Peter Swallow MP: speeches

Speeches

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

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 2 Jun 2025 · Neighbourhood Policing · Hansard source

  More

  2. What recent progress her Department has made on improving neighbourhood policing in Bracknell Forest.

• 2 Jun 2025 · Neighbourhood Policing · Hansard source

  More

  Bracknell Forest has seen a spate of tool thefts recently. Tool theft is a double whammy: traders have to fork out thousands for new tools, all while they are out of work. I have raised this issue with Thames Valley police and the police and crime commissioner, but what more can be done through the Government’s neighbourhood policing guarantee to stamp down on this cruel crime?

• 22 May 2025 · School Teachers’ Review Body: Recommendations · Hansard source

  More

  I declare an interest, as I was a primary school governor right up until the election and I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment. It is quite shocking to hear Opposition Members’ protestations about school funding, given the absolutely dire state in which they left school funding after 14 years of Conservative government. When I speak to school leaders in my constituency, they tell me about their real and lasting struggles to balance their budgets. I understand that the Minister cannot speak today about the outcome of the review until the statement, but can she give us information more broadly about conversations she has had as part of the spending review, so that we can get the funding we need to invest in schools and turn around the dire situation we inherited?

• 22 May 2025 · Mental Health Bill: Legislative Scrutiny · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a really good point. It is vital, as we have seen across health, education and the justice system, that we get back to having a laser-like focus on early intervention, because we know that the earlier we intervene, the better it is for all involved. As he suggests, improving our mental health system through the measure recommended in the report would mean that we do not get to a crisis point where individuals have to be sectioned under the Mental Health Act. Instead, community support, which we know works when it is there, can be used to provide these individuals with the help they need.

• 22 May 2025 · Mental Health Bill: Legislative Scrutiny · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. We heard through our reporting of families being in real distress, particularly where a child is in treatment and where treatment is happening a long way away from where the family lives, making access to the family member even more difficult. The hon. Member’s point is really important. Of course, our Committee was scrutinising this Bill through the lens of human rights, though it was important to us, as I said in my statement, that we hear from those with lived experience of the mental health system to inform our recommendations. He makes a powerful point.

• 22 May 2025 · Mental Health Bill: Legislative Scrutiny · Hansard source

  More

  We did look at whether the process for assessing people was appropriate, and that issue came up. It is one where the individual’s human rights are exercised, and we must strike a careful balance between the need to protect them and those around them and to ensure that the deprivation of liberty is only ever a last resort. Off the top of my head, I seem to remember that the report finds that the balance currently struck is appropriate, albeit it is one that the Government should look at. If I have got that wrong, I will happily correct the record.

