John Slinger MP: speeches

Speeches

• 10 Feb 2026 · Urgent care provision in Rugby · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the investment that has expanded and improved services at the Hospital of St Cross in Rugby, but my constituents want urgent treatment to improve further and to include more doctor-led services. I have raised this issue with Ministers and in the House. Locally, I have convened roundtables with stakeholders, including community health organisations, councillors and campaigners, to ensure their voices are heard by local health leaders. I have asked these leaders when their review of urgent emergency care will conclude; now I expect local health leaders to take note and, more importantly, to take action. The petitioners therefore request that: “the House of Commons urge the Government to work with NHS Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board to ensure that urgent care provision at the Hospital of St Cross…is retained and enhanced, to include a doctor led urgent care service. And the petitioners remain, etc.” Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the constituency of Rugby Declares that the continuing investment in services at the Hospital of St Cross, a much-loved local hospital at the heart of our community is welcome; further declares that, as shown by recent demonstrations, members of the community in Rugby are concerned about ensuring the continued provision of urgent treatment from this site, and that these concerns have been raised at consultation events and meetings with health leaders; and further declares that there is not yet clarity as to how the Integrated Care Board’s review of urgent care will affect the Hospital of St Cross. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to work with NHS Coventry and Warwickshire Integrated Care Board to ensure that urgent care provision at the Hospital of St Cross, Rugby is retained and enhanced, to include a doctor led urgent care service. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003162]

• 4 Feb 2026 · Construction Industry Training Board: Funding · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing this very important topic to the Floor of the House. Does he agree that anything that can be done to support businesses and employers in training young people must be done? When I visited my local college, Rugby college, I was informed that it is increasingly difficult to encourage employers to provide work experience time, particularly for T-level students, who need 315 hours. I wonder whether the Minister might reflect on any additional support that the Government can give to employers to incentivise them to do that.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Town and City Centre Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I will make two brief points—one per minute. The first is around Rugby town centre and how the police officers, community wardens and BID rangers all work together to ensure that it is safe. Will the Minister look at whether borough or district council-run community wardens can play a really powerful role in defeating antisocial behaviour and criminality at the sub-policing level? My second point is about children and young people carrying out antisocial behaviour and criminality in our town centres. There was a recent case in Rugby in which the police made several arrests of young people for antisocial behaviour and criminality. Those officers made every possible effort to work collaboratively across agencies to avoid going down the criminal route with arrests. In some circumstances, however, it is sadly necessary to make arrests, particularly when members of the public, visitors, businesses and others are badly affected. Will the Minister set out her thoughts on the Government’s approach to antisocial behaviour and criminality among young people, given that the respect orders in the Crime and Policing Bill apply only to people over 16? That potentially leaves a gap for powers available to police and others in that regard. We need to ensure there is no lawlessness on our streets. Irrespective of the age of the perpetrator, we do everything we can to avoid arrests, but we must ensure that police have the powers they need.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Iran · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that the brutal, violent and illegal repression of Iranian civilians by this regime shows just how difficult it is for civilian populations to rise up against their oppressors, as is so often demanded by people around the world? Would he pay tribute to the young women who have been protesting on the streets with great courage at this incredibly difficult time for their country?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am assuming that the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth is opposing the policy before us today. So you actually do not want to take the measure that we are going to take—

