Manufacturing Skills

Maya Ellis Excerpts

Tuesday 20th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Richard Quigley) for securing the debate. I am particularly fond of this discussion because, in a slightly tenuous link, my late grandad Bill Dibley was born and raised on the Isle of Wight and went on to become an electrical engineer. When I was about five, he made me my first circuit board to play with, which ignited my love of innovation. I am sure he would be delighted that we are here supporting the great legacy of technical skills in the Isle of Wight and the whole UK. I am grateful to private companies in my constituency such as BAE Systems, which, in its Academy for Skills and Knowledge, trains apprentices for both its own organisation and the surrounding supply chain.

I want to make two quick key points. Under the EU, areas such as mine in Lancashire were among the biggest beneficiaries of skills support and funding, but now, as schemes such as the apprenticeship brokerage service go only to mayoral areas, which Lancashire is not, we risk losing so much of our progress. I have been encouraged by the Prime Minister’s focus on reindustrialisation and this Government’s commitment to growth in every postcode, but we need to ensure that it means exactly that.

I also have a lot of food manufacturing companies in my heavily rural constituency. One of those is Baxi, which typically would look to take on around 30 apprentices each year. However, this year, because of wider financial pressures, it has not been able to take on any. We must address skills shortages, not just by encouraging more young people into manufacturing, but by ensuring that businesses have the means to invest in them.

I am grateful that this Government believe deeply in technical education, and we know that the public are with us, because 93% of people believe that manufacturing is important for growing the UK’s economy, but we have to ensure that the cost of doing business is not too high to develop those skills, and that all parts of the UK are supported to contribute to building our skills base here.

[Sir Christopher Chope (in the Chair)]

John Grady, you have half a minute.

Milburn Review: Interim Report

Maya Ellis Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Western]

I refer the hon. Member to the rest of paragraph 268, because his selective quoting does not cover all that was in there. It also says:

“the UK’s NEET crisis is much more long-term and deep-seated than any decisions taken in the last few years.”

Milburn is very clear that action is needed, that there are a range of reasons for that and that he will bring forward a set of recommendations on which he expects the Government to act. We await those and stand ready to act.

[Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)]

It is brilliant to see an example in the interim report of a young woman who taught herself Shopify in order to start a business. This Government have prioritised growth, which comes from innovation and entrepreneurship. Given that young people have incredible ideas and often thrive when they can direct their own destiny, rather than adapting to another company’s culture, does he agree that encouraging entrepreneurship among young people needs to be a significant part of the solution?

[Andrew Western]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and I know that the Secretary of State is interested in what we can do to increase the support available to self-employed people of all ages.

Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill

Maya Ellis Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 1st July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Debbie Abrahams]

I have not yet seen the details, but it is a subject that I raised, and, as we know, the funding will follow.

Covid exacerbated these problems, as did the mental health crisis that we have experienced in the United Kingdom, especially among young people. A UK Millennium Cohort study shows that the key drivers of the NEETS levels are poverty and austerity, as well as other issues faced by families.

Let me get back to the Bill. I thank the Government for the concessions that they have made to date to protect existing PIP claimants and people on UC LCWRA with severe conditions or terminal diagnoses. Th growing evidence of the potential harms that they would have experienced was significant, and it was the right thing to do. However, people who are newly disabled or who acquire a health condition from November 2026 will also need help with their extra costs. The New Economics Foundation has estimated that 150,000 people will be pushed into poverty as a result of no longer being eligible for PIP.

[Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Debbie Abrahams]

No—I am sorry, but I will not get an extra minute.

Pushing people into poverty will, in itself, worsen their condition. It will make it easier for people to live independently, including going to work, if they get money through PIP.

There is still confusion about the PIP review. Will it be co-produced with disabled people and their organisations? If so, why are we saying that the outcome of that review, and the new PIP assessment, is predetermined at four points? Therein lies the problem. Most of us are aware that this dog’s breakfast of a Bill is being driven by the need to get four points to the Office for Budget Responsibility to enable it to be scored for the Budget. The Governor of the Bank of England has said that we have to stop over-interpreting the OBR’s forecasts, which, as we know, are fallible.

I urge the Government to remove the reference to four points in clause 5. We can table amendments, but the Government should put a commitment to the co-production of the new PIP assessment review on the face of the Bill and delay the implementation of the freezing of UC LCWRA.