Oliver Ryan MP: speeches

Speeches

• 16 Dec 2025 · Transgender People: Provision of Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) for securing this important debate. She is the champion we all deserve, and she almost brought me to tears with her passion in opening the debate. I commend her work and her advocacy. She is a modern-day LGBT icon, and I feel privileged to serve with her. In a world that feels increasingly divided, debates like this matter because they force us to confront and test a simple but critical principle: the great, objective universality of our healthcare system—who gets access to healthcare, and who is treated? My gut, my politics and my experience as an LGBT person say everyone. I am sure that all Members present would agree that healthcare is not a privilege to be earned; it is a right grounded in dignity, compassion and evidence-based care. It is an inalienable right of every citizen of this country. To get to the nub of this debate, that means transgender people too, such as constituents who have come to see me in my surgeries. They are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for the same thing as any of us would expect: timely, safe and respectful healthcare, and dignity. I am sorry to say, however, that healthcare falls short for them. Thousands of transgender people are waiting years for first NHS appointments. Those are not just statistics, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth said, but people spending years of life in uncertainty and distress—years when people put their lives and careers on hold, delaying their education and questioning whether they will even survive long enough to be seen. Where care is delayed, it is denied, and 48,000 trans people are currently on waiting lists. Many are pushed towards unregulated overseas routes, not because they want to bypass safeguards but because the alternative feels unbearable. Families make decisions out of love and desperation, often fearing self-harm or suicide if they are left without support. That is not a failure of those families; it is a failure of an outdated system, which apparently is unfortunately questioning its duty to these individuals.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Transgender People: Provision of Healthcare · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that very relevant point. He took the words right out of my mouth, to quote Meat Loaf. We must also recognise that the wider picture, though, is that transgender people face questioning or even denial of their very existence as people. They face barriers not just in specialist gender and transitioning services, but across society as well as our healthcare system, including GP surgeries, maternity care, cancer screenings and mental health support. Too many avoid seeking help altogether not because they are disengaged, but because they fear being misunderstood, judged and discriminated against, or turned away, as unfortunately they are, as the evidence tells us. Taking this away from silly social media debates, evidence-led medicine, properly funded services and clear clinical guidance do not harm patients; they protect patients. In a world where there is still so much hostility, we have a responsibility and a duty to work harder to ensure that everyone has a place. I know that this Labour Government, at their core, believe that. This House has a responsibility to speak up for those individuals who are too often drowned out by fear and misinformation and by the madness of the online space because we owe it to the sort of country we want to be, where we consider everyone in a mature, dignified and rational way to be worthy of healthcare. I am not transgender, but I believe in fairness and the principle of good, timely, effective, universal access to healthcare, which applies to transgender people as much as anyone else, because at its core, this is about whether we meet people at their most vulnerable moments with care or with closed doors, and I know which side of that choice I stand on. I hope to hear the Minister take up the points my hon. Friend has made, and I hope to see a more dignified approach to this debate from all concerned in future.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the £50 million or £60 million that the Government have provided to Lancashire county council to provide good roads for my constituents. On the Minister’s point about business investment, I welcome the three-year holiday from the stamp duty reserve for new listings, which we are not talking about enough. That will be a huge benefit to newly listed companies in the UK and manages our competitiveness very well.

• 15 Dec 2025 · NHS: Winter Preparedness · Hansard source

  More

  I am so angry. I am sorry to say this, but I feel that by its actions today, the BMA is killing our NHS, and quite possibly my constituents and patients over the Christmas period, and it has become almost the midwife for privatisation under Reform. The Secretary of State has been robust in his role as patient advocate in chief, and more power to him in that, but will he go a step further and join me in appealing to resident doctors in my constituency and elsewhere, and say, “Go back into work and look after my constituents.”?

