Wildfires: UK-Welsh Government Co-operation

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Tuesday 13th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I start by thanking my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) for securing this important debate.

Wildfires have had a profound impact on communities in Wales and across the UK this year. The scale of the challenge this summer was stark. More than 1,300 wildfires have been recorded across England, and I know that Wales was similarly impacted, resulting in the deployment of around 200 military personnel to south Wales to support the committed frontline crews protecting their communities. At the height of the activity, 11 major incidents were declared in a day across the UK, and some incidents lasted for more than 30 days. That put immense strain on frontline services that were also dealing with other emergencies. We owe immense gratitude to the firefighters, military personnel, local responders, land managers, volunteers and others who worked in difficult and dangerous conditions to protect people, homes, businesses and the natural environment.

[Becky Gittins (Clwyd East) (Lab)]

In my north-east Wales constituency, we saw the absolute best of community spirit in Halkyn and Windmill, where the community came out to do a post-wildfire litter pick to clear up the area. As the Minister has recognised, their efforts, along with those of firefighters and military personnel, were crucial. My right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) has put forward many ways to improve wildfire responses; does the Minister agree that the response this time also showed the importance of cross-border collaboration in tackling wildfires?

[Florence Eshalomi]

My hon. Friend raises an important point that demonstrates that wildfires cannot be responded to by emergency services alone: it takes the community, the people, voluntary organisations and a number of charities working together to respond. It is important that we have in place an action plan that includes cross-border and cross-Government work on responses.

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

The Minister is absolutely right. If we look at the wildfire management in Torfaen, the military personnel were deployed by the UK Government and the Secretary of State for Wales. Obviously, areas such as land management are devolved to the Welsh Government. The Minister is absolutely right about the number of agencies, but does she agree that we need a cross-Government plan to make sure we get that co-ordination right?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I will come on to that point, but I agree with my right hon. Friend. One of the reasons that the Prime Minister is calling the summit is to address that issue and to consider the national capability to respond. We want to make sure that we do not have a situation where we have more wildfires.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

My understanding is that North Wales fire and rescue service commissioned the provision of military aid to the civil authorities, and the Welsh Government backed it up. We need clarity, but the fundamental point is that it appears that across the United Kingdom, we have a real shortage of trained pilots and the equipment they need to bring water to fire situations in remote places. I would be interested to hear the Minister’s response to that point.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the right hon. Lady for raising that important point; those are key areas. It is about making sure we have the right people across the table when the summit is held. The summit cannot just be dictated by Whitehall; we must work on the ground with the devolved nations to make sure that the key people are around the table so that we can get the best solutions going forward.

Although fire and rescue policy is devolved, so each devolved Government is responsible for arrangements in their nation, the impacts and challenges of wildfires remain constant. We work in tandem as we face shared challenges. Tackling wildfires is a good example of where practical co-operation, drawing on mutual aid and specialist capability, sharing learning and co-operating on planning for complex incidents, can make a real difference. We saw the value of such co-ordination in Wales in the development of the national wildfire capability pilot earlier this year. The pilot established six specialist teams, with vehicles, equipment and expert training, that are ready to be deployed in response to significant incidents. Not only do the two teams from south Wales form part of this programme, but their expertise has been instrumental in increasing resilience across the UK.

Despite the advances, the severity of this year’s incidents exposes areas where arrangements must and can improve, including cross-border co-ordination, consistent data, forecasting public warnings, and the way that operational learning is shared. Aerial firefighting is another area that we need to re-examine, including how we most effectively utilise capability across the four nations. This is vital in ensuring that firefighters on the ground get the best possible support when the terrain, scale or accessibility makes their jobs especially difficult. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen and other Members have mentioned, the Government will hold a wildfire summit this autumn in response to these challenges, bringing together fire chiefs, the National Fire Chiefs Council, the Fire Brigades Union, and other key organisations, to turn the lessons from 2026 wildfires into action. It is vital to ensure that key organisations, local constituents and Members of Parliament are involved in that summit.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee will soon be publishing a report. When it comes to who will be in the room come that wildfire summit, will the hon. Member give me an undertaking that it will not only be the organisations, but the private individuals, the gamekeepers, land managers, farmers and shepherds, who are very often the first line of response? Can she ensure that their voices will be heard at the same time as all the organisations?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the right hon. Member for that point. He may be aware that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs have established joint governance to develop a wildfire action plan. They will be working to look at the attendees. I am sure that the hon. Member will make his representations, and I will pass those on to colleagues.

The Government are determined to support those on the frontline by ensuring that they have the capability, support and partnership they need to meet future challenges. We must act to reduce the risk of wildfire, improve readiness, strengthen frontline response and support communities to become more resilient. I know that Welsh colleagues will be holding their own summit later this month and we will continue to work and share insight with the Welsh Government, working together to enhance future readiness. The plan for the national wildfire summit is to look at the full risk cycle: prevention, readiness, response, recovery and adaptation. Work is already under way to improve forecasting and risk mapping, develop specialist capability and learn from this summer, ahead of future periods of heightened risk.

Better emergency response is only one part of the answer; wildfire resilience also depends on what happens before a fire starts. That means better forecasting and public information, responsible behaviour, proportionate land management and strong local readiness. Land managers, fire and rescue services, local authorities and local resilience forums all have an important role to play. By working together, they can understand local risk, protect vulnerable places and plan for the recovery as well as the response. By acting on the lessons learned from this year, we can improve readiness, strengthen specialist support, and make sure that Governments and responders share learning that has practical value.

[Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) for securing this debate, and to the Minister for giving way. I visited Ely fire station in my constituency and congratulated the firefighters there for their hard work. They asked me whether the summit will look at deterrents as well as prevention—they were in attendance at a fire, but arsonists then restarted the fire, so the firefighters do not feel that the sentencing laws are strong enough. Will the Minister look at that as part of the summit? Prevention is very important, but deterrents for arsonists are also important.

[Florence Eshalomi]

Just to reassure my hon. Friend and others, the agenda and themes for the summit have not been decided, but I am sure we will want to ensure that hon. and right hon. Members are able to feed in. As I mentioned, MHCLG and DEFRA are working on the joint summit, and there will be many opportunities for Members to feed in and ensure that we get the right people at the summit, and work on the right areas, so that we can get the best outcome.

I also want to take this opportunity to highlight the work of so many people on the ground. I thank the soldiers from the Queen’s Own Gurkha Logistic Regiment, the South Wales fire and rescue service and firefighters up and down the country for their help getting the relentless wildfire at Blaenavon under control. At the height of the summer, an emergency alert reached 55 million phones across England and Wales, demonstrating the shared nature of the risk and the importance of ensuring that we work across Governments to make sure out nations are safe.

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

Talking about people on the frontline, I am sure the Minister shares my horror that our firefighters did not have the personal protective equipment that they needed. I hope she will pass on to the relevant Minister as a matter of urgency that that is one practical thing that we really need to deal with.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my right hon. Friend for highlighting that; he will know that the National Fire Chiefs Council, the Fire Brigades Union and firefighters, alongside other organisations and groups, will be at the seminar. I am sure they will make their voices and representations heard loud and clear.

I also want to highlight the two constituents mentioned by my right hon. Friend, Anthony Watkins and Sara Warman, for their work and effort in making sure we continue to work in co-operation with UK Governments including the Welsh Government, looking at shared learning, resilience and ensuring that the right funding is brought forward to address these key areas.

By acting on the lessons learned this year, we can improve readiness. My Department is committed to continuing to work with the Welsh Government and the Governments of Scotland and Northern Ireland, as well as fire and rescue partners and communities across the UK. In conclusion, I once again thank my right hon. Friend for securing this debate and bringing the issue to the House.

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I have one final point. As I said in my speech, there is also an issue around how the UK Government calculated how much money went to the North York Moors National Park Authority for recovery from a peat fire, which is also the situation in Torfaen. Will the Minister undertake to speak to ministerial colleagues about this? I have written to ask how exactly that was calculated. I am sure that is something I could look at putting to the Welsh Government, so will the Minister undertake to secure a response for me?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I will take that away and write back to my right hon. Friend with further details. He will be aware that MHCLG also announced a £97 million upgrade to the national resilience assets, including equipment and national wildfire response capability pilots, with specialist firefighters, equipment and training positioned right across the UK, but I will come back to him in writing on that specific point.

