James MacCleary MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Nov 2025 · Remembrance Day: Armed Forces · Hansard source

  More

  Remembrance Day is when our nation pauses to honour those who have served, those who continue to serve and, most especially, those who made the ultimate sacrifice in defence of our freedoms. Indeed, just this morning I was in Polegate, in my constituency, to lay a wreath alongside representatives of the local Royal British Legion, councillors, and local clubs and societies, and I had the honour of laying wreaths in Ringmer and Lewes on Sunday. We MPs have the unique honour of standing alongside people from across our communities—particularly young people; there was a huge turnout of young people at all our remembrance events—as we lay wreaths to remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice for us. During the second world war, our corner of Sussex saw convoy after convoy of troops and provisions pass through our small villages and country lanes. Indeed, some of those country lanes still bear the scars of tank tracks that damaged kerbs and other infrastructure. In 1942, Operation Jubilee, otherwise known as the Dieppe raid, was launched from Newhaven in my constituency, to test plans for the full-scale invasion of the Normandy coast. The cost was high: in the operation, nearly 4,000 Canadian and British troops were killed, wounded or taken prisoner. Every year, we remember those brave soldiers in ceremonies in Newhaven and Dieppe. Today, in my constituency of Lewes, more than 3,600 households contain at least one veteran. Remembrance Day is an event that brings us together. It is a time of unity and pride, as well as solemnity and reflection. Yet remembrance without action is merely sentiment. True remembrance demands that we translate our gratitude into tangible support for those who have served. It demands that we look honestly at how we treat our veterans and serving personnel today, not just how we commemorate those of yesterday. When we do so with clear eyes, we must acknowledge an uncomfortable truth: that we can do better. That is why I really welcome the publication of the Government’s new veterans strategy this week. Britain’s armed forces are the finest in the world. Our servicemen and servicewomen possess unparalleled skill, courage and dedication, and that is the legacy we must uphold. The men and women who wear our uniform today stand in an unbroken line stretching back through centuries, as we have heard from the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois). They carry forward the same spirit that saw their predecessors stand firm against wannabe despots, from Napoleon to Hitler. But excellence requires investment. Defence is not simply another Department competing for resources but the fundamental obligation of the state—the bedrock on which all our other freedoms depend. Without security, there can be no prosperity, and without defence, there can be no democracy. The world today is more dangerous than at any time since the end of the cold war. Modern warfare is no longer confined to tanks, ships and planes; it is also fought with drones, in cyber-space and in our data networks. That is why we must be able to move quickly, adapt rapidly, and learn from our Ukrainian allies, who are innovating on the battlefield every day. Britain must be ready to absorb and integrate these lessons and ensure that our own armed forces are ready. This is not the time for retreat or for isolationism; this is the time for Britain to lead in Europe, to stand firm alongside our allies, and to ensure that our armed forces have everything they need to defend our nation and our values. The Government’s commitment to boosting defence spending to 2.5% of GDP is welcome, but it is not enough. We need cross-party talks to agree on a rapid path towards 3%, and I would welcome the Minister’s views on how we can work together to achieve just that. Let us be under no illusion: we have the most capable military in Europe, so as the US continues to withdraw forces from across our continent—it recently withdrew a division from Romania—it will be the UK that will be looked to, to step up and lead. We need sustained, long-term investment in our armed forces, not reactive gestures driven by electoral cycles. As we have seen in the strategic defence review, investment will need to be sustained over a long period. On this Remembrance Day, as we honour those who served before, we must also stand beside those serving today. Recruitment and retention are in crisis; more people leave our armed forces than join. The Haythornthwaite report identified family impact as the most common reason for departure, and one third of military spouses say that they would be happier if their partner left the service. We have failed to provide decent housing and failed to support military families adequately. Three quarters of all personnel live in service accommodation, yet barely half remain satisfied with service accommodation conditions. I welcome the Government’s announcement of £9 billion for military housing, but we must be clear that that is not generosity; it is catching up on the years of neglect. The housing crisis for veterans extends beyond their time in the service. Thousands of households containing someone who served in our armed forces are assessed as being homeless each year, and, shamefully, that figure is rising. Having veterans on our streets in 2025 is a profound dereliction of duty. I was pleased to hear the Chair of the Defence Committee, the hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi), mention the treatment of women in our armed forces, which I am sure is a major concern for us all. We are all familiar with the terrible case of Gunner Jaysley Beck, who took her own life at Larkhill in Wiltshire, and the bungled handling of that case by the Army, which has subsequently come to light. They did not listen to her —nobody listened to her—and the inquest found that the failure to take appropriate action was a direct contributor to her death. The Atherton report revealed the scale of the crisis: the majority of women who responded to its survey reported experiencing bullying, discrimination, harassment or sexual assault during their service, sometimes at the hands of senior officers. The Ministry of Defence has introduced reforms, but they are not having the impact on the ground that was hoped for. We must implement every recommendation of the Atherton report. We must ensure that the new independent Armed Forces Commissioner has responsibility for handling serious complaints. We must do more to improve conviction rates for sexual assaults within the armed forces. How can we expect women to put their lives on the line to keep us safe when their voices are still not being heard within their own ranks? Mental health is another critical area in which we have fallen short. More than half our veterans report having experienced mental health problems, yet when veterans seek help, they face long waiting times, inadequate provision and services that fail to understand their specific needs. We must provide comprehensive, easy-to-access, professional mental health support. We must offer regular mental health assessments at key transition points. We must fight the stigma surrounding mental ill health, so that asking for help is seen not as a weakness, but as a strength. The global security landscape is more volatile and unpredictable than it has been in a generation. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shattered the relative peace that we have enjoyed on our continent for decades. An emboldened Kremlin seeks to undermine western democracies through disinformation, cyber-attacks and attempts to influence our political processes. We have seen evidence of Russian interference in elections across Europe, attempts to sow discord through social media manipulation, and sustained efforts to weaken NATO from within. China expands its military capabilities and asserts increasingly aggressive territorial claims. Instability spreads across the middle east, Africa and beyond. Authoritarian regimes grow bolder, while democracies appear hesitant and, at times, divided. Our commitment to NATO must therefore remain the cornerstone of our security. Only a few weeks ago, Portsmouth-based HMS Duncan was deployed under NATO command to shadow the Russian destroyer Vice-Admiral Kulakov through the channel. It was a striking image of an alliance in action: British, French and Dutch forces working together to protect our shared waters. The ageing Russian vessel, limping westward, stood in stark contrast to the cutting-edge capability of the Royal Navy’s Type 45 destroyer. It is proof that our strength lies not in isolation, but in standing together with our allies, at sea and beyond.

