Housing Provision in Stafford

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered housing provision in Stafford.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate.

To give some understanding of the local picture, Stafford borough is currently without an adopted local plan. A new draft plan was due to be approved just as the general election was called last year, but with that and the new housing targets, the process paused. While it is good that the work has restarted, getting a new plan in place for our area will take years, even in the best-case scenario. That matters because, in the meantime, communities such as Eccleshall are left exposed to speculative development without the protections that a local plan provides.

I attended a public meeting in Eccleshall two weeks ago, and the atmosphere was thoughtful, not hostile, and the message was clear. People understand that we are in a housing crisis, and they know we need more homes not just for this generation but for the next generation. People also want to stay close to their family. They want to contribute to their community and grow old where they have always lived, but they are also dealing with the consequences of past development in which infrastructure has not kept pace.

Those pressures are visible in Eccleshall’s drains, roads and local environment. Eccleshall’s sewage treatment works flooded 67 times in 2023 and has flooded 26 times so far in 2025. The aim is to have no more than 10 spillages a year by 2045—that is in 20 years’ time. It flooded again last Sunday, spilling sewage and waste water, which affected residents. That is the reality for people living there now, before a single additional home has been built.

I make my position absolutely clear: I know that we need more homes. Across Staffordshire and across the country, far too many people—including young families, pensioners and key workers—are being priced out of the areas in which they grew up, and that is true even in Eccleshall. That is the legacy of the previous Government, who made things worse.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Lady for securing this debate. Does she agree that housing must be provided for families, for single people and for elderly people? Newtownards in my constituency is providing a mix for everyone. Is that something she is trying to achieve for her constituents, in conjunction with the Minister?

[Leigh Ingham]

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman. My dad does not work any more, but he was a bricklayer. He always said to me that if he had owned his own business, he would have built bungalows because there is always a need for them—this country can never build enough bungalows. We need a mix of housing, but he always said, “If you want to sell houses, build bungalows.” That is my dad’s life tip, if anyone is interested.

That goes to the point that we have not built the right homes in the right places. Pensioners cannot find smaller homes to downsize into; families are not able to settle for the long term; and people are being pushed away from their support networks and lifelong communities. We need to build, but we have to do it responsibly and with infrastructure. In Eccleshall right now, that balance has not been found.

Residents are understandably alarmed, as there are 10 speculative development proposals on the table for potentially over 1,500 homes. Accounting for families, that is likely to be more than a 50% population increase for a town of 6,500 people. That would stretch the resources of any community, but it would be overwhelming for a very small market town. To be very clear, not a single application has yet been approved, but the sheer number of proposals coming in simultaneously is creating real anxiety and uncertainty, because people do not know what might be approved.

More broadly, we have already seen how this can go in another part of my constituency, in Loggerheads. There, development went ahead without an up-to-date local plan. Developers insisted that infrastructure was adequate, but in reality there were no buses, few community services and precious little investment in support to new residents. The building continues.

In Eccleshall, planning officers are doing everything they can, but without a local plan, they are working with one hand tied behind their backs. The default position of presumption in favour of sustainable development leaves them vulnerable. The Minister and his Department are committed to fixing this broken system, and I recognise wholeheartedly that the challenges are not new—they were building up for years under the previous Conservative Government—but Eccleshall provides a case study of why councils need more tools and more flexibility to get things right.

Today, I want to offer four practical suggestions that would make a real difference to Eccleshall and other communities like it. First, we need faster and more flexible processes for approving local plans. Right now, it can take up to three years, in ideal conditions, and during that time councils and communities are left in limbo. If we want to plan properly, we need the system to keep pace.

Secondly, infrastructure must come first, not years later. The flooding in Eccleshall is a red flag. The system has not caught up with past development, let alone proposed future growth. With respect to that, I ask the Minister: what specific support is available to towns such as Eccleshall to help building to happen sustainably, without overloading existing stretched services?

Thirdly, we need to let councils assess housing proposals in the round, not one by one. When multiple speculative bids are in play, applications cannot be treated as if they exist in isolation. Local authorities must have the power to consider the cumulative impact and align decisions with community priorities.

Fourthly, we need strong protections for our best agricultural land. In Eccleshall, the sites under threat are all grade 2 and 3a, some of the best and most versatile farmland in the country. If we lose it, we do not get it back. We cannot build over the land that feeds us and call that sustainable.

