Jim Dickson MP: speeches

Speeches

• 5 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Member give way?

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Minister represents a political party and the Opposition’s view has a wider perspective on the work that we are doing today. To try to carve this Bill out entirely from the wider appointments process seems odd when he represents a party with a Secretary of State and a party leader who take a wider view on these matters.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am a Crystal Palace season ticket holder.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  indicated dissent.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is not in the scope of the Bill.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Jeremy. I want to start by expressing my gratitude for the opportunity to be part of this Bill Committee. I again declare an interest as a season ticket holder at Crystal Palace for over 35 years, which has given me a chance to see the ups and downs of a football club and the perils of clubs going into administration. That has happened to Palace twice in just over 25 years, but that shows that clubs can sometimes bounce back. I hope, Sir Jeremy, that you will tolerate me briefly putting on the record my joy at having been at Wembley two weeks ago to watch the mighty Eagles win the FA cup—a high point in my time as a fan. I promise the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup that I will not turn the Committee into a clash of the south London giants over the next month or so. I warmly welcome the Bill. Fans and all those who value clubs as integral parts of local communities will fully support the establishment of the independent regulator and the three primary objectives of sustainability, resilience and protecting heritage. The enhanced owners and directors test; the club licensing system, which is proportionate and puts advocacy first; the oversight of financial distribution; and the backstop powers in the Bill are very important. Fan organisations are particularly pleased by the provisions requiring clubs to meet the fan engagement threshold. Clause 1 sets out the purpose of the Bill and defines sustainability. The hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup seeks to change that definition. I am curious why the Opposition want the definition of the sustainability of English football to be tied to, for example, its increasing TV viewership. Although I am sure that is well intentioned, I fear that it conflicts with other parts of amendment 96. While growing a TV audience is obviously important, if it is considered critical, I am sure that clubs will argue for even more late changes to fixture schedules to produce the best kick-off times for TV, or, as has started to happen in other leagues, to begin playing games abroad. Those things create major expense and inconvenience for fans and therefore will not meet the needs of present or future fans, which the amendment refers to. The amendment misses the point in another important respect by muddying the waters between success and sustainability. Across their history, the Premier League and the English Football League have been very successful in generating revenue. According to the football finance expert Kieran Maguire: “Since the Premier League was formed in 1992-93, its revenues have increased by 2,857%, whereas the Championship is at just over 1,000%”— also very healthy. Given that prices have doubled, from a consumer prices index perspective, that is great business. However, that has come alongside an inability to control costs. The most significant costs in the industry are wages. While Premier League revenues are up by 2,857% since 1992, wages have increased by over 4,000%. Mr Maguire also said: “Similarly, as far as the EFL Championship goes, if we take just one division, wages are up 1,400% compared with revenue of 1,000%...As a consequence, if we look at the figures for 2022-23…the 20 clubs in the Premier League lost a collective £836 million. In the Championship, on average the clubs were losing £20 million: League One, £4.1 million, League Two, £1.4 million; and in the National League, £970,000. All those clubs have been part of a spectacularly successful industry, of which we should be proud.” He added, as the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup has also said: “It has globalised the game of football as coming from the UK. There has been a collective inability to control costs.” –– [ Official Report, Football Governance Public Bill Committee, 14 May 2024; c. 5, Q1.] One of the results is that since the start of the Premier League, roughly 40% of clubs in the top four leagues have gone into administration, which further underscores the problem. It is little wonder that, according to Dr Christina Philippou from the University of Portsmouth: “More than half of the clubs in the top five leagues are technically insolvent, so if they were any other business, they would not be in existence.” –– [ Official Report, Football Governance Public Bill Committee, 14 May 2024; c. 7, Q4.] So why is it right for the Bill to focus on the broad definition of sustainability? It is because the fans and communities need these clubs to exist. Unless we root the definition of success in sustainability, rather than the other elements that the Opposition are trying to introduce, we will not see that happen.

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  If the number is 42 at the moment, as the Minister says, and the regulator is not yet up and running, might 50 not be an entirely inappropriate number for the work that the regulator ultimately has to do, as set out in the Bill?

• 3 Jun 2025 · Football Governance Bill [ Lords ] (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I think we all agree that any regulator, including this one, should be agile, proportionate and just large enough to do its job, but is it really the role of politicians to pluck figures out of the air based on rumour and conversations, and put them in a Bill in a way that ties the regulator to that figure forever and a day? I know it is a maximum figure, but should not politicians stick to the thing that they do best—setting regulation and making the law—rather than trying to specify the detail of individual organisations that have a job to do?