I pay tribute to everyone who has responded across the UK and in Wales this summer, as well as the communities impacted on the frontline. Their experience must shape what we do next, and our focus must now be on applying those lessons before the next wildfire season.

Question put and agreed to.

Homes for Ukraine: Funding

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Tuesday 15th September 2026 Written Statements

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

Over the past four years, the Government have remained committed to supporting Ukrainians fleeing Putin’s illegal and unjustified full-scale invasion. Through the Homes for Ukraine scheme, we have welcomed over 181,000 Ukrainians to the UK. Our commitment to Ukraine and its people remains steadfast, as the Prime Minister made clear last month in making Kyiv the destination for his first international visit.

The Government are sincerely grateful to sponsors and hosts who have opened their homes to those fleeing from the invasion. They have played a truly pivotal role in helping Ukrainian families to find safety, stability and community in the UK. The response across the last four years reflects the generosity and solidarity of the public in providing sanctuary to those in need. In addition to sponsors and hosts, councils and voluntary and community sector organisations have been central to the strength and effectiveness of the Homes for Ukraine scheme.

Since the launch of the Homes for Ukraine scheme, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has provided two core types of funding to support those seeking sanctuary in the UK. Local authorities receive the Homes for Ukraine tariff—a payment made in respect of each arrival to meet their costs associated with the delivery of the programme. Sponsors and hosts can also claim thank you payments as a gesture of appreciation for their generosity in opening their homes. To date, the Government have provided over £1.81 billion in funding for the scheme.

The Homes for Ukraine scheme has evolved from an initial emergency response into a more established programme. The Government are therefore making changes to Homes for Ukraine funding to ensure that the scheme remains sustainable, so that we can continue to support those fleeing the war in Ukraine.

Changes to Homes for Ukraine funding

The following changes will take effect from 1 January 2027:

Where sponsors/hosts are claiming thank you payments from local authorities, the Government will reimburse local authorities via the Homes for Ukraine sponsor thank you grant at a rate of £100 per month, per household, irrespective of how long a guest has been on the Homes for Ukraine programme. This is a reduction from the current rate of £350 per month. All thank you payments made by local authorities during the Ukraine permission extension visa period will be reimbursed at a rate of £100 per month for a maximum of 18 months. Sponsors/hosts and guests are encouraged to consider what this change means for them. If a sponsor/host is looking to end sponsorship, then they could explore moving on to a more formal rental arrangement. Advice on renting a room in their home (including through the Government’s rent a room scheme) or renting out a property is available on gov.uk.

The Homes for Ukraine tariff will decrease from £5,900 to £3,300 for arrivals after 1 January 2027 to ensure this funding remains affordable. This funding can continue to be used flexibly to meet local and individual needs, and remains at a sustainable level that continues to meet core administrative costs, while still enabling investment in rematching and homelessness prevention activity.

Funding for the most vulnerable arrivals—unaccompanied minors—will remain at the current levels, in recognition of the complex needs and safeguarding requirements associated with unaccompanied minors. Local authorities will continue to receive multi-year tariff funding via the Homes for Ukraine eligible minor grant, which remains at £10,500 per arrival in year one and £6,100 for subsequent years.

Implementation and next steps

The Government will be writing to sponsors/hosts, local authority leaders and chief executives, and colleagues in the devolved Governments, to set out the planned changes to Homes for Ukraine funding.

Updated guidance will also be published on gov.uk. This guidance sets out the changes and what they mean in practice, including arrangements for local authority quarterly claims.

[HCWS351]

Residential Buildings: Safety Remediation

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Tuesday 15th September 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) for securing this important debate.

I thank all hon. Members who are here this morning. Nine years on, a number of them have rightly raised the tragic incident at Grenfell Tower. As a London MP, I vividly remember the night of 14 June 2017. My son had been born a week earlier, on 7 June. Watching TV throughout the night was like watching a horror film with flames and black pieces, not knowing that the black pieces coming out of the building were people jumping. It is right that this House is united in continuing to scrutinise the pace of remediation and the support available to those affected.

Many residents across the country have lived with uncertainty about the safety of their homes, their financial security and their ability to move on with their lives. We recognise the impact that building safety can have not only on people’s homes, but on their wellbeing and peace of mind. Nine years on from Grenfell, we have to be honest and say that there can be no justification for unsafe buildings remaining unaddressed. Although significant progress has been made, more than 4,000 buildings have been identified as requiring remediation, and too many residents continue to face the consequences of failures that they did not cause.

That is why this Government are committed to speeding up remediation, ensuring that those responsible bear the cost of making buildings safer, and strengthening protections for leaseholders and residents. Our objective is clear: to remove barriers to remediation, speed up delivery and ensure that people can feel safe and secure in their home. Since the launch of the remediation acceleration plan, more than 420 additional buildings over 11 metres have completed cladding remediation through the Government-funded scheme and the developer remediation contract, meaning that some 35,000 more residents are now living in safer homes. The Government have approved £2.1 billion of funding for cladding remediation since the plan was launched and have committed to more than £1 billion to accelerate remediation in the social housing sector.

But we recognise that further action is needed. We are considering how we can go further to protect residents, particularly those who fall outside existing protections, and to ensure that no responsible party can avoid its obligations. That is why we will build on the foundations established by the Building Safety Act through the forthcoming remediation Bill and our wider programme of building safety reforms.

The Bill will provide greater clarity and certainty about which buildings require remediation and the standards that must be met. It will strengthen regulators’ ability to check delay and non-compliance. It will improve routes to recover remediation costs from those responsible and ensure that residents have a pathway to remediation even where responsible entities fail to act or are unable to meet their obligations. Taken together, these reforms will strengthen accountability across the system and help to ensure that buildings are made safer faster.

I turn to some specific issues raised during the debate. The hon. Members for Surrey Heath and for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) raised the issue of PAS 9980. As hon. Members will know, PAS 9980 was developed by the British Standards Institution. The Government sponsored the BSI to review and update it to ensure that it remains fit for purpose and captures best practice, looking at the learnings since it was introduced in 2022.

As the hon. Member for Surrey Heath outlined, the BSI published an update to PAS 9980 yesterday. I do not agree with the hon. Member’s characterisation. PAS 9980 provides an industry-wide accepted methodology to enable qualified and experienced assessors to undertake the fire risk appraisal of external walls. It provides a consistent and proportionate building-specific approach to risk assessments and helps to achieve the right solutions for each building, keeping residents safe while preventing unnecessary and disruptive works. As the update highlights, it has improved the clarity of the structure and usability of PAS 9980, with the aim of achieving greater transparency and consistency by assessors. It does not, however, materially change how risks are assessed, so fire risk appraisals of external walls undertaken using a previous version of PAS 9980 will remain valid. Government remediation programmes require that fire risk appraisals of external walls be undertaken using this methodology.

To further safeguard quality and ensure consistency in assessments, the remediation Bill will mandate how external wall assessments are carried out, to align with our best practice remediation programmes and ensure a nationally consistent approach to remediation work. It will also establish mandatory auditing of fire risk appraisals of external walls in law. This requirement will reinforce trust in both the assessors and the outcomes. I hope that that helps to reassure hon. Members.

Several right hon. and hon. Members rightly mentioned the issue of fire risk assessors. Fire risk assessors perform a critical safety role, and it is essential that they are fully compliant and competent. We have therefore accepted the full recommendation in the Grenfell Tower inquiry phase 2 report for mandatory certifications of fire risk assessors. To meet the recommendation, we intend to bring into law mandatory compliance requirements for fire risk assessors to perform that vital role, subject to parliamentary approval and timescale.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

I welcome that step, but what the Minister says suggests it is some way off. Can she give some indication of the timescale for getting mandatory licensing in place?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I agree that many people will continue to question when the fire risk assessors will be in place. The Government recently launched a public consultation on the proposal to establish a fire risk assessor profession with consistently high levels of competency, whereby trust is rebuilt and a strong and diverse pipeline of talent comes forward to ensure that fire safety standards are met. We are currently analysing all the consultation responses, and the Government will publish a full response later this autumn, so hopefully my hon. Friend will not have to wait much longer.