In conclusion, no one—residents or developers—wants to see 10 disconnected developments forced on a community with no plan and no infrastructure. I want to be clear: the people I represent are not opposed to growth. They want to be part of shaping it, and to build homes in a way that is planned, not piecemeal, with infrastructure first, communities and the environment protected, and fairness at its heart. I ask the Minister to meet me—after recess; I will not I will not make him do it today—specifically to speak about Eccleshall. We have a meeting coming up to talk about wider housing provision in Stafford borough, but I hope he will not mind me asking for a separate conversation about this specific and unique case. I believe that we can build the homes we need in a way that is fair, sustainable and community-led, and that this Government want to do that. I hope this debate will be a constructive step towards making sure that happens.

Strategy for Elections

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Thursday 17th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Rushanara Ali]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that important question. He will be aware that the defending democracy taskforce is leading the work on a range of issues—including, of course, in relation to the points that he has made. We are taking action to bear down on those issues, with a cross-Government approach. The Online Safety Act 2023 is important in relation to some of the points that he has made. As I have pointed out, we are also aware of the dangers of foreign interference and foreign state actors, and these reforms are really important to protect the integrity of our system and our democracy.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

As a member of the Speaker’s Conference, I have heard evidence that has shocked me to my core, so I know how much needed these reforms are.

This week I have held my first summer school with 16 and 17-year-olds this week. Twenty of them have been learning about how they can make a change not only in their community, but in the country they live in. Does the Minister agree that they deserve to have their voices heard at the ballot box, too?

[Rushanara Ali]

I thank my hon. Friend for her work to support young people to participate in our democracy. Young people can work at 16, pay taxes and join the Army. There is no reason that they should not have the right to a say in who represents them and the right to shape their future. They are passionate about the issues affecting their communities and country; I know that at first hand from the work I have done over the years to support young people in their leadership journeys and in participating in our elections.

Oral Answers to Questions

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Monday 14th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Rushanara Ali]

I refer the hon. Gentleman to my earlier answer: this Government have invested nearly £1 billion to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping. As the Secretary of State has pointed out, we are dealing with the root causes of homelessness. That means investing billions of pounds to ensure that some 300,000 social and affordable homes are created over the decade, so that we can get people into the housing that is urgently needed.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

Last week, nearly 3,000 people across Stafford borough were told at short notice that Homes Plus, one of our housing associations, is effectively scrapping the current housing waiting list. It also said that nearly 2,000 people no longer had a housing need, but it has not explained how it has come to that conclusion. People are confused, angry and scared. Does the Minister agree that this is unacceptable, and will he meet me to help me find a way forward for those who have been left in limbo?

[Matthew Pennycook]

I will happily meet my hon. Friend about that concerning development. If she could write to me with the details in advance, that would be extremely useful.

Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 9th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Tom Hayes]

I make it a habit to agree with my hon. Friend and I will keep that tradition today. I do indeed agree, and she rather anticipates the points that I am about to make.

New clause 82 is so important because it provides key things that our children need. It would require developers to deliver and fund adequate play in their communities. It would ensure no net loss without equivalent provision as a consequence of development, but let me be clear: this is not about requiring every development to have a blanket requirement. It is not about holding every development hostage, because we know that development is important for growth in our communities. It is about ensuring that councils are well equipped and that planning authorities are supported to take a view in the round of what play sufficiency would be in a given area, and indeed to use contributions from developers to fund adequate—indeed, excellent—play provision.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I know that my hon. Friend is passionate about this issue, as am I as a signatory to this new clause. In my constituency of Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages, I have been working with a group of local parents on a joint campaign for safe, inclusive parks for neurodiverse children. Those spaces benefit not just neurodiverse children but parents who also need somewhere safe to go with their children and young people. In recognition of the cost of living crisis, does my hon. Friend agree that these spaces should be provided for all children, not just those who are neurotypical, and that they should provide space for their parents too?

[Tom Hayes]

My hon. Friend and I have talked many times about the importance of inclusive play, and I commend her as a fantastic champion for children with special educational needs and disabilities to access those play opportunities. I agree with her entirely, and one thing that my new clause 82 would do is to introduce a requirement for planning authorities to assess play sufficiency, particularly inclusive play sufficiency. That is a critically important point.

In a nutshell, we need to have national policy frameworks and national planning actions that will ensure that the voices of children and their families are properly listened to, that they are consulted on their needs, and that planning authorities are required and supported to introduce the outdoor play equipment and areas that can so enhance their life chances. In so doing, we would be building on the work of that last Labour Government that I was just talking about. If you ever want to enjoy a beautiful photograph that sums up all of what the last Labour Government were doing, have a look at Ed Balls and Andy Burnham on a swing announcing the 2008 national play strategy. It is a fantastic sight. Genuinely, you can see in their faces the joy that comes from play and extending play opportunities. You can see that they are Ministers who are fantastically enjoying their jobs, and that is because they are delivering for children. That 2008 strategy was a critical development in the world of play, and the play sector responded so positively to it. It came with £235 million of investment to provide up to 3,500 new or refurbished playgrounds. I still get sent photographs by people who have seen those playgrounds with the Department for Children, Schools and Families logo on them, with its beautiful rainbow, and we should have more of that.