• 15 Oct 2025 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of her statement. I warmly welcome the announcement of fresh sanctions aimed at cutting Putin’s oil and gas profits. It is vital that we make use of all the tools at our disposal to undermine his war machine, and we know that oil and gas revenues are primarily used to fund it. These measures are a further step in the right direction, but I encourage the Government to go even further. Analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air think-tank shows that UK-owned or insured liquefied natural gas carriers have facilitated the transport of £45 billion of Russian gas since the start of the full-scale invasion. That means that 76% of the total export value of Russian LNG was carried on UK-owned or insured vessels. It is unconscionable that UK businesses are still contributing to Putin’s coffers, so will the Foreign Secretary commit to banning the provision of maritime services, including transport and insurance, for Russian gas? Will she engage directly with the maritime insurance sector, a large proportion of which is based in the UK, to find practical ways to implement such a ban? I was very pleased to hear of the Foreign Secretary’s ambition to progress plans to use the full value of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine’s war effort. That is a measure that the Liberal Democrats have been pushing for action on for some months. The Government need to move at pace as Ukraine continues to face Putin’s relentless assault, so can the Foreign Secretary confirm the timetable she is looking at for new funds becoming available from frozen assets? Can she outline how those funds will be allocated, and if barriers to seizing those assets are put in place internationally, can she commit to the UK Government acting unilaterally when it comes to seizing the assets held in the UK? It is more than three years since Roman Abramovich sold Chelsea football club. In June, the then Foreign Secretary said that the Government were ready and willing to take legal action to finally secure the £2.5 billion generated from the sale that is earmarked for additional support for Ukraine. It appears, however, that the Government’s bark has been worse than their bite so far, as we have heard no more about how the Government intend to pursue those assets. What concrete action have the Government taken since June to secure them? We all hope to see a just peace in Ukraine. When we do, thoughts will switch to reconstruction. Can the Secretary of State commit to provide full UK backing, including funding, to the Council of Europe’s register of damage for Ukraine?

• 16 Sept 2025 · International Day of Democracy · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, I did see that story, and it is absolutely shocking. Anyone who purports to care about free speech and accountability, then bans journalists from attending meetings for no good reason, does not respect that at all. We cannot pick and choose who provides that scrutiny. I have not spoken at length here about the media, but it performs a fundamental role. We have spoken today about the iniquitous role of some social media, and that has shown the transition in the way that people consume information about democracy. We must protect and support local government reporters, which the hon. Member mentioned, who are absolutely essential to the democratic process in this country. That is an important point. I was just about to say that globally, records show declines in press freedom on every continent. Rule of law is slipping. One in five nations saw a deterioration in freedom of expression, economic equality and access to justice. Hong Kong activists face intimidation, even on British soil, with Chinese Communist party-linked bounties pinned to lamp posts, even in our own towns. In Iran, the Revolutionary Guard exports terror and targets women demanding freedom. In Russia, Vladimir Putin claimed an 87% “victory” in a sham election while jailing and killing rivals. These regimes do not simply repress at home; they meddle abroad, launder their money through London and seek to divide our alliances. Crucially, Britain’s credibility must start at home. Many people feel that democracy is not working for them in this country. They feel detached and distanced from this place, and look to those who offer easy answers. Our politics is realigning, and our system of democracy must realign with it. That means real electoral reform; a system of proportional representation that reflects what people actually voted for. There is a real danger that at the next election the distorted first-past-the-post system, which both the Conservative and Labour parties have done so much to protect, will sweep them away. The time for change is now. Democracy is something precious that we must all work to protect, but it is not certain, and it is not inevitable. Too many people who claim to cherish our democracy now spend time subverting it—deliberately or not—by undermining our judiciary, discrediting serious media outlets and attacking the integrity of election results that do not suit them. The Liberal Democrats’ answer is clear: we must restore Britain’s moral authority by defending rights robustly, here and abroad; champion a proportional electoral system, so that every vote counts and political monopolies cannot fester; enshrine the ministerial code in law; uphold the Human Rights Act 1998 against those who would dilute it; impose Magnitsky-style sanctions on those who persecute in Hong Kong, Georgia, Serbia and elsewhere; and fund development and diplomacy properly by reversing aid cuts that leave vacuums for autocrats to exploit. Democracy is not merely a ballot box. It is a citizen in Tbilisi protesting without fear; a journalist in Belgrade exposing corruption without a midnight knock at the door; a student in Hong Kong refusing to be silenced by Beijing; a Ukrainian citizen voting for their future under Russian fire; and a voter in Lewes knowing that their vote will really count. Authoritarianism spreads when democracy grows timid, and we Liberal Democrats will not be timid. We will stand with the people of Georgia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, with Hong Kong’s exiles and Ukraine’s heroic defenders, and with every community fighting to have their voice heard. Britain must be known as a country that does not just lecture on democracy, but lives it, defends it and invests in it.

