Florence Eshalomi MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Dec 2025 · Sudan: Humanitarian Situation · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for responding and I thank the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) for securing this important urgent question. It is important for us to keep the focus on Sudan. Islamic Relief recently held an exhibition in my constituency entitled “Are your eyes on Sudan?” I am sure the organisation would be ready to welcome and host the Minister to show him the range of images and pictures. I attended a similar exhibition earlier this year, hosted by my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell) and organised by Waging Peace, which included images drawn by children of their parents, brothers and sisters being raped. Rape is being used as a weapon of war in this conflict. Will the Minister set out how we are working with our international partners to stamp that out, and how we are ensuring that vital humanitarian aid gets to the vulnerable women and children who are caught up in this horrific conflict?

• 15 Dec 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for coming to the House to respond to the urgent question. I know that this is an issue that she cares passionately about, and I can sense her frustration about the fact that such an important strategy is to be announced in the House on the last day before the recess, when many Members will not be here to respond and give their feedback. I hope that we will have another opportunity in the new year. I also hope that the strategy will confirm that there will be cross-departmental work, and that a big part of it will relate to where these vulnerable women and girls are to be housed. Did Ministers from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government attend the advisory board meetings, and will housing feature in the new strategy?

• 11 Dec 2025 · St Andrew’s Day and Scottish Affairs · Hansard source

  More

  I am a London MP, but I feel that I must step in for the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is not here. But my intervention does have a connection to the subject of the debate. It is about the vibrancy of Scottish universities. People from my constituency travel as far as Scotland to get a world-class education, and during a recent trade envoy visit to Nigeria, I spoke to Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office staff who had studied at Scottish universities. Does my hon. Friend agree that we must invest in education, as that is a good way to achieve economic regeneration and support?

• 11 Dec 2025 · National Plan to End Homelessness · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her statement this afternoon. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner) for their work; this is an area they were both committed to when they were in their previous ministerial roles. The Minister is correct that reversing the tide of homelessness should certainly be a national priority. It is not something that will happen overnight, and we know that further action will be needed to ensure that councils have the support they need for the pressures they are facing—particularly London councils, as the Minister will know, which are collectively facing costs of £5 million a day just on TA. One of the ways the Government can help to alleviate those pressures and stop people becoming homeless in the first instance is with their rents. There have been asks of Government with cross-party support and from a number of organisations, including the Local Government Association, to look at local housing allowance rates to ensure that people can afford to rent locally so that they do not find themselves facing the threat of eviction and homelessness. Has the Minister discussed this matter with colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions and the Treasury to ensure that our residents and tenants do not find themselves evicted? I think of the many children who, two weeks from today, will be opening their presents in another B&B or in more unsuitable temporary accommodation. For them and for many others, we have to make sure we get this right.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Local Elections · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds) for asking this urgent question and the Minister for responding. Real change is about having mayoral candidates rooted in their community, with an increase in power and funding so that they can deliver that change. There are many issues and challenges across local government, which we all talk about, from special educational needs and disabilities to temporary accommodation and children’s social care. These are big issues that our councillors are dealing with day in, day out. On 11 November, the Secretary of State told our Select Committee that he did not think local government reorganisation was taking longer than planned and that elections scheduled for May would be going ahead. Less than a month later, the Minister is saying that more time is needed for local government reorganisation in some areas. Given that we are less than six months out, can the Minister reassure the House by confirming that local elections will be going ahead in areas that are seeing reorganisation into a unitary authority and that there will not be any additional delays? This will have an impact on the local people who are working hard on this and may be worried about their jobs, so it is vital that we get clarity from the Government on those areas where unitarisation is carrying on.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  As one of the co-chairs of the all-party parliamentary group on HIV, AIDS and sexual health, I thank all Members across the House for joining in to recognise World AIDS Day on Monday and at Prime Minister’s questions on Wednesday. It is important that parliamentarians continue to show that cross-party support in highlighting that HIV is still very real for many people, but that by working together, we can be one of the first countries to end new HIV transmissions by 2030. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the Government on the new HIV action plan, which sets out how we will prevent HIV transmissions, scale up testing and address the stigma that sadly affects many people, including women and black and minority ethnic people? Will he also congratulate the many charities and organisations that are working, often on a shoestring budget, to ensure that this agenda is still firmly on the Government’s mind?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Angiolini Inquiry · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for this statement and join colleagues in their remarks about Sarah Everard’s family. Her mother is quoted in The Guardian as saying that she is still “tormented” by the horror of what her daughter suffered at the hands of Wayne Couzens. I think too of the many other victims who have suffered at the hands of men and boys, including, as the Minister knows, and as I have referenced, Elianne Andam and Johanita Dogbey. Meeting a family who are grieving the loss of their daughter, sister, mother or friend—there are no words, especially when we think of the horrific way those women were killed. The extracts from the report that I have read make for difficult reading. I know that this is an area that the Minister is very committed to. Lady Angiolini says that sexual offenders should be banned from the police, but this has not happened. She also says that there is a troubling lack of momentum, funding and ambition for this prevention work. That is worrying. As mentioned by the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, a quarter of police forces have still not implemented the most basic policies in this really key area. It does make for troubling reading. One of the other troubling things mentioned in the report is the connection with online abuse—it is not just in a physical atmosphere that women are getting abused. Can the Minister shed more light on how we are going to really tackle the disgraceful misogyny and abuse that women face online?

