(1 day, 15 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered police powers for tackling the use of illegal off-road bikes in the North East.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank all the Members who have come to support the call for more police powers, police resources and a multi-departmental approach to tackling the scourge of e-bikes, battery-powered bikes and off-road bikes on our streets. Since I was elected with this Labour Government in July 2024, it has become increasingly clear that battery-powered bikes are the getaway vehicle of choice for those who do not respect the rule of law.
I alert the House to my constituent Julie Francis, who is in the Public Gallery today. Her mother, Gloria, was killed in Sunderland by a teenager illegally riding an off-road bike. Julie is as determined as I am to get more resources, and to get justice for Gloria, herself and the family.
Lewis Atkinson (Sunderland Central) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. Gloria Stephenson was my constituent, and her tragic death in Ryhope really affected our community. Does my hon. Friend agree, as the number of Members present suggests many of us do, that we need swifter action to prevent such tragic deaths in future?
Lola McEvoy
I absolutely agree that we need more powers, more action and more police on our streets to tackle this. I have some points on powers and resources that I ask the Minister to address in her remarks. She and I have previously met to discuss this. It is a cross-departmental issue, and as a group we will be meeting the Department for Transport to address some of the licensing issues, but this debate is about what the police need now.
I commend the hon. Lady for raising this issue, and she is absolutely right. I share her concerns, which we have back home, too. We have been working on a cross-party basis in the Assembly to ensure that the Justice Bill enables the Police Service of Northern Ireland to seize scooters and bikes right away, without warning. Does she agree that the Minister should commit herself—I know she will—to sharing best practice across the regions to stop those reckless riders turning our public parks into dangerous racetracks?
Lola McEvoy
As always, the hon. Gentleman makes a clear and coherent point.
I ask the Minister to consider bolstering police powers to support our communities, which regularly report antisocial behaviour in the form of balaclava-clad battery bike riders. The police’s problem is that they do not have the resources to send out a police helicopter and a full squad to chase down those people every time antisocial behaviour is reported. The issue in Darlington and across the north-east is that e-bikes are also the vehicles of choice for organised crime.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
My hon. Friend and I have worked very closely on this issue. It is helpful to highlight that we are talking about two types of bike: dirt bikes, which have been around for more than 100 years, and e-bikes. The problem is that dirt bikes are unlicensed, so riding them on a road, in a park and so on is illegal. Similarly, when a non-compliant electrically assisted pedal cycle is ridden on a road or in a park, it immediately becomes illegal.
Does my hon. Friend agree that the sale of non-compliant e-bikes and the horrible kits that create them should be banned? A number of police, fire and crime commissioners across the country have asked for that. Does she feel that the solution for dirt bikes is that they should have a registered keeper when they are sold and that, if they are going to be used off road, they should have a statutory off road notification?
Lola McEvoy
My learned and hon. Friend is the expert on this issue in the House, and I absolutely and wholeheartedly agree. In the interests of time, I will not reiterate the points I agree with, because I agree with all of them, and they were part of my speech, but I ask the Minister to please address them.
I agree that we need to ban the sale of e-bikes, but I am concerned about the use of antisocial behaviour as a reason against the police being forced to take action on this issue. I would like the prolific use of off-road electric bikes in our communities to be increased to a criminal offence.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
One way we can help the police is to better educate the public. We are in the run-up to Christmas, and it is generally misunderstood that e-bikes are not legal in our parks, on our roads or on our pavements. One young constituent found that out to his cost: he had owned his e-bike for only a couple of weeks, but he rode it on the road, and it was seized and crushed. Should we not say to parents, “Do not buy them this Christmas, because you are likely to lose them”?
Lola McEvoy
I absolutely agree. I have written to some high-street retailers that sell battery-powered scooters, which are popular among the younger generation. Children also use them to copycat and mimic the criminals that we see across Darlington. That is an escalation in antisocial behaviour, and it is really dangerous for those children.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
Does my hon. Friend agree that we should ask the Minister to consider targeted funding? The shoplifting element of the safer streets programme, and the police operation we had, were really successful. We need targeted funding with better intelligence and transparent data about where bikes are being seized and crushed.
Lola McEvoy
I agree that we need targeted funding, including for police vehicles in Durham and constabularies across the north-east. Having the ability for a police team to use a motor vehicle or a motorbike is an effective way of catching these criminals. The problem is that it is a game of cat and mouse. The police have to go round all the alleys in Darlington and across the north-east, and they do not have enough power. We need deterrents too.
Lola McEvoy
I will make some progress. One of the deterrents I ask the Minister to consider is repeat reporting in hotspots. Neighbourhood policing needs more resources if it is to act as a deterrent. We would like to see increased police resources in estates or parts of the town where there is repeated antisocial behaviour involving off-road bikes.
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)
My hon. Friend is being very generous in giving way. I thank her for her tireless work on this issue. At a recent meeting that I convened on this issue at Beamish museum with stakeholders including the police, local authorities, emergency services and community groups, a key theme raised was the need for stronger enforcement powers. Will my hon. Friend join me in urging the Minister to extend to police community support officers, as well as police officers, the power to stop and seize these bikes and report road traffic offences? That would give them the tools they need to tackle this persistent antisocial behaviour.
Lola McEvoy
I agree that PCSOs need further powers to be able to tackle the use of these bikes and to seize them. I attended a crushing, if that is what it is called—that word is new to my vocabulary—of 70 of these vehicles, which was incredibly satisfying; I really enjoyed myself. However, it is not enough to confiscate them. The public do not want to see them. They do not want them on the streets. We need to probit their sale, impose consequences for those selling them and strengthen community powers to ban them from areas.
Adam Dance
On community, a lot of residents in my constituency are scared to leave their home because of people with masks and balaclavas on riding scooters and e-bikes. I spoke to a resident who has not left her home in three weeks because she was knocked over the last time she did, and the police are just not doing enough. Will the Minister write to Avon and Somerset police to give PCSOs the authority to have handcuffs? We are one of the only places in the country where PCSOs do not have handcuffs.
Lola McEvoy
Unfortunately, I do not know enough about that bit of the legislation, but I am sure the Minister does and will address that point.
The use of balaclavas to evade detection is intimidating. The fact that the bikes are not licensed, plated or chipped means that the riders have a getaway vehicle. If the police were to catch and prosecute them, they could confiscate and crush the bikes, but that is not enough of a deterrent and the balance is weighted in favour of those using them.
