Tag: 2026

  • Lilian Greenwood – 2026 Comments on the Government’s Road Strategy

    Lilian Greenwood – 2026 Comments on the Government’s Road Strategy

    The comments made by Lilian Greenwood, the Local Transport Minister, on 6 January 2026.

    Our vision with this ambitious road safety strategy is clear: to ensure that people can travel safely on our roads however they choose.

    One of the hardest parts of my job is speaking to families who have lost loved ones on our roads and this is something we as a government are taking action to prevent. No family should have to endure that loss, and this strategy sets out how we will work to ensure fewer do.

    Experts and campaigners have long called for a comprehensive strategy that treats road safety as a shared responsibility – from car manufacturers and town planners to drivers and legislators.

    This strategy, the first in over a decade, shows a government that is not just listening, but leading and together, we can build a safer future for all road users.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Thousands of lives to be saved under bold new Road Safety Strategy [January 2026]

    PRESS RELEASE : Thousands of lives to be saved under bold new Road Safety Strategy [January 2026]

    The press release issued by the Department for Transport on 6 January 2026.

    New road safety strategy shows that the government is listening and leading: together, we can build a safer future for all UK road users.

    • government announces its first road safety strategy in over a decade, with a plan to reduce deaths and serious injuries on Britain’s roads by 65% by 2035
    • new consultations on minimum learning period for learner drivers, eye tests for older drivers and lowering the alcohol limit for driving to help prevent causes of collisions
    • the strategy will help save thousands of lives and deliver on the government’s commitment to growth, safer communities and easing pressure on the NHS

    The first road safety strategy in more than a decade will save thousands of lives on the nation’s roads by tackling drink driving, improving training for young drivers and introducing mandatory eye tests for older motorists.

    Launched today (7 January 2026), the strategy sets out an ambitious plan to reduce deaths and serious injuries on Britain’s roads by 65% by 2035, with an even more stretching target of 70% for children under 16.

    Approximately 4 people die on Britain’s roads every day, with thousands more seriously injured each year, but through targeted action on speeding, drink and drug driving, not wearing seat belts and mobile phone use, thousands of these tragedies can be prevented.

    The government will consult on lowering the drink drive limit in England and Wales, which has remained unchanged since 1967 and is currently the highest in Europe.  

    In 2023, 1 in 6 road fatalities involved drink driving, but a consultation will explore the use of preventative technology, such as alcohol interlock devices and new powers to suspend driving licences for those suspected of drink or drug driving offences.

    This could mean that, in future, some drink drive offenders might be required to have one of these devices fitted to their vehicle as a condition of being allowed to drive again.

    With the number of older drivers continuing to rise as Britain’s population ages, a consultation on mandatory eyesight testing for those over 70 will be launched, while options for cognitive testing will also be developed to protect all road users. 

    New measures will also target the growing problem of illegal number plates, including ‘ghost’ plates designed to fool camera systems, while also cracking down on uninsured drivers and vehicles without a valid MOT.

    Secretary of State for Transport, Heidi Alexander, said:

    Every life lost on our roads is a tragedy that devastates families and communities. For too long, progress on road safety has stalled. This strategy marks a turning point.

    We are taking decisive action to make our roads safer for everyone, from new drivers taking their first lessons to older motorists wanting to maintain their independence. The measures we are announcing today will save thousands of lives over the coming decade.

    Local Transport Minister, Lilian Greenwood, said:

    Our vision with this ambitious road safety strategy is clear: to ensure that people can travel safely on our roads however they choose.

    One of the hardest parts of my job is speaking to families who have lost loved ones on our roads and this is something we as a government are taking action to prevent. No family should have to endure that loss, and this strategy sets out how we will work to ensure fewer do.

    Experts and campaigners have long called for a comprehensive strategy that treats road safety as a shared responsibility – from car manufacturers and town planners to drivers and legislators.

    This strategy, the first in over a decade, shows a government that is not just listening, but leading and together, we can build a safer future for all road users.

    Independent road safety campaigner, Meera Naran MBE, whose 8-year-old son Dev died in a road traffic collision, said:

    I welcome this much-anticipated road safety strategy and am pleased to see a number of measures set out to reduce road deaths and serious injuries.

    I am especially grateful to the Secretary of State for giving me her word that she would honour Dev and recognise the importance of legislative change to adopt the General Safety Regulations, as Dev’s Law and for delivering on that commitment. I look forward to working closely with the department to ensure that the appropriate steps are taken to establish a robust and effective framework.

    Over the past decade, 22 European countries have made more progress than the UK in reducing road fatalities, causing Britain to slip from third to fourth in European road safety rankings.

    This strategy, therefore, sets out a new approach to reverse a decade of stalled progress. The bold strategy adopts the internationally recognised Safe System approach, which acknowledges that while human error is inevitable, deaths and serious injuries are not.

    Rather than placing responsibility solely on individual drivers, the system ensures that road design, vehicle safety, enforcement and education work together to protect all road users.

    A new Road Safety Investigation Branch will analyse collision patterns and inform prevention strategies, drawing on linked police and healthcare data to identify root causes and target interventions more effectively.

    The strategy also mandates 18 new vehicle safety technologies, including autonomous emergency braking and lane-keeping assistance. This will ensure drivers and road users in Great Britain benefit from access to these cutting-edge technologies and support growth by requiring manufacturers to meet the same requirements across Europe.

    Edmund King OBE, Director of The AA Charitable Trust and AA president, said:

    This is a positively radical reframing of road safety, which is long overdue. We commend the government for its wide ranging and ambitious strategy and ambitious targets, which we hope will save the lives of thousands of people.

    Tackling drivers who drive under the influence of drink or drugs, people who don’t wear their seatbelts and those getting behind the wheel without insurance are key to reducing road deaths and serious injuries. We also endorse the mantra of road safety being a lifelong education, not just when learning to ride or drive.

    IAM RoadSmart Director of Policy and Standards, Nicholas Lyes, said:

    After what can be described as a lost decade in terms of reducing the number of killed and seriously injured on the roads, we welcome the government’s commitment to ambitious targets and robust policies to make our roads safer.

    The strategy focuses on all key aspects, including behaviours, training, vehicle technology and enforcement – all of which play a crucial role in keeping us safe on the road. An emphasis on younger drivers and motorcycle safety is particularly positive, considering these are some of our most vulnerable road users.

