The infected blood scandal is the worst medical scandal in the history of our NHS, and the infected blood compensation scheme was set up to provide some small measure of justice to victims and their families. We have set aside £11.8 billion for victims, and since the scheme became law on 31 March, the Infected Blood Compensation Authority has the powers it needs to press ahead and make payments to those eligible for compensation. The compensation payments began last December, and 69 people have accepted their offers, totalling more than £71 million.
My constituent, who is 77 years old, is a victim of the infected blood scandal. He is worried that haemophilia patients infected with hepatitis are being sidelined by the compensation scheme. He tells me that he was told those on the special category mechanism with hepatitis C would be upgraded to the same level as those with cirrhosis, but that position has now been reversed. Will the Minister look into my constituent’s concerns about disparities for haemophiliacs infected with hepatitis?
I will certainly write to my hon. Friend on the issue of the special category mechanism. I reassure her that the Government’s objective is for all victims of the infected blood scandal to be able to achieve the compensation that they deserve.
My constituent, Mr Alan Kirkham, has been badly affected by the infected blood scandal. He was infected with hepatitis C from a blood transfusion in 1983. I met Alan recently, and he has been campaigning for justice for years. Will the Minister welcome and pay tribute to the work of campaigners like Alan? Can he provide assurances that we are working at pace to deliver compensation? Will he consider fast-tracking older and more vulnerable people?
I will certainly pay tribute to Alan and to the work of all campaigners over decades. I am restless for progress, and I will support the Infected Blood Compensation Authority to deliver compensation as quickly as possible. On fast-tracking for specific claimants, last week IBCA set out details of how it is prioritising claims from infected people nearing the end of their life.
What direct discussions has the Minister had with people in Scotland who have been impacted by the infected blood scandal about the slow pace of compensation payments?
In the course of the work I have done, I have not only spoken to groups in Scotland, but engaged with the Scottish Government’s Health Minister on this matter. On the pace of the payments, IBCA has taken a test-and-learn approach, which allows it to deal with a sample of the cases and then subsequently to scale up. IBCA is operationally independent, but I stand ready to provide all the support I can to speed up the payments.
My constituent Hazel, from Street, was infected with hepatitis C in the 1970s after receiving blood products following the birth of her child. She suffered years of ill health and related problems, and is still waiting for the infected blood compensation scheme. Her case is truly heart- breaking, so what assurance can the Minister provide to people like Hazel that they will soon be supported?
First, I express my sympathy and, I am sure, that of the whole House to Hazel in respect of what she has been through. The assurance I give is that this Government will act at pace. That is what we did in putting the first set of regulations in place by 24 August last year and by putting the second set of regulations in place by 31 March this year. I continue to stand ready to help and support IBCA, which is operationally independent, in any way that I can to speed up the payments.
This Government believe in the power of good public services to provide security and opportunity, but we are clear that the way in which the state works has to change. That is why we are reforming the planning system to get more houses built, why we have introduced free breakfast clubs to give children the best start to their day, why we have launched the AI action plan to drive the adoption of new tech in public services, and why a combination of investment and reform has helped us to cut NHS waiting lists for months in a row.
Labour was elected to get the NHS back on its feet, and that is exactly what we have been doing. At Sandwell and West Birmingham hospitals NHS trust in my area, the waiting list has fallen by 10% since the election, which means that patients are finally getting the treatment they need. One of the key things we have been doing is to look at things such as ambient AI to automate doctors’ notes and ensure that we have modern technology in the NHS. Will the Minister set out what we are doing to ensure that the NHS adopts all technology and reform to ensure that patients are being seen as quickly as possible?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is huge potential to increase NHS productivity through the adoption of new technology and AI. As I have said, the combination of investment and reform has helped us meet our election pledge to deliver 2 million extra NHS appointments in England in the first year seven months early, but we want to go further. We want to adopt the technology to which my hon. Friend has referred to get maximum productivity and better outcomes for patients.
I thank the Minister for his response. I have been contacted by a constituent who is concerned for his poorly elderly father, who requires cryotherapy. That service used to be offered at his local GP, avoiding a difficult trip to our local hospital, which would have a deleterious impact on his father’s already poor health. Given the Government’s focus on moving more health services into the community and people’s homes as part of our public service reform agenda, does my right hon. Friend agree that cryotherapy services should be considered as part of that welcome shift?
The Health Secretary has talked about three big shifts that are part of the 10-year NHS plan. One of those shifts is from hospital to the community, which will require more services to be available locally. We have agreed a new GP contract, which will see a large boost to general practitioner funding, alongside reforms to improve digital access. If we are going to make this shift, it is important that services are available in the local community.