I would like the Minister to consider our points. We are seeing an increase in blatant disregard for the law. There are reports of these criminals wearing balaclavas, drug dealing in plain sight in the street, and carrying machetes and other very dangerous weapons. It seems that they are willing to take the risk because they do not think they will get caught. As I said, the police are making incredible headway with Operation ORB, which is about seizing and crushing these bikes, but things seem to be weighted in favour of the criminals.
Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)
In Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme, this problem destroys not just lives, but livelihoods. We are giving grants to community centres to get people out, but people are scared to go. Farmers and rural communities are having their livelihoods swept away by this horrible scourge. Will the Minister give us some reassurance that we will give our police more preventive measures to catch these people?
Lola McEvoy
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend.
Will the Minister consider addressing the powers around this use of off-road vehicles, including antisocial behaviour orders? Using a public spaces protection order to ban the use of balaclavas and off-road bikes in Darlington town centre, for example, which I have called for, would mean that a police officer had to go and find somebody who was not committing a crime, but who was wearing a balaclava and using an off-road bike, and then issue them with a £100 fine for being in breach of the PSPO. Will the Policing Minister address the concerns about the deterrent being skewed, and not in favour of the public? A £100 fine is not enough of a deterrent, and the person has to be caught. We need to make sure that there are other deterrents in place, such as confiscation.
There are also problems with the licenses for riding these vehicles and with who is buying them. As my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash) mentioned, these scooters can be bought on the high street, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns) knows well, kits can also be bought online to change what could be seen by a parent as a pretty safe and fun vehicle into a really dangerous vehicle. We need to address that with more deterrents and tougher punishments.
Alan Strickland (Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for leading the debate and for her national leadership on this issue. She makes important points about additional powers, but those powers need policing resource. Just a few weeks ago, we debated Durham constabulary’s financial challenges in meeting the requirements of increasing crime. Does she agree that, as well as additional powers, Durham police must have the proper funding they need to lead a crackdown on this appalling problem?
Lola McEvoy
I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend. The funding formula is not in Durham police’s favour. We need funding formula reform, and we need it soon. I would also say that it is all well and good funding neighbourhood policing, which will act as a deterrent, but we simply do not have the resources to tackle the organised and very serious crime that is often masked as antisocial behaviour. I would argue that the scourge of balaclava-clad people on electric battery-powered bikes and dirt bikes on our roads is encouraging a more blatant flouting of the law in other areas.
I ask the Minister to address the fact that although communities are making a comprehensive attempt to report the use of these off-road bikes, by the time the police turn up, the culprits have obviously fled on those vehicles wearing a balaclava, and go completely unidentified. I therefore ask for some investigation into tracking the sale of these bikes or into other ways we can identify the wearers, who are blatantly dealing drugs in the town and surrounding areas.
I know that the Minister will be meeting the Department for Transport to address lots of these issues in a cross-departmental approach, but I ask that the Durham and north-east police forces, which are on the frontline, are seen as a pilot for any interventions. We have been given drones by our police and crime commissioners, but they are only as good as the police officers on the ground who follow them. It is all well and good seeing where the bikes are going, but if officers cannot then go and identify those using them, because it is seen as too little of a crime to drive one on the road, then it is not in their interests to use those resources to follow them. It is also not in the police’s interests to engage in a very dangerous high-speed chase down the main roads, because they know that that will endanger pedestrians.
I ask the Minister to understand some of the challenges we are facing in Darlington and the surrounding areas. I urge her to see what I have said not as an MP clutching her pearls and saying, “We are a lovely town”—which we are—“and we deserve better,” but as a canary down the mine for what criminals think they can get away with. If it is happening in Darlington in the north-east, you can bet your bottom dollar that it will happen right across the country.
That is a shocking statistic. We will certainly take that away and see whether that is replicated elsewhere. We will ask our NHS colleagues to see whether there is data on that and how it is gathered, but that would be useful.
On what more we can do, I am having a series of conversations with MPs and I will do a couple of roundtables. I know a lot of MPs are interested in this space—I understand there is a WhatsApp group—and want to give their views. We have obviously taken some steps, such as the powers to seize these vehicles and not have to give notice, and the powers to extend dispersal orders, as well being able to dispose of these vehicles quicker than before.
On the point my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington made about PSPO breaches, we have increased fines to £500. It is not the answer to everything, but it is at least something, going from £100 to £500. We are looking at a number of different areas, and all the things that have been suggested are things we are looking at. I cannot promise that there will be magic money and, although I would like to, I cannot wave a wand and give all police forces extra money to tackle this problem, but we are very much looking at this challenge in the round and I know that the Home Secretary is very interested in this area, too.
There are legal changes we can think about, which obviously involve the need for legislation and to go through that process, so what are the things we could do sooner rather than later? How much can we corral police forces that carry out big operations that take these vehicles off the streets and dispose of them, and look at that nationwide? There are issues around training for officers, which we are looking at. My hon. Friend the Member for Darlington talked about the dangers of pursuing someone, but to be able to pursue, officers need a level of driving training. We need to look at whether there is an issue with the number of officers we are training. I talked only today with the new inspector of His Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services, who has just started his new role—he was the head of the College of Policing—about the things in this space that we can think about doing.
There is obviously a big piece of work to be done across Government about the rules for how these things can be used. The point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington about people not understanding that a lot of this is illegal is absolutely right. The existing legal situation is messy when it comes to what someone can and cannot do, and we need to work across Government to address that.
Lola McEvoy
I would have liked to have addressed a few easy wins, but in the interest of time maybe the Minister could address them now. One issue is that a lot of people who are caught are under 18 and do not have a driving licence. Is there any avenue to addressing that through the parenting orders? For example, if someone’s child is caught riding one of these on the road, there could be knock-on consequences for their driving licence.
We had an incident in Darlington where parents were ringing up the police and asking when they could get the confiscated vehicle back. It is not the same thing as when a teacher confiscates a child’s phone for using it in school; these bikes are illegal and dangerous and have no place on the road. We need to differentiate that for parents by applying some consequences, if we cannot do it for the young people themselves.
My hon. Friend raises a good point about what to do with under-18s. We have just introduced respect orders, which are useful in this space because people who are consistently antisocial and driving these bikes are prime suspects for respect orders, which can result in a criminal offence—people can end up in prison if they breach their conditions. But respect orders do not apply to the under-18s. We need to look at our under-18s and make sure that, whatever the antisocial behaviour is, there is deterrence and interventions, as well as support where the child is vulnerable and may need it. I will take that away and commit to looking into it.