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

  More

  The hon. Lady is painting a picture that will be very familiar to my constituents in Dartford. In my case, we have deteriorating services under Kent county council, with 30 years of Conservative rule meaning that buses have got worse pretty much every year. I have written to the new Reform-led administration in Kent county council asking them to undertake to use the powers in the Bill to improve bus services in Dartford and across Kent. Would she agree that the new Bill offers huge opportunities for local authorities to improve bus services and transport networks for the benefit of residents in my constituency and hers?

• 22 May 2025 · Diego Garcia Military Base · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for setting out very clearly why this is the right thing to do for the UK. Could he share with the House any threat assessments that he has, indicating that without guaranteed access to Diego Garcia—and “guaranteed” is the key word—China and other countries could attempt to expand their regional military presence, building installations close to the base?

• 20 May 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I also very much welcome the clause, which rectifies the fragmentation of housing and transport and therefore the inability to co-ordinate them. It will be hugely important to the new towns that the Government are planning in order to fulfil our housing targets. I have one query for the Minister. The clause covers local transport authorities and their relationship with development corporations. Did he consider including a provision on the relationship between development corporations and national transport bodies such as National Highways? I can foresee situations in which co-operation between those bodies will be necessary to achieve the aims of the development corporation. In such a situation, would he use powers to ensure that National Highways co-operates with the development corporation, or at least broker the conversation to enable that to happen?

• 20 May 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eleventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I welcome these measures to make development corporations fit for purpose. In my constituency, as members of the Committee may know, Ebbsfleet development corporation is building Ebbsfleet garden city. That experience shows how important it is that we align infrastructure delivery with housing growth to ensure that communities are supported from day one with everything that they need to live full and healthy lives. I welcome the clause. Development corporations outside Ebbsfleet, across the country, are an extremely important tool to get the right, well-balanced developments planned and built, so that they become communities. The clauses in part 4 give development corporations the flexibility to adapt, each one to a unique circumstance. I have a couple of questions for the Minister to come back on if possible. First, given that development corporations are time-limited, what consideration has been given to the need for them to plan for their legacy, and to how their newly-built amenities will be catered for after closure, especially given the financial challenges faced by local government? Secondly, I know there is some desire in the sector for development corporations to have an explicit aim to provide upskilling and training for local residents, so that the economic benefits of their work can be shared across the local area. Have the Government looked at that, or might they consider looking at that in future?

• 20 May 2025 · Government Travel Advice: Laos · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This issue does not just affect young people. It is important that we get messages across to young people, and I am suggesting a variety of ways to do that, but travellers of all ages could be at risk from methanol poisoning, and other alcohol tampering and spiking. I will also suggest some ways that the Government could deal with that issue. I would like the Government, as part of their ongoing work, to reform the curriculum, perhaps through personal, social, health and economic education, and to consider how we can build awareness among young people of how to travel safely. If they are looking for inspiration, they might want to look at the Australian campaign and lessons on alcohol safety. I know that Simone’s friend Bethany currently has a petition on the parliamentary website to that effect. I appreciate that the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has updated the health section of the travel advice on its website, but I hope that we might be able to review what could be done to make the warnings clearer and more explicit, and that information more readily available. The Government’s Travel Aware website has an informative section on methanol poisoning, but could more be done to make that advice and guidance better known to young people before they travel? Someone really has to search for it to find it. I also hope that the Government might explore whether one of the big players in the travel industry—we all know that big brand names are involved in the travel industry—might consider funding an awareness-raising campaign to educate travellers about how to stay safe as they explore. I look forward to the Minister’s response. I hope that she may be able to answer some of the questions I have raised, and further reassure Simone’s family that everything possible is being done to protect and inform young people of the dangers of methanol poisoning. I commit not just to listening to the response to this debate, but to continuing the campaign to make sure that the different parts of Government that have to work together to solve this problem genuinely do that.