We recognise the additional pressures on building control and fire engineer capacity across the country. We have established the independent building control panel and the fire engineers advisory panel to examine the issues and provide recommendations on strengthening the system. The Government are committed to working with the BSR on long-term reform and exploring options for a more efficient building control system. Any future changes will be developed in consultation with the industry and other stakeholders.

[Dame Meg Hillier]

We all want to see stronger and better building control, but local authorities have been hollowed out. We have lost a lot of experienced planners and there is not always a pipeline coming through with the necessary experience. Can we lobby the Treasury for support for local government in that respect?

[Florence Eshalomi]

My hon. Friend will know that I will definitely continue to lobby Treasury colleagues very hard, and any help from colleagues around the House will be helpful. In the meantime, the current system includes a new initiative looking at digital building control programmes. I can confirm that over £45 million has been invested in growing the workforce to help to address the key issue of capacity, streamline the process and support development. More is coming, but a lot more needs to come through the pipeline.

A number of Members, including the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, mentioned the key issue of building insurance and the continuing financial strain felt by so many innocent leaseholders. They see their insurance premiums going through the roof, in some cases paying more than for their mortgages. In the remediation acceleration plan, the Government have committed to working with the insurance industry to explore options to address the insurance challenges faced by residents living in buildings that are undergoing remediation.

To strengthen the evidence base, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government launched the remediation programme insurance survey, a UK-wide survey of buildings in Government remediation programmes. The findings, first published in July 2026, provide the most comprehensive dataset collected to date on insurance costs, premiums and claims and remediation status across more than 2,000 buildings undergoing remediation. The evidence is informing ongoing engagement with insurers and wider work to understand how insurance costs can better reflect improvements in building safety as remediation progresses. The Financial Conduct Authority is undertaking a short and focused review of the multi-occupancy building insurance market, and the findings will strengthen the evidence base on the next steps.

The Government are also undertaking action to improve transparency and fairness in residential building insurance. We are proceeding with secondary legislation to prevent insurance commissions, which can be opaque and excessive, from being passed on by freeholders and managing agents as freeholders’ expenses, and to replace such arrangements with fair and transparent permitted insurance payments with a fee structure. Alongside that, we will introduce through secondary legislation a new transparency requirement for building insurance, including in respect of the disclosure of the relationships and financial arrangements among landlords, managing agents, brokers and insurers.

[Jeremy Corbyn]

I am pleased to hear what the Minister just said about looking at the fairness of the whole market for insurance, but the immediate issue is that many of our constituents have for several years paid exorbitant and very excessive insurance costs. This is not their responsibility or fault—they did not install the dangerous cladding or fail to inspect properly. They deserve compensation from the insurance industry for what they have been through, and if that is not forthcoming, the Government should have a default position of backing it up. Our constituents have suffered grievously through this problem.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the right hon. Member for raising that point. He highlighted examples of various developments in his constituency, including Drayton Park and Highbury Gardens, underlining the fact that innocent leaseholders have continued to pay exorbitant fees for many years. It is really important that we get to grips with this, especially for new buildings. I know that my right hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning will be discussing the matter in respect of the national planning policy framework and some other areas, and I will continue to discuss it as well. On the specific issue of backdating, it is important for us to look at clear insurance procurement—the pricing, the cover, the prescribed timeframes for providing information and the mechanism for challenging any future delays.

Together, the measures the Government have outlined are intended to improve transparency, strengthen accountability and help to ensure that residents have a clearer understanding of insurance costs. There is a lot of jargon and hidden figures. We need to make sure that the costs are clear and that when residents challenge them, they get the right information back so that they can assess what they are being asked to pay for.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Minister for her answers; she is giving a comprehensive and detailed response, as I knew she would. Ever mindful that she has been in place for only a short time, I have a specific question about what is happening here compared with the situation back home. We have an outstanding problem with many properties in Belfast. It would be helpful if we were able, perhaps through the Minister, to engage with the Northern Ireland Assembly, and in particular the relevant Minister there, to ensure that what is learned here can be passed on to those back home in the Assembly.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the hon. Member for raising a valid point about what lessons can be learned from what happens in the UK. As he has outlined, buildings right across the UK need to be safe. Every home needs to be safe; it does not matter where a person lives. I am very open to looking at areas of best practice, which we can share as we develop legislation.

Several Members, including the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, outlined the big issue with EWS1 forms, which has caused many homeowners a great deal of stress. The Government recognise the difficulties in selling and remortgaging homes, and the concerns for residents living in buildings impacted by building safety issues. We have continued to work with major mortgage lenders to improve access to lending for affected buildings and support the functioning of the housing market while remediation progresses.

The hon. Gentleman referred to concerns about the validity of certain EWS1 forms. I can confirm that my Department is aware of those concerns, which relate to a fire engineer who was removed from his professional accrediting body and is, as I understand it, no longer operating in the field. Although I cannot comment on individual cases, it is important to reiterate that the EWS1 form is not an official Government form but an industry tool used by lenders and valuers to help them to understand the remediation status of participating buildings.

My officials continue to engage with the mortgage lending industry to encourage it to take a proportionate approach when using EWS1 forms. The Government consider that lenders should be moving away from the forms, but there is still an over-reliance on them. The hon. Gentleman highlighted an additional bill of £4,500 because of the delay in getting an EWS1 form. We understand that EWS1 forms continue to be used by individual lenders, and the Government will continue to stress loudly that lenders should move away from that requirement.

A number of Members highlighted the issue of cost and who pays for historical remediation. The Building Safety Act puts the responsibility for undertaking, and in most cases paying for, remediation on the building’s landlords, while making it very clear that developers must pay to fix buildings that they have developed or refurbished even if they no longer own them. Courts have new powers to extend liability to associated companies, thereby stopping complex corporate structures being used to dodge responsibility. This was not fair and took a mental toll on many homeowners.

Where a developer cannot be identified or has not yet agreed to pay, public funding is available to address life-threatening cladding risk on residential buildings over 11 metres high, so that no leaseholder in those buildings will face cladding remediation costs. Many holders of qualifying leases are protected in full from non-cladding and interim measures—for example, where the landlord or its group meets the contribution condition or where the property value is below the set threshold.

Other qualifying leaseholders have their costs firmly capped and spread over 10 years, with costs already paid out since 28 June 2017 counting towards the cap. For obvious reasons, in Greater London the cap is £15,000 and across the country it is £10,000. That rises to £50,000 for properties valued between £1 million and £2 million, and to £100,000 for properties valued at more than £2 million.

The hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington mentioned the building safety levy, which will come into force on 1 October and will raise funds to pay for the remediation of cladding on residential buildings where the developer cannot be held responsible or identified. That is a key element for ensuring trust.

Under the work started by the previous Government, 53 developers signed the developer-led remediation contract with the Government. The contract covers more than 2,000 buildings in England that are over 11 metres high and have life-critical fire safety defects. Developers have contributed and committed to pay or fix the matter, at a cost of around £4.2 billion. Any developer that fails to comply with the remediation obligations faces significant commercial consequences, including the imposition of statutory prohibitions, effectively preventing them from building new homes in England. We expect all developers to accelerate their remediation work without compromising safety.

[Luke Myer]

That is very positive, but of course those are the developers that are willing to engage, and many of them are not. I recently spoke to Carl Harris from Teesside who suffered life-changing injuries when a wall collapsed on him. He has been trying to engage the sector with an innovation he has developed to prevent unfinished walls from collapsing. What more can the Government do to encourage developers who are not already involved to innovate and protect workers and residents?

[Florence Eshalomi]

rose—

[Dr Andrew Murrison (in the Chair)]

Minister, please allow a couple of minutes for the winding-up speech.

