Tom Gordon MP: speeches

Speeches

• 2 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T8. Last month, I met Anoosheh Ashoori and opened his exhibit “Surviving Evin” at a Harrogate district Amnesty International branch event at Ripon cathedral. Given the continued use of arbitrary detention and state-sponsored kidnapping and hostage-taking by Iran, what steps are the Government taking to strengthen protections for British nationals when abroad?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Driving Test Availability: South-east · Hansard source

  More

  As ever, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) on securing this important debate. The availability of driving tests is a subject of growing concern for families, young people and businesses in every constituency across the south-east and beyond. We have heard many fantastic interventions from Members representing areas ranging from the highlands of Scotland, down into the south-west and beyond. For many young people, learning to drive is not a luxury; as we have heard, it is a key to independence. It is the ability to reach a job, attend education or training, support family members and participate in society. I know this myself, having passed my test just before I turned 18. Fortunately, I passed first time with only a few minors. However, I lived in an area surrounded on three sides by North Yorkshire, so I had to cross the boundary into a different county to get to college. Rural public transport is poor, so driving really was necessary. Today, across the south-east and the whole country, that independence has been put on hold, limiting people’s opportunities. Driving test waiting times are at some of the highest levels in memory, and the effects are being felt deeply. I will reinforce some of the points made by my hon. Friend about the impact of long driving test waits on individuals across the country. Although this debate focuses on the south-east, it is undeniably a national problem that affects all corners of our United Kingdom. Learners and instructors—from my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough, down to Cornwall, up to Cumbria and beyond—are all reporting the same patterns of delay, frustration and rising costs. I recognise that the Department for Transport is committed to tackling the issue and that steps have been taken over the past year to bring the system back under control. Progress is welcome, but there are still real concerns about the timelines for implementing these changes, as well as about the unforeseen challenges arising from some of these decisions. We know the Government will not meet their commitment to return test waiting times to seven weeks by the end of this year, as originally promised. In fact, they have not been able to commit to meeting the target even by next summer. That is unacceptable, and it leaves those waiting for tests with little reassurance that there will be real, meaningful improvement in the short-to-medium term. We need clarity for learner drivers, so can the Minister tell us when the target will be met? Last year’s seven-point plan promised the recruitment of 450 new examiners, but a year later, we have seen a net gain of only about 40 examiners. That is a remarkable shortfall, so I would appreciate reassurance from the Minister about what additional steps will be taken to recruit and retain examiners. Recent retention payments are welcome, but it is a late intervention that does not address the structural issues of high staff turnover for test centre workers and examiners. We need a credible workforce strategy, not simply an emergency patch. The redeployment of MoD examiners is also welcome; every extra pair of hands makes a difference. However, it will only provide about 6,000 additional tests in a system that needs to deliver about 2 million tests in any given year. Frankly, it is a drop in the ocean. It will not meaningfully shift the national average waiting time, which is over 22 weeks, with many test centres already booked out to the maximum booking limit of 24 weeks. We have already heard much about the deeply unfair use of bots and third-party selling sites, which push up the price of tests. Let us be clear—such behaviour is entirely exploitative, undermines trust in the DVSA, and blocks genuine learners from accessing the transport they need to get around and have more opportunities. Recently, the Government have promised action and tried to beat bots in the ticketing industry. If we can combat profiteering for concerts and theatre bookings, we must ensure that we are doing the same for a core public service, such as the provision of driving tests. There must be a clear and enforceable ban on the resale of test slots, combined with tools strong enough to prevent bots from hoovering up appointments. Unless this issue is confronted head on, every other reform risks being undermined. A driving instructor in my constituency recently wrote to me describing the very real impact on her livelihood of long waits for tests. She is not in the south-east, but her experience mirrors those across the country. Students wait for months on end, blocks of lessons continue for far longer than necessary, and the financial pressure mounts for both learners and instructors. Driving instructors have also raised some serious concerns about recent proposals to prevent them from selecting test slots for their students. Although I understand the reasoning, namely to prevent manipulation of the booking system, the proposals risk having the opposite effect. Instructors play a vital gatekeeping role; they ensure that learners only book a test when they are ready to take one and an instructor is available to accompany them. Removing instructors from the process would risk making more learners book prematurely and consequently failing their test, which would add further pressure to an already strained system. It also increases the likelihood of cancellations when instructors are unavailable because they were not part of the booking process. The removal of a test swap function is another area of concern. Instructors often use this tool to correct honest mistakes or to allocate unused slots to other suitable learners. Removing it while bots remain rampant would simply give profiteers more opportunities. Until bots are under control, the Department should proceed cautiously in this regard.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Driving Test Availability: South-east · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister elaborate on whether there will be further input from driving instructors? Has there been an impact assessment of the effect that removing their ability to book tests will have on the system overall?