• 20 May 2025 · Government Travel Advice: Laos · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that moving intervention. Our hearts go out to Kirsty’s family; it was a pleasure to meet her mother just now. I pay tribute to them for the work they have been doing since their loss. I agree very much with the hon. Member that more needs to be done to strengthen the curriculum, particularly to ensure that young people are aware of the risks involved in methanol. But there is much more that we think the Government can do, and I will suggest some ways in which they can do that later in the debate. Following Cheznye Emmons’s tragic loss in Indonesia, Cheznye’s family, including her mum Pamela and her sister Measha, have been campaigning through their “Chez—Save A Life” campaign to warn of the dangers of counterfeit alcohol. I hope we can use this debate—I know other Members wish to participate—as an opportunity to widen awareness of the significant danger that methanol poisoning can pose. That is especially crucial for travellers heading to countries where organised crime, as I said, seeks to profit from using methanol as a cheap way to dilute spirits. I hope that there will soon be progress in the case of the death of Simone and other tourists who died in Laos. I hope very much that those responsible will be swiftly brought to justice, but I know that the case is ongoing and the outcome is uncertain. I am optimistic that with the Government’s support we can take important steps to prevent more families going through what Simone’s family has experienced. I know they would like to see the dangers of methanol much more widely communicated, especially to young people and other inexperienced travellers heading out on those incredibly important first trips abroad. In Australia, the Government are taking steps to increase awareness of alcohol-related risks in overseas travel and are launching a dedicated advertising push to reach young Australians. The Smartraveller hub is a website provided by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. It will roll out a specific marketing campaign to raise awareness and educate Australians on the signs of methanol poisoning and how to protect themselves from drink spiking, and on broader alcohol safety, as well as warning young people that they must travel knowing the risks and watch out for their mates.

• 20 May 2025 · Government Travel Advice: Laos · Hansard source

  More

  It is indeed the case that not enough awareness is currently out there among citizens of all ages travelling from the UK to places where organised crime regularly doctors drinks. Part of the mission of this debate and our conversations with the Minister and the families is to raise awareness and find ways that the Government can help to do that.

• 20 May 2025 · Government Travel Advice: Laos · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Government safety advice for visiting Laos. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I am grateful for the chance to lead this debate on the Government’s safety advice for visiting Laos and to raise awareness of the dangers of methanol poisoning. Late last year, the family of Simone White contacted me to alert me to her tragic case and their worries about a lack of awareness among young people of the dangers posed by counterfeit alcohol. As any Members present who have seen the media coverage will know, Simone was travelling with her friend Bethany in Laos, as many young people from the UK and other countries do. They were staying in the town of Vang Vieng, a regular fixture on the backpackers’ trail around south-east Asia, when they drank free shots that they were offered in a hostel. The next day, both felt unwell and initially thought that they had food poisoning, but a few days later, Simone tragically died in hospital, the victim of methanol poisoning. I have since had the opportunity to meet Simone’s family and have heard what a wonderful young woman she was, with a brilliant life ahead of her. When attending her funeral in January, it was clear from the eulogies delivered the kind of esteem in which she was held by friends and family. What really struck me was the sense of determination that came through from her friends and family that, no matter what, when she set her mind to do something, she would go out there and achieve it, whether that was playing a musical instrument or deciding at 13 that she wanted to become a lawyer, as she subsequently successfully went on to do. The eulogies also told of a keen sportswoman who regularly played football and netball, as well as finishing several half-marathons to raise money for good causes. A testament to her character was the voluntary legal work she took on outside her job, helping victims of domestic abuse. She also became a covid vaccine volunteer. I pay tribute to the courage of Simone’s family—her mum Sue, her dad Neil, and Tom and Amanda, and their wider families—as well as to her friend Bethany, who was with her in Laos. They have shown courage in fighting for justice for Simone and in trying to raise awareness so that other families do not lose loved ones in the same tragic circumstances. I welcome members of Bethany’s family and others involved in tragic cases involving methanol to the Public Gallery this afternoon—thank you for joining us. Simone was not the only young person to die at the hostel, with two young Australians, Holly Bowles and Bianca Jones, two young Danish women, Anne-Sofie Orkild Coyman and Freja Vennervald Sorensen, and an American, James Louis Hutson, losing their lives as well. All our hearts go out to their families, who lost loved ones in the most difficult circumstances. As Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said in November, this is “every parent’s worst nightmare”. I put on record my gratitude to the Minister for taking the time to meet Simone’s family earlier this month, and for her replies to my many letters on the subject. I appreciate the support that the Minister’s Department, along with Kent police, have offered to the family during this awful time. Issues with the addition of methanol to alcohol are not confined to Laos, with reports of over 30 deaths in Turkey earlier this year. Nor is the issue new: just over 10 years ago, Cheznye Emmons was travelling in Indonesia with her boyfriend when she drank gin that had been mixed with methanol. The inquest into her death heard that she suffered sudden blindness and convulsions, and died five days later.