[Florence Eshalomi]

As of April 2026, developers had assessed whether remediation work was required in 94% of their buildings. Despite the progress, there is still a lot to do. Some developers are behind that stretch target and we will continue to engage with them.

The Government remain firmly committed to building a safety regime that is robust, proportionate and protects residents while enabling the delivery of much-needed homes. We have listened to concerns and have already taken decisive steps to strengthen the regulator’s capacity, improve its processes and ensure it is fit for purpose. We will continue to work with the industry, residents and Parliament to ensure that the regulation delivers effectively.

I am grateful for all the points Members have raised and will come back to them on any points I have not addressed, especially where they raised individual constituency cases. I look forward to the ongoing dialogue as we continue to address this really important issue.

Battle of Cable Street: 90th anniversary

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Monday 14th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

I congratulate my fellow London MP and hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum) on securing this timely debate. She referred to a number of issues that sadly are still happening on our streets. She also referred to the tragic death of 25-year-old Altab Ali in 1978. I remember when I first learned about the history of that park and the fact that it was renamed in 1998 following his death in 1978. When people go to Whitechapel and see that arch, the history and significance of that is powerful. My hon. Friend and my hon. Friend the Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Rushanara Ali) highlighted their shared connection in that proud part of the east end.

The battle of Cable Street was a defining moment in the history of the city that I and my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse proudly represent. When Londoners blocked Mosley’s antisemites from marching, they showed the world that hatred and intolerance have no place on these streets. London, both then and now, is built on solidarity across our differences. I am proud that we are a hugely diverse city—it is a key component of our success. We are bonded by being Londoners. We look out for each other in London. This is the point that the fascists back then could not comprehend, and it is exactly what far-right extremists today fail to understand.

The 4 October 1936 was not just a significant moment in London’s history; it was pivotal in the history of British Jews. It was Jewish communities that Mosley was targeting, and it was Jewish communities who led the response and built the barricades against the fascists, made with anything they could find from nearby streets and builders’ yards. In the many years since, the Jewish community has been at the heart of London’s culture, identity and great achievements. Yet, 90 years on, Jewish people continue to face the same ugly brutality and racism here in our city.

I can testify to that first hand. As an MP working directly with many different communities, I was deeply disturbed to be confronted by the casual, day-to-day antisemitism on our streets. We remember with deep sadness the victims of Heaton Park—I attended a memorial with the Secretary of State on the bank holiday on 31 August, meeting the families of the two people who were tragically killed—and the stabbing of two Jewish men in Golders Green. But we must do much more than remember; we must confront this hate where it persists in educational settings, workplaces, public services and beyond.

Today we are here to celebrate the resistance of 1936, but we must also draw lessons from it in how we confront the hatred we see today. In the aftermath, as my hon. Friend mentioned, Ministers introduced a ban on marching in uniforms and required demonstrations to notify the police of their intentions. These principles remain important today. The Government have demonstrated through action their unwavering commitment to tackling antisemitism. We must also be alert to how Mosley’s political violence was financed by far-right extremists abroad and raise our defences again today. But the most important lesson from Cable Street is that it was the local community that stood up against hate and division.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

Is the anniversary not also an opportunity for us to pay tribute to the trade union movement and the countless working people who stood against racism, fascism and hatred? It is in the spirit of the trade union movement’s best traditions: collective responsibility, solidarity, and fighting prejudice and discrimination, wherever it occurs.

--- Later in debate ---

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the importance of that solidarity, which our hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse also highlighted.

It was local residents from many different backgrounds, including trade unionists, east-enders and those from migrant communities, who told the vocal minority, “Your hate does not represent us.”

Today, our Jewish friends and neighbours, in the face of antisemitism, need us all to stand with them again. This Government have taken a firm stance against antisemitism and are tackling it across businesses, civil society, health, education, culture and policing. That commitment is backed by action, including £32.4 million for Jewish community protective security, alongside a wider £251.1 million policing package over the next three years, a £1 million expansion of the Common Ground programme for communities facing antisemitism, and up to £7 million to tackle antisemitism in schools, colleges and universities.

In 1936 the fascists wanted to march through the east end because its boroughs were predominantly Jewish. Today it is also home to Muslims, and for that reason the far right today often try to whip up their hate through so-called demonstrations through the east end. They will not succeed, be it in Whitechapel or elsewhere in the country, for the same reason that they failed back then: London and Britain are home to good, decent people—people who are proud to be British across ethnicities and religions.

We are addressing the root cause of division through investment in cohesion and inter-faith initiatives. As we set out in our social cohesion action plan, “Protecting What Matters”, we are providing a further £800 million to bring communities together to decide where investment is spent in our neighbourhoods. Overall, our Pride in Place programme is providing up to £5.8 billion over 10 years to support 284 places. This will serve as a cornerstone of this Government’s support for communities.

We are also supporting inter-faith work, continuing to bring forward programmes such as Near Neighbours, which brings people together in religiously and ethnically diverse neighbourhoods, and growing Inter Faith Week to strengthen understanding and interaction between people of different faiths.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that peace walks, such as the one I attended yesterday in Rugby, where members of the community, members of different faith groups and people of no faith, walked between different religious establishments, are an important part of that inter-faith work, showing that ordinary people want to come together, irrespective of their background, faith or ethnic background, and unite as one community against those who would divide us?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. Many community initiatives, including many peace walks, some of which I have attended in my constituency, are so vital where people can come together—as my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss) mentioned, local people, real people and trade unionists all coming together to show that solidarity.

We are taking wider steps to boost faith and belief literacy. But none of this can substitute for a very clear position that antisemitism, far-right extremists and political violence have no place in Britain. So I say to the blackshirts then and to the thugs now, we continue to say, “No pasarán! They shall not pass!”

Question put and agreed to.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2: Progress Report

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Thursday 10th September 2026 Written Statements

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

My noble Friend the Minister for Building Safety, Fire and Resilience (Baroness Blake of Leeds CBE) has today made the following statement:

The Grenfell Tower fire was a preventable tragedy that claimed 72 lives and exposed deep-rooted weaknesses in the systems designed to keep people safe. It remains a profound failure of oversight and accountability which should never have happened and the bereaved, survivors and local community remain at the heart of our response.

This Government accepted the inquiry’s findings and are today publishing the September 2026 Grenfell Tower inquiry Government progress report to update on work under way to implement the recommendations. Since May 2026, we have completed a further nine recommendations, bringing the total of closed recommendations to 30 since February 2025. We remain on track to deliver all recommendations by the end of 2029.

Alongside the September progress report, we are publishing the interim chief construction adviser’s final report.

Together, the progress report and the interim chief construction adviser’s final report demonstrate continued progress in implementing the Grenfell Tower inquiry’s recommendations and reforming the wider building safety system. They represent important steps towards sustained system-wide change by reducing fragmentation, strengthening accountability and ensuring that those responsible for building and fire safety have the support and oversight needed to keep people safe in their homes.

The Government recognise that lasting change requires sustained transparency and oversight. We have delivered the inquiry’s recommendation on transparency through our new dashboards which publicly track progress to deliver accepted recommendations across inquiries, alongside our regular progress reports on Grenfell implementation. Parliament also has an important role to play in overseeing how Government implement recommendations and I await the outcome of PACAC's work in early 2027.

[HCWS331]

Social Housing Bill [Lords]

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 10th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for bringing their experience and expertise to today’s debate. Like many of them, I was fortunate enough to live in social housing, which my family secured following a period of homelessness in my childhood. My hon. Friend the Member for Normanton and Hemsworth (Jon Trickett) mentioned the relief, and that light in your eyes when you get a set of keys and know that you and your family do not have to move yet again with plastic bags and a suitcase. The relief that social housing brought us, the safety and security of having a roof over our heads, was priceless. I share the disappointment and anger expressed by Members from across this House about the fact that this is not available to many families today. Many Members highlighted the importance of social housing to communities up and down the country.