• 26 Nov 2025 · Driving Test Availability: South-east · Hansard source

  More

  I recognise that that is part of the problem, but we need a comprehensive solution in the round that does not simply add to the backlog and the other pressures on the system, which I have outlined. I would be grateful to the hon. Gentleman if he could come up with any solutions: I am sure the Minister would be all ears. I would be grateful if the Minister could outline what discussion he has had with instructors and professional bodies. Although the public consultations were rightly open to learners, there was concern that the voices of experienced instructors were overshadowed. Those professionals understand the system in a way that few others do. Their insight should be central to meaningful reform. Rural areas also face additional pressures. Limiting learners to booking at only two test centres disproportionately affects learners in remote areas. For places such as north Yorkshire, where test centres are sparse and over- subscribed, those restrictions can make securing any driving test at all nearly impossible. Rural test centres also experience greater disruption during severe weather. As we enter winter, the Department must now set out how it will prepare for and mitigate weather-related delays or cancellations, because otherwise the backlog will worsen further as we go into the depths of winter. In conclusion, the Liberal Democrats are campaigning to ensure that, especially in rural areas, more test centres are allowed to close the black market for bots, so that they are rooted out. We also want to ensure that more tests are delivered by increasing the instructor workforce and offering greater flexibility in scheduling, including out-of-hours tests where appropriate. We also want to see a clear plan for how test centres will operate during bad weather, which is an issue of growing importance as our winters become more severe and unpredictable. This issue is not just a procedural problem; it is a matter of fairness and opportunity. People’s lives have been held in suspension because of endless delays. Families are paying the price, rural communities are being left behind, and young people are being denied the independence they need to build their future. The Government must act with urgency, ambition and clarity. Learner drivers deserve nothing less.

• 24 Nov 2025 · Sale of Disposable Barbecues · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. During the course of the previous debate, I waited over four hours to speak. In the Minister’s winding-up speech, she did not acknowledge any of my contribution or the amendments. I believe I was the only Yorkshire MP to speak in the debate, and this underlines the point about how decisions are made about Yorkshire people and how they might be better made by a Yorkshire Parliament. What advice would you give me, Madam Deputy Speaker, on how I might pursue a response from the Minister?