• 22 May 2025 · Mental Health Bill: Legislative Scrutiny · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to present to the House the Joint Committee on Human Rights’ report into the Mental Health Bill. As Members will know, the Joint Committee is a cross-party body of both Houses, chaired by Lord Alton of Liverpool, whose remit is to examine matters relating to human rights within the UK, including through legislative scrutiny. Over the course of our inquiry into the Bill, we have examined legal frameworks and witness submissions and, crucially, heard from those with direct experience of the mental health system. As part of our inquiry, the Committee convened a roundtable with individuals who had experienced detention under the Mental Health Act 1983. Their testimonies were powerful, candid and often harrowing. They spoke of the trauma of being sectioned, the overuse of medication and restraint, and the disempowerment from being detained in facilities that too often felt isolating rather than therapeutic. Participants have since shared with us “how important this visibility was to them, to see their evidence truly listened to and shared publicly”. Hearing directly from people with lived experience was not just informative; it was essential. These conversations grounded our scrutiny in the realities faced by patients and families. The insights shared at that roundtable shaped our thinking and sharpened our final recommendations. As one participant told us: “lived experience matters. Using it to inform policy should be the standard, not a shock.” I take this opportunity to thank all those who contributed to the roundtable, often at the cost of revisiting past trauma. The Committee is also grateful for the expert work of the Committee’s legal counsel, particularly Alex Gask who led on this work, as well as Thiago Simoes Froio and Hafsa Saeed who led on the delivery of the roundtable event. It became clear over the course of our scrutiny just how overdue the Mental Health Bill had become. It will introduce substantial changes to the Mental Health Act, which provides the legal framework for the detention and compulsory treatment of people with “mental disorders”—an outdated term, but one that remains part of our law. The changes introduced by the Bill will bring our mental health legislation into the 21st century, strengthen patient rights and help end practices that bring more harm than good. When people hear about detention under the Mental Health Act, many instinctively think of those who have committed the most serious and violent crimes. They picture high-security hospitals such as Broadmoor, which happens to be located in my constituency. I have had the opportunity to visit Broadmoor. The work they do there is outstanding; it is vital, world-leading work that deals with some of the most complex and challenging cases in psychiatric medicine. Let us be clear, though: the reality of detention under the Mental Health Act is not limited to high-security hospitals or individuals convicted of serious crimes. Many people detained under the Act are not criminals. Many of them are children, young people and adults with autism or learning disabilities who are detained not because they pose a danger to others, but because the support they need in their communities simply is not there. This is not just inefficient, it can often be deeply traumatising and raises significant human rights concerns. That is why the Committee welcomes the major changes introduced by the Government’s Bill. It will end the detention of individuals under section 3 of the Mental Health Act solely on the basis that they are autistic or have a learning disability; tighten the criteria for detention and require decision makers to consider the nature, degree and likelihood of harm before deciding to detain; introduce the concept of a nominated person to replace the outdated nearest relative system; and remove police stations and prisons as places of safety for individuals in crisis. As stated in the evidence we received from witnesses, those are important, welcomed and long-awaited reforms. They reflect the breadth of the Government’s consultations and prove that the Government listened to the information they received. While welcoming the Bill’s direction of travel, the Committee believes that there are areas where the Government could go even further to provide enhanced protections for human rights. That is why, based on the evidence we received during the inquiry, we have recommended a few key amendments. First, we recommend a new clause to ensure that children detained under the Mental Health Act are accommodated on adult wards only when that is demonstrably in their best interests. Secondly, we recommend an amendment to clause 1 to include equity as a fifth guiding principle under the Act. This would refer specifically to addressing inequalities in treatments and outcomes on racial grounds in particular, and I welcome the Health Secretary saying on Second Reading of the Bill on Monday: “People from ethnic minority communities, especially black African and Caribbean men, are more than three times as likely to be sectioned.” —[ Official Report , 19 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 783.] In our report, we find that adding equity as a guiding principle would do more to address racial disparities. Thirdly, we recommend an amendment to clause 32 to shorten the review periods for restricted patients who are discharged into conditions amounting to the deprivation of liberty. The first review will be required within six months, rather than 12, and subsequent reviews will take place annually, rather than every two years. Those key amendments come amid a range of other recommendations. Recent case law shows that mental health patients in state-commissioned and funded but privately provided care do not come within the protection of the Human Rights Act. That loophole must be closed, and we recommend that the Government do just that. We also heard evidence that the question of when the Mental Health Act and when the Mental Capacity Act should govern a patient’s deprivation of liberty and treatment is far too complex and raises human rights concerns, not least because depriving a person of their liberty on any ground can be justified only if the legal basis is clear. We therefore recommend that the Government carry out an urgent review and provide the clarity that is currently lacking on this question. Another crucial area the Bill covers is the rights of children, who are particularly vulnerable when assessed or treated under the Mental Health Act. Many of the proposed changes to the law will be positive for children, including the introduction of an opt-out approach to receiving a report from independent mental health advocates, but we recommend that the Government consult on introducing a statutory test for assessing whether under-16s are competent to consent or to refuse consent to treatment—a cornerstone of compliance with a child’s human rights. The Committee also deems it vital that prisoners whose mental health makes holding them in prison unsuitable are transferred promptly to an appropriate setting. Keeping them in prison may result in human rights breaches. In our report, we welcome the introduction in the Bill of a statutory 28-day timeframe for hospital transfer. Relevant data should be collected and made available to monitor and help to ensure compliance with that standard. The Committee welcomes changes to restriction orders placed on a small number of offenders detained under a hospital order, but the Government should consider introducing more prompt and regular reviews by the mental health tribunal, to ensure that any loss of liberty is justified. Witnesses told us that, in the absence of effective support in the community, autistic people and people with learning disabilities could still end up in unjustified detention on other legal bases. The Government have stated that the change in the Bill will come into force only where there are strong community services in place, but it is vital that this does not delay the much-needed reform. We therefore welcome the Government’s commitment to provide a written ministerial statement annually to both Houses of Parliament setting out progress to date on implementation. On what more the Bill could do to improve the prospects of patients receiving timely care in the community, we also ask the Government to consider introducing an English equivalent to the right to a mental health assessment that applies in Wales. The report makes it clear that much more is needed to fix the broken mental health system in this country, and I know the Government recognise that as well. This is a small, targeted Bill, which will not change everything, but the changes it will introduce are significant and long overdue. The Government have committed to introducing mental health experts in every school, to set up Young Futures hubs and to recruit 8,500 more mental health staff. By focusing on community-based interventions and driving down waiting lists for mental health support alongside the welcome changes in the Bill, we can turn the tide and fix our broken mental health system, so that the human rights of all those with mental health needs are properly protected and they can get the support they need. I commend this report to the House.

