are so varied, so I hope that we hear from the Minister what more we can do, both here in this place and through the Department of Health and Social Care, to ensure that people with learning disabilities are not dying of preventable causes, and to see the very best practice, as set out in the Clive Treacey safety checklist, adopted up and down the country, so that we can end this perverse postcode lottery.

• 17 Nov 2025 · Illegal Waste: Organised Crime · Hansard source

  More

  In January, criminals dumped two lorry loads of rubbish on Watery Lane, just outside the city of Lichfield. The dump was so large that it blocked access to the road and, in the process, stopped emergency services being able to access nine properties. One of the residents of those properties requires chemo and has issues with his blood pressure, and occasionally he needs to call an ambulance. Given that these incidents are having such a serious impact on people’s lives, are the Government looking to introduce an aggravating factor for such situations, so that if fly-tips prevent access to a property, the risk to life is treated as an aggravating factor, and the waste criminals receive larger sentences?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Last week I had the honour and privilege of attending the dedication of the new LGBT+ armed forces community memorial at the National Memorial Arboretum in Alrewas in my constituency, alongside His Majesty the King, proud veterans and members of our armed forces. Will the Minister join me in commending the unveiling of this important memorial, and does she agree that it will serve as a lasting reminder of the injustice and discrimination suffered by LGBT+ service personnel and as a powerful symbol of our commitment to equality and respect for all those who serve?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Property Service Charges · Hansard source

  More

  I place on record my thanks to the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) for bringing this debate before the House, and to the Backbench Business Committee for scheduling time for it. From the number of Members present in the Chamber today, we can all see that property service charges are a problem across the entire country, but they certainly are for people in Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages. In the time I have, I will focus on just one of the estates where these charges are an issue: the Roman Heights estate in the village of Streethay, on the edge of Lichfield. The people who live on that estate know just how difficult managing agents can be. I have had dozens of households get in touch to tell me about the appalling service they have received from their managing agent— I will not name it, but I am sure it is the first name we would think of. Over the summer, I held a town hall with residents, at which I heard the same thing over and over again. Bills for management were coming through completely irregularly, sometimes with three bills for three years being received in the space of three months, which is interesting. There was absolutely no transparency about the level of charge, with demands to come up with huge sums of money at a moment’s notice. All the while, basic maintenance such as cutting the grass just was not being done, leaving residents wondering what exactly they were paying for.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Property Service Charges · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right. She is a very good friend, and often she has seen speeches before I give them, but she has not seen this one, and she gives me the perfect segue into my next point. Transparency is so important. When I surveyed residents in the affected estate, 85% told me that billing was either poor or very poor. Some 79% have told me that the management of the estate was poor or very poor. I have written to that management company, and I am looking forward to meeting it, because its written response is simply not good enough.