• 16 Sept 2025 · International Day of Democracy · Hansard source

  More

  It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I thank the hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Rachel Blake) for securing this really interesting debate. I echo your words, Sir John—it has been really valuable. I thank all hon. Members for their contributions, many of which I agreed with very strongly and some of which I did not agree with quite so much, but it has been an excellent illustration of what a functioning democracy looks like on this International Day of Democracy. It is often said these days that we face a crisis in democracy. Authoritarian regimes in Beijing and Moscow become bolder, while long-standing democracies in Europe and the USA appear to struggle in the face of populism. It has never been more important for us as British parliamentarians to stand against those who would erode and diminish our hard-fought democratic freedoms, both here and abroad. I will speak today about this crisis, but also about the opportunities that the response to it presents both here in the UK and around the world. It starts with respecting the building blocks of any successful democracy—the rule of law, free and fair elections, rights and freedoms, and accountability and transparency. In some countries, the erosion of these building blocks is worrying. In Georgia, for instance, the stakes could not be higher. Last November the Georgian Government suspended EU accession talks, a choice that outraged a nation where polls consistently show overwhelming support for integration with Europe. Since then, protesters have filled Rustaveli Avenue almost daily, braving batons and water cannons to say, “Our future is ours”. Over the summer, the Georgian Dream Government started arresting opposition leaders. Just weeks ago, I was informed that my friend Giorgi Vashadze, a leading opposition figure, had been arrested and sentenced to eight months in prison. Just yesterday another, Elene Khoshtaria, was arrested. The heinous crime of which she is accused? Damage to the mayor of Tbilisi’s election posters. How we respond to these challenges to democracy defines us as much as it defines those countries who are seeing their rights diminished. Another example is Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the Dayton peace agreement is being undermined by Milorad Dodik and his breakaway Republika Srpska. Less than a week ago, Dodik was hosted by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow. The decision under the last Government to withdraw British troops from the EUFOR peacekeeping force in 2020 was a strategic blunder. The Liberal Democrats have called on the Government to recommit to the EUFOR mission, to support the civic groups painstakingly building bridges between communities and to reinforce Britain’s commitment to democracy and peace in the Balkans. That also holds true in Serbia, where anger over corruption, negligence and brutality erupted after the Novi Sad railway station disaster last November. What began as mourning for victims became a nationwide anti-corruption movement, drawing hundreds of thousands on to the street. Rather than listening, President Vučić smeared protesters as foreign agents and invited Russian backing, while riot police fired stun grenades and tear gas. There were five nights of unrest and party offices in flames, but still there has been no meaningful reform. The UK must send an unmistakable message: the Balkans cannot become a playground for Moscow’s interference. That means fair and transparent elections where the results are respected. Those of us in positions of responsibility and power must uphold those standards. If we do not, the consequences can be violent, as we saw in January 2021 when the US Congress was stormed by those who agreed with the current US President that the election result, in which he had been clearly defeated, was illegitimate and sought to overturn it. Across Europe and around the world, we find democracy under pressure. From Tbilisi to Hong Kong, hard-won freedoms are being eroded, legislatures hollowed out and the voices of citizens silenced. The Liberal Democrats understand that democracy is more than just a mechanism for simply choosing Governments; it is a covenant between people and power—between rights and responsibility. It is how ordinary citizens hold the mighty to account. These crises are a symptom of a broader malaise.