• 20 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source

  More

  Morrisons has said that the deal will “ease…pressure on food prices”, Asda has said it “has the potential to significantly reduce costs and bureaucracy”, and the British Retail Consortium has said it will help to “keep costs down”. Does the Prime Minister agree with their assessment that this deal will help families in Bracknell Forest and across the country facing a high cost of living?

• 19 May 2025 · National Security Act 2023: Charges · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and the Security Minister for his written statement last week on the work of the defending democracy taskforce. As the Home Secretary will be aware, the Joint Committee on Human Rights is conducting an inquiry into transnational repression. I am sure that she will look at our findings carefully. Will the state threats joint unit bring a cross-Government approach to the work on transnational repression so that we can tackle this important issue?

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

  More

  My right hon. Friend is touching on ways to strengthen this Bill even further. He will know that the Joint Committee on Human Rights has just this morning published our report on the Bill. We have praised it for all that it will do to address a number of inequalities, but we have picked out one or two areas where it could go even further. I know that he will not yet have had a chance to look at our report, but will he arrange for a meeting with members of the Committee and the relevant Minister to discuss our findings?

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Before Second Reading, I held a public meeting where I heard a range of views from my constituents. One thing that kept coming up was the need to protect medical professionals from being compelled to take part in assisted dying. I am really pleased to see that being addressed in new clause 10, but does my hon. Friend agree that having the choice to take part must go both ways for medical professionals?

• 13 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend confirm that this Government are totally opposed to the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza and are four-square behind restoring the ceasefire?

• 7 May 2025 · United States Film Tariff · Hansard source

  More

  Whether it is because of the fantastic, state-of-the-art Shinfield Studios just up the road, access to fantastic filming locations such as Swinley forest on the Crown Estate, or our incredible transport links, Bracknell Forest is increasingly becoming a go-to location for the film industry. As the Minister has already touched on, we need to see more emphasis placed on home-grown skills, so that young people in Bracknell can access the fantastic opportunities that the film sector offers. Will he say a bit more about what this Government will do to break down the barriers to opportunity in the film industry?

• 1 May 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T5. This month I met Berkshire Growth Hub, which works with businesses in Bracknell and beyond on everything from starting up to opportunities in AI. How can we ensure that growth hubs work with Skills England to continue to deliver local growth in communities such as mine?