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with my hon. Friend that it is insulting, and it was surprising that the shadow Secretary of State could not cite any evidence at all. Regardless of any two-child limit, parents will of course still have children, and those children must never be punished for the circumstances of their birth. The best way to support them, the single most effective way to lift them out of poverty, is this Bill. Some Members across the House and some across our country implied that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor does not care about child poverty. They implied and claimed that she does not care about economic inactivity and our moral duty. That accusation was not just wrong; it was deeply disrespectful, particularly given her long record of campaigning on these issues.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention; I always enjoy them. I found this one particularly amusing—and I very much respect and like the right hon. Gentleman—given that I was not actually quoting. I did not say, “And I quote”. I am allowed to use words without having to justify every single one. [ Interruption. ] The right hon. Gentleman knows full well that I was referring to the general view of hon. and right hon. Members in this House. [ Interruption. ] I think I have dealt with that—it was a good effort, but I will move on. This measure, made possible by the policies of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor—let’s not forget that—will lift 450,000 children out of poverty, and I am proud to say that that includes 2,020 children in Rugby. Let me be clear: lifting the two-child limit is not the whole answer; it is part of the Government’s wider mission. I say to people outside this Chamber, “Do not let the doomsters, the gloomsters, the cynics and the propagandists mislead you.” In just 19 months, as part of that wider mission, this Labour Government have achieved the following: day-one rights for paternity and parental leave; Best Start family hubs bringing health, parenting and wellbeing under one roof; 30 hours of funded childcare from nine months old; free breakfast clubs, with 405 children in my constituency of Rugby benefiting from the April roll-out; minimum and living wages up; record investment in schools; apprenticeships reformed; full funding for apprenticeships for under-25s in our small and medium-sized enterprises; the youth guarantee, mentioned by the Chancellor in the recent Budget; ensuring routes into work, training and education; and Young Futures hubs and youth hubs. May I please ask Ministers on the Front Bench whether I can have one of those hubs in Rugby? Helping children is about more than lifting the two-child cap. This Government do not, and should not, define our moral purpose solely by the pounds we give to those in need—although we should of course give money to those in need. Unlike the Conservatives, we will do those things I listed and, of course, spend money on lifting the two-child limit. We are glad to do that because it is not just about poverty in financial terms; it is about the poverty of aspiration for our children, which all too often results from the policies of the parties of the right, and it is about the poverty of ambition for what a Government can and should do to unleash the potential of all children. We reject that poverty too. Opportunity, prosperity and dignity for all cannot come—whether through the animal spirits of the economy or the progressive policies of a Government such as ours—unless child poverty is ended once and for all. In conclusion, we are the Labour party; we want to give young people the skills and opportunities, and to create the ecosystem, that will unleash their potential. That starts by preventing their early years from being blighted unnecessarily by poverty. We also stand for compassion and support for those who really need it, and that is what we will provide. Ending the two-child limit, and the wider measures I have outlined, are vital to ensuring that our young people become the architects of their futures, not merely tenants living in a world shaped by the older generations, by vested interests and, indeed, by those who are opposed to this Bill.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I will not give way. The arguments we heard about parental responsibility, the claim that people have children to get benefits, are short-sighted, wrong and, frankly, insulting. The shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately), could not cite any evidence for her claims.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  That is indeed the statistic that I was reaching for in my notes, and I thank my hon. Friend. Even now, Opposition Members would undo progress. They would reintroduce the limit; they would make things worse. And as for Reform UK— [Hon. Members: “Where are they?”] Exactly! Where are they? We have seen populist policy hokey-cokey already today. It was probably taking place while the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin) was speaking.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The child poverty crisis that we inherited from the previous Government is, indeed, stark. In 2014, 16.5% of children were in relative poverty and by 2024, that had risen to 21.8%. The simple truth is that Conservative Members oppose a measure that lifts children out of poverty. They have not changed. Successive Conservative Governments—and yes, the Liberal Democrats, who cannot get off scot-free, given the coalition—carried out policies that led to hundreds of thousands more children being pushed into poverty. To be precise, the figure is 900,000 more , leaving 4.5 million children living in poverty across our country. That is a shameful number, as large as the population of countries such as Croatia or Ireland. By the end of the Conservatives’ time in office, almost a third of children in the UK were living in poverty. That tells us exactly who they prioritised and who they did not. Even now, they would undo progress.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend agree that fecklessness is not a trait exhibited only by poorer people in our country?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  It is perfectly acceptable and reasonable for a Government such as ours to take measures in Budgets to provide the resources necessary to enact a policy, as this Bill would do, that will lift so many children out of poverty. I think the hon. Member makes a fairly fatuous point, if I may say so.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I could not have put it better, particularly the point my hon. Friend made about enjoying a pint. I too enjoy a pint, but linking something as serious as tackling child poverty to the price of a pint in our pubs is trivialising an incredibly serious topic— [ Interruption. ] The hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) is speaking from a sedentary position. Would he like to intervene?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend. I was very moved by his speech, which he delivered from a position of great knowledge and great concern built up over a very impressive career. He is absolutely right. I, of course, would not recommend people to take too seriously policies that are, as I said, populist policy hokey-cokey. To scrap or to reinstate? It is hard to tell. What we have seen from Reform UK is the concept of political triangulation being stretched absolutely to breaking point. In fact, it has broken, with some of the populist nonsense that Reform has spoken about in recent days.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The number of children— [ Interruption. ] The number of children in poverty rose substantially.

