Commons Chamber

Tuesday 29th April 2025

(began 9 hours, 3 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
11:34
11:34
None Portrait Oral questions: Energy Security and Net Zero
-

Speaker Mai Kadra, auto. The clerk
11:35
None Portrait Q1. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his Department’s policies of recent trends in levels of standing charges for electricity bills. (903840)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

will route the bill read for selection. Second reading.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Second reading. The question is that the bill now be read a second time.
11:35
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:42
None Portrait Q3. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the UK's priorities for the UN Climate Change Conference 2025. (903842)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

That is why we are working across government with the Department for
11:42
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:55
11:55
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
12:00
12:00
Ed Miliband Portrait Rt Hon Ed Miliband MP, The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Doncaster North, Labour)
-
-
Social housing constituent is disabled and has faced multiple barriers preventing him from a self funding improvement from the same ability in energy efficiency and is home to help reduce his energy poverty and improve his health. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure social housing tenants receive energy upgrades in their homes particularly those living in older housing stock where upgrades might be more complex to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It sounds like the honourable Lydia is raising a specific case and Lydia is raising a specific case and she can draw that to our attention on the more general point, I believe our local authority has received £6 our local authority has received £6 million as part of the Forms Local Grant saw it is worth talking to Grant saw it is worth talking to them about that. Where there are them about that. Where there are issues about the way schemes are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

issues about the way schemes are working, please draw them to our attention and we will work on them. The hospital in my constituency was delighted to receive £450,000 in investment for solar panels and the local trust saved more than £1 million by reducing energy bills in the lifetime of the project. Will the Secretary of State join me in celebrating this excellent start and update the House on the next steps update the House on the next steps to get us towards our vision?
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:38
12:38
12:38
12:39
12:40
None Portrait Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if he will make a statement on the killing of 26 people in Pahalgam, Kashmir and the increasing tensions between India and Pakistan
-

That completes questions. Let the We We now We now come We now come to We now come to the We now come to the urgent We now come to the urgent question.
12:40
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
Will the Minister make a statement of the killing of 26 people in Pahalgam in Kashmir question marks pick among the horrific terrorist attack on April 22 in Pahalgam...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You will have to sit down.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam one April 22 was devastating. Our thoughts are with devastating. Our thoughts are with those affected, their loved ones, and the people of India. This attack left 26 dead, most of whom we understand were tourists who were understand were tourists who were travelling and following the attack India has announced diplomatic measures against Pakistan and Pakistan has reciprocated. The official advice for travel continues to advise against all travel to Kashmir except by air to the city of Jammu and within the territory of Ladakh.

There is a real risk to the wider state and please understand, Mr Speaker, there has been huge interest and Kashmir has been a flashpoint for conflict between India and Pakistan at many times over previous decades. The Prime Minister has spoke to Narendra Modi two expresses condolences on behalf of the British people. The UK condemns all forms of terrorism and the extremism that sustains wherever it occurs. The Prime Minister spoke to the External Affairs Minister of India to pass on his condolences and express the support of the UK government to the Indian people at this difficult time.

The Foreign Secretary is also spoken to the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Pakistan. Heightened tensions between India and Pakistan tensions between India and Pakistan inevitably raise concerns about escalation. Effective channels of engagement to safeguard stability in the region are essential. The UK
12:43
Gurinder Singh Josan Portrait Gurinder Singh Josan MP (Smethwick, Labour)
-
-
supported the UN Security Council statement on April 20 which condemned the attack and recognise acts of terrorism are criminal and acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable. The long-standing position of the UK is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation in resolution to the situation in Kashmir, taking into account the wishes of the people. It is not for wishes of the people. It is not for the UK to prescribe a solution. It will continue to monitor the situation closely.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank you for allowing this question and I thank the Minister question and I thank the Minister for the statement. This was an attack of the upmost barbarity and attack of the upmost barbarity and my thoughts are with the families of the victims. The killing took place the victims. The killing took place in a popular tourist location and among the victims was a man on his among the victims was a man on his honeymoon with his wife. The manner in which the victims were selected was horrific with the killers was horrific with the killers sitting out non-Muslims.

The Minister will be aware that these attacks have claimed many a -- innocent life. Support can the UK provide to ensure the terrorists are found, brought to justice, and that the methods of support for them dismantle. Secondly, there have been measures discussed and Pakistan including those outlined by the Minister. There have been hostilities in this region in the past and there is a real risk of military conflict. What can the UK
12:45
12:46
Priti Patel Portrait Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (Witham, Conservative)
-
-
particular incident but it is obviously concerning. We take a responsible teeth under the Vienna Convention for the security of all embassies and indeed high embassies and indeed high commissions, both the Pakistani and Indian high commission will receive all of the support to ensure that all of the support to ensure that they stay safe. As my honourable Friend has said, and I know many of my constituents feel, we call on all my constituents feel, we call on all communities involved to call for calm at the time of tension in the region.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shadow foreign secretary. I thank the member for securing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member for securing the question. My honourable friend the member for Harrow East for the support he has given because he tabled a question on this. My condolences thoughts and prayers are condolences thoughts and prayers are also with all those affected by this murderous violence terrorism that murderous violence terrorism that has taken place. I recognise for India and that Diaspora communities in the UK in particular this has in the UK in particular this has been a difficult week.

This was an act of terrorism and we should call it out for what it is. It is part of a long-standing pattern of attacks on civilians, visitors to the region, and also minority communities. The UK must always stand with our friends during times of this nature. We have a series of long-standing security and counterterrorism partnerships with India going back to that new Delhi declaration in 2002. And the India UK strategic partnership in 2016. The competitive strategic partnership announced in 2022, and the UK India 2030 roadmap agreed under the last government.

Under that security issues have been watertight which is why we must always be in lockstep with our friends in India. Can the Minister tell us what information the UK government has on those responsible for carrying out these terrorist attacks? Does the government believe that the terrorist group prescribed in the UK best responsibility? The government where any cross-border links to Pakistan of the perpetrators of this terrorist act? Given that the attack seems to take place at the same time when high- profile US politicians visit India, this is not the first time, the government got a view on whether this is a coincidence or does it demonstrate a pattern of targeted and deliberately targeted attacks? We know the prime minister spoke to Mr Modi last week.

Has the UK provide any specific support in response to this terror attack taken any factual steps to assist our friends in India? Has the government undertaken an assessment of the security indications of this attack on the UK? There are disturbing
12:49
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
reports emerging that this terrorist group may have had engagement with group may have had engagement with Hamas. Has the government made assessment of the relationship between groups causing terror and destabilisation in Kashmir and those destabilisation in Kashmir and those pursuing violence and terrorism that threaten our interests and global peace and security? Can the Minister peace and security? Can the Minister give an update on the actions being taken to prevent tensions from escalating to communities in the UK escalating to communities in the UK including protections of the high commission which has already been commission which has already been mentioned? Will the UK leverage its influence in easing tensions between India and Pakistan?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Mr Speaker. I thank the right honourable lady for her right honourable lady for her questions. India is a good friend to the UK and we have been clear the depth of our friendship and our depth of our friendship and our response to this incident. She would not expect me to comment in detail not expect me to comment in detail on counterterrorism matters in relation to this attack but I assure her we are looking closely. her we are looking closely.

Terrorism wherever it is found in the UK as a threat to global peace and security. I won't comment and security. I won't comment further at this Dispatch Box on links between some of the groups that she mentioned. I assure her that security services take these matters seriously as you would expect. She asks important questions about the high commission. As I said in my earlier answer, we will offer our full support, we have 24/7 enhanced protection outside by commission and it will be a top priority for government to ensure no harm comes to any Indian diplomats here in the UK.

