Changing Places Toilets: Capital Funding

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. This is the second or third time we have been in the same debate this week, so Members are in competition with me. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) for securing this important debate and for his ongoing efforts to speak up for issues that matter not only to him but to so many of our constituents across the country. He has been a committed advocate for Changing Places toilets and so many issues that others find difficult to talk about. He is the voice of many constituents around the country.

I welcome the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Government to this important debate, which comes on the back of another important debate about public toilets for people with stomas, which some Members in this debate took part in. I thank all Members, including the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth), for their contributions and their thoughtful, emotional and challenging speeches. Often these are the sorts of debates that have a real impact on policy change.

As Members have pointed out, for many people the availability of an accessible public toilet that is clean and safe can be the deciding factor in whether they feel able to visit a town centre, a high street, a local attraction, their park, or just something they want to do that weekend. Such facilities support dignity and independence for people with disabilities and accessibility needs. There is also an impact on the families that support those with a disability.

However, for some individuals with profound and multiple disabilities, or other conditions that severely limit mobility, standard accessible toilets might not provide the support they need. Such toilets might lack essential features such as adult-sized changing benches, hoists and enough space for a disabled person and one or more carers. As hon. Members have highlighted, that is exactly why Changing Places toilets are so important. They provide the space, equipment and dignity that standard provision simply cannot provide. I know that from my own experience as a Member of Parliament who has visited a lot of special educational needs provision and spoken to many parents about their own lived experience and the need for the gap to be fixed.

The Government want people to be able to live well, work, enjoy days out, shop and socialise, and we recognise that access to appropriate public facilities can be an important part of enabling that. Reasonable adjustments, as has already been mentioned, are instrumental to changing lives and allowing everybody to live fulfilled lives.

As hon. Members have acknowledged, in recognition of the importance of the issue, the Government delivered over £30 million for the Changing Places toilets programme, and I am delighted that the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak) joined the debate. The programme has supported the targeted installation of well over 400 new disabled toilet facilities in areas where they were most needed across England. Although that programme closed last year, changes were made in January 2021 to the statutory guidance accompanying building regulations.

[Wera Hobhouse]

The Minister just acknowledged that the fund was closed, although I am not sure whether all the money was spent. We all agree that the fund provided and delivered a very important human dignity facility, as we have all talked about. Can she please explain why a fund that provided for human dignity was cut?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank the hon. Member for her passionate advocacy. Since the fund was allocated, we have had a significant spending review through which moneys were allocated to local government. I will make the case for why decisions around spending are best made locally, but that does not mean I do not recognise the important cases that have been made. I also recognise that the moneys that had been allocated to Changing Places toilets delivered change on the ground with facilities across the country.

I also absolutely accept the important point that my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford made about the speed at which additional facilities are being provided. There has clearly been a reduction in the speed of provision across the country—I am not in the business of rejecting the evidence in front of us—but the Government’s important spending review included a record spending settlement for local government, and spending decisions should be taken locally.

The 2021 regulations were significant. I remember them well; as a council leader, I followed building regulation changes, which have an impact on local government budgets. As a result of the 2021 regulations, all building works must meet the functional requirements of the 2010 building regulations, including part M, which addresses accessibility. In addition, at the 2025 spending review the Government committed more than £5 billion in new grant funding over three years for essential local services, including public toilets.

We continue to provide 100% mandatory business rates relief for separately accessible toilets. I accept that that is a slightly different conversation, but I want to give a sense of the Government’s broader commitment to ensuring that there are accessible toilets for everybody in our communities. Taken together, those measures are intended to increase the availability of these vital facilities over time and ensure that accessibility is treated as a mainstream consideration as we plan and build our public spaces.

I hear and accept the powerful cases that hon. Members have made. I acknowledge the calls for a new capital fund pot for Changing Places but, as Members will appreciate, it is a little beyond my ability to make a spending commitment, although I am reminded that Ministers in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government have gone on to hold offices that have the power to make such commitments. Members will take the point that I am making.

The Government believe that local authorities are best placed to understand where facilities need to be, so our approach to funding them is important. We encourage them to allocate the funding necessary to deliver public toilet provision. Decisions are best made locally.

[Wera Hobhouse]

I understand the money argument, but will the Minister acknowledge that local authorities are stuck when it comes to providing mandatory services? They have to provide children’s and adult social care, but public toilets are optional. That is the dilemma. Local authorities cannot make that money available, as we have discussed.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank the hon. Lady for making that point. My hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford and I have spent a long time in local government, so we know all too well that statutory services are under huge pressure and that choices have to be made. I accept the argument that if funding is not ringfenced, things sometimes do not get done. However, this Government are committed to funding local authorities well, and we have done that through the spending review.

We are also committed to saying to local authorities, “You are best placed to make decisions for your area and assess what is needed. We will support you and encourage you to make the right decisions.” It is a balancing act, but debates like this give us an opportunity to reinforce the important message from Government that access to facilities and public toilets for all who need them is a crucial part of what local government should be doing.

[Daniel Francis]

As the Minister said, we were friends for many years in London local government prior to being elected to this place. I want to make two points. First, there is the issue of the Changing Places that have been provided in recent years and the amount of information out there about them. In the last week, I have written to a number of providers about cases where the money was provided or the facilities were set up under the new regulations, yet nobody has advertised that they exist, or they have not been made available. Would the Minister commit to working with me to write to local authorities to remind them to get that information out there?

Secondly, on cross working, as I said earlier, that needs to be provided not just by local government but by the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department for Transport as well. I very much hope the Minister is in the same position next week, working to secure a meeting for me to see how we can continue that spend across Departments.

[Nesil Caliskan]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the important point he made earlier. I was coming on to say that of course I absolutely welcome a dialogue with him, but also with the consortium that has been referenced in the debate, which does such good work already. I am happy to meet with the consortium myself, but I am also confident that MHCLG and all current or future Ministers would welcome that engagement and dialogue. My hon. Friend is right that these sorts of facilities are successfully delivered only if there is a cross-governmental commitment.

Regulation and funding are part of that challenge, but we also need a joint recognition of the challenges in our communities to be able to see things delivered. The consortium is clearly playing a valuable role in articulating those challenges. It is absolutely right that MHCLG has that engagement and I am confident that it will going forward. I am happy to discuss with my hon. Friend any letters, correspondence or meetings that we need to have as a Department in the coming weeks and months to make sure that we can continue to make the case for these facilities.

Let me address the point about specific Government Departments and the opportunities that we face now because of Government initiatives and changes, which we do not want to lose, so that we can improve facilities for those who have needs. I was shocked to hear that so many NHS hospitals do not have the provision that we are talking about. That is not acceptable, and I think that all our constituents would be surprised to hear that. I am very happy to take that away and speak to colleagues in other Departments; I think they, too, will be surprised. It is a good example of where we need cross-governmental working, and I welcome the input from Members on how we might be able to do that.

I recognise the important points made about transport. The Government’s commitment to accessible transport is demonstrated in the spending that we have committed to the railways. Because of that, there is an opportunity to make sure they are accessible, and our transport hubs will play a key part in that. I will take those two specific points away.

I recognise the point that my hon. Friend made on modernising software and maps. A needs map, if you will, feels like quite an obvious thing that we could do, which would really make a difference to constituents across the country who simply do not know if there is a facility. An ability to map out the gaps could also give the necessary encouragement to Government and local authorities to allocate the moneys that are required to set up facilities.

I recognise the strength of feeling across the House in this very important debate on ensuring that public spaces are accessible, inclusive and supportive of people’s dignity and independence. I pay tribute to my good and hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford. The very best of politics are people who just get things done. I saw that for many years in local government, when he got things done, and he gets things done as a Member of Parliament too, but nobody who knows him will say that he is a soft touch in any way. He is formidable and effective. He is my hon. Friend, but he will tell me if we are doing something wrong as a Government, as he has.

[Rishi Sunak]

I add my thanks and congratulations to the hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis). Before the Minister wraps up, I thank her for a very considered, informed and thoughtful response to the debate. Whatever happens next week, I very much hope that she is in a position to continue being a champion of this cause in Government, because I think she would do it very well.