    We’re also pleased to see action being taken on drug driving, which is a growing menace and by giving police additional powers to take action against those caught at the roadside, it will serve notice that such dangerous behaviours will not be tolerated.

    A new Road Safety Board, chaired by the Minister for Local Transport, will oversee delivery of the strategy, supported by an expert advisory panel drawing membership from local authorities, emergency services, active travel groups and road safety organisations.

    Vulnerable road users remain a key focus. Motorcyclists account for just 1% of motor vehicle traffic but 21% of road deaths, while children from the most deprived neighbourhoods face 4 times the pedestrian casualty rate of those in the least deprived areas. To address these disparities, the strategy includes consulting on reforms to motorcycle training, testing and licensing and supporting trials to improve motorcycle safety on rural roads.

    An estimated 1 in 3 road traffic fatalities involves someone driving or riding for work, prompting the launch of a National Work-Related Road Safety Charter pilot. This will establish a national standard for employers requiring people to drive or ride for work, covering HGVs, vans, cars, motorcycles, e-cycles and cycles. It aims to help businesses in both the public and private sectors reduce work-related road risk by promoting good practice, accountability and compliance with existing legislation.

    The success of this strategy depends on strong partnerships between government, local authorities, businesses, road safety professionals, emergency services and the public working together to ensure that every journey starts and ends safely.

    RAC road safety spokesperson, Rod Dennis, said:

    We’ve long said the dial needs to be turned up when it comes to reducing road casualties, so we warmly welcome this strategy – and especially the reintroduction of casualty reduction targets, that were scrapped 16 years ago.

    The simple truth is that this strategy can’t come soon enough. Britain might have some of the safest roads by international standards, but on average, 4 people are still killed and 76 seriously injured every single day. That’s an unacceptable number of lives being ruined or cut short.

    The strategy addresses many areas we know drivers are concerned about, including drink and drug-driving, ‘ghost’ plates and dazzling headlights. The inclusion of a commitment to consult on the use of alcohol interlocks for convicted drink-drivers – which are internationally proven to save lives – is particularly encouraging, especially given the extent to which drivers are supportive of their use. It’s also positive to see proposals on the table for both improving young driver safety and tackling the scourge of uninsured drivers who push up motor insurance costs for everyone.

    It’s important to remember that the ultimate success of any new or updated penalties or laws will depend on awareness among drivers and enforcement. But undoubtedly, this strategy is a real chance to give the whole topic of road safety the focus and public attention it deserves. What we need now is for it to quickly evolve into a set of concrete actions that make the roads safer for everyone.

  • Mary Creagh – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    Mary Creagh – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    The speech made by Mary Creagh, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on 6 January 2026.

    It is lovely to be here with you again to celebrate the new year, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wish you and all colleagues in the House a very happy new year. What a shame it is that we are starting it with the trash from last year.

    As we have just celebrated Christmas and the holiday period, we will have seen our bins and recycling facilities overflowing with the Christmas excesses. We have faith in our systems that when that is taken away, it is responsibly dealt with. I therefore thank the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for raising this important issue. I share his anger and the public’s anger about this serious crime and its impact.

    Waste crime blights our communities, as I know from my work as a constituency MP in Coventry. Waste criminals damage the environment and, in the worst cases, directly threaten our health, life and limb. These criminals also undermine legitimate businesses and deprive the Exchequer of tax income. That is why the Government are committed to tackling waste crime. We will crack down on the waste criminals and the organised crime groups who have moved into this lucrative space, and we will ensure that they are brought to justice.

    I confirm that the criminal investigation into the Kidlington site is moving forward apace. Environment Agency officials, working closely with the police, have taken samples of the waste materials on site for forensic examination. There is a lot we can divine from some of these materials as to where they originated from. Those forensic results will be available by the end of January.

    The Environment Agency is working closely alongside partners including Oxfordshire county council, the police and fire and rescue services as part of the site’s strategic co-ordinating group and tactical co-ordinating group. The strategic group has set the overall goals for this major incident, supporting the gold commander with advice, analysis and community links, while the tactical group implements those goals at the scene. The strategic group has local and operational expertise, and it has determined that the scale of the fire risk sets this case apart from the other illegal waste dumps in England.

    This location presents an overriding public imperative. That is why the Environment Agency took the exceptional decision to clear the waste and why it is working rapidly to implement a safe, systematic and focused clearance plan. It is important to stress that only two other sites have been cleared by the Environment Agency in the past five years: Hoad’s Wood, via a ministerial direction; and Twyford House in Stoke-on-Trent, where lots of flammable liquids were stored close to the west coast main line. The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock will see some of the similarities there.

    The Environment Agency will continue to closely monitor the site while preparatory work takes place. It has informed me today that prep work will begin shortly and clearance of the waste is expected to start in February. Further timeline updates will follow from the Environment Agency. It is important that the site’s vast amount of waste is handled correctly and moved to the right facilities without causing damage to the environment. The Environment Agency is monitoring risks at the site and will respond promptly to any change in situation.

    It is important that people, whether members of the public or well-meaning journalists, do not enter the site. It is an environmental crime scene and climbing on the waste is dangerous. In doing so, people are putting themselves at risk and compromising the criminal investigation, which is a criminal offence in itself. We do not need to add extra problems to the very big one already there. There is now 24-hour surveillance in place.

    The Environment Agency’s approach and actions are always based on evidence, and with the containment and clearance, actions were taken in response to a changing risk level and the potential for a rise in the water levels. The Environment Agency was on site within days of receiving photographic evidence from a member of the public and immediately visited the site with the local authority and confirmed it as a high-risk illegal waste site. Over 80% of the waste on site was there before the Environment Agency visited on 2 July, so the vast majority happened before it was alerted. When further waste movements were reported in September, the EA swiftly obtained a restriction order in October.

    The current risk of waste entering the river is very low. A barrier has been installed at the site to prevent the waste from entering the river, to safeguard both the environment and public safety in the event of river levels rising or flooding. The Environment Agency has carried out water quality sampling of the River Cherwell to check for potential impacts of run-off or leaching from the waste. Having sampled upstream and downstream of the site, it has found no indication of pollution entering the Cherwell as a result of the waste.

