Manuela Perteghella MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Sept 2026 · Tourism: Overnight Visitor Levy · Hansard source

  More

  Stratford-upon-Avon is one of the country’s most important visitor destinations. It attracts millions of visitors each year, supporting local businesses, theatres, heritage attractions and jobs across my constituency. The all-party parliamentary group for hospitality and tourism, of which I am a member, heard evidence that a 5% visitor levy could reduce tourism spending and employment. Will the Minister commit to ensuring that any future levy is subject to meaningful consultation with the sector and local residents, and to the transparent ringfencing of revenues for investment in our local area?

• 14 Sept 2026 · Water Sector: Public Ownership · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker. I speak today on behalf of not just my constituents but my rivers. The Avon, Alne, Arrow and Stour in my Stratford-on-Avon constituency are part of the ecosystem of the mighty Avon. They are all central to our communities, wellbeing, local environment and wildlife. However, the current privatised water system has failed the public and the environment. First, I want to thank the many citizen science projects in my constituency and the campaign groups across the country. Without their tireless work and water testing, much of this scandal would have remained hidden. That community effort is also matched by growing public anger about sewage discharge into rivers and seas, and about executives receiving large bonuses while customer bills rise and rise. A model of public ownership could be for the water companies to become mutually owned. That would mean greater accountability, with a focus on public benefit rather than shareholder profit; executive boards that include environmental experts and local citizens groups; and a greater investment in infrastructure, with any profits reinvested into the water system. Public ownership would make it much easier to manage water collectively, as a social good rather than a commodity. That would make solutions such as sustainable drainage systems, sponge cities and controlling pollution at source not only feasible but easier to implement. We in Stratford-on-Avon want clean, thriving waterways, and we will not stop campaigning until this mess is sorted out.

• 9 Sept 2026 · Jaguar Land Rover: Redundancies · Hansard source

  More

  This announcement is a devastating blow for my constituents who are employed by JLR, and they will be incredibly worried for their future and their families, so what discussions have the Government had with JLR and the affected authorities—not just the West Midlands combined authority, because JLR is present in Warwickshire as well—regarding support for employees at risk of redundancy, and what measures will the Government put in place to help affected workers secure alternative employment?

• 7 Sept 2026 · Local Government Reorganisation · Hansard source

  More

  This sudden U-turn is greatly disappointing for my constituency, after so much work by council officials, residents, councillors and other partners, and after so much money wasted on LGR costs. Given that the two-unitary model in Warwickshire—South Warwickshire and North Warwickshire—was championed by my constituents, the majority of local council leaders and the majority of Warwickshire MPs, will the Secretary of State reassure us all regarding the timescale for this review? Above all, will she reassure us that the decision will respect the democratic input of the people of Warwickshire who contributed to the previous LGR process?

• 7 Sept 2026 · Draft Licensing Act 2003 (Mandatory Licensing Conditions) (Amendment) Order 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. The Liberal Democrats are supportive of the order. Individuals should be able to have the option to verify their age digitally, but we want to make it clear that doing so must not replace the use of physical ID. The option must always be retained, thereby giving young people the freedom to choose. It is important that the protections are robust and contain adequate safeguards to prevent misuse and ensure that digital identities are genuine. Will the Minister therefore set out whether she is satisfied that sufficient safeguards are in place to ensure that the system will be enforced in the prescribed manner? Furthermore, what discussions has she had with the sector about the implementation of the system? How will the change be communicated to the public? What future measures will the Government consider to ensure that age is verified effectively under the 2003 Act when alcohol sales take place remotely? What steps are they taking to monitor compliance and accountability, and where necessary to take enforcement action against companies certified under the DVS trust framework? I thank the Minister for clarifying that the order is not about going down the route of compulsory digital IDs. I reiterate that the Liberal Democrats are clear that a mandatory digital ID system would cross a red line. It would risk eroding long-held civil liberties. Digital tools should be about giving individuals more control over their personal data, not giving the Government more control over our lives. Our concern remains that a mandatory digital ID system could deepen digital exclusion and disproportionately affect society’s most marginalised: older people, people living in poverty, and disabled people, who often have limited access to digital devices or low digital literacy. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