We need to look across Government and the consider the different laws that exist around these vehicles. In the Home Office, we need to be thinking about what bit of legislation, what change, or what corralling in policing we can do, and how we can send out messages about what is and is not legal. We are considering all of these issues in the Home Office. Now is the time to have these conversations, and we are looking at what we can feasibly do.
There is a general point around bikes and antisocial behaviour, which is that post covid there has been a big increase in antisocial behaviour that policing has not kept on top of, largely because of resources. This is a symptom of that. We have to make it clear to our communities that there is a way to behave and a thing to do, and that there will be consequences if people do not stick within the law. The message to all our fair, law-abiding citizens should be, “You are abiding by the law, and we are grateful for that. These other people will not get away with what they are doing.”
I am thinking about what the quick wins are, what longer-term wins we need through legislation and how we can make sure this is not seen as in any way acceptable.
Lola McEvoy
I thank the Minister for being so generous with her time. Something that comes up a lot on the doorstep when we talk about this issue is that it is the same small group, and everybody knows who it is. They might say, “Everybody knows who it is and they are always driving these bikes in and out the house.” Obviously, I do not know because they will not tell me who it is, so there is an issue there with the neighbourhood policing.
Is there any support that the Minister could give police around repeated multi-problem hotspots and families, where it is known by the community? This is driving down public confidence in the police, as well as how people feel on a day-to-day basis, as has been raised by many hon. Friends across the House. It is making people feel intimidated, scared and miserable, as well as being a danger. Can the Minister address that?
My hon. Friend makes a good point. There is the wider issue here of the years of austerity that ripped away services that supported parents and families to be the best they can be, whether Sure Start or the various iterations of family interventions over the years that have been ripped away. The police can do only so much. There is an infrastructure issue around our other public services. That is something we will look at.
I want to touch briefly on PCSOs because they have been raised a couple of times. Certain powers are given to PCSOs by each force. Different areas do different things with their PCSOs. Some, for example, are able to use drones, but others are not. On a basic level, they cannot arrest people or carry weapons. There are certain rules about what PCSOs can do, but within that local forces have some flexibility. I will take away the questions about that. I am always keen to encourage more PCSOs and their use as much as possible. I am very happy to take that away and look at it.
Lola McEvoy
Let me put on record the stellar job being done by PCSOs on the beat in Darlington, across the north-east and in every other constituency. I am sure that everyone will agree with that. PCSOs take huge personal risk for very low pay, and they work often gruelling shifts.
One PCSO—she would not like me to name her—was incredibly brave when she found two people on an off-road bike. She followed them, jumped them and got the bike; but when they turned around and realised that she was on her own, they got the bike back and assaulted her. It is deeply disturbing that that is the level we are at in the lovely town of Darlington. It is not right that the balance is so skewed in favour of those who do not respect the law. Will the Minister keep her in mind when increasing the powers of PCSOs?
I will certainly keep that in mind. There are lots of extraordinary examples of PCSOs showing great bravery and being really important crime-prevention agents as well as fighting crime in our local communities. It would be wrong of me not to say that three police officers have died in my hon. Friend’s region over the past year. We pay tribute to them and what they have given for their country. We will continue to do that, and we are very grateful for what the police do.
I absolutely hear and am having lots of conversations about the need to look at this challenge, recognise it and see it. The Home Secretary recognises and sees it, and we are very much in the market for the things that we can do. It is, therefore, a very helpful time to have this conversation and debate. I thank all hon. Members who have contributed and encourage them to keep talking to me and others in the Home Office. I will convene some roundtable sessions, and we need a proper cross-Government session as well. I thank my hon. Friend for raising such an important matter.
Question put and agreed to.
(9 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Thank you for your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby South (Baggy Shanker) for securing the debate. York may have a purple flag, but the feeling of security is certainly not spread across my community. There are particular areas of crime where we have great concerns, such as bike and shop theft—I welcome the measures that the Government are taking on that—and personal safety across our city.
We have already heard about the challenges people face with substance misuse. We have to drive that public health model to ensure that there are safe places people can use, and that they get the help and public health support that they need. We also need to go upstream and ensure that we are addressing the waves of county lines, which come into the city of York and cause much disturbance. We must ensure that we have early intervention and a seamless approach to youth services in our city. I called two meetings—
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
My hon. Friend is making a great speech, outlining the need for more youth services. In Darlington, I have called for the council to apply a public spaces protection order, which would allow them to remove balaclava-wearing people who commit anti-social behaviour. We are seeing an escalation in such activity from young people, who are trying to be “the big man” in the town and wearing balaclavas to hide their identity from the police. What is her view on that?
I thank my hon. Friend for all the work she is doing in Darlington. Clearly, PSPOs can be used in a really powerful way to create safer spaces in our town and city centres.
I called two meetings in York, one for the night-time economy in the city and one for the daytime economy, because they operate in very different ways. I called together all the agencies involved to examine, first, where the strategies for the two economies can be co-ordinated and come together, and, secondly, the specific issues for each economy.
The issue that came to the fore was CCTV and ensuring that there is a proper strategy for it, including making sure that cameras are switched on, are in the right places and are of the right resolution, so that we can identify crime. I am working with agencies across our city to ensure that we have proper CCTV protection. I am also looking at how we can ensure there is co-ordination across the different agencies that work in our city, which is really important.
However, the words that come to the fore so often are that we need more bobbies on the beat. We need more police on our streets, and there is also an issue with the funding formula for policing. When I spoke to our deputy mayor for police and crime, they highlighted the real challenges in areas such as North Yorkshire, which is a huge rural area with crime hotspots in our urban spaces. I ask the Minister to look at that funding formula again.
Let me briefly mention Unite’s important campaign, Get Me Home Safely—I declare my interest as regards Unite. We need to ensure that our taxis are safer. I want to ask the Minister what has happened since Casey’s recommendation on changing taxi licensing regimes. We operate a safe taxi licensing process in York. We want to ensure that there is such a process in the city, and that we have the resources to control and monitor it. Will she also consider how we can protect our transport staff? I know that the RMT has campaigned hard for that, because it is so important.
In closing, I thank all the agencies that keep our city safe.
Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)
In October last year, I ran a community meeting in partnership with Catriona Munro, who is Labour’s candidate for Holyrood in the Edinburgh South Western constituency. One of the key things that was brought up was the activity of food delivery companies. At the heart of this activity is what some would call a precarious business model, based on precarious work, which essentially exploits these workers and encourages them to drive illegal e-bikes in quite a reckless manner. In November last year, outside my constituency office, the police managed to impound 13 of these e-bikes. Just imagine what they could do if they were fully funded.
Lola McEvoy
My hon. Friend is eloquently making a point about the funding given to the police to eradicate e-bike crime. Does he agree that we would be in a better position if we had more bobbies on bikes? Perhaps the Minister will talk about that in her speech.
Order. We do not have very much longer. I want to get other Members in, and the Minister and the Opposition spokespeople need the opportunity to speak. I am not telling the hon. Gentleman not to take interventions, but I will end up cutting somebody out of the debate if he does.
(9 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. The argument for urgent and robust regulation to protect girls online has been won, thanks in no small part to the grit and resilience of survivors who have spoken out, and of the Minister herself, who is a formidable force in this area.
I began campaigning on this issue in defence of 14-year-old girls. Being 14 is tough: your hormones are wild, your body is changing, you take risks and you are desperate to belong. It has not been that long—although it is longer than I care to state to the House—since I was 14, so I do remember it. Some people advocate for an imaginary time gone by, filled with innocence, skipping ropes and cross-stitch, but that world was not real for most girls. Most 14-year-old girls will take risks, will keep secrets, will have a crush or 10, and will say mean things they should not say. That is part of growing up.
What we have allowed to happen to our girls, through the explosion of unsupervised stranger contact and self-published content, is utterly appalling. It is not normal, and we must take action now. I will outline as quickly as possible why I think we must take action to ban any form of stranger contact for under-16s online and why self-published content and functionalities that publish unregulated and unvetted content need to be banned for under-16s, to stop the exploitation.
The first meeting I had when I was elected was with the headteachers of secondary schools in Darlington, about online safety. I wanted to hear what the real issue was in Darlington and how severe it was, because so many parents had raised it with me. The results from the first forum, in which a thousand pupils came forward, were worse than I had feared: 60% of girls had known someone who had been bullied or blackmailed online, 53% of girls had been contacted by somebody lying about their age, 49% had been asked for pictures or personal information, compared with 28% of boys, and over 70% had been contacted by a stranger. One 14-year-old girl told me that they had been added to groups of strangers and that extreme content was then shared. That was on an app where you are not supposed to have contact from strangers.
The platforms say that adults should no longer be able to contact under-16s, but it is obvious that it is still happening. It is easy to pass through: recent analysis of the ban in Australia showed that a lot of children had drawn on moustaches and coloured in fake beards in order to pass the facial recognition age verification test. I urge the Minister to look into that and to offer her support for a more rigorous ban.
Obviously, strangers should not be able to contact under-16-year-old girls. The secondary point about enforcement is quite clear, but there is also a point that has not yet been made to the House, about self-publishing and online safety. Where we see self-published content, we see an organised criminal network of people grooming children through links and through more enticing content that might lead them into a darker space that is even less regulated. I urge the Minister to support work to address that.
Finally, we need to address the deep imbalance in who pays the price for online extortion with images of girls. Girls who make a single mistake are made to suffer a permanent price. That is obviously wrong. Their image could be circulated at any time. The threat of it is unbearable: it can be used anywhere and shared with any number of people throughout their life. That is brutal enough, but as one girl in the forum said to me, “It’s so wrong. The girl’s always blamed. She’s totally responsible.” Can the Minister outline how we can do more to support girls who are victims and survivors?
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I thank the hon. Member for Preston (Sir Mark Hendrick) for securing this very important debate.
All of us here recognise that rapid technological change is creating new risks and contexts for the exploitation of women and girls. The speed, anonymity and ease of communication provided by social media, combined with increasingly sophisticated AI tools, have led to new forms of sexual abuse emerging at alarming rates.
In 2025, the Internet Watch Foundation discovered 3,440 AI videos of child sexual abuse, a vast increase on the previous year, when only 13 such videos were found. That is why this debate, and our swift action, are so important. Far more needs to be done to keep women and girls safe online, and doing so is becoming at once more difficult and more urgent by the day. If we do not act swiftly, we cannot be surprised when new technologies exploit our lack of urgency.
Lola McEvoy
Does the hon. Member have any observations on the fact that technology has always outstripped legislation, and that this is actually about accountability and the enforcement of regulation?
Marie Goldman
Absolutely, and that has always been the case. Equally, we need to learn from the fact that it has always been the case and not be surprised when these things happen. We must not wring our hands and say, “There is harm being done—what could we possibly do about it?” We need to think smarter than that and bring in legislation that is much more forward-thinking and adaptable, and enables swifter action.
As hon. Members have already pointed out in this debate, digital abuse and exploitation are overwhelmingly targeted at women and girls. Research from Internet Matters found that 99% of new deepfakes are of women and girls. Moreover, according to the Revenge Porn Helpline, 98% of intimate images reported to its service were of women and 99% of deepfake intimate image abuse depicts women. It has also been discovered that many AI nudification tools do not actually work on images of boys and men.
We have now reached a point where AI tools embedded in major platforms are capable of producing sexual abuse material, demonstrating serious failings in our current framework. X’s AI tool, Grok, is a case in point. We have talked about this many times before. Grok facilitated the illegal generation and circulation of non-consensual sexual images, yet Ofcom’s response was, I am sorry to say, woefully slow. The executive summary of the violence against women and girls strategy states that it will
“ensure that the UK has one of the most robust responses to perpetrators of VAWG in the world.”
I agree with that intention, but we must recognise that Ofcom’s response was not wholly robust. We must do something about that; we owe it to women and girls in this country to act sooner and stronger. We need more effective legislation and a regulator with the capability and confidence to take appropriate and, crucially, swift action.
I welcome the move to make the creation of non-consensual intimate AI images a priority offence under the Online Safety Act, but that will be effective only if online platforms and services are held accountable under that Act. My Liberal Democrat colleagues and I have called on the National Crime Agency to launch an urgent criminal investigation into X, which should still happen, and to treat the generation of illegal, sexual abuse material with the seriousness it demands. We must act decisively when social media platforms refuse to comply with the law.
It is also time that we introduce age ratings for online platforms and limit harmful social media to over-16s. How can we expect to tackle violence against women and girls when the next generation is being drip-fed misogynistic content on social media?