[Nesil Caliskan]

That is very generous of the right hon. Member. I again thank all Members for their contributions and provide my reassurance that MHCLG will be committed to doing everything it can to meet the challenges that our constituents face.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (in the Chair)]

To put the fear of God into the Minister, I call Daniel Francis to wind up.

Estate Regeneration

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Wednesday 15th July 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. May I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), for his generous words? I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon); he and I are competing for appearances in this Chamber this week—

[Jim Shannon]

You’re playing catch-up!

[Nesil Caliskan]

Yes, and I have a long way to go.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy) for securing this important debate and thank all Members for their contributions. Each one has provided an important perspective on the challenges of estate renewal and the need generally to build homes in a way that works for communities. My hon. Friend spoke powerfully about the difference between good regeneration and poor examples in his constituency. The Government recognise that good estate regen is critical to delivering our housing target and to providing decent homes for everybody to live in.

There are many reasons why estate regeneration might be the best thing for existing tenants or for a local area. In some cases, years of neglect from a Conservative Government that failed to invest in existing estates and mandated council rent reductions, which meant even less for housing revenue accounts, has left many estates in dire need of regeneration. I know that only too well, having led a local authority that felt the burden of pressures on the HRA account. Social housing was the tenure most affected by damp and mould issues—my hon. Friend correctly highlighted the impact that that has on many of his constituents, and I know that many other Members have cases involving the same problem.

An ageing housing stock not only impacts life chances, but costs the taxpayer more in the long term, because disrepair has a bigger impact on communities and also on the stock itself. In that context, it might make more sense for an entire estate to be regenerated than to take a sticking-plaster approach, particularly when some buildings reach the end of their life. In other cases, estates are the best places to build more affordable homes, particularly in our towns and cities, where there may be fewer development sites available, but more social infrastructure in local areas.

The people often forgotten in housing debates are the 1 million families on council housing waiting lists and the thousands of people trapped in temporary accommodation. I know that there are something like 4,000 on the housing register in my hon. Friend’s local authority area, and the figure is similar in my borough of Barking and Dagenham. Everyone deserves a decent home—a safe home, in a clean neighbourhood, with decent social infrastructure. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson), who spoke so passionately and accurately about the importance of the facilities that make a community, whether that is a youth centre or much needed GPs. I pay tribute to her long-standing campaign, which reflects the need to build neighbourhoods with homes that are more than just the buildings that house people.

In my view, the simplest, most powerful thing we can do to lift people out of poverty and improve life chances in this country is to provide more decent homes. First and foremost, we must recognise that the supply of homes is the foundation for everything. Indeed, we will only address the housing crisis by building more homes, period. I listened with great interest to the shadow Minister, who made important points about house building and getting on with it. I have to say, though, having been a council leader in and now a Labour Member of Parliament in London, that it is a great shame that Conservative and Lib Dem councils, councillors and MPs frequently object to house building.

Of course, brownfield sites are a really important part of the solution; but the idea that we can meet housing need in London or the rest of the country only by using brownfield sites or doing infill on existing estates is, I am afraid, misleading. That does not mean that we look at only one aspect of house building. I recognise that the picture is complicated, and it will take a multitude of approaches to make sure that regeneration delivers the number of homes to the decent homes standard that we need, but I also know that regeneration must be delivered in partnership with communities. Good regeneration puts communities in the driving seat. That does not just mean being transparent with decision making; it also means allowing those who live in the community to have a real say in shaping proposals. Decisions on property size, building height, materials, amenities and timelines for delivery are important for getting community buy-in. That approach is not new. Good developers, of which there are many, do that anyway, and the regulatory standards are clear: registered providers must communicate with tenants, provide information to them and take their views into account in decision making. That extends to providers undertaking estate regeneration.

It is difficult to set out realistic timelines, because each estate regeneration is different and unique due to their different sizes and ambitions, and good engagement with existing residents may further change those ambitions. Timelines for estate renewal are also highly dependent on viability, phasing, planning permission conditions, and ground and infrastructure prep, but I accept that families who live on an estate face huge anxiety when they do not know when their home is going to be knocked down. Indeed, there are examples in my constituency of families who have been told their estate has been earmarked for renewal; they can see their community being hollowed out, yet they do not know when they will need to move on. Timelines for estate renewal are complicated, but it is important that engagement takes into account the instability caused by estate renewal.

My hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke asked a valid question about whether the process for decision making should be through a ballot. I led a local authority that had a ballot for an area. It is hard work to say the least, but it is perhaps one of the most important things a local authority can do to secure community buy-in. However, to say that ballots in themselves are what secured that engagement would be to do a disservice to the engagement that the ballot provided.

Ballots in and of themselves do not solve trust issues among residents. They can force developers to do the meaningful engagement that they should be doing anyway, but they do not mean that we will get the outcome that we want. Where providers fall short, there is usually a complaints process and an ombudsman. In addition, the Government have also committed to introducing social tenant access to information requirements from this October, which will make it mandatory for providers to give information about property management in response to information requests.

[Luke Murphy]

I completely accept that, as the Minister said, residential ballots are not the answer in and of themselves, but they do drive the behaviour that helps to build community consent. Will she extend my request to the Housing Minister, our hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook), to meet me about this issue following this debate?

--- Later in debate ---

[Nesil Caliskan]

Of course I will. The Department welcomes any engagement about that. I have to emphasise that the engagement process requires more than just a “yes or no” tick box, and the best regeneration and estate renewal programme demonstrate a long-term commitment to engagement with residents and to giving residents the opportunity to shape the outcomes of the programmes. In the best programmes, local leadership also demonstrates political bravery in saying, “We have to have some homes built, so let us go on this journey together.” Too often, we see examples where it has become too easy to say no to everything, and that is how we have ended up with a housing crisis.

A good question was asked about the governance of regeneration schemes. I agree with Members who stated that it is vital that estate regeneration schemes demonstrate transparency, particularly when they involve public land or public money. Estate renewal can actually be quite easy, if all the land is sold off. Particularly in places like London, an estate will not be short of interest from developers. Estate regeneration is much harder if we are committed to delivering affordable homes and ensuring the amenities that make an estate a community. The estate regeneration national strategy guidance helps to set out a framework from Government to achieve what is needed. The Regulator of Social Housing works to improve standards and the ombudsman provides routes for readiness. On more effective statutory routes for better estate regeneration, some important steps have been taken by the Government, but I recognise that we need a longer-term commitment and a culture change, supporting local authorities to develop estate regeneration in a way that works for communities.

Let me address the point about lack of trust on repair issues. Too often, people talk as though estate repairs are a task separate from long-term estate renewal. The truth is that estate regeneration for an existing area is a project that may last decades. Five years is a relatively short period of time in terms of estate renewal, but that is how long a young person spends in secondary school. If, throughout that time, they have a leak in the roof or damp, or if there is antisocial behaviour or basic things just need to be fixed on their estate, that will have an impact not only on their life chances, but on their trust and confidence in the ability of those who are responsible for fixing the basics in their home now to also deliver homes for the future, where they may live for the rest of their lives. I take the point very seriously, and I would welcome any further discussions that Members might want to have with Ministers in MCHLG, so that we can strengthen existing the guidance and build, not erode, trust and confidence to ensure an endorsement for further house building in this country.

Estate renewal programmes are possibly the most difficult thing that local authorities can do. I recognise the important points made about place making. I welcome local authorities being place makers. Where a local authority has decided to be the master developer, it is a tough task. I would welcome more local authorities acting as the master developer, with support from MCHLG. A local authority could perhaps be a developer, but in my view, the master developer bit is what helps to build trusted relationships between communities, ensuring buy-in for long-term housing delivery. More than any housing delivery, estate renewal requires brave local political leadership and a long-term commitment to engaging and shaping. It also requires money. I am proud that the Government have already allocated almost £40 billion for affordable homes, but none of that matters if we do not have buy-in from the local community.