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak to new clause 28. I thank my Liberal Democrat colleagues who tabled a similar amendment in Committee. New clause 28 would effectively allow a new form of regional governance. One thing that frustrates me at the moment—it is quite bonkers from a fairness perspective—is that Yorkshire has almost the population of Scotland, the economy of Wales, and a strong sense of identity, but unlike those countries, we do not have anywhere near the level of power. For too long, Westminster has handed Yorkshire crumbs and called it a settlement. There has been lots of talk this evening about regional mayors and powers, but Yorkshire was technically chopped into four different constituent components. Westminster has taken our ability to build across the region and be the real powerhouse that we could be. My new clause would allow the creation of a Yorkshire regional body, on a par with Scotland and Wales, and empower it with provision of health, education and transport. That would stop holding Yorkshire back and give us Yorkshire folk the tools to do what we know we need to do for our areas. Put simply, it would give Yorkshire solutions to Yorkshire problems. Currently, the mayoral arrangements across the area are disparate and vary wildly. The Labour Mayor of West Yorkshire, Tracy Brabin, has been elected twice on the promise of delivering a franchising of buses, which is yet to happen. We recently got a new mayor for York and North Yorkshire, but we are yet to see any meaningful investment on the ground for local people. I do not want mayors who are empowered to be glorified lobbyists in Westminster and Whitehall; I want to see real regional forms of government that empower people on the ground. Compared with other European countries that have meaningful forms of devolution and regional governance, we have a democratic deficit, so why not think big? On transport, we need to integrate across the entirety of Yorkshire—a transport for Yorkshire that does not simply stop at the borders of West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire. Investment in mass transit for Leeds, for example, involves the West Yorkshire area. People who live in my Harrogate and Knaresborough constituency commute, work and learn there, so giving a new regional body that power over transport would make sense. If Yorkshire had those powers and funding already, and people on the ground were in the driving seat and had a stake in the project, a Leeds mass transit system might have actually happened, rather than being endlessly promised, kiboshed, re-promised and then knocked on the head again. Devolving health powers to a local region such as Yorkshire makes massive sense. Yorkshire Cancer Research, which is based in my constituency, talks endlessly about the poor life outcomes of our region compared with places in the south of England. Why not have people who know best make the key decisions about what health interventions would make sense for our area? All those points about transport and health seek to fix something that has gone wrong in our system: Whitehall brings us to this place when we would be better off empowering people in our communities to take them forward. The naysayers will say, “It’s just a new form. There’d be more elections and more people involved.” We have seen that in the creation of combined authorities and mayoral authorities. What worries me is the fact that we have ended up with endless strategic directives and chief executives of new organisations. They often kowtow to diktats from Whitehall anyway, so where is the devolution? I want Yorkshire answers to Yorkshire problems. I hope that other people support that too.

• 24 Nov 2025 · English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I tabled new clause 28, which would make provision for a new form of regional governance. The explanatory statement specifically mentions that it would make provision for a Cornish assembly. I understand that when the hon. Member was on the Bill Committee, he might have abstained on such a measure. Can he elaborate on his thoughts about what he would like to see at a Cornish level?

• 19 Nov 2025 · Suicide: Reducing the Stigma · Hansard source

  More

  One of my constituents, Steve, founded the Jordan Legacy after he lost his son to suicide. Its work involves outreach to schools, universities, employers and community groups. I echo the point that the hon. Gentleman is making. Does he, like me, think that there should be more support for the fantastic work of such charities and organisations?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Efficiency Schemes: Consumer Confidence · Hansard source

  More

  6. What steps he is taking to improve consumer confidence in energy efficiency schemes.

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Efficiency Schemes: Consumer Confidence · Hansard source

  More

  I appreciate the response that the Minister has given. He will not be surprised to hear me banging on—

• 18 Nov 2025 · Energy Efficiency Schemes: Consumer Confidence · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister will not be surprised to hear me talking about spray foam insulation once again. One of the biggest frustrations that people have is that they do not have faith or trust in Government schemes because of the failure of the installation of spray foam insulation under the previous Government. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that mortgage lenders do away with the blanket ban on providing mortgages to people with spray foam insulation, what steps has he taken to reform TrustMark, and what consideration has he given to fixing the problem once and for all?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Land Use Change: Food Security · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Lady has talked a lot about housing and development infringement upon the green belt. An issue in my area, around the village of Scotton, is the proposal for a huge solar farm. While I completely agree and want to see that the targets and net zero are reached, does the right hon. Lady agree that rather than using prime agricultural land, we should be looking at the roofs of distribution warehousing and other alternatives first?