• 2 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Secretary of State agree that the hard-working staff at St Thomas’ hospital across the bridge, who deal with patients from right across the country, including many who have had surgeries and operations booked for many months, still kept the show going during the last rounds of strikes? Will he please do everything in his power to make sure that the strike does not go ahead?

• 24 Nov 2025 · Families in Temporary Accommodation · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for outlining those points. The situation is not just isolated to London; many councils are seeing an overspend—still going up —in this really tricky area. Just today, Epsom and Ewell borough council reported an overspend of £500,000, rising to £800,000 by next year. Slough estimates a £22 million overspend on TA; Woking, a £330,000 overspend; Waverley, a £165,000 overspend; and Waltham Forest, a £31 million overspend. That is just on temporary accommodation. This situation is not sustainable financially for councils or taxpayers. What more can the Minister do? Can she speak to Treasury colleagues about the big sticking point: the increase in and freeze on local housing allowance, which is not allowing people to live locally and rent locally?

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  We should declare an interest, as the hon. Gentleman and I both served as London Assembly members for south London—the best boroughs. He speaks about there not being accountability of the mayor. Would he recognise that even after the voting changes, our current mayor won an overall majority and was re-elected for the third time?

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for outlining the new power that the Government are looking at. I had a meeting this morning with two of my neighbouring parliamentary colleagues, my hon. Friends the Members for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) and for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy). In some areas, we are seeing licensing policies that are having a detrimental impact on local communities. Does the Minister agree that in the proposals she is outlining there is still a crucial role for local licensing authorities, where our hard-working councillors are working with the community to determine which licensing applications come forward?

