Debate on the Address

Bell Ribeiro-Addy Excerpts

Wednesday 13th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) (Lab)]

In 2024, the public voted for change, for an end to Tory chaos and for a Government who would transform their lives. That summer, our Government set out a King’s Speech to deliver that. In the past two years, in spite of everything, we have begun to make truly transformational changes, including ending no-fault evictions and finally scrapping the two-child benefit cap. Those are things that have changed lives, but today’s offering pales in comparison, perhaps because we have heard so much of it before, but definitely because it lacks the urgency and the radical transformation that we need. I do not believe that this is the “further and faster” that we have been hearing so much about. It seems that we have put the handbrake on offering change, and that we are wasting political capital on divisive measures that were not even in our manifesto, such as ID cards and curtailing the rights of asylum seekers.

I want to be clear that I am not in any way objecting to the King’s Speech. I am pleased to see measures like the Bills on conversion practices, on votes at 16, on tackling antisemitism and on reforming leaseholds, as well as the Hillsborough law and many other key measures, but why are we not doing more? What is there to shout about? Last week, the electorate sent our party a clear message that they were dissatisfied with the Government, and I do not believe that this is a King’s Speech to inspire them back to us. I do not believe that my constituents will hear this and think, “My life will be better when Labour introduces digital ID, replaces the water regulator and instigates another top-down reform of the NHS.”

At a time of great turmoil and difficulty, with global uncertainty hitting households in their pockets, people need policies that will ease the financial pressure they are under today. Building on the successes of the last legislative Session—and there were successes—I would have liked to see an extension of renters’ rights and the introduction of rent controls, especially in major cities where private rents are beyond extortionate. We acknowledge that those living in social housing need their rents capped and regulated, yet we disregard the thousands of low-income households and young people left at the mercy of the private rental markets.

I had also hoped to see a second employment rights Bill announced today. While the first one deserves significant praise, it does not go far enough. We need a Bill that will restore sectoral collective bargaining, give basic rights to the self-employed and gig economy workers, and commit to greater insourcing. The nationalisation of British Steel is welcome, but this should have been accompanied by the nationalisation of rail, mail, water, energy and other essential services. These are not mere industries; they are lifelines. They should never have been handed over to shareholders, and it is long past time we took them back.

I would have liked to see greater acknowledgement of the biggest existential crisis we face as a species, nationally, by reducing the planning burdens on solar farms and on offshore wind. If the Government really want to help people with their energy bills, we need to be switching to renewables much faster. Internationally, I would have liked to see steps to introduce debt cancellations for those climate-vulnerable nations who are fighting the crisis with their hands tied behind their backs. If we want to reduce the numbers of people seeking asylum, we need to work with allies to tackle the biggest causes of displacement.

As the only Labour MP to vote against the Brexit implementation agreement, I was very pleased to see measures on the strengthening of our relationship with the EU. We can now all stop pretending that Brexit was in any way a good idea. Watching the disastrous impact that it has had, I feel vindicated, but I would also advise the Government that, with all the Henry III clauses in that legislation, we could do so much more and faster, and we could do it in a way that would quickly benefit our nation.

I understand that some things take time, but other things are not hard. I would have liked to see steps to address the continued private sale of human remains. At the start of this year, I presented a simple Bill that ought to have ended the vile practice of human remains, many of which have unknown provenance, being bought and sold by private individuals. It would have been relatively straightforward to end this practice, but the Government have no plans to close this loophole and implement such legislation. As I said, I understand that these things take time, but there are some simple things that we could just get done. It feels like the Government may be inclined to capitulate to the right and row back on some of their climate goals, but I remind them that we lost more votes to the left of us than we did to the right of us; if we carry on doing the bare minimum on climate issues, this could only get worse.

I would also have welcomed steps to strengthen the citizenship rights of children who were born here or have grown up here, and to address the extortionate fees that block them from becoming citizens. I have raised this subject again and again in this House—just about every single year—and I was guaranteed that there would be some changes. I do not like being misled, inadvertently or otherwise, on such issues. Whatever our differences on migration, people right across this House agree that these children are not migrants, yet we continue to treat them like that and to price them out of their rights.

I acknowledge the fact that there are measures in this King’s Speech to tackle the cost of living crisis but, frankly, successive Governments have been skirting around this issue for years, making minor tweaks that slightly ease the pressure but do not go far enough. It is time to be bold and to consider the merits of a universal basic income. This is not a radical idea; it is a logical one. Poverty is a political choice. Even at these difficult times, we remain one of the richest countries in the world, so why do we have such a huge cost of living crisis? Why are people skipping meals, rationing heating and working themselves into the ground doing multiple jobs just to stay afloat? This does not happen by accident. It happens because those in power decided it was acceptable. For the avoidance of doubt, we are the ones in power. The question is not really affordability; it is whether we have the courage and the will to take on such a transformative policy. At the moment, it feels like we are offering piecemeal change and minor tweaks. They may be necessary, but I do not believe they will excite anyone or make the tangible change that we need.

I know that we cannot sell people the world, and systematic changes need to be made to facilitate reforms, but we cannot solely offer that and then tell people that their lives have been changed, especially not after the very clear message that the electorate delivered to us last week. People may call me unrealistic, but I would say that I am ambitious for what we can achieve in government right now in this parliamentary Session. Labour Governments have always accompanied radical transformational change in our society. This is the change that the electorate want—they made that very clear—and it is the change that we promised them, but I do not believe that this legislative agenda goes far enough to achieve it for them. The public are demanding more, and I believe that we can do more to give them that.