• 29 Apr 2025 · The Future of Acoustic Couch, Bracknell · Hansard source

  More

  The Acoustic Couch is a fantastic, inclusive community-run grassroots music venue in the heart of Bracknell. Grassroots music venues play a huge role in communities across the country but have faced substantial difficulties in recent years, and I know the Government recognise the need to protect them. The petition states: The petition of residents of Bracknell and supporters of the Acoustic Couch, Declares that the Acoustic Couch is a community-run grassroots music venue that contributes richly to the culture and economy of Bracknell; further declares that the current venue which houses the Acoustic Couch is under a carpark that is no longer structurally sound, and will therefore be closed from the end of 2025; notes that Bracknell Forest Council has been working with the Acoustic Couch to identify possible alternative venues, but an affordable and accessible location has yet to be identified; and further declares that grassroots music venues across the country have faced substantial difficulties in recent years, and recognises the need to protect their invaluable contribution to our shared music heritage. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to consider what support can be made available to secure the future of the Acoustic Couch in Bracknell. And the petitioners remain, etc. [P003065]

• 28 Apr 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Fans of Reading football club, including the many in my constituency, will be anxious as they wait for the final game of the season. We are neck and neck with Leyton Orient, and a good result against Barnsley on Saturday—apologies to the Minister for Sport, my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley South (Stephanie Peacock)—will send them to the play-offs. Any football fan knows these jitters; they are an essential part of what makes the beautiful game so beautiful. The sad reality is that Reading fans are anxious for another, entirely avoidable reason: the stranglehold that their absent owner Dai Yongge has on their club. I will not rehearse it all now; I spoke about it in a Westminster Hall debate a few weeks back, and we have heard a lot tonight about the state of the club. However, with the EFL now finally forcing Dai Yongge to sell up, with a deadline of 5 May, Royals fans really are nervous. The Bill will come too late for Reading fans, but it is so important, because what has happened to Reading should never be allowed to happen to another club. I want to take this opportunity to praise the Supporters’ Trust at Reading, which has been fantastic in standing with the club and fans throughout this process. I thank the Secretary of State for meeting me and colleagues to discuss the plight of Reading, and I thank the Minister for meeting with us and staff. Staff welcomed the Bill, as have fan groups up and down the country, which makes it all the more shocking that the Tories have U-turned and are proposing to vote against it tonight. What the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) said—that it is all okay because no club has been lost irrevocably—is an indictment, and there is one party that has been completely silent tonight. Where are the Reform MPs? Why are they not in the Chamber standing up for the clubs in their constituencies? It is not good enough. I will quickly touch on three aspects where the Bill could go further and do what I hope it will: ensure that what happened to Reading is never repeated. The first is the protection of community assets. The Bill rightly protects stadiums, but it would be great to see more action on other community assets, including training grounds. The second is about giving fans a say in their club. It is so important that the Bill is strong, so that bad-faith clubs are not allowed to get away with simply paying lip service to these matters. Finally, it is so important that a fit owners test is included in the Bill, but we need to work out what will happen when bad owners are already in post or slip through the net. I recognise the huge complexities here, but Reading really is a cautionary tale.

• 28 Apr 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  rose —

• 28 Apr 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  The shadow Secretary of State says that he cares deeply about football and the communities that it unites. My patch is just down the road from Reading, where we have seen truly horrific scenes as a bad owner has ripped the heart out of the football club and driven it almost to the point of extinction. Reading fans back this Bill, and they do so because they know that the Bill will make it far harder for what has happened to Reading ever to happen again. So I ask the right hon. Gentleman: why will he not back this Bill?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with the hon. Gentleman that not all football club owners are maniacs determined to ruin their club, but I gently point out that this regulator will ensure that those clubs that do have such owners will be better protected in future. Does he not accept that point?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Football Governance Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I am genuinely astonished. The hon. Gentleman seems to be suggesting that a football team can be stripped to its very bones, and can limp along, barely alive but still being called a football team, and that should be good enough for fans. Is he genuinely suggesting that we should not have any more hope or ambition for the community clubs that make our towns?