I welcome the debate secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke. I pay tribute to his passionate campaigning and advocacy on behalf of his constituents. I recognise the huge amount of casework that he gets on repairs and maintenance, as well as his commitment to see more homes built for his area. He knows, like I do, that home building will change people’s life chances in this country.

Regeneration in Reddish

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) for securing this debate, and for using this opportunity to highlight so powerfully not only the brilliant things about his constituency and Reddish, but the challenges that need to be addressed.

The regeneration of our towns and cities is at the heart of this Government’s core mission to deliver growth and prosperity in all corners of the country. Protecting and enhancing local areas, including vital community assets such as libraries, leisure facilities and health facilities, is central to that work. I know that that is felt particularly keenly in neighbourhoods across Stockport, including Reddish, which my hon. Friend has spoken about today. Too many neighbourhoods have been let down and left behind after decades of under-investment and many years of austerity—areas such as Reddish have paid a heavy price. I know that political choices have to be made, but the consequences of the choices made in the austerity years are still being felt by people in Reddish.

My hon. Friend was absolutely right to say that the impact of years of decline has not been felt equally. That is why it is crucial that this Government are relentless in focusing on growth and regeneration to raise living standards across the country. By working in partnership to invest in and empower all regions of this country, we will kick-start growth and work to address the imbalances that exist between and within regions.

Funds such as the local regeneration fund and the UK shared prosperity fund have helped local areas to regenerate, but there have been limits. I am pleased that residents in Stockport will have benefited from a number of schemes financed by both funds, including for new employment spaces, improved rail access and walking and cycling routes, all of which are aimed at bolstering the local economy, connectivity and public health. However, as my hon. Friend has said, too many legacy funds were pitting places against each other through competitive bidding, which led to places such as Reddish being left behind. Those funds are coming to a close, and the Government have been looking at how local projects are funded, introducing a longer-term approach that provides sustainable and predictable support for local authorities.

The truth is that elected local leaders have the expertise on how to invest in their communities. Having served as a local council leader myself, I feel that very strongly, and I know that, regardless of political party affiliation, the interests of local communities are best understood by local leaders. That is why the Government have committed to a series of new devolved levers and flexible funds to regenerate places, including by introducing new funds for mayoral strategic authorities.

In its integrated settlement, Greater Manchester has been allocated £141 million of local growth funding over the next four years. That enables strategic, place-based investment, meaning that money will be targeted where it is needed most, addressing challenges for areas that need additional support to get projects off the ground. We have also announced city investment funds, which will place money directly into the hands of mayors to deliver new housing and to get existing projects moving forward. Local authorities are, of course, essential partners in that work. We know that mayoral strategic authorities work closely with their constituent councils to shape priorities, as they should, including by co-designing interventions and ensuring that funding reflects local need.

One example of new and locally led delivery is the Pride in Place programme, which I am glad my hon. Friend referred to. Over the next decade, it will deliver £2 million per year directly to the local community in Brinnington, which is just on the other side of Reddish Vale country park. As I say, local people know what changes are needed for their community to thrive. That is why decision making on how those funds are spent sits with local neighbourhood boards. They will decide how to spend that money, whether it is on local arts, culture, heritage, sports, parks or something else that they think is important for their community.

[Lisa Smart]

I strongly agree with the Minister’s point about local leaders being best placed to make decisions. However, does she agree that when £3 of every £4 of Stockport council’s revenue spending goes on social care for children or adults, the number of choices that the council can make is far too limited?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I entirely agree that local government has for too long been underfunded, and we are, as a Labour Government, having to respond to 14 years of deep austerity. Having spent 10 years in local government, I would want to see more if the pot were endless, but politics is full of choices, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport said. Before us is the choice being made by this Government to ensure that we target resources at the areas that need them most. Projects such as Pride in Place, and the record amount of money given to local authorities across the country, demonstrate that.

There is much more to do, which is why I welcome this debate. My hon. Friend has highlighted the need for more investment in Reddish. I was pleased to hear that, since the launch of the Pride in Place fund, really good progress has been made, but there is more to do, and I hear his strong representations.

I know that local services, including decent library services, are a lifeline to many people up and down the country, including in Reddish and other parts of my hon. Friend’s constituency. I pay tribute to the individuals he mentioned in his speech, some of whom contribute on a voluntary basis. If it were not for the voluntary sector, and for individuals who help communities through their activities, we would be much worse off as a country. I pay tribute to those individuals, as well as to local council officers who work in frontline services and care so deeply and passionately about things such as library services.

We all agree that regeneration and protecting community assets are important. Investing in services, particularly libraries, is crucial. So many communities up and down the country want to see more of that. The most effective way to enshrine the needs of our communities in regeneration, to ensure that it works for them, is to equip local leaders with the necessary skills and tools to make that happen, and to ensure that we give them the voice and the levers that they need. I am pleased to see progress in the borough of Stockport, not only through new flexible spending powers granted to the Greater Manchester combined authority, and new funds and announcements to generate growth in the city region, but from empowering the local community to deliver and enhancing areas through projects such as Pride in Place.

My hon. Friend is right to say that the co-operation and co-production of services and regeneration, with the leadership of Members of Parliament, residents, and local authorities—which, in my experience always have good intentions, even if we do not always agree with their political choices—is an opportunity to shape a local place. The Government’s approach recognises that different areas require different interventions tailored to local circumstances. We must not only focus on the immediate challenges, but continue to ensure that funding goes in the right direction for the long term.

I very much welcome and accept the kind invitation from my hon. Friend to visit Reddish and his wider constituency—I would be delighted to visit. I note that I was not invited to drink cider, but I shall invite myself to do that, too, alongside the visit to the hat museum. I thank him once again for securing this important debate and for being such a strong champion for his constituents.

Question put and agreed to.

High Streets

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

Thank you, Sir John. As I look around the Chamber, I see that some of the Members who were here earlier are still here. I thought I might get away with repeating much of what I said this morning—but then I saw that you were chairing the debate, so I will have to say some other things, but in absolutely the same spirit with which I spoke this morning.

This is such an important topic. I thank the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) for securing this debate: high streets matter to every Member of Parliament because they matter to everybody up and down the country and across the devolved nations. They symbolise the places where people live, the communities that they are part of and the places that they identify with. They are more than just bricks and mortar; they are also the spirit of where individuals live and the communities that they are part of.

Like every Member here, when considering this debate I thought about the high street in my own constituency. I thought about the brilliant businesses in Barking that I have had the pleasure of coming across since being elected; they include businesses from the beauty industry, which I hosted in Parliament last year, and other businesses too. I thought about the fact that high streets have so fundamentally changed in recent years. The hon. Member for East Londonderry is absolutely right that the challenges we face exist in every corner of the country, but every high street and town centre should be different because they are about the character of that place. We must help different businesses to thrive and give local communities the power to shape their high streets for the better.

The Government are taking action on that, whether through the £300 million of funding to support those efforts or the £10 million used to expand high street rental auctions, which Members have already referenced. That has been successful at tackling the issue of empty shops. We are launching a £61 million fund as part of Pride in Place, and the community right to buy fund is also making a difference.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

Unfortunately, Cornwall was unsuccessful in the latest Pride in Place funding round. Does the Minister agree that Cornwall desperately needs a proper devolution settlement so that Cornwall council can fill the many empty shops in Bodmin, in Launceston, elsewhere in my constituency and across Cornwall? The council does not currently have the power to easily put shops back in community use or put them to other excellent uses.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank the hon. Member for raising Cornwall; he and his fellow Cornish Members of Parliament make excellent representations. He eloquently set out the case for giving power back to local areas. I know he is disappointed that Cornwall has not secured Pride in Place funding, but he will forgive me for recognising that lots of other places have. They are celebrating that as they should, because Pride in Place funding provides an opportunity for areas to regenerate their high streets. Perhaps even more importantly, Pride in Place provides a different way of doing things, because the boards allow communities to shape what the money is spent on over a longer period of time.

Funding is important, but it is not the complete answer. We need indeed a radical rethink of how high streets work. Although retail remains important, high streets cannot rely on it solely; online shopping will remain, so we need to be more creative, as the hon. Member for East Londonderry recognised. High streets must become more diverse. They need to include hospitality, leisure, public services, and art and culture.