Sarah Bool (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. Digital exploitation does not affect women and girls exclusively, but, given that four in five victims of online grooming are girls, it is an issue that we must focus on. As MPs, we are all aware of the risks and threats that women face in the online sphere. It is no surprise that the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children found that only 9% of girls feel safe in online spaces. The accounts of stalking given earlier are terrifying, especially those using Ring doorbells, which are designed to keep people safe; that they would be manipulated in that way is horrific. The case of Holly that involved Snapchat in the constituency of the hon. Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) is frankly horrifying.
There is no doubt that the complexity of the online world has resulted in significant digital exploitation. At this very moment, online content is being produced that takes advantage of women for financial gain. That is particularly worrying given that, according to Ofcom’s 2025 report on the time people spend online, women are spending more time than men across an array of websites. The issues around the digital exploitation of women and girls are particularly prominent on social media sites: over half of girls and women report receiving sexist comments about themselves online. This is a problem on an industrial scale.
The recent Grok sexual imagery debacle brought this into sharp focus. It demonstrated the dangers posed to women who had not even engaged with the technology. People merely used an existing image to take advantage of the technology and spread it using the power of social media. I welcome steps to stop it, but are we equipped to handle the changing digital landscape in the future? The Online Safety Act introduced key changes to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and criminalised sharing intimate images of another person without their consent. The Government are now adding provisions to the Act to make it a criminal offence to create non-consensual intimate images. Do the Government believe that that will be sufficient, and that Ofcom has the necessary powers to stop this abhorrent practice?
What I have seen from the Government so far is a reactive approach to AI and how it relates to women and girls. The technology is undoubtedly here to stay, but given the uncertainty of its development, is the Minister confident that the Government’s approach is sufficiently agile to prevent people from taking advantage of the technology to exploit women and girls?
As we have heard, AI is only one part of the problem: social media is driving much of the digital exploitation of women and girls. Data from 44 forces provided to the NSPCC showed that the police recorded 7,263 “sexual communications with a child” offences in the last year— a number that has almost doubled since the offence came into force in 2017-18. Data from the crime survey of England and Wales showed an increase of 6% in child exploitation offences compared with the previous year, and that comes on top of evidence that these platforms are linked to the fact girls are twice as likely as boys to experience anxiety. Recent data shows that girls who use social media at the age of 11 report greater distrust of other people at the age of 14.
The problem is only growing. Every day that the Government delay is another day that millions of girls are left at risk. We do not need further reviews or consultations; we need a ban on social media for under-16s. It is time to grip this issue.
Lola McEvoy
Will the hon. Lady elaborate on her definitions of “social media” and “ban”?
Sarah Bool
In terms of social media, I mean platforms such as Facebook and Snapchat; I am not talking about WhatsApp, which is a communication platform that many families use, although we have to be careful how it is used, because images can be shared on it.
A ban is about ensuring that children cannot access these platforms. The issue has been raised at different levels. The problem is the content that children can see, and especially the way the algorithms are used. I recognise that the companies also need to take responsibility for what is being accessed and how people are accessing it, because this is going on at a scale larger than any parent could imagine. This is not the social media that we grew up on, where we used to post a little note on a wall for our friend’s birthday or upload photos from a night out—that is definitely not what children are seeing.
Lola McEvoy
My problem with the hon. Lady’s argument is that we have constantly said that our legislation is lagging behind technological advances, but the proposed solution is to name a number of platforms where there is evidence of exploitation, crime and damage. I agree that we need to do that, but is it not better to make evergreen legislation, as some Members have argued, than to have a list of examples that somebody else has come up with?
Sarah Bool
I agree, but we need to take action now on the ones that we are aware of. Our legislation absolutely needs to be much more agile for the future, and I am not saying that a ban will be a silver bullet, but it will protect many girls from digital exploitation. That is why I am asking the Minister to follow the policy set out by the Conservative party, which was accepted in the House of Lords, and prohibit those under the age of 16 from using social media. If we do not put our children into those arenas, they will be far less likely to experience the opportunities for exploitation that stem from the internet and target the young and the vulnerable.
If the Government support those measures, they could move fast and take action without delay. Let me be clear: the challenges posed by digital exploitation will not vanish if we prohibit the use of social media, but that would be a bulwark against the dangers that social media poses, particularly to young people. If we allow people to access these platforms when they are more mature and more educated, we can hopefully achieve reductions in exploitation.
(1 year, 4 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for his brilliant articulation of Sarah’s story, which for too many of us, including myself as the MP for Darlington, is not uncommon. Before I was elected as the MP, I raised this issue in Darlington because a number of people there had been affected by spiking. Does he agree that bringing this provision into law today is important because for so many people—often women and vulnerable people—not being believed when they report being spiked is one of the big barriers to seeking justice?
A lot of us have been inspired by my hon. Friend’s campaigning before she arrived in this place, and her intervention is a powerful example of why. It is exactly that moment—that lack of belief—that far too many victims of spiking are encountering when they go to the authorities at the moment, and it is that lack of belief that we are looking to completely undercut in legislating to make this a specific offence today.
Sarah reached out to me because, excited as she is about the Bill, she rightly wants to ensure that we are delivering it as fully as possible. I know that it is the same motivation that made the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East table his amendment. I thank the Minister for taking the time to speak to me about this amendment on Friday. I know from the conversations she has had with officials that they are confident that, as drafted, the Bill would capture the fullness of possible offences related to spiking.
As we have heard, the Bill is broad in scope. Before I turn to the couple of amendments that I support, I want to recognise that the Bill’s scope is evidenced by the breadth and number of amendments and new clauses. It is worth gently reminding ourselves that a number of the measures were carried over from the Criminal Justice Bill, which sadly fell due to the general election almost a year ago, though there are obviously new clauses and amendments. I hope the Minister is in listening mode, in change mode and is willing to work across the House, and I hope that she accepts some of these amendments, because they would go a long way to further improving this legislation.
I have read through the Bill, and much of it goes right to the heart of the communities we seek to serve and represent. There are topics in the Bill that regularly pop up in my inbox and I am sure into colleagues’ inboxes as well. I want to cover two specific areas. The first is fly-tipping and littering—an issue that I have spoken about on many occasions in this Chamber since I was first elected. I support the amendments and new clauses tabled by the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers).