The Government’s laudable mission-led approach has seen NHS waiting lists fall for five months in a row. Like many public services, our NHS has been plagued by over-specified guidance and unnecessary targets for many years, so will the Minister assure the House that the mission-led approach will mean a focus on core non-negotiables to deliver for the British people?
The missions set out the Government’s long-term targets, and the plan for change sets out the key targets for the next few years. I do believe that targets can play a key role in driving behaviour, and that the focus on getting waiting lists and waiting times down set out in our plan for change can make a real difference over the coming few years.
I thank the Minister for that answer. I know from my time as a councillor outside this place that under the last Government, policy was made in Westminster, with very little thought given to how it could hit frontline services more locally. However, examples such as test and trace during the pandemic show that local services can deliver national priorities effectively, so what can the Minister do to ensure that civil servants down here work better with frontline workers up there to make sure that this Government’s priorities are being delivered?
The hon. Member makes a very good point. It is really important that we change the way in which policy is made—that we listen more to the frontline and work with the test-and-learn approach that was referred to by the Minister for the Cabinet Office in answer to the previous question. That can help drive better outcomes for the public.
It is clear to me that under the last Government, our state failed the public. We had an agenda that was not rooted in the lives of everyday people, meaning that despite the number of civil servants being the highest in a generation, outcomes for my constituents in Wirral West and people across the country were worse. Will the Minister please set out how a smaller, more modern and more focused state can once again deliver world-class public services?
Over recent years, the public have seen the state get bigger and taxes go up, but they have not always felt that they are getting the right outcome from those changes. To deliver our plan for change, we need to reform the state to make it more efficient and more effective. We have started to deliver those reforms through stronger performance management, accelerating AI adoption, a focus on the frontline, and reforming rules around recruitment and secondments. Those plans will help empower our excellent civil services to work better, reduce bureaucracy and focus on what really matters, which is better outcomes for the public.
I commend the ministerial team, both on the innovation fund and—more importantly—the test-and-learn culture that has been referred to, which embraces a willingness to take risks and iterate. Does the Minister agree that in order for this work to be truly successful and transform our public services, we must also reform our governance and approval processes in parallel, so that they do not inadvertently stifle this welcome method of innovation?
The right hon. Member obviously has hugely important experience in this regard. He will know from that experience that the traditional system can be risk-averse, and that it can seek to resolve too much and try to cover every base before launching a policy. The test-and-learn approach is different by intention. It intends to start small and to build from there. What is absolutely certain is that whether it is his party or my party in power, there is a duty on any Government today to pursue reform of the state to improve outcomes for the public, so in that regard I agree with him.
A number of months ago, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster announced the plan for change and the pillars, missions and various other things that come with it. When will he update the House on how that is going and how the Government are meeting those targets?
Well, I have good news for the right hon. Gentleman. [Laughter.] This is parliamentary accountability in action. One of the key targets in the plan for change was to get waiting lists and waiting times down. I am pleased to report to him that they have fallen for five months in a row and that we have met our first step on 2 million extra appointments early, and I look forward to more progress in the future.
With 2,100 jobs set to go at the Cabinet Office by 2028, please can the Minister confirm what impact those cuts will have on his Department? What responsibilities might be transferred out of it?
The Cabinet Office has tripled in size in the past decade or so. I think it is right, after growth like that, that we look at productivity and how to get the best outcomes for the public. We have introduced a mutually agreed exit scheme. Some of the headcount reduction will be by transferring functions to other places, but I believe that the Cabinet Office can absorb a headcount reduction after, as I said, tripling in size over the past decade or so.
Can the Minister outline Government plans to reform the funding of fire authorities? That is especially important in Somerset, where changes to employer national insurance contributions, the ending of the rural support grant, the removal of the services grant and the reduction of the pension grant will cost Devon and Somerset Fire Authority nearly £2 million a year, at a time of rising costs.
I do not want to interrupt the collegiate mood we have had this morning by pointing out that we had to take those decisions after the inheritance we received. I cannot speak for every local authority settlement around the country, but the local authority settlements announced after the Budget were on the whole better than they have been for many years. They will not make up for the past 14 years, but they are better settlements than many local authorities have seen for some time.
I thank the Minister very much for his answers to those questions. The reform of public services is important, and I welcome the ideas he has put forward. I know he has a deep interest in Northern Ireland. Is it possible on his journeys to Northern Ireland—I understand that he goes regularly —for him to discuss the reform of public services with the Northern Ireland Assembly and the relevant Minister to ensure that we can have the same benefits that come from what he is putting forward today, thereby improving services and saving money at the same time?