[Melanie Onn]

The Minister is making a really important point. Grimsby town centre has diversified what the town centre offers; there will be a new cinema and more activities for families. That all ties into a youth offer with the brand new Youth Zone, a community hub for people in crisis, and town centre housing, which was desperately needed. It is absolutely essential to take a holistic view of how we rebuild our town centres.

[Nesil Caliskan]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Diversification is very important in town centres. It drives footfall, which is what keeps high streets alive. Footfall, coupled with having money to spend, will mean that businesses can thrive. The Government are committed to publishing our high streets strategy, which looks at all the elements referred to already in the debate. We have announced funding for innovation partnerships to support local communities to reimagine and revive struggling high streets and make them purposeful and fit for the future.

[Naushabah Khan]

The Minister is making a powerful point about community partnerships and how we work together. Does she agree that involving the community in decisions about the future of the high street, as we are doing in Gillingham, is really important? It will secure the future of high streets.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I know my hon. Friend’s area well, and she does good work not only to champion it but to campaign for improvement. She is absolutely right: if local communities have a real say, and that is coupled with backing from central Government, we can see real progress in our high streets and towns. That is important not only for local communities to feel ownership and pride; it is also crucial for employment. High streets are often where young people go for their first jobs. Small and medium-sized businesses are the backbone of the local economy for many towns, so being able to support high streets, including through the high streets strategy, is a crucial part of the Government’s agenda.

The hon. Member for East Londonderry was absolutely right to talk about the opportunity to relocate public services to high streets, which could improve the accessibility of those public services, as well as drive footfall and boost vibrancy. Many places are already doing that effectively.

[Sarah Dyke]

The Minister is talking about driving footfall, but driving footfall in rural areas is sometimes quite difficult because of the sparsity. Rural high streets face significant challenges—if car parking charges are forced on our local authorities, for example. Will the Minister outline what specific support she is putting in place to help our rural high streets to thrive?

[Nesil Caliskan]

On car parks in particular, a review is under way; I am happy to write to the hon. Member to set out timelines for when we will have the responses.

The point about rural communities is important, which is exactly why the Government are committing to making sure that while we do what we can from central Government, we really allow communities to shape their own services locally. The density point is important, particularly for rural communities. Banking hubs, for example, have been a real lifeline for communities that have had no banks in their area. As a Government, we have committed to almost 300 hubs; more than 230 have already opened. It is important that we commit to more initiatives like that, so that high streets get the support that they need.

As I say, there are good examples of public services locations. Barnsley, for instance, has opened a community diagnostic centre in its Glass Works shopping centre; that has led to more screenings and fewer missed appointments, and has brought a £3 million boost to the local economy. I could list many examples from across the country that really make the point that the relationship between the relocation of public services and our high streets can be a powerful tool in regenerating our high streets. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been working closely with other Government Departments, including the Department of Health and Social Care, to encourage them to roll out like health centres in other locations.

I recognise that we have to go further. With local community leaders, we have to think about how central Government can be more strategic and purposeful and how we can support those leaders to deliver locally. We have to work with local government and mayoral strategic authorities so that devolution and reorganisation can lead to tangible improvements on high streets.

Local capacity is an issue for local authorities, which is why MHCLG is committed to supporting local councils to shape high streets in a way that works for local residents. We are bringing vacant shops back into use and tackling the perverse incentive that makes shops remain empty. As I said, high street rental auctions have already proved successful—we have been oversubscribed, which is why we are expanding the programme. We are supporting local authorities by upskilling local authority officers so that they can use compulsory purchase order powers to bring landlords to the table, enabling more transformational change for areas that have a particular problem with empty shops. The national planning policy framework is playing a role in some of that work, too.

Finally, I will address business rates. Many retail, hospitality and leisure businesses are grappling with rising costs. We are committed to supporting high street businesses so that they can compete with online and out-of-town alternatives. Most of that is about appropriate place making, but we are also reducing the burden of business rates on independent high street businesses and introducing permanently lower business rate multipliers for retail, hospitality and leisure properties, giving greater certainty and long-term support. The new multipliers are worth £1 billion per year, will benefit more than 750,000 properties and will give long-term certainty and support to high streets.

I thank Members for their contributions. I recognise that high streets are a topic that people feel passionate about, and rightly so. They are intrinsic to constituents’ identity and local place. I thank the hon. Member for East Londonderry again for securing the debate.

Question put and agreed to.

High Street Regeneration and Unlawful Storefronts

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes), for his warm words welcoming me to my place. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this important debate, and I thank all Members for their passionate contributions, reflecting their commitment to their local high streets and to the people they represent.

High streets are integral to our communities. They are where people work, shop and spend time together. At their best, they are vibrant and welcoming places, supporting local communities and building pride in place. However, as Members have articulated, too many high streets face real challenges, from changing consumer habits to vacant units and declining footfall. In some areas, those challenges are compounded by the rise of businesses used as fronts for criminal activity. The Government are determined to address both sides of the challenge: to support regeneration and renewal, while tackling the unlawful activity that undermines all our high streets.

Thriving high streets do not just happen by accident. They require investment over a long period, planning, and a clear vision for the future—backed, crucially, by local leaders with powers to protect their towns and high streets. I understand that well; having served as a council leader, I know how passionate debates about high streets can become. Later this year, the Government will publish a cross-Government high street strategy, because saving our high streets needs a cross-Government approach. The strategy will be backed by £300 million to support the retail, leisure and hospitality sectors— I was pleased to meet with representatives of the hospitality sector last week—and to help them to reimagine the role of the high street in modern Britain.

[Sir John Hayes]

To do that, we must reimagine the role of Government. The Government need to stop their preoccupation with driving people online. How wonderful it would be if the Government suddenly said, “You can no longer do this online. You must do it face to face.” Those personal interactions, with all their civilities and courtesies, make up the tapestry of civilised life.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I do not disagree with the right hon. Member. We have seen the impact of online retail, and I think it would be misleading to say that we are about to see its disappearance. Instead, we have an obligation to think about what our high streets might look like in the future. Local communities want to be able to shape their high streets. The partnership between a local authority, businesses and residents can shape future high streets, not least through the commitment to densification—an important point made by a number of Members today.

[Gareth Snell]

As part of that densification process, I encourage the Minister to look at living accommodation in town centres and on our high streets. There are examples in Hanley, in Stoke-on-Trent, where new apartment blocks have driven footfall into the town centre while providing accommodation that meets the demands of local people. That model has worked incredibly well, and I hope the Government will consider it as part of the high street strategy.

[Nesil Caliskan]

Footfall is a key part of keeping our high streets alive. That comes partly through home building, but it also comes from ensuring variety on our high streets. A key part of the Government’s high streets innovation partnership will involve working with selected places to set out new approaches, boost activity and support a shift towards a mixed use of high streets. Alongside that, the Government are investing almost £6 billion into Pride in Place programmes over the next decade to give communities the power and funding to transform their local areas.

[Wendy Morton]

I want to mention quickly something that I did not have time to talk about earlier. I welcome the funding that we have had for Brownhills, but will the Minister work with us to ensure that it goes to the areas of Brownhills town that we need it to reach? Would she accept that regeneration of the high street is critical?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I am very happy to work with the right hon. Member. I was about to say that I would be happy to meet her to talk about Ravenscourt, which I think she referred to in her speech, but I extend that to any part of her constituency that will benefit from the Government’s Pride in Place funding.

[Robbie Moore]

Will the Minister give way?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I will make a bit of progress, if that is all right.

Supporting high streets means Government backing our high streets. Each place—each town, high street and village—has a different personality and identity. The role of Government should be to support them and enhance the place they live in. The Government believe that people who live in those places know them best. That is why we are moving beyond a one-size-fits-all approach, equipping places with practical levers for change and shifting funding, decision making and accountability from Whitehall to the hands of mayors, councils, local businesses and residents.