In an intervention earlier, I touched on the cost of littering to the country. I think I said that it was £1 million, but I meant £1 billion; I hope that can be firmly corrected, because it is a big difference. The principle is the same—it is money that could go back into our communities—but £1 billion spent on managing littering and fly-tipping is a huge amount of money that could otherwise buy a huge amount of services for constituencies up and down the country.
Lola McEvoy
Does the right hon. Lady’s calculation of £1 billion account for how people feel, for the degradation of pride in areas where people fly-tip, and for the failure of local services to be able to afford to collect and clean up rubbish tips on the side of our roads? I wonder if there is a multiplier effect in how people feel about their areas because of all this fly-tipping.
The hon. Lady makes an important point. There is a social and community cost that is difficult to evaluate. I am fortunate to have some fantastic volunteers and groups, including the Wombles group, that go out and litter pick. I do not mind going out and helping when I can. There is a great sense of a community coming together, but nothing is more frustrating than litter picking a street, walking back and finding that one of the tossers has just tossed some more litter out of their car.
That is an important point about pride in where we live and about hope. As I travel around the country, I often take a mental note of the number of potholes I drive across; there is a noticeable difference from one authority to another. I have to say that Walsall is quite good at the moment when it comes to filling potholes.
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point about litter and communities. My local authority of late has been successfully prosecuting some litterbugs. I have seen a couple of examples on social media just this week of individuals who have been treating the high street in Pelsall as their own personal litter bin, and the local authority has gone after them and fined them. That sends a strong message, but there is more we can do. Although much of this is about clearing up after these people, we also need deterrence to stop this happening. A lot of it is down to a lack of respect for the community and antisocial behaviour, for want of a better word, and it is a burden that we should not expect the taxpayer to keep shouldering. We have reached something of a tipping point, and we need to do something more than letting people walk away with a slap on the wrist.
Whether it is bin strikes, as we have seen in Birmingham, rural fly-tipping or littering, a lot of our communities feel absolutely fed up and overwhelmed, and they want action. I support the amendments tabled by the shadow Minister because, taken together, they form a serious and joined-up response that would help to protect and support not only our communities and those who want to keep them clean, but the local environment and wildlife too.
Similarly, it is often local farmers who face the burden of fly-tipping. When fly-tipping happens on their land, the cost of removing it falls to them. It hardly seems fair that they are left to foot the bill for waste that they did not create. Amendment 172, on clean-up costs, seeks to address that. I have heard time and again from frustrated landowners and farmers that the system often punishes the victims of fly-tipping, not the perpetrators.
Lola McEvoy
Does the right hon. Lady have any thoughts on the idea that people who hire somebody privately to take away their rubbish are often being held accountable for that third-party company dumping the rubbish illegally? People are at a loss to know what they are supposed to do.
The hon. Lady makes another important point about tackling waste crime—I think that is the technical phrase for it. Again, that is something that I see locally. Enforcement matters, but there also has to be strong reminder—I hate to use the word “education”, so perhaps “reminder” is best—to our constituents: if somebody comes to you and says they will clear your rubbish away, your need to think carefully about where they are putting that rubbish. In my constituency, fridges and mattresses have been dumped. I was driving down Bridle Lane last year and saw a whole lorry or van-load of rubbish that had been fly-tipped in the middle of the road. That meant that the road had to be blocked. That is outrageous and it needs to stop.
Jo White
I agree with my hon. Friend—those orders could be used.
The Bill strengthens the ability to seize motor vehicles when they are used in a manner causing alarm, distress or annoyance, but this is a nationwide problem, and I ask the Minister for a private discussion to consider whether the Bill can be strengthened to make it criminal to organise, promote or attend an unofficial road-racing event.
I welcome the Bill because it respects and recognises the daily risks our shop workers face. My constituent went to buy a pint of milk in his local Sainsbury’s at Easter time. He was queuing up for the milk when somebody rushed in and swept the whole shelf of Easter eggs into a bag. They call it “supermarket sweep”, and it is the new form of shoplifting. It is not someone sneakily putting something in their pocket or bag—it is people stealing food to order very publicly, and it is food that is worth a lot of money.
Lola McEvoy
In my constituency of Darlington, I have witnessed people doing what my hon. Friend described so often that it is now a common source of conversation between me and the assistants working in those shops. Does she agree that USDAW’s campaign to protect shop workers, which has been going on for years, is brilliant and that it is excellent that this Labour Government are going to finally introduce the right punishments for people who commit aggravated assaults against shop workers?
Jo White
USDAW was the first union I ever joined, and I very much support its campaign. I share the fear that shop workers have, because there is nothing they can do. They have to sit or stand and watch the crime happen, for fear of being assaulted or abused—that is the advice that USDAW and their management have given them. The law has to be strengthened to protect them. They have to go to work every day and face that fear, which creates inordinate stress. That is unacceptable.
Graham Leadbitter
I am pleased to hear that work is ongoing throughout the country.
I should have said at the start that I am speaking to amendment 2, which stands in my name. The SNP recognises that there have been calls for further legislation on licensing, which is what my amendment relates to. The SNP tabled a similar amendment in Committee relating to off-road bikes.
Everyone who uses our roads and paths is responsible for respecting other road and path users and for following the rules and guidance in the highway code. Unfortunately, a significant minority of road users are not respecting the rights of other road users and are riding motorised vehicles illegally on our roads and paths. In the worst cases, they have caused serious injury and death to either themselves or other people, causing huge heartache for the families affected.
Lola McEvoy
I commend the hon. Member for making that important point—these young people who are using off-road bikes are not only tearing up communities and green spaces, but putting themselves at severe risk. I commend him for bringing that point to the House, because it is such an important one.
Graham Leadbitter
It goes to the point made by the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas), who talked about his experience as a young driver and being a more responsible driver now. I would echo that myself, and I am sure most people recognise that in themselves. Some of it is inexperience, sometimes it is just plain stupidity, but that education is important to help tackle the issue, and ensure that people understand the potential consequences of such actions both for themselves and for other people.
A particularly good education piece was done in north-east Scotland, when children from all over the area went to a large venue and were given a hard-hitting and pretty blunt message, including videos of serious road accidents where people had been either seriously injured or killed. When they went into the venue they saw a fine-looking car; when they came out, that car had been crushed as if it had been in an accident. That was a hard-hitting experience, and lots of young people came out of it with a new respect for driving and using motor vehicles.