I turn first to the reasoned amendment to the Bill, tabled by the Opposition. While I am happy to see the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking), a fellow former member of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, I am worried to hear Opposition Front Benchers contradicting themselves. They welcome our support for protections for victims of domestic abuse, but I am disappointed with their contradictory response to our wider reforms. They both want to permit homes to be sold under the right to buy at the unsustainable rate that is discouraging our local councils from building more of them, and say that we should support more councils in building and increasing the supply of social homes, but it cannot work like that.

I am mindful of time—we do need to finish—but I want to reflect on some remarks made. My constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), spoke about protecting tenants who are fleeing violence. I am sad to say that I have had to help three families in my constituency who, tragically, have lost young people due to knife crime. It is important that we look at this issue and highlight some of the changes that were outlined by my right hon. Friend the Housing Minister.

Many Members raised the issue of shared ownership. As the Housing Minister outlined, we have taken positive steps to look at the shared ownership model, including the expectations on landlords who bid for shared ownership funding. As the Minister highlighted, we do not believe that a review is necessary, but we are already considering specific issues that have been raised, including about data and long-term affordability for customers. We will report back on that at a later date.

[Andrew Cooper]

Is my hon. Friend aware of how difficult it is to sell a shared ownership home when the previous owner is deceased? The estate can end up paying service charges and rent for quite a long period. Will she consider whether there is further action that the Government could take on that?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that point. I think that will be one of the areas that we consider when my right hon. Friend the Housing Minister looks at shared ownership.

A number of right hon. and hon. Members mentioned domestic abuse and debt. It is really important to know that this is a key area for survivors of domestic abuse. The Government are committed to addressing this issue in their national plan to end homelessness. We believe that the best route for doing so is to ensure that the regulations are amended and the relevant legislation is looked at. My understanding is that the Housing Minister will look at that. I am due to meet the all-party parliamentary group on domestic violence and abuse, which was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum), and I would welcome other hon. Members attending that meeting.

A number of hon. Members mentioned council disposals. I recognise the strength of feeling in the House on this matter. I want to reassure hon. Members that we take the issue very seriously. We want local authorities and housing associations to, where possible, retain homes in the social housing sector. We believe the new disposals notification requirements in the Bill will help to maximise opportunities for social housing providers to retain homes. I repeat what my right hon. Friend the Housing Minister highlighted: housing associations remain independent organisations, responsible for their own asset management decisions. However, we will continue to explore what further steps we can take to stop social housing stock being sold.

Our right to buy reforms will mean a net gain of 18,000 social homes over the next 10 years, whereas there would be a loss of 26,000 homes if we retained the current system. The right to buy remains a crucial route into home ownership, but we must also confront the reality: social house building has struggled to keep pace with sales under the right to buy, and that has resulted in an increase in the number of families in costly temporary accommodation and expanded social housing waiting lists across the country. Our right to buy reforms, notably the new build exemption, will give councils the confidence to get building again.

We refute the accusation that we are doing nothing to ensure that social housing is being used effectively. The Government expect social housing landlords to maximise the use of existing homes, as well as to build more. We have launched a review of how effectively social housing providers use their properties. We will report on its findings later this year.

On the Opposition’s concerns about the allocation of social housing to non-UK nationals, the Government do not support restricting social housing solely to British citizens. Such an approach would be unworkable and would cut across legal obligations, including obligations relating to EU citizens with settled status and the Equality Act 2010. Eligibility for social housing is already tightly controlled by local councils. If a person’s immigration status does not allow them recourse to public funds, they are not eligible for social homes. The racist rhetoric and the demonising of people who want to work has to stop. The vast majority of those allocated social homes in the UK are UK nationals. That is a fact, so I hope that the Opposition will withdraw their amendment on the issue.

When the Prime Minister stood on the steps of No. 10, he put building more council homes at the heart of this Government’s agenda. For far too long successive Governments have failed to deliver the homes that we need up and down the country, while simultaneously failing to protect our housing stock. We know we can and must go further.

The Bill is about bringing an end to the era of failure on social housing; it is about protecting the homes that we have and supporting the building of the new homes we need; it is about ensuring that the system works fairly for those who need it the most; and it is about reducing the overreliance on temporary accommodation that is crippling so many councils, up and down the country. Collectively, London councils are spending £5.5 million a day on temporary accommodation. That is unsustainable.

We need to turbocharge social housing, up and down the country. Social housing is not just about a roof over people’s heads; it creates strong connected communities, enables families to live happily, enables healthy lives and provides long-term sustainable housing. The Government are making progress to reverse the decline of social housebuilding, as represented by the latest figures from Homes England showing a 65% increase in social rent completions.

Across the country, almost 180,000 children are growing up in temporary accommodation. As many hon. Members have mentioned, over 1.3 million people are on the housing waiting list. That has a devastating impact on the wellbeing of our children and families, who are facing poor conditions, lacking the space to grow. How can we expect those young children to contribute to society in later life when they do not have a safe place to call their home? The Bill brings an end to that failure.

The Bill provides the crucial step that many families want to see—the same step my family was given many years ago. It ensures that when families face homelessness and women are fleeing domestic abuse with their children, they are not the ones who are evicted—the perpetrator is. The Bill ensures that we restrict right-to-buy sales, and that 100% of the receipts go back to councils so that they can reinvest in their local areas.

The Bill will ensure that we turbocharge and bring a new lease of life to local council building across the country, working with our councils, providers, housing associations and private developers to get the housing right. It is important that we continue to progress the Bill. I commend it to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. Before I put the question, I need to inform the House that in the event of a Division—I pass no comment on whether there will be one—some of the pass readers in both Lobbies are currently not in operation. I ask all Members to follow the directions of Doorkeepers and Division Clerks and use the working pass readers, which have notices on them. The Parliamentary Digital Service are working hard to restore the remaining pass readers for any Divisions tomorrow.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

Retirement Property Management Companies: Regulation

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

May I congratulate the hon. Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare) on securing the debate and thank him for his kind remarks on my appointment? I have fond memories of shadowing him when I was in opposition. I know that he has a breadth of knowledge across housing, communities and local government, and that this issue is close to his heart. I also thank the other Members for their contributions.

I want to start by reassuring the hon. Gentleman that although this area sits with my colleague the Minister for Housing and Planning, I have been looking at it and will feed back to him on the key issues. The contributions have highlighted a really important area: the many challenges that leaseholders across the country, and especially elderly leaseholders, are facing with management companies, with flagrant disregard for people who have worked so hard to secure their property and live independently.

The hon. Gentleman highlighted the key areas where management companies continue to let people down, including issues with transparency, accountability, communication, responding to issues, raising complaints and unaudited accounts. Those are basic things that management companies should be doing. I think about elderly leaseholders and how, for many of them, if they do not have a network of family support helping them to navigate this, it can feel predatory, as the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) highlighted. When someone receives those letters with demands, it can be quite scary.

We recognise the hugely important role that the older people’s housing sector plays—I do think there is a role for it—in ensuring people have independence in later life. We want to be able to make sure of that. We are keeping people out of hospital, and that can only happen if they have a safe and secure home of their own to go back to. The Government are committed to enhancing provisions and choice across the residential market, including for older people, and that means both increasing the supply of homes to older people and, most importantly, improving their experience in their own homes.

Many residents of retirement homes have made a significant financial and, in some cases, personal contribution to their homes, and they should have the confidence that when they raise valid concerns, those should be addressed promptly and in a timely manner. When they challenge bad practice, they should get a response and they should not have to come to their Members of Parliament. Yet we are seeing so many people resorting to raising issues and parliamentarians having to name and shame management companies until any action is taken. That should not be the way that things are happening.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

I am delighted to see the Minister in her place. I am sure she will remember that the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee recently scrutinised the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill. We found it wanting; it did not go far or fast enough. The solution to the problems outlined in this debate is to properly regulate property managing agents and especially those that run retirement homes for the vulnerable elderly. Does the Minister agree that the Bill needs to come back urgently with that regulation?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I hope the Select Committee is going very well. The hon. Gentleman will know that this is an issue that we championed on the Committee to the point that, if he recalls, in many senses I harassed the former Prime Minister and the Minister for Housing, saying “When will we see the Bill? The Bill has to come before the House. It is an issue that comes into many parliamentarians’ inboxes, it is a cross-party issue and we want to see the Government act on that and make good on that commitment.”