• 18 Nov 2025 · China Espionage: Government Security Response · Hansard source

  More

  I have previously mentioned that the Joint Committee on Human Rights report on transnational repression specifically singled out China for having the most comprehensive TNR campaign in the UK of any country. The report called for China to be on the enhanced tier of FIRS. If all the actions the Chinese Government are taking—the espionage, the bounties on people’s heads and the clear attempts to subvert democracy—do not qualify them to be on that enhanced tier, does that not undermine the scheme?

• 13 Nov 2025 · Rogue Builders · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) on securing this important debate. Over the last year, I have been campaigning on behalf of homeowners affected by faulty spray foam insulation installed under the previous Conservative Government’s green homes grant scheme. The aim was to improve the energy efficiency of homes across our country by offering households help to make their homes warmer, greener and cheaper to run. Many homeowners used the scheme to fund the installation of spray foam insulation. However, in a number of cases the installation was done incorrectly, causing moisture to become trapped, creating structural issues such as roof timber decay. Under the green homes grant, as with other Government retrofit schemes, homeowners were told that only TrustMark-approved contractors could carry out the work, yet we have seen substandard and unqualified contractors admitted to the scheme, carrying out poor-quality work and then disappearing when problems emerge, leaving homeowners to deal with the consequences. These cases have exposed a growing problem: the rise of rogue builders and traders operating under the banner of Government assurance. Although spray foam may seem niche, that case is not isolated. It is a symptom of a much deeper failure in oversight and consumer protection. The Government’s own quality assurance mechanism, TrustMark, as the hon. Member for Wyre Forest mentioned, is administered by the Department for Business and Trade, and it has failed in its most basic duty. TrustMark was established to ensure that only qualified and competent contractors were permitted to carry out work under Government-funded schemes, yet here we are with hundreds, if not thousands, of homeowners left with defective installations. Recent announcements about improper installation under the Great British insulation and ECO4 schemes have further highlighted this failure. To put it simply, TrustMark is not fit for purpose. If the Government are to tackle the issue of rogue builders, they must start with those that they endorse under their own schemes. The Department for Business and Trade must work more closely with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to ensure that future schemes are properly monitored, contractors rigorously vetted, and consumers protected. That must include a thorough evaluation of TrustMark’s capacity to deliver the effective consumer protection that it ought to offer. At present, it is failing to provide meaningful quality assurance or to keep rogue builders out. What is worse is that these failures have created a second wave of exploitation. Rogue traders are now targeting households that had any form of spray foam insulation and offering to remove it, at great cost, even where the insulation is properly installed and functional. In many cases, these removals, which are completely unnecessary, cause further damage to the property, leaving homeowners with even greater costs. These vulnerable consumers have been exploited not once, but twice: first by unfit contractors operating under a Government-endorsed quality scheme, and then by opportunistic builders and traders exploiting the chaos that that failure has created. As my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) mentioned, often the companies are then wound up, leaving people without a mechanism or a person to seek redress through. This is precisely why stronger oversight is needed. The Department must work with TrustMark to ensure that contractor vetting, auditing and enforcement are properly co-ordinated, leaving no room for unsuitable contractors to operate under the banner of Government assurance. Secondly, there must be clear and accessible routes to redress. Homeowners should not be left to navigate complex complaints systems or take costly legal action against builders who may already have vanished. While TrustMark offers a dispute resolution service, those who have tried it will know how difficult it is to access and how rarely it delivers meaningful outcomes. I therefore urge the Minister to take up this issue seriously. TrustMark must be reviewed, consumer protections must be strengthened, and we must clamp down on rogue builders who exploit public funds and private households. Rogue builders are not just a nuisance; they are a serious threat to consumer confidence, public spending and the integrity of the housing sector. It is time we treated them as such.