It is important that we have good dialogue between all the devolved Governments and the UK Government. I believe that we do have that good dialogue in place at the moment. There are always different political parties represented around the table, and people will come at things from a particular angle, but when it comes to this kind of agenda, the questions are: how do we get the best value for money for people, how do we get waiting lists down, and how do we make sure that the taxes that people pay get the best possible public sector productivity? There is a common agenda there, and I see no reason why we cannot keep working productively together on that.
The Government are introducing a range of measures to strengthen our emergency preparedness. We hold regular cross-Government planning exercises for a range of scenarios. Later this year, we will undertake a pandemic response exercise, and we will also undertake a national test of our emergency alert system. Next week, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster will open the new UK Resilience Academy, which will train over 4,000 people a year.
I thank the Minister for her response, and I particularly welcome the proposed test of the emergency alert system. The demise of landlines and the switch off of the public switched telephone network means that residents—particularly those in areas that suffer prolonged power outages, such as parts of my Carlisle constituency—now rely on their mobile phones more than ever in emergency events. Does the Minister share my desire to see Ofcom expedite its work on the radio access network resilience project so that we can move towards a position where the networks put in place emergency generators to switch the masts back on in the event of a prolonged power outage?
This is an issue that I recognise, and I reassure my hon. Friend that my colleagues in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology are working very closely with telecoms companies and Ofcom to ensure that consumers are protected throughout the public switched telephone network migration. As she mentioned, that will include provisions to protect access to emergency services during power outages.
Local resilience forums such as Northumbria LRF and Durham and Darlington LRF, which cover my constituency, play a very important role in identifying potential risks and supporting our local communities. Can the Minister tell the House how the Government are working with these local forums, and how they will ensure that their insights feed into the Government’s planning and preparation for risks such as pandemics?
I thank my hon. Friend for her important question. The Government recognise the importance of local resilience forums and the role they play in boosting resilience in places and communities. I hope she feels reassured that I have met all local resilience forums across England to discuss their concerns, and I have also met businesses to talk about the importance of local resilience. We will continue to work closely with local resilience forums, including Northumbria LRF in her local area, to plan and prepare for a broad range of risks, including pandemics.
While I was a police and crime commissioner, I saw many of the things that have been referred to by hon. Members as critically important for emergency resilience planning across the public sector and working with the private sector. To ensure that that is all targeted in the right way, it is key to make sure that all the different agencies, public bodies and companies have a shared understanding of the risks that we face as a country, and receive the latest updates on those. Can the Minister tell the House when the Government will next update the national risk register, and explain what plans Ministers have for the frequency with which those updates will be published?
I thank the hon. Member for his work in this space, because I know he has done a lot of work on this issue. We are constantly looking at the risk register and updating it, and a lot of work has been done. Alongside that, we are carrying out a resilience review. As he rightly pointed out, we need to work across a wide range of sectors to make sure that wider society plays a greater role in this matter, and the work that I have been doing has involved meeting businesses, voluntary organisations and vulnerable groups to make sure that the issues are reflected. We will make sure that we share the lessons learned with the House in due course, and I have also engaged with parliamentarians on this issue.
In the last few weeks, Dorset has been ravaged by wildfires, especially Upton heath and Canford heath in my local area, where more than 130 acres are gone. I was blown away by the work of the fire crews from Dorset, Wiltshire, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Will the Minister thank the fire services for their combined work, but also acknowledge that there needs to be a review of funding for emergency services to ensure that they are consistently able to protect us in the face of climate change? I ask her for that assurance.
I thank the hon. Member for raising such an important matter. I want to put on record my thanks to the emergency services, which have been doing a lot of work on the ground, particularly through local resilience forums and her work as a local MP. As part of the resilience review, we are looking at the issues she has raised. We are also working collaboratively across Departments to make sure that the climate change matters she has raised are looked at, because they should be looked at not only by the Cabinet Office alone, but across all Departments.
I would like to turn to the sorry state of Labour-run Birmingham, where rats the size of dachshunds are terrifying local residents. Indeed, in The Daily Telegraph this morning, we read that
“Birmingham city council warns of a surge in rat-borne diseases…that the elderly, disabled people and babies are ‘particularly susceptible’ to”.
The Government have had emergency powers throughout this crisis, not least the Civil Contingencies Act 2004. Will the Minister set out for the House why they have declined to use them?
I thank the hon. Member for his question, and I am sure he would like to join me in praising the Deputy Prime Minister and her team for their hard work on this. A lot of the rubbish has been cleared, and I want to take this opportunity to thank all the staff in Birmingham and across Departments who have played a key role in responding quickly to and dealing tirelessly with this matter.