• 3 Feb 2026 · Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker. The hon. Gentleman is opposing the policy that will reduce child poverty by an enormous number. Conservative Members have not really even tried to defend their record. Perhaps that is because it is indefensible. Their decisions were not accidents; they were choices. The consequences were known, the damage was predictable and the outcome is now painfully clear. Years of ignoring child poverty have left this country with many problems, including the number of children not in education, employment or training. That is an inheritance that this Government are now tackling, not least through the excellent work of Alan Milburn and his investigation into work and child poverty that was commissioned by my right hon. Friend the Work and Pensions Secretary. Children are being condemned to a lifetime of economic inactivity, which is bad for them and their future wealth. As the “Keep Britain Working” report found, someone leaving the workforce in their 20s would lose up to £1 million in earnings. It is also bad for their health. Having four more years in education on average relates to a 16% reduction in mortality rates and reduces the risk of heart disease and diabetes. It is also bad for the country—all that untapped potential and all that unnecessary benefit spend.

• 2 Feb 2026 · China and Japan · Hansard source

  More

  Like the Prime Minister, I am a musician and a strong advocate for the creative arts sector. Could he set out to the House a little more about why he took so many creative arts and cultural organisations with him to China? Does he agree that Britain is the best in the world at the creative arts, that they are good for trade, good for jobs and good for our young people in particular, and that the kind of visit he has been on will help with that, as will investment at home and abroad?

• 2 Feb 2026 · US Department of Justice Release of Files · Hansard source

  More

  Could the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister explain what steps this Government have taken to make sure that the voices of the victims and survivors of sexual abuse and violence are heard by those in power?

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the even more loyal hon. and gallant Member for his history lesson, but it does not change the fundamentals: 85% of the negotiations took place under the Conservatives. In November 2022, the right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly), who was then Foreign Secretary, said: “Through negotiations, taking into account relevant legal proceedings, it is our intention to secure an agreement on the basis of international law to resolve all outstanding issues”. —[ Official Report , 3 November 2022; Vol. 721, c. 354WS.] In February 2025, a spokesperson for the Leader of the Opposition insisted that she understood that negotiations over the islands were needed due to the international legal position. This motion is obvious political opportunism. These are hon. and right hon. Members of this House of Commons who raised no objections in Parliament, filed no critical questions and voiced no concerns on social media. Only after leaving government did they do so, but with no plan of their own. On the matter of the sovereignty of the Chagossians, the Conservatives’ view is logically inconsistent. They want the UK to retain sovereignty, but they attack the Government for not giving the Chagossians the right to self-determination. They ruled out resettlement. Some Chagossians want to return to Diego Garcia, so are Conservative Members calling for them to be returned to that island, with the inevitable issues that that would cause for the operation of the vital base? Opposition Members have gone rather silent on that point.

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. and even-more-loyal-than-I Member for his intervention. We spar across the House—

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  Before I turn to the subject of the Opposition day debate, I must comment on the answer that the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel), gave to the right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart)—a Member I respect hugely. She mentioned climbing the greasy pole, possibly even in relation to me. It is always amusing when people who have served in the Cabinets of multiple Conservative Prime Ministers accuse Back-Bench Members of somehow being involved in climbing a greasy pole. It is just very, very amusing. [ Interruption. ] I thank the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) for his comment; I understand he also did pretty well in the past. This motion is the Conservatives playing politics with national security—their friends in the other place using a wrecking amendment to block the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill being a prime example of that. Conservative Members have never been able to answer this question: if there was no problem with British sovereignty and operation of the base, why did they begin the negotiations in the first place?