• 11 Nov 2025 · Autistic Adults: Employment · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure the hon. Gentleman is highlighting some fantastic work. I completely agree; there are great examples out there. What we need is a system that holds those up and champions them, and encourages people to do the same and do better across our country. That brings me to Access to Work, a system that is currently shutting people out. This is another part of the broken pipeline, and I want to be really clear: it is not fit for purpose. Everyone I speak to tells me that it is failing them. It was designed to support people but simply falls short. It is also failing the employers who want to do the right thing but cannot navigate the red tape. I have heard examples of businesses that reached out to try to secure training for staff, but that fell on deaf ears and was never taken up. And it is failing the economy by wasting talent that we desperately need.

• 11 Nov 2025 · Autistic Adults: Employment · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) on securing the debate. She outlined some fantastic best practice in Stockport, where I know she was a local councillor for many years. I am sure some of that work is down to her powerful advocacy for her constituents—those who are here today and those who are not. I thank all the families, campaigners and organisations who fight every day for change, not least because those in my own constituency, including our local branch of the National Autistic Society, who I meet regularly, have told me time and again about the sheer exhaustion that comes from trying to get a system that is supposed to help people to actually do what it is meant to do and what it promises. Many people face a broken path from school to work, with the journey from childhood from adulthood a series of locked doors. We hear of many families waiting for months—often years—for autism assessments, and we hear about teachers, undertrained and underfunded, struggling to provide the right support. One mother in Harrogate told me that by the time her son was finally diagnosed he was already told he was lazy, disruptive and difficult. How is any child meant to come back from that? That line has stuck with me because if we get things wrong in school, we do not just risk a bad exam result; we risk shaping how young people see themselves for years to come, into adulthood. That is why the Liberal Democrats believe fixing SEND is not just about education; it is about setting children up for life, too. We need early identification, we need properly funded support plans that do not depend on parents shouting the loudest, and we need schools to be judged on how inclusive they are, not just on pupils’ grades. If we want autistic adults to thrive in work, we have to start by helping autistic children thrive in school.