To conclude, this Bill is critical for children’s development. This is also a pro-growth new clause because we have in our play sector small family businesses who contribute to our economy to the tune of £250 million and are powering employment and economic opportunity in our communities. Our country feels like it needs a lick of paint at times. We need potholes filling, we need litter collecting and we need playgrounds repairing. In so doing, we can bring hope back to our communities, and in doing that we can help people to feel positive about the potential for politics to make change.

High Street Rental Auctions

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Wednesday 26th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Government policy on high street rental auctions.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. As many Members know, our high streets are the beating heart of our communities. They are not simply places where people shop. They are gathering points and cultural centres and they serve as symbols of local identity. They fuel local economies, support countless small businesses and provide many thousands of jobs. They inspire confidence in our communities and encourage residents to stay connected to the areas they live in.

For too long, our high streets have been neglected. They have become defined by the number of empty shop fronts and “to let” signs they sport, rather than by the vibrancy and the footfall that once sustained them. When people stop visiting town centres, antisocial behaviour and crime are allowed to flourish, creating vicious cycles that benefit only those looking to create disorder and discord in our communities.

Town centres were once a great source of pride for our communities, but their decline has had real consequences. We cannot deny that the retail landscape has changed, and it is a challenge to adapt to this new reality. The rise of online shopping, out-of-town retail parks and over a decade of austerity have left town centres struggling to adapt. This is a national story that I am sure Members across the House will recognise, and it is one that characterises our experience in Bournemouth West.

My constituents are rightly frustrated by the state of our town centre. It is the No. 1 issue that people bring up on the doorstep and in conversation. Time and again, I hear that people feel unsafe—they are worried about reports of drug use and homelessness—or that there is nothing for them to do in the town centre. Empty shops, a lack of variety and overall decline have led many people to change the way that they interact with Bournemouth, and sadly, many of my constituents have not visited the town centre in many years due to its falling reputation.

Bournemouth was once known for its vibrant shopping streets, its summer tourism and its cultural heritage. Long-time residents yearn for the days when we could walk down the old Christchurch Road and pop into Beales or Dingles, or head over to the Westover Road, which was often referred to as the Bond Street of Bournemouth, with its luxury brands and high-end goods. That is the Bournemouth I remember from my childhood—a town that was thriving and safe. My parents never thought twice about letting me get on the bus or the train to spend the day in Bournemouth with my friends.

Over the past decade, we have seen an increasing number of shop closures and long-term vacant premises, with no apparent plan for repurposing or reuse. Changes in consumer behaviour, the arrival of Castlepoint—an out-of-town shopping centre—and the cost of living crisis have all had their part to play, and we currently face a staggering 15% vacancy rate of shop fronts, which is far above the national average. The failure to revitalise these spaces has more than just economic consequences; it has major implications for the way people feel about our town.

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for securing a debate on an important issue that is raised regularly with me in Stafford. I have spoken to a local small business owner, Alison, who is concerned about the vibrancy of Stafford high street and told me that a shop nearby had been closed for over two decades. Does my hon. Friend agree that these powers are long overdue and that by giving local authorities greater control, the Government have taken a vital first step towards revitalising our high streets?

[Jessica Toale]

The story my hon. Friend tells about the shop in her constituency is one that I am sure many of us recognise from our own. High street rental auctions can have a transformative effect in many towns around the country, and I will come on to that.

Despite the challenges we face, Bournemouth has much potential and so much to offer. Its beach was recently rated the 12th best in the world by Tripadvisor users. It has amazing examples of heritage architecture just waiting to be repurposed. If we were to design the town of the future, it would have the beautiful gardens that run like a central artery through our town, connecting the beach to the town hall.

I am pleased to say that there are lots of green shoots to celebrate. Bobby’s, in the Square, has been repurposed into a multi-use space, including Patch, a collaborative workplace for small businesses and start-ups. That has huge potential to serve as a community hub, hosting local events—including one that I am hosting next week on women’s safety in the town centre—and providing support to new entrepreneurs. The former House of Fraser building is also being converted, into student accommodation, and its large commercial space is being converted into smaller units, making them more accessible to a wide range of businesses.