We are playing a role to try and ensure that tensions do not escalate. Many of us in this house are familiar with the tens history between the two countries. We are friends to both and do not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

want to see uncontrolled escalation. Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I pay my respects to those who have lost my respects to those who have lost loved ones in the horrific terrorist attack in India. My thoughts are with them at this devastating time. with them at this devastating time. My constituents have written to me about the escalation of hostilities here in the UK. Can the Minister say what conversations he is having with India and Pakistan counterparts to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

address this? Mr Speaker, this escalation is unsettling for communities within the UK. Both British Pakistanis and British Indians are valued part of our community. We look to all community and faith leaders to spread the message that now is the time for coming together across differences and not to play out the tensions between two states. We will continue to make that argument.
12:51
12:52
12:53
12:55
12:55
12:56
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
government may give expressions of condolences and support for the people of India, the fact remains people of India, the fact remains that the terrorist spaces that exist along the line of control in legal along the line of control in legal part of Kashmir, illegally occupied by Pakistan, still continue to operate across the line of control. operate across the line of control. The government now commit to full support for India, in apprehending the terrorist responsible, and bringing the backers of those terrorists to justice as well? And terrorists to justice as well? And take all steps to support the erosion and elimination of terrorism

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in Kashmir? Mr Speaker, the audible member

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Mr Speaker, the audible member has come to have an argument but I'm not sure which part of the statement not sure which part of the statement he did not like. We should not, to the mitigation is complete, we the mitigation is complete, we should not speculate on the nature of the attack. We will do everything of the attack. We will do everything that we can to ensure that those who

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that we can to ensure that those who committed this horrific attack are brought to justice, and India will have our support. Thank you Mr Speaker. I share the comments made in this house, horrified by this terrorist attack, and my thoughts are with the families and the victims of those in India. We have seen some worrying scenes play out in London, as honourable Member mentioned to stop honourable Member mentioned to stop we cannot let this escalate onto UK shores. All of us very response ability to help de-escalate tensions will stop what steps the UK taking will stop what steps the UK taking to support international bodies, especially the United Nations, and its call for de-escalation intentions? intentions?
12:58
12:59
12:59
12:59
12:59
13:00
13:01
13:02
13:03
13:03
13:03
13:04
13:05
13:05
13:07
13:07
13:08
13:09
13:09
13:10
13:10
13:11
13:11
13:12
13:13
13:14
13:15
13:15
13:16
13:16
13:17
13:18
13:19
13:19
13:19
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:24
13:24
13:25
13:25
13:26
13:26
13:27
13:27
13:28
13:28
13:28
13:29
13:30
13:30
13:30
13:31
13:31
13:32
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

questions, Mark Francois. Let the Thank you for granting this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for granting this urgent questions. To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will make a Department if she will make a statement on the alleged incitement to murder members of Parliament by to murder members of Parliament by the Irish Republican group.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Irish Republican group. Thank you. Can I thank the right honourable gentleman for his urgent questions. Let us never forget that questions. Let us never forget that we lost two members of this house, Jo Cox and Sir David Amess, in tragic circumstances. Both of them were passionate advocates for their constituents, who cared deeply about a range of issues and embodied the finest democratic qualities, traditions and values of this House. I know the thoughts of the whole House will be with their families today, and everyday.

I want to reiterate the Home Secretary's words and fully condemn the comments that have been made. Remarks like these are dangerous and irresponsible, and this government utterly rejects the views expressed by this group. Let me be crystal-clear. Political intimidation and abuse have no place in our society. I know the House will want immediate answers on this issue, but as the policing Minister said yesterday in relation to the urgent questions on that case, the desire for immediate answers is often constrained by the obligation we have as Ministers and as members of this House not to do or say anything that will interfere with what is a live police investigation.

The investigation and prosecution of criminal offences are a matter for the police and the Crown Prosecution Service to determine. And they are operationally independent of government. It is important that the police are allowed to carry out their ongoing investigations free from political interference. However, for the benefit of the House let me recap what the Metropolitan Police have themselves said about these reports. We have been made aware of the video and it has been referred to the counterterrorism internet referral unit for assessment, and to determine whether any further police investigation may be required.

Whilst I will not comment further on this specific case, the safety and security of members of this House and all those who serve in elected office is an issue to which I attach the utmost seriousness, as does the Home Secretary, and as does Mr Speaker. Elected representatives at all levels, and across all parties, must be able to perform their duties safely and without fear. And through the defending democracy task force we are driving a whole of government effort to ensure that that is the case.

The task force has recently agreed a program of work to tackle the harassment and intimidation of elected members. The task force is also supporting the speakers conference, which is addressing these issues. Those of us who attend this place are all too aware of the devastating consequences of violence against our colleagues and friends. We may not always agree, but if there is one universal truth we
13:36
Mark Francois Portrait Rt Hon Mark Francois MP (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
-
-
would all subscribe to it is surely that our politics is better when it is conducted respectfully and is conducted respectfully and safely. And I hope and trust that will have the support of members will have the support of members right across this house. The Home Secretary and I condemn the comments that have been made, and we will work tirelessly to ensure the safety work tirelessly to ensure the safety and security of all those who step

**** Possible New Speaker ****

forward to serve in public office. To MPs, Jo Cox and Sir David Amess, have been murdered within the last decade. In the line of duty meeting their constituents. Frankly, that could have been any of us. So I should like to ask the Home Secretary, albeit in absentia today, for very specific questions. One, how long is this counter terrorism police inquiry likely to take? The video plainly speaks for itself. How could the words "Kill your local MP" possibly have been taken out of context? Second, we now have a cap for the grant in the previous government vetoed rightly by the member for North West Essex.

Kneecap then appealed against this decision as discriminatory. The incoming Labour government concluded fighting the appeal would be not in the public interest. Can I ask the Home Secretary to tell the house which Government Minister approved that absurd decision to effectively surrender to kneecap over this, and why? Third, kneecap are still booked to appear at Glastonbury. The organisers of which incidentally received £1.5 million of taxpayer subsidy over COVID. Does the Home Secretary agree it would be unconscionable for kneecap to appear, at least while the police inquiry is underway.

They should surely be barred today. To be
13:38
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
crystal-clear, does the government agree with that or not? Yes, or no? Finally, kneecap have now offered a Finally, kneecap have now offered a crocodile tears apology to Katie Amis, haven't that family been Amis, haven't that family been through enough already? So as it's within the Home Secretary's gift, would she now seriously reconsider would she now seriously reconsider their request to examine potential their request to examine potential failures by Prevent, which may have contributed to David's death, via the auspices of the Southport inquiry.

Isn't that the least we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

could do? Thank you. I'm genuinely grateful to the right honourable gentleman for him right honourable gentleman for him bringing forward this matter, because I think it provides an because I think it provides an opportunity to discuss these issues. Something I have been keen to do for some time. Let me firstly gently say some time. Let me firstly gently say to him that he mentions the name of the band on a number of occasions, I the band on a number of occasions, I deliberately did not name them and deliberately did not name them and will not name them.

And it's for right honourable members to choose what language they use. But my advice is not to give them any further publicity by naming them. I won't be doing so, I suggest other members don't as well. The right honourable member spoke about the Home Secretary, let me tell him what the Home Secretary said. Because she said this is a total disgrace, it's dangerous and irresponsible to say these sorts of things and I hope everybody involved, not just the band but also those involved surrounding them and those involved in events, also take some responsibility on this and look seriously at the consequences of these kind of remarks.

