Nesil Caliskan MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 Jul 2026 · Regeneration in Reddish · Hansard source

  More

  I entirely agree that local government has for too long been underfunded, and we are, as a Labour Government, having to respond to 14 years of deep austerity. Having spent 10 years in local government, I would want to see more if the pot were endless, but politics is full of choices, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport said. Before us is the choice being made by this Government to ensure that we target resources at the areas that need them most. Projects such as Pride in Place, and the record amount of money given to local authorities across the country, demonstrate that. There is much more to do, which is why I welcome this debate. My hon. Friend has highlighted the need for more investment in Reddish. I was pleased to hear that, since the launch of the Pride in Place fund, really good progress has been made, but there is more to do, and I hear his strong representations. I know that local services, including decent library services, are a lifeline to many people up and down the country, including in Reddish and other parts of my hon. Friend’s constituency. I pay tribute to the individuals he mentioned in his speech, some of whom contribute on a voluntary basis. If it were not for the voluntary sector, and for individuals who help communities through their activities, we would be much worse off as a country. I pay tribute to those individuals, as well as to local council officers who work in frontline services and care so deeply and passionately about things such as library services. We all agree that regeneration and protecting community assets are important. Investing in services, particularly libraries, is crucial. So many communities up and down the country want to see more of that. The most effective way to enshrine the needs of our communities in regeneration, to ensure that it works for them, is to equip local leaders with the necessary skills and tools to make that happen, and to ensure that we give them the voice and the levers that they need. I am pleased to see progress in the borough of Stockport, not only through new flexible spending powers granted to the Greater Manchester combined authority, and new funds and announcements to generate growth in the city region, but from empowering the local community to deliver and enhancing areas through projects such as Pride in Place. My hon. Friend is right to say that the co-operation and co-production of services and regeneration, with the leadership of Members of Parliament, residents, and local authorities—which, in my experience always have good intentions, even if we do not always agree with their political choices—is an opportunity to shape a local place. The Government’s approach recognises that different areas require different interventions tailored to local circumstances. We must not only focus on the immediate challenges, but continue to ensure that funding goes in the right direction for the long term. I very much welcome and accept the kind invitation from my hon. Friend to visit Reddish and his wider constituency—I would be delighted to visit. I note that I was not invited to drink cider, but I shall invite myself to do that, too, alongside the visit to the hat museum. I thank him once again for securing this important debate and for being such a strong champion for his constituents. Question put and agreed to.

• 1 Jul 2026 · Regeneration in Reddish · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) for securing this debate, and for using this opportunity to highlight so powerfully not only the brilliant things about his constituency and Reddish, but the challenges that need to be addressed. The regeneration of our towns and cities is at the heart of this Government’s core mission to deliver growth and prosperity in all corners of the country. Protecting and enhancing local areas, including vital community assets such as libraries, leisure facilities and health facilities, is central to that work. I know that that is felt particularly keenly in neighbourhoods across Stockport, including Reddish, which my hon. Friend has spoken about today. Too many neighbourhoods have been let down and left behind after decades of under-investment and many years of austerity—areas such as Reddish have paid a heavy price. I know that political choices have to be made, but the consequences of the choices made in the austerity years are still being felt by people in Reddish. My hon. Friend was absolutely right to say that the impact of years of decline has not been felt equally. That is why it is crucial that this Government are relentless in focusing on growth and regeneration to raise living standards across the country. By working in partnership to invest in and empower all regions of this country, we will kick-start growth and work to address the imbalances that exist between and within regions. Funds such as the local regeneration fund and the UK shared prosperity fund have helped local areas to regenerate, but there have been limits. I am pleased that residents in Stockport will have benefited from a number of schemes financed by both funds, including for new employment spaces, improved rail access and walking and cycling routes, all of which are aimed at bolstering the local economy, connectivity and public health. However, as my hon. Friend has said, too many legacy funds were pitting places against each other through competitive bidding, which led to places such as Reddish being left behind. Those funds are coming to a close, and the Government have been looking at how local projects are funded, introducing a longer-term approach that provides sustainable and predictable support for local authorities. The truth is that elected local leaders have the expertise on how to invest in their communities. Having served as a local council leader myself, I feel that very strongly, and I know that, regardless of political party affiliation, the interests of local communities are best understood by local leaders. That is why the Government have committed to a series of new devolved levers and flexible funds to regenerate places, including by introducing new funds for mayoral strategic authorities. In its integrated settlement, Greater Manchester has been allocated £141 million of local growth funding over the next four years. That enables strategic, place-based investment, meaning that money will be targeted where it is needed most, addressing challenges for areas that need additional support to get projects off the ground. We have also announced city investment