• 3 Sept 2026 · Building Homes and Renewing Communities · Hansard source

  More

  The south Warwickshire local plan requires more than 27,000 new homes to be allocated to Stratford-on-Avon district under the standard method, and my constituents support the delivery of truly affordable homes and social rent. However, these homes are not going to be affordable for local people, and housing growth continues to outpace investment in transport, schools, GPs, and drainage and sewage infrastructure. Will the Secretary of State review the mandatory targets to ensure that local housing need rather than a centralised formula determines housing allocations in rural areas? Can she also guarantee that the infrastructure will keep pace with development instead of lagging years behind, if it is delivered at all?

• 3 Sept 2026 · Global Biodiversity and Ecosystems: National Security · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Gentleman agree that if we are serious about tackling global biodiversity loss, we must ensure that commodities such as soya and palm oil entering the UK supply chain are not linked to deforestation and that UK trade and finance are not contributing to ecosystem destruction overseas?

• 2 Sept 2026 · Rewiring the State · Hansard source

  More

  I, too, warmly welcome the First Secretary of State to her place. Last month, my constituents experienced wildfires, including the major incident in the parish of Salford Priors where Warwickshire fire and rescue service worked through extremely challenging conditions to protect homes and save lives. I pay tribute to all the firefighters, ambulance crew and those from the local community who assisted. Given the increasing frequency of heatwaves and drought and the severity of wildfires, particularly in rural areas where access to water is challenging and gaining access to burning fields is difficult, will she tell the House what urgent actions are being taken to better protect rural communities, farmland and natural habitats from future wildfire risk?

• 2 Sept 2026 · Representation of the People Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The Bill gives us a real chance to defend and strengthen our democracy, and although it is not in the scope of the Bill, I hope that the Government will look in future legislation at electoral reform and proportional representation. I have tabled new clauses 20 and 21 and supported many amendments because the Bill as it stands does not go far enough. New clause 21 enshrines in the Bill the principle of a cap on political donations. It is time to kick big money, foreign or domestic, out of British politics, and restore public trust in our political system. As I have said previously, the people of this country, not the deep pockets of billionaires—foreign or otherwise—or corporate interests, should decide our country’s future in elections and referendums. I welcome the Government amendment on donations from overseas electors, but at present there is no limit at all on how much a single individual in the UK can give to a political party. New clause 21 would require the Secretary of State to set an annual cap on political donations, informed by an independent review, so we can ensure that the cap is sustainable. The Bill’s title is “Representation of the People”. New clause 20 would extend the parliamentary franchise—that representation—to qualifying EU citizens and to foreign nationals with a right to enter or remain in the UK, and would extend the local government franchise in England on that same basis. Having leave to remain does not automatically give someone the right to vote, no matter how long they have been in the UK, and we now have different franchises in relation to EU citizens living in the UK following Brexit. That means that millions of residents have no right to vote at all. Like many of us, I represent a constituency where people who have lived here for years, who pay their taxes, work in our hospitals and run our businesses, still have no vote in the elections that decide who represents them. Residents pay council tax but some of them cannot vote on who is going to be in charge of their refuse collection. As the old American revolution slogan goes, “taxation without representation is tyranny.” Voting based on residency rights means that democratic participation is extended fully to people across the whole of British society. I want to set out where else I think the Bill needs to go further, because the argument runs the same way throughout: open up participation and representation, close down improper or malign influence, restore trust in our politics, and raise the standards for the campaigns we run. On widening participation and making voting genuinely accessible, I want to see a proper feasibility study into overseas voting, because British citizens abroad still face real, practical barriers to casting a ballot. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on citizens’ rights, I have heard from British electors living abroad about the challenges and barriers they face just to exercise their right. I support the Government extending the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds. That is really brilliant news for our young people and for representation. I welcome the case for automatic registration, so that the right to vote does not depend on people navigating forms. On the integrity of political money, which is where I believe the Bill still has the most to tackle, the same logic that applies to new clause 21 applies with even more costs. The loopholes that currently let donations flow from foreign Administrations, from those linked to political violence and from undeclared foreign income and corporate interests, like those fossil fuel companies, have no place in our politics and I want them closed. I fully support closing the loophole currently exploited by non-permissible donors giving in small amounts, and I support tightening the rules on cryptoasset donations, which are far too easy to hide. Parties should be required to carry out proper due diligence on where donations actually come from, and I support a proper independent look at spending limits. Finally, on standards and the world in which we now campaign, candidates deserve proper safety guidance. AI-generated campaign material must be honestly labelled, and I want the Electoral Commission to have strong powers over online harms and disinformation, along with proper measures against foreign interference. Our democracy should be open to everyone who lives under its laws, and closed to the money, undue influence and manipulation that nobody voted for.