Not just what's been said. Let me say to the right honourable gentleman, I share the defending democracy task. The Home Secretary has overwhelming responsibility but the judgement is that I would be here as the person who chairs the task force. We both of course take it incredibly seriously. Right honourable gentleman asked about the length of the investigation. I know he will understand that is not a matter for Ministers. That is a matter for the Metropolitan Police. He also asked about the funding of the group.

Let me just say to him again, gently and respectfully, that I don't agree with the characterisation of the case he made with regards to the funding of the group. The truth of the matter is, and I did not raise this proactively, I'm only referencing it in response to his question about it, this is a situation we inherited from the previous government. It's a scheme we inherited, but it's also a situation we inherited. Because after approving the grant they then you turned on it being given, didn't take proper legal advice, ended up in a costly legal battle which the then government then lost.

And obviously this government has a duty to bring that to an end and protect taxpayer money. But we are deeply concerned about all of these things that make up this case, that is precisely why the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport make this point yesterday, that we are rightly taking the opportunity to review the scheme. The right honourable gentleman asked about Glastonbury. It is for the organisers of the festival to decide who appears. If the honourable gentleman would just be patient and listen to the entirety of my response.

It is not for government Ministers to say who will appear at Glastonbury, it's for the organisers of the festival. But, there is, as I've said, an ongoing live police investigation. So the government would urge the organisers of the Glastonbury Festival to think very carefully about who is invited to perform later this year. The right honourable member, for reasons I completely understand, and I appreciate very much, mentioned the Amis family. And our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the Amis family, as they are with the family of Jo Cox.

As the House will be aware, because I've spoken about this previously, we have published the Prevent learning review to ensure there is public scrutiny and transparency over the perpetrators dealing with prevent. We will also publish the finding from Lord Anderson's review. The Home Secretary and I want to make sure that every avenue has been explored. And that is why we will appoint a senior figure to scrutinise all of the previous reviews that have taken place, to see if there are any questions that still need to be answered or issues that still need to be addressed.

And we will act as necessary if any such gaps are identified as a result of that process.
13:43
13:44
13:44
Chris Philp Portrait Rt Hon Chris Philp MP (Croydon South, Conservative)
-
-
I'm very grateful to him for the remarks he has made, not just today but previously as well. I totally agree with the points he has made. He is absolutely right that words do have consequences. And all of us, both inside and outside of this House, should treat others with respect and with dignity. I completely join with him in condemning the words that have been used. And I give him and the House categorical assurance that we will do everything we possibly can to ensure the safety and security all

**** Possible New Speaker ****

those who serve in elected office. Our thoughts today are with our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Our thoughts today are with our dear friends, Sir David Amess and dear friends, Sir David Amess and Joe Fox, they were brutally murdered doing their job on behalf of their constituents on a surgery. And constituents on a surgery. And tragically they weren't the first tragically they weren't the first MPs to be murdered. Those who incite the murder of MPs are attacking the murder of MPs are attacking So Will the Minister join me in condemning unreservedly the despicable evil which Need Represents in the appalling comments they made -- kneecap.

Secondly, I would like to ask about the funding question. It was in November of last year, November 2024 that the Department of business and trade decided to end its support for the legal challenge, a decision which resulted in the band winning and becoming entitled to the money. Why did the government make that decision? In light of what we now know, or they appeal against that decision? And Will the Minister, critically, make a categoric assurance from the despatch box that this band will never, under any circumstances, receive public money again from any source, including the national lottery and including Northern Ireland screen? This organisation has also expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah, prescribed terrorist groups.

The Minister said he didn't want to comment on the police investigation at all. But of course the government did comment quite extensively on the investigations going on after Southport. Sound like him just to make clear, as the government did last summer, that they consider it in the public interest that the police to investigate, and if there is evidence, prosecute these offences or potential offences because if he's not willing to do that now, as the government did last summer, he does risk the perception of two-tier justice.

Finally, I would like to say I very recently met with Sir David's widow Julia and his daughter Katie who bears the
13:48
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
Minister can imagine, an enormous burden of grief. Want to make sure the lessons are learned from Sir the lessons are learned from Sir David's murder. The perpetrator as the Minister knows had been in the Prevent program previously, like the perpetrator in Redding and like the perpetrator in Southport. Julie and perpetrator in Southport. Julie and Katie Amis would like Sir David's Katie Amis would like Sir David's murder and the face of Prevent to be looked at alongside the Southport case which is being investigated and case which is being investigated and the D Redding case as well, so will the Minister on his memory by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

agreeing to that today? I'm grateful to the shadow home secretary for the remarks that he secretary for the remarks that he has made. He is right that when a threat is made to a member of this threat is made to a member of this House or anyone who serves in elected office, it isn't just attack on that particular individual. It is on that particular individual. It is an attack on our democracy. That is precisely why this government, as did the last one has placed so much did the last one has placed so much emphasis and importance on the work of the Defending Democracy Taskforce.

He will know from his time in government that this is the fulcrum point that draws together all of the different bits of government and ensures that our response to the threats that we face is properly organised, that the resources are marshalled correctly and appropriately, and we make sure that we enable all of those who wish to serve in public life are able to do so without the fear of the kind of completely unacceptable attacks we have seen in recent years.

So I agree with him and I hope that that is a matter on which we can all be agreed. And I also agree with the points you made about the remarks themselves. I'm not going to name the band, but I do reiterate what I have said previously that the government unreservedly condemns the remarks that have been made. Now he asked me specifically about funding. I gave in my earlier response I think a pretty detailed reply in terms of the sequencing of the funding.

The funding that was agreed under the previous government, but he did ask me about future funding. So let me be clear with him and with the House, we don't think individuals expressing the views that we have heard should be receiving taxpayer funding. I think that is a noncontroversial thing to say, and as the Secretary of State for DCMS said yesterday, officials are reviewing their music export growth scheme in light of the comments that have emerged. I also add comment he may or may not agree with this, I think you properly well, it does seem strange to me and I'm sure other members of this House that a Republican group, seemingly opposed to the British Government in the first place, would want to receive funding from it.

I find that baffling. I have to say. Now he mentioned prescription and Hamas and Hezbollah. He will know very well that Hamas and Hezbollah are prescribed organisations. Once an organisation is prescribed, it is a criminal offence to belong to, invite support for, recklessly expressed support for, or arrange a meeting in support of a prescribed organisation. It is also illegal to wear clothing or present an image of clothing or any article in a way which arouses reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or a supporter of a prescribed organisation.

So the government is again crystal-clear, support for prescribed organisations is wholly unacceptable. And where an offence has been committed, the government trusts that the police will use the full extent of the offences available to them. His final point was about lady and Katie Amess. I
13:52
13:53
13:54
13:55
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
they have apologised to the families of Sir David Amess and Jo Cox. But clearly these comments should never have been made in the first place. Incitement to violence against member's apartment cuts to the very heart of our democracy. The reality is two MPs have been murdered in the last decade. It is absolutely right that the authorities are looking into other comments relating to encouraging support for prescribed terror organisations. And I want to look at what more the government can do. What criteria does the Home Office apply when assessing whether artists or performers are promoting harmful or extremist rhetoric, particularly where there is a clear attempt to provoke public outrage.