I turn now to off-road and quad bikes, and particularly e-bikes, which the amendment is focused on. The SNP supports Police Scotland and its partners in dealing with illegally modified vehicles and the misuse of off-road vehicles. The Scottish Government are considering ways forward, in partnership with Police Scotland and local authorities, to tackle vehicle nuisance and related safety issues. That includes continuing to liaise with the UK Government—a lot of work has gone on behind the scenes between the devolved Administrations and the UK Government, and I welcome that work by the Minister and her civil servants, which has been helpful. The ongoing collaboration ensures that Scottish interests are considered in any UK-wide decisions affecting road safety.
We are also considering further options, including liaising with the UK Government on a cross-party basis, and community engagement regarding the potential use of mobile safety camera vans to deter registered vehicles from speeding on public roads. The amendment calls on the Government to conduct a consultation on licensing and tracking the ownership of e-bikes and e-scooters, which in many cases are required to be insured, although the public are generally not aware of that.
I will make a final plea to the insurance sector, which I think could be doing a lot more to make it clear to people what insurance does and does not cover. The modification of vehicles—that was raised earlier by the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (Jo White)—is one such issue, and I do not recall seeing a great deal about that in insurance documents I have received over the years. The insurance industry could do a lot more to increase public awareness and try to tackle such issues and support the Scottish and UK Governments in their objectives.
David Smith
I will make progress.
The new clauses seek to address a perceived problem of police actions that were over-zealous in a handful of cases by making a fundamental change to abortion law that would put more women at risk while also risking the lives of infant children.
Lola McEvoy
My hon. Friend is giving a speech that I think many Members will find difficult to hear from such a wonderful friend and colleague. Does he agree that many women are already facing incredibly difficult situations, and many could already have a late-term abortion for which they could order pills online? We do not want to criminalise those who are not doing that. It is entirely wrong to criminalise people for taking action. Does my hon. Friend agree that the majority of women are doing the right thing?
David Smith
I absolutely do agree that the vast majority of women are doing the right thing, but I do not believe that we can cover all eventualities through such a fundamental black-and-white change in the law.
The real problem is that the temporary pills-by-post abortion scheme brought in during covid, which does not require in-person appointments, has been made permanent. That is why I added my name to new clause 106. In-person appointments would remove any doubt about the gestational age of a foetus within a narrow range, and massively reduce the likelihood of successful coercion, which is something I have seen throughout my work, as I have mentioned. This would consequentially remove the possibility of egregious police overreach, which I know my hon. Friends are so concerned about.
I am afraid there is simply not enough time.
That failure is now being used to justify the loosening of abortion laws still further due to a recent uptick in cases of women being investigated. I have looked carefully at the arguments being pushed for decriminalisation, and with those from the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy), I see that the bogeyman of the US right is back. Apparently, unless we agree to these amendments, evangelical religious groups paid for by US cash are going to start rolling back women’s reproductive rights in this country. This is utter nonsense. We are in the UK, and we have a very different and a more balanced national conversation. This is not pro or anti life. It is not extremist to want protections for viable babies, and it is not anti-women to say that coercion or dangerous self-medication should not be outside the reach of the law.
We also see the argument made that this is solely a woman’s health issue and nobody but she should have a say over what happens to her body, but that is to ignore a very inconvenient truth that has always stalked the abortion debate: this is not about one body; there are two bodies involved. Like it or not, this House has a duty to consider the rights of a woman against the safety and morality of aborting the unborn viable child without consequence. It is not extreme or anti-women to say that a baby matters too. I accept that new clause 1 does not decriminalise a doctor or third party carrying out an abortion outside existing time limits, but let us step back and ask why we have criminal law at all. It is not simply to punish, but to deter.
The former Justice Minister Laura Farris has expressed concerns that the challenge of prosecution for infanticide will become greater. She has also raised similar concerns about prosecuting coercive partners if the termination is no longer a criminal offence.
Tom Hayes
I want to start by aligning myself with, and commending the speeches of, my hon. Friends the Members for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Lizzi Collinge), for Ribble Valley (Maya Ellis), for Monmouthshire (Catherine Fookes), for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) and for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy). I am proud to stand alongside my colleagues and was proud to listen to what they had to say today. And because of what they had to say today, I have less to say, which will allow more people to speak.
I have been sent here by my constituents to defend and further their right to safe and illegal abortion. My inbox has been inundated with messages from constituents who are concerned, and who want to be able to have safe and legal abortions. They want to be removed from the criminal justice system, as my hon. Friend the Member for Gower said, because we have situations where clinically vulnerable women, who have gone through some of the worst experiences that anybody can go through, will in some cases be arrested straight from the hospital ward, hurried to cells and made to feel unmitigated levels of shame and guilt, on top of the physical and mental traumas they have already experienced.
Lola McEvoy
My hon. Friend is articulating exactly the point, which is that very few women, if any at all, take the decision to have an abortion lightly. It is an incredibly difficult, painful and hard decision, which is physically and mentally very tough to deal with. Does he agree that that is the crux of what we are doing here: alleviating some of the pain that those women are having to go through?
(2 years, 3 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
It is customary to pay tribute to the speaker before me for his first contribution to this House, but, let us face it, that was quite a polished contribution that he has had 21 years to prepare—so thank you to him.
This is my maiden speech as the first woman to represent Darlington from the Government Benches. I wish to pay tribute to Baroness Chapman, the first female MP for Darlington, for paving the way. She smashed that glass ceiling and now I have the privilege of serving our town in a Labour Government. Representation matters, and I will use my platform to highlight the issues facing women in the town—issues such as low-paid work, additional care responsibilities, the childcare crisis, menopause discrimination, maternity services and poor paternity rights. I will also be a champion for women’s health and support services.
I wish to pay tribute to the work of our police and crime commissioner, my friend Joy Allen and her team, on ending violence against women and girls in the town and to Harbour and Family Help, which do exceptional work in very difficult times. I am proud that this Labour Government will bring forward strong legislation to tackle this important issue.
I would like to pay tribute to my predecessor Peter Gibson, first for his respect throughout the general election campaign and secondly for his work ethic. Trust in politicians across both sides of this House is at an all-time low, and Mr Gibson worked tirelessly to communicate positively to everyone in Darlington about the work that he was doing. People thanked him for it, and I will emulate it. I genuinely wish him well.