funds, which will place money directly into the hands of mayors to deliver new housing and to get existing projects moving forward. Local authorities are, of course, essential partners in that work. We know that mayoral strategic authorities work closely with their constituent councils to shape priorities, as they should, including by co-designing interventions and ensuring that funding reflects local need. One example of new and locally led delivery is the Pride in Place programme, which I am glad my hon. Friend referred to. Over the next decade, it will deliver £2 million per year directly to the local community in Brinnington, which is just on the other side of Reddish Vale country park. As I say, local people know what changes are needed for their community to thrive. That is why decision making on how those funds are spent sits with local neighbourhood boards. They will decide how to spend that money, whether it is on local arts, culture, heritage, sports, parks or something else that they think is important for their community.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Sir John. As I look around the Chamber, I see that some of the Members who were here earlier are still here. I thought I might get away with repeating much of what I said this morning—but then I saw that you were chairing the debate, so I will have to say some other things, but in absolutely the same spirit with which I spoke this morning. This is such an important topic. I thank the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) for securing this debate: high streets matter to every Member of Parliament because they matter to everybody up and down the country and across the devolved nations. They symbolise the places where people live, the communities that they are part of and the places that they identify with. They are more than just bricks and mortar; they are also the spirit of where individuals live and the communities that they are part of. Like every Member here, when considering this debate I thought about the high street in my own constituency. I thought about the brilliant businesses in Barking that I have had the pleasure of coming across since being elected; they include businesses from the beauty industry, which I hosted in Parliament last year, and other businesses too. I thought about the fact that high streets have so fundamentally changed in recent years. The hon. Member for East Londonderry is absolutely right that the challenges we face exist in every corner of the country, but every high street and town centre should be different because they are about the character of that place. We must help different businesses to thrive and give local communities the power to shape their high streets for the better. The Government are taking action on that, whether through the £300 million of funding to support those efforts or the £10 million used to expand high street rental auctions, which Members have already referenced. That has been successful at tackling the issue of empty shops. We are launching a £61 million fund as part of Pride in Place, and the community right to buy fund is also making a difference.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Diversification is very important in town centres. It drives footfall, which is what keeps high streets alive. Footfall, coupled with having money to spend, will mean that businesses can thrive. The Government are committed to publishing our high streets strategy, which looks at all the elements referred to already in the debate. We have announced funding for innovation partnerships to support local communities to reimagine and revive struggling high streets and make them purposeful and fit for the future.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I know my hon. Friend’s area well, and she does good work not only to champion it but to campaign for improvement. She is absolutely right: if local communities have a real say, and that is coupled with backing from central Government, we can see real progress in our high streets and towns. That is important not only for local communities to feel ownership and pride; it is also crucial for employment. High streets are often where young people go for their first jobs. Small and medium-sized businesses are the backbone of the local economy for many towns, so being able to support high streets, including through the high streets strategy, is a crucial part of the Government’s agenda. The hon. Member for East Londonderry was absolutely right to talk about the opportunity to relocate public services to high streets, which could improve the accessibility of those public services, as well as drive footfall and boost vibrancy. Many places are already doing that effectively.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  On car parks in particular, a review is under way; I am happy to write to the hon. Member to set out timelines for when we will have the responses. The point about rural communities is important, which is exactly why the Government are committing to making sure that while we do what we can from central Government, we really allow communities to shape their own services locally. The density point is important, particularly for rural communities. Banking hubs, for example, have been a real lifeline for communities that have had no banks in their area. As a Government, we have committed to almost 300 hubs; more than 230 have already opened. It is important that we commit to more initiatives like that, so that high streets get the support that they need. As I say, there are good examples of public services locations. Barnsley, for instance, has opened a community diagnostic centre in its Glass Works shopping centre; that has led to more screenings and fewer missed appointments, and has brought a £3 million boost to the local economy. I could list many examples from across the country that really make the point that the relationship between the relocation of public services and our high streets can be a powerful tool in regenerating our high streets. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been working closely with other Government Departments, including the Department of Health and Social Care, to encourage them to roll out like health centres in other locations. I recognise that we have to go further. With local community leaders, we have to think about how central Government can be more strategic and purposeful and how we can support those leaders to deliver locally. We have to work with local government and mayoral strategic authorities so that devolution and reorganisation can lead to tangible improvements on high streets. Local capacity is an issue for local authorities, which is why MHCLG is committed to supporting local councils to shape high streets in a way that works for local residents. We are bringing vacant shops back into use and tackling the perverse incentive that makes shops remain empty. As I said, high street rental auctions have already proved successful—we have been oversubscribed, which is why we are expanding the programme. We are supporting local authorities by upskilling local authority officers so that they can use compulsory purchase order powers to bring landlords to the table, enabling more transformational change for areas that have a particular problem with empty shops. The national planning policy framework is playing a role in some of that work, too. Finally, I will address business rates. Many retail, hospitality and leisure businesses are grappling with rising costs. We are committed to supporting high street businesses so that they can compete with online and out-of-town alternatives. Most of that is about appropriate place making, but we are also reducing the burden of business rates on independent high street businesses and introducing permanently lower business rate multipliers for retail, hospitality and leisure properties, giving greater certainty and long-term support. The new multipliers are worth £1 billion per year, will benefit more than 750,000 properties and will give long-term certainty and support to high streets. I thank Members for their contributions. I recognise that high streets are a topic that people feel passionate about, and rightly so. They are intrinsic to constituents’ identity and local place. I thank the hon. Member for East Londonderry again for securing the debate. Question put and agreed to.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Streets · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for raising Cornwall; he and his fellow Cornish Members of Parliament make excellent representations. He eloquently set out the case for giving power back to local areas. I know he is disappointed that Cornwall has not secured Pride in Place funding, but he will forgive me for recognising that lots of other places have. They are celebrating that as they should, because Pride in Place funding provides an opportunity for areas to regenerate their high streets. Perhaps even more importantly, Pride in Place provides a different way of doing things, because the boards allow communities to shape what the money is spent on over a longer period of time. Funding is important, but it is not the complete answer. We need indeed a radical rethink of how high streets work. Although retail remains important, high streets cannot rely on it solely; online shopping will remain, so we need to be more creative, as the hon. Member for East Londonderry recognised. High streets must become more diverse. They need to include hospitality, leisure, public services, and art and culture.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  Let me just address the points on business rates, Ms Vaz. Members will recognise that business rates are a long-standing issue. The Government are determined to remove barriers to investment. That is why we have introduced new multipliers that are worth over £1 billion per year and benefit more than 750,000 properties. They will give long-term certainty to high streets and businesses. We know that the cut must be a sustainably funded model, so the Government are paying for it through a high-value multiplier on the top 1% of the most expensive properties. Pressures on businesses are complicated. Business rates play a part, but viable businesses depend on footfall, place-making of a high street and support from agencies such as the local authority and the public sector. A number of points have been raised, including about the importance of footfall, the role of public services relocating into high streets, making sure that family hubs exist where there is footfall, and densification through things such as banking hubs. I thank hon. Members for their contributions, and I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove again for securing such an important debate.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for that important point. I recognise how passionate people are about that. The NPPF does set out some of that, but the truth is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Having been a council leader, I know how challenging that can be. It is important that the public realm is shaped by local people. The best examples are where there is co-production and co-operation between local partners, residents and businesses.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss whether the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government can do something to support the local authority in rectifying that situation. As I say, the Government are also extending and reviewing closure powers. We want to ensure a sustained, long-term response alongside that, so we have established a new high street organised crime unit to bring together government, law enforcement and partners. Over and over again, we have seen that a committed approach to data sharing and understanding the role of local government alongside intelligence from local policing can really make a difference in closing down illegal businesses.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for reiterating that important point. The Government will make changes here in Westminster, but we have to ensure that those changes are embedded in our local communities, so that local authorities feel they have the agency, the powers and the resources they need to implement those changes, and that local businesses know what the legislative framework is so that good businesses feel they are supported and illegal businesses know that they cannot get away with it. In essence, that is what helps to build thriving communities for our high streets and town centres.