I am afraid I am not going to congratulate the Deputy Prime Minister, in much the same way that the people of Birmingham are not thanking her either. I very much hope that the Deputy Prime Minister will take the Prime Minister and maybe the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to Birmingham to see that, in fact, much of the rubbish has not been cleared. I also hope that the Labour party will undertake not to take any donations from Unite the union while this crisis is ongoing.
The Government have commissioners in Birmingham at the moment, but we know from answers to parliamentary questions that the commissioners are not involved in the negotiations to end this ongoing problem with the local union. The Government have powers to do so. Why are they not using those powers, and when will they bring an end to these strikes and set the people of Birmingham free?
I thank the hon. Member for the question, but I am slightly disappointed by the approach he has taken. It is important that we work collaboratively together. As he rightly pointed out, Birmingham is the focus here, and let us move the politics out of it. It is important that the dispute is resolved as swiftly as possible, and that is what the Deputy Prime Minister and her team are doing at the moment.
When we came into power, the Government commissioned a comprehensive state of digital government review, which demonstrated just how far we have to go. It set out a picture of fragmentation, silos and a failure to maximise the opportunity of data to personalise and target services. The average UK adult citizen spends a week and a half dealing with government bureaucracy every year. The Government have set out a plan to change this, and we are taking wide-ranging action: from creating the national data library to increasing the number of services that use gov.uk One Login.
I am glad the Minister mentioned the Government’s state of digital government review and its fairly excoriating conclusions. It is clear that the public sector is not using data well enough. It detailed the challenges, barriers and reluctance in getting the best out of the data available to Departments—some cannot even get their own arm’s length bodies to share data with them—and if we use data better, we can deliver government better. Would the Minister meet me to discuss further how the Cabinet Office can lead in acting on the lessons of the review and ensuring that the citizen experience is put at the heart of the changes it makes?
I would be delighted to meet the hon. Member. I am very passionate about this. In local government, I saw how difficult it was for frontline staff who were not able to get data from different services. Most importantly, citizens are having to tell their story to and share data with multiple services, which causes confusion. We are working very closely with the new digital centre of government on this, and we have an action plan to address it. However, I always welcome new ideas, because this could be really transformative for citizens.
Too often, when I am trying to get to the bottom of problems for my constituents in Ribble Valley, I get responses to written questions saying that Ministers just do not have the data available. I applaud the Government for putting data at the heart of their plans, but I worry that we could get too carried away with looking at AI solutions before we get to solutions for actually collecting data in the first place. Could the Minister reassure me on how we are working with local government to make sure we are collecting data from all possible sources in one place to start with, before we get to how we can make that more efficient?
The two issues are completely linked. To use the opportunities of AI, which are enormous, to personalise services and target prevention, we need to have a clear data picture. We need to be able to bring data together across different levels of Government. There is a huge amount of data in Government, but some of it is stuck in legacy systems and not shared properly. This is the absolute bedrock of the opportunity around AI, so it is something we are very committed to, especially working with local government.
I hope to continue the positive cross-party approach to this question. I particularly like the Minister’s commitment to a clear data picture. The Sullivan review into Government data was published in March this year, and Professor Sullivan made 59 recommendations to ensure that across Government accuracy and consistency are maintained. I do not expect the Minister to have a full formal response to that review today. However, can she reassure me that the Government will issue a full formal response to the review and its recommendations to provide that clear data across Government within, say, a year of the report’s publication?
I appreciate this collegiate style of discussion. There is a huge amount to do here. When we came into power, we set out, as I said, a review of the picture that showed just how hard it is for citizens to negotiate. When moving home, one has to announce it to 10 different organisations using different public services, sometimes 40 different services, so we need to change. We have not waited for the review. We have already set out our own plans, but we will of course respond to external reviews that come forward.
Let me thank the thousands of diligent and hard-working civil servants who are dedicated to making people’s lives better. We want to get the best for civil servants and out of civil servants, so we are reforming the structure and the focus so that it is better placed to fulfil that purpose. That includes a number of important steps in recent weeks: robust performance management; better use of digital tools; faster recruitment; cuts to some wasteful spending; and a review of the arms-length body landscape, including the changes announced on NHS England, to return both power and responsibility to elected representatives.
I thank the Minister for his response and I am perfectly happy to accept the diligence of the civil service. Regardless, every two years a third of the civil service change their Department and countless more change to unrelated policy roles within each Department. Under the previous Government, policy expertise was completely hollowed out from the civil service. Will the Minister set out how we intend to resolve that to bring policy expertise back into the civil service and ensure we have Government teams capable of delivering for Britain?