• 13 Jul 2026 · Domestic Abuse: Police Response · Hansard source

  More

  Intimate image abuse is increasingly being used to threaten, control and exploit women and girls after relationships break down, yet the police have no power to require the deletion of those images if they were obtained consensually. What steps is the Minister taking to close that gap and better protect victims?

• 13 Jul 2026 · State of Climate and Nature · Hansard source

  More

  Despite the whole-of-Government effort to tackle the climate and nature crisis, I fear that there is still a misalignment of policies across Departments, as we have seen with the dilution of environmental protections in the revisions to the national planning policy framework. Can the Minister therefore ensure that there is more collaborative working across Government so that future decisions on planning and infrastructure leave nature in a better state, rather than contributing to its decline?

• 2 Jul 2026 · Air Pollution · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I thank the hon. Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) for securing this important debate on the urgency and duty for policymakers to tackle air pollution—the silent killer in our towns and cities. I also thank all the Members who have contributed so passionately and movingly to the debate. Toxic, poisonous air threatens the community spaces that we all love and the people we care most about. It knows no boundaries, reaching our workplaces, homes, schools and other public spaces. As other hon. Members have done, I would like to pay tribute to Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, mum to Ella Roberta. For over a decade, Rosamund has campaigned tirelessly for cleaner air through Ella’s law. I had the privilege to meet Rosamund last month when, as a member of the Environmental Audit Committee, I visited communities to understand the physical and mental health impacts of air pollution on their lives. Ella was a happy, playful and bright child, and she lived not far from the South Circular Road in Lewisham with her family. By the age of seven, she was suffering debilitating asthma attacks, which would see her cough and wheeze so much that she would fall unconscious. A few weeks after her ninth birthday, Ella died. She had suffered a fatal asthma attack. A landmark inquest in 2020 ruled that toxic air from traffic emissions contributed to her death, marking the first time that air pollution was officially recognised as a cause of death in the UK. Ella’s death was preventable. Among other measures, Ella’s law would enshrine a legal right to breathe clean air, requiring the Government to meet stricter air quality standards based on the World Health Organisation guidelines. We must not let children like Ella and their families down when turning our attention to this urgent problem, yet in the UK, an estimated 500 people die of disease related to air pollution each week. Air pollution is an invisible and insidious enemy. According to a recent report by the Royal College of Physicians, air pollution has been linked to 30,000 deaths and, as we have heard, it costs our economy more than £27 billion per year. Long-term exposure to emissions can cause heart and lung problem and increase the risk of a person developing cancers. Fine particulate matter from polluted air penetrates deep into the body, settling in our lungs. Recent research has also pointed to an increased risk of cognitive decline, Alzheimer’s disease and dementia from long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution, which can affect the heart and blood vessels. The public health burden is not shared equally: the most vulnerable in our society, including the elderly, those already facing deprivation, and babies and children are most at risk. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists stated that a growing evidence base links maternal exposure to air pollution and adverse pregnancy outcomes. That is why the Liberal Democrats have called for the introduction of a new clean air Act, based on World Health Organisation guidelines and enforced by a dedicated air quality agency. The scale of the issue is such that we need strong, independent oversight to tackle pollution at its source and protect public health. We must also transform how people travel, reducing dependence on the cars that spew noxious fumes into the air we breathe. The Government must work with local authorities to curb transport emissions. We need to invest in affordable, reliable public transport to ensure that fares do not rise above inflation, restore the £2 bus fare cap, and improve the passenger experience so that it is cheaper and better to travel by public transport. We must electrify our railways, embrace cleaner technologies and support active travel by creating safe cycling and walking networks across the country. For those who have no option but to rely on cars, especially those in isolated rural areas, we must make the transition to electric vehicles easier and more affordable by expanding charging infrastructure and reducing costs. Finally, we must address the inequalities at the heart of the issue. By increasing the public health grant and empowering local communities, we can develop targeted solutions such as supporting healthier and better insulated housing, reducing traffic exposure and improving local planning. As some hon. Members have already stated, health experts recommend stronger controls on household wood burning and effective action to raise awareness of health harms from indoor air pollution, including damp and mould. Children in the UK today have some of the worst asthma outcomes in the developed world. It is not right that so many lives are shortened by diseases that we can work together to prevent. Most importantly of all, there is no effective advice to help people to avoid air pollution if they have only one route to work or school, if they live near a busy road, if their care home or school is near air pollutant sources or if their house is poorly insulated. We call on the Government to recognise, in law, the human right to breathe clean air and to legally enforce air quality standards that meet WHO limits by 2030. We owe clean air to the baby born today, to the child coming out of school right now and to every child who will come after them.