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the Minister on bringing this Bill back. On a happier note than that of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes), I think this Bill does outline some of the powers going down to local communities. My understanding is that this is the first Bill to have “community empowerment” in its title, which shows the Government’s commitment to push on it. The Minister and I are fellow Labour and Co-operative MPs, and I am very excited about the community right to buy. I pay tribute to the many across the co-op movement who have been fighting for this for many years. I am mindful of the time, so I want to reflect on three specific areas. First, new clause 25, tabled by my Select Committee colleague, the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr Dillon), would require the Secretary of State to publish guidance on community infrastructure levy charges on homeowners, including on how local councils will respond to technical errors. Our Committee heard representations from the CIL Injustice group, which represents dozens of homeowners who have been unfairly charged CIL for home extensions, self-build and other small projects, even though CIL is intended as a levy for large-scale developments. Councils have seemingly issued the charges due to technical administrative errors such as paperwork being completed incorrectly, but the impact of these charges are life changing for some residents. We heard evidence of homeowners facing unexpected bills ranging from £40,000 to £200,000. We heard that some councils are applying a zero-tolerance approach, with the threat of imprisonment if these bills are not paid. Ultimately, we are seeing homeowners suffering real distress as a result. Some of them have been forced to sell their homes because they have been charged for something they should not have been charged. To the credit of the Minister for Housing and Planning, he told our Select Committee that the CIL regulations are “not intended to operate in this way”, and that the Government are “giving very serious consideration to amending them” to ensure no one is unfairly charged. However, that was back in July, and in a letter to the Committee earlier this month, he was unable to provide an update on the plans to amend the regulations. He told us that the Department “has not issued any formal or informal communications” to councils about charging CIL. New clause 25, tabled by the hon. Member for Newbury, would require the Government to take the steps urgently needed to address the unfair CIL charges. It would be helpful if the Minister, when winding up, gave the House an update on when the review of CIL guidance is coming, or if we can expect any secondary legislation to address this. We understand that Ministers cannot intervene on individual cases, but a clear direction should be issued to councils that they cannot treat applicants in this way and that they should clear up the paperwork to stop more homeowners being pursued for thousands of pounds of charges. Secondly, new clause 31, on the tourism levy, has been tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker). This new clause would give established mayoral strategic authorities the power to impose a levy on overnight accommodation in their area. Importantly, subsection (6) would require that money received from this levy is paid into the general fund of the authority, so it would be going directly to local councils. Our Select Committee has pressed the Government to go further with fiscal devolution. We welcome the empowerment of local councils in many areas, but we are very clear that the one omission from the Bill is fiscal devolution down to our local colleagues. Our report on the funding and sustainability of local government finance, which we published in July this year, included a recommendation to the Treasury to devolve tax-setting powers to local authorities, allowing them to set their own forms of local taxation, such as the tourism levy. I understand that, as the Minister outlined, anything to do with taxation is down to the Treasury and is not something for HCLG Ministers to look at, but I hope they are actively having such conversations with Treasury Ministers. We acknowledge that visitor levies have pros and cons. Their benefits would not be equal right across the country, and the right approach must be taken in each local area. However, our Select Committee heard that, where it does work, it would be helpful as a new form of fundraising at the regional level. For example, Mayor Tracy Brabin, the mayor of the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, told us that a visitor levy would give the authority an opportunity to become more self-sufficient. Councillor Louise Gittins, the chair of the Local Government Association, told us that some form of the tourist levy would be really helpful to deal with the pressures that tourists can put on local economies. The Government’s explanatory notes state that the purpose of the Bill is to transfer power out of Westminster, but, as I mentioned, the fiscal devolution element has been very quiet. I hope the Minister will recognise that until Westminster is willing to let go of its tight grip on tax setting and revenue raising down to local authorities, we will not see the kind of independence, community empowerment and local accountability we all want. New clause 31 would grant local authorities the power to impose visitor levies. It would be a positive first step in that direction.

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Minister for discussing the issue of council tax, which I am sure he will agree is one of the most regressive forms of taxation. If he is honest, he will recognise that successive Governments have dodged this issue by placing it in the “too difficult” box, including during the last 14 years. Does he agree that maybe this is something that the previous Government should have looked at?

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  On the losses to the council, does my hon. Friend recognise that for many councils the costs of additional street cleaning, refuse collection, signage and lighting all add up when an event is granted a temporary licence, and for many councils there is no compensation for that?

• 17 Nov 2025 · Asylum Policy · Hansard source

  More

  The reality is that we need an asylum and immigration system based on fairness and consistency. My constituency of Vauxhall and Camberwell Green is a testament to that, as it is a place that has been made richer because of the people who have come there from all over the world. Some of them have fled persecution and have made a home in my constituency over many years. I meet these people every week in the community, including in schools, where I see those children excited about their future. When this Government came into office last year, they were right to say that their priority was to tackle the huge backlog of unprocessed asylum claims left by their predecessor. Clearing that backlog is a big task, but it is right that we identify who has the right to be here, although introducing more assessments of those who have been here for many years and making new judgments about the safety of a country, will take considerable resources. Is the Home Secretary confident that these changes will not have the unintentional consequence of making it harder to achieve her goal?