    The clear-up of illegal waste sites by the Environment Agency should only be a last resort, undertaken in exceptional circumstances to protect the public and the environment. In accordance with the “polluter pays” principle, criminals who disregard the law, undercut legitimate businesses and blight communities and the environment must pay the penalty—not us as taxpayers. We do not wish to create a perverse incentive for some people to dump, or facilitate the dumping of, waste. It should be for polluters, not taxpayers, to pay the costs of clean-up.

    I acknowledge the huge frustrations about the time such an approach takes—I know that from my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee). In some cases, that can undermine public confidence or create a perception somehow that the matter is not taken seriously or tackled swiftly. As with any police investigation, there is no running commentary provided either by police, law enforcement or Ministers. I can confirm, though, that I am vigorously pursuing all avenues on this and other waste crime sites. We are committed to bearing down on the cynical waste criminals who damage our environment, harm businesses and blight our communities.

    I will go through each of the hon. Member’s questions. I request the patience of the House—Madam Deputy Speaker, feel free to cough if I go on too long. I believe we have until 7.30 pm, so strap in! The hon. Member asked how we are tackling the blight on the country caused by waste crime. We are pursuing a series of reforms that will have a lasting impact on reducing waste crime. We are bringing in reforms to the carrier, broker and dealer regimes, which will shrink the number of people who can handle waste. That is the first thing. We are changing the waste permit exemption regimes. At the moment, certain activities do not need a permit and we are shutting down those exemptions. We are also introducing digital waste tracking, which is coming in this year. These are things that I have done as a Minister that have been consulted on as far back as 2018 but have not been enacted by successive Governments. We think these three actions—this pincer movement, if you like—will be the most effective way to drive criminality away from the waste sector, because this is all about knowing the chain of custody for these materials.

    Alongside this, we have increased the Environment Agency’s budget for waste crime enforcement by over 50% this year to £15.6 million. This is the investigatory part of what the EA does, and it includes issues involving misdescribed waste, waste shipments and all the difficult business. This work is very time consuming and painstaking because it has to be done to a criminal standard of proof that will stand up in a court of law. I want to go into a bit more detail about this. These reforms were deprioritised and stalled, but under this Government they are being accelerated.

    Mandatory digital waste tracking will replace outdated methods for monitoring waste movements and unify fragmented processes. It will provide a single comprehensive view of waste types, waste quantities and waste destinations. The lack of digital record keeping in the waste industry is frequently exploited by organised criminals, who undercut legitimate businesses through mishandling waste, illegal exports and simple fly-tipping. Data in the new system will help regulators to check that waste is ending up at legitimate, licensed sites and enable the quicker investigation of illegal activity. This digital waste tracking system is being phased in this year, beginning with the introduction of a system for waste receiving sites—for example, landfills—and with planned expansion to other waste operators such as waste carriers in 2027, subject to further funding.

    Adam Jogee

    I am grateful to the Minister for sharing with the House this important step forward. We are talking about these issues going back to 2018, and it just worries me that if this had been done before, some of the issues that I have hassled her about in relation to Walleys Quarry since I was elected to this place in July 2024 could have been dealt with a lot sooner. This raises many questions about the impact on my constituents back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme under the previous Government, who were clearly missing in action. We can discuss this further outside this House.

    Mary Creagh

    I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s assiduousness on the issue of Walleys Quarry. That site is also now being run by the Environment Agency, and the risk of odour that his constituents were really grievously suffering is now extremely low, but that has come at a cost, as he rightly says.

    This is nothing new. When there is a problem and no action is taken and no new policy is created, these illegal businesses think, “Well, it’s a victimless crime, so I can carry on making money.” Then they tell their friends and, guess what, soon many flowers are blooming. But they are the wrong sort of flowers, and this creates incentives. Then of course, the legitimate businesses are like, “Hang on, why am I paying all these fees if all I need to do is buy a field, dig it up and dump stuff in it?” This creates disincentives for legitimate operators as well. I am only too aware of this. It was starting post-2016 when the then Government were focused on leaving the EU and the large international issues. I was chairing the Environmental Audit Committee at the time and I was always worried about what was going to happen to waste, including chemical waste, once we put up a border with our nearest neighbours.

    Secondly, we will reform waste management and transport. Instead of the current light-touch registration system, it will now be a permitted system. We will move on from a system that was so lax that people were able to sign up Oscar the dead dog to be a waste carrier. Activists were doing that back in 2018-19, so we have known about these problems. Anyone can falsify a bit of paper. We will introduce tougher background checks for operators and tougher penalties for those who break the law.

    We will also require vehicles that transport waste—the man with the van—to display their permit numbers on their vehicles and on their advertising, so service users can be reassured that their waste is being handled by an accredited business rather than criminals. The reform will introduce mandatory technical competence for all permit holders, meaning that anyone transporting or making decisions about waste will have to demonstrate that they are competent to do so, rather than simply just going on a register. Waste will be managed by authorised persons only and in a safe manner.

    Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)

    I am fascinated and happy to hear what is being proposed. Will it be possible for members of the public to check an online database for that permit? When somebody picks something up from a house and shows their permit, people can feel quite vulnerable. Being able to go online and check the permit against the local authority or central database would give people a lot more confidence.

    Mary Creagh

    I will get back to the hon. Member on that, if I may. The point of a digital waste tracking system is that everything is digitised. The problem has been that it is a paper-based register, so how can people check it at the moment? My understanding is that the move is to a digital system, but I will get back to her. I do not want to mislead her or the House. Perhaps Box officials can enlighten us while I go through the third reform of the waste permit exemptions.

    Thirdly, there are exemptions for three high-risk areas: end of life vehicles—that is, car scrappage—end of life tyres and scrap metal. Those exemptions have long caused problems and have been abused. We will replace them with a requirement for a full environmental permit for all those activities. We will introduce greater record keeping requirements for all waste exemption holders and impose controls on how exemptions can be managed at one site.

    At the moment, there are seven waste exemptions: construction waste, preparatory treatments, treatment of waste wood, manual treatment, burning vegetation at the place of production only—that is essentially for farmers—storage in containers and storage in a safe place. As I have mentioned, we have increased the waste crime investigation unit budget. It now has 43 full-time staff.