And what assessment has the Minister made of the impact that comments like these may have on community cohesion?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will I'm grateful to her. As I always am for the very sensible and reasonable way in which she has framed her remarks. She is framed her remarks. She is absolutely right, incitement to violence is utterly unacceptable in violence is utterly unacceptable in any context. But in the context of members of this House and other elected politicians, it is elected politicians, it is completely unacceptable. That is why the Prime Minister has recently the Prime Minister has recently refreshed the mandate of the Defending Democracy Taskforce.

That Defending Democracy Taskforce. That is why as the chair of the task force, and working very closely with law enforcement and with all government departments in the Electoral Commission and a range of different organisations, including the police to ensure that right around the country, we have the most coherent and joined up and properly resourced response. Thinking back to the general election last year, all of us I'm sure will have seen things we consider to have been completely unacceptable.

It is the ambition of myself, the government has chair that electoral events in the future and currently am very conscious we are working through one of the moment, bought in a way that yes, enables and encourages reasonable
13:57
13:57
13:57
13:58
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
I take this moment to thank the speakers office for the support they give new MPs to ensure that we all feel safe. And I thank the Minister for his response to this equal commitment to ensure members of this House feel safe and secure in their work. However with the Minister agree with me that when we about the security of MPs we must also consider the safety of MPs staff? I think about the staff who work in my constituency of Harlow who do their jobs solely because they want to help people in my constituency and should never feel intimidated or

**** Possible New Speaker ****

unsafe. I'm grateful to him. I think he makes a really important point, and I would like to join with him in thanking Mr Speaker, Deputy Speakers and all of the Speaker's Office for and all of the Speaker's Office for the work they do with the pulmonary security department in ensuring that all members of this House are safe all members of this House are safe and secure. And the Speaker's conference into these matters is a very important process, but the very important process, but the government is supporting.

I gave evidence to Mr Speaker along with evidence to Mr Speaker along with the elections minister from MHC G a couple of weeks ago from top it's a process we considered to be hugely valuable and we look forward to Mr speakers conclusions and will want to work closely with him in terms of implementing findings. He is absolutely right though to reference MPs staff. All of us will know that often, where the rubber hits the road now constituencies is the extraordinary dedicated work that is being done by our office managers, Parliamentary assistance, our Parliamentary caseworkers who do amazing work on our behalf.

They are absolutely in my thoughts when I think about these matters. The Bridger network about the country is there for them as well as it is for
14:00
14:00
14:01
Luke Akehurst Portrait Luke Akehurst MP (North Durham, Labour)
-
-
Wickford has done for the House today is to give us all the opportunity to make a point that opportunity to make a point that really shouldn't be needed to make. Namely that incitement to violence against members of Parliament is no against members of Parliament is no more acceptable than incitement to violence against any other member of violence against any other member of Would he agree with me that although he is entirely right to be cautious he is entirely right to be cautious about prejudicing a specific investigation into whether the criminal law has been broken in this criminal law has been broken in this instance, what we can and should say today is that artistic licence is not a defence to breach of criminal

**** Possible New Speaker ****

law. I agree with the right honourable gentleman on both counts.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

gentleman on both counts. I think the concern here is not just about the glorification of just about the glorification of violence against MPs and the impact that has on the families of MPs who that has on the families of MPs who have been murdered in terrorist incidents, whether that is Jo Cox or incidents, whether that is Jo Cox or Sir David Amess, but also the same band has expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah which are prescribed groups and that has an impact on the feeling of safety and security in the Jewish community.

The rhetoric they are using represents a return to the ugly rhetoric about communal differences in Northern Ireland, which causes fear and pain to
14:02
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
honourable members from Northern Ireland who lost friends and colleagues from terrorism. My main colleagues from terrorism. My main concern is of the impact on democracy as a whole, calls for democracy as a whole, calls for violence against politicians of any party actually have a chilling effect on the willingness of any effect on the willingness of any normal citizen to think I could run for counsel or MP, because they are for counsel or MP, because they are thinking they will put themselves and families at threat of violence.

With the Minister agree it is vital With the Minister agree it is vital for the future of democracy in this country that people feel they can engage in public life without putting their lives and safety in danger.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the honourable member made two really important points, I completely agree with the remarks he completely agree with the remarks he made at the beginning of his question. And he is absolutely right to raise concerns about the chilling effect this could well be having on our democracy. I'm sure all of us in our democracy. I'm sure all of us in this place will know exceptional people who, for reasons we all understand, have decided not to step understand, have decided not to step forward to serve in public life.

And this House, local councils, Police and Crime Commissioners, are not getting people who would otherwise be in a position to make a significant contribution to public life. And that is a tragedy for our country, that some people might feel they shouldn't be stepping forward because of the risks, the pressures, the harassment and intimidation that goes with service in public life. That is precisely why we take the defending democracy task force very seriously. That is precisely why we are working with colleagues across government.

It's why we are working with colleagues both in local
14:04
Gavin Robinson Portrait Rt Hon Gavin Robinson MP (Belfast East, Democratic Unionist Party)
-
-
government and the devolved assemblies, to make sure people don't feel like politics is somewhere that is too dangerous for somewhere that is too dangerous for them to be. That would be a terrible state for our country if we got to state for our country if we got to that place. And I'm absolutely determined, as the Home Secretary is, to make sure the defending is, to make sure the defending democracy task force is as successful as it possibly can be in successful as it possibly can be in ensuring that nobody feels like they don't want to step forward because

**** Possible New Speaker ****

of the risk of doing so. Can I thank the honourable gentleman for making the reference he did, because whilst it is natural we refer to Jo Cox and Sir David Amess, I think it is important for members of this house to recognise that there are four plaques in this chamber to Iain Gow, Airey Niamh, Robert Bradford and Sir Anthony Berry. All of whom were murdered by the Irish Republican antecedents to kneecap. Whilst we have heard over the last 24 hours crocodile tears, confected apologies, what about Terry, nothing can be said that can mask the naked hatred that exists within the individuals for whom their balaclava has slipped.

Can I say to the Minister, and I've heard him on his defending democracy task force and his aspiration that there is a coherency across this United Kingdom on the glorification of terrorism. Can I say to him that for
14:05
14:06
David Taylor Portrait David Taylor MP (Hemel Hempstead, Labour)
-
-
absolutely right to draw reference to all of the plaques in this chamber. We think about all of those chamber. We think about all of those who have lost their lives serving our country. He may be aware that I our country. He may be aware that I was in Northern Ireland recently, where I met with the judge space Minister to -- justice Minister to Minister to -- justice Minister to discuss this and other matters. I have previously written to all of the leaders of the Northern Ireland parties offering to meet them, I sent that letter in autumn of last sent that letter in autumn of last year.

He is saying he didn't receive the letter, so let me say to him of course I would be happy to meet with him and I'm keen to do that as soon as possible.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yesterday I wrote to Glastonbury Festival urging them to remove this Festival urging them to remove this music group from their lineup. The reason I did this is because they have allegedly called for the murder of Conservative colleagues in this of Conservative colleagues in this house, and because we have seen the footage of them appearing to show support for Hezbollah and Hamas, including the waving of the flag of including the waving of the flag of the proscribed organisation. Words have consequences.