• 2 Jul 2026 · Historical Forced Adoption · Hansard source

  More

  We heard on the Education Committee harrowing testimonies of the cruelty that unmarried mothers and their babies were subjected to. They were shamed, coerced and separated from their babies, causing lifelong trauma for them all. The Government’s apology is welcome yet long overdue, because for many survivors, official recognition of this injustice is an essential step towards healing. Ensuring that survivors obtain information about their personal histories is fundamental, so will the Prime Minister set out a timescale for the national online resource to improve access to adoption records?

• 29 Jun 2026 · Benefits System: Bereaved Families · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met members of bereaved families in my constituency, including Joe. They told me about the distress of knowing, while they are grieving, that the bereavement support payment ends after just 18 months, and despite the rising cost of living since the payment was introduced in 2017, it has not been uprated for 2026-27. Will the Government commit to uprate the support payment in line with inflation and review the 18-month limit?

• 17 Jun 2026 · Rural Pubs: Fiscal Support · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) for securing this important and timely debate. I want to put on record that I am an officer of the all-party parliamentary group for hospitality and tourism. In my constituency, pubs are a central part of our local economy and job creation. The rural pub is the beating heart of village life. Domestic and international tourists alike flock to our array of historical pubs and alehouses to drink a crisp pint in a picturesque setting, and it goes without saying that we locals like them very much too. I have many such pubs in my constituency—too many to name—all fantastic places to eat, drink and socialise. That reality is threatened, however, by the monumental challenges faced by all hospitality businesses in recent years. The local pub, once a staple of every town and village, is now an endangered species. In Stratford-on-Avon treasured, long-standing pubs are on the brink of closing. In rural, often isolated areas, the village pub is the only community infrastructure still standing after the school, the post office and the local shop have all closed. It is where quiz nights and coffee mornings are held, and where social life happens. Despite their social and economic value to the community, our rural pubs are firefighting on all fronts. One such pub is the Golden Cross in Ardens Grafton, a cherished 18th-century, family-run pub situated in the heart of the pretty south Warwickshire countryside, within easy reach of the town of Stratford-upon-Avon, and with views of the Vale of Evesham and the Cotswolds. A more perfect setting for a profitable pub could not be imagined but, almost with the feeling of inevitability, it closed its doors for the very last time earlier this month. That has been a heartbreaking decision for the owners, who did everything they could to avoid closure; but with rising operating costs, increased wage bills, higher national insurance contributions, escalating energy costs and supplier price increases, they simply had no other choice but to say goodbye to the business that supported the livelihoods of their families and community life. Elsewhere in my constituency it was only through the intervention of local residents and of the charity Plunkett UK that the Fox at Loxley was saved from the same fate and became a community-owned pub. When will the Government intervene to save our pubs and our wider hospitality industry? The Government’s policies should be providing the platform for our pubs and hospitality businesses to thrive. The emergency pub relief has been eaten up by cuts in relief and steep increases in rateable values from April 2026. Business rates must be reviewed and made fairer. For a Government who claim that their main objective is economic growth, it boggles the mind that they thought the way to achieve that was to increase employer national insurance contributions—a measure that disproportionately impacts hospitality, raising costs for part-time staff and hitting small and medium-sized businesses the hardest. That is why I and my Liberal Democrat colleagues have been calling on the Government to exempt hospitality small and medium-sized enterprises from the employer national insurance contributions increase, and to cut the VAT on hospitality businesses by 5%. In other countries of Europe, the hospitality sector has 10% VAT, which means that it can grow and employ more people. Rural pubs are among the providers of first jobs for our young generations, forming the foundation of a working life where they learn so many skills each day. I do not know what evidence the Government need to see before they believe that our pubs are at crisis point and that another U-turn is necessary. I hope that the Minister will take the Golden Cross in my constituency as firm evidence that the current situation is entirely unsustainable for our pubs and that Government intervention is needed now to save our pubs from extinction.