• 28 Jan 2026 · British Indian Ocean Territory · Hansard source

  More

  The sovereignty of the Chagossians is a sensitive and delicate issue which we are attempting to deal with, as my hon. Friend the Minister set out. We have established a contact group. Many meetings have taken place, and I strongly endorse those steps to give respect to the Chagossian people for what has happened to them. The Conservatives used only £1.6 million of the £40 million support fund for the Chagossian people, which hardly indicates that when they were in office the interests of the Chagossian people were their No. 1 priority. In conclusion, this motion is political opportunism of the worst kind, because it concerns national security and the British national interest, and the Conservatives really should not be playing party political games with that. Nor should they be using words like “surrender” with such abandon, as the shadow Foreign Secretary does, because that implies things that are simply not true and it is whipping up public concern, which is totally unnecessary, particularly regarding British national interest. That is why I am very glad to oppose this opportunistic motion before the House. I commend the Minister on her speech.

• 28 Jan 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q3. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that the good work of this Labour Government to get the NHS back on its feet, with waiting lists down—they are down by 2,400 in my constituency—as well as ambulance waits down and prescription charges frozen, could be put at risk by Reform UK, as was confirmed at the weekend, when the last-but-one defector, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), was asked about a private health insurance system and replied, “I don’t object to that”?

• 27 Jan 2026 · Women’s Safety: Walking, Wheeling, Cycling and Running · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) for her assiduous campaigning and for bringing this important issue to the Chamber. This is a problem suffered by women but caused by men—not all men, of course—and men must be the main part of the solution. Women’s spaces are being constricted. Women are forced to take exercise in more public places and to avoid footpaths and canal towpaths, and parents of daughters will have had those conversations with them. However, when they move into those more public places, which are better lit and supposedly safer, they face intimidation, catcalling and the like. That is a total outrage, as my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) said. If it were happening to men, I can assure Members that it would be dealt with very rapidly. Women are adapting their behaviour, but it is men’s behaviour and attitudes that need adapting, confronting, changing and—yes—on occasion prosecuting. Many men and boys do not even know they are doing anything wrong, but they are intimidating women, and shrinking their status and freedom as citizens. We therefore need a multifaceted approach, and that of course is what the Government are taking through their VAWG strategy, encompassing education, public education, police and criminal justice system work, and more. This is clearly not something that can be prosecuted out of existence, but part of the challenge is to defeat the defeatism, and more can and is being done. If we mention catcalling, people instinctively say, “That can’t be dealt with; How could you prosecute it?” However, as we heard in relation to the Jog On campaign, it is possible for police to take action. I want to touch briefly on the work of Warwickshire police in Rugby. They have a safer neighbourhood team that carries out VAWG walks; an enhanced policing initiative on Friday and Saturday nights that promotes Ask for Angela; and Project Vigilant, in which officers are trained to detect predatory behaviour. They have also set up a working group that looks at surveys from the parkrun and walking groups to get data so that they can work out whether they would like to carry out an operation similar to the Jog On operation carried out by Surrey police. They also do a lot of education in schools. We need to ensure that there are no no-go areas for women and girls in our society, and to commit to work more to tackle the misogynistic, predatory behaviour of some men and boys. They need to be the people who feel worried and intimidated when they go into public spaces—or any other spaces—with the attitudes we have talked about and perpetuate them.

• 26 Jan 2026 · NHS Urgent Care: Staffordshire · Hansard source

  More

  I note what my hon. Friend says about his integrated care board. I have very positive meetings with my ICB, but a similar situation is affecting the town of Rugby, which I represent. The urgent treatment centre is nurse-led, and we very much want there to be a doctor-led treatment centre. A review is under way, but my constituents and I are simply not aware of its end date. That causes the kind of concern around services that you talk about—