Defence Investment Plan

Debate between Caroline Dinenage and Luke Pollard

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

My hon. Friend is a real champion for defence businesses in and around Bournemouth. I am really pleased that we were able to announce yesterday the universities and colleges across the country that will receive the uplift in student places, with the supplementary places grant that will enhance the skills provision. We have already enhanced the provision of skills for further education, with the announcement of five defence technical excellence colleges in England, hopefully two in Scotland if the Scottish Government will support a second one, and one in Wales. We need to go further with more higher education places in defence and defence-adjacent courses. The money announced yesterday, not just for Bournemouth but for universities and colleges nationwide, will help to support the next generation of talent to work in defence—good, well-paid, decent jobs.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I just cannot understand how it is that the Government still have no idea how they are going to pay for the DIP. According to media reports this morning, the DIP is likely to be half the bare minimum the defence sector says it needs and even defence chiefs still have not seen it. I wonder if the Minister could comment on those media reports. That is against the backdrop of every corner of our armed forces currently being asked to find cuts right now. The pips are squeaking in our armed forces, and defence employers in my constituency are still in a state of limbo and uncertainty about the future. I have enormous respect for the Minister, as he knows, but even he must see that this feels like chaos.

[Luke Pollard]

I equally have enormous respect for the hon. Lady, which is why I will say politely that I disagree with her characterisation. I will also politely say to her, as someone who reads the media speculation on what is in the DIP and what discussions have taken place, to not always believe what is written down online.

Defence Readiness

Debate between Caroline Dinenage and Luke Pollard

Wednesday 20th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

This Government have called for a ceasefire. We have called for increased aid to get to the people who need it. We have introduced arms export controls against those weapon systems that could be used in Gaza. We of course keep all export licences under review, but I think the whole House, whichever party we are in, wants to see a lasting peace and a two-state solution, so that the people of Gaza and Palestine can live side by side with a secure Israel. That is the effort that this Government are making in that respect.

The Conservative equipment plan that we inherited in July 2024 was overcommitted, underfunded and unsuited to the threats we now face. This Labour Government are rearming and renewing our armed forces and ending the Tory hollowing out and underfunding that we inherited. Our strategic defence review and our defence investment plan will put that right. [Interruption.] If the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) was listening to the Defence Secretary’s speech last night, he would have heard him say that it is getting close.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

When is the plan going to happen? I represent the constituency with the highest proportion of veterans in the UK. They take a keen interest in what goes on in our armed forces. We look across Portsmouth harbour to ships that are sat stationary, not going anywhere, and see a defence industry that is being undermined at every step. When will the Government actually put their words into action?

[Luke Pollard]

The hon. Member, like me, represents an area with a lot of military personnel and a lot of veterans. That is why I know that she will welcome the fact that veterans spending is at a record high under this Labour Government. We are working to deliver the defence investment plan, but that has not stopped us from investing in new capabilities, which I will come to in a moment.

New Medium Helicopter Contract

Debate between Caroline Dinenage and Luke Pollard

Monday 12th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

My hon. Friend is right to say that the defence industrial strategy is a key piece of the puzzle in building up our new armed forces. It was published last year—[Interruption.] The shadow Minister is asking where it is, but it is on the internet because it was published a number of months ago, so if he has not read it, he should have a read. My hon. Friend’s question about Rolls-Royce is important. We have given Rolls-Royce a £9 billion contract for new nuclear reactors to support the SSN-AUKUS work. That Unity contract is an important part that enables Rolls-Royce to invest in its infrastructure and, perhaps most importantly, in its skills base. I recently met Rolls-Royce, and I know it has plans to go even further with its product offer and employment opportunities, and I will continue to keep the House informed about those developments.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

The Secretary of State promised long-term partnerships with our domestic defence industry, but when the Government dither and delay in giving primes confidence with their big contracts, that directly impacts the ecosystem of brilliant British subprimes across our country. Those include StandardAero at Fleetlands in Gosport, which has the opportunity to provide the assemble and inspect test on the GE motor in Leonardo’s AW149. Fleetlands has been a key player in our country’s defence rotary wing history for 100 years. Does the Minister see how delay in that decision is not only holding back our world-class industry, but delivering uncertainty to key companies across our country and all the people they employ?

