Oral Answers to Questions

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd November 2026 Commons Chamber

[James Murray]

I question whether the hon. Lady was listening to the Budget if she thinks we were not prioritising hospitality, given that retail, hospitality and leisure businesses received real help on their business rates in England. I would urge the Welsh Government to follow suit.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

The green innovation corridor in my constituency has investment zone status and £27 million in capital funding, with £7 million earmarked to prepare sites for development. What further Treasury support, including access to finance and targeted tax incentives, will the Government provide to attract private investors and deliver more skilled jobs in Wolverhampton North East?

[Lucy Rigby]

My hon. Friend is a relentless champion for her constituency. The Government are devolving powers and funding to the west midlands combined authority to support investment, and the National Wealth Fund is partnering with it to develop many projects, which I am sure will benefit her constituency.

Oral Answers to Questions

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Emma Reynolds]

I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that I am working extremely closely with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland who, as he will know, is in discussions with all the parties in the Northern Ireland Executive. We need to make sure that a budget is set for Northern Ireland so that the Executive can continue to deliver vital local public services.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

I was pleased to see that the Chancellor was in the west midlands yesterday meeting manufacturing apprentices alongside Mayor Richard Parker. What conversations has he had with the mayor about using new devolution powers to invest in local skills and employment, and what will he do to make sure that young people in Wolverhampton North East get more local opportunities to benefit from?

[John Healey]

Indeed, the West Midlands Mayor, Richard Parker, is using the powers that he has, including recently by stepping in and taking action to improve bus services across the west midlands. Yesterday he stepped in to provide support for the Jaguar Land Rover workers who may face redundancy and will certainly be well placed to get further jobs.

Middle East: Economic Response

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Thursday 21st May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Reeves]

I am really excited about what is happening in Blackpool in the lead up to the 100th anniversary of the Blackpool illuminations in three years’ time. I very much look forward to my next trip to Blackpool. I do not eat only fish and chips, but I remember a very happy meal of fish and chips in my hon. Friend’s constituency during his by-election campaign.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Parents, grandparents and carers will know that keeping children busy during the summer can feel like an expensive endurance event. Will the Chancellor assess the economic and social value of the great British summer package of savings, particularly its impact on opening up access to museums, cinemas, libraries, sports facilities, theatres, theme parks and attractions? It will build children’s cultural capital and life experiences, while also supporting local economies in Wolverhampton and Willenhall, and across the country.

[Rachel Reeves]

Spoken like a proper former teacher! Expanding their cultural capital is what my children want to do every weekend. Whether it is expanding cultural capital, or having fun at a theme park in Blackpool or at Alton Towers, I want children and families to be able to enjoy this summer. As a former teacher, my hon. Friend will know that although the summer holidays are a welcome relief for teachers and children, it can often be a time of worry for parents. I hope that today’s changes will make the summer holidays a bit easier for all families.

Spring Forecast

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Reeves]

In every month since I became Chancellor of the Exchequer wages have risen faster than inflation. We have increased the national minimum wage and the national living wage to put more money in the pockets of the poorest people, and the interest rate cuts mean that a typical family getting a fixed-rate mortgage will be paying £1,300 less a year than when I became Chancellor. The OBR confirmed today that GDP per capita will rise by 5.6% over the course of this Parliament. I recognise that the legacy of the previous Conservative Government still runs deep and that it will take a while for people to feel the impact of these policies, but I am confident that this will be the year that things start to turn around.

[Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Does the Chancellor agree that restoring confidence and hope for families in Wolverhampton and Willenhall is achieved through a stable economy, with borrowing, debt interest and inflation falling faster than expected, moving away from the chaos of spiralling mortgage rates and towards the stability of falling rates?