I want to highlight that there are many good managing agents out there. This is not about saying that the issue of managing agents is all bad. There are good ones who are responsible, who respond on time and who are responsible for providing safe and secure homes for their residents. However, we know that far too often, the poor and unscrupulous managing agents let the sector down.

Managing agents play an important role in the maintenance of a wide range of multi-occupancy buildings and freehold estates. Their importance will only increase as we transition towards a commonhold future, so it is essential that we take action to drive up the standards within the sector. As the hon. Member for North Dorset and other hon. Members will know, the previous Government committed to regulating managing agents in 2018 and asked a working group chaired by Lord Best to advise them on how to do that. Yet, they failed to respond to the group’s final report, which was published in July 2019. We have moved on from that. It is about how we now take those recommendations and bring an outcome for so many people, and the Government are ready to take forward a number of those recommendations.

The retirement sector has some specific arrangements in place. Many retirement housing managing agents already operate under the Association of Retirement Housing Managers’ code of practice, which sets the standards on transparency and complaints handling, but as we have heard this evening that does not seem to be working and it is about how we ensure that we are enforcing some of those key areas. Elsewhere in the sector, similar consumer protection standards are promoted through the Associated Retirement Community Operators’ consumer code for its members. I stress again: we recognise the concerns that remain in parts of the sector and are considering how we can protect consumers and residents to strengthen that and have a consistent approach.

In the recent consultation on strengthening leaseholder protections over charges and services, we consulted on powers to appoint a manager or to replace a managing agent, as well as on mandatory professional qualifications for managing agents in England. The Government will consult on the introduction of qualifications for estate and letting agents next year. We have also made it clear that we plan to introduce a code of practice this year setting out the minimum standards expected of all residential property agents. This includes estate, letting and managing agents. The Government are considering Lord Best’s report in full, and we will set out our overarching position on the regulation of estate, letting and managing agents in due course, but this has to come at a timely pace.

[Tom Gordon]

I mentioned earlier in response to the hon. Member for North Dorset (Simon Hoare) that this was in some sense analogous to the issues that park home residents face. While there is a fit and proper person test in that instance, it is often lacking and not the tightening regulation that people had hoped for. What measures will the Minister bring forward, having learned from those experiences, to ensure that we get proper regulation that has teeth and that will work?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage—

[Tom Gordon]

Harrogate and Knaresborough.

[Florence Eshalomi]

Nearly right! My apologies. That is an issue that I will definitely be forwarding. I have taken a note of it and I will forward it to the Housing Minister so that the hon. Gentleman can get a proper response.

[Tessa Munt]

When the Minister says managing agents, does she mean management companies, a bit like FirstPort, which provide a lamentable service? One of the retirement buildings in my patch has just been offered the repainting of its windows for £240,000. I think that works out at over £5,000 per flat. This is just for the birds. It is absolutely bonkers. I want to be sure that they will be captured within the legislation that she is proposing.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I can reassure the hon. Lady that FirstPort continues to come up regularly. I had the pleasure, in my former role as Chair of the Select Committee, of scrutinising and questioning the managing director and chief exec of FirstPort, and the hon. Lady will be aware that the Housing Minister has also held important meetings with FirstPort. There are other managing agents that we should not let off the hook, but FirstPort has a large share of properties across the country.

The hon. Member for North Dorset mentioned the consultation on section 20, and this is a key issue that the Government have been looking at. The Government consulted on that last year, and my understanding is that they will be setting out the response in due course. Again, this is something that I will push the Housing Minister on, on the hon. Gentleman’s behalf, to ensure we come back to this in a timely manner.

I also want to highlight the experiences that other hon. Members have raised on behalf of their constituents. It is important that we continue to share these really valid examples to show why we need to move at pace in regulating this important area. We recognise that the pre-legislative scrutiny report into the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill recommended that a number of measures should be extended to retirement providers, and we will consider that as part of our work. I am happy to say that it was a good Member of Parliament who led on that pre-legislative scrutiny.

I am grateful to the many hon. Members who have come to the House this evening to debate this important issue. I thank them for sharing their insights and, most importantly, sharing the lived examples and concerns that many residents continue to face. We continue to see people who are worried, when another bill or letter comes through the door, about what will be demanded from them. We see them worry that, when they do not respond to those letters, they could be issued with court and threatening letters. It is really important that we address this emotional, physical and mental impact; it is not just about the financial impact it is having on vulnerable residents. I want to thank all Members for engaging with this, and I look forward to working with them. I know that the Minister for Housing and Planning will also be engaging further with Members.

Question put and agreed to.

Draft Building Safety Levy (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2026

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Monday 7th September 2026 General Committees

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the draft Building Safety Levy (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2026.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. The remediation of residential buildings with unsafe cladding in England is a priority for this Government. Nine years on from the Grenfell tragedy, there is no justification for any building to remain unsafe. Helping residents to feel safe in their homes and to move on from this issue is crucial work.

The Government are committing £5.2 billion of taxpayers’ money to the costs of remediation, and the building safety levy is an essential part of the remediation funding package, which will protect leaseholders from costs and ensure that taxpayers are not further burdened. We estimate that the levy needs to raise £3.4 billion, likely over 10 years or more. The revenue target may be adjusted in accordance with the number of buildings requiring remediation and the costs of works. The levy regulations were made in November 2025 and will come into force on 1 October 2026. These draft amending regulations will clarify how the levy will work and are intended to come into force on 1 October.

The levy will be charged on certain building control applications for new residential floorspace in England. It is important to note that developers have known about the levy since February 2021 and about its rates since March 2025, providing a significant lead-in period to plan for and incorporate the costs into their projects. The levy has been designed to ensure that the tax base remains wide enough to fund essential remediation, while protecting housing supply. The impact on the viability of new development has been kept as low as possible with rates that vary by local authority, indexed to local average house prices. There is also a 50% discount for brownfield sites. Social and affordable housing is exempt, as are small sites with fewer than 10 units. The levy will start being charged on new applications from 1 October 2026. We have been working closely with local authorities, private sector-registered building control approvers, and IT providers to support implementation ahead of commencement.

I turn now to explaining the changes that the draft regulations will make. The Building Safety Levy (England) Regulations 2025 allow for development on previously developed land—often referred to as brownfield land—to benefit from a 50% discount levy rate. That recognises the higher cost of building on that type of land and protects the viability of development on brownfield sites. My officials received feedback that the definition of previously developed land was not clear. In particular, stakeholders noted that it was not clear that car parks and other areas of hardstanding that would appear as previously developed could qualify for the discount.

Our intention has always been to support the development of sites with those features, so the draft regulations amend the definition to make it clear where areas of hardstanding can qualify. That will better reflect the original policy intention and will, I hope, make it easier for local authorities and developers to understand which sites qualify for the discount, reducing costly and time-consuming disputes.

The draft regulations and updated guidance provide more information about how the changes will work, and the instrument also makes a small number of minor technical amendments and corrections. The regulations do not change the fundamental design of the levy but provide clarification on previously developed land and make a small number of technical amendments to support implementation. We will keep the rates and processes under review, and will report on them at least every three years. I commend the draft regulations to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the Opposition for their positive contributions to this debate. In that spirit, we need to continue to work across parties to address this important issue.

The shadow Minister asked about viability, a key issue that continues to come up. As he mentioned, we both serve as London MPs and see the impact across London and right across the country. It is important to recognise that the levy has been designed to minimise potential housing supply while also balancing the revenue required to make homes safe. The measures include variable rates to local authority levies and a 50% discount on developments on previously developed land, reflecting the additional costs of building on those sites.

As I highlighted in my opening remarks, affordable housing is exempt from the levy, which should help to bring forward new housing supply. On average, the levy charge represents 1.1% of house prices on non-previously developed land, and 0.55% on previously developed land. It is therefore expected to have only a very small negative impact on supply. As I also mentioned, the levy was announced in 2021, so the sector has known about it for some time. We appreciate that many issues outside the sector and outside the Government’s control, whether locally, nationally or internationally, are having a big impact on developers, but it is important that they continue to price this work into the deals that they are doing.