• 15 Sept 2025 · Children with SEND: Assessments and Support · Hansard source

  More

  For families in my constituency of Lewes, this is not an abstract policy debate but their daily reality. That includes the 229 constituents who responded to this petition, to whom I am very grateful. The failures of the SEND system are in my inbox every week. Take the little boy in my constituency who travels 56 miles every day just to attend a school in Hastings, because there simply is not a suitable place closer to home. It is not fair on him or his parents, and it is not sustainable for the system. Or take the children whose parents wrote to me, as they still did not know—even as September loomed—where or if their children would be starting school. For families, that limbo is agonising. It is not just individual cases; the system as a whole is failing. In East Sussex, almost 5,000 pupils have EHCPs, yet time and again parents are forced to take the council to tribunal to secure the support to which their children are legally entitled. Between 2020 and this summer, over 92% of those cases were decided in favour of the parents. That is not evidence of pushy families gaming the system; it is proof that councils are getting it wrong at huge cost to the taxpayer and enormous stress to families. What is more, tribunals are becoming ever more expensive. East Sussex county council has gone from spending a few hundred pounds on SEND tribunals in 2020 to well over £100,000 in the past year. Every pound wasted fighting parents is a pound not spent on children. Meanwhile, special schools in my constituency, Bowden House and Cuckmere House, which I visited recently, are oversubscribed. Families are increasingly turning to independent special schools, such as Northease Manor school, which do extraordinary work, but are now facing VAT changes that will hit parents and local authorities hard. That is the picture across the south-east. Families in Newhaven, Seaford, Lewes, Polegate and across our local villages are not asking for the earth. Until this Government show that they are willing to act with urgency and ambition, families will continue to be failed by a system that is meant to serve them.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Day in, day out, I hear from people across my constituency—from Polegate to Plumpton—who want to use the bus but simply cannot do so. People must be at the heart of transport policy, so let me begin with one example from my constituency. I recently heard from a woman in Wilmington village who wants to get to her job in Lewes by bus but cannot do so at present. To do so, she must travel in the wrong direction to Polegate, wait, then take a slow service through multiple villages. What would be a 15-minute drive becomes an hour or more on the bus, so she drives. That is not a lifestyle choice; it is a failure of network design. This Bill could give us the tools to put that right, if we use them properly. The A27 in my constituency desperately needs a direct service between Eastbourne and Lewes, and we must make that happen. The stops are on the road; there is just no bus to serve them. That is exactly why I support amendment 2, on socially necessary routes, so that journeys to work, schools and health services are guaranteed, even when the market will not deliver. Franchising powers in the Bill mean that our local transport authority could finally design services around what people need, not what happens to be commercially convenient. The new duty to provide socially necessary routes must make that real. Our amendments would ensure that if the market will not deliver, the authority must step in and be properly funded to do so. The A27 express should be at the top of that list. I recently heard from a young lady in Stone Cross in my constituency who tries to get to college. Buses fail to appear—one recently sailed by her when she was waiting—and that means lost education time. The powers in the Bill on performance, data and enforcement must bite. We must publish stop-level reliability and give local transport authorities the lever to withhold payment for no-shows and require operator recovery plans. We must also back our “headphone dodgers” amendment, so that authorities can make byelaws against sustained antisocial noise. Safe, civil journeys retain passengers. Much like the case in Stone Cross, I see the same story repeated in the village of Ringmer. An 85-year-old constituent depends on the bus to reach the Tesco in Lewes, yet sometimes it never arrives, and at other times the driver simply drives on by. That is not a public service; it is a gamble. If people are to use these services, they must be able to rely on them. That is why I back amendment 11, on accessible stopping places and reliability. We must ensure that information is clear, that drivers are trained and that passengers are not left stranded. Rural villages across my constituency send the same message: they have gaps, long waits, and first and last buses that do not work for people’s real lives. Community transport services are a lifeline in rural areas where commercial routes do not run. In my constituency, volunteer-led Cuckmere Buses and CTLA keep people connected. The Sussex Art Shuttle, run by Cuckmere Buses, shows how small, community-driven transport projects can open up access and enrich local lives. These schemes run on tight budgets and good will, yet they deliver where the market will not. Amendment 9 would recognise their value and ensure that funding streams work for them, not against them. There is also the Flexibus scheme, a forward-thinking initiative from East Sussex county council showing how a local authority can take control and fill the gaps left by traditional services. With booking available by app or phone, it is a practical, people-centred service that makes rural transport work for many. New clause 8, on VAT rules for demand-responsive services, would make it easier for such schemes, allowing councils to innovate locally and deliver real solutions for communities. Sadly, in Lewes we have lost our bus station. Years of campaigning could not save it. The result is an interchange tacked on to the Phoenix Causeway bridge—busy, exposed and in the wrong place. It is not possible to grow ridership while dismantling the places where people change buses. We should give local transport authorities explicit powers, duties and funding to safeguard and replace our interchanges as part of franchising schemes. That is why new clause 5, on accessibility reports so that bus stations and interchanges are explicitly safeguarded and properly planned, is so important. The upcoming Budget must unlock much-needed funding for major roads that are congested and therefore delay bus service. I have raised the A259 in my constituency directly with the Prime Minister in this place. It is a vicious cycle: congestion holds back buses, people turn back to cars, and traffic gets worse. Better buses mean fewer cars, and a transition to a zero emissions fleet must be central to how we plan for the future. Affordability underpins all of this. The Liberal Democrats’ new clause 1 would restore the £2 fare cap, which worked well; it put money back in pockets and passengers back on seats. Lifting it is a bus tax on work, study and care. Our new clause would restore the cap and require a formal assessment of the impact of hikes. We go further: new clause 9 would provide free travel for those on carer’s allowance, and new clause 2, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), would remove time restrictions for disabled concessionary passes. This Bill will be judged not by what it promises on paper, but whether it delivers for people who wait at the bus stop, and I hope this Government will deliver that.