The high streets rental auctions are a key example of that, giving councils the power to bring persistently vacant properties back into use. We have just announced £10 million to support the expansion and roll-out of that programme, helping councils to identify opportunities, engage landlords and get properties back into use. Alongside the community right to buy, now backed by £61 million of funding, that will give local people a greater say in the future of their area. In my experience, local people are not short of opinions on how they want to shape their area, but crucial actions by Government are needed to back that vision.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley), who spoke about the need to renovate older buildings. The Government have taken some good steps on that. Members today have called for changes to address the blight of betting shops and vape shops. The Government have taken some action with the gambling cumulative impact assessments, but I recognise that many are looking for further action, so that we can put a stop to the betting shops popping up all over our high streets. It is not enough simply to respond to change. We must empower local communities and provide the resources to those local communities and councils to shape their high streets.

The points hon. Members made about beautiful design and places looking nice are important. There is not a lot a local authority or community can do if people have to step over rubbish or, frankly, do not feel safe in the local park in the town centre. Design codes are important, as is the national planning policy framework.

[Bradley Thomas]

I thank the Minister for her speech. Will she implore her colleagues to restore beauty to the centre of the NPPF, and consider mandating design codes to local authorities, so that they can boost the aesthetic quality of their local area?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank the hon. Member for that important point. I recognise how passionate people are about that. The NPPF does set out some of that, but the truth is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Having been a council leader, I know how challenging that can be. It is important that the public realm is shaped by local people. The best examples are where there is co-production and co-operation between local partners, residents and businesses.

[Sir John Hayes]

Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder. As Keats said, beauty is truth, truth beauty. That truth is about recognising that the aesthetic of a place informs people’s association with it. All my hon. Friend the Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) is asking is for design codes to have statutory force and not simply be guidance, which is not enough.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I acknowledge that call, and I believe the NPPF goes some way towards doing it. I understand there may be gaps; Government will always be willing to look at that and work with the Local Government Association, for example, which supplies some of that guidance. Whether a statutory response is appropriate is yet to be debated. I am confident that the NPPF provides what is necessary. I do accept the point that the public realm is a key part of regenerating our high streets and town centres.

On the points about organised crime and illegal activity, I assure hon. Members that the Government recognise that we will not see high street regeneration or thriving town centres without tackling that head-on. Regardless of how many functions we devolve and high streets we regenerate, they simply will not thrive if illegal businesses are left to take hold. I recognise the concerns raised by the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley, that too many high street premises are being used as fronts for organised crime, facilitating money laundering, tax evasion, illegal working and the sale of illicit goods.

Although opinions may differ on what looks nice in relation to design codes, nobody wants to see illegal activity on our high streets and in our town centres. The Government have announced £30 million of investment over three years to target those businesses and crack down on the corrupt networks operating on our high streets. A sum of £20 million to strengthen national co-ordination and local enforcement will make a difference, which we are seeing already, with hundreds of so-called businesses conducting illegal activity targeted, visits to thousands of premises, hundreds of arrests and the seizure of millions of criminal proceeds.

We are strengthening the role of trading standards, which has been left for too long without the required resources, with £6 million to boost its capacity in priority areas. I recognise trading standards is still under pressure, and local government representatives frequently raise the subject with me. Alongside enforcement, we are strengthening powers to act quickly and effectively. I hear too often that local authorities want to take power but feel restricted. We are extending and reviewing closure powers, including consulting on increasing the maximum duration of closure orders to 12 months.

[Dr Gardner]

Absent landlords are a blight. In Longton town centre at the top of The Strand, there is a building without a roof following a fire, with several shops functioning underneath. Trying to get powers under section 215 to chase the landlord to undertake maintenance required is extremely difficult. Will the Minister look at how to make that process easier?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss whether the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government can do something to support the local authority in rectifying that situation.

As I say, the Government are also extending and reviewing closure powers. We want to ensure a sustained, long-term response alongside that, so we have established a new high street organised crime unit to bring together government, law enforcement and partners. Over and over again, we have seen that a committed approach to data sharing and understanding the role of local government alongside intelligence from local policing can really make a difference in closing down illegal businesses.

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

The extension of closure orders to 12 months would be very welcome. There was a closure order a few years ago in Gravesham, but the shop was still selling illegal cigarettes and even hormone replacement therapy medication literally that day and that month. I welcome the new powers, the strengthening measures and the focus on getting these criminals off our streets.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank my hon. Friend for reiterating that important point. The Government will make changes here in Westminster, but we have to ensure that those changes are embedded in our local communities, so that local authorities feel they have the agency, the powers and the resources they need to implement those changes, and that local businesses know what the legislative framework is so that good businesses feel they are supported and illegal businesses know that they cannot get away with it. In essence, that is what helps to build thriving communities for our high streets and town centres.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. The Minister may want to give the Member in charge two minutes to wind up.

[Nesil Caliskan]

Let me just address the points on business rates, Ms Vaz. Members will recognise that business rates are a long-standing issue. The Government are determined to remove barriers to investment. That is why we have introduced new multipliers that are worth over £1 billion per year and benefit more than 750,000 properties. They will give long-term certainty to high streets and businesses. We know that the cut must be a sustainably funded model, so the Government are paying for it through a high-value multiplier on the top 1% of the most expensive properties.

Pressures on businesses are complicated. Business rates play a part, but viable businesses depend on footfall, place-making of a high street and support from agencies such as the local authority and the public sector. A number of points have been raised, including about the importance of footfall, the role of public services relocating into high streets, making sure that family hubs exist where there is footfall, and densification through things such as banking hubs.

I thank hon. Members for their contributions, and I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove again for securing such an important debate.

Windrush Day

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) on securing this important debate and on her poignant speech, and I thank other Members for their brilliant speeches on this important topic. It is an issue that Members across the House have deep and personal feelings about. Windrush Day means so much to so many across the country, including many in my constituency of Barking in east London. I am grateful for those contributions today, because they speak to the independent and personal experiences of many of our constituents. There have been a number of excellent speeches, and I will address some of the specific asks.

To participate in a debate that has such a powerful and vivid history brought the Windrush story to life. I begin by paying tribute to the Windrush generation and their descendants. Earlier this week we marked the anniversary of the arrival of the Empire Windrush at Tilbury 78 years ago. The people who disembarked in Essex on that June day in 1948 came to the country in a moment of profound need; a country still reeling from the trauma and destruction of the second world war. They helped to rebuild Britain, working in a range of settings, including construction, public transport and manufacturing, as well as our NHS. Even more precious than that generation’s contribution as members of the workforce was the important part they played socially and culturally in this nation. From food to music, literature to art, as Members have already outlined, the Windrush generation changed our society for the better. The Windrush story is indivisible from our national story. Those who came in the middle of the last century, and subsequent generations, are owed our thanks.

And yet, the tragic truth is that they have not always had our thanks. In fact, for years many were made to feel that they were imposters in their own country, and were subject to terrible injustices by the very state that had called on them to come here. The Home Office Windrush scandal reminds us of an embarrassment in our country’s history. That is why this Government will strive relentlessly to provide those affected with the support and justice that they deserve.

As other Members have reflected, today is primarily a moment of celebration. It is at this point every year that we come together to mark Windrush Day and honour the immense contribution made by the Windrush generation and subsequent generations through a range of events that are taking place across the country. Each one is a unique tribute to the Windrush story and the people who live it. This year alone, the Windrush Day grant scheme has funded 33 projects, bringing communities together right across the country. Hon. Members across the Chamber will have visited the exhibition in Portcullis House. It is very important that we, as legislators, never forget the Windrush generation. I encourage those who have not been to visit the exhibition, which runs until 3 July.

Despite adversity, the Windrush generation continue to build, create and contribute so much to British society. The Government are proud to support Windrush Day through the grant scheme and wider engagement across the country. It is a time to commemorate the legacy of the Windrush generation, to pause and reflect, and to give thanks—to ensure that the Windrush generation and their contribution are not forgotten.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

Britain is a great country, and Bournemouth is a great town; everywhere I go I see the values of unity and decency. I saw this recently at St Walburga’s primary school in Bournemouth, where I was invited by one of the teachers, Kern Browne, to hear from year 6 students who were remembering the Windrush generation. Bruno, Takondwa and Poppy read out diary entries and Alesia, Zack, Beatrix, Luke, Leo and Abigail read out poems that they had written after reading Benjamin Zephaniah’s “Windrush Child”. At the same time as she thanks the Windrush generation, will the Minister thank these young people for trying to spread diversity in our communities?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting how important it is that young people in our constituencies have the opportunity to learn about, talk about and celebrate the contribution of the Windrush generation and what they gave this country. It is vital that they are able to articulate that, and I thank the young people in his constituency for doing so.

