Yesterday marked the ninth anniversary of the Grenfell Tower fire—a day for remembrance and for sombre reflection. The 72 residents who so tragically lost their lives will never be forgotten. My thoughts are with the survivors, bereaved families and all those affected, and I know that they have the deepest sympathies of the whole House. We accepted the inquiry’s findings last year, and we will take forward action on all 58 recommendations. We are determined that nothing like this will ever happen again.
I thank the Minister for his comments about Grenfell. I welcome the legislation that the Government have introduced to lower the voting age to 16, and to make it easier for people to register to vote, but has he considered the benefits for increased participation in elections of adding a “none of the above” option on all ballot papers? This change could be made without primary legislation.
The Government are very interested indeed in increasing participation in elections, and I know from personal experience that the biggest way to do that is to increase campaigning, because that increases turnout. Beyond that, the Government have already piloted flexible voting pilots at the May 2026 elections; we tested early voting, and the use of non-traditional places to vote. Also, the Democratic Engagement Fund is providing £2.5 million to support local projects that encourage more people to vote. Of course, we want to look at all proposals for getting people voting, because that is central to the efficiency and effectiveness of our democracy.
May I echo the words of the Secretary of State, nine years on from the terrible fire at Grenfell? It is incredibly important that we learn the lessons from that tragedy and ensure that people are protected in their home.
Labour says that 16 and 17-year-olds are mature enough to vote, but in a written answer to me, it also says that 16 and 17-year-olds are not mature enough to serve on juries, because that is “an adult duty”. It says that 16 and 17-year-olds should vote, but should not play on their phone after the Government-defined bedtime of 8.30 in the evening. These are just two examples from the list of inconsistencies triggered by Labour’s “votes at 16” policy. The only consistent thing about that policy is the blatant party political self-interest, isn’t it? [Laughter.]
I am not sure about the right hon. Gentleman’s last point; I think the laughter across the Chamber probably answers that one for him. Of course, 16 and 17-year-olds were able to vote in some elections in parts of the United Kingdom while he was in government. If he had really felt that 16 and 17-year-olds should not be able to vote anywhere, he would have done something about it. It is only right that we standardise the system, so that people of that age can vote in all elections across the country. I, for one, welcome the increase in the franchise, and the encouragement of more people to participate. It is their country too, and they deserve a say. I hope that young people under the age of 18 see the Conservatives who are trying to deny them the vote, and will remember that at the ballot box in the future.
Travellers built an unauthorised development in Willows Green in my constituency over a bank holiday weekend. I wrote to the Secretary of State about this, and his reply amounted to little more than a hand-wringing word salad. If he is serious about ending the abuse of retrospective planning in Essex and elsewhere, why will he not take up the proposals that we have put forward and end the “build first and apply later” culture?
That is exactly what the Government are doing. We are looking at how we can tackle those developers who go ahead and build and then seek planning consent retrospectively. It is not acceptable. We have put more money into councils, so that they can fund building control functions, which were severely underfunded by the Government when the right hon. Gentleman was in office. That gives councils more power to take precisely the action that he is calling for. He had 14 years to do this, but he did not—so we are doing it for him.
T4. New towns such as Tempsford should offer an opportunity to ease development pressures, not add to them, so I thank the Minister for listening to my representations, and ensuring that if Tempsford comes forward, it will be included in Central Bedfordshire council’s housing target, rather than being in addition to it. Across Central Beds, lots of developments have come forward without the right infrastructure. As we explore the vehicles required to bring forward new towns such as Tempsford, how can we ensure that we do everything possible to get infrastructure right from the outset?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his constructive engagement on the new towns programme, and on Tempsfordin particular. It helped to inform our approach, including to the decision that new town proposals will contribute to meeting the identified housing need of relevant authorities in all instances. We are assessing options for delivery vehicles across the proposed sites, with a view to ensuring that each is best placed to drive delivery and secure essential infrastructure in a timely manner.
T2. The Government’s proposed high-value council tax surcharge will be collected by councils but retained by the Treasury. If councils neither control the charge nor keep the revenue, why is it being called a council tax? Will the Minister commit to changing this misleading policy title? Given that most of the revenue from the surcharge will be raised in London, will the Government ensure that a fair proportion is reinvested in the capital?
I thank—[Interruption.] I can assure the shadow Secretary of State that I was very busy last week. Most people are bothered about the fairness of the council tax system, and that is why it is right that the Chancellor introduced this policy. Rather than debating what it is called, it is important that we get on with it and introduce fairness into the system.
T7. The Department for Education has recently released new guidance for local authorities on the role of family hubs. It describes a significant departure from conventional delivery models; there will be a high degree of network and partnership delivery, not only with public bodies, but with the voluntary sector and businesses—a change in culture that will improve all areas of local authority delivery. What measures might the Department consider to foster and facilitate networking and best practice across local authorities, and will the Minister meet me to discuss how the all-party parliamentary group on family hubs, which I chair, might help to deliver that culture change?
T5. The old British Home Stores building in the heart of Stratford-upon-Avon lies disused and crumbling—a blight on the beauty of our high street. Does the Minister agree that it must be made easier for communities to tackle eyesore buildings by imposing harsher measures on offending landlords, and by strengthening measures to allow local authorities to bring them back into productive use?
I thank the hon. Member for raising that important issue. The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act 2026 goes some way towards addressing it, but I highlight that the Government are pushing ahead with high-street rental auctions, which are helping to bring long-term empty shops back into use.
T9. The King’s Speech contains proposals for an overnight visitor levy. The decision on whether to introduce it is to be devolved to mayoral strategic authorities and, potentially, foundation strategic authorities. Most coastal and rural areas that struggle with the impact of tourism are not in mayoral areas—[Hon. Members: “Hear, Hear!”]—so can the Minister confirm that FSAs will also receive the power to use the levy, and will she and Treasury officials meet me to discuss this?
The cheer across the House is a second reminder for me of the importance of coastal communities; the first reminder came when I responded to the Adjournment debate in the week before last. The Government are committed to mayoral strategic authorities having the fiscal tools to drive good growth in these areas. We have recently consulted on extending those power to FSAs, and will publish a response shortly.