    People have often asked me about enabling the Environment Agency to use environmental permit income to tackle waste crime. Rules are set out by the Treasury in “Managing Public Money” about how the income raised by public bodies may be used. These rules ensure transparency to us as parliamentarians and ensure that fees and charges are not set higher than necessary to cover activity that should be properly funded from taxation. We instead look to innovative ideas, and the EA has consulted on the implementation of a 10% levy to generate a further £3.2 million of waste enforcement funding each year. That would enable a further 30% increase in enforcement activity to be targeted at activities identified by the EA as waste crime priorities. Those include tackling organised crime groups, increasing enforcement activity around specific areas of concern such as landfill sites, closing down illegal sites more quickly, using intelligence more effectively and delivering successful major criminal investigations.

    Calum Miller

    I am grateful to the Minister for such a comprehensive response. On the question of funding, the £15.6 million in the budget this year for tackling waste crime, as she said, is for the officers who engage in investigation, but it still strikes me as a small amount of money, with 43 officers for a crime that is now taking place up and down the country. Can she clarify whether the additional £5.6 million is now permanently in that budget and will be going forward such that the additional funds she has referred to for permitting will be over and above that sum? Fundamentally, does she think that this is enough?

    Mary Creagh

    My aim is not to spend further taxpayers’ money on crime; my aim is to stop it happening in the first place. All budget decisions are subject to the normal business planning, but we hope that, through our three-year spending review, we can give the Environment Agency a three-year or indicative settlement that will enable it to plan, rather than the annual process of, “Up this year, down next year,” so that there will be long-range line-of-sight planning. As I say, the EA is consulting at the moment on the additional extra revenue. If that goes through, there would be a funding uplift.

    I have the answer to the question from the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade): we are happy to confirm that it is already possible to check the online database for permits, so that is good news there.

    I have mentioned the different reforms and I think I have answered all the hon. Gentleman’s questions. I am pretty much coming to the end of my speech. On steps taken since 11 December and his specific question about the rise in water level of up to two metres, equivalent to the peak recorded at Thrupp in November ’24, the waste is within a large floodplain that can store a substantial volume of water during heavy rain. The EA has carried out more detailed flood risk assessment to understand any changes in water levels due to the illegal waste and has determined that there will not be any increased flood risk to local properties. My understanding is that sandbags and a fence are there in order to protect the river.

    The EA has also carried out regular water quality sampling of the river to check for impacts of run-off or leaching and has found no indication of pollution. If any pollutants were found in the watercourse, the action would depend on the nature and type of the pollutants found.

    On fire risk at the site, EA officials have been working with the fire and rescue service, which is leading on monitoring the temperatures of the waste and planning appropriately. The fire risk was one of the main reasons that an exceptional decision was taken to progress works to clear the site entirely.

    Analysis on how the site would be cleared, including ecology surveys, has been carried out with partners and the Environment Agency to get contracts in place as soon as possible, but we need to follow legal process to ensure that the waste is disposed of correctly. The clearance timetable is being finalised and will shortly be published on the EngagementHQ website. As I said, we hope that clearance will begin in February. Early indications and scoping indicate that full clearance will take approximately six to nine months. Where possible, we are seeking to recover our costs from those responsible in accordance with the legislation and the “polluter pays” principle, and the EA is working with the economic crime unit to target the finances of waste criminals. That unit can freeze bank accounts, seize assets and investigate cases of money laundering linked to waste crime.

    Adam Jogee

    I am grateful to the Minister for setting out so clearly how seriously she is taking this issue, which will be of continued reassurance to people back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme. In many examples, waste crime is rural crime, such as in the example from the constituency of the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) and for me back home. The Minister talks about working together—can she touch a little bit more on the importance of co-operation and partnership work with the Home Office to make sure that we are getting that right? Clearly, in many communities up and down the country, people think that they can get away with doing whatever they want in rural communities, where there are fewer people around. We have to make sure that we tighten that up quickly.

    Mary Creagh

    I agree with my hon. Friend. One of the things that I am very interested in exploring is what the playbook is. The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock asked who such things should be reported to, and the problem is that if that is not clear, people do nothing. The most important thing when any crime is being carried out, wherever it is happening—whether that is on the Tube or wherever we see things happening—is for us as citizens to do something. That might be reporting it to the council, the local police or the Environment Agency, whose hotline is 0800 807060—I thank my officials for getting that through so that it is on the public record.

    The playbook is important. Once something has been reported, what does the local authority, the police or the EA do? What is the definition of “major site”? I have visited sites, including Watery Lane in Staffordshire, where two vanloads of fly-tipping was not classified as a major problem, and it fell to the local authority to clear it. People were locked in their homes physically unable to leave via the road—an absolutely extraordinary position for people to find themselves in. What is the playbook, what are the definitions and where do national agencies step in?

    The Environment Agency expects to fund the clearance efforts by making efficiencies in its operations, without impacting on or scaling back any other services. The EA is not funded to clear up waste sites nationally, however, and makes these types of decisions only in exceptional circumstances.

    The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock asked about additional landfill tax revenue. The waste crime survey that the EA has carried out indicates that 20% of waste is handled illegally. His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs estimates that 23% of landfill tax is evaded, contributing to an annual waste crime cost of roughly £1 billion a year, including a £150 million landfill tax gap, which is 23% of the theoretical liability—I hope that everyone can understand that. That £1 billion a year shows that this is big business. It is a profitable and lucrative business, and we are all paying. We are paying twice, because we are losing the £1 billion and then clearing up the waste, so it is a double whammy for us—it is maddening.

    Calum Miller

    I am grateful to the Minister for setting out those figures so clearly. That was the point that I was driving at in addressing the budget for waste crime. It is not so much that I or anybody else wants to spend money dealing with criminals, but a relatively modest investment in detection and investigation could yield a higher proportion of that missing tax. We lose £1 billion every year, but a relatively modest increase in the waste crime unit’s budget, or the National Crime Agency doing more, could potentially bring in more of that revenue, which should be used for the benefit of all taxpayers.

    Mary Creagh

    I am in passionate agreement with the hon. Gentleman, as I am sure is everyone in the Chamber and watching at home. I would say, however, that big businesses use all available resources to protect their income. They are sophisticated businesses—some are registered companies—and they have their own ways of making life difficult for law enforcement. We are in a bit of a David and Goliath situation. They have been very good at doing that. This is a complex crime, and it takes a while to unravel.