• 13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I pay tribute to those in the other place for their work in getting us to this stage. I am conscious of time—it is a Thursday, and many Members want to speak—so I will not go into great depth on the amendments. However, I welcome the changes that the Government have made in the other place, and the work of Ministers to reach a compromise to get the Bill on to the statute book as soon as possible. I particularly welcome the series of pragmatic Government amendments on environmental delivery plans. It is critical to ensure that any system to protect our environment is robust, and the measures outlined by the Government will go some way to quelling some of the fears outlined not just in the other place but by Members across this House on Report. I also welcome reforms to address water supply and encourage the building of badly needed reservoirs, as well as measures to ensure that developers have extra time to commence work when a court grants a judicial review. That sensible and proportional approach will ensure that permissions do not expire through no fault of the developer, and avoid any unnecessary repetition of the whole planning process. As Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, I wish to touch on two points that relate to the scrutiny we have in this place for planning and infrastructure. The first relates to Lords amendment 1, which is identical to amendment 83, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier) on Report. As the Minister said then, this is “about ensuring that scrutiny is proportionate to the changes being made,”. —[ Official Report , 9 June 2025; Vol. 768, c. 756.] However, we must be honest and say that even amendments to statements can have a massive impact on our communities up and down the country. Sometimes that impact is even bigger than that of Bills, which are subject to the full weight of parliamentary scrutiny. I understand the point that the Minister made in Committee, which is that the system has led to unacceptable delays, sometimes for several months. I also know as much as anyone that just because a Committee recommends something to Ministers, it is far from a guarantee that the Government will change their policy. However, it is important that this change is not used to ride through significant changes without Committees having the chance to carry out proper scrutiny into how the measure will impact the lives of people up and down the country. It must also not be used to bypass scrutiny when a statement is amended so much over time as to become a de facto new statement. That is part of the role that we were elected to carry out by this House, and it is something that helps give confidence to the whole House that we have properly considered the statements before us. I heard the Minister indicate earlier that the Government will not accept Lords amendment 1, but I gently ask whether he can assure the House that Committees will still be included in the process of amending statements, and that they will not be sidelined when we engage proactively and in a timely manner with that process. The introduction of this Bill is long awaited, after years of failing to unblock a broken planning system and to build on the scale that we desperately need. Research from Crisis found that nearly 300,000 families and individuals have ended up without a home of their own, while previous Governments failed to act, and as we know, some children do not even have a room in which to learn to walk or crawl. In reality that will not end overnight; it will end only when we have a system that consistently builds the affordable and social homes that we desperately need.

• 13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is a proud advocate of highlighting that issue, which we constantly raise with the Minister. This is about ensuring that our councils are part of the building process, and the new social and affordable homes package—the £39 billion—will help to ensure that we build those homes. It is good to see that package. The prospectus was announced last week, and bids will be coming in from February 2026—build, baby, build!

• 13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Just this week at the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, the new Secretary of State outlined that the Government will not be urging national development management policies to be non-statutory. That almost seems at odds with the Government’s direction of travel, which is towards speeding up the national scheme of delegation. Will the Minister explain why the Government are taking the approach of making the guidance non-statutory?

• 5 Nov 2025 · Diversity, Equality and Inclusion: Public Sector · Hansard source

  More

  As we come to the end of celebrating Black History Month, it is vital that we continue to promote diversity in all workplaces. Does the Minister agree that it is fundamental for us to have DEI practices in all workforces so that we can fight for equality, fairness and transparency and prevent discrimination, especially the discrimination that far too many people still face in the workplace?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Huntingdon Train Attack · Hansard source

