Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill

Debate between Lola McEvoy and Chris McDonald

2nd reading
Tuesday 1st July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

I was pleased yesterday to hear the Secretary of State acknowledge the anxiety of disabled people in her comments from the Dispatch Box. If we really want to understand why changes such as this cause such anxiety and fear in the disabled population, then just sit and listen to the speech that was completely without empathy from the Leader of the Opposition at the start of this debate. Areas such as the north-east of England where, over decades, industry has declined are the same places that have the highest levels of poverty, poor health outcomes and consequently the highest need for social welfare support.

The right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) talked about the lack of productive capacity. I can tell him that it was successive Conservative Governments who stripped the productive capacity from seats such as mine. That is why Professor Peter Kelly, a former director of public health for Stockton North, when asked what would be the best way to improve the health of our residents, said it would be for

“everyone who can to have a secure, well paid job that they like doing”.

We see it time and again: a physical health condition is left untreated due to long NHS waiting lists and the resulting inactivity leads to musculoskeletal problems, which turn to isolation, anxiety and depression. Our benefits system often compounds that hurt, forcing people to prove and reprove their disability, creating a climate of doubt rather than dignity. I am pleased to see that the Bill will address that by removing the need for reassessment and protecting existing claimants.

I thank the Minister for Social Security and Disability as well as other Ministers for listening to me when I have raised the concerns of my constituents. There have been some really meaningful concessions on the Bill, such as the protection of existing claimants, support for new claimants and inflation-proofing of annual increases, but as the Minister knows, a major concern for me has been clause 5—I was pleased to hear about the withdrawal of that clause—as well as the Timms review on PIP assessments.

I am also concerned about mental health being made worse by debt and unemployment. I welcome the Government’s investment in expanding access to occupational health and the almost 7,000 new mental health workers since last July. Those are not just policies; they are the foundations for a healthier and, I think, more hopeful society.

We have heard a lot about work and Labour’s commitment to work, with the purpose and dignity it offers as well as the improvement in mental resilience. I want to be clear that there is a value judgment behind that, but it is not one that chooses to separate people in work from those who are not. People’s lives have equal value regardless of whether they work, but work does in and of itself improve the quality of people’s lives.

[Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is giving a passionate speech about our region. Does he agree that although lots of people would like to contribute, for too long the workplace has not been disability-friendly? My experience as a trade unionist is of seeing time and again people who really needed support and wanted to be in work being managed out of the workplace, despite that being illegal. They have told me that they were bullied out of the workplace because of the weak reasonable adjustments clause.

[Chris McDonald]

I agree that accessibility to work is important, both through buildings and transport, as well as Access to Work. It is not just about supporting people to get into work but whether they can physically get into work.

To reiterate, people’s lives have equal value regardless of whether they work, and it is our duty to ensure that as many people as possible are supported into secure, purposeful, well-paid work, and that employers satisfy their duty to make necessary adjustments for people with disabilities.

My hon. Friend the Member for Norwich South (Clive Lewis) outlined some things that the Government are doing to try to reduce unfairness. I would add to that investment in our NHS, which will help deal with people’s long-term health problems, and the employment support measures announced by the Government, which will offer a pathway to work. The Employment Rights Bill and the industrial strategy will create more opportunity for work.

I also want to speak directly to those who may never return to work. They deserve dignity, and they deserve unconditional support. They offer more to society than previous Governments have ever recognised. This is the time to turn a page on Conservative Governments who treated claimants with suspicion and to work hard to build trust with actions rather than words.

I would like to conclude by quoting a few words that I heard on the “Today” programme last week from the former welfare Minister, Lord Blunkett. He said:

“Labour is the party of supporting people into work, not the party of keeping people on benefits.”

I have got faith in the intrinsic value of everyone in our society and their ability to contribute. So long as the voices of disabled people continue to be heard and they remain at the table, the Government’s plan for changing the country will enable everyone to thrive regardless of their ability.

Armed Forces Recruitment: North-east England

Debate between Lola McEvoy and Chris McDonald

Wednesday 25th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor (Alan Strickland), not only on securing the debate but on his doughty championing of the armed forces in our region and around the UK.

Armed forces recruitment in the north-east is of regional and national importance, and matters very deeply to my constituents in Stockton, Billingham and Norton. Our armed forces community is a great source of pride, as hon. Members will have seen if they were with me on Stockton High Street on Saturday, when we had a flag-raising ceremony for Armed Forces Week. There were representatives of our local regiment, the Royal Yorkshire Regiment; the Royal Military Police, which has a base in Norton in my constituency; and our cadets—the sea cadets and RAF cadets based in my constituency, and Royal Marine cadets too.

Those brave members of the regulars and reserves deserve more than my words and the words of hon. Members in this Chamber; they deserve real action. As my hon. Friend pointed out, the reality is starkly different from some of those words. The British Army is now at its smallest size in 200 years. With due respect to the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois), who I know is personally a strong supporter of the armed forces, the last decade did not cover his party or the previous Government in glory on this issue.

The armed forces have been hollowed out. They have been underfunded, overstretched and undervalued. As we have heard, over the last decade the number of recruits in the north-east has fallen by a third. This in an area that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) said, is proud of its commitment to the armed forces, and where people know that joining the armed forces provides a route of opportunity that is sadly lacking elsewhere in our economy.

[Lola McEvoy]

What does my hon. Friend think are the causes of the drop in recruitment in our area? I frequently speak to veterans and the aftercare for people coming out of the forces has been really poor. Does he agree that the Labour Government have an opportunity to show not only that we are proud of people when they are serving, but that when they leave, they need to be looked after properly?

[Chris McDonald]

My hon. Friend is right that aftercare is very important. On why recruitment levels have fallen, I would expand on the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Aycliffe and Spennymoor made about the recruitment process and criteria, such as the medical requirements.

When Admiral Sir Tony Radakin spoke to the Public Accounts Committee in April, he clearly said that there is no shortage of people wanting to serve—as we know in the north-east—but too few of those applications are turned into recruits. The rigidity of medical standards is certainly an issue: 76,000 applications were rejected on medical grounds in the last five years, and the MOD’s website makes it clear that even a minor or historical health issue that does not affect daily life could disqualify someone.

Sir Tony is far more qualified than I am to speak about this, but he made a very compelling point that we are assessing people for 22 years of service when most will serve only 10. In fact, if we could take a more flexible approach and think about a five-year service interval, that would open the door to thousands more capable recruits willing to serve.