The Ivy has arrived. Home-grown businesses such as Bad Hand Coffee and Naked Coffee have transformed unused spaces and are supporting an ecosystem of retail and hospitality. We have a burgeoning tech and creative industries sector, supporting the town and making use of the talent coming out of our world-leading universities and colleges. I will also namecheck Trove, Calabrese, Revival café and Brazilian Snacks. They are all local businesses making an outsize contribution to our high street. I encourage as many of my local residents as possible to rediscover and to champion all the good things that are happening in Bournemouth.

However, the scale of the challenge is still enormous. For too long, Governments have left it to the market, which has seen the managed decline of our high streets. To tackle that challenge, we require urgent action, collaboration between central and local government as well as the private sector, and creativity in how we imagine our high streets and town centres of the future—with a mix of culture, retail, hospitality and community spaces.

That is why I welcome the Government action to introduce high street rental auctions. They are taking the action that the last Government failed to take and giving local authorities the power to bring vacant commercial properties back into use. I am proud that Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council has been selected as an early adopter for the scheme.

Coalfield Communities

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I thank my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), for securing this debate.

Stafford also has a proud coalfield history. Many of my constituents were miners, who dedicated their lives to the mining industry both below and above ground. Today, like many hon. Members, I want to highlight my constituents who are members of the British Coal staff superannuation scheme, the BCSSS. At the general election, I was proud to stand on a platform that recognised the injustice of the mineworkers pension scheme. Following the election, I was delighted that swift action was taken to return the investment reserve to its rightful owners.

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Neath and Swansea East (Carolyn Harris), I believe that the BCSSS is worth reviewing. It shares many of the same characteristics as the mineworkers pension scheme and has equally deserving members. I particularly want to highlight the nearly 5,000 women in the mining industry, the majority of whom were in the BCSSS. They were often among the lowest paid in the mining industry, but their contribution should not be overlooked. They deserve the same financial security and recognition in later life as their male colleagues.

The Minister has stated that the Government will review the BCSSS after the arrangements with MPS trustees have been agreed. I am so appreciative that the Government are open to exploring the scheme, I am contacted daily by constituents, desperately asking for clarity on the process. I hope that discussions will take place soon, but more directly, I am calling for transparency on timescales so that I can reassure my constituents that this is a priority for our Government.

Playgrounds

Leigh Ingham Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) for securing this debate on an important issue. Every child deserves the opportunity to play, not only for their health but to foster a sense of connection within their local community. That includes children with special educational needs and disabilities. Ensuring that our playgrounds are sufficient and inclusive is not simply a matter of infrastructure; it is a matter of fairness and compassion.

I am concerned that there are not enough accessible parks, and that those that are accessible are not similarly so for neurodiverse children. To truly cater for SEND children, both with physical disabilities and neurodiversity, playground design must go beyond a sticking-plaster approach. We need well thought out, fit-for-purpose equipment that prioritises sensory play and safety. That includes sensory equipment items that are both functional and inviting, and spaces that are designed to reduce overstimulation.

In my constituency of Stafford, Eccleshall and the villages, I have been working with some SEND campaigners, who are parents themselves: Becky, Shannon and Jess. I pay tribute to their hard work. They are particularly concerned for the safety of neurodiverse children in playgrounds. When a neurodiverse child is overstimulated, they sometimes want to run, and parents are finding themselves having to resort to harnesses to keep their children safe. The campaigners believe that high, sturdy metal fences, much like those in Victoria Park in my constituency, are essential for children who sometimes run. They are similar to those seen around old Victorian parks in many of our constituencies. These fences provide security for parents and carers, reducing the need for uncomfortable measures like harnesses.

The emotional toll of exclusion is profound. Parents of neurodiverse children often describe feeling ostracised when playgrounds fail to accommodate their children’s needs. Without adequate sensory equipment or secure calming spaces, neurodiverse children may struggle to engage, leading to further isolation for the child and the family. Parents have told me that they have received comments and judgments from friends and family for using harnesses with their children. Alongside parents in my constituency, I have recently engaged with Newlife, a charity for disabled children. It provides equipment and resources to parents of children with disabilities, and its people told me about the exhaustion of parents who turn to them with their experiences.

Playgrounds are not just play areas for exercise and fun but social hubs for children and parents. Many parents love that moment to sit, have a chat with other parents and let their children have fun. Caring for a child with special needs can already be exhausting and isolating, and it is not just children with special educational needs and disabilities who deserve community; it is their parents as well. More accessible playgrounds would open the world up to these families, and it is imperative that we give them access to that opportunity.