As well as celebrating the contribution of the Windrush generation, it is right that the state recognises the hurt caused by the Home Office Windrush scandal. The Government are committed to ongoing efforts to give those who were affected the support they deserve and the compensation they are owed. Through honest engagement and meaningful reform, the Home Office has worked to make the response to the Windrush scandal fairer, faster and more compassionate. The aim is clear: to right the wrongs as far as we can and deliver the maximum compensation as quickly as possible. More than £128 million has been paid in compensation, and more than 19,000 individuals have been issued with documentation confirming their British citizenship.

Although that demonstrates real progress, I recognise that some remain deeply frustrated. I know that no amount of compensation will undo the pain, suffering and loss of many victims who suffered. I have had the honour of meeting many from the Windrush generation, their children and grandchildren, both in my constituency of Barking and Dagenham and across the country. They speak about their experience and of feeling betrayed following the scandal. They know that the impact still lingers. The truth is that we should do everything we can to talk about their experiences so that we can get this compensation scheme to a much better place. Today is an opportunity for me to reiterate the Government’s position: we are determined to ensure that those affected receive the documentation they require and the compensation they deserve.

The Government have been clear that community feedback must be at the heart of improving the compensation scheme. I take particular note of the important points made by hon. Members, in particular on the disparity between the compensation secured when individuals apply for compensation alone versus the amount they might secure if they have legal advice. The Home Office will continue to listen and act on these concerns, and I will certainly be making that point in particular.

We know that the voices of those affected need to be heard loudly so that their views can shape the Government’s approach, as does the insight and expertise provided by the Rev. Clive Foster, who was appointed by the Government as the first Windrush commissioner a year ago. His role is to provide independent scrutiny and challenge in relation to the Government’s response to Windrush, support cultural change in the Home Office and act as an advocate for those affected by the Home Office Windrush scandal.

I note with interest the important points that Members have made about the cultural change still required in the Home Office so that victims are supported in an appropriate away. The re-established Windrush unit is working with the Windrush commissioner and stakeholders to ensure that we take a trauma-informed approach when designing restorative dialogue events, the purpose of which is to listen and acknowledge the harm that occurred and identify the actions that the Department and wider Government must take to rebuild trust and ensure that the lessons learned from the scandal lead to meaningful and lasting change. The Home Office is also completing a review of all 30 recommendations from the Windrush lessons learned review before considering the next steps.

I note the call for the compensation scheme to be moved from the Home Office to a different Department. I recognise that is in part because of the frustration with the process and the speed at which victims are able to secure their compensation; however, the Home Office view is that moving the scheme to a different Department may risk a delay in payments altogether. The focus is really on improving the experiences of claimants at this point.

This year marks 78 years since the arrival of the Windrush; in two years, it will be the 80th anniversary, which provides an important opportunity for us to mark this national commemoration and recognise the lasting contribution of the Windrush generation and their descendants. I wholeheartedly welcome the calls from Members across the House to ensure that we are ready as a Government and as a country to celebrate the Windrush generation, and steps are already being taken by the Government to secure a steering group to establish what events can take place across the country in order to adequately mark the occasion.

I once again thank all Members who have contributed today and my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood for securing the debate. I have heard all the points made. I will take them to the Home Office and speak to colleagues in my own Department—MHCLG—and across Government. The scrutiny that this kind of debate provides is absolutely critical to ensuring that we get the compensation scheme right.

I conclude my remarks with this reflection. As the granddaughter of two people who decided to leave one island to come to another, I know just how important it is that the experiences of those who live in this country are recognised even when they were not good ones—in fact, particularly when they were not good experiences. It allows us to be a better society and to recognise that the rich and diverse communities we live in have been built on the back of their experiences. As we celebrate the contribution of the Windrush generation, we also redouble our efforts to right the wrongs of the past. We do so for all those in the Windrush generation, because they deserve it, and it is the very least that we can do.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Helen Hayes to wind up.

Stoma: Public Toilet Provision

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Thursday 18th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd.

I begin by paying tribute to Members from across the House for the incredibly thoughtful and personal stories that they have shared. I am very conscious that Members speak on behalf of their constituents, and that some Members speak from personal experience. Although I do not have that personal experience, I have a very close family member who does, and I have heard Members speak in the Chamber before about their own experiences and have reflected very carefully on the power of those remarks for those beyond the House who hear them. I thank Members very much for their contributions.

I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this very important debate, and for his continued interest in this issue. I know that he is a committed advocate for public toilet provision, including for those with non-visible disabilities such as stoma use.

I recognise the importance of the provision of good-quality, accessible public toilets more broadly. For far too many people, access to clean and safe public toilets can be the deciding factor in whether they feel able to visit a town centre, a high street, a park or any local attraction. As others put it so eloquently, such facilities support the dignity and independence of people with disability and accessibility needs. Of course, accessibility to a decent facility encourages everybody to spend more time in their local areas, and to use the shops, services and attractions in them. I do not need to detail the benefits of that in itself.

It is true that for many people, it is just too difficult to access the facilities that the rest of us can access so easily every day. Members have correctly pointed out that that is a challenge not only for those with a stoma, but for many other people, including those with ulcerative colitis or irritable bowel disease. The list is much longer than that; the point is that many people are impacted by the lack of accessibility facilities.

However, this debate is focused on stomas, and I want to place on the record the Government’s recognition that this is absolutely a real challenge. Approximately one in 335 people of all ages in the UK is estimated to be living with a stoma, and each year more than 13,000 people in the UK undergo stoma surgery. For people living with a stoma, access to suitable toilet provision is not simply a matter of convenience; it is fundamental to their dignity, safety and independence. Many people living with a stoma feel anxious about leaving home, particularly in the period after surgery.

The Government recognise that being able to live well, to work, to enjoy days out, to shop and to socialise requires access to appropriate public toilet facilities. However, as Members across the Chamber have said, standard public toilets may not always provide that facility for everybody in a safe and dignified way. It is important that we recognise the specific experience of people with invisible disabilities, who are often uneasy about using a disabled facility for fear that it may be a challenge to do so—assuming that the disabled facility would even meet their needs.

In recognition of the importance of this subject, at the last spending review, in 2025, the Government committed more than £5 billion over the next three years for essential local services, including public toilets, and we continue to provide 100% mandatory business rates relief for stand-alone public toilets, which is helping reduce ongoing costs for local authorities, but I absolutely accept that the facility needs to exist in the first place. I recognise that, for stoma users, practical features such as clean shelf spaces and discreet disposal bins can make a significant difference. I thank Members for raising the issue of facilities in male toilets, which are so frequently overlooked.

It is worth highlighting that all building work must meet the functional requirements of the Building Regulations 2010, which address accessibility and provide guidance on meeting those requirements, including the installation of shelves, sanitary disposal units and accessibility toilets. However, I accept that the very fact we are having this debate means that the reality on the ground is very different.

The Building Safety Regulator has a duty under the Building Safety Act 2022 to keep the standard of buildings under review, and I welcome the fact that the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson), drew attention to the £30 million Changing Places programme, which supported the targeted installation of almost 500 new disabled toilet facilities. I learned much about that programme when I served as a council leader—if I learned anything from my days in local government, it is that bins and toilets are two topics that people get very passionate about.

The role of local authorities is central to this conversation. It is the Government’s view that local authorities are best placed to understand the needs of their communities, and to make decisions about the provision that is right for their areas. I take careful note of the important arguments made about statutory requirements and regulations, but I say gently that local authorities might not think that is the best approach. I am yet to come across a local authority that does not want to do the best for its area, and I think there is a conversation to be had about how we can better support them to do that.