• 16 Jun 2026 · Community Hospitals · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is very generous to give way again. In my Stratford-on-Avon constituency, the Ellen Badger community hospital in Shipston-on-Stour served the community for hundreds of years. The Coventry and Warwickshire integrated care board removed the in-patient beds, which were really important in rehabilitating and looking after patients from acute settings before they went home. Those beds were close to their home. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government must invest in care in community hospitals to relieve the pressure on acute settings?

• 16 Jun 2026 · Community Hospitals · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for her passionate speech about community hospitals. In my constituency we have a fantastic community hospital with a minor injuries unit, but the unit is open only on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, with reduced hours. It could treat thousands more patients each year. Does my hon. Friend agree that opening minor injuries units for extended hours would help to relieve pressure on A&E departments in acute hospitals?

• 15 Jun 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. The old British Home Stores building in the heart of Stratford-upon-Avon lies disused and crumbling—a blight on the beauty of our high street. Does the Minister agree that it must be made easier for communities to tackle eyesore buildings by imposing harsher measures on offending landlords, and by strengthening measures to allow local authorities to bring them back into productive use?

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I am bringing forward this debate because of the many fatalities on the roads in the west midlands, and the catastrophic consequences of collisions and crashes. In seconds, happy worlds are turned upside down, lives are destroyed and families are left grieving their loved ones. My constituents are dying on the roads as a direct result of successive Governments’ inaction on tackling the scourge of speeding and dangerous driving, and I intend to set out exactly what must change. Let me begin with an example that has stayed with me. On 19 May, a constituent contacted me to say that drivers on a road near them were regularly travelling at more than double the 30 mph speed limit. They were frightened, and they wanted something done, so I wrote to the Government to raise their concerns. The response I received was that the Department for Transport was not at that time considering any changes to the data used in assessing road safety interventions. On the same day that the response arrived, there was a fatal accident on that road—and that was the third death on south Warwickshire roads in a few days. The Government must change their approach to road safety and intervene to save lives on our roads. They must also safeguard and consider all road users, and any new measures must protect vulnerable users such as pedestrians, walkers, cyclists and roller skaters, and ensure that funding for active travel infrastructure is available to communities so that people can enjoy safe walking, cycling and horse riding. Why must cycling infrastructure cost millions of pounds? Why is it so difficult to have separate and well-marked cycle and active travel lanes in Britain? I welcome the Government’s road safety strategy, published in January. It is ambitious in its aim to cut the number of people killed or seriously injured on Britain’s roads by 65% by 2035 and by 70% for children under 16. Yet a strategy without teeth is not a strategy at all. The Government need to commit to radical solutions; tinkering at the edges is no longer sufficient. The scale of death and serious injury on our roads demands bold, evidence-based action—and it demands that now. We need national legislation that is properly enforceable, that sets clear thresholds for interventions on dangerous roads and that does not leave communities at the mercy of local councils that are failing in their duty of care.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. I would like the county council to focus on what really matters to our residents, rather than spending its first six months in power deciding which flag should fly on which flagpole or talking about other culture war policies. I received an email from a visitor to my constituency who had hit a pothole, which thankfully had not resulted in a crash, but his car had been badly damaged. Now he is in conversation with the county council. This is not good for residents, or for our local visitor economy. The council needs to get a grip on the state of the roads, which obviously contributes to these dangers. In rural constituencies such as mine, speeding through villages is the norm. Speed limits of 30 mph mean very little when there is no enforcement to back them up. Our country lanes carry cars, lorries, farm vehicles and cyclists, and collision blackspots are all too common. Narrow roads prevent us from having things like chicanes or narrowings, because large farm vehicles obviously need to use the road as well. Street lights are also an issue when we have many dark sky villages. Rural communities feel abandoned due to the lack of police officers and, as the hon. Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) just mentioned, the lack of power for local councils, as well as the lack of attention from Government. I will focus on some locations in my constituency, but the list is not exhaustive. Rather, it is illustrative of the road safety issues that we all have in the west midlands. One example that I want to put on record is the junction where the A422 Banbury Road meets the B4455 Fosse Way, just east of the village of Ettington. Every day, drivers, cyclists, bikers and farm workers navigate a junction that should never have been designed the way it was. I have been calling on the Department to step in and engage with Warwickshire county council to ensure that this junction gets the full safety review and redesign that it so urgently needs. People have already paid the price for the failure to act. There are many other dangerous junctions, including Oakleigh Road and Justins Avenue, off the Birmingham Road in Stratford-upon-Avon, with residents reporting near-misses and, sadly, crashes too. I have had meetings with National Highways about the Billesley junction on the A46, but we are still waiting for improvements to that junction, where several fatalities have already happened.