It is probably true to say that a long-held frustration of some Ministers has been turnaround and the pattern of career progression, where people move on after a few years just as they are becoming an absolute expert in their area. Our ambition is not just to have policy expertise, but to change the way that policy is put together in the first place. That is why the test-and-learn approach, which we discussed earlier in this session, is so important. Frankly, the old way of having a group of experts writing a White Paper, throwing it over a wall and hoping it will work first time, just does not work in today’s age. What we really have to avoid is a two-speed world, with massive innovation in the private sphere and a public sphere working in the same old ways. We have to avoid that in the interests of the public.
The right hon. Gentleman talks a good game about scrapping quangos and I support the review he announced to reduce the size of the bureaucratic state. Why then, despite the rhetoric, are the Government at the same time creating dozens of new quangos?
This is another debate, which has gone on for many years and relates to the question of headcount—Governments can magically reduce headcount by creating a quango somewhere, but the headcount may not have changed at all. What is informing the drive this time is the fiction that an arm’s length body can somehow absolve Ministers of responsibility. It does not work like that in the real world. Sometimes there is a good case for having an arm’s length body, but in the end, we know that accountability will be with Ministers, and that is what is informing how we look at these things at the moment.
I have listened with a great deal of interest to what the right hon. Gentleman has had to say on the Government’s plans to make Whitehall more efficient and to make significant reforms to service delivery, and we on these Benches very much welcome the intention behind that statement. However, announcements have been made in the media about the intention to cut 2,100 jobs in the Cabinet Office and reduce the Department’s workforce by a third. Why have we not had a statement in this House about those job cuts specifically, and when will Members of Parliament get an opportunity to scrutinise exactly what that means for their constituents and their expectations about service delivery?
I work very closely with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Treasury on this matter. The truth is, civil service headcount grew by more than 100,000 in the years the Opposition was in power. We believe that some of that can be explained by the repatriation of powers after Brexit, but some of it can be looked at in terms of efficiencies, which is what we are doing. By reducing the Government’s overhead, we can devote the resources to where they are really needed: in frontline public services. After such growth presided over by the Conservatives over the past decade, we believe that can be done.
My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster spoke a few moments ago of a good dialogue. We are committed to working with the devolved Governments across the UK, and there is frequent, proactive engagement between Ministers and their devolved counterparts to achieve that. For example, we have worked with the Scottish Government on the joint investment plan for Grangemouth, with the Welsh Government through the Tata Steel/Port Talbot transition board and alongside the Northern Ireland Executive on the city deals.
The Minister will be aware of last week’s historic UK Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a woman being based on biological sex, which provided important legal clarity. It is critical now that the UK and Scottish Governments work in a co-ordinated manner to ensure that the practical impacts are understood. How does the Minister plan to ensure that this co-ordinated approach delivers for women in Scotland and across the United Kingdom, and does he agree that the ruling must be a lesson for the SNP Government to stop wasting Scottish taxpayers’ money on flawed legislation and court cases?
The ruling upholds the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex and brings welcome clarity and confidence for women and, indeed, service providers. The Equality and Human Rights Commission, as Britain’s equality regulator, has already committed to supporting service providers with updated guidance. On the specific point raised by my hon. Friend, we will meet Scottish counterparts to discuss the implications of this significant judgment.
I thank the Minister for his answer to the earlier question. Events such as Tartan Day provide a vital opportunity for companies such as RSE in Cumbernauld to promote their products to international markets. RSE has repeatedly told me that it wants to be a part of Brand Scotland. Will the Minister outline how he will work with the Scotland Office and the Scottish Government to ensure that Tartan Day is an even bigger success next year to secure investment in the Scottish economy and create Scottish jobs?
Let me first pay tribute to RSE and all its brilliant work on water tech. Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of representing Scotland in the United States along with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland at Tartan Week, where we met a range of businesses and investors to bang the drum for Scotland as a great place to invest and to work. It was, frankly, a powerful opportunity to show that Scotland has two Governments committed to its prosperity and wellbeing. As the UK Government committed to growth, we are more interested in new markets than old arguments, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State actively reached out to the First Minister seeking to co-operate by co-ordinating our presence.
I welcome the steps that the Government are taking to strengthen co-operation with the Scottish Government, to cut waste and inefficiency and to ensure that Ministers take responsibility for public services. This is an important area for potential co-operation and dialogue, because, in Scotland, we currently have more quangos than there are MSPs in Holyrood, which wastes millions of pounds a year. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the SNP Scottish Government should stop hiding behind these quangos, end the culture of waste and take responsibility for plummeting standards in Scottish public services?
I echo the sentiments of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. The powerful point he made about the ultimate ministerial responsibility resting rightly and reasonably with elected representatives applies north of the Tweed as surely as it does south of the Tweed. I only wish that the Scottish Government would use the powers that they have to do the same and actively cut waste and bureaucracy. Scotland deserves better than what we are witnessing just now.