• 11 Nov 2025 · Autistic Adults: Employment · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree. This comes back to one of the systemic barriers that people face throughout the Access to Work system, and the barriers to employment for autistic people. Access to Work sounds good on paper. In practice, it has become a bureaucratic maze that far too many autistic people simply cannot navigate. I have spoken to constituents who waited six months, nine months and even more than a year for applications to be processed. It is simply not good enough. I have heard from people who have lost job offers because the scheme could not provide basic adjustments in time, from others whose support was suddenly cut back without explanation, and from employers, especially small ones, who gave up trying to help because the process was so unclear and too slow. Let us be honest: if Access to Work was a business, it would have gone under years ago. It is inefficient, unaccountable and detached from the lived reality of the people it is meant to serve. There is no consistency, no urgency and seemingly no understanding of autism. Many of the assessors have had little to no training in neurodiversity. Applicants are repeatedly asked to prove their condition and justify basic needs, and to fill in complex forms that would test the patience of anyone, let alone someone who suffers from communication or executive function issues that are daily challenges. It is not empowering; it is humiliating. The worst part of all is that people’s lives are on hold while they wait. I met one man who was offered a job by a local company. He was up front about his needs, honest, open and hopeful, and the employer was supportive, but trying to get adjustments in place through Access to Work took so long that he ended up losing the job offer. His confidence was shot. There is nothing about that that is acceptable, in any way, shape or form. Worryingly, that is not an isolated story. This is happening up and down the country, and it is something that people regularly email me about. What makes it worse is that we have known for years how to fix it. Backlogs can be cleared with proper staffing and resourcing. Delays can be reduced by digitising the system and simplifying forms. Training can be improved so that assessors actually understand neurodiversity. But the Government are seemingly sitting on their hands. The Buckland review made sensible suggestions and recommendations: awareness campaigns, better recruitment practices, inclusive workplace design and real career progression support. None of that requires new legislation. What did we get instead? Nothing. A review was launched and delayed, and now we are told that we might not get a proper Government response at all. It is really frustrating. Autistic people, who have waited long enough for change, are seemingly left out in the cold again. I have heard about recruitment processes that are commonly exclusionary and job adverts with open-ended interview questions that just make it impossible for people. When I met the Harrogate branch of the National Autistic Society, we spent about an hour and a half talking through these barriers. What really resonated with me is the desire and passion of people with autism who want to contribute, and we are simply not letting them. People’s fear of disclosure was also raised. They do not want to explain or even talk about their autism because they are not convinced that employers will help. One constituent of mine had been happily in employment for seven years, with the support of a really helpful line manager. When that manager left, there was seemingly a breakdown in the relationship with the workplace, which left her without the necessary adaptations and support. She ended up losing the job and has now been struggling to find alternative employment for two years. What needs to happen? We need a complete overhaul of Access to Work—not tweaks or new guidance, but a root-and-branch rebuild. That means clear targets for processing times, so that people are not left waiting for months; dedicated neurodiversity teams who actually understand the conditions that they are assessing; transparency, so that applicants can track their progress and appeal decisions easily; automatic continuity of support, so that when people change roles, they are not thrown back to square one; and, above all, trusting autistic people that they know what they need. If we did that, we would not only help thousands into work, but restore faith in a system that currently does the opposite. This is not meant to be about schemes and structures; it is about people. A woman in Harrogate told me that she had recently given up looking for work altogether—not because she does not want to work, but because the last time she tried to get support, she was made to feel like a fraud. She said: “I can cope with being autistic. I can’t cope with being disbelieved.” That sentence should haunt this Government. We talk endlessly in this place about productivity, growth and getting more people into work, yet we actively exclude people who want and are ready to work, because our systems are so rigid and slow. Fixing Access to Work will not solve everything, but it is one of the easiest, quickest and most practical steps that could make employment fairer for autistic people. If we linked that together with a proper SEND strategy that captures early need, supports families, trains teachers and equips young people with confidence, we would finally have a joined-up system that might be better at supporting people with autism from childhood into adulthood. That is what inclusion really means. I will end with this thought. Another constituent told me that what makes work hard for them is not being autistic, but the world around them not understanding what they need to thrive. There is a thread running through everything we have heard today. Autistic people do not need to change who they are. It is the systems, services and structures that need to change. Access to Work could be a bridge between ability and opportunity, but right now it is a barrier. Until that changes, we will keep on losing potential, wasting talent and letting people down. I urge the Minister to fix Access to Work and SEND, and to start building a society that sees autistic people not as a problem to solve, but as part of the solution.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Settlement route for British National (Overseas) visa holders · Hansard source

  More

  I present a petition on behalf of British national overseas passport holders in my constituency and beyond. The petition “Declares that altering the 5+1 settlement route for British National Overseas (BNO) passport holders, which currently allows them to apply for Indefinite Leave to remain after 5 years and citizenship a year after that,” which could be changed by the Government, would be “unfair…on a community of nearly 150,000 people who have made the UK their home following China’s imposition of a National Security Law on Hong Kong in 2020, and are largely expecting to become eligible for indefinite leave within the next year”. Locally in Harrogate and Knaresborough, we have a thriving Hongkonger community that contributes in all walks of life. I am personally grateful to Albert Kam, who has helped round up over 300 signatures for the petition. The petitioners “therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to change course and keep the current 5+1 settlement route in place for those British National (Overseas) visa holders already residing in the UK, to ensure that they can continue to settle” and contribute in their new lives in the UK. Following is the full text of the petition: [The petition of residents of the United Kingdom, Declares that altering the 5+1 settlement route for British National Overseas (BNO) passport holders, which currently allows them to apply for Indefinite Leave to remain after 5 years and citizenship a year after that, but would likely be changed to 10 years under current plans, would be an unfair change on a community of nearly 150,000 people who have made the UK their home following China's imposition of a National Security Law on Hong Kong in 2020, and are largely expecting to become eligible for indefinite leave within the next year ; and further declares that the changes will severely disrupt the dignity and stability of this group of people who are subject to transnational repression from China. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to change course and keep the current 5+1 settlement route in place for those British National (Overseas) visa holders already residing in the UK, to ensure that they can continue to settle into their new lives in the UK. And the petitioners remain, etc.] [P003125]