    We continue to work with the Treasury on the best approach to fiscal policies to tackle and reduce waste crime. The joint unit for waste crime is a UK-wide partnership, working with the Environment Agency, HMRC, the National Crime Agency, the police and others. It shares intelligence, powers and resources to disrupt waste criminals. The unit, which was launched in 2024 and uses proceeds of crime action and asset freezes, has doubled in size thanks to our extra funding. Anyone with intelligence about waste crime can report it to Crimestoppers on 0800 555111.

    My message to our constituents around the country is that waste crime is an absolute top priority for the Government. My message to the waste criminals is we are coming for you and we are going to shut you down. My message to the legitimate waste operators is thank you for your work maintaining safe, healthy and clean environments in our towns and putting pride in our places. Let us all ensure that we work together to create a truly circular economy in which this sort of terrible crime is unthinkable and its perpetrators are put out of business.

  • Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    Calum Miller – 2026 Speech on Clearing Illegal Waste from the River Cherwell

    The speech made by Calum Miller, the Liberal Democrat MP for Bicester and Woodstock, in the House of Commons on 6 January 2026.

    It is my privilege to represent a beautiful part of England’s countryside. Stretching from the Chilterns in the east to the Cotswolds in the west, it is criss-crossed by a network of rivers that define the geography of the area. The largest of these is the River Cherwell, which flows from its origin in Northamptonshire for about 40 miles south, where it joins the Thames in Oxford. My constituency also hosts two major highways: the M40 and the A34. It is the proximity of the A34 to the River Cherwell that created both the setting and the opportunity for a major environmental crime to be committed.

    In late October, I was knocking on doors in Kidlington when a conversation opened my eyes. The resident—not particularly interested in politics—was ready to close the door when he said, “Actually, my housemate Billy might want to talk to you.” He shouted upstairs and Billy came down. Billy Burnell is a local angler who knows the River Cherwell inside out. He showed me photos and videos of a vast waste dump beside the river. This was not fly-tipping—it was industrial-scale organised criminal dumping.

    It quickly became clear that this was not new. Billy and others had been raising concerns for months. The Environment Agency had visited the site on 2 July with local council officers and determined it was a major incident, which the EA took responsibility for addressing. Yet local anglers, farmers and residents saw dumping continue through the summer.

    What emerged was staggering: around 20,000 tonnes of waste had been dumped illegally on a floodplain beside the River Cherwell, close to the A34. You had to see it to believe it—and many people did, thanks to media coverage that went viral due to its shocking nature. This mountain of waste was one of the most serious cases of criminal dumping anywhere in the country.

    We quickly had an energetic response from local councillors like Laura Gordon and Gemma Coton, and campaigners stepped up too. Environmental groups including Friends of the Thames helped to amplify the concerns across Oxfordshire and nationally. Around Kidlington, a parliamentary petition gathered nearly 1,000 signatures, which I presented here on 9 December following a series of interventions: my oral question to the Minister on 13 November, my urgent question on 17 November, the question of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) to the Prime Minister on 19 November and my meeting with the Minister on 2 December. I thank the Minister for her engagement with this issue from the start and for her work with officials to ensure that the risks were identified and managed.

    Locally, following my initial question and the media coverage that followed, the Environment Agency convened key partners from councils and emergency services to develop a strategy for the site. The agency confirmed last month that it will take the exceptional step of clearing the site itself, citing serious fire and public safety risks. This is highly unusual and entirely reflective of the sheer amount of effort and support local councillors, campaigners and activists put in to raise the alarm. It should never have been allowed to reach this scale, but this decision shows what determined local people, backed by political pressure, can achieve.

    We come now to the situation today. The River Cherwell is, thankfully, not high by its winter standards, yet it still laps against the sandbags and fencing installed by the Environment Agency. Water testing has, thankfully, not shown any significant increase in chemical pollutants downstream from the site. I am truly grateful that we appear to be averting environmental catastrophe—for now. However, now that the winter trees have shed their leaves and revealed the scale of the illegal waste site, it is visible to my constituents and is a constant reminder of the damage already done and the risks ahead.

    My constituents continue to ask what is being done to avert the environmental disaster of the waste contaminating the River Cherwell, and I have some questions to ask the Minister on their behalf. Have the measures to contain the waste been designed to cope with a rise in water levels equivalent to a further 2 metres—the peak recorded at the nearest EA measuring station at Thrupp in November 2024? What actions will be taken by the Environment Agency if water testing reveals that chemical pollutants are leaching into the River Cherwell? What steps have been taken to reduce the risk of fire at the site? The December decision to clear the site was warmly welcomed by all the campaigners who had fought for it, yet the factor that led the Environment Agency to authorise the clearance—the risk of fire from combustible and decomposing waste—remains.

    Local people remain angry that criminals did this to our countryside and deeply frustrated that more than six months after the site was first visited by the Environment Agency, the waste is still there. The key question that my constituents continue to ask is: when will the waste be removed?

    On 11 December, a press release from the Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs stated that

    “preparatory works for clearance will begin imminently. Further details on the timeframe for clearance will be set out shortly.”

    To the best of my knowledge, no physical preparatory works have commenced, and the timeframe for clearance has not been set out. I therefore ask the Minister to tell my constituents the following. What steps have been taken since 11 December? When will a timetable for clearance be published? When will the first lorry remove waste from the site? When does she estimate the site will finally be cleared?

    Finally, my constituents are concerned about who will bear the cost for this clear-up, so can the Minister confirm that all efforts are being made to identify the criminals responsible and recover costs from them, and that in the meantime the Environment Agency will meet the cost of clearance and that it will not fall to local taxpayers? Can she further confirm whether she has an estimate of what the total cost will be?

    Since news broke of the illegal waste dump in Kidlington, there has been concerted media focus on the scandal of industrial-scale, criminal waste dumping up and down the country. Like many people, I had no idea it was so widespread. I have been shocked to learn of how many communities are afflicted by it. Research commissioned by the Liberal Democrats in December indicated that 20% of UK adults have witnessed large-scale illegal dumping in their own local areas, and three in five of those say that the problem has got worse in the last year. This is truly an epidemic of criminal activity that damages our natural spaces and harms the lives of local residents.

    People who play by the rules—who dispose of their own litter carefully and take their household waste to council-run tips—are rightly appalled that gangs are doing this and, too often, getting away with it. I know that it is less of a surprise to the Minister, who has been working on these issues for some time. She will know that the House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee, led by my noble Friend Baroness Sheehan, has been critical of the Government’s response to its inquiry and recommendations of October 2025. I do not intend to cover those points extensively, but I want to highlight three that directly reflect the experience in my constituency.