• 3 Dec 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q4. I declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on multiple sclerosis and as the proud son of a lifelong multiple sclerosis patient—she joins us in the Gallery today. Neurological conditions such as MS and Parkinson’s affect one in six, but wait times for first and follow-up neurology appointments have increased by a huge 65% since 2020, risking delayed treatment and diagnosis at a critical time. I am proud that this Government are bringing down NHS waiting lists, cutting admissions and investing in care and equipment. Will my right hon. and learned Friend formalise these efforts, support an NHS modern service framework for neurology and get these wait times down?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  This Budget sets out a serious and responsible direction for our country’s future and speaks directly to the needs of people in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield. It supports families and workers, puts the public finances back on stable ground and backs the businesses that are the backbone of towns like ours. Crucially, we are already seeing real, measurable progress for Britain after 14 years of incompetence, failure, stagnation and rampant inflation. Growth has been upgraded to 1.5% this year and wages have risen faster in our first year than during the last decade the Conservatives were in power. For people in towns like ours, those are not abstract statistics; they are the difference between treading water—constant struggle—and finally feeling as though we are moving forward again as a community and as a country. Families in my area have felt the squeeze more than most. I hear weekly about parents monitoring the thermostat hour by hour, commuters worried about every fare rise and households whose disposable income has simply evaporated with the cost of living. I welcome our plan, which gives people real relief right now: £150 off energy bills next year, rising to £300 for those who need it most; more support; more homes insulated and more homes built in towns in our constituencies; a freeze on rail fares, petrol duty and prescription charges; and, for our NHS, the largest reduction in waiting lists in almost 20 years, in addition to 250 new neighbourhood health centres, 5.2 million more NHS appointments and care brought closer to home, with more doctors and nurses. However, it is not just short-term support that matters; it is long-term renewal. We are maintaining the highest levels of public investment in 40 years, because our constituencies cannot rebuild on the foundations left behind after austerity and the chaos of 14 years of Tory Britain. Better transport connections, stronger and better-funded local services, investment in skills and young people, and higher-paid, quality jobs—these remain the building blocks of renewal in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield.

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  I will not, because of time. We are doing all that while paying down the national debt and getting into surplus—something promised several times by the Tories but, as far as I am aware, never done. We are doubling the fiscal headroom, which is a momentous achievement—something we are probably not shouting about enough—and taking responsibility for the public finances after the rank mismanagement of the previous Government. For too long, the welfare system that we inherited left working families too poor to eat and wrote off hundreds of thousands of people as too sick to work without offering them proper support. Indeed, when the shadow Chancellor was Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the welfare bill soared by £33 billion, and he put an extra 229,000 people into the welfare system. The welfare bill doubled during the Conservatives’ time in office, which is bad for our budget, our communities and the people they wrote off. We are finally putting that right. We are addressing poverty at the same time by scrapping the two-child limit, which is lifting 450,000 children out of poverty nationally, including a huge 5,170 children in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield. We are guaranteeing jobs for people under the age of 25, ending long-term youth unemployment and ensuring that no young person is abandoned. I am conscious of time, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just want to make a point about support for businesses. We have not only maintained Government capital investment plans, but made sure that we will lower permanently business rates for local employers and multipliers for our high street. We are doing this to create a stable and long-term approach for businesses. We are taking important steps such as relieving stamp duty on the first three years of new UK-listed companies for larger entities, which is our invitation to the world to do business here. That will have a direct effect on our competitiveness. We are putting in place more support for manufacturers in places such as my constituency, where energy bills have swelled over the last 10 years. We are extending capital allowances for business assets and leasing, and we are extending tariff suspension and support likewise. This will help some of my area’s largest employers to grow. In addition, we are extending NICs relief for those who hire veterans. Our measures include ISA reform to encourage investment into quite sizeable businesses. I am also interested in the call for evidence on firms with scale-up potential, which will end next year. All these steps will create growth for the economy and help my constituents, and I greatly welcome this Budget.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Flood Risk and Flood Defence Infrastructure: North-west England · Hansard source