[Rachel Reeves]

I was very pleased recently to spend some time in my hon. Friend’s constituency, where we met a family who are now able to get on the housing ladder because of the reduction in interest rates. Instead of living with mum and dad, that couple and their young child are now able to get a home of their own. That is only possible because of the stability that we have returned to the economy, giving the Bank of England space to cut interest rates six times since I became Chancellor.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Committee of the whole House
Tuesday 13th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Gareth Snell]

Absolutely, we do need to do that. I am an old-fashioned state regulator; I like the idea that the state can regulate things. I like the idea of tax and spend as well, which is what we are doing in the Budget. It is a good thing—[Interruption.] I was so close—I raised the hopes of the hon. Member for North West Norfolk (James Wild) and then dashed them.

We should think about some of the changes that came in through the White Paper, including the whistle-to-whistle ban on promoting certain products, the premier league’s voluntary opt-out on gambling company sponsorship, and the soon-to-be banning of gambling companies on football shirts. Again, that uniquely affects Stoke-on-Trent, because bet365 sponsors Stoke City. Therefore, should we ever make it to the premiership—we came so very close at the beginning of the season, but we are not quite there now—we would have to have a complete change of kit.

There is more that we can do about the unregulated sector, but that should be a collective effort. We should also not kid ourselves that what we are doing today is about trying to get on top of the unregulated sector. We are talking about the taxation of the regulated sector. As a consequence, we may inadvertently push more people into the unregulated sector. The consequence of that will be bad for society and bad for people who are problem gamblers. It will also be a challenge for the Gambling Commission to them try to regulate, and we need to be up front about that.

I recognise that there are some very addictive games that people can get hooked on and spend an absolute fortune, because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen said, they are affected psychologically; they get drawn in, spending more money to make the experience worth while. But we may be in a perverse situation, because the machine gaming duty rate for a land-based product will be 20%, but the remote betting duty—for products where people can bet on a football match using one of the apps at home—will be 21%. Although we recognise that the gaming side is much more damaging than the betting side, we are going to have a lower rate for land-based gaming than for remote betting, when we recognise that betting as a product presents a safer, more cost-intensive situation. Was that by design, or is it a consequence that the Treasury has not considered? Will the Minister address that point?

The Minister has said that this is a fair levy, taking the gaming rate to 40%. That will make us an outlier compared with our European neighbours. The next on the list are Czechia at 35%, the Netherlands at 34% and Denmark at 28%. There is a point at which the taxation of a product becomes so de minimis in its return that it ceases to have an effect. I have never believed in the Laffer curve—I am sorry to disappoint the hon. Member for North West Norfolk again—but I can see that we will get to a point where we are trying to squeeze an increasingly large amount of money out of a shrinking tax base because more people are taking their spend elsewhere.

That would be damaging for everybody. It would be damaging for my constituents, because if the demand for the service and products made by the companies in my constituency dry up, the jobs also dry up. It would also be bad for the Treasury because the amount of money it can raise from the regulated sector will decrease, and that is not something that we want to see. Has the Minister looked at the evidence from the Netherlands? When the Netherlands increased its rate, which it did for good reason—a decision around tax and spend in order to raise money to pay for parts of its social programmes—it actually saw a huge spike in the use of unregulated products, with something like a fivefold increase over three years, and a huge decrease in the expected rate of return for its revenue.

There are similar examples in other European countries. I do wonder whether we have looked at those before making some of the decisions that we are making today. Do we have a contingency? It is not that we are hypothecating taxation in this country, but we have said that these changes are, quite rightly, to fund the reduction of child poverty through the removal of the two-child benefit cap. If the revenue rates from the changes decreases, where will the additional money come from?

Finally, will the Minister touch on the impact on Gibraltar? The decisions on gambling tax rates that we make today will have an effect on Gibraltar. Nigel Feetham, the Minister for Justice, Trade and Industry in Gibraltar, has repeatedly pointed out that 3,500 people in Gibraltar derive their job from the gambling sector. It makes up 30% of GDP there; one third of Gibraltar’s tax receipts comes from the gambling sector. He has said only this week that the change will remove tens of millions of pounds from the Government of Gibraltar’s budget. There is absolutely no way they can replace that from domestic sources in any reasonable time.

