Backing Business to Create Economic Growth

Olly Glover Excerpts

Monday 18th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker—I had forgotten how to do it.

When assessing the effectiveness and suitability of the King’s Speech, we need to consider what we need for a great and renewed United Kingdom. First, we need a fairer society with greater opportunities; secondly, we need an economy that works for people; and thirdly, we need a strong and globally relevant United Kingdom.

Starting with a fairer society, the King’s Speech contains some good intentions in relation to housing, with the social housing renewal Bill and the commonhold and leasehold reform Bill. However, the former falls a long way short of real action on social housing, with the Government continuing to refuse to refocus their targets on social housing specifically, and with no clear legislative plan to properly regulate property management companies and their charges.

The proposed Bills on health and education also both fall short. The Government continue to prevaricate on the desperate need to act on the findings of numerous reviews of adult social care, which is the best way to support our struggling NHS. The focus on special educational needs provision is welcome, but the proposals in the King’s Speech are unlikely to succeed without investment in state special schools, which is necessary to reduce significant local authority expenditure on private special schools and transport to distant special schools.

On transport more widely, measures to improve taxi and private hire safety and regulation, railway investment in the north of England, and private finance for roads have merit. However, it is important that we do not blindly follow the Treasury’s obsession with avoiding capital spending. There are many examples of private finance initiatives that ended up as very poor value for money on a whole-life-cost basis, which is what we should think about rather than “sign and forget” private finance deals.

While votes at 16 are welcome, real ambition is missing when it comes to fixing our broken politics. The Government’s proposals do not address the real need to modernise the House of Lords, deal with grubby money in our politics, or introduce a fair voting system that delivers election outcomes that bear some resemblance to how people vote.

Perhaps the greatest omission for my constituents is yet another failure to deal with the dysfunction of our planning system—centrally imposed housing targets without the same targets or focus on the infrastructure and public services needed to support them, whether that is healthcare, transport, or large-scale leisure. Councils are often blamed for not providing those services, but much of the fault really lies with central Government.

On an economy that works for people, we face the twin challenges of small and local businesses being under massive pressure and some very large companies needing to be prodded to play fair and respect consumers. The Government’s proposals go some way towards dealing with the problems with big businesses, but totally absent from their agenda are things that would really help small and local companies, such as business rates reforms, measures to rejuvenate our high streets, and initiatives to encourage greater employment.

The Government’s plans include some welcome measures to better protect consumer rights and reduce costs. The energy independence Bill and the electricity generator levy Bill are long overdue attempts to ensure that consumers feel the benefit of our move towards renewable electricity generation and accompanying grid upgrades, including by reducing the effect of electricity prices being determined by a small amount of gas power generation. However, we need more and faster action on home insulation, a heating oil price cap and the creation of an energy security bank to finance critical green energy generation upgrades. These steps are exactly what we need. Climate change prevention cannot be done to people; it must be done with them, and the benefits have to be very clear to people, economy and planet.

The clean water Bill is an attempt to end the likes of Thames Water charging ever-higher water bills while delivering inadequate upgrades to reduce water leaks and sewage dumping, aided by a toothless Ofwat largely watching from the sidelines. What is missing from the Government’s proposals is the radicalism needed to assuage justified public anger by mandating water companies to publish the volume and concentration of discharges from emergency overflows and to end sewage dumping at key bathing sites by 2030, and by making all our water companies become customer-owned public benefit corporations.

The King’s Speech also lacks a credible plan to help more people to get into the workplace, which will happen only with investment in skills, education and training that adapt to changing societal and economic needs, in improvements to the Access to Work programme, and in research and insight into the many reasons why some people do not work.

On international matters, it is welcome that the Government have acknowledged the need to try to do something with their European partnership Bill. However, the Bill continues to reflect the Government’s self-delusion on the Europe issue. Those with expertise in the matter are clear that there is very little growth to be had by tinkering around the edges of our existing inadequate agreements with the European Union. Only by joining the customs union and single market will we regain the significant economic and security benefits of being part of humanity’s most successful peace and economic project. It is interesting that it apparently takes an undeclared leadership contest and crisis within the Labour Government for the idea even to start to be discussed and maybe accepted.