  More

  It is great to hear about the record funding to tackle flooding. I wonder whether I can copy the words of another Member and invite the Minister to my constituency to see some of the great benefits of that funding increase in Padiham.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Flood Risk and Flood Defence Infrastructure: North-west England · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure, as ever, to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington South (Sarah Hall) for securing this critical debate, and praise her language, campaigning approach and resilience —that is really the buzzword for this topic. When we talk about flood risk in the north-west—not just in Burnley but, more obviously, in Padiham and Brierfield—we are not talking about abstract theories or far-off scenarios. We are talking about real people with water in their homes and shops, and about destruction. In Padiham, many families still recall the shock of waking to rising water, the distress of damaged homes and businesses, and the long clean-up that followed the Boxing day floods of 2015. Those experiences stay with our community. That is why the Padiham flood risk management scheme is so important and such a momentous project for Padiham. It is more than a construction project; it represents security, care and commitment to the people who live and work in our town. Once completed, the scheme will protect around 160 homes, businesses and public buildings in the centre of Padiham, and defend our community from the River Calder, the Green brook and the surface water that has caused so much destruction in the past. We are now seeing clear progress: the new flood wall and gate at Bendwood Close is already finished, detailed design work for the wider scheme is nearly complete and full construction is planned to begin in spring 2026, with completion expected by winter 2028. The investment gives the town something very valuable: the ability to look to the future with greater confidence. I put on record my recognition of the team effort that the scheme has been—it has spanned three Members of Parliament and 10 years of lobbying—and of the work of all involved, involving the Environment Agency, Burnley council, Councillor John Harbour, Councillor Barbara Dole, Councillor Alun Lewis and, indeed, the Minister, who I believe signed off the proposals last week, in her first week in office. I am proud that the Government have seen fit to fund the proposals, after the floods in 2015, and that residents and businesses can now have assurance that the scheme will be completed. I ask that the Environment Agency, which I thank for the work so far, does its best to keep the scheme on track and get it delivered. For residents, the scheme is about not just engineering, but peace of mind. It is about being able to put children to bed on a stormy night without worrying that the streets, shops and homes will be flooded in the morning. On Christmas day last year, I was contacted by businesses on Padiham high street; people were texting me as they watched the water levels in the Calder while enjoying their Christmas day turkey. This is about keeping the heart of Padiham strong, vibrant and protected for years to come. Padiham is a reminder that investment in flood resilience is ultimately an investment in people, their wellbeing, and the secure future that they deserve.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Welfare Spending · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for allowing me to contribute briefly on this huge topic. While I am glad to discuss welfare reform, I am perplexed as to why the Conservatives would want to do so, given their completely disastrous record. In response to the hon. Member for North West Norfolk (James Wild), I wonder whether he has read the plans for their £23 billion-worth of welfare cuts, on the back of the fag packet on which it is displayed, because there are no details to speak of on things such as housing benefit, which was raised by the Minister beforehand. I do not even think it is brass neck any more from the Conservatives; it is just desperate. Their hope is that we forget what they left us only last year, and forget what they were like in government: employment is lower than before the pandemic; 10 million households are now net recipients of Government support; 4.5 million children are growing up in poverty; 2.8 million people have been left languishing on waiting lists and out of work; and 1 million young people are out of work and have been left jobless in the first straits of their lives—all while we have record welfare spending, with billions of pounds spent every year on failure. Indeed, when the shadow Chancellor was at DWP—I made this point earlier—we saw the biggest rise in welfare spending since records began in 1996, including £33 billion in one year alone. The Conservatives have zero credibility on this issue and a record of expensive failure. It is a disastrous legacy, which they ought to be utterly ashamed of. They left people in this country languishing on benefits and left out of work, and left us to pick up the bill for years to come. I have touched on their plan, so I will not say any more on that, but it feels a bit like standing next to an arsonist who is watching a house on fire and complaining, “Someone should really put that out,” having started the fire. I am short of time, but I want to say something about reform—real reform, not the turquoise Tories of Reform UK, who I notice are not here for the debate and who I believe would destroy the welfare system as we understand it. We all know that welfare spending must come down, and we all want to get people into work—young people, disabled people and those who can, want and should work. The current system—the Conservatives’ system—does not enjoy public support system because of the Tories’ failure, and risks undermining the whole welfare state and social contract as we know it; hence our reforms earlier this year. If we believe in helping those who really need it—the disabled, the sick and those unable to work, whom the welfare state is designed for—we must make the tough choices that the Conservatives did not make over 14 years. The current front door for the work capability assessment is not fit for purpose, and I am glad that we are doing away with it, but neither is the assessment for personal independence payments, as it is considered by many to be out of date and unfit for the modern wave of claimants living with mental health conditions and likewise. I would welcome the Minister’s thoughts on whether more reform in this area would be welcome and will come. The arguments made for reform, which were explored in the papers earlier this year, still stand. Too many people are rolling on to PIP, too many are failing and falling out of work ill, and too many, having done so, are not re-entering the jobs market. So I am glad that we are stimulating more people into work through measures such as our £1 billion Pathways to Work guarantee. Because of the sheer number of applicants and particularly of successful applicants since the pandemic, we have to consider the appropriateness of some of the thresholds for people currently applying for PIP to ensure that the support is still there for those who really need it.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Welfare Spending · Hansard source