[Mr Snowden]

Having been a councillor and served on the front bench of a council, I know about delivering these facilities, and I feel for councils when it comes to doing so. As has been said, the reality is that even if councils want to do their best, and they know what is best for their local areas, funding is tight. We all know that ever-increasing adult social care bills and so on are creating bigger burdens on local government finances, and statutory requirements will always take priority over other things. I do not want to create a system that ends up costing more than opening the toilets themselves through its complexity and bureaucracy, but it is really important to place some greater requirement on councils to understand the provision and fill the gaps. If the Minister is looking for a commissioner for the crappers in the future, it may be a role for me!

[Nesil Caliskan]

I absolutely take the point. There is a conversation to be had with the sector, local authorities and the Local Government Association about how we can best support local authorities to do that. I think there is a real willingness among local authorities. I accept the point about statutory services, but there are great examples of local authorities providing services that are not statutory because they recognise the importance of public provision.

[Vikki Slade]

I take the Minister’s point. As a former council leader, I know that the last thing that councils need is a whole load of additional things that they have to do, but the point is that there is fear and inconsistency. If there is a postcode lottery when it comes to whether a council is sufficiently interested in ensuring provision or making information available to people, people will end up staying at home because they do not know what the rules are in the place they are travelling to. I gently urge the Minister to think carefully about placing a duty on local authorities to make provision in their area. If we want everybody to have the opportunity to engage in public life, that is the bare minimum.

[Nesil Caliskan]

I absolutely take the point, but there is scope for us to consider how to do that without putting additional statutory burdens on local authorities. Ultimately, we want the same outcome: we do not want a postcode lottery. A person who needs accessible toilets should know that they can leave the house and access them. I am open-minded about whether we do that through regulation or by having schemes that support the roll-out of better facilities. There are good examples of services being delivered across the country, so we should look at how the sector can learn from them and how the Government can best support local authorities.

Bins and toilets are areas of interest for local authorities, councillors and council leaders. I note the experience of Members in the Chamber who have a local government background. I recall rolling out a community toilet scheme when I was council leader. That required very small things, such as small grants to businesses—I think they were £1,000—to encourage them to make their facilities available to the public. That meant that the local authority did not have to think about additional toilet spaces. In many ways, the provision of a toilet in a local business or on a high street meant that our residents had more access than they would if they had to go to a park.

[Vikki Slade]

I cannot resist the opportunity to plug the fact that, prior to being the council leader, I had a business on Broadstone high street, and we were part of the community loo scheme. There are currently five or six businesses in my ward that have open access to their toilets. Previously, there was one public toilet, which was often closed, vandalised or subject to crime. I want to take the opportunity to tell the public that “use your loo” schemes are there for people; they do not need to buy anything. It is really important that we remind our residents of that, because people are often reluctant to go into a café if they are not going to spend money.

[Nesil Caliskan]

That is exactly the point that I am making. I thank the hon. Lady for highlighting that very good example of what local leadership can deliver in the community. It is important that we empower local authorities and leaders to think outside the box, champion this issue and speak up on tricky topics. That gives me the opportunity once again to pay tribute to hon. Members for taking part in this debate. By talking about and giving attention to a difficult subject, we are able to shift views and encourage our public sector to provide facilities that meet the needs of our communities.

[Jim Shannon]

The role of councils is incredibly important. The Government’s 10-year health plan sets out a shift from hospital to community, from sickness to prevention and from analogue to digital. For stoma care, moving from analogue to digital could mean remote monitoring for high-risk people living with a stoma, app-based ordering of stoma appliances, reducing prescription errors and delays, and digital self-management for diet, hydration and troubleshooting. Those are all critical issues for the health service to consider when moving from analogue to digital. I ask the Minister, whether or not it is in the notes I gave her, to look at that point as well. I also ask that she meets Colostomy UK with all Members present. That organisation has much more knowledge than me, and we look forward to that opportunity.

[Nesil Caliskan]

Absolutely. I am very happy to meet any campaigning organisation to discuss this important issue. I note that other hon. Members have also made that request. If charities would like to contact me, I will happily meet them to talk about how we can better support the needs of all our communities.

On the important point the hon. Gentleman makes about the NHS plan and healthcare support, he is absolutely right. It is all the more reason why we need a joined-up approach to what local authorities and NHS local boards are doing. I take the opportunity to highlight health and wellbeing boards across the country, which will play a really important role in making sure that, as one part of the local authority is delivering something, it is making the most of what it is doing so that it meets the objectives of a different part. In the case we are talking about, health is a really obvious example.

To return to my general point about local authorities thinking outside the box and doing things differently, one area we should encourage them to consider is how they conduct procurement. There are many examples across the country where public toilets in parks and open spaces have fallen into disrepair. Some local authorities are addressing that through procurement processes by stipulating, for example, that the owner of a new café must look after the toilets in that space. Those are good ideas that should be encouraged and will ultimately make it easier for our communities to access facilities.

[Mr Snowden]

The Minister is being incredibly generous with her time. She probably entered this room and, having seen only one Back-Bench Member, thought this debate would not get close to 4.30 pm—but here we are.

I have two points. First, is there a greater role for section 106 moneys, potentially through planning processes, in supporting public toilets? The Minister gave a really good example of creative thinking around ownership of toilets in parks and cafés. My sister will kill me for saying this, but when she was growing up she had a phobia of metal toilets. I think it was actually just a phobia of unclean spaces. A lot of people would rather use a well-kept toilet in a private business, where they will not be judged for using it—provided it is not at the far end and they do not have to walk past all the tables with everyone looking at them—than use a public toilet that, by its nature and because it is not in a manned location, cannot always be guaranteed to be as clean. I think that is a great example. Will the Minister work with colleagues in local government to see whether that can be rolled out more, and consider how section 106 moneys might help to create more of an incentive for commercial operators who might not otherwise be able to afford it, or for whom it might not be viable?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s contribution. Section 106 moneys are often thought about in terms of big infrastructure money, but for a very small amount of money we can make a big public impact; the grant funding of £1,000 to a business is a good example of that. I am very happy to take that back. There are lots of examples across the country of where this is being done well, and we should, as a Government—I will take this back—find a better way to communicate some of that best practice.

I also want to comment on the very important point the hon. Gentleman makes about lived experience. Too often, Governments and councils design and deliver schemes with good intentions, but they do not necessarily meet the real needs of communities. That is why lived experience must be at the heart of policymaking. He referenced his sister’s experience, and I will join him: my sister’s experience is not dissimilar. As he said, many people who live with such conditions develop great resilience over their lifetime. My sister, too, is incredibly resilient, because of her experience of living with her colitis, which was diagnosed as a teenager, as it is for many people. It is a very particular experience to be diagnosed with a lifelong condition as a teenager.

People who experience that are some of the most resilient individuals in our community, and their lived experience is central to making sure that our councils and the Government design provision and services that meet their needs. In that spirit, I welcome continued dialogue with Members. I know that there are others who are not in this Chamber who also feel very strongly about this topic. Local government, MHCLG and partners can work together to deliver more accessible, well-maintained public toilets. We should look at existing schemes and new schemes that can encourage such provision.

I thank hon. Members, particularly the hon. Member for Strangford for securing this important debate and for his warm words in welcoming me to my place; it was very generous of him. The Government recognise the importance of ensuring that public spaces are accessible, inclusive and supportive of people’s dignity and independence. I welcome further representation from hon. Members, the brilliant charities that do fantastic campaigning on this issue, local authorities across the country and other partners who want to see the provision of public toilets improve.

Pride in Place: High Streets Update

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

We are nation of a thousand neighbourhoods, where our identity and sense of belonging all depend on what is around us. When the streets are clean and the high streets are thriving, times are good. But when shops are empty and crime is rife, those are the moments when we ask what is going wrong. As part of the Government’s commitment to restoring Pride in Place, we are today announcing further measures to echo the pride that people have in their town and city centres, ahead of the publication of the high streets strategy this summer.