Does the Minister agree that this Labour Government’s plan for change has helped to deliver 1,500 more GPs to help stop the 8 am rush and that the Scottish Government should work with the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to look at how the SNP-run health service in Scotland could learn from such action?
As the UK Government, we have delivered more than 2 million extra NHS appointments seven months early, as the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster set out just a few moments ago. Yet we all know that, despite the brilliance of NHS staff, the NHS in Scotland is still on its knees. Today, from this Dispatch Box, I urge our colleagues in the Scottish Government to work with us and actually learn some lessons from our team in the Department of Health and Social Care who are already driving change across England.
Of course, if the Government were serious about co-operating with the devolved Government, tomorrow’s Second Reading debate on devolving immigration policy to Scotland, which has been secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins), would not be necessary. The Minister will recall that, in the run-up to the general election, Labour’s Deputy Leader in Scotland, Jackie Baillie, said that they would be open to talks on this issue and, of course, it would be unthinkable that she would have said such a thing just to gain short-term electoral advantage. Therefore, having waited a year, can the Minister tell us when he expects those talks to open?
In the spirit of collegiality that has been the hallmark of this question session so far, let me respectfully suggest that there is a fundamental philosophical difference between our two parties. The SNP wants to end the United Kingdom and we believe in devolution, which is, ultimately, a two-Parliament, two-Government solution. There are two Governments who represent the best interests of the United Kingdom and, in that sense, I appreciate that there is a constant demand and a constant set of grievances from the SNP about why devolution is not working. It is about time that we had a Government in Scotland who were committed to making devolution work.
Further to the question from the hon. Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Kenneth Stevenson), given last week’s UK Supreme Court ruling, which I welcome as a return to common sense and biological reality, what steps is the Minister taking to ensure that Government messaging reflects this clarity and that it is implemented consistently both across the devolved regions and here in Westminster?
I can assure the hon. Lady that the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which has a remit across the nations and regions of the United Kingdom, has already committed to supporting service providers with updated guidance. I assure the hon. Lady that we are talking to colleagues in Scotland and that we will also be talking to colleagues in Wales and, indeed, in Northern Ireland.
I welcome the House’s continuing passion for procurement, and my hon. Friend has helped to lead the way in this area at Hammersmith and Fulham council. I have seen how much energy there is in local government to use procurement to deliver jobs and growth. The Government are working on plans to allow local authorities to reserve contracts for local employers. Public procurement can be a key tool in driving growth and supporting businesses across the economy. Our new national procurement policy statement looks to maximise spend with small businesses and asks contracting authorities to work collaboratively on local and regional growth plans.
I thank the Minister for her reply and for the excellent work she has done in putting together the procurement strategy. It has been a passion of mine for many years that we do not use procurement just to get extra social value but extra economic value, which will help local firms and local growth. That is what this statement does, and I hugely welcome it. May I ask the Minister whether she intends to issue guidance to local authorities so that they know how best they can achieve economic value? For example, they could proactively tell small firms what contracts are coming up or train them in how to tender, which is very difficult for them. They could also encourage small firms to break procurement into lots, so that they have a better chance of bidding. Finally, they could stop requiring an unreasonable number of years of accounts to be shown before small firms are permitted to bid.
Growth is the No. 1 mission for this Government. We have learned from local authorities such as Hammersmith and Fulham, which built economic value into procurement. The Procurement Act 2023 makes new tools available, but what is critical is how they are used to deliver innovation and growth. The Government will be consulting on new plans to set targets for small and medium-sized enterprise use for the wider public sector. We have delivered extensive training and developed new communities of practice to help make the most of this huge opportunity. As my hon. Friend has said, much of this is about culture and the use of the tools. We will be working with local authorities around the country to deliver on this enormous opportunity.
My constituency is a food production powerhouse, and I welcome any steps by the Government to encourage local authorities to procure British-produced food. Local authorities are under extreme pressure to procure at very low cost. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that, first, the Groceries Code Adjudicator ensures that farmers are paid fairly for the food they produce and, secondly, the Department for Business and Trade is not about to undermine the food they produce by entering a damaging trade deal with the US that would undermine those standards?
The guidance we put into the national procurement policy statement makes it clear that we want to deliver best value for money, which means not just cost but ensuring that we support growth and local suppliers. That allows local authorities to make decisions on what will create jobs and best opportunities for communities in the procurement of food.
This Government were elected with an overwhelming mandate to deliver change. We inherited a country hit by an unprecedented cost of living crisis, with millions stuck on waiting lists and communities blighted by crime and antisocial behaviour. We are already delivering the change we promised. There will be a pay rise for 3 million workers, thanks to our increase in the national minimum wage. NHS waiting lists are down six months in a row, and there is funding for 13,000 neighbourhood police and community support officers. That was the change we promised, and that is the change we are delivering.