  More

  To quote the shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend thinks he is “so clever”, arguing with facts! Those facts are not particularly appreciated by those on the Conservative Benches. Does he agree that what is important in this debate is the people who were left destitute by the policies of 14 years of Conservative government?

• 4 Nov 2025 · Welfare Spending · Hansard source

  More

  On savings and leaving the next generation with a bill, can the hon. Lady remind the House just how much the now shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Central Devon (Sir Mel Stride), increased Department for Work and Pensions spending on welfare during his time in the Department? The figure I have on the tip of my tongue is somewhere north of £30 billion. Could she comment on that?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Jaguar Land Rover: Cyber-attack · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for that answer, for his work thus far, and for his extensive correspondence with me and the industry during this crisis. Local suppliers, such as the brilliant BCW in Burnley, have told me that the finance just is not getting to suppliers and that some of them are going to the wall or cutting jobs. JLR is not doing enough to avoid widespread supply chain job losses. This is affecting the entire British car industry through contagion effects, and suppliers are telling me that they are not out of the woods yet. What more can he do to get more support for our suppliers, such as BCW?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Jaguar Land Rover: Cyber-attack · Hansard source

  More

  15. What steps his Department is taking to support businesses in the Jaguar Land Rover supply chain affected by the recent cyber-attack.

• 29 Oct 2025 · Civil Justice Council Review of Litigation Funding · Hansard source

  More

  It is always a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mrs Harris. I thank the right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon (Sir Julian Smith) for securing the debate and allowing me briefly to contribute. When people go to court, they deserve justice, not a financial system that puts investors before victims, yet that is what litigation has too often become. We all remember the Post Office case, which the right hon. Gentleman eloquently discussed. It was one of the darkest chapters in recent legal memory. The postmasters fought for years to clear their names, yet when the settlement came in, around 80% of the damages—£46 million—went not to them, but to funders and lawyers. That is not right. This is not some distant issue that affects courts in London. In my constituency of Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield, many households were drawn into cavity wall insulation claims by legal vultures only to be left thousands of pounds in debt when the funder and law firm behind them, SSB, collapsed. Ordinary families were left exposed, with no resource and no protection. That failure should shame us all. We can do better by having effective regulation of the market. The Solicitors Regulation Authority and others still have questions to answer about SSB. More than 70 litigation funders are active in the UK, managing billions of pounds but operating with very little formal oversight. That gap leaves consumers exposed and confidence in our legal system weakened. The right hon. Gentleman has ably explained some of the practical recommendations in the Civil Justice Council report—in which Seema Kennedy, previously of this parish, although on the Conservative Benches, was also involved—so I will not go into them now. However, I hope that this Government take on board recommendations for greater transparency and oversight, clearer limits on funding controls, the strengthening of the ombudsman and alternative dispute resolutions, as has been mentioned, and court scrutiny of the profits and sources of funding of those taking these legal cases through. Those steps would restore fairness and integrity to collective actions and make sure that outcomes serve the people involved in these cases and not the profit motive. I know that my hon. and learned Friend the Minister has ambitions to address concerns in this area, perhaps in legislation. I look forward to hearing her response and I thank the right hon. Gentleman for allowing me to contribute.