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I acknowledge that call, and I believe the NPPF goes some way towards doing it. I understand there may be gaps; Government will always be willing to look at that and work with the Local Government Association, for example, which supplies some of that guidance. Whether a statutory response is appropriate is yet to be debated. I am confident that the NPPF provides what is necessary. I do accept the point that the public realm is a key part of regenerating our high streets and town centres. On the points about organised crime and illegal activity, I assure hon. Members that the Government recognise that we will not see high street regeneration or thriving town centres without tackling that head-on. Regardless of how many functions we devolve and high streets we regenerate, they simply will not thrive if illegal businesses are left to take hold. I recognise the concerns raised by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley, that too many high street premises are being used as fronts for organised crime, facilitating money laundering, tax evasion, illegal working and the sale of illicit goods. Although opinions may differ on what looks nice in relation to design codes, nobody wants to see illegal activity on our high streets and in our town centres. The Government have announced £30 million of investment over three years to target those businesses and crack down on the corrupt networks operating on our high streets. A sum of £20 million to strengthen national co-ordination and local enforcement will make a difference, which we are seeing already, with hundreds of so-called businesses conducting illegal activity targeted, visits to thousands of premises, hundreds of arrests and the seizure of millions of criminal proceeds. We are strengthening the role of trading standards, which has been left for too long without the required resources, with £6 million to boost its capacity in priority areas. I recognise trading standards is still under pressure, and local government representatives frequently raise the subject with me. Alongside enforcement, we are strengthening powers to act quickly and effectively. I hear too often that local authorities want to take power but feel restricted. We are extending and reviewing closure powers, including consulting on increasing the maximum duration of closure orders to 12 months.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a bit of progress, if that is all right. Supporting high streets means Government backing our high streets. Each place—each town, high street and village—has a different personality and identity. The role of Government should be to support them and enhance the place they live in. The Government believe that people who live in those places know them best. That is why we are moving beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, equipping places with practical levers for change and shifting funding, decision making and accountability from Whitehall to the hands of mayors, councils, local businesses and residents. The high streets rental auctions are a key example of that, giving councils the power to bring persistently vacant properties back into use. We have just announced £10 million to support the expansion and roll-out of that programme, helping councils to identify opportunities, engage landlords and get properties back into use. Alongside the community right to buy, now backed by £61 million of funding, that will give local people a greater say in the future of their area. In my experience, local people are not short of opinions on how they want to shape their area, but crucial actions by Government are needed to back that vision. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley), who spoke about the need to renovate older buildings. The Government have taken some good steps on that. Members today have called for changes to address the blight of betting shops and vape shops. The Government have taken some action with the gambling cumulative impact assessments, but I recognise that many are looking for further action, so that we can put a stop to the betting shops popping up all over our high streets. It is not enough simply to respond to change. We must empower local communities and provide the resources to those local communities and councils to shape their high streets. The points hon. Members made about beautiful design and places looking nice are important. There is not a lot a local authority or community can do if people have to step over rubbish or, frankly, do not feel safe in the local park in the town centre. Design codes are important, as is the national planning policy framework.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I am very happy to work with the right hon. Member. I was about to say that I would be happy to meet her to talk about Ravenscourt, which I think she referred to in her speech, but I extend that to any part of her constituency that will benefit from the Government’s Pride in Place funding.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  I do not disagree with the right hon. Member. We have seen the impact of online retail, and I think it would be misleading to say that we are about to see its disappearance. Instead, we have an obligation to think about what our high streets might look like in the future. Local communities want to be able to shape their high streets. The partnership between a local authority, businesses and residents can shape future high streets, not least through the commitment to densification—an important point made by a number of Members today.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes), for his warm words welcoming me to my place. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this important debate, and I thank all Members for their passionate contributions, reflecting their commitment to their local high streets and to the people they represent. High streets are integral to our communities. They are where people work, shop and spend time together. At their best, they are vibrant and welcoming places, supporting local communities and building pride in place. However, as Members have articulated, too many high streets face real challenges, from changing consumer habits to vacant units and declining footfall. In some areas, those challenges are compounded by the rise of businesses used as fronts for criminal activity. The Government are determined to address both sides of the challenge: to support regeneration and renewal, while tackling the unlawful activity that undermines all our high streets. Thriving high streets do not just happen by accident. They require investment over a long period, planning, and a clear vision for the future—backed, crucially, by local leaders with powers to protect their towns and high streets. I understand that well; having served as a council leader, I know how passionate debates about high streets can become. Later this year, the Government will publish a cross-Government high street strategy, because saving our high streets needs a cross-Government approach. The strategy will be backed by £300 million to support the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors— I was pleased to meet with representatives of the hospitality sector last week—and to help them to reimagine the role of the high street in modern Britain.