I thank the Minister for her answer. It is a really impressive catalogue of achievement in the early months of the Government. Can the Minister set out more specific detail for my constituents and the House on big infrastructure projects such as the lower Thames crossing? I am delighted that the Government have now given consent to it, and Dartford residents are delighted too. How can these big infrastructure projects not only kick-start economic growth but provide jobs, skills and opportunities for residents in Dartford and across the Thames estuary?
My hon. Friend is a great champion for the people of Dartford. Fixing Britain’s creaking infrastructure is vital for our growth mission and plan for change. We are reforming our planning rules to cut through blockages to delivering infrastructure and to help meet our target of 150 planning decisions by the end of this Parliament. The Government are committed to working with the private sector to deliver the lower Thames crossing. As well as creating jobs, it will reduce congestion and drive economic growth by improving connectivity between Kent and Essex.
As the Minister is undoubtedly aware, part of the plan for change is kick-starting economic growth. Prior to the recess, the Secretary of State for Transport advised me in relation to her statement about electric vehicle charging that the Cabinet Office is responsible for EU reset negotiations. What assessment has the Cabinet Office made of the cost of the UK not being in a customs union with the EU?
The Minister for the Cabinet Office has been negotiating with the EU in the country’s national interest. We have been clear that there will be no return to the customs union or single market, but the reset in our relations with the EU is an important one.
Key to much of that plan is the Government’s target to make the UK the fastest growing economy in the G7. But with the International Monetary Fund joining the Office for Budget Responsibility and the OECD in massively slashing projections for UK growth and the IMF not expecting the UK to be the fastest growing economy in the G7 in any year between now and 2030, how confident is the Minister that the Government will meet that target?
The prediction is that we are set to be the largest growing European economy in the G7. Since coming into government in July, we have prioritised growth: for example, Universal Studios building Europe’s biggest theme park in Bedfordshire, and unblocking planning decisions on projects like the lower Thames crossing. We are getting on with delivering the growth that the country needs after 14 years of decline under the Conservatives.
Since the last oral questions, we have been working to create a more focused Cabinet Office that will drive the work of reform and help to deliver on our plan for change. We have taken decisive action, including by cutting wasteful spending so that resources can be targeted on the frontline. I am pleased to inform the House that I will shortly be opening the UK Resilience Academy, which will be an important resource in training public servants for a range of potential emergencies.
I am sure the Minister will agree that the diversity of those in positions of responsibility across all areas of UK Government and public institutions is key to maintaining confidence among the British public that the Government are working for all of us. Diversity is important across all the various equality strands as well as the various geographical areas of the UK’s nations and regions. Will he detail what work has been done to review the diversity of public appointments in the UK and to maintain and improve that diversity, particularly in view of the changes proposed to public bodies?
Merit will always be the primary consideration in any appointment, but diversity is important, and we are not giving up on it. We want to see a public service that looks like the country and speaks with all the accents that make this country a great place. The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Queen’s Park and Maida Vale (Georgia Gould) recently spoke at the civil service social mobility conference to bring home that message, which will reflect what we do on public appointments.
Will the Paymaster General give us an update on his negotiations with the European Union? He has not updated the House since the beginning of February, and there has been much speculation in the press. Will he take this opportunity to rule out dropping the right to annual quota negotiations on fishing?
We will negotiate in the interests of our fishers and understand and implement our marine protection rights. As I am sure the hon. Gentleman will understand, I will not give a running commentary on the negotiations, but we are clear that we will negotiate in the national interest and in line with the manifesto that the Government, with 411 Members of Parliament, were elected on.
The whole House will have heard the Minister fail to rule that out.
It was good to hear the Prime Minister recently praise the Brexit freedom to regulate as we wish on artificial intelligence; will the Minister assure the House that EU AI rules will not be applied to Northern Ireland?
Again the hon. Gentleman comes with his questions on the reset. We have had an atmosphere of collegiality, and I want to join in by agreeing with the Leader of the Opposition that the previous Conservative Government left the EU without any plan for growth. That is absolutely true. The hon. Gentleman should follow the public debate on this issue. Major retailers including M&S, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons and Lidl all support this Government’s approach in the reset to get a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement. The hon. Gentleman should back that approach; otherwise, people will rightly conclude that he and his party have learned nothing.
I am pleased to hear about the seven new free breakfast clubs in Carlisle, and I am delighted that Brent Knoll school in my constituency also has a new free breakfast club. With our plan for change, we will give children the best start in life, breaking down barriers to opportunity and putting money back in parents’ pockets by saving them up to £450 with the roll-out of free breakfast clubs.