Beloved have consequences. Beloved colleagues, Jo Cox and Sir David Amess, were tragically murdered on 16 June 2016, it remains one of the worst days of my life. And I know many colleagues in this house feel the same. We all have a duty to prevent this ever happening again. I welcome the comments the Minister
14:07
14:08
14:09
14:09
14:10
14:11
14:13
14:14
14:14
14:15
14:16
14:17
14:18
14:18
14:19
14:20
14:20
14:21
14:21
14:23
14:23
14:24
14:24
14:26
Liz Saville Roberts Portrait Rt Hon Liz Saville Roberts MP (Dwyfor Meirionnydd, Plaid Cymru)
-
-
brings together the collective resource of the UK Government and it resource of the UK Government and it is on me to ensure that those resources are properly marshalled in the right place at the right time so the right place at the right time so that we can be ambitious about ensuring that people don't get ensuring that people don't get subject to the kind of completely unacceptable harassment and intimidation. So given that intimidation. So given that assurance that I will do everything I possibly can working with colleagues across government and I colleagues across government and I would be very happy to speak to him and to come back and update this House accordingly.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Apology to the families of Sir David Amess and Jo Cox, the only David Amess and Jo Cox, the only slim chance for redemption. The use of inciting language when it becomes apparent as to be condemned, just as violence against elected representatives is always to be representatives is always to be representatives is always to be condemned. Politics is about being alert to the right use words powerfully and the risks and responsibilities of doing so. Does responsibilities of doing so.

Does the Minister agree therefore that it is both right and necessary to condemn incendiary language and also to ensure freedom of speech right

**** Possible New Speaker ****

across the political spectrum? Grateful to her. Yes, I do agree

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grateful to her. Yes, I do agree with that. And let me say to her that I was in Wales recently where I discussed these matters with the First Minister. And as I mentioned earlier on, it's very much the government's intention that our government's intention that our approach and our response isn't just conducted at the UK Government conducted at the UK Government national level but is wired for
14:27
14:28
14:29
14:30
14:30
14:32
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis MP, The Minister of State, Home Department (Barnsley North, Labour)
-
-
Minister, glorified terrorism on a regular basis. To that extent they regular basis. To that extent they could be called the musical wing of Sinn Fein. Will the Minister give us Sinn Fein. Will the Minister give us an assurance that first of all he will encourage the police to investigate this quickly, secondly he will undertake to ensure that the formula for funding doesn't allow formula for funding doesn't allow groups like this to get funding any more in the future, and thirdly that he will seek to do his best to deny he will seek to do his best to deny them any further platforms because I suspect they are planning an apology will get them a lucrative tour in Canada and America, rather than

**** Possible New Speaker ****

being sorry for what they said. Let me say to him that incitement

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Let me say to him that incitement to violence is completely unconscionable and there's no excuse unconscionable and there's no excuse for it, he is right to raise the case of the former members of this house who lost their lives searching their constituents and our country. their constituents and our country. And I again give a commitment to the determination that the government determination that the government and myself have in terms of seeking and myself have in terms of seeking to ensure all of us in this place and all who serve in public life are able to do so in a safe and secure fashion.

He spoke about the investigation, and as I've said to
14:33
14:33
14:34
14:34
14:34
14:34
14:35
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
With your permission, I will make a statement on the visit of Prime Minister Mustafa. Yesterday at the invitation of the government the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Dr Mustafa visited the UK. He was accompanied by the Minister of State for foreign affairs, and the Minister of health. The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary both held meetings with Prime Minister Mustafa yesterday, I was delighted to meet with him again this morning. This visit reflects the UK's steadfast support for the Palestinian Authority, and the Palestinian people.

At this critical juncture in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. During the visits we reaffirmed our unwavering commitment to advancing a two state solution, as the only pathway to achieving just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Where Israeli sand Palestinians can live side-by-side in peace, dignity and security. We are clear that the Palestinian people have an inalienable right to self-determination including an independent state. This government is committed to strengthening bilateral relationships with the PA, they are the only government in the occupied territories.

It's important that gals and the West Bank are reunified under their authority. The UK is clear, the PA must have a central role in the next phase in Gaza. There can be no role for Hamas in the future of Gaza. We have been clear, Hamas must immediately release the hostages and relinquish control of Gaza. Israelis must be able to live in security next to their Palestinian neighbours, and 7 October must never be repeated. The Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister must offer signed a landmark memorandum of understanding to enhance the bilateral partnership between our two countries.

The memorandum of understanding established a new framework, to guide and advance the strategic partnership and high-level dialogue across areas of mutual interest and benefit. Including economic development and institutional reform. As part of our meetings with Prime Minister must for, we discussed the gravity of the situation in Gaza, the Westpac and East Jerusalem. We condemned the appalling suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and agreed on the urgent need for a return to the ceasefire in Gaza with the release of hostages and the unblocking of aid.

Aid workers need protection, only diplomacy not bloodshed can achieve long-term peace. We also shared our alarm at the heightened tension in the West Bank. We reiterated our clear condemnation of Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law. And they harm the prospect of a future Palestinian state. We call for an end to settlement expansion and violence. We are also clear that Israel must release frozen Palestinian Authority funds. Prime Minister must of outlined the essential reforms of the Palestinian Authority that they are undertaking.

We fully support the implementation of these much- needed reforms, including the provision of technical assistance. These reforms will strengthen the financial sustainability and economic development. They should enhance the transparency and efficiency of governance and service delivery, and promote peaceful coexistence with neighbouring countries. As part of our MOU, the Palestinian Authority underlines its commitment to delivering its agenda in full as a matter of priority. As part of the visit we also announced
14:39
Priti Patel Portrait Rt Hon Priti Patel MP (Witham, Conservative)
-
-
part of the visit we also announced £101 million package for the support Palestinian Authority, strengthening Palestinian Authority, strengthening PA governance and reform. As the Foreign Secretary has made clear, we Foreign Secretary has made clear, we will not give up on the two state solution. With the Palestinian state and Israel living side-by-side in and Israel living side-by-side in peace, dignity and security. The peace, dignity and security. The visit was a significant step in strengthening our relationship with the Palestinian Authority, a key partner for peace in the Middle East.

At this most critical moment. I commend this statement to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

house. I'm grateful to the Minister for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the Minister for advanced sight of his statement. The governance MOU fails to stand up to critical scrutiny as it fails to outlining anyway how much it will help to achieve a meaningful end to the conflict. The MOU says that the the conflict. The MOU says that the PA is the only legitimate governing entity across the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza, and that the UK government wants to see the PA running all three. There clearly cannot be any future for Hamas, we agree with that, how will the Minister and the government bring this about without a clear strategy for the removal of the terrorist Hamas regime in Gaza? I have asked this many times at the Dispatch Box but the government has no answers.

There is also a commitment that the Palestinian Authority will hold presidential -- parliamentary elections "In the shortest feasible timeframe". What is that timetable and who is dictating it? What mechanisms are put in place for elections and has this been supported by our partners and neighbours who are signatories to the Cairo plan to rebuild Gaza? Does he believe the PAN its current form are capable of holding free and fair elections, and if not is it the governments intention to provide election assistance? How would the government rule out Hamas being able to run in those elections as well? There is also nothing explicit in the MOU about a plan to ensure terrorist infrastructure in Gaza is dismantled once and for all, which is inexplicable.

What dialogue has taken place with key Middle Eastern allies since the Cairo plan for Gaza was published? On the question of recognition of a Palestinian state, the government's approach is incoherent. The MOU provides no parity of the long-term intentions, conditions or timing when this could happen. Can the Minister tell the house whether he agrees with us that we are not at the point of recognition now, that recognition cannot be the start of the process, and that recognition anywhere of the efforts to build on the Abraham accords as a way for building stability.