• 30 Jun 2026 · High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts · Hansard source

  More

  Footfall is a key part of keeping our high streets alive. That comes partly through home building, but it also comes from ensuring variety on our high streets. A key part of the Government’s high streets innovation partnership will involve working with selected places to set out new approaches, boost activity and support a shift towards a mixed use of high streets. Alongside that, the Government are investing almost £6 billion into Pride in Place programmes over the next decade to give communities the power and funding to transform their local areas.

• 25 Jun 2026 · Windrush Day · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) on securing this important debate and on her poignant speech, and I thank other Members for their brilliant speeches on this important topic. It is an issue that Members across the House have deep and personal feelings about. Windrush Day means so much to so many across the country, including many in my constituency of Barking in east London. I am grateful for those contributions today, because they speak to the independent and personal experiences of many of our constituents. There have been a number of excellent speeches, and I will address some of the specific asks. To participate in a debate that has such a powerful and vivid history brought the Windrush story to life. I begin by paying tribute to the Windrush generation and their descendants. Earlier this week we marked the anniversary of the arrival of the Empire Windrush at Tilbury 78 years ago. The people who disembarked in Essex on that June day in 1948 came to the country in a moment of profound need; a country still reeling from the trauma and destruction of the second world war. They helped to rebuild Britain, working in a range of settings, including construction, public transport and manufacturing, as well as our NHS. Even more precious than that generation’s contribution as members of the workforce was the important part they played socially and culturally in this nation. From food to music, literature to art, as Members have already outlined, the Windrush generation changed our society for the better. The Windrush story is indivisible from our national story. Those who came in the middle of the last century, and subsequent generations, are owed our thanks. And yet, the tragic truth is that they have not always had our thanks. In fact, for years many were made to feel that they were imposters in their own country, and were subject to terrible injustices by the very state that had called on them to come here. The Home Office Windrush scandal reminds us of an embarrassment in our country’s history. That is why this Government will strive relentlessly to provide those affected with the support and justice that they deserve. As other Members have reflected, today is primarily a moment of celebration. It is at this point every year that we come together to mark Windrush Day and honour the immense contribution made by the Windrush generation and subsequent generations through a range of events that are taking place across the country. Each one is a unique tribute to the Windrush story and the people who live it. This year alone, the Windrush Day grant scheme has funded 33 projects, bringing communities together right across the country. Hon. Members across the Chamber will have visited the exhibition in Portcullis House. It is very important that we, as legislators, never forget the Windrush generation. I encourage those who have not been to visit the exhibition, which runs until 3 July. Despite adversity, the Windrush generation continue to build, create and contribute so much to British society. The Government are proud to support Windrush Day through the grant scheme and wider engagement across the country. It is a time to commemorate the legacy of the Windrush generation, to pause and reflect, and to give thanks—to ensure that the Windrush generation and their contribution are not forgotten.