• 28 Apr 2025 · Scientific and Regulatory Procedures: Use of Dogs · Hansard source

  More

  We are a nation of dog lovers and animal lovers. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is widespread public support for setting out a road map for ending the use of animal testing, so that the very sad stories that she is describing can be left in the history books, where they belong?

• 22 Apr 2025 · “For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling · Hansard source

  More

  I want to thank the Minister for these remarks in her statement: “Dignity and respect for all—those are the values that lift us up and set us free. Those are the values that define and distinguish any modern and compassionate society.” Will she just reiterate one more time that when this Government talk about increasing the support for equality for all, that really does mean all?

• 7 Apr 2025 · Road Maintenance · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely—I am very happy to do so. The reason why that investment is so badly needed, in Reading West and Mid Berkshire as well as in Bracknell, is the huge backlog of repairs we have inherited from the previous Government. As well as resurfacing major and residential roads that have not received the support they need for too long, this investment will allow for other upgrades, including a new toucan crossing between Halifax Road and Ranelagh Drive in Bracknell. Bracknell Forest council is also using that investment to address the pressing need for more parking. That is a massive issue in Bracknell, which has a number of old estates—previously social housing—where there is simply not enough parking for residents. However, because we have been putting residents’ priorities first, we have delivered more parking on estates through the grass verge conversion scheme. It is slow progress, and there is much more to be done, not least because it requires agreement between the local authority and the social housing providers. Although the Minister has very kindly spoken to me about this issue before, I ask her what more support she can set out. It is clear that these investments are not “job done”; there is a huge amount more to do to address the issues of potholes and parking. That is why I welcome the scrutiny enabled by the Government through annual progress reports, so that residents can see the actions that we and the local council are taking on their behalf. From October, there will be a duty to listen to residents’ priorities for what work needs to be done and where it needs to happen. I am proud to say that I believe Bracknell Forest council already does so, but extra focus is always welcome. I also want to touch on the issue of roadworks caused by utility companies. During the general election, there were a large number of roadworks in Crowthorne in my constituency, so much so that the joke on the doorstep was, “How do you leave Crowthorne? You don’t.” Crowthorne is a lovely place—I am very proud to live there—but one does occasionally have to leave. Just this weekend, I have been dealing with utility companies’ roadworks down Yorktown Road in Sandhurst. That road, which is the main road through Sandhurst, has been repeatedly dug up by utility companies. One constituent commented on Facebook, “I have worked out that since the start of the year, Yorktown Road has only been free from extremely disruptive roadworks for about 30 days”—that is 30 of the 100 or so days we have had this year. Can the Minister tell us what more we can do to make sure that those disruptive roadworks caused by utility companies do not repeatedly hit the same stretch of road, which sadly all too often leads to what was a resurfaced road only last year being left in a terrible state of repair? In the short time I have left, I will touch on another important element of our road network: buses. I am pleased that under this Labour Government, we have seen a £1 million investment into Bracknell Forest buses. That is more than in the previous three years combined. That has seen massive improvements to our local services, including the 194 bus, which now serves Buckler’s Park in Crowthorne. That has been able to leave, I am pleased to say. The X94 is now stopping at Martins Heron station, with more journeys between Heatherwood and Frimley Park hospitals, connecting our train stations and our hospitals up with our bus network. The council has also announced new companion passes for companions of disabled passengers to travel for free. More is coming with the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill, so that we can see greater local control over our bus network. With this Government, we are back in the driver’s seat, back behind the wheel and, I am proud to say, driving on resurfaced roads. There is more to do, and there are more potholes to be filled, but that is this Government’s plan for change, and it is delivering.