Representation of the People Bill

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Report stage & 3rd reading
Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

The Bill gives us a real chance to defend and strengthen our democracy, and although it is not in the scope of the Bill, I hope that the Government will look in future legislation at electoral reform and proportional representation.

I have tabled new clauses 20 and 21 and supported many amendments because the Bill as it stands does not go far enough. New clause 21 enshrines in the Bill the principle of a cap on political donations. It is time to kick big money, foreign or domestic, out of British politics, and restore public trust in our political system. As I have said previously, the people of this country, not the deep pockets of billionaires—foreign or otherwise—or corporate interests, should decide our country’s future in elections and referendums. I welcome the Government amendment on donations from overseas electors, but at present there is no limit at all on how much a single individual in the UK can give to a political party. New clause 21 would require the Secretary of State to set an annual cap on political donations, informed by an independent review, so we can ensure that the cap is sustainable.

The Bill’s title is “Representation of the People”. New clause 20 would extend the parliamentary franchise—that representation—to qualifying EU citizens and to foreign nationals with a right to enter or remain in the UK, and would extend the local government franchise in England on that same basis. Having leave to remain does not automatically give someone the right to vote, no matter how long they have been in the UK, and we now have different franchises in relation to EU citizens living in the UK following Brexit. That means that millions of residents have no right to vote at all.

Like many of us, I represent a constituency where people who have lived here for years, who pay their taxes, work in our hospitals and run our businesses, still have no vote in the elections that decide who represents them. Residents pay council tax but some of them cannot vote on who is going to be in charge of their refuse collection. As the old American revolution slogan goes,

“taxation without representation is tyranny.”

Voting based on residency rights means that democratic participation is extended fully to people across the whole of British society.

I want to set out where else I think the Bill needs to go further, because the argument runs the same way throughout: open up participation and representation, close down improper or malign influence, restore trust in our politics, and raise the standards for the campaigns we run. On widening participation and making voting genuinely accessible, I want to see a proper feasibility study into overseas voting, because British citizens abroad still face real, practical barriers to casting a ballot. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on citizens’ rights, I have heard from British electors living abroad about the challenges and barriers they face just to exercise their right.

I support the Government extending the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds. That is really brilliant news for our young people and for representation. I welcome the case for automatic registration, so that the right to vote does not depend on people navigating forms.

On the integrity of political money, which is where I believe the Bill still has the most to tackle, the same logic that applies to new clause 21 applies with even more costs. The loopholes that currently let donations flow from foreign Administrations, from those linked to political violence and from undeclared foreign income and corporate interests, like those fossil fuel companies, have no place in our politics and I want them closed. I fully support closing the loophole currently exploited by non-permissible donors giving in small amounts, and I support tightening the rules on cryptoasset donations, which are far too easy to hide. Parties should be required to carry out proper due diligence on where donations actually come from, and I support a proper independent look at spending limits.

Finally, on standards and the world in which we now campaign, candidates deserve proper safety guidance. AI-generated campaign material must be honestly labelled, and I want the Electoral Commission to have strong powers over online harms and disinformation, along with proper measures against foreign interference. Our democracy should be open to everyone who lives under its laws, and closed to the money, undue influence and manipulation that nobody voted for.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

I start by welcoming the Minister to her new role. It will be truly brilliant to work with her, and this is a transformational Bill with which to start. It will allow British politics to take huge strides to restore the trust that has been lost in our political system and to protect our democracy from being sold off for profit. I have personally set up and hosted an inspiring youth Parliament, and hearing the voices of 16-year-olds and younger children is truly a humbling experience—their dedication and education is always awe inspiring.

I had hoped that the amendments I have tabled would improve the Bill even further, returning integrity to British politics, but I am reassured that the Government are seeking other ways to strengthen our democracy and transparency. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders) and congratulate him on his promotion, and I thank him for his work in bringing forward these amendments. I also thank my other colleagues who have tabled valuable amendments, especially my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy), my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry) and my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington).