• 3 Nov 2025 · Video Games: Consumer Law · Hansard source

  More

  In my speech, I talked about the recent buy-out of EA. Part of the investment by the consortium is taking on large amounts of debt. Profitable games such as “FIFA” and other titles will now have to find money to service that debt. Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that equity companies and capital buying up games might hinder the market?

• 3 Nov 2025 · Video Games: Consumer Law · Hansard source

  More

  I completely agree. There has been a change in the way that people have been gaming—a silent, creeping approach over the years. When I started playing games, most of them were on CDs, which are now a thing of the past—we do not see those anymore, do we? There is a particular divergence between PC gaming, where it is easier to host servers remotely or privately, and consoles, where that is a little harder. I do not necessarily expect the Government to get into the weeds of that, but setting out some clear principles that gamers can expect would be a welcome first step. I thank the constituents who got in touch with me to raise this important matter and everyone who signed the petition, and I look forward to hearing what the Minister has to say.

• 3 Nov 2025 · Video Games: Consumer Law · Hansard source

  More

  It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell. There have been a number of instances in this place where I have had to come out: first as LGBT, then as Parliament’s biggest Swiftie, and today as a gamer. I have been playing computer games since I was a little kid. I remember waking up every morning before going to school to plug in the internet to download the latest bits for “The Sims”. It has been a staple of my life. As the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) highlighted, there are myriad reasons why people game—whether to switch off, unwind or make friends. It is a never-ending world of wonder for people who get into gaming, and I count myself as one of them. The issue is what happens when a developer goes bust, shuts down or is gobbled up in a merger? In those instances, it is not clear who bears the responsibility of hosting or running servers for online gaming. Most of the games I play are not online, but I understand from those who play them that we already see servers going offline or timing out. We only have to look at the recent gaming industry landscape: Electronic Arts has been bought up by a conglomerate, which includes Saudi Arabia and others, in a £55 billion deal. The acquisition will take it off the stock market and into private equity. We have also seen measures taken to replace developers with artificial intelligence. That puts a question mark on how long term and sustainable gaming on such platforms will be for consumers. What I would like to see—and I am sure many Members across the House will also invite the Minister to do this—is clearer, more tangible responsibility from Government and protections for consumers.

• 28 Oct 2025 · Support for Disabled Veterans · Hansard source

  More

  The armed forces covenant all too often does not live up to what people expect. I have a constituent who has struggled to access housing suitable for his needs. He has two children, but because he suffers with post-traumatic stress disorder and wakes up in the night with night terrors, the children are not able to stay with him. Does my hon. Friend agree that when it comes to housing, we need to do much more to support those who have served?

• 27 Oct 2025 · Holidays During School Term Time · Hansard source

  More

  The steps that the hon. Member is outlining seem clear and pragmatic. Local children used to take time off school to go to the Great Yorkshire Show. He talked about expanding horizons and the educational and vocational understanding of things. Does he agree that another pragmatic step would be allowing time off school for people to enjoy things like the Great Yorkshire Show?

• 23 Oct 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Last week I held a drop-in with the Great Start in Life Foundation, which supports health visitors and school nursing services across much of the north of England, helping children and families to get the best start in life. Will the Leader of the House congratulate that organisation on its work and find time for a debate on supporting and strengthening nought-to-19 public health services, which play such a vital role in improving outcomes for children and young people?