First, we will deepen our commitment to tackling the blight of boarded-up shops, which damages the vibrancy of high streets and encourages antisocial behaviour. Since 2024, through a partnership with 12 early adopter local authorities, we have been successfully trialling high street rental auctions. These are new powers that enable councils to auction the lease of high street premises that have been empty for over a year in a two-year period, and compel the landlord to accept an offer. The experience of these councils shows that the powers are an effective lever to engage landlords, as over 60 high street shop units have been reoccupied without a rental auction needing to be held, and evidence of a tangible impact on vacancy rates. We now want to see these powers being taken up across the country, and to do this we will provide £10 million over the next two years, available to local authorities across England to apply for to fund refurbishment grants and other associated costs. This will open these spaces up to new tenants—not just taking out eyesores, but providing businesses with access to tenancies at below-market rent.

Next, we want every Pride in Place area to use their £20 million to support the local economy, so today I can announce that we will publish guidance to ensure that neighbourhood boards have all the tools they need to use local suppliers and invest in local businesses. This programme amounts to £6 billion for the most deprived communities in Britain. If we can use that to support community businesses, we can make this investment go so much further.

Finally, we are introducing changes to the business improvement districts by modernising the rule book. We will simplify voting procedures, strengthen transparency and accountability and, crucially, include property owners in the process. Across the country, businesses and BIDs have shown what they can contribute to revitalising high streets, and this Government will support them.

[HCWS81]

Holocaust Memorial and Learning Centre

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

In February 2025, the Government published their response to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Holocaust Memorial Bill. In line with an undertaking given to the Select Committee, the Government:

Have submitted representations via the Planning Casework Unit that security should remain a key issue.

Have consulted on security with the Metropolitan Police Service, the National Protective Security Authority, the Community Security Trust, Westminster city council, and the corporate officers of the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

Are depositing consultees’ comments in the Libraries of both Houses, except where security sensitive.

The Government are grateful for comments received from consultees and look forward to continuing close engagement as the programme proceeds.

[HCWS77]

Coastal Communities: Government Support

Nesil Caliskan Excerpts

Monday 1st June 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) for securing this important debate. I so appreciated the way that he spoke about the area he represents. His opening remarks made reference to the smell of the sea, which I know will be nostalgic for many. He also made an important point about hospitality and how important it is for the local economies of coastal communities.

Coastal communities are a vital part of our national identity, serving as a key reminder of our national pride and shared maritime history.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

It is very important that coastal communities are recognised for our role in the overall identity of the country, but we are also a vital way of developing economic growth in this country. As co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for coastal communities, what I am asking for, along with many Back-Bench colleagues who are present, is a coastal economic strategy that identifies the key industrial sectors that can help us to grow. It is not only about hospitality, although that is vital; it is also about ensuring that we have a year-round economy.

[Nesil Caliskan]

My hon. Friend makes a really important point. It is only my second week in this role, but I have already had passionate representations from my hon. Friend and other colleagues who represent coastal communities, and I will continue to engage with them to talk about the important points they have made in this Chamber and beyond.

The Government are committed to supporting coastal communities everywhere to fulfil their potential and thrive. Coastal communities are a key part of our ambition for the whole country. They play a vital role both for the areas themselves and for the whole economy. Protecting coastal communities, particularly from coastal erosion, is a priority for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and we will continue to do that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Poole made important points about the local communities and economy. I would like to take this opportunity to talk about MHCLG’s commitment to Pride in Place and a number of the other programmes that the Department is using to directly target a range of economic, social and health-related challenges felt by coastal communities. Our £5.8 billion Pride in Place programme will deliver up to £20 million of funding and support over the next decade to 284 communities across the UK, and at least 56 coastal communities across the UK are part of it. They will receive over £1 billion collectively through that programme.

A package of targeted investments will be delivered through each community developing a plan, in consultation with local people, that reflects local need and determines where that money is best spent. The programme will help communities to improve local infrastructure and play areas, important cultural venues, and health and wellbeing services, among many other things.

[Perran Moon]

Coastal communities, because of our geographical location, work very closely together, so within the Pride in Place definition of “community cohesion” we are marked down in our ability to access Pride in Place funding. Therefore, across six constituencies in Cornwall—even though Cornwall is one of the most deprived regions in northern Europe—we have had zero pounds from Pride in Place because of our community cohesion. Does the Minister agree that needs to be looked at?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that important point. Community cohesion is an important aspect of how we allocate money through MHCLG, but I recognise that it is not the only important aspect. I am therefore happy to meet him and other Members of Parliament who want to talk about how we allocate money in a fair and transparent way.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

I am grateful to the Minister for issuing invitations to meet to colleagues. My constituency did not get Pride in Place funding, and I would be grateful if she could find some time to have a cup of tea with me so that I can make the case for it to her before too long.

--- Later in debate ---

[Nesil Caliskan]

I am always happy to have a cup of tea with colleagues, and especially my hon. Friend.

I will turn to the important points made about holiday lets, which particularly impact coastal communities. The Government have committed almost £40 billion to the social and affordable homes programme, which is important for the delivery of houses and affordable homes more generally.

[Amanda Martin]

Does my hon. Friend agree that, as well as housing, education is vital, and that is really missing in coastal communities, so our constituencies are often seen at the bottom of league tables?

[Nesil Caliskan]

That is a very important point. As my hon. Friend will know, education is a top priority for the Government, which is why we have seen record investment. I believe that coastal communities will benefit from that commitment.

[Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I will make a little progress.

Although short-term holiday lets can be hugely beneficial to local economies, the Government appreciate that their excessive concentration in some areas of the country can impact on the availability and affordability of homes to buy and rent; hon. Members have highlighted some of the challenges. That is why the Government are making progressive changes to the tax system to protect our vital public services and to ensure that housing is primarily seen as a home rather than an investment. Those taxation changes will be important for coastal communities.

Alongside that, the Government have abolished the furnished holiday lets tax regime, meaning that landlords will no longer be incentivised via the tax system to make their properties available for short-term holiday lets. That is an issue that has long been raised by those who live in coastal communities.

On the important points that my hon. Friend the Member for Poole made on health, I recognise that some of the greatest health inequalities can be found in our coastal towns. I am therefore delighted that the Government have made it a core mission to strengthen joined-up approaches between health and social care services so that people experience health services locally in a more integrated way, with a person-centred approach. Coastal areas will really benefit from that joined-up thinking. A neighbourhood health service approach along with reforming the better care fund in line with the commitments set out in the 10-year NHS strategy are all things that will benefit our coastal communities, which are disproportionately impacted by health inequalities.

[Lee Pitcher]

We cannot talk about coastal communities and health without talking about safety, and particularly water safety. Over the past couple of weeks, when we have had hot weather, at least 17 people are known to have died by drowning, many of them children and young adults. Will the Minister talk to other relevant Ministers about holding a national campaign before the summer, when it gets hot once again and children are on school holidays, to ensure that we prevent unnecessary deaths on our waterways?

[Nesil Caliskan]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising an important point. Sadly, over the past decade or so children have become less likely to have swimming lessons, and the consequences have been catastrophic, particularly when we consider coastal communities. I know that my hon. Friend and other hon. Members have already made such representations, and I am happy to take the idea away and ask MHCLG to look further at it. We must also work across Government to ensure that we are doing everything we can to support children and adults to benefit from swimming classes, so that we can keep them safe, as well as communities more generally.

We also need cross-departmental and cross-Government work with the Environment Agency to ensure that water is clean, so that our coastal communities can be enjoyed not just by the people who live in them, but by those who visit them. Clean water is not just a “nice to have”; it is fundamental to the health and safety of everybody who visits coastal towns, and I will ensure through MHCLG that we have an adequate cross-departmental approach on that.

Finally, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Poole for securing this debate. I know that he cares passionately about the issues he raised, which go beyond his coastal area and speak to many constituencies across the country. The identity of our coastal communities is intrinsic to the identity of our country, and each of our coastal communities has a particular identity that is important to the local area. Government investment to ensure that our coastal communities are properly looked after is not just about borders; it is about ensuring that we support people who live in those communities, reduce health inequalities, and ensure that everybody has the opportunity to thrive.

Question put and agreed to.