• 19 May 2025 · Mental Health Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I thank everyone who has taken part in the debate, from the Secretary of State onwards. It has been moving and inspiring to see the House united on the need for change. It has been particularly useful for me to benefit from the professional expertise and the personal experience of so many Members who have spoken. My hon. Friend the Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Kevin McKenna), the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer), my hon. Friends the Members for Ashford (Sojan Joseph) and for Thurrock (Jen Craft) and the hon. Member for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) have all educated and moved me with their experience and knowledge. It has long been known that the Mental Health Act 1983 is not fit for purpose, and I pay tribute to all the work that has been done so far, including the excellent review undertaken by Professor Sir Simon Wessely, commissioned by the former Member of Parliament for Maidenhead when she was Prime Minister. I know that the intent of the Bill both to strengthen the voice of patients and add statutory weight to their right to be involved in the planning for their care and to inform their choices about the treatment that they receive is strongly welcomed by Members on both sides of the House. Also welcome are the steps that the Government have taken since the election to start to transform mental health services with new funding—mentioned by the Secretary of State—and the plans to recruit 8,500 new mental health workers. Before I deal with the substance of the Bill, may I ask the Minister whether, when he winds up the debate, he will be able to provide some reassurance about the future of the patient and carer race equality framework, which I believe is vital to the achievement of equality of outcome in mental health, and which I believe would be more effective as part of the Bill than simply as guidance? I know that that is the strongly held view of many of the experts by experience who have worked on PCREF. One thing I know from my time in a previous role, when I helped to develop mental health services in Lambeth over two decades, is that a disproportionate number of people from African and Caribbean-heritage communities are detained under the Mental Health Act, as has been said by others. Figures highlighted by Mind show that rates of detention for black or black British groups are over three times those for the rest of the population. Similarly, black or black British groups are more than 10 times more likely than white groups to be subject to community treatment orders. In Lambeth, working with organisations such as Black Thrive—set up by my great former colleague Dr Jacqui Dyer, among others, to radically change mental health services in south London and elsewhere—we showed that hearing people’s voices, early intervention, reducing stigma among African-Caribbean communities, and focusing on keeping people well via work and training provided by membership organisations, such as Mosaic Clubhouse, can prevent people from becoming ill and from tragically coming into the mental health system for the first time via the criminal justice system. I welcome the changes in the Bill and the commitment from the Minister in the other place to improve data on outcomes and on patients’ experience of community treatment orders. Despite the passing of the Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Act 2018—otherwise known as Seni’s law—which was brought forward by my right hon. Friend the Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed), the use of force in mental health settings remains too frequent, and that must be addressed as well. Prevention work and intervention to address mental health needs at the earliest possible stage are critical, because if someone faces mental health problems when they are young, it can hold them back at school, damage their potential and leave them with lifelong consequences. That is why I warmly welcome the work that the Government are doing to bring vital services into schools so that they can intervene early, support pupils and help prevent conditions from becoming severe. It is really encouraging that mental health support teams should reach 100% coverage of pupils by 2029-30—the end of this Parliament. Young people in Dartford, where I ran a well-supported engagement event last month, will absolutely welcome the introduction of Young Futures hubs in communities in England to deliver support for teenagers who are at risk of being drawn into crime or facing mental health challenges by providing open-access mental health support for children and young people in communities. I have seen that approach achieve excellent results at the Well Centre, a mental health centre run for young people in Herne Hill as part of Lambeth Together’s care partnership. I very much look forward to seeing this legislation progress through the House and become law with the support of all Members. I will support it 100% as it does so.