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Gentleman. I was a school governor for many years, so I know how teachers write letters to parents to ask them to park considerately, and also not to idle their engines, because obviously that causes lots of pollution, and health issues such as asthma. The hon. Gentleman is right that we need to ensure that schools are given the tools to change behaviour. We can send as many letters as we want, but I often find that the thing that makes parents and carers change their behaviour is the children themselves—children telling their parents that it is walk to school week and that they want to walk rather than drive. The role of education is really important, and even firefighters, policemen or local councillors can go and speak to children at school to change behaviour from the ground up. Wales and other nations are implementing 20 mph zones. I want to see whether we can learn any lessons from them, but because of all the data that shows how dangerous 30 mph is, I think 20 mph zones should be standard on new residential developments. In one of the new developments in an urban area of my constituency, the new road appears to link houses with a local school, but the speed limit will be set at 50 mph. Again, that was raised with Warwickshire county council, but it just said that it follows national guidelines, despite the council having a suite of active travel policies and the fact that the road goes through a residential estate. It is really difficult to make the council review that limit. We now have so many new houses being built, and this road cannot a have 50 mph limit. We really must ask local highway authorities to do better. Let me turn to one of the groups we know are most at risk. Young drivers between the ages of 17 and 24 account for just 6% of new driving licences, but they are involved in 24% of fatal and serious collisions. Those are young people from constituencies like mine and across the country who never make it home. The evidence for what works is not hard to find. Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and every single state in the United States already operate some form of graduated licensing for new drivers. Those schemes are sensible, proportionate and evidence-based, and they include measures such as restrictions on night-time driving, limits on carrying passengers—especially young passengers—in the early months of a licence, and probationary periods marked by visible plates. They save lives. We should be doing the same, and I urge the Government to look at graduated licences and to bring forward proposals without further delay. The RAC believes that a form of graduated licensing for young drivers could help to save lives on our roads. I want to thank my constituents Robbin and Patsy, who have been formidable campaigners for graduated licences and road safety for young people since losing their child. Road safety is not just about physical measures; it is also about changing driver behaviour. Nationally, I want to highlight the work of THINK!, which has launched important and lifesaving campaigns, from encouraging the use of seatbelts to tackling excessive speed, drink and drugs and, recently, the use of mobile phones at the wheel. Such campaigns must continue to be properly resourced and funded and reach every driver. The Warwickshire Road Safety Partnership holds an annual memorial service to remember the lives lost and injured on Warwickshire’s roads, which I attended last year. It was a sombre event, because we all knew that all these deaths and injuries could have been prevented. The families of those killed on the roads of the west midlands are not asking for the status quo; they are asking for change that will save lives. I am asking the Government today to deliver it.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for his passionate intervention, and I fully agree with him. I will talk a bit about what is happening in Warwickshire and I hope that Warwickshire colleagues will also intervene and share their experience. I also hope that the Minister will say something about guidance for local authorities, so that they are not just reactive but proactive. Communities up and down the west midlands want to see proper enforcement and a reduction of speed limits in residential areas, especially where schools are located. My constituency of Stratford-on-Avon is a case in point, where we are left exposed by the Reform-run Warwickshire county council. Parish councils and community watch groups work hard to gather data, but it is incredibly difficult to implement any type of traffic calming measures or speed reduction orders. Often, even if those are agreed, the cost of the proposals falls on parish and town councils. The problem is felt with particular force in rural constituencies like mine.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, at the heart of this debate is changing the culture from local government to national Government. We need to have education and behavioural change, and I will say a bit about that, but the culture also needs to change. We need to be proactive, and we can be, because only then will we save lives. Speeding near schools an issue. The children of Mappleborough Green primary school have written to me as they are experiencing fear and anxiety when crossing and walking along a very busy road that still has a 40 mph limit. We have a 40 mph limit outside a primary school. We are not getting any support in keeping those young children safe on their journey to school—and I am not even going to touch on the air pollution that the children are experiencing. What does the Minister say to those children? Constituents have contacted me about speeding on the A3400 through Wootton Wawen village, which is making it difficult for elderly residents to cross the road to go to the post office or the shops and, again, for children to go to school. As the hon. Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) mentioned, we need a shift from reactive to proactive enforcement. We need that cultural shift. We cannot keep waiting for collisions to occur and then investigate the wreckage.