• 10 Sept 2025 · Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend may be aware that in East Sussex, where I am lucky enough to be an MP, the county council has already removed the restriction on timings. Indeed, he has met my former Liberal Democrat council colleague Sean Macleod to discuss that. Does my hon. Friend agree that that creates a postcode lottery across the country, where some people are fortunate to live in places that have removed the restriction and others are not so lucky?

• 10 Sept 2025 · Russian Drones: Violation of Polish Airspace · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister was quite right to describe this violation of Polish airspace as unprecedented, but I am sure he would agree that it is not isolated; in fact, it represents the latest escalation in Russia’s campaign of attacks on central and eastern European NATO allies. Just last year, shopping centres in Vilnius and Warsaw were set on fire, and the leaders of those countries pointed the finger firmly at Russian military intelligence. Just last week, a jet carrying the President of the European Commission suffered a cyber-attack that was initiated by Russia. Russia is clearly not deterred by the current measures in place. Will the Minister outline what we can do as a leading military power in Europe and in NATO to enhance and reinforce the capabilities of our NATO allies who are on the frontline of the confrontation with Russia?

• 4 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. I recently spoke to David, who farms near the village of Berwick in my constituency. He told me that he has recently given up raising livestock altogether due to the lack of local abattoirs—his nearest option is well over an hour away. What action are the Government taking to support new and existing abattoirs, so that farmers across the country who are in a similar situation to David do not stop raising livestock too?

• 4 Sept 2025 · Early Education and Childcare · Hansard source

  More

  As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for early education and childcare, I speak frequently to representatives of the private and voluntary childcare sector, who tell me that they are in crisis. Staffing shortages and an unsustainable funding model mean that they do not know how they will deliver the very laudable aims outlined in the Government’s statement. Does the Minister understand that those aims are unachievable without the support of the private and voluntary sector? Will he agree to attend a meeting of our APPG to hear directly from key voices in the sector?

• 3 Sept 2025 · Pavement Parking · Hansard source

  More

  Some see pavement parking as merely a nuisance, but in some parts of my constituency it is far more serious, affecting businesses and residents every day. Due to the time restriction, I will talk about just one community—the town of Polegate—where the crisis has become particularly acute. People tell me every day that cars are parked on pavements in the town, forcing parents with prams into the road, leaving wheelchair users stuck and making the high street harder to use for everyone. Some businesses are even struggling to keep going due to parking. What makes it even worse is patchy enforcement. In Polegate and other communities in the Wealden district part of my constituency, parking has never been decriminalised. That means responsibility still sits with the police, who understandably have other priorities, so offences simply go unchecked. It is a bizarre situation that leaves residents with no effective recourse. I am pressing for urgent action so that parking can finally be enforced and my constituents are not left abandoned. Meanwhile, there has been action in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and I believe there are preparations for action in Wales, too. Yet in England—outside London, at least—we are still stuck in limbo. Local councils want to tackle it and residents demand change, but the Government have left them with a clunky, expensive process that can take months or years to achieve little. We must give councils the powers and clarity they need and back communities like Polegate that are demanding safer streets because, every week it drags on, more families are pushed into the road, more vulnerable people are shut out, and more of our pavements are broken up. It is now time to act.

• 2 Sept 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The Bill brands itself as “devolution by default”, but in practice it could be seen as centralisation by stealth. Real devolution shifts power out of Westminster and Whitehall to the people in local communities, but the Bill risks doing the opposite. For instance, clause 4 lets Ministers draw and redraw local maps in order for areas to have a mayor. Clause 50 lets them bolt on new functions by regulation with minimal scrutiny, and clause 9 creates seven unelected commissioners answerable only to a mayor. It also fails to explain how it will all be paid for. Let us be clear, local government is in serious financial difficulty. East Sussex county council is on course to exhaust its reserves by 2029. Councils across East Sussex carry £500 million-worth of debt. Our inboxes are full of cases that should be handled by councils that no longer have the staff or the funding. Reshuffling deck chairs on a sinking ship will not save it. Without a sustainable settlement for social care and children’s services, structural changes will fail. Some powers are welcome, if they are funded. Bus franchising can reconnect towns and villages but not on an empty budget. Requiring key route networks and local growth plans adds duties but at the moment without giving resources. A new local audit office could help clear the audit backlog, but it cannot be both regulator and auditor—no one should mark their own homework. I was particularly alarmed to read clause 55; this issue has affected my community particularly heavily. The clause enables forced mergers into new unitary councils. In my area, Brighton and Hove city council has launched a surprise consultation to push its boundary east to absorb Newhaven, Kingston and nearby villages in my constituency. Newhaven is a distinct port town 10 miles from Brighton. Kingston, Iford, Rodmell and Southease are rural communities in the South Downs national park. I have already written to a Minister on this subject. They are not Brighton neighbourhoods, and residents do not want decisions made for them at Hove town hall. The Government say that they want pace. The East Sussex proposal, supported by the county council and all five districts and boroughs, keeps the county boundary intact and lets East Sussex move forward together. Brighton’s farcical counter-proposal risks delay and confusion, not least by proposing to cut across the boundaries of two county divisions and a parliamentary constituency. Its consultation does not even consider a westward expansion where the urban area of Brighton and Hove naturally continues; it goes straight into cutting up East Sussex. Here is the test for the Bill overall: does it move power and resources to people and places, or does it pull more strings into the Secretary of State’s hands? Does it strengthen scrutiny or sidestep it? Does it fix the finances or dodge them? At the moment, it falls short on all these counts. I hope the Minister can explain the answers to those challenges. Devolution should feel like power in people’s hands, not something being done to them.