• 23 Oct 2025 · NHS Workforce Levels: Impact on Cancer Patients · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Clive Jones) on securing this important debate. It is unusual to be called so quickly; we are often oversubscribed, so it is a pleasure to be able to say something a little more substantive than what I had initially prepared. I want to talk about the impact on the workforce in my area, Harrogate and Knaresborough, and across the Yorkshire and Humber region. We need a strong and sustainable NHS workforce, which is critical to improving cancer outcomes. There is rising demand: the number of people in Yorkshire receiving urgent checks for cancer has doubled in the past 10 years and is projected to keep rising. Cancer services in our region are consistently failing to meet national targets. Action is desperately needed to make the NHS a more attractive and sustainable career choice. That includes investing in training, improving retention and prioritising staff wellbeing. One of the biggest frustrations I hear from local staff at our hospital is the inability to even find a place to park at work and the impact that that has on the surrounding area. I welcome the forthcoming workforce plan. I know that a number of organisations, including Yorkshire Cancer Research, will be keen to submit evidence to ensure that the needs of cancer patients in our region are fully addressed. We need to make sure that staffing levels are delivered and that the support for growing demand is not left behind. There are a number of gaps in the workforce across my patch. Yorkshire has the lowest rate of clinical and medical oncology consultants of any region in the country, at 5.1 per 100,000 people aged 50 and above, compared with 6.6 nationally and 11.3 in London. The regional shortfall in clinical oncology consultants is 18%, higher than the national average of 15%. As has been mentioned, we are also experiencing shortfalls and shortages in services and support staff, such as clinical radiologists. There is considerable concern, with 79% of clinical directors across Yorkshire and the Humber—the highest proportion in England—saying there are insufficient radiologists to deliver safe and effective care. The current shortfall is 33%, and the figure is projected to rise to 41% by 2029, placing Yorkshire among the worst-affected regions. We are also experiencing the complexity of an ageing workforce. Yorkshire and the Humber has the joint highest proportion of clinical radiologist consultants expected to retire over the next five years—22%, compared with 20% in the rest of England—and a lower than average forecast of growth in that role. I hear from local people that some of the barriers they face to accessing cancer pathways are at the point of general practice. Difficult conversations often occur at the GP. Timely access is crucial, yet we have significant variation in GP availability across the country and even across Yorkshire. For example, in Kingston upon Hull East, each GP services 3,664 patients, which is more than double the number in Sheffield South East. With one in two cancers diagnosed late, improving access to GPs is vital for early detection and therefore better outcomes. I have received a number of emails from people completing their training in the NHS as GPs and doctors on their concerns about their ability to find work. I hope the Minister—and, going forward, the workforce plan—can address that. Research-active hospitals deliver better survival outcomes, even for patients who are not directly involved in trials. For example, bowel cancer patients treated in NHS hospital trusts with high levels of research participation had improved survival outcomes in the first year after diagnosis. What worries me is that across Yorkshire we saw a 25% decline in clinical academic posts between 2012 and 2022, which was four times higher than the national decline. When we talk about the NHS workforce and its impact on cancer, it is important to acknowledge that the charity sector often supplements the work our NHS does. In my constituency, we have Harrogate Hospital and Community Charity, which is celebrating its 30th anniversary this year. I was pleased to run the Paris and London marathons to raise money for it earlier this year. It is a fantastic organisation that does amazing work on the ground, going above and beyond what the NHS can provide for people with a range of health issues. Last year, I was able to attend a Macmillan coffee morning at the Sir Robert Ogden Macmillan Centre, and today I attended the Macmillan coffee morning here in Parliament. Broadly speaking, the feedback I hear from anyone accessing cancer facilities and services in my patch is that our local provision is fantastic. One constituent, John Fox, who has recently gone through those services, described an amazing team that was supportive, caring and helpful. It is important, while we talk about the issues that we are facing, to highlight some of the positives and the good experiences that people have. In summary, what I would like to see going forward, and what I hope the Minister might be able to comment on, is how we will better invest in training, recruitment and retention of staff in the NHS and how we will address regional inequalities and support research capacity.