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I fully agree with the hon. Gentleman. With the new national road safety strategy we have a real opportunity to ensure that we reduce serious injuries and deaths on the roads. I hope the Government will take into consideration our views and the responses to the consultation, and will ensure that the guidance is updated so that we are not acting after a fatality, because that is too late. It is too late for the families and for the young drivers who might have crashed—it is lives destroyed. Also, we cannot have a speed reduction policy that is based on how fast the cars are travelling, rather than on the dangers they pose to road users, including children walking to school or elderly residents crossing the road to get to the post office, the shop or their GP. We must identify the risks before lives are lost and intervene accordingly. That is the change in culture that Members have mentioned, and the change in policy that the Government must now commit to. There must be cultural change at council level, too, as currently there is a reactive culture in which interventions are made only if there is a history of road traffic accidents, and locations with recorded collisions, especially collisions resulting in injury, are prioritised. County highways authorities often use the speed that most drivers do not exceed as data to judge whether a road has a speeding problem, but interventions should not be based on how fast drivers are driving. We need a change to the Department for Transport guidance, which also seems to reinforce reactive behaviour, especially on speed limits. I look forward to hearing about that from the Minister. A constituent in Bidford-on-Avon—one of my villages—told me recently: “Current analysis shows that 63% of cars exceed the speed limit through the village.” I raised this situation with the local police force, which told me that 35 mph is the enforceable limit—but why? The charity Brake says that a pedestrian hit at 30 mph has a one in five chance of being killed, rising to one in three if they are hit at 35 mph. Children can be killed at 30 mph, so why are we waiting to enforce at 35 mph instead of 30 mph?

• 9 Jun 2026 · Road Safety: West Midlands · Hansard source

  More

  I fully agree with the hon. Member’s points. With the road safety strategy consultation and review, we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make changes to the culture and assess the situation. If we want to reduce deaths and serious injuries on our roads, we need to be bold and make sure that local authorities have better, bolder guidance on interventions for urban as well as rural areas. For example, every time I ask for cameras, I am told that there have to have been five fatalities. There had to be been one fatality when I started campaigning for road safety in my village. I could not cross my road with my children—holding a little one by the hand and pushing the pram—so I started campaigning on road safety measures in my village. I was told, “You need to wait for five fatalities before automatic number plate recognition cameras are installed.”