  More

  I associate myself with the powerful tributes to the train driver, staff and members of the public. The incident demonstrates the importance of having more than one staff member on trains. The train guards play a vital role in protecting passengers. My constituency is home to Vauxhall and Waterloo—busy mainline stations. In under six weeks, millions of people will travel home for Christmas on the public network. They need to be reassured that train travel is an efficient and good way to travel across the country. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary mentioned that there will be additional resources across the network for the next few weeks. Will that go on into the busy Christmas period? This issue is also covered by the Department for Transport. As transport geeks will know, the British Transport police has a strange funding mechanism: it is funded by the industry, not by the Home Office. As we take on more control of the public network and train services, responsibility for funding will fall to the Government. Will the Home Secretary and Transport Secretary consider that, and ensure that the British Transport police is fully funded to protect people on public transport?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Land Value Capture · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. This week, the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee published our third report, following our inquiry into land value capture. I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for allocating time for this statement, and I thank the HCLG Committee staff for their help in preparing the report. I also thank our specialist adviser, Professor Richard Dunning from the University of Liverpool, for his guidance throughout the process. In many ways, the cost of land is one of the biggest root causes of the housing crisis. Land is usually the single biggest expense of any new housing development. When farmland is granted planning permission for housing, its value can soar. The value of private land also rises when we build new infrastructure nearby, such as road schemes or train links. Those increases in land values are not caused by investment from landowners; they are the result of decisions by local authorities. It is therefore right that land value capture policies seek to recover a fair percentage of those profits for public benefit. Currently, England’s land value capture system has two key parts. The first is planning obligations through section 106 agreements, which require developers to build affordable homes and public infrastructure alongside homes. The second is the community infrastructure levy—a cash payment to local authorities to fund roads, GPs, schools and other critical investment. If the Government are serious about delivering new towns, new communities and the infrastructure they require, they must look at reforming land value capture. Our inquiry considered how pragmatic reforms can help to support a rapid increase in house building, which would contribute to the Government’s target of delivering 1.5 million new homes during this Parliament. Our report also takes stock of the Government’s first-year progress towards that target. Stakeholders told our inquiry that there are several easy wins for reform of section 106. Modest changes could streamline the process for local authorities and small and medium-sized enterprise developers, while delivering more affordable housing, including much-needed homes for social rent. Currently, the section 106 negotiation process can be unpredictable, complex and drawn out. We heard that local authorities are often tasked with formulating complex legal wording when they should be focusing on site- specific factors such as the community benefits from the development. We therefore recommend that the Government should introduce template clauses for section 106 agreements, and that local authorities should be encouraged to adopt them. Local planning authorities must be supported with the resources they need to negotiate section 106 agreements on behalf of communities, but the reality is that planning departments have been long stretched. The Government’s pledge to fund 300 new planning officers demonstrates that they recognise the problem, but that is equivalent to less than one planning officer in each local authority in England. What is more, the Government are restricting access to level 7 planning apprenticeships, despite the skills White Paper’s ambition for more young people to pursue degree-level apprenticeships. We recommend that the Government look at that again and extend access to degree- level planning apprenticeships to students of all ages. We heard that only 52% of local authorities are currently charging the community infrastructure levy, perhaps in no small part because planning departments are so stretched. Local authorities often want their staff to prioritise affordable housing delivery rather than administering CIL, which cannot be used to fund affordable housing. However, where CIL is charged, we have heard that it is a vital tool to fund infrastructure, which residents expect alongside new housing. Therefore, the Government must push for greater coverage of CIL where it is financially viable. To support that, we recommend that the Government publish a map of CIL coverage. That would make the whole system easier for developers to navigate and bring an end to the complex patchwork of different local rates. The evidence we heard from across the sector, including from developers, was clear: the Government must extend CIL coverage where possible to support new communities and unlock more housing. That is why we were surprised to hear last week that the Government are planning to cut CIL for some developments in London and effectively cut London’s affordable housing target from 35% to 20%. The Secretary of State has said that cutting London’s target will increase the number of social and affordable homes built overall. My Committee has asked to see what impact assessment the Department has done on that, but the modelling has not been published yet. We are concerned that, in evidence to our inquiry, the Greater London Authority said that reducing affordable housing targets can inflate land values, inflate developer returns and slow down housing delivery. The Department must therefore publish its modelling in the coming weeks. The Committee has recommended that if there is a decline in the number of affordable homes built in London, the Government should reinstate the 35% target. That is an area that my Committee wants to scrutinise further in coming weeks, including when the detailed consultation is launched in November. Our report also finds that there is a vital opportunity for land value capture in new towns to fund the roads, GPs and schools that they will need. However, we are concerned that some of the opportunity may have already been missed. The Government have published maps of possible site locations, yet without policy to protect their land value from speculative development. The new towns taskforce specifically recommended that the Government protect the locations or risk “jeopardising the new town plans.” We are concerned that land values in those areas may already be rising, long before the Government have set up the development corporations to purchase the land. Therefore, we recommend that the Government bring forward the funding development corporations at the Budget so that the land agreements are in place before the final locations are confirmed in the spring. Finally, our report takes a step back from land value to consider the progress towards the target of 1.5 million new homes. It is fair to say that the Department has had a busy first year, with a range of planning reform and legislation. However, our Committee has heard a lot of doubt and uncertainty from the sector. Even the Government told us that the target is “stretching” and “hugely ambitious”. The Government were quick to update the housing targets in the national planning policy framework last year, but on average local plans are still taking seven years to produce. We recommend that the Government implement a new 30-month local plan timeline as a priority so that the national reforms lead to change on the ground. The truth is that while planning reform might be able to deliver more planning permissions, that is not the same as building 1.5 million new homes. The Government must look at the wider issues in the housing market such as mortgages, build-out rates and the workforce capacity. They have started consultation on some of those issues, but there is no overarching long-term housing strategy. The Government promised that the strategy would be published in spring of this year, but we are still waiting. We hope that the strategy will include an impact assessment to show how the policy changes will add up to the 1.5 million new homes and finally give the sector some certainty about what is planned for the rest of this Parliament. Our most urgent request of the Government is to bring forward the long-term housing strategy within weeks, not months. The sector needs to have confidence in the road map ahead. We think that some of the pragmatic, uncontroversial reforms to land value capture would help to unlock new homes and should be part of that road map. We look forward to a timely response from the Government. I thank all the witnesses and organisations who supported our inquiry, and I commend the report to the House.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Land Value Capture · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my fellow Committee member for her useful points. I know this is an issue close to her heart. She represents a rural constituency where additional infrastructure is needed with the new housing, because people need to get to work as well as having somewhere to live, and community facilities are vital. For far too long, many developers have been promising the earth to get over the hurdle of the planning application. Good developers fulfil their obligations, but some renege on them. We hope the Government will look at our recommendations to make the process a lot easier so that there is transparency and, most importantly, so that communities get the infrastructure that they were promised as part of the new developments.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Land Value Capture · Hansard source