• 25 Jun 2026 · Windrush Day · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting how important it is that young people in our constituencies have the opportunity to learn about, talk about and celebrate the contribution of the Windrush generation and what they gave this country. It is vital that they are able to articulate that, and I thank the young people in his constituency for doing so. As well as celebrating the contribution of the Windrush generation, it is right that the state recognises the hurt caused by the Home Office Windrush scandal. The Government are committed to ongoing efforts to give those who were affected the support they deserve and the compensation they are owed. Through honest engagement and meaningful reform, the Home Office has worked to make the response to the Windrush scandal fairer, faster and more compassionate. The aim is clear: to right the wrongs as far as we can and deliver the maximum compensation as quickly as possible. More than £128 million has been paid in compensation, and more than 19,000 individuals have been issued with documentation confirming their British citizenship. Although that demonstrates real progress, I recognise that some remain deeply frustrated. I know that no amount of compensation will undo the pain, suffering and loss of many victims who suffered. I have had the honour of meeting many from the Windrush generation, their children and grandchildren, both in my constituency of Barking and Dagenham and across the country. They speak about their experience and of feeling betrayed following the scandal. They know that the impact still lingers. The truth is that we should do everything we can to talk about their experiences so that we can get this compensation scheme to a much better place. Today is an opportunity for me to reiterate the Government’s position: we are determined to ensure that those affected receive the documentation they require and the compensation they deserve. The Government have been clear that community feedback must be at the heart of improving the compensation scheme. I take particular note of the important points made by hon. Members, in particular on the disparity between the compensation secured when individuals apply for compensation alone versus the amount they might secure if they have legal advice. The Home Office will continue to listen and act on these concerns, and I will certainly be making that point in particular. We know that the voices of those affected need to be heard loudly so that their views can shape the Government’s approach, as does the insight and expertise provided by the Rev. Clive Foster, who was appointed by the Government as the first Windrush commissioner a year ago. His role is to provide independent scrutiny and challenge in relation to the Government’s response to Windrush, support cultural change in the Home Office and act as an advocate for those affected by the Home Office Windrush scandal. I note with interest the important points that Members have made about the cultural change still required in the Home Office so that victims are supported in an appropriate away. The re-established Windrush unit is working with the Windrush commissioner and stakeholders to ensure that we take a trauma-informed approach when designing restorative dialogue events, the purpose of which is to listen and acknowledge the harm that occurred and identify the actions that the Department and wider Government must take to rebuild trust and ensure that the lessons learned from the scandal lead to meaningful and lasting change. The Home Office is also completing a review of all 30 recommendations from the Windrush lessons learned review before considering the next steps. I note the call for the compensation scheme to be moved from the Home Office to a different Department. I recognise that is in part because of the frustration with the process and the speed at which victims are able to secure their compensation; however, the Home Office view is that moving the scheme to a different Department may risk a delay in payments altogether. The focus is really on improving the experiences of claimants at this point. This year marks 78 years since the arrival of the Windrush; in two years, it will be the 80th anniversary, which provides an important opportunity for us to mark this national commemoration and recognise the lasting contribution of the Windrush generation and their descendants. I wholeheartedly welcome the calls from Members across the House to ensure that we are ready as a Government and as a country to celebrate the Windrush generation, and steps are already being taken by the Government to secure a steering group to establish what events can take place across the country in order to adequately mark the occasion. I once again thank all Members who have contributed today and my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood for securing the debate. I have heard all the points made. I will take them to the Home Office and speak to colleagues in my own Department—MHCLG—and across Government. The scrutiny that this kind of debate provides is absolutely critical to ensuring that we get the compensation scheme right. I conclude my remarks with this reflection. As the granddaughter of two people who decided to leave one island to come to another, I know just how important it is that the experiences of those who live in this country are recognised even when they were not good ones—in fact, particularly when they were not good experiences. It allows us to be a better society and to recognise that the rich and diverse communities we live in have been built on the back of their experiences. As we celebrate the contribution of the Windrush generation, we also redouble our efforts to right the wrongs of the past. We do so for all those in the Windrush generation, because they deserve it, and it is the very least that we can do.