This is despite the accords providing the framework to support and finance for a new future for Palestine, and supports a two state solution. Where efforts to expand the accords discussed with the Palestinian Authority leadership yesterday. On the economic front the MOU talks about boosting trade, what kind of increases are we looking at in value terms? When we have this instability in the region, what sectors are the government now pursuing? Will this involve UK government spending money on promotion measures? Why was there no mention of welfare reform in PA - controlled territory, which we know is in dire need of urgent potential.

Meanwhile there are references to education which are extreme vague and unsatisfactory. Needs to be clear and set proper parameters so there are clear plans for education and upskilling a whole generation that has been poorly served by political leaders were too long. Can the Minister confirm whether he hold discussions with the PA about the urgently for them to do ending in their powers to banish anti-Semitism from Palestinian school textbooks? Can you provide any detail on the opaque commitment to educational, scientific and cultural exchanges, what form will this take place? Can he clarify what exactly the £101 million he has announced yesterday is going towards? Can he tell as which organisations will be trusted with the money, and whether WinRAR will receive any of it? What specific programs will it be funding? There is only a brief mention of the need to tackle corruption in this document, which is inadequate.

What is assessment of the current corruption levels and the PA leadership levels to deal with it? What is his definition of progress? The section on security operation also needs unpacking and more accountability. Exactly how will the security cooperation be enhanced, and which global challenges and threats does the Minister envisage jointly countering with the Palestinian Authority? The MOU also says "The participants commit to the women and minority groups and preventing the targeting of people in these groups", does he believe these rights are being sufficiently held in the West Bank this moment? The freedom of expression and media freedom need serious attention, the PA has its work cut out to prove its credibility.

As a chapter on climate
14:44
14:44
14:44
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
done since the house last met on this issue to support international efforts to secure the release of those poor hostages who remain in such cruel captivity in Gaza. Finally, I would like to turn to Finally, I would like to turn to Iran. If we are serious about sustainable peace we must address the root causes of this terrible the root causes of this terrible suffering. We still have no clarity from the government about how they see working with the US administration, I will give the Minister another opportunity to answer that question.

Will he furnish us with the government's official response on the legal attempt here in the UK to try and challenge the proscription of Hamas?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There were many questions from the leader of the opposition, the the leader of the opposition, the spokesperson for the opposition on foreign affairs. Let me be clear, the British government sees the PA the British government sees the PA as a vital partner that must go through reform. The new Prime Minister has shown leadership on Minister has shown leadership on that reform agenda and has made progress on a range of issues. She raises some important ones, one is raises some important ones, one is to do with the content of textbooks, a question on which we have discussions with the PA and I have discussed with other parties who have strong views, understandably, on the vital importance of ensuring both communities are raised with a belief in coexistence rather than hatred.

There are a range of other very important reform questions that are at issue, one of them the Prime Minister has shown real leadership on is the so-called pay to slay arrangements where progress has been made. We must encourage the Palestinian Authority in those reform efforts. The memorandum of understanding is intended to provide a framework to upgrade that cooperation, because the PA is the vital partner in the Middle East. The right honourable lady rightly asks what we will do to ensure Hamas leave the Gaza Strip and do not play a government role.

One of the most important things we can do is ensure there is a serious and credible alternative to Hamas, that must be She asks two very important questions about the UK government's position in relation to Iran. We welcome the talks between the United States of America and Iran. I was in Oman after the first stages of the talks. The Foreign Secretary has been there recently. We are talking to all parties, and we want to see a diplomatic solution to the nuclear weapons threat that Iran poses, not just to the region but to the world, and we hope that these talks will prove successful.

She asks very reasonably about the allocation of the 101 million. I'm not in a position to give a full breakdown of exactly where the money will go, though I will provide the House without breakdown. I would anticipate that both funding is directed to UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority directly but
14:47
14:47
14:48
Monica Harding Portrait Monica Harding MP (Esher and Walton, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
same. We do wish to recognise a Palestinian state. We wish to do so as a contribution to a two-state solution, and we will make the judgement about when the best moment is to try and make the fullest possible contribution because as I said to the Palestinian Prime Minister, this morning, our responsibility is for the reality of the situation on the ground. The practical viability of the Palestinian state. Of course there are other states that have taken a different position from the UK Government, and chosen to recognise Palestinian state.

That is not called it into existence. Our job in the British Government is to make a practical contribution to a two-

**** Possible New Speaker ****

state solution, and that's how we intend to approach this issue. Liberal Democrat spokesperson

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Monica Harding. Is glad to see the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary meet with the and Foreign Secretary meet with the Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mustapha and reaffirm this country's support very two-state solution. A Palestinian state as part of a wider two-state solution remains their two-state solution remains their only path to long-term peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians. The Liberal Democrats Palestinians. The Liberal Democrats have called for the immediate recognition of the state of Palestine.

I asked the Minister this question most weeks, and I will ask it again, and I hope the position will change one week. Following yesterday's meeting, or the government now take this vital step, and will it commit to working with international partners like France on issuing a joint recognition? Now is the time for a restoration of the ceasefire, the release of the hostages and a return to the political process. This government has pledged 101 million package of support for the OP Tees, including for humanitarian relief.

This is welcome, yet for more than 50 days, Israel has blocked aid from entering Gaza and has shuttered border crossing points. As a result the feedstocks of the UN's World Food Programme, which previously reached half of Gaza's population have entirely run out. The risk of starvation, disease and death is very real. Even as 116,000 tons of food aid languish at border checkpoints. In a joint statement with French and German counterparts, the Foreign Secretary called this intolerable. And rightly so.

But what is the government doing to end the blockade and to ensure aid can flow into Gaza? The International Court of Justice has opened hearings on Israel's responsibility to
14:51
14:52
14:52
14:53
14:54
14:54
14:55
14:56
14:56
14:57
14:58
14:58
14:58
14:59
15:00
15:01
15:01
15:03
15:03
15:03
15:04
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
one voting against it. There was plenty of notice of the UK not recognising the state. What difference would it make if the UK recognise the Palestinian state, he replied to me it would be a change, a new platform, it all starts with recognition. Given the crucial meetings between UK Prime Minister and the Palestinian prime minister, what impediment stands in the way now of recognising Palestine as a nationstate? What practical impediment? I hear repeatedly of the need for a practical solution, could you please explain.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I won't rehearse, a number of the vital questions about security and governance that will clearly need to underpin a two state solution in which both states are able to live which both states are able to live in peace and security and cooperation. I won't rehearse them cooperation. I won't rehearse them now for time, but these final status determinations have long been vexed. Whilst we are committed to the Whilst we are committed to the inalienable rights of the Palestinians to a state as part of a two state solution, let us not two state solution, let us not pretend that there are not vexed issues at the centre of what a Palestinian state would look like.