Given that Gibraltar is one of our important overseas territories, will the Minister set out and explain what conversations the Treasury has had with counterparts in Gibraltar? What are the contingencies if we find ourselves inadvertently creating a massive black hole in the budget of the Government of Gibraltar? Again, if we have to bail them out in some way, where will that money come from? If it is taken out of the revenue that is expected to be raised from this particular rate, that then undermines the figures in other parts of the Budget, which, in its entirety, I support.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

My constituents know all too well that there are some gambling companies that thrive on making vast profits from addiction, distress and despair, often delivered straight into people’s homes through online platforms and their mobile phones—quietly but devastatingly tearing families apart. That is why I speak today on clauses 83 to 85 and schedule 13.

Remote gaming, including online slots and casino games, is the most addictive and fastest growing part of the gambling industry. Those products are deliberately engineered to keep people playing, spending and losing long after the fun has gone and the harm has begun. In Wolverhampton North East, through my constituency casework, I see the real-world consequences of parents trapped in spiralling debt, children going without the basics and relationships breaking under unbearable strain. The Bill addresses that harm head-on.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 16th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

For my constituents, the Finance Bill is more than just a legislative process; it is a statement of who we are as a country and what we believe our future to be. I can say with confidence that this is a Finance Bill for places such as Wolverhampton and Willenhall.

I came into politics after years in the classroom. I know the harm that poverty does to our children. I have seen too many young people believe that a successful career is for someone else and not for them, and not addressing poverty ends up costing society far more in the long run. We inherited a country where we have a rise in food banks—more food banks than branches of McDonald’s. There is no single silver bullet to end poverty, and some of the Bill’s measures might not ever make the headlines, but they show the different choices that a Labour Government will make for our communities.

I support the Finance Bill to enable us to lift the two-child benefit cap. Independent analysis estimates that it will lift around 450,000 children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. The inaccurate attacks from some quarters, painting families in poverty with a broad brush, are disappointing but not surprising. In Wolverhampton North East, I inherited more than a third of children in poverty after housing costs—higher than the UK average. Lifting the two-child cap will benefit more than 4,200 children in Wolverhampton North East. That is the equivalent of 20 primary schools packed full of children. How could I not support that measure? And for those who are still clinging to lazy stereotypes, did you know that 60% of families in poverty are working families? The rest may be families who have lost a parent or where a parent has lost a job, fallen ill or become disabled. So this, along with the expansion of free breakfast clubs for all families and free school meals for children from families on universal credit, ensures that no child is too hungry to learn. Labour values and choices are clear: children need to come first.

I welcome the Chancellor’s response to calls from MPs like me and others to reintroduce libraries in our secondary schools, with an additional £5 million in funding on top of the £10 million for primary schools. I want all children to benefit from social mobility-boosting libraries and reducing inequalities that saw libraries removed disproportionately from poorer areas. This is a Finance Bill that shows that our children matter.

The Bill goes further. It strengthens the dignity of work. The national living wage will rise to £12.71 per hour from April 2026, putting more money directly into people’s pockets. That money is more likely to be spent in our local shops, precincts and high streets. Targeted cost of living measures continue to make a difference: prescription charges frozen, energy bills likely to fall by around £150, train fares frozen for the first time in 30 years, and continued support to ease everyday financial pressures. Alongside no cuts in capital projects, sustained investment in public services, infrastructure and skills, the Bill is set for stronger long-term growth: a long-term plan with undeniable benefits for Wolverhampton and Willenhall and across the UK.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

Oral Answers to Questions

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Reeves]

Employment is up since we took office, and part of the reason for the disparity between those numbers is the fact that people who were economically inactive are now seeking work. That is exactly what we want, for people to be seeking work and to get back into work, but there are more jobs in the economy today than when we took office.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

T8. As a former deputy headteacher, I and other school leaders knew of the pressures faced when having to turn libraries into classrooms due to underfunding by the Tories, which disproportionately affected children in our deprived areas. Does the Chancellor agree that her £5 million commitment for libraries and books for secondary schools is an example of how increasing opportunity for all children is good for our future economy?