[Gareth Bacon]

I think the Minister misspoke. She said that the regulations had been designed to minimise housing supply. I am not sure that that is what she meant.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the shadow Minister for highlighting that. I should have said that the levy has been designed to minimise potential housing supply impact.

The shadow Minister asked whether the levy could have an impact on our ambitious target—rightly so—of reaching 1.5 million new homes. We continue to work closely with the housing market to look at supply. We are committed to working with the industry to ensure that homes continue to be built at pace. This issue comes up in my inbox, as it does for many hon. Members—it is not isolated to London. It is important that we build good-quality homes.

The shadow Minister also highlighted the impact that the measures could have on innocent homeowners, who should not be burdened with the cost. I thank him for agreeing that the cost should not be placed on them. It is right that developers and house builders be responsible for it, in order to protect innocent homeowners.

The Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington, highlighted an issue on which many of us have campaigned for many years: ensuring that innocent leaseholders and homeowners are not responsible for paying the levy. Many of them struggle with housing costs and the cost of living crisis on a day-to-day basis. It is important that developers have a way to fund the levy with no additional cost to the taxpayer.

The Lib Dem spokesperson asked about properties that fall out of scope. We will continue to identify those properties and work with the sector to highlight other ways of supporting them, in order to ensure, again, that costs are fairly shared across the market.

[Gideon Amos]

On a point of further clarification, I hope that the Minister agrees that one reason for broadening the scope of funding for the safety regime so that it includes cladding manufacturers is that in constituencies such as mine in Somerset, there are no high-rise buildings at all—indeed, most of Somerset has no high-rise buildings—but all the developers in Somerset will none the less pay for remediation in the big cities. None of us begrudges the importance of paying for that remediation, but I hope that that example illustrates the importance of widening the funding of the regime so that cladding manufacturers are required to contribute.

[Florence Eshalomi]

As I mentioned, we will keep under review the process and, importantly, the rates, and we will report back to the House every three years on those key areas.

The building safety levy is essential to fund the remediation of historic building safety issues without further burdening residents and leaseholders. The draft amending regulations before the Committee are designed to support this work and make the levy work more efficiently, in accordance with our initial intention to support redevelopment of brownfield sites. They are intended to correct drafting and improve clarity and consistency of process for developers and local authorities, rather than alter the underlying policy design of the levy.

The Government are committed to delivering 1.5 million homes in this Parliament to meet the country’s long-term housing needs and unlock growth. That mission must work in parallel with our commitment to remedy the building safety failures of the past. We expect the development industry to contribute to our work making buildings safe for those who live in them. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Monday 7th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Alex Baker (Aldershot) (Lab)]

6. What steps her Department is taking to encourage greater participation by young people in democratic processes.

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

Minister, welcome!

[Florence Eshalomi]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Young people must be seen and heard. We are giving 16 and 17-year-olds across the UK a vote in elections. We are working across Government and with our partners to prepare them to exercise that right, including through our £2.5 million Democratic Education Fund.

[Ms Minns]

I very much welcome the Government’s plans to extend the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds, but blind and visually impaired young voters will still be disenfranchised as long as there is not legislation that requires them to be able to vote, in secret and independently, like their peers. Will the Minister please reiterate the commitment she gave last week that the Government will table an amendment to the Representation of the People Bill to provide fully accessible voting to all voters of all ages?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for all her work highlighting this important issue, and I am happy to reiterate my commitment on Report. As she noted in that debate, the Government have indicated their readiness to act during the passage of the Bill so that visually impaired voters can vote independently and in secret. We will continue to work with her and other hon. Members to deliver that outcome.

[Alex Baker]

This summer I had great conversations with the latest cohort of work experience students from Farnborough sixth form college, who came to spend time in my office. They all agreed that their citizenship education from the various local secondary schools they had attended was a bit hit and miss in terms of what they had been taught about how democracy works, and how they can participate in it. Does the Minister agree that if we want more young people to engage with our democracy, we must give them the knowledge and confidence to do so? What more can the Government do to ensure that young people leave school understanding how they can make their voices heard?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for the work she has highlighted. When we are going out and speaking to young people across schools and sixth forms, it is important to ensure that they are equipped. We want them to engage with the democratic process and to ensure that they continue that into adulthood. That means equipping and empowering them with the knowledge and understanding that they need. The Education Secretary is considering recommendations for the curriculum and an assessment review, alongside the Government’s ambition to transform technical education from 14 through to 16. We expect there to be a full public consultation on proposals for the curriculum, and an assessment in due course.

[Rishi Sunak (Richmond and Northallerton) (Con)]

My local schools do an excellent job of engaging young people in democracy, and pupils at Brompton Community primary school deserve particular praise for taking action. They gathered evidence, took local views, and came to speak to me and the council about implementing a 20 mph speed limit outside their school—something now being actively worked on. Will the Minister join me in praising their effort, and agree that they are an inspiring example of what young people can do when they get involved in the democratic process?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his work; it is good to see that he continues to be an active constituency MP. One of the best parts about this role for us all is going to visit our primary and secondary schools and meeting young people—we never know what questions we are going to get. I praise the campaigning efforts of the young people from Brompton Community primary school, and encourage all young people in other schools to carry out similar community engagements.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

I would like to put on the record some fantastic youth organisations, such as Harrogate Youth Council in my constituency, that do their bit to engage young people in democracy. My office manager will attest that I also do my bit by having an endless stream of work experience students through the office door—much to her frustration given the number of people who are interested.

One of those students, Benjy, told me recently that he is really excited that in future young people will be able to vote, but he said that there was an unequal opportunity in education when it comes to accessing social media for young people. One way that young people will get information about voting will be through social media. What steps is the Minister taking with other Departments to ensure that young people can find information online?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that important point. It is important that we understand that young people receive information about voting through many different means, including through social media, and I know that colleagues in the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport are looking at challenges around misinformation and fake news circulating online. It is important that we look at the places where young people spend the majority of their time—schools and educational settings—and ensure that our teachers, trainers and carers are equipped to engage with our young people in the right way. The democratic engagement fund will be key to helping with that and the Electoral Commission is also looking at the issue of online engagement.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

7. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of planning policy on green-belt land in Esher and Walton constituency.

--- Later in debate ---

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

14. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help tackle rough sleeping.

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

The Prime Minister has set a clear ambition to end rough sleeping at the earliest opportunity, backed by the full support of central Government. The Government will convene an interministerial group to work to drive progress in the PM’s ambition and towards the commitments made in the national plan to end homelessness.

[Steve Yemm]

I recently wrote praising the determination of the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State to make tackling rough sleeping a priority, and I highlighted how the Old Eight Bells in Mansfield was turned from a derelict building into a lifeline for adults who need supported housing, bringing new activity into our town centre. Does the Minister agree that if that approach were backed in our fight to end rough sleeping, it would be a significant helping hand?

[Florence Eshalomi]

My hon. Friend raises an example of a good local initiative as we look at how we can end the scourge of rough sleeping. We have to be honest that central Government alone cannot achieve that task. We have to work with the local voluntary groups, councils, community groups and charities that are doing fantastic work across the country. I would be pleased to look at the example that my hon. Friend set out to see what lessons we can learn.

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

My constituency has among the highest levels of deprivation. Unfortunately, subways and bus shelters are home to the most vulnerable. I know that £440 million has been allocated, but I do not know how much has been given to Birmingham city council. Will the Minister meet me to see how we can address this issue?

[Florence Eshalomi]

It is truly shocking that we are still seeing people having to sleep in poor and worrying conditions on the streets. I am happy to look at how much funding the hon. Member’s local authority has received from the new funding. The Government have committed £442 million in new funding in the Prime Minister’s ambition to end homelessness, and I am happy to give the hon. Member additional detail on the impact that will have for his constituency.

[Ms Abena Oppong-Asare (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab)]

15. What progress her Department has made on tackling rough sleeping and homelessness in Erith and Thamesmead constituency.