I am a product of my constituency and proud of it. I am from good stock: west end star Zoe Birkett of “Pop Idol” fame went to my high school; “Big Brother” winner and men’s mental health campaigner Anthony Hutton is a Darlington resident; and we have a proud and active veterans community. In fact, two of the brilliant Doorkeepers in this Chamber told me earlier that they know Darlington well because of their training at Catterick Garrison, just outside my constituency. I thank Dan Smith, an active campaigner for veteran support in Darlington, for his work for our town and for his friendship to me during the campaign.
We have a bustling business and hospitality community across the town. We have Dan the Bakerman, whose sourdough is nationally acclaimed, the Echo 3 and Hatch coffee houses, which keep me caffeinated, and Claire from the Cheese & Wine Shop who herself welcomed our Prime Minister and Chancellor very recently.
We have a brilliant sporting community, from Spraire Lads football team, which my brother used to play for, to the Headlanders netball club and the Hundens Lane bowls club to name just a few. It would be remiss of me not to mention the Quakers, Darlington’s football club, which have a very famous alumni in the Three Lions’ best ever goalkeeper, Jordan Pickford. Like many of us from Darlington, I love the town, I like a laugh, I work hard and I do not like to be taken for a fool.
I was sent here to right the wrongs that have led to too many in our town being let down, and I will do just that. I will not lose sight of those who sent me and went above and beyond to put their time and trust in me—my teachers, the St Augustine’s community, my Labour family and, of course, my parents, my brothers and my husband, all of whom have had their personal lives thrust right into my political story, not entirely through choice, but in the name of our common goal, which is a better future for our community.
I am lucky to be here. I got a second chance on a vocational master’s degree at Newcastle University, where I was taught on the job how to be a journalist. I come from a long line of people who have done better for themselves than was expected for them and I will dedicate my time in Parliament to knocking down barriers to opportunity for everyone in our town, so that no matter their postcode they can live the life they want, well.
I was inspired by those who went before me on our brilliant Northern Echo paper, which was founded in 1870—two years after the constituency of Darlington—and still boasting fantastic campaigning journalists. They include Chris Lloyd, the town’s historian—I am mentioning him in this speech so that he will help with my new blue plaque scheme for the town—and Kayleigh Fraser, who is still chasing me for a quote. Sorry, Kayleigh.
This Saturday just gone, I had the joy of visiting a new tourist attraction in Darlington—Hopetown, named after the area of the town in which I grew up, where Darlington’s famous contribution to the railways and the industrial revolution was based. The new attraction incorporates our railway heritage and has incredible artefacts, top-of-the-range art installations and digital interactive educational points to tell our story to visitors. I am telling Members this because I welcome everyone—on both sides of the House—to come and visit. When they do, they must try the Black Diamond ice cream; it is already taking off on social media.
I have huge pride in the town’s industrial contribution and I am delighted to be the first Darlington Member to represent Heighington and Coniscliffe, and with them come their beautiful villages and even more railway history. Mr Deputy Speaker, this is for you to note especially. I learned something new about my home town this weekend. Before the establishment of the railways, our clocks were not standardised and Darlington operated a full four minutes behind Westminster, so, as those who know me well will attest, I still like to operate on Darlington time. As a nod to tradition, I shall be keeping to my town’s original time for the duration of my time on these Benches.
One of the artefacts that caught my eye in the museum, among the railway medals and the framed timetables, was an award from 2019 for the manufacturing giant Cleveland Bridge. Like so many brilliant companies over recent years, Cleveland Bridge has ceased trading. What makes this company particularly of note is its vast global contribution. It built the Sydney harbour bridge and, in fact, the former Health Secretary and Labour Darlington MP, the right hon. Alan Milburn, referenced it in his maiden speech two decades ago. I am determined that our manufacturing contribution in Darlington is not consigned to museums and the history books. We are proud people and we are grafters. We do not need handouts; we need a Government who allow our brilliance to shine again. I have already had the excellent engineering firm Cummins to Parliament to discuss making our area a green hydrogen cluster and ensuring that hydrogen is at the heart of our decarbonisation strategy. I look forward to working with my neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald), an expert in green hydrogen and the future of steel, in his new brief.
Over the course of the campaign that led up to my election, the biggest thread from the people of Darlington, from people of every income, background and political persuasion, was that the cost of living is too high and public services are at breaking point. I firmly believe that this Government must urgently tackle the mental health crisis blighting our town and region. In my own network, I know seven men who have died by suicide. Mental health waiting times and services for men, mothers, children and veterans are way behind where they need to be. I will be relentless in my approach to improving our mental health services for everyone in our town. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, who I know shares my passion for equity between mental health and physical health, will not be able to avoid me, just as soon as I can work my way around the Palace labyrinth.
As a woman in politics, I am frequently offered unsolicited advice and told that I need a thick skin, although I firmly believe that those with too thick a skin have been ruling this Chamber for too long, and I am here to represent ordinary people with compassion, because I am one of them. I am only too aware of the emboldening effect that online platforms give bullies and harassers. I think we have reached a fork in the road and I will use my position to stamp out online bullying, not just for those who are victims of it now, but for the next generation, who I believe we have a duty to protect.
This Labour Government are committed to tackling climate change and wealth creation, and that is an opportunity for our region that must be grabbed with both hands. That is why I have already visited Hitachi with my neighbour and friend the hon. Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland), to put my full support behind efforts to secure the future of skilled and essential jobs at the Newton Aycliffe plant that employs many of my constituents.
The Treasury and many other key Departments have a presence in my constituency, providing skilled graduate jobs, which we welcome and want to build on. I will be a champion for public money being better spent. I have made my career improving public procurement contracts, fighting for working people to earn a wage they can live on and have decent terms and conditions. I will use that experience to ensure that when public money is spent in Darlington, it provides the best possible bang for our buck in impact and outcomes for our town. I will be a loud voice on this issue and will work with everyone and anyone who believes, like I do, that we can get our regional economy thriving with decent jobs for local people, so that people can work hard and earn enough to save for their future, and have safe, secure housing and spend quality time with their families. I am very fortunate that the Chancellor will be visiting her second office in Darlington regularly and I am committed to maximising the opportunity that brings to benefit my community.
My constituency and everyone in it has the potential for a bright future, and I will do everything I can to secure it. While I want to make our country better, my priority is improving the lives of those in my home town, those who raised me, those who have sent me here—the good people of Darlington. So, in keeping with my railway theme, full steam ahead!
Several hon. Members rose—