    First, we need to make it easier for people to report waste crime. In this case, constituents told me that they had suspicions and even evidence in the form of number plates or a description of unusual activity, but did not know what to do with it. Should they call the council, the police, the Environment Agency? They did not know, and that stopped them from acting. Early detection of sites is key to stopping the criminals before they get started, and we should make it as easy as possible for people to report concerns. Will the Minister look again at creating a single national hotline for reporting waste crime?

    Secondly, it is clear that the Environment Agency is grossly under-resourced to tackle waste crime. When I first raised this case in the House with the Minister on 13 November, she said that the budget for waste crime enforcement had been increased by 50% this year. That took the budget to £15.6 million, yet as this case shows, the costs of clearance can be close to that full amount. At the same time, the Treasury received £486 million in revenue from landfill tax in 2004-05. Have the Government conducted an assessment of how much additional landfill tax revenue is generated for each pound spent on tackling waste crime? Has DEFRA pressed the Treasury to allocate a larger share of the revenue from landfill tax to the waste crime budget? Given the Government’s response to the House of Lords Environment and Climate Change Committee, can the Minister set out a clear timetable for the publication of the revised national metrics on waste crime and confirm whether interim reporting will be put in place while those indicators are developed?

    Thirdly, in this case it is clear that the Environment Agency prioritised investigating the crime over protecting the site by containing the waste on it. Between 2 July and 15 October, the joint unit for waste crime worked to establish who the landowner was and collected evidence about the crimes. I am glad that that led to an arrest last year. However, nothing was done to anticipate the risks to the site, either from waste entering the River Cherwell or fire hazard. It was only after my question to the Minister on 13 November that work began to put in barriers to prevent the waste entering the Cherwell.

    I want to be clear: the EA has worked swiftly since November to prevent further environmental damage, and working with other local partners it identified the risks of the site, which led to the decision to remove all the waste from it. My concern is that, perhaps for financial reasons, in this case the EA prioritised investigation ahead of early protective action on the site. Does the Minister think that the EA should reassess the balance between investigation and environmental protection when it identifies sites? Is the Minister satisfied that the EA has the resources and expertise to tackle serious organised criminals who are committing waste crimes, or should the National Crime Agency take over major investigations?

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

    I did not realise that the A34 goes through the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, as it does mine—we will have to do a road trip some time. I congratulate him on his excellent speech. The Minister will not be surprised to see me here, because in Newcastle-under-Lyme we lived with the very worst example of waste crime and profit over people that was Walleys Quarry. We have just marked a year since the landfill site was closed and the cowboy operators driven out of town. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need a stand-alone strategy for waste crime and that we need it quickly?

    Calum Miller

    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. Perhaps we can look forward to joining up on the A34 at some point. I agree that we need an approach that is truly national and truly strategic. What I have witnessed in my constituency is a piecemeal approach, with best efforts by an under-resourced agency unable to join the dots and, despite the hard work of many people within that agency, a failure to conduct, on the one hand, the investigation and, on the other hand, the preventive measures. It is clear that the estimates of the scale of the criminal activity justify a robust and fulsome national strategy. I agree with him and hope that the Minister will respond to his question.

    Strange as it may seem, my constituents and I have been lucky, in so much as this site met the narrow criteria for exceptional intervention. Many communities up and down the country, such as the one just cited, also face the blight of criminal waste dumping yet do not have exceptional circumstances that allow the EA, under the current resourcing and rules, to clear their sites. The site chosen by criminals to dump waste in my constituency suited them as it had easy, undetected access to the A34, but its very proximity to the A34 became the reason that exceptional action has now been approved to remove the waste.

    What has struck me most about this toxic crime is how strongly people feel it is wrong. It is wrong to be so arrogant as to despoil our beautiful countryside; wrong that too many people get away with it and that the penalties are not higher; and wrong that it takes too long to clear up these sites. When Billy told me about the site, I vowed that I would work to see the waste contained and then cleared. I am glad that that is happening now, and I hope the Minister will confirm that it will be delivered with urgency.

    When I learned how widespread the issue was, I vowed to work with all those like the Minister who care deeply about it to ensure that we make real progress in stopping this crime from blighting so many communities. I look forward to continuing that work with colleagues across the House.

  • Jodie Gosling – 2026 Speech on the Property Registration and Valuation Bill

    Jodie Gosling – 2026 Speech on the Property Registration and Valuation Bill

    The speech made by Josie Gosling, the Labour MP for Nuneaton, in the House of Commons on 6 January 2026.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about requirements relating to the registration and valuation of domestic and non-domestic property; to make provision about exemptions from such requirements; and for connected purposes.

    Happy new year to you and all your team, Mr Speaker. For thriving communities, we need warm homes, and safe places where people can live, thrive and survive, bring up their children and start their businesses.

    We want to see our high streets thriving, with every shop filled, and restored to the proud places they once were as the beating hearts of our communities. My residents in Nuneaton have grown all too used to high streets and residential areas littered with empty properties. Shuttered-up shops and empty storefronts on our local high street deter shoppers and much-needed investment. Vacant homes in disrepair are wasteful and leave hundreds of residents on waiting lists for housing and young families struggling to get on to the property ladder.

    The figures for my local area show that Nuneaton and Bedworth borough council has over 1,800 empty properties—that is equivalent to one in every 24. Local leaders in Nuneaton, including council leader Councillor Chris Watkins and Councillor Steve Hey, have fought to address the issue, recognising the deep impact it has on our communities—it is literally a waste of space, instead of providing hope and security. I know that they are supportive of the second-home surcharge, as well as additional charges on long-term empty properties. Those are important levers for local authorities that have been strengthened by this Labour Government. However, those measures alone do not account for the full picture or scale of the problem that local authorities such as Nuneaton and Bedworth face.

    When a property is derelict, it is often removed from the valuation list. That is because it is no longer considered habitable or usable; it is no longer an asset. That measure was originally intended to enable renovations to take place on properties without additional costs being incurred. We support some of that and do not wish to remove the legislation as a whole; we merely wish to time-limit the exclusion, because a deregistered property does not appear on the valuation list unless it is brought back into use. That has led to the situation where properties can lie unoccupied for years. Potential is wasted and properties become an eyesore, attracting antisocial behaviour and restricting local authorities’ capacity to transform our neighbourhoods and high streets.