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

Encouraging progress has been made against national homelessness and rough sleeping targets in the Erith and Thamesmead constituency. In particular, the number of families in B&Bs for more than six weeks in Greenwich has decreased by 96% year-on-year, from 100 households to four—congratulations. More than £168 million in new funding was announced for London last month in the rough sleeping programme. That funding will be used across key areas to tackle rough sleeping in the winter and beyond, including the Erith and Thamesmead constituency.

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

Women who are experiencing rough sleeping are often hidden from official figures. Will the Minister ensure that there is a specific focus on that during the forthcoming homelessness summit, and will she ensure that new guidance is backed by the resources that councils need in order to provide safe, trauma-informed support?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for making that important point. We have made it clear that authorities in all areas should look at providing accessible support for women, including specialist support, where needed. Our ending rough sleeping programme will require a whole-society approach. This autumn, the Prime Minister will bring together a diverse range of leaders from businesses, finance, charities, faith, health communities and many more areas to consider a range of options to meet the needs of different people and, most importantly, the needs of women.

[Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)]

16. What progress her Department has made on tackling rough sleeping and homelessness in Southport.

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

The number of families in temporary accommodation has decreased in Southport year on year, and in June 2026 no people were sleeping rough in the West Lancashire borough council area. Funding for the national rough sleeping programme was announced last month, with £340,000 allocated to Sefton, £6.7 million to the Liverpool city region and £189,000 to West Lancashire borough council. That will ensure that people sleeping rough in Southport can be offered a roof over their head and be off the streets by Christmas.

[Patrick Hurley]

Light for Life, a homelessness charity in Southport, tells me that some of the rough sleepers with the most complex needs are precisely the people least able to navigate the bureaucracy associated with finding that roof over their head. Will the Minister consider creating a distinct pathway for entrenched rough sleepers, and allowing trusted local bodies to triage people directly and to get them into emergency accommodation, rather than expecting those with addiction issues, poor mental health and chaotic lives to navigate the bureaucracy before they can obtain help?

[Florence Eshalomi]

It is important that we highlight the complexity and challenges faced by many people who are sleeping rough, and it is important that we recognise that that those with complex needs can be the least able to navigate traditional services. Our new £442 million rough sleeping programme will fund routes off the streets, as well as settled accommodation and intensive support. It will bring together the multi-agency support response that is often needed to move people off the streets for good. Local authorities will have the flexibility to work with trusted voluntary organisations that can reach those who are furthest from the services. I am happy to look into the experience that my hon. Friend has described, and the experience of Light for Life in Southport.

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

17. How her Department defines a walking distance to a train station.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)]

T4.   Rough sleeping is a huge challenge in Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven, so I am delighted that the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State are making it such a big priority, but will any of the very welcome additional funding go to existing schemes, such as the ending homelessness in communities fund—a brilliant scheme, but heavily oversubscribed—or charities in my constituency?

[The Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith (Florence Eshalomi)]

As I mentioned earlier, I think it is important to look at local initiatives. I repeat that the Government’s new £442 million rough sleeping programme and the ending homelessness fund will look at that. Brighton and Hove has received £1.35 million through the rough sleeping programme allocation, while Brighton Women’s Centre has been allocated £371,380 through the ending homelessness in communities fund, subject to grant agreement completion.

[Alex Brewer (North East Hampshire) (LD)]

Last week, police and Trading Standards carried out co-ordinated visits, led by our local police officer, to retail premises on Fleet Road over suspected criminality, which is of increasing concern to me and my constituents. How is the Minister working cross-departmentally with the Home Office to keep our high streets safe and lawful?

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

T7. Having previously worked for a homelessness charity, Streets2Homes in Harlow, I welcome the Housing First approach that this Government are taking to tackle rough sleeping. However, would the Secretary of State, or whichever Minister answers the question, agree with me that, along with that housing, we must provide long-term support to ensure that people can keep tenancies securely?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important initiative in Harlow. Housing First is an important intervention, which evidence has shown can transform the lives of people with complex needs. We are funding Housing First and other forms of housing-led accommodation through our £2.7 billion homelessness, rough sleeping and domestic abuse grant for areas like Harlow. That includes, as I have mentioned, the £442 million for the rough sleeping programme.

[Patrick Spencer (Central Suffolk and North Ipswich) (Con)]

Campsea Ashe is a tiny village with 100 residents, no school, no high street and no major employer, but it has a train station and a planning application that would double the size of the village. If the Secretary of State will not reconsider this blanket policy, will she at least intervene on this specific application?

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

I recently met a homeless man at the homelessness charity the Matthew 25 Mission, who said that he had been “dumped” in temporary accommodation in Eastbourne by Brighton and Hove city council without the support that he needed. The previous Minister promised that she would review the out-of-area placement guidance for local authorities on this matter, so will this Minister meet me to discuss the progress of that review?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising that point. Matthew should not have had to go through that. I am happy to meet with the hon. Gentleman to discuss the case.

[Damien Egan (Bristol North East) (Lab)]

With the Kingswood area of my Bristol constituency currently being targeted by landlords of houses in multiple occupation, can the Minister set out the Government’s current thinking on how powers to restrict HMOs can be made more effective?

--- Later in debate ---

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for sharing that example of the fantastic work carried out by the gurdwara. It is important to mention that we will work with all organisations, including charitable organisations. Faith communities play an important role, as a number of people who are sleeping rough seek sanctuary with faith communities. I am happy to look at the example my hon. Friend has raised and at what further work we can do.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Housing, Communities and Local Government

Florence Eshalomi Excerpts

Monday 7th September 2026 Written Corrections

The following is an extract from the debate on the Representation of the People Bill on 2 September 2026.

[Florence Eshalomi]

These Government amendments therefore propose a ban on political donations made in cryptoassets, in line with the recommendations in the Rycroft review. The ban applies to donations of all values. The specific risk associated with foreign interference and crypto donations is not the same as the risk associated with donations made by bank transfers.

The ban will apply retrospectively. Any donations made in cryptoassets from 25 March 2026 must be returned within 30 days following the commencement of these provisions.

[Official Report, 2 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 263.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith, the hon. Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi):

[Florence Eshalomi]

These Government amendments therefore propose a ban on political donations made in cryptoassets, in line with the recommendations in the Rycroft review. The ban applies to donations of all values. The specific risk associated with foreign interference and crypto donations is not the same as the risk associated with donations made by bank transfers.

The ban will apply retrospectively. Any donations made in cryptoassets on or after 25 March 2026 must be returned within 30 days following the commencement of these provisions.

The following is an extract from the debate on the Representation of the People Bill on 2 September 2026.

[Florence Eshalomi]

The ban will apply retrospectively, ensuring that any donations made after 25 March 2026 will be returned. 

[Official Report, 2 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 264.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith:

[Florence Eshalomi]

The ban will apply retrospectively, ensuring that any donations made on or after 25 March 2026 will be returned. 

The following is an extract from the debate on the Representation of the People Bill on 2 September 2026.

[Florence Eshalomi]

As drafted, a number of the Bill’s provisions apply specifically to registered political parties. These include the restrictions relating to donations and regulated transactions involving cryptoassets, the cap on donations made by, and transactions involving, overseas electors, and restrictions on donations made by transactions including companies and LLPs.

[Official Report, 2 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 267.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith:

[Florence Eshalomi]

As drafted, a number of the Bill’s provisions apply specifically to registered political parties. These include the restrictions relating to donations and regulated transactions involving cryptoassets, the cap on donations made by, and transactions involving, overseas electors, and restrictions on donations made by and transactions involving companies and LLPs.

The following is an extract from the debate on the Representation of the People Bill on 2 September 2026.

[Florence Eshalomi]

The new clause also allows the Secretary of State to impose similar restrictions on the use of gifts made by overseas contributors and companies to incorporated associations making political donations.

[Official Report, 2 September 2026; Vol. 790, c. 267.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith:

[Florence Eshalomi]

The new clause also allows the Secretary of State to impose similar restrictions on the use of gifts made by overseas electors and companies to incorporated associations making political donations.