• 11 Sept 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Padiham Greenway bridge has been closed since 2021. In December last year, this Government gave £280,000 to Sustrans to get the work finished, but there is a shortfall. The Government have given £19 million to Lancashire county council through the active travel fund and the capability fund to get this project online. Does the Minister agree that Lancashire county council should prioritise this and get it done? I thank him for his extensive correspondence with me on this topic.

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

  More

  Does the Minister agree that the £3 fare cap is an essential lifeline for people taking the bus from Burnley to Blackburn hospital, which was a service that I managed to secure through work with local transit companies and Lancashire county council?

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

  More

  I am glad to hear the Minister’s resolve and, indeed, the whole House’s united condemnation and shock at these outrageous attacks. The UK must stand firm with NATO, with Poland and with Europe, and we must increase our support for Ukraine and its neighbours including Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Lithuania and elsewhere. Following on from the previous question, what steps has the Minister taken to review our defences in the light of recent events?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Financial Services Reform · Hansard source

  More

  I also welcome my hon. Friend to her new role. Small businesses in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield are the lifeblood of our community, providing jobs and livelihoods to our people. Growing manufacturers and exporters such as the brilliant Barnes Aerospace in Burnley are doing an excellent job at taking Britain across the world. Will the Economic Secretary set out what the Government are doing to support small and medium-sized business, particularly our manufacturers, with access to finance?

• 9 Sept 2025 · Financial Services Reform · Hansard source

  More

  10. What steps she is taking to reform the financial services sector.

• 3 Sept 2025 · Property Taxes · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the surge in borrowing costs actually started with Liz Truss’s mini-Budget and has not really stopped since the trajectory started?

• 1 Sept 2025 · Borders and Asylum · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Home Secretary, the former Immigration Minister, has some brass neck, do we not think? He opened so many hotels that at one stage I thought he might take over from Lenny Henry in fronting Premier Inn. My constituents are so fed up with this, and I am glad that the Home Secretary is taking it so seriously, getting the numbers down. While we do everything we can to get the numbers down, does she agree that everyone involved in the debate, particularly politicians, should not incite or encourage the sort of aggression and, actually, sheer racism that we have seen over the summer, some of which was directed towards our brave police officers?

• 14 Jul 2025 · UK-France Migration: Co-operation · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Home Secretary’s action today. She is taking this problem seriously and is producing serious solutions and a serious strategy. It is now 80 days since the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) told the world on social media that, “The Reform UK policy unit has drafted a comprehensive strategy for the deportation of illegal migrants.” Has the Home Secretary seen that strategy yet, or indeed any detail of Reform’s plans? The Frenchman Jules Verne wrote that Phileas Fogg travelled the world in 80 days. Does she think that the leader of Reform has perhaps been too busy travelling the world, flogging gold and selling Cameos to produce any such strategy at all?

• 11 Jul 2025 · Courts (Remote Hearings) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for his considered contribution to the debate. I will be brief. He is making some reasonable points, but he is answering his own question. We currently have a bottleneck in the court system, and by being against the measures in the Bill, he is, probably inadvertently, making it easier for these people not to be seen by the court system. The Bill is reasonable and small, as I have said. If we can release some pressure in that bottleneck—the points he made about council tax debtors and others are quite right—more debt will be recovered and more miscreants will be seen in the criminal justice system, and that is always a good thing. He is making reasonable points, but he is answering his own question through the explanatory notes.

• 11 Jul 2025 · Courts (Remote Hearings) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time. We covered the Bill extensively in Committee, and there been a fairly wholesome debate about amendment 1 on Report. This is a sensible and proportionate Bill. It is slim and sophisticated, and I ask the House to approve its Third Reading.