That's one of the reasons why so much diplomacy has been focused on these issues.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I warmly welcome my honourable friend's statement and thank him for bringing an expense of thank him for bringing an expense of expertise to his role. I wonder if my honourable friend would agree it is only right for a British is only right for a British Government Minister to ask searching Government Minister to ask searching questions both of the PA and of the Israeli government, and in doing so will he reassure me that he will continue to ask students surrounding the accountability of humanitarian the accountability of humanitarian workers that are killed trying to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

perform their duties. I thank my honourable friend for his kind words and his dedication to these issues. Clearly there has been an absolutely tragic loss of life amongst aid workers who are delivering vital services in Gaza. We all remember in this house that a year ago a tragic incident killed 78 workers from the world's central kitchen. That included James Henderson, Jon Chapman and James Kirby, three British nationals who remain in our thoughts. It has been more than a year and we expect
15:07
15:07
15:07
15:08
15:09
15:09
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:12
15:13
15:13
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
the leadership role which the UK government has and stressing again the importance of the recognition of the state of Palestine. Bearing in mind that leadership role, and 140 jurisdictions already recognising that state, canned the Minister explained to the house today the reasons for the impediment of not making that recognition? It's really important that we hear that because we are here to hold the government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to account. 147 states have recognised the Palestinian state, yet no Palestinian state, yet no Palestinian state is fully functioning. That underlines the importance of taking the practical measures which are going to be absolutely vital. Not only to support Palestinian life, but to ensure two states can coexist ensure two states can coexist peacefully side-by-side. Many members have referred to some of the members have referred to some of the practical impediments, whether it's the removal of Hamas from the Gaza Strip, whether it's the economic challenges that face the Palestinian territories both in the West Bank and in Gaza.

And let me be clear, we continue to have a extremely violent conflict taking place. Without a ceasefire it's hard to imagine the creation of a state. I'm sure we will continue to discuss the merits of recognition in this chamber, let us not pretend there are not serious complications before the creation of a Palestinian state is possible. In changing the facts on the ground. That's the approach will take.
15:15
15:16
15:16
15:16
15:16
15:16
15:18
15:18
15:18
15:18
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:21
15:21
15:22
15:22
15:24
15:24
15:25
15:26
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:28
15:29
15:29
15:30
15:30
15:30
15:31
15:31
Hamish Falconer Portrait Mr Hamish Falconer MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Lincoln, Labour)
-
-
is key to a two state solution and should be on the basis of what we all want to see. I welcome the focus on practical steps to build up the authority and those are more important than statements which might be interpreted as performative. Can be menaced to update the House on the work to improve the situation on the ground in the West Bank, including the recent increase in terrorism and the expansion of settlements which represent practical barriers to the two-state solution?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend raises an important point and has a long history of engagement on those issues. The security challenges are issues. The security challenges are important and he is right to raise them but I have set out our position them but I have set out our position on settlements and clearly this has been done from the dispatch box and been done from the dispatch box and I reiterate them. We are talking to the Palestinian Authority about those challenges and demonstrating those challenges and demonstrating the effectiveness to prevent violent disturbances within the areas that they control and it is vital that settlements are restrained and the terrible increase in settlement activity is reduced and it is vital that Israel enables the Palestinian that Israel enables the Palestinian Authority to effectively function, including having electricity and all including having electricity and all the other basic fundamentals that an nationstate would require.

nationstate would require. It was a real honour to join the meeting yesterday and I welcome the hard work of the Minister. I desperately want peace for Palestinians and Israelis. The way forward has to be peace and dignity and justice for all. Does the Minister agree that practical considerations of recognising considerations of recognising Palestine, we must keep our mind on peace and justice and that a state of Palestine is part of that? of Palestine is part of that?
15:33
15:34
15:35
15:35
15:36
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Maternity Units (Requirement for Bereavement Suite)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for the question. The Prime Minister
15:36
15:36
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Maternity Units (Requirement for Bereavement Suite)
-

told me he wants the hostages to be
15:36
Rosie Wrighting Portrait Rosie Wrighting MP (Kettering, Labour)
-
-
released. It is critical. The hostages must be released as soon as hostages must be released as soon as possible and the whole House thinks that. That concludes the statement on the Palestinian Authority prior ministerial visit. And now the Frontbench can move quickly and orderly before the Ten Minute Rule orderly before the Ten Minute Rule Maternity units Requirement for Bereavement Suite.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move that leave be given to bring in the bill to require new maternity units to have a maternity units to have a bereavement Suite for connective business. For anyone experiencing business. For anyone experiencing the loss of a baby, it is one of the most difficult times in their life already and made more difficult when already and made more difficult when experiences in the maternity ward in the hospital surrounded by mothers and families celebrated new life. There is no number of new facilities that can take the pain away but for parents, when a local hospital has a dedicated bereavement Suite away from the main labour ward, that can be processed with privacy and peace.

I am often inspired by my constituents and I am especially proud to introduce this bill that is inspired by the Twinkling Stars Appeal which campaigned for a new bereavement Suite at Kettering General Hospital. I want to thank everyone who's worked on the appeal and also to those who made sure everyone affected gets the care and support that they need. I recognise the work the NHS is doing every day and the staff at Kettering General Hospital help people through one of the most difficult experiences anyone can imagine and they continue to do this despite years of underfunding and understaffing which is testament to the staff.

I thank all the families who have been involved in this campaign and anyone who has donated or helped out at fundraising events or raised money during the pandemic, even doing skydives. The maternity ward at Kettering General Hospital is where I was born eight weeks early as a premature baby. It was a complicated and traumatic breath from my mum which would have been harder surrounded by healthy and happy mums. Many people in Kettering started their lives in the same place and so it was alarming to hear that that was crumbling because of rack and I'm pleased to hear it has been mitigated and a two-storey extension will be built to help the team improve the care that they deliver every year to about 3000 families and their babies.

It will be particularly important in Northamptonshire where we have a growing population with new families moving in to the area and on a recent visit I walked the grounds of the new maternity ward and saw the plans for the new bereavement Suite and thanks to a campaign by the local charity I have seen the place that this will now be built. Before this, families who had lost a baby during pregnancy or birth or through compassionate induction stayed in the labour suite and mothers could be close to babies but not next to them and partners could walk through the maternity ward to reach them.

Surrounded by the sounds of new life and delighted parents making a heartbreaking experience even harder. The hospital cares for up to 100 families every year. They will now be cared for in a sweet with a private bereavement room with ensuite facilities. It will have dedicated family room with a kitchenette, sofa bed, a peaceful private space for families to gather to support each other and the quiet office space for midwives to have sensitive conversations with care.

Some of these facilities were already in place and the appeal ends to create somewhere for follow-up care with specialist bereavement nurses not on the bereavement ward and saw the appearance fight and experience of unique trauma, when they return to the -- when parents have had unique trauma, they will not have to trigger painful memories at the same place. A midwife wrote to me in support of the campaign and said coming to hospital to give birth to a baby who is known to have died or will die is unimaginable.

The grief and devastation can never be fully understood as each circumstance is very different. As a hospital, we can try our best not to add to those feelings and make an awful situation even worse by not providing support in an understanding environment. We want them to feel supported and heard and truly cared for. She explained her team are currently based in the maternity ward but are not easily accessible for families to drop in for support and it is difficult to find for the staff members looking for support themselves.

The bereavement suite would allow more families and allow the parents to return a discharge and spent more precious time with ditties and provide a separate space where families are not coming face to face with other pregnant women and newborn babies while going through a heartbreaking time. These campaigns are based on real-life experiences. The changes being made to maternity units in hospitals in Northamptonshire had been noticed by families after experiencing bereavement themselves and they want to make a positive difference for future parents.

I cannot begin to express the admiration that I have for parents taking back pain and channelling it into its two making things better for those after them. Some of them have contacted me and mentioned the importance of quite clear when going through a time like this and they have told me every parent going through the worst time of their lives should have the opportunity to receive care in private. When I've spoken to the health charity, they have highlighted the importance of the voices of families and how this could have a chilling impact for some families who have been involved.