  More

  It is really good to have my hon. Friend’s knowledge and expertise on the Committee; he is always citing reasons why new towns are successful and something that this Government should support wholeheartedly. The key thing that we want to ensure is that funding is attached to deliver on those recommendations, including by ensuring a mixture of homes in new towns. The new towns taskforce has recommended a 40% target for affordable homes, including a minimum target of 20% for social rent. We hope the Government will look favourably on that recommendation, and we can see how building those homes will help to make a dent in the housing crisis that exists across all constituencies in the UK.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Land Value Capture · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his question. I know that there are constituencies on the outskirts of London that are feeling the impact of a lack of affordable housing, and there are issues with temporary accommodation. A number of London boroughs simply do not have enough homes to house people, so they look to neighbouring boroughs. The Government are working with the Mayor of London to investigate the issue. They are challenging the mayor on his commitments in the London plan, and we continue to work with him to look at that as well. The Government hope to commit to ensuring that our Committee has monthly updates on the new affordable housing targets that they have agreed with the mayor. That will be open for public scrutiny once the Committee has looked at that.

• 22 Oct 2025 · Heathrow: National Airports Review · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and am pleased to hear that this will be a thorough and meaningful consultation, because even though my constituency is not near the airport, my constituents in Camberwell, Stockwell and Brixton write to me regularly to say that they are suffering from air and noise pollution. The Secretary of State talked about infrastructure; a key point will be ensuring that more people use public transport to get to Heathrow. The reality is that some upgrades to the airport have not had the funding over many years, as the Chair of the Select Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), highlighted. I want to tease out more from the Secretary of State on private funding, because in a number of cases, developers commit to something, but then the viability issue comes up, and the money never seems to appear. Will she ensure that there is funding to secure the transport infrastructure that will be vital if there is any new airport runway?