At the general election last year, Labour promised the biggest boost to renters’ rights and protections in a generation. Earlier this month, our historic Renters’ Rights Act 2025 gained Royal Assent, and it will transform private renting for 11 million renters in England. The reforms will be introduced in three phases. The first phase, including abolishing section 21 no-fault evictions, will come into effect on 1 May 2026. Those 11 million renters will never forget that Reform UK and the Conservatives opposed these changes, which will massively benefit renters’ security by allowing them to remain in the homes that they love.
The hospitality industry in South Shields has really struggled over the last year. There are now deep concerns, which I share, about the imposition of a tourism tax. Can my right hon. Friend explain what assessment he has made of such a tax’s impact on beautiful little coastal tourist towns, like mine?
My hon. Friend tempts me to venture into terrain that is properly within the decision-making jurisdiction of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. She only has to wait 48 hours to find out what the Chancellor has decided. I suggest that she ask the Chancellor on Wednesday, rather than me this afternoon.
The Prime Minister, the Chancellor and even the Secretary of State himself have said that they will not touch council tax bands in this Parliament. Does he not recognise that a new tax, or levy, revaluation or surcharge, would be a de facto breach of that commitment, and will he therefore rule it out?
Again, much as I would like to comment on matters that are properly for the Budget, the right hon. Gentleman will know that there is a very long-standing convention that prevents me from doing so.
All the Secretary of State had to do was repeat his earlier commitments. He chose not to do so. Labour’s unfair funding review shows that the party is consciously starving well-run councils of money, penalising councils that have kept council tax low and subsidising his political friends in high-spending, wasteful, Labour-run councils. How on earth can the Secretary of State justify this blatant party political decision?
The right hon. Gentleman will remember his former colleagues being caught on video boasting about how they were taking money away from poorer areas, and giving it to wealthier parts of the country that needed it less. Through the fair funding review, this Government are ensuring that funding is aligned with need and with deprivation. That is the right thing to do.
T6. This follows on from previous questions about the fair funding review. Luton has seen local services decimated, due to years of Conservative decisions, which stripped consideration of deprivation and need from the funding formula. Under a fairer funding system, Luton is set to gain. What can we expect to see from the formula in places like Luton, which suffered so badly under the Conservative Government?
Under our new approach to funding, in places like Luton, which were starved of the resources that they needed for far too long, and for which we can evidence significant levels of deprivation, councils can expect to see the resources that they need in order to help people properly.
The Planning and Infrastructure Bill takes smaller decisions away from councillors. Last week’s direction, announced in a ministerial statement, will take big decisions involving over 150 homes, such as the decision on Oldway Road in Wellington, out of the hands of local councillors. Do the Government no longer trust local people to shape communities and deliver the housing that we need?
I say gently to the hon. Gentleman that I think he misrepresents the proposal that has been announced. It is not an automatic removal for all planning applications relating to more than 150 homes; it is simply a referral process, which applies in other situations already, that allows the Secretary of State to call in individual applications.
I recently met representatives of BUUK, a multi-utility infrastructure provider that constructs and operates essential utility assets, and can provide all utilities as a one-stop shop. In view of the Department’s progress on new towns, and the need to rapidly scale up house building, what consideration has the Department given to using innovative delivery models, such as BUUK’s site-wide deployment of utility infrastructure, and thus reducing bureaucracy, streamlining delivery, improving accountability and allowing house builders to get on with building?
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. The Government obviously recognise the importance of ensuring that new housing development is supported by appropriate infrastructure. On the individual company that he references, I will ask my officials to reach out to it directly to discuss its delivery model and find out a bit more about its potential advantages.
T3. The Planning Inspectorate recently overturned a decision by North East Lincolnshire council for a development of 200 houses in New Waltham in my constituency. The objections centred on highway capacity. In his report, the inspector acknowledged that the nearby roundabout was over capacity, but said that an increase from 100% to 107% capacity would make very little difference. Clearly, local residents disagree. Would the Minister acknowledge that public confidence in the process—