Our election law was written in an analogue age, and the legislation has not kept pace with how safe or unsafe something is. Modern campaigns now reach voters in the palms of their hands, 24/7. Election campaigns with highly targeted content are delivered directly into social media feeds, distributed at speed, with some of it only seen by the people it is designed to influence. Legislation rightly restricts commercial advertisers from making false claims about shampoo, broadband deals, financial products or sausages. Food producers face a wealth of legislation that restricts what they are allowed to say about their products and rightly makes sure it is factually accurate—makers of porky sausages cannot tell porky pies, and pie manufacturers cannot tell lies. It is ridiculous that our political adverts are under no such restrictions. This presents a serious risk to our democracy and undermines any attempts to improve integrity and trust in our political system.

AI-generated campaigning, which looks so convincing, produces misinformation that spreads at scale and speed, while elections are increasingly decided on wafer-thin margins with more and more candidates on ballot papers. With elections that close, and with budgets having been increased by 80% in 2023, misleading electoral advertising can make a real, material difference to our politics and our futures. New clauses 49 to 51, which stand in my name, present practical solutions to this issue. They deal with the narrow, clearly defined category of factual claims in paid material. Crucially, they do not regulate political opinion, argument, satire, pledges, speeches, interviews or ordinary democratic debate; they simply apply to statements of fact that can be tested against data. That distinction matters. If we wish to restore faith in our politics, any reasonable person would agree that voters must have accurate information to build their opinions on. Research by Opinium found that 76% of people agree, alongside the backing of this House.

I have also tabled new clause 52—which, again, builds on the excellent work of my colleagues—to strengthen a code of conduct and standards relating to harassment and intimidation, placing them on a statutory footing. This will ensure people have the right to stand for election and represent their views safely. I accept the Government’s decisions on these issues and look forward to further debate, but I do wish that they would accept some of the other amendments that have been mentioned today to ensure that this Bill achieves its enormous potential and that our democracy is protected.

[Brendan O’Hara]

During this Bill’s Second Reading back in March, I said that the SNP generally welcomed its introduction, particularly its extension of the franchise to 16 and 17-year-olds. We on the SNP Benches still do. Evidence is always helpful; unfortunately, the right hon. Member for Tatton (Esther McVey) is no longer in her place, but Scotland has had this in place for 12 years, and it has been an unqualified success. No serious person is planning to backtrack on it.

That said, we do still have serious concerns about the Bill, because what is currently on offer is a far cry from what the Labour party promised during the passage of the Elections Act 2022. Back then, we all recognised that that Act was an appalling piece of legislation; it was nakedly partisan, and quite rightly, when opposing it, the Labour party promised to shred it. Now it is in power, I fear that it has chosen to tinker rather than shred. We can see for ourselves the levels of frustration that exist on the Labour Benches, because Labour Members know that this Bill was an opportunity to undo great democratic harms that were caused by the 2022 Act and introduce an entirely new system—one that would have fairness, equality, transparency and accountability at its heart. I fear that the Bill as it currently stands squanders that opportunity.

The clearest manifestation of that frustration is the number of amendments to the Bill that have originated from the Government’s own Back Benches. There are scores of amendments—215 pages of them. I want to highlight a few that I believe would have significantly improved the Bill, had the Government taken them on.

New clause 34, tabled by the right hon. Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne), would tighten up cryptocurrency. He explained in an intervention earlier that the Government’s position in the Bill does not go nearly far enough, and we agree. New clause 35, tabled by the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell), would extend the franchise to those with indefinite leave to remain. Such a system has been in place in Scotland for more than six years, and it works well and has been entirely uncontroversial.

Local Government Reorganisation

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order. Good temper and moderation are called for at all times in this Chamber.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

I welcome today’s decision, which brings an end to decades of destabilising indecision across Warwickshire, and I thank the Government for being decisive. The decision, which has cross-party support from four of the five districts in Warwickshire, will empower North Warwickshire to focus on growth, investment and funding to meet the needs of our communities, and allow us to be the masters of our own destiny. A previous report raised concerns about sustainability—this was before the Government’s generous settlement under fair funding—so can the Secretary of State reassure my residents that financial assessments were done in full before considering the options?