• 2 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I was pleased to read that the Government are finally taking steps to rejoin the Erasmus+ programme—something for which the Liberal Democrats have been calling for some time. Will the Minister now set out a timetable mandate and expected terms for UK reassociation with that programme?

• 22 Jul 2025 · Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  I speak today in the tradition of using these debates to highlight issues facing constituents. Sir David Amess set a high bar in making the most of his opportunity to champion his constituents, and while we came from different political traditions, I respect the example that he set. Let us start with road safety. Over the last year, I have raised serious concerns about rural roads throughout my constituency. I have highlighted dangerous junctions on the A27, and recently backed Arlington parish council’s campaign to improve safety on the rural roads around Arlington and Upper Dicker. Elsewhere, communities have been left to take matters into their own hands. Those living along the C7, which runs through Kingston, Rodmell, Piddinghoe, Southease, Iford and Swanborough, have raised more than £20,000 just to fund a feasibility study as part of the “Safer C7” campaign. The fact that communities are having to crowdfund for something as fundamental as road safety speaks volumes. It is a damning indictment of national Government failure to deliver the infrastructure that our villages and rural communities need. Let me now turn to the issue of housing and planning. Housing remains one of the greatest pressures facing my community. Too many families are stuck in temporary accommodation while genuinely affordable homes remain out of reach. In areas such as mine, we urgently need high-quality housing in which people can actually afford to live. At the same time, we see poor planning decisions and underused sites wasting precious opportunities. I have raised the case of Talland Parade in Seaford directly with Ministers as a prime example of what happens when developers are allowed to bank brownfield sites in town centres to the detriment of communities. I am hopeful that promised new powers in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill will give local authorities the powers to act, at last, on cases such as this. We do need new homes, but they must come with the infrastructure to support them, along with proper consultation with local residents and a focus on affordability. I am glad that my local district council listened to local concerns, and chose not to include the Eton new town proposal in its draft local plan. That was absolutely the right decision. Speculative, large-scale developments of that kind, dropped into rural areas without proper infrastructure or consultation, do not serve our communities. Meanwhile, villages such as Ringmer are being bombarded with a constant stream of individual housing applications, with no investment in roads, schools or healthcare to match. That is not planning; it is placing pressure on communities that are already at breaking point. Transport provision is key to making planning decisions. I welcomed last week’s news of a direct rail service from Eastbourne to London Bridge, via Polegate, Berwick, Glynde, Lewes and Cooksbridge, which is a step in the right direction for rail connectivity across the south-east, but like many of my constituents in the area I was very unhappy to learn that it would not stop at Plumpton. My constituents deserve better than to be left behind in major transport decisions, and I will be objecting to the rail operator, GTR, and to the Department for Transport in the strongest terms. Finally, constituents regularly raise with me the ongoing and unacceptable closure of the west beach in Newhaven—the only stretch of sandy beach in our area. Even nearby coastal towns, such as the aforementioned and wonderous Eastbourne, cannot match up to our sandy stretch in Newhaven. Shut off by Newhaven Port & Properties, which is partly controlled by the French authorities, this treasured local space has been out of bounds to residents for too long. I have engaged directly with those responsible to demand answers and to push for the beach to be reopened. This is not just about a stretch of sand; it is about fairness, local pride, and the right of communities to enjoy what should be a shared public asset. Generations of local families have memories of happy summers spent on that beach. They should not have to look back wistfully; they should be able to return to it. We will keep fighting to reopen the west beach—enough is enough. None of these problems exists in isolation. The issues of road safety, GP access and housing all reveal a deeper failure of governance over many years. I will keep working with my local constituents, residents and campaign groups to get real change on the issues that matter, and to provide genuine representation for residents in Seaford, Newhaven, Lewes, Polegate and every village that I represent.

• 16 Jul 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q4. Severe pregnancy sickness—hyperemesis gravidarum, or HG—can mean vomiting more than 20 times a day. It causes physical discomfort, acute malnutrition and severe dehydration, which often leads to hospitalisation. It has profound and long-lasting mental health consequences. It was recently reported that a woman took her own life after being denied access to the only licensed treatment, Xonvea—tragically, her unborn child died too. The drug is licensed and available, yet women face a cruel postcode lottery to access it. Will the Prime Minister work urgently with the Department of Health and Social Care to end this scandal, so that every woman who needs Xonvea can get it, wherever she lives? Will he meet with me and campaigners to look at this as a matter of urgency?