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Stoma: Public Toilet Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely take the point, but there is scope for us to consider how to do that without putting additional statutory burdens on local authorities. Ultimately, we want the same outcome: we do not want a postcode lottery. A person who needs accessible toilets should know that they can leave the house and access them. I am open-minded about whether we do that through regulation or by having schemes that support the roll-out of better facilities. There are good examples of services being delivered across the country, so we should look at how the sector can learn from them and how the Government can best support local authorities. Bins and toilets are areas of interest for local authorities, councillors and council leaders. I note the experience of Members in the Chamber who have a local government background. I recall rolling out a community toilet scheme when I was council leader. That required very small things, such as small grants to businesses—I think they were £1,000—to encourage them to make their facilities available to the public. That meant that the local authority did not have to think about additional toilet spaces. In many ways, the provision of a toilet in a local business or on a high street meant that our residents had more access than they would if they had to go to a park.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Stoma: Public Toilet Provision · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I am very happy to meet any campaigning organisation to discuss this important issue. I note that other hon. Members have also made that request. If charities would like to contact me, I will happily meet them to talk about how we can better support the needs of all our communities. On the important point the hon. Gentleman makes about the NHS plan and healthcare support, he is absolutely right. It is all the more reason why we need a joined-up approach to what local authorities and NHS local boards are doing. I take the opportunity to highlight health and wellbeing boards across the country, which will play a really important role in making sure that, as one part of the local authority is delivering something, it is making the most of what it is doing so that it meets the objectives of a different part. In the case we are talking about, health is a really obvious example. To return to my general point about local authorities thinking outside the box and doing things differently, one area we should encourage them to consider is how they conduct procurement. There are many examples across the country where public toilets in parks and open spaces have fallen into disrepair. Some local authorities are addressing that through procurement processes by stipulating, for example, that the owner of a new café must look after the toilets in that space. Those are good ideas that should be encouraged and will ultimately make it easier for our communities to access facilities.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Stoma: Public Toilet Provision · Hansard source

  More

  That is exactly the point that I am making. I thank the hon. Lady for highlighting that very good example of what local leadership can deliver in the community. It is important that we empower local authorities and leaders to think outside the box, champion this issue and speak up on tricky topics. That gives me the opportunity once again to pay tribute to hon. Members for taking part in this debate. By talking about and giving attention to a difficult subject, we are able to shift views and encourage our public sector to provide facilities that meet the needs of our communities.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Stoma: Public Toilet Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely take the point. There is a conversation to be had with the sector, local authorities and the Local Government Association about how we can best support local authorities to do that. I think there is a real willingness among local authorities. I accept the point about statutory services, but there are great examples of local authorities providing services that are not statutory because they recognise the importance of public provision.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Stoma: Public Toilet Provision · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s contribution. Section 106 moneys are often thought about in terms of big infrastructure money, but for a very small amount of money we can make a big public impact; the grant funding of £1,000 to a business is a good example of that. I am very happy to take that back. There are lots of examples across the country of where this is being done well, and we should, as a Government—I will take this back—find a better way to communicate some of that best practice. I also want to comment on the very important point the hon. Gentleman makes about lived experience. Too often, Governments and councils design and deliver schemes with good intentions, but they do not necessarily meet the real needs of communities. That is why lived experience must be at the heart of policymaking. He referenced his sister’s experience, and I will join him: my sister’s experience is not dissimilar. As he said, many people who live with such conditions develop great resilience over their lifetime. My sister, too, is incredibly resilient, because of her experience of living with her colitis, which was diagnosed as a teenager, as it is for many people. It is a very particular experience to be diagnosed with a lifelong condition as a teenager. People who experience that are some of the most resilient individuals in our community, and their lived experience is central to making sure that our councils and the Government design provision and services that meet their needs. In that spirit, I welcome continued dialogue with Members. I know that there are others who are not in this Chamber who also feel very strongly about this topic. Local government, MHCLG and partners can work together to deliver more accessible, well-maintained public toilets. We should look at existing schemes and new schemes that can encourage such provision. I thank hon. Members, particularly the hon. Member for Strangford for securing this important debate and for his warm words in welcoming me to my place; it was very generous of him. The Government recognise the importance of ensuring that public spaces are accessible, inclusive and supportive of people’s dignity and independence. I welcome further representation from hon. Members, the brilliant charities that do fantastic campaigning on this issue, local authorities across the country and other partners who want to see the provision of public toilets improve.