It's important that parent consultation is at the heart of the bill and the government is building an NHS fit for the future and part of that is listing to service users and taking feedback on board. This is particularly important in species like bereavement suites and the changes that might feel small like the feel of the space and the access to the can make a difference to parents and families. Bereaved parents have met with nurses and walked through the maternity ward and have pointed out where changes can be made to better support parents in the future.

Currently in the UK, 13 families every day lose their baby before, during, or shortly after birth, around 4500 per year and so it is bigger than Kettering or Northamptonshire and when I was researching the bill, I when I was researching the bill, I looked on Just Giving to find it full of appeals from around the country for funding for new facilities, specialist counselling, and trained midwives for bereavement services. A collaboration of charities working to support people affected by the death of a baby have developed the National Bereavement Care Pathway to improve the quality of care received by parents after pregnancy loss or the death of a pregnancy loss or the death of a baby.

As of 2024, every NHS trust in England has signed up to the National Bereavement Care Pathway but there is still work to do and not all hospitals are currently able to provide a properly equipped bereavement room and some are in the middle of the labour ward or are not soundproofed. The Twinkling Stars Suite is a perfect example of friendly welcome contributions of those with experience, we spot things we did not know that we needed but at the moment it is families, communities, charities raising money so parents can face such a difficult time with more Nobody can take away the pain of losing a baby, but we can make sure that in that pain families and met with compassion, dignity and privacy.

And that begins with a bereavement suite in every maternity

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ward. Thank you. The question is that the honourable member have leave to honourable member have leave to bring in the bill, As many as are of bring in the bill, As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye". Of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. The Ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the bill?... Lady Barran, Mike Reid and myself.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Maternity Maternity unit Maternity unit requirement Maternity unit requirement for.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Maternity unit requirement for. Second reading, what date?
15:47
15:47
Andrew Western Portrait Andrew Western MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Stretford and Urmston, Labour)
-
-
Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill, as amended in public board committee, to be considered.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We will begin with government news, to consider the other selected clauses and amendments as a listed. I call the Minister to move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government a new clause 17. I beg to move that the clause be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

read a second time. Apologies, Madame Deputy Speaker,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Apologies, Madame Deputy Speaker, slight anomaly to set us off. Thank slight anomaly to set us off. Thank It is my pleasure to bring this bill back to the House, may I start by thanking law members who have made contributions so far and extend special thanks to members of the For the detailed scrutiny, some of whom are present in the chamber today. This government has an ambitious plan for change. But to deliver everything we want to achieve, we must spend taxpayers money wisely.

That is why we committed in our manifesto to not tolerate fraud, or waste anywhere in our public services. This bill delivers on that commitment. It is part of the biggest crackdown on fraud against the public purse, in a generation. Nothing less will do, giving the appalling position we inherited.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does his own government tell us this will only...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I hope the right honourable gentleman will forgive me, I did not gentleman will forgive me, I did not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hear him. If you want to come again. Does he not recognise that his own government's assessment of the effectiveness of the bill is to effectiveness of the bill is to effectiveness of the bill is to Certainly the right honourable gentleman will be aware that there was a total of £55 billion, a year to fraud across the public sector. This bill will require 1.5 billion, parked on the DWP side of the bill, order measures to save £9.6 billion, across the forecast period.

By the very nature of the changes we are making with the PSFA, we are designing those to be scalable and as they become more familiar with the work they are undertaking, we think that they will be able to save a significant amount more. As I was a significant amount more. As I was saying, with the benefit of fraud alone, costing £7.4 billion alone in 2023/2024, this is a major problem that is getting worse, not better. Afford to ignore it and we certainly do not accept it.

Fraud against the public sector is not a victimless crime. Our public services, everyone who depends on them and the taxpayers that fund them all suffer. And they are increasingly suffering at the hands of fraudsters, who use evermore sophisticated techniques to steal money, meant for the public good. The private sector has evolved and adapted its tools and tactics to respond, but, as the scale of the losses that I just outlined make clear, the same cannot yet be said for the public sector. With this bill, we will put that right, with new powers, so the Public Sector Fraud Authority can investigate and deal with public sector for, outside the tax and social security systems.

And a new powers for the DWP, so it can modernise its response to fraud and error in the benefit system. Is that the Secretary of State said, at the second reading of this bill is tough and it is fair. It is Chalfont the dodgy business people who try to defraud our public services and it is tough on the criminal gangs and individuals who cheat the benefit system. It is fair to claimants who make genuine mistakes, by helping us to spot and prevent errors earlier.

And, it is fair for taxpayers who deserve to know that every single

**** Possible New Speaker ****

pound of their hard earned money is being spent wisely and that they are supporting... I thank you very much a giving

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank you very much a giving way. The Human Rights Act was one of the best acts ever passed by the best acts ever passed by covenant. Can the Minister assure this House that this bill, in no way

**** Possible New Speaker ****

convenes the Human Rights Act. I cannot give my honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I cannot give my honourable friend that assurance, and indeed the legal obligations have been satisfied as part of the obligation of this bill. The absolutely imperative thing for myself, as a Minister in the Department for Work and Pensions is that we are supporting those who need the social security safety net, not the fraudsters who pick holes in it. So,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

turning to the government amendments. Ungrateful, one of the concerns

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ungrateful, one of the concerns we have is the changing nature, in which people conduct benefit fraud. which people conduct benefit fraud. One of the ways is to influence others in giving buzzwords, to others in giving buzzwords, to Out of it what is theirs. Does he Out of it what is theirs. Does he think there is a scope here, in this bill, particularly with some of the new clause is to be able to say actually we should have specific legislation against that, to prevent people from using words, buzzwords,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

teaching people how to cheat the benefit system. I'm grateful to the honourable gentleman for his explanation, he is correct we have a problem with so- called influences. We were hearing called influences. We were hearing the debate more broadly, the the debate more broadly, the government does have existing powers at the fraud act of 2006 and the at the fraud act of 2006 and the service crime act of 2007, to take action in those areas, if necessary. He is right to suggest that we should be doing more and I would encourage members of the party encourage members of the party opposite to reflect on what they did, in this space, during their period in power.

You will be period in power. You will be reassured to know that department work looking at what more we can do to stop the legislative terms, I do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

believe we have seen this before. That was genuinely the dog, not a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That was genuinely the dog, not a member of Parliament. In case Hansard hasn't picked it up. I'm sure he is grateful for that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm sure he is grateful for that clarification. Even if she would be most welcome on the side of the most welcome on the side of the House. I hope I've reassured the honourable gentleman that we do have the legislation required to act.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the legislation required to act. ... Plainly they are not working, we know that these influences are we know that these influences are doing their deeds and people are responding to that, particularly in the mental health sphere for, where many of the claimants are made. We know officials acting on behalf of officials are looking out. There is a buzzword in there somewhere, they can bank the case, move onto the next one. So something needs to be done, to stop this.

Will he look again at the new clause 8 and 21. Which would ensure that these influences are targeted specifically. And what they would do in order to deal with this particular group. The contributing significantly to the failure identified by my right honourable friend the amount of money that were actual able to claim back from the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

huge sum that is laughter fraud. I very much agree with the honourable gentleman. I think where we differ is on the legislation in we differ is on the legislation in that regard. Where I think we are falling down that present is the falling down that present is the scale of the activity we are undertaking, and the moment I think we could be doing significantly we could be doing significantly more. As I said in response to the previous intervention, I've commissioned work to make sure that happens.

We do already contact happens. We do already contact social media companies to take specific post down, where we think it could enable people to commit fraud against the welfare system. Very happy to consider practical points. I