    Nuneaton has seen properties left dormant for decades. The former Kingsholme pub has stood empty since 2008 and two houses on Stoney Road were removed from the valuation list in 2000. Those homes have stood empty for a quarter of a century, while we face a national housing crisis and children sleep in temporary accommodation. Nuneaton is growing and the houses we need are being built, but we also have to use the houses and properties that we already have effectively. Nationally, an estimated 260,000 residences are long-term empty. That is a quarter of a million, many of which have been zero-rated and do not pay back to their local councils.

    I know that many honourable colleagues have the pleasure of getting the train through my constituency each week as they travel down the west coast main line to Westminster. Those who venture further into Nuneaton will see at first hand the impacts that the regulations are having. Nuneaton’s transformed town centre, Grayson Place, is due to open later this year, which is a real opportunity to redefine our town. Yet at the town end of Coton Road, as people enter the brilliant redeveloped site, there is a row of empty properties with buddleia sprouting out of the roofs. Three of those properties are nil-rated—they hold no value—preventing the council from charging an empty property levy and from holding the owners to account for the neglect of buildings that blight my community.

    At the other end of Coton Road, next to the Coton arches, honourable colleagues will find the Cube, which was formerly a church and has been left to fall into disrepair. Despite the property no longer being owned by a church, it still receives its place of worship exemption, again meaning that it pays nothing. There is no incentive to bring it back from the brink or to make such properties the assets that my town needs them to be, and no responsibility for the impact on the area. Further, once a property has left the register, it becomes increasingly difficult to trace those responsible for it.

    Nuneaton and Bedworth borough council welcomes the increased powers, but those powers can only do so much. Like many councils, after a decade of harsh austerity, it lacks the financial capacity to compulsorily purchase or restore the sheer number of properties. Nuneaton and Bedworth council leaders view the reorganisation of the Valuation Office Agency as a welcome step forward, but it is clear that the registration and exemption regimes need to be updated to ensure that councils have the power to hold the owners of empty properties accountable for the state of their buildings and turn those eyesores back into assets. That is why my Bill proposes that all properties should remain on the register unless they are demolished, that all properties are given a value, and that all exemptions become time-limited, ensuring that all exempt properties are being used for their exempt purpose.

    As has been noted by my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst), this is an issue that impacts almost all our constituencies. Updating our registration and exemption rules will provide us with the tools to embrace regeneration and remove the barriers that hold us back. I hope that my hon. Friends and colleagues will support this Bill and the measures within it today. We all want to see the effective use of our assets and to ensure that all our buildings are put to use to house our residents who need homes and that our local high streets are open for business.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Ordered,

    That Jodie Gosling, Rachel Taylor and Cat Eccles present the Bill.

    Jodie Gosling accordingly presented the Bill.

    Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 16 January, and to be printed (Bill 354).

  • Paul Davies – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Paul Davies – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Paul Davies, the Labour MP for Colne Valley, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    Forty-seven per cent of cancers diagnosed in the UK are rare and less common cancers, and 55% of deaths are from rare and less common cancers. That means that, every year, around 180,000 people will be diagnosed with a rare and less common cancer, and more than 92,000 people will die from such cancers. Blood cancer is one such cancer, and I recently met the Blood Cancer Alliance to discuss improving access to lifesaving blood cancer treatments across the UK. Over 280,000 people in the UK are living with blood cancer, and every year 40,000 more receive a diagnosis, including 5,000 children. It is the fifth most common cancer, the most prevalent childhood cancer and the third biggest cancer killer in our country. However, despite amazing advances in tech and treatment, our outcomes are falling behind in the nations.

    The reason is clear: systemic barriers within the NHS and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence appraisal processes are preventing patients from accessing innovative therapies. Between 2019 and 2025, over a third of NICE appraisals for new blood cancer treatments were terminated—more than double the rate for other cancers. Those are not ineffective drugs; many are available overseas, and even privately in the UK. That creates a two-tier system in which those who can pay receive better care than those who cannot. It is unacceptable. I have been told that treatments such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy can transform lives, extending survival and improving quality of life.

    The current system, with rigid cost-effectiveness thresholds and inflexible commercial frameworks, is failing patients. That is why I warmly welcome the UK Government’s cancer plan, which represents a vital opportunity to reset our approach to cancer care and to ensure that innovation is embraced, not obstructed. By prioritising timely access to effective treatments and addressing systemic barriers, the cancer plan can help deliver world-class outcomes for patients.

    I stand with the Blood Cancer Alliance and Cancer52 in calling for urgent, joined-up action from Government, NICE, the NHS and industry. Together we can ensure that every person with blood cancer has timely access to the best possible care, because survival should never depend on postcode or income.

  • Vikki Slade – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Vikki Slade – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Vikki Slade, the Liberal Democrat MP for Mid Dorset and North Poole, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    I thank the hon. Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) for that really moving account. We know that cancer affects us all. In my family it claimed my mum Lin; my sister-in-law Lisa and my stepmum Sally have both beaten it, and now my dad Ray is living with terminal cancer. One of my team is also undergoing treatment for cancer, so we know that it is prevalent among all our lives. All of them were fit, healthy people who did everything right, as are so many others each year who get the horrible news or—worse—turn up in A&E after becoming suddenly unwell. According to a Cancer Research study, many of those patients had visited their GP but had not been referred for tests, either because they did not meet the thresholds or because they had been missed altogether. This is not a criticism of our GPs, who are working in highly difficult situations. Indeed, when I shadowed Dr Wright from Walford Mill surgery in Wimborne, he had the sober task of sharing a diagnosis and undertaking a very personal test during his appointment, which he let me witness.

    If diagnosis doubled across the six least survivable cancers alone, an additional 7,500 lives a year would be saved. Each year in my constituency of Mid Dorset and North Poole, there are 540 diagnoses of cancer and 300 cancer deaths. Although 85% of them should be starting treatment within 62 days, the number is actually only 60%. What is the Minister doing to bridge that gap? If we met the target in my constituency, 70 additional people would be getting on with their lives. Across the country, 45,000 additional people would be given a greater chance of not just surviving but having a life shared with those they love.

    Furthermore, once they get to hospital, patients are faced with out-of-date machinery and not enough specialist nurses. Macmillan Cancer Support says there is an acute shortage and calls for a cancer nurse fund to increase the numbers by 3,700. Will the future cancer strategy include such funding?