• 14 May 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. As we have seen, there are very many amendments to this part of the Bill, which speaks to the fact that it is one of the most important parts of the legislation the Government are moving through. It is absolutely necessary that it should happen, but I want to make a quick point about infrastructure that is pertinent to this amendment. As the Minister knows, and the Committee may know, I represent Ebbsfleet Garden City in Dartford: a new community that has arisen from no homes in about 2015 to around 5,000 now, and is due to be 15,000 by the middle of the next decade. We have seen with Ebbsfleet Garden City the importance of social and physical infrastructure being built alongside homes. Generally, the corporation there has done a good job in making sure that there are schools, recreation areas, community spaces and medical facilities; the timing has not always been brilliant, and sometimes the growth of the homes has outstripped the provision of infrastructure, but that infrastructure does eventually get delivered. It is extremely important that the Minister gives an assurance, in line with what the amendment, I know, is seeking to do. I do not know whether the precise format that the amendment suggests is the right way to do it, but it is vital that we see that social and physical infrastructure grow at the same time as the housing.

• 14 May 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member is helping me to make my point. The only difference I have with him is that I know that the Government intend to ensure that infrastructure appears at the same time as homes and the Minister will provide reassurance on that. It is vital that that happens, via either a development corporation with those powers, or the spatial development strategies that we are discussing. Let us ensure that we do build the physical and social infrastructure at the same time as homes, with the examples of generally good development we see in Ebbsfleet Garden City reproduced elsewhere, as the Government meet their ambitious plans to build 1.5 million homes during this Parliament.

• 13 May 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Just before I speak to the amendment, I will say that I fully support what the Government are doing here. As a former member of a local authority, I have seen good training, but in other contexts I have also seen very poor training for planning committee members. I know that most local authorities have a scheme in place, which is obviously welcome, but it is variable. Having some national guidance and trialling it in legislation is extremely important. My point on the amendment is that accessibility is vital. I hope it will appear in guidance that the Department produces further to the legislation. We might wish to see a whole range of other considerations in that guidance, too, but I hope this one will be in there. Perhaps the Minister will reassure us that these important issues will be included in guidance. He might make the case that it is much better to have them in guidance because it can be changed regularly, rather than in primary legislation, which is changed via a much more torturous process. It would be interesting to have the Minister’s insights on the full range of the guidance.

• 13 May 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I fully support what the Government intend to do in this clause. Those of us who have worked in local authorities or have supported the development industry over many years will know that there are many occasions when statutory deadlines are not hit, reports do not go to committee at the right time to enable consent within an agreed timescale, and reports have to be deferred because they have not been written well enough by an overstretched planning department. I have a couple of questions for the Minister about the arrangements that will be introduced through this legislation. Will there be a backstop for local authorities that do not put a regime in place? Will he consider allowing local planning authorities and developers to agree bespoke fees for applications to be determined on a shorter timescale? Is the use of planning performance agreements, which are currently in common use, affected by the new legislation? What performance management arrangements do the Government want local authorities to put in place to justify the fee changes?

• 13 May 2025 · Mansion House Accord · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the accord and the Minister’s words. People in Dartford are awaiting further news of a funding package for the lower Thames crossing, which the Government consented recently and is incredibly welcome to residents there. Does the Minister agree that this is just the sort of shovel-ready infrastructure project which pension funds could invest in both for the benefit of their savers and to drive economic growth for constituents including my residents?

• 6 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T9. Far too many promises made by the last Government—promises that care would be moved out of hospitals and into the community—turned out to be hollow. From speaking to residents in Dartford, I know that hospital and community services have struggled to keep pace with new housing developments in the constituency. I am pleased to say that later this year in Dartford we will be seeing an expansion of our state-of-the-art community diagnostic centre, taking care closer to where people live. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is the start of Labour getting on with finally delivering that big shift, and will he visit Dartford with me—

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Is the hon. Member aware that Cavendish, the organisation that produced the report, is a company that undertakes consultations? It might just be in its interest to make the case that consultation is not at fault for the delays. Does she agree that the five separate consultations over 15 years that were required—or not required, in my view—for the lower Thames crossing were excessive?

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister, like me, recall the evidence we heard last week from the chair of the National Infrastructure Commission? A report written by the organisation in 2023 said that one of the reasons for the extravagant delays to nationally significant infrastructure projects was “disproportionate consultation”. My constituents are acutely aware of that issue because they have had to wait more than 15 years for the lower Thames crossing to be consented, partly as a result of the very disproportionate consultation that Sir John Armitt referred to. Does the Minister agree that the clauses and amendments he is proposing will provide a significant change to the speed at which NSIPs take place, which will benefit those who are currently suffering as a result of the lack of infrastructure in their area?