[Luke Pollard]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right to say that there are important defence companies in her constituency, and across the country. We continue to place contracts with the defence industry, with more than 1,000 placed since the general election, and over 80% of those with UK firms, and that is an important continuation of our efforts to renew our armed forces. I entirely understand her argument that we want more investment and certainty, and when the defence investment plan is published—shortly, I hope—that will provide clarity on the kit we are buying, and in what order and sequence. That will help to support the growth of British businesses both large and small.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Caroline Dinenage and Luke Pollard

Tuesday 23rd October 2018 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Care (Caroline Dinenage)]

Health and social care hubs are a great example of health and care systems coming together through sustainability and transformation partnerships and integrated care systems to transform services in local areas. The NHS long-term plan will set out how we will enable and encourage better integration.

[Luke Pollard]

The Minister will know that Plymouth is leading the way in developing health and social care wellbeing hubs. She will also know that we have bid for £15 million of funding to create more hubs across the city, especially in our city centre, to bring together NHS dentistry and dental schools, sexual and mental health support, social care and new forms of general practice. Will she do all that she can to look positively on that bid, so that we can help to improve our health outcomes?

[Caroline Dinenage]

I am really pleased that the hon. Gentleman has raised this issue. Plymouth is indeed leading the way in creating hubs and showing how incredibly valuable they are in bringing together all the relevant services in one place, not only to tackle people’s current healthcare needs but to play a vital role in prevention.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Caroline Dinenage and Luke Pollard

Tuesday 19th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) (Lab/Co-op)]

Much of the health and social care for people with learning disabilities in Plymouth is provided by Livewell Southwest, a social enterprise. The new pay increases for NHS staff will not be mapped over to social enterprise staff, so when they merge back into the NHS, we risk a two-tier workforce. Will the Minister consider extending the pay increases to support those who work with people with learning difficulties in the social enterprise sector so that we ensure that everyone doing the same job is paid the same amount?

[Caroline Dinenage]

The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. It would be terrible to see a health and social care sector in which people doing the same work are valued differently, so I will look carefully at the point he raises.

PACE Trial: People with ME

Debate between Caroline Dinenage and Luke Pollard

Tuesday 20th February 2018 Westminster Hall

[Caroline Dinenage]

I thank my right hon. Friend for her intervention. As has already been said, it is important that we listen to patients. As I will go on to explain, NICE is now looking at reviewing its guidance on this and, in the light of that, it may well be worth discussing the issue more fully.

[Luke Pollard (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) (Lab/Co-op)]

Does the Minister agree that believing patients is also important here? Patients with the condition are often not believed and concerns about the PACE trial have not been believed, and that has just loaded concerns on those individuals.

[Caroline Dinenage]

As I have already set out, sometimes it can take a really long time for this to be diagnosed. People have to keep going backwards and forwards to GPs and others with their symptoms. Many other potential conditions have to be discounted before it can be fully diagnosed, which often leaves people feeling that their symptoms are not being taken seriously or they are being dismissed. Obviously, that is massively concerning, which is why, as we have already said, it is important that patients are listened to and that clinical professionals are well-equipped to be able to recognise the symptoms and identify them.

As I said, the data has been examined more widely. Critics, including some clinical academics, have suggested that it shows CBT and GET are not as effective as the trial results suggested. In turn, the trial authors have defended their work. They have responded to criticisms in medical journals and the wider medical printed press. I know the hon. Member for Glasgow North West raised one such criticism at the oral evidence session of the Science and Technology Committee in January, concerning possible conflicts of interest of the PACE trial authors. On that point, in line with normal practice, all such conflicts were published with the trial protocol as well as the results. If she has evidence to the contrary, I would be very happy to discuss that with her afterwards.