    I want to speak briefly about pancreatic cancer, which claimed the life of my cousin Colin, a super-fit former Welsh Commonwealth games cyclist who died in his 50s despite the best care available. Many other constituents have written to me about poor prognosis for this treatment. They have flagged that the NHS has approved selective internal radiation therapy, but only for colorectal and liver cancers—not those whose primary cancer was in the pancreas and then spread to the liver. These families are keen for urgent trials to be undertaken to allow the treatment to be used, given the incredibly short life expectancy faced by patients. Will the Minister consider that?

    We have been waiting such a long time for this cancer strategy. We need the workforce plan and the road map for the NHS plan. Nine hundred and fifty people will be diagnosed with cancer today, and those people need hope.

  • Patrick Hurley – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    Patrick Hurley – 2026 Speech on Less Survivable Cancers

    The speech made by Patrick Hurley, the Labour MP for Southport, in Westminster Hall on 6 January 2026.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. Less Survivable Cancers Awareness Week is an important marker in the calendar, but I want to talk about another important marker when it comes to these cancers—one that is important for me and my family anyway—because this year marks 20 years since I was made unavoidably aware of the devastation of oesophageal cancer. In May of that year, my father developed the classic symptoms: difficulty swallowing, feeling like food was getting stuck, heartburn and weight loss. He was diagnosed in August and died on 23 December: from becoming symptomatic to losing his life was just seven months. The rapidity of the decline was overwhelming. Barely had he been diagnosed than he was given a terminal diagnosis. I must admit, though, that I was not giving my father my full attention during that time. In almost any other circumstances I would have been a much more dutiful son, but my own focus was elsewhere that year. On 1 August 2006, my wife Susan also became symptomatic with oesophageal cancer. She was diagnosed on 11 September and died on 14 November.

    The speed with which I read that sentence reflects the speed with which Sue died. There was barely any chance to understand what was happening, to seek help or for the family to manage. That is not unusual with these sorts of diseases. It is the sort of story that thousands of us know. Crucially, for my Southport constituency, it is also a story that disproportionately impacts people from the north-west and from north Wales. For my family, there was not any long fight or slow decline—only shock, confusion, urgent decisions and death. That is what a less survivable cancer looks like.

    May I make a clear ask of the Minister today? I am asking for a personal commitment, and a commitment across Government, to drive up survival rates for all these less survivable cancers, but most urgently—for my personal history and for the geographical distribution that shows that my part of the country has higher levels than elsewhere in the UK—for oesophageal cancer. That could mean things such as early diagnosis, recognising that one size fits all does not work. It could mean fast-track treatment pathways once suspicion is raised. Above all else, it should include serious investment in experimental and pre-symptomatic techniques, finding ways to detect cancers before symptoms even appear. These are difficult cancers to deal with, and that is why they need targeted action. I am here today because two people I loved did not get the help they needed, so I urge the Government to help other families avoid that same fate.

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Comments on West Midlands Police and Football Policing Decision

    Kemi Badenoch – 2026 Comments on West Midlands Police and Football Policing Decision

    The comments made by Kemi Badenoch, the Leader of the Opposition, on 6 January 2026.

    West Midlands Police capitulated to Islamists and then collaborated with them to cover it up.

    They knew extremists were planning to attack Jews for going to a football match, and their response was to blame and remove Jewish people instead. They presented an inversion of reality and misled a Parliamentary Committee.

    We have had enough of this in Britain.

    The Chief Constable’s position is untenable.

    The British Police serve the British public, not local sectarian interests.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Remarks after Coalition of the Willing Meeting

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Remarks after Coalition of the Willing Meeting

    The remarks made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 6 January 2026.

    It’s important that we are starting the year like this –  

    European and American allies, side-by-side with President Zelenskyy…  

    Standing for peace. 

    And we are closer to that goal than ever…  

    But the hardest yards are still ahead…  

    So we’re here today to keep driving that effort forward.  

    And we’ve had a very constructive meeting…  

    Which has built on the excellent progress made in negotiations over recent days and weeks.  

    The purpose of the Coalition of the Willing… 

    Is to help deliver a peace that can last –  

    And to work with the US to guarantee Ukraine’s security for the long term. 

    This work is now more advanced than ever.   

    Today’s joint declaration set that out in clear terms –  

    On top of that, and alongside President Zelenskyy and President Macron,  

    We went even further today.

    We signed a Declaration of Intent… 

    On the deployment of forces to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal. 

    This is a vital part of our iron-cast commitment to stand with Ukraine for the long term.  

    It paves the way for the legal framework… 

    Under which British, French and partner forces could operate on Ukrainian soil –  

    Securing Ukraine’s skies and seas –  

    And regenerating Ukraine’s armed forces for the future. 

    We discussed these issues in detail today. 

    And so I can say that, following a ceasefire,  

    The UK and France will establish “military hubs” across Ukraine… 

    And build protected facilities for weapons and military equipment… 

    To support Ukraine’s defensive needs. 

    And with our Coalition partners,  

    We also have agreed significant further steps.  

    First, that we will participate in US-led monitoring and verification of any ceasefire. 

    Second, we will support the long-term provision of armaments for Ukraine’s defence. 

    And third, we will work towards binding commitments… 

    To support Ukraine in the case of a future armed attack by Russia. 

    This is all about building the practical foundations on which peace would rest. 

    But we can only get to a peace deal if Putin is ready to make compromises. 

    And so, we have to be frank –  

    For all Russia’s words…  

    Putin is not showing that he is ready for peace. 

    Over the last few weeks, we have seen the opposite: 

    Further horrific strikes on Ukraine… 

    Killing and wounding civilians… 

    And cutting off power from millions of people in the dead of winter. 

    His forces hit a hospital in Kyiv just yesterday.  

    And he has tried to distract from peace efforts with unfounded claims of attacks on his residence. 

    Now this only hardens our resolve.  

    We will continue to step up our support to Ukraine’s defence in 2026… 

    To ensure it gets the equipment and backing it needs to continue the fight. 

    And we will keep up the pressure on Russia… 

    Including further measures on the oil traders and Shadow Fleet operators funding Putin’s war chest.  

    We will continue these efforts until they come to the table in good faith… 

    And until we realise the goal that we all share – of a just and lasting peace. 

    Thank you, Emmanuel.