Warm words about a reset in UK-EU relations are no longer enough. The summit that will take place in London on 19 May is an opportunity for real action. Will the Minister take the opportunity that the summit presents to commit to bringing in a UK-EU youth mobility scheme that will boost economic growth and enhance chances for young people in our country and across the EU?
A youth mobility scheme is not part of our plans. We have always said that we will listen to sensible EU proposals, but we will not go back to freedom of movement. Where I do agree with the hon. Lady is on concrete proposals and concrete progress on 19 May. We are looking to secure a new partnership with the EU that will make our country safer, more secure and more prosperous.
AI is a huge opportunity for the UK. The AI opportunities action plan was a statement of our ambition to make the UK a world leader in AI. We launched an expression of interest on AI growth zones and have received more than 200 responses. The first such zone has already been announced at Culham, home to the UK Atomic Energy Authority.
We have recently found out that portraits and paintings of Elizabeth I, Sir Walter Raleigh and William Shakespeare are among 69 pieces of artwork that have been removed from No. 10, No. 11 and across the Government estate. Does this not make a mockery of the Government’s St George’s day celebrations this week? They are more interested in chasing the latest woke trends than celebrating the history and heritage of this great country.
I have already said that we want a public service that reflects all the great accents that make this country such a great place. We celebrate our history, and I warmly wish the hon. Member—a day late, I admit—a very happy St George’s day.
My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate on this issue. It is incredibly important that the Government are held to account for the implementation of inquiry recommendations. It is why the Government have already committed to establishing a publicly accessible record of recommendations made by public inquiries since 2024. We will ensure that becomes standard practice in the future. We are also considering wider reform of the inquiries landscape.
There is no such link, and the right hon. Gentleman knows that the current arrangements will come to an end in 2026. We will negotiate in the interests of our fishers and are looking at our responsibilities to the marine environment.
My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate for her constituents. The Infected Blood Compensation Authority is of course operationally independent, but I stand ready to take all the steps I can to ensure that compensation is made as soon as possible. Payments to the infected started at the end of last year; payments to the affected will start by the end of this year.
It is every British citizen’s right to vote, and voter turnout is one demonstration of public engagement with politics. Will the Minister consider scrapping photo voter ID, so that the 777,000 people who said that was the reason they did not vote at the last general election will be able to exercise their right to vote at the next general election?
As we set out in our manifesto, the Government are committed to encouraging participation in our democracy and believe that it is unacceptable when legitimate voters are prevented or discouraged from voting. Although we have no plans to remove the voter ID rules, at the elections in May the veteran card will be accepted for the first time, and we are conducting a thorough review of the voter ID rules, evaluating how they impacted citizens at the general election.
Too many Government Departments and public bodies have foreign-made tableware purchased with British taxpayers’ money. May I invite the ministerial team to make a commitment to ensure that every Department replaces its foreign-made table set with a British-made one—preferably from Stoke-on-Trent?
We know of the brilliant craftsmanship of the Stoke-on-Trent industry. We are committed to supporting British businesses and ensuring that they have the best chance of winning public contracts. Our new national policy statement asks contracting authorities to maximise spend with small and medium-sized enterprises and to support our industrial strategy.
During the last Parliament, I made a submission, on behalf of the National Association of Retired Police Officers, for a medal to be issued in recognition of the service given by those injured on duty and invalided out of the service. That had the backing of the then Policing Minister, and I understand it also has the backing of the current Policing Minister, but it has now disappeared into a black hole in the Cabinet Office. Will the Minister please dig it out, dust it off and give it a fair wind?
I will find out exactly where we are with this matter and then write to the right hon. Member.
Under the Windsor framework, the Government, through the Cabinet Office, regularly supply data to the European Union about the number and type of checks conducted at the Irish sea border, but they refuse to provide that data to Members of this House. When I was a Member of the Northern Ireland Assembly and the oversight of those checks lay with the local Department, I was able to acquire that, but now that it is under the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Members who ask those questions get a refusal of an answer. Why is that?
I am perfectly happy to look into the matter that the hon. and learned Gentleman raises. On the UK-EU reset, I very much hope that if the Government are able to secure a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement that they will reduce the number of checks on the Irish sea.
The 36th anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster came and went over the recess, when we also saw in the media rumours that the Government are considering watering down their proposed Hillsborough law. Can the Minister explain the Government’s thinking?
I pay tribute to the Hillsborough families and those who have campaigned over so many years. The Government are committed to bringing in a Hillsborough law, but it is also important that we work closely with the families to ensure that we get it right, and that is precisely what we will do.