• 15 Jul 2025 · SEND Provision: South-east England · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Sir Edward. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) on securing this important and timely debate. We all know that the SEND system is broken in this country—a point even acknowledged by the Prime Minister at a recent Prime Minister’s questions. Families in my constituency and across the south-east are in desperate need. Children are being let down, and councils such as East Sussex county council are under unbearable financial strain. Across my constituency, in Seaford, Lewes, Newhaven and Colgate, and across our villages, the reality is stark, and children are forced to travel unacceptable distances. One little boy in my constituency travels 56 miles daily to school in Hastings because school provision simply does not exist locally. We should bear in mind that East Sussex has a higher than average number of specialist provision schools, yet this is still taking place in the area. Multiple children still have no places for September. Imagine the anxiety and distress being faced by families right now. Colleagues have mentioned individuals coming to their surgeries to talk about this issue. Almost weekly at my advice surgeries, distressed parents speak to me about SEND provision in our area and a lack of spaces. Indeed, schools, including primary schools, in particular, have been in touch, concerned with the level of intake of children with special educational needs and disabilities—some are quite acute—and worried about how they are going to cope in the coming academic year. A local teacher I spoke to put it very well in relation to one of the structural challenges facing our SEND system: “Parents feel they have no choice but to fight for a full specialist place, because the so-called ‘facility’ secondaries can’t meet their needs.” The said that the primary to secondary “transition planning is broken and it leaves children vulnerable.” The situation facing one of my local families epitomises the crisis. Their child is severely disabled and cognitively delayed, and needs specialist schooling, yet despite unanimous agreement from the parents, nursery and mainstream primary school, the local authority insists that he attend a mainstream secondary school. It is July, and after months of battling bureaucracy, he still has no suitable place for September. Across East Sussex, nearly 5,000 pupils have EHCPs. Labour’s plan to strip away the legally enforceable rights that families rely on could leave more than 1,400 EHCP pupils in mainstream East Sussex schools vulnerable. We must be clear that children’s rights cannot be rolled back. We urgently call for a new national SEND body to oversee and fund the most complex cases, removing the postcode lottery once and for all. We need immediate investment in specialist and mainstream education, teacher training and support for local authorities. The system must put children and families first, because every child deserves better than what the previous Government offered them.

• 3 Jul 2025 · Women’s Football: Financial Viability · Hansard source

  More

  6. What steps her Department is taking to support the financial viability of women’s football.

• 3 Jul 2025 · Women’s Football: Financial Viability · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her response; I know she is aware of some of the financial challenges that my local club in Lewes faces. With England about to start the defence of their European title in Switzerland against France on Saturday, does she share my concern that, despite the phenomenal rise in popularity of the women’s game, domestic prize money for the women’s FA cup still falls woefully short of that for the men’s? It is frankly embarrassing that in 2025 we still tolerate that glaring inequality. Will she support my call for the Football Association and the Premier League to equalise the women’s FA cup prize fund, so that women footballers are rewarded equally for the same achievement as their male counterparts?

• 3 Jul 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  As my East Sussex neighbour, Madam Deputy Speaker, you are likely to be familiar with the issue that I want to raise. In Polegate in my constituency, there is a growing parking crisis. Local businesses and residents are suffering because of antisocial parking—often pavement parking—and a lack of effective enforcement. Will the Government make time for a debate on the impact of antisocial parking in towns like Polegate, and what more can the Government do to support effective enforcement in order to promote and support our high street businesses?

• 3 Jul 2025 · Community Cohesion · Hansard source

  More

  A really positive example of community cohesion in action is the Rewild the Church project, with the Lewes Climate Hub and churches in Lewes joining forces to tackle biodiversity loss and bring people together through their parishes. They are working towards the inspiring goal of rewilding 30% of Church-owned land by 2030. Will the Second Church Estates Commissioner join me in congratulating them on this important work, and support this ambition for the Church of England to lead by example in restoring nature and supporting local communities to come together in doing so?

• 3 Jul 2025 · Women’s State Pension Age: Financial Redress · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) for securing this debate. She spoke superbly and with great passion on the subject. December last year marked a shameful day for this Government, when millions of women born in the 1950s—women who have given a lifetime of service, hard work and care to their families, communities and country—were utterly betrayed. As ever, the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) gave a superb speech, but I take slight issue with one thing he said, which was that the Government did nothing. If only they had done nothing, we would be in a better situation. Instead, despite the clear evidence from the parliamentary ombudsman of maladministration by the Department for Work and Pensions, the Government decided that there would be no financial compensation— no justice, only betrayal. That was a choice that the Government made on behalf of these women—women who faced significant hardship because they were not properly informed about changes to the state pension age. An apology, while necessary, is simply not enough. A Government cannot apologise for maladministration and then refuse to put things right. It is disgraceful to acknowledge an injustice, but refuse to fix it. These women deserve fairness, they deserve dignity, and they deserve compensation. As other hon. Members have mentioned, we know exactly why the Government will not act. It comes down to money. For years, the Liberal Democrats have championed the cause of WASPI women, among others. We have consistently called for fair and proper compensation, in line with the ombudsman’s recommendations. In my constituency, I have seen at first hand how deeply this injustice has affected women’s lives. They have worked hard, planned carefully and trusted this Government to keep their promises, only to be badly let down. I will quickly share the story of my constituent, Helen from Seaford, who is part of my local WASPI group. She was shocked to hear about the changes in 2012, in a letter informing her that the age at which she was due to retire would rise from 60 to 65. Unbelievably, that was only two and a half years before she was due to retire, and it meant she had to work an extra six years to be able to support her daughter properly. Helen spent 50 years paying national insurance as a single parent, and she told me she was so angry that what she had worked for had been taken away from her. I am sure the House would agree that Helen’s resilience and determination are inspiring, but she should never have been placed in that position. This Government made a cynical calculation that these women can be ignored and that they would not fight back and would not keep pushing, but they underestimate the strength and determination of women across this country, including in my constituency, who have stood up and demanded fairness. This decision cannot and must not stand. It is a bitter irony that the Government are now fighting in court the very people they said they would stand up and fight for. I urge the Government to reconsider their position, to listen to reason and finally do the right thing and compensate these women now.