• 18 Jun 2026 · Stoma: Public Toilet Provision · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I begin by paying tribute to Members from across the House for the incredibly thoughtful and personal stories that they have shared. I am very conscious that Members speak on behalf of their constituents, and that some Members speak from personal experience. Although I do not have that personal experience, I have a very close family member who does, and I have heard Members speak in the Chamber before about their own experiences and have reflected very carefully on the power of those remarks for those beyond the House who hear them. I thank Members very much for their contributions. I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this very important debate, and for his continued interest in this issue. I know that he is a committed advocate for public toilet provision, including for those with non-visible disabilities such as stoma use. I recognise the importance of the provision of good-quality, accessible public toilets more broadly. For far too many people, access to clean and safe public toilets can be the deciding factor in whether they feel able to visit a town centre, a high street, a park or any local attraction. As others put it so eloquently, such facilities support the dignity and independence of people with disability and accessibility needs. Of course, accessibility to a decent facility encourages everybody to spend more time in their local areas, and to use the shops, services and attractions in them. I do not need to detail the benefits of that in itself. It is true that for many people, it is just too difficult to access the facilities that the rest of us can access so easily every day. Members have correctly pointed out that that is a challenge not only for those with a stoma, but for many other people, including those with ulcerative colitis or irritable bowel disease. The list is much longer than that; the point is that many people are impacted by the lack of accessibility facilities. However, this debate is focused on stomas, and I want to place on the record the Government’s recognition that this is absolutely a real challenge. Approximately one in 335 people of all ages in the UK is estimated to be living with a stoma, and each year more than 13,000 people in the UK undergo stoma surgery. For people living with a stoma, access to suitable toilet provision is not simply a matter of convenience; it is fundamental to their dignity, safety and independence. Many people living with a stoma feel anxious about leaving home, particularly in the period after surgery. The Government recognise that being able to live well, to work, to enjoy days out, to shop and to socialise requires access to appropriate public toilet facilities. However, as Members across the Chamber have said, standard public toilets may not always provide that facility for everybody in a safe and dignified way. It is important that we recognise the specific experience of people with invisible disabilities, who are often uneasy about using a disabled facility for fear that it may be a challenge to do so—assuming that the disabled facility would even meet their needs. In recognition of the importance of this subject, at the last spending review, in 2025, the Government committed more than £5 billion over the next three years for essential local services, including public toilets, and we continue to provide 100% mandatory business rates relief for stand-alone public toilets, which is helping reduce ongoing costs for local authorities, but I absolutely accept that the facility needs to exist in the first place. I recognise that, for stoma users, practical features such as clean shelf spaces and discreet disposal bins can make a significant difference. I thank Members for raising the issue of facilities in male toilets, which are so frequently overlooked. It is worth highlighting that all building work must meet the functional requirements of the Building Regulations 2010, which address accessibility and provide guidance on meeting those requirements, including the installation of shelves, sanitary disposal units and accessibility toilets. However, I accept that the very fact we are having this debate means that the reality on the ground is very different. The Building Safety Regulator has a duty under the Building Safety Act 2022 to keep the standard of buildings under review, and I welcome the fact that the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson), drew attention to the £30 million Changing Places programme, which supported the targeted installation of almost 500 new disabled toilet facilities. I learned much about that programme when I served as a council leader—if I learned anything from my days in local government, it is that bins and toilets are two topics that people get very passionate about. The role of local authorities is central to this conversation. It is the Government’s view that local authorities are best placed to understand the needs of their communities, and to make decisions about the provision that is right for their areas. I take careful note of the important arguments made about statutory requirements and regulations, but I say gently that local authorities might not think that is the best approach. I am yet to come across a local authority that does not want to do the best for its area, and I think there is a conversation to be had about how we can better support them to do that.