[Rachel Reeves]

My hon. Friend will know that when I was at secondary school, my school library was turned into a classroom because there were more students than there was space. We have put £10 million into primary schools to get a library in every single primary school in this Parliament, and next year, to celebrate the national year of reading, we are putting £5 million into having more books at secondary schools, and I am really proud to be doing that.

Office for Budget Responsibility Forecasts

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Monday 1st December 2025 Commons Chamber

[James Murray]

I know that journalists from all publications need no encouragement to speculate on the contents of a Budget. Let me draw the right hon. Gentleman’s attention to my earlier remarks: this Government take the Budget process, and our responsibility to the House, very seriously.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

Like other Members on both sides of the House—I hope—I am deeply concerned and shocked by the fact that the OBR has leaked not just the autumn Budget but previous fiscal events: it is hugely concerning. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Chancellor’s decision to more than double fiscal headroom has been welcomed by markets and will strengthen UK resilience?

[James Murray]

My hon. Friend is entirely right to draw attention to the fact that not only doubling the headroom but getting it to £21.7 billion is a crucial step in strengthening the resilience of the UK economy and the public finances, helping to bring down Government borrowing and protect us from future shocks.

Oral Answers to Questions

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Reeves]

We have secured an agreement with the biggest pension companies to invest on a voluntary basis in UK unlisted equities and infrastructure, which is something the Conservatives never achieved. We are getting investment into British infrastructure and British businesses because that is the way to grow the economy and support working people.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

T4. Will my right hon. Friend outline the steps being taken in the forthcoming spending review to ensure that increased defence spending will stimulate economic growth, so that supply chain companies, such as Collins Aerospace in my constituency, can continue to strengthen national defence capabilities while boosting our local economies, jobs and quality apprenticeships?

[Darren Jones]

As my hon. Friend knows, the Government are committed to increasing spending on defence to 2.5% of GDP, with an ambition to go further to 3% in the next Parliament when economic and fiscal conditions allow. As part of that increase in spending, we are making sure that UK companies and UK workers get the benefit, including in places such as Wolverhampton, through apprenticeships, good jobs and good growth.

Defence Sector Financing

Sureena Brackenridge Excerpts

Wednesday 7th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Charters]

There could be nothing more ethical than investing in the companies that support our Ukrainian friends.

I believe Britain’s membership of a multilateral defence development bank could cement Britain as a leader not only in financial services, but in defence. Today, I will also talk about how we can bolster our sovereign defence industries by fixing the capital stack here at home and by sorting out the credit and cash-flow issues for British companies.

I will just take a couple of steps back. When I was at the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority, I was working on cross-border payments, sanctions and so many related things, but more importantly, I had a front-row seat to the regulatory and financial barriers that defence start-ups faced when I was acting head of compliance at a fintech. I saw how everything from export controls and dual-use rules to complex international regimes made it really difficult for those defence customers.

A few months ago, the Prime Minister pledged the largest defence spending rise since the cold war. That sent a clear signal that now is the time to invest in peace. Yet British defence innovators have told me they still face hurdles accessing finance, bank accounts and insurance. That is why my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker) and I brought together over 100 Labour parliamentarians to write to the sector, highlighting some of those challenges. Following that, we wrote to the FCA, which helpfully published a statement that, as we have heard from firms, has eased environmental, social and governance perception concerns.

[Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)]

At this pivotal moment for national security, I welcome my hon. Friend’s call to clarify ESG rules to better back defence investment. Collins Aerospace in my constituency works really hard to create highly skilled jobs and apprenticeships. Does my hon. Friend agree that financial institutions play a vital role in supporting the defence sector, so we can further boost UK jobs in our economy?

[Mr Charters]

If we can get the financing environment right for Collins Aerospace, perhaps it can grow at more pace and deliver more high-skilled jobs in my hon. Friend’s constituency, for which I know she is such a powerful advocate. My hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot and I hosted a summit at the Guildhall last month, and we were kindly joined by the Minister for Defence Procurement and Industry, my right hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Garston (Maria Eagle). Also joining us were defence primes, small and medium-sized enterprises, major banks and other stakeholders.