• 2 Jul 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q3. On Monday afternoon, a four-year-old girl was seriously injured after being hit by a car on Lewes Road, just off the A259 in Newhaven in my constituency. I can report to the House that she is recovering well in hospital. Residents in Newhaven, Seaford and nearby Sussex coastal towns have been warning about how unsafe these roads are. Indeed, the county council submitted a fully costed plan for safety improvements on the A259 to the Government, but funding remains blocked. So I am appealing to the Prime Minister directly: will he personally intervene to unblock the funding needed to make the A259 and surrounding roads safer, to ensure that there is never a repeat of such an incident?

• 25 Jun 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q3. The Government’s expansion of funded childcare from September is welcome, but early years settings face a critical staffing crisis that could make expanded provision practically impossible. Not enough applicants, a lack of qualifications, low salaries and high turnover mean that many nurseries are operating well below capacity. Many now find themselves operating at a loss, due to increased national insurance contributions. Can the Deputy Prime Minister outline what clear steps the Government are taking to address the crisis in early years staffing to ensure that all our children get the best possible start in life?

• 24 Jun 2025 · Department for Education · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on early education and childcare. Early years providers are facing an escalating financial crisis. The Government’s latest tax increases will add an average of £40,000 a year to staffing costs for early years providers. Hopscotch nurseries—a group operating across Sussex, including in Seaford in my constituency—estimates that increases to employment costs will add £140,000 to its wage bill, and this comes at a time when 84% of nurseries nationwide report that they cannot find suitable staff. Staffing accounts for nearly three quarters of their running costs, and these financial pressures mean nurseries face closure or fee hikes that families cannot afford. On recent visits to nurseries in my local community, I have heard from practitioners working with young children every day that, although the Government’s aim to expand funded childcare is laudable, there are simply not enough qualified staff available to deliver it. Not enough applicants, a lack of qualifications, low salaries and a high turnover have led to many nurseries operating at well below capacity. One nursery in Newhaven in my constituency recently told me that it takes only half the number of children it could take. This is not because of a lack of demand—far from it—but because of a lack of qualified staff to care for children safely. An Early Years Alliance poll of 1,000 nurseries in March found that two in five nurseries are set to reduce the number of Government-funded places for three and four-year-olds to cover rising costs, including the increases to the minimum wage and employer’s national insurance. This is the direct opposite of the Government’s stated desire to expand provision of funded hours in early years. As a parent of young children myself, I share the frustration at rising childcare fees, with childcare in the UK among the most expensive in the world. Private and voluntary nursery providers, which deliver the majority of early years education, are particularly vulnerable. Without urgent intervention, we risk a mass closure of facilities that are integral not just to child development, but to our local economies and communities. A survey this month by the Early Education and Childcare Coalition showed that nearly 20% of nurseries are operating at a loss. I urge Ministers to reconsider exempting early years providers from their national insurance increases to prevent nurseries from being pushed into closure. We cannot afford to lose more essential childcare places. This is also a question of opportunity and fairness. Investment in early childhood education has been repeatedly proven to significantly narrow achievement gaps, benefiting disadvantaged children. I support the Government’s aim to expand funded childcare and the provision of free school meals, but without adequate funding for providers, there is a real danger the Government could end up putting nurseries out of business and increase the strain on school budgets breaking even. I implore Ministers to find ways to support our nurseries, including an exemption from the Government’s national insurance hike, to deliver education and support to our children in a way that is financially sustainable for both parents and providers.

• 19 Jun 2025 · Access to Nature: Young People · Hansard source

  More

  The rivers and coastline in my constituency are treasured by local families and children, including my own, whether they are kayaking and paddleboarding on the Cuckmere and Ouse rivers or swimming off the beaches of Seaford bay, yet they are regularly blighted by sewage discharges courtesy of Southern Water. Will the Minister meet me to discuss our local campaign to secure bathing water status for the Cuckmere river and blue flag status for Seaford beach to reassure local families and visitors alike that we are taking water quality seriously, so that they can be confident that they can use these outdoor spaces safely?