[Steve Reed]

I thank my hon. Friend for recognising the benefit to her constituents from eliminating duplication and putting the savings into the frontline services that her residents care about—it is a shame that the shouty Members on the Opposition Benches do not care about their constituents in the same way as she cares about hers. Of course, financial viability was one of the key criteria that we took into account in accepting the proposals that we are putting forward today.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Wednesday 18th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

Q8.   On 1 July, Warwickshire county council will permanently remove one of Nuneaton’s two fire engines. Its decision, based on dubious data that does not account for local factors such as high deprivation, does not accurately represent the current risk to residents. The cuts will put lives in Nuneaton in danger. Will the Deputy Prime Minister please look into this matter to confirm that there has been sufficient scrutiny and a thorough risk analysis to ensure safety for the good residents of Nuneaton?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important issue, and I know that the fire Minister—the Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham North and Kimberley (Alex Norris)—will be happy to discuss it further. I am committed to ensuring that fire and rescue services across the country have the resources they need to keep communities safe. The deployment of fire engines, though, is decided locally, so this really is a question for Warwickshire county council, which is now led by Reform. The hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) should have a word with his county councillors in Nuneaton and get them to explain why Reform is cutting fire services.

Disadvantaged Communities

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Wednesday 4th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with your Chair, Sir Roger. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton North East (Mrs Brackenridge) on securing the debate. Poverty has affected the work that I have done over the last decade, and I probably would not be in the House today had it not been for some of the things I have witnessed over the past 10 to 15 years.

While I was researching for the debate, I found a report on child poverty dating back over a decade. The foreword reads:

“In the UK today, millions of children”

and

“adults are daily experiencing the crushing disadvantage that poverty brings. They are living at the margins of society, unable to achieve their aspirations and trapped”.

The report goes on to say that that is unacceptable in “today’s” society—obviously, it was written over a decade ago. It is not usual for me to quote the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), but those comments are particularly pertinent. In 2013, when the report was written, poverty in Nuneaton stood at around 18%, but it is now 33%—almost double—and in some communities it is over 50%.

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

On the question of barriers to opportunity, the potential for growth in some areas is high, but access to funding and education—particularly further education—can be difficult, as it is in Cornwall. Does my hon. Friend agree that, as a result, the people who live in an area cannot always take advantage of that growth potential?

[Jodie Gosling]

I thank my hon. Friend for her valuable intervention, and I absolutely agree. One challenge is under-skilled children who have left school without the right qualifications. As a result, they experience a lag in getting qualified and being able to access opportunities.

In one of my wards, Chilvers Coton, over 65% of households—two out of three—live with one marker of deprivation. The majority of them are defined as living in deep poverty and destitution, and they are not able to meet basic needs. That is not my understanding of the word “eradicate”, and it appears that the strategy that was laid out over a decade ago actually perpetuated significant poverty, rather than eradicating it.

Poverty eats into every corner of people’s lives. It drains people and grinds them down, and it makes every aspect of life harder. The physiological and psychological impacts are profound. As poverty has soared, we have seen healthy life expectancy fall by over four years, with cardiopulmonary conditions, diabetes and preventable death statistics among those affected by poverty well above the national average. Poverty strips people of their dignity and their power to shape their lives and livelihoods and those of the people they love.

Living in poverty is a full-time job, as people juggle making sure that they can pay their debts, get their kids out, do the daily shopping—which involves having to look for the yellow stickers in the aisles—and deal with the chaos of managing arrears, evictions and sleepless nights, as they worry about how to just get through tomorrow. Despite that, the vast majority of Nuneaton households in poverty still work, with over 60% of affected households having at least one working adult.

Poverty is also wasteful. It is expensive; it costs more to live in poverty because people cannot access cheaper supermarkets and might not have the data to order online—

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Order. I call David Chadwick.

Coalfield Communities

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

I declare my interest as a voluntary director of a nursery that is run from a venue supported by the Coalfields Regeneration Trust. It is a good example of the wider impact of investment in our coalfields. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) for securing this important debate, and for all his hard work to drive this issue forward.

Nuneaton’s first shafts were sunk in the 1850s, and the last pit, Daw Mill, closed in 2016 after 160 years of service—of men going into the darkness to keep the lights of the nation on and the army of people working around them to support them and the industry. I know that they are delighted by this new Government’s rapid progress on resolving the disputes over the mineworkers pension scheme, and very much look forward to similar progress and updates from the Minister on the British Coal staff superannuation scheme.

I am proud to live in a coal village. It is a strong and vibrant community, and my constituents’ understanding of the sacrifice made by so many is embedded in our towns’ collective history and consciousness. The pit closures left a vacuum and a legacy of social, economic and health challenges which to this day have an incredible, indelible impact on my constituency.

The people of Nuneaton earn around £100 a week less than our neighbours and the national average. People in Nuneaton die younger and live less healthy lives, and children in Nuneaton leave school less qualified. Data from the Office for National Statistics shows similar trends to those mentioned by other colleagues: our young people choose to leave Nuneaton, and the devastating impacts of poverty are still felt by far too many families and children. These challenges are compounded by complex historical infrastructure decline. It has taken years of fighting to ensure that Daw Mill’s restoration order will be delivered.

Issues such as shared sewers and drains, land contamination and unadopted roads mar our beautiful villages and estates, eroding pride and leaving us feeling forgotten and unloved. Pat from New Arley has been almost housebound for years. She has to be carried on to the pavement because the unadopted service roads—the Arley backs—by her door are in such a poor state that it is dangerous for her to use her wheelchair and scooter. She has difficulty attending hospital appointments or seeing friends. These issues have been present for years, and sticking-plaster investment and quick wins will not solve them. Rectifying the widespread disrepair is no quick fix.

These abandoned service roads invite antisocial behaviour, drugs and theft. They are relics of a forgotten time when we had weekly coal deliveries, and they cause many issues and lengthy delays for our utilities. Fixing water leaks, overhead cables and supplies takes much longer than it should because of complexity; it can take days just to identify who is responsible for the land and to gain access. More support is needed to rebuild complex capital programmes and to work with highways authorities to adopt and maintain these areas, to prevent them from becoming forgotten wastelands. Yet new estates with similar issues and unadopted roads continue to be built.

We appreciate the investment we have seen from the Coalfields Regeneration Trust in Nuneaton, which has supported projects like the one to tackle long-term health issues by installing community cardiac facilities in Camp Hill. The power of our community and the ability to thrive in our coalfield communities is dependent on support nationally.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

English Devolution and Local Government

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Wednesday 5th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Angela Rayner]

The hon. Member will know that the fact that it is an island produces limitations, but nothing has been taken off the table. We want to deliver reorganisation and deliver for the people of the Isle of Wight, and we will continue to work with him, as well as local leaders, to deliver that.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Nuneaton was recently named the town with the best potential growth in the UK. That is truly an opportunity to transform the lives of my constituents, but it also speaks to the immense challenges we face. For far too long, there have been serious questions about the appalling service level, the SEND crisis, stifled growth and low wages after 20 years of an underfunded Conservative county council that tried to push for a rapid resolution to our devolution. Getting this right is vital. For Nuneaton to achieve that amazing potential requires a full appraisal of all possible options and of the best way forward. Can the Secretary of State reassure us that support will be given in the process?

[Angela Rayner]

Absolutely. I congratulate my hon. Friend on always seeing the potential of Nuneaton, and this Government want to work to release the opportunities there. But we also recognise that the 14 years of Conservative failure have left many councils and local areas without the funding and support they need. That is why we are putting a cash-terms real increase of 6.8% into local government—£69 billion—and we will continue to work with local areas to unleash the full potential of all areas of England.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jodie Gosling Excerpts

Monday 20th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

18. If she will make an assessment of the potential impact of the English devolution Bill on local public services.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

20. If she will make an assessment of the potential impact of the English devolution Bill on local public services.

[The Minister for Local Government and English Devolution (Jim McMahon)]

The English devolution Bill will strengthen public services by delivering local government reorganisation and establishing more directly elected mayors, who will have the new power to convene public services. The Bill will also deliver a new health improvement duty for strategic authorities, and enable more mayors to take on responsibility for police and crime commissioner functions, and health functions as well, to co-ordinate better on local public services. Beyond mayors, the White Paper reasserts the role of local authorities as leaders of place and the delivery arm for the Government’s missions.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jodie Gosling]

English devolution provides a generational opportunity to unlock the potential of towns such as Nuneaton. I thank the Minister for his time and support in ensuring we get these options right. Will he continue to meet me and council representatives to discuss the best options for unlocking growth and opportunity in Nuneaton?

[Jim McMahon]

I thank my hon. Friend and the many other MPs with whom I have had meetings to talk about devolution—at the last tally, about 140 one-to-one meetings with MPs have taken place, such is the interest being shown in devolution for the right reasons. I am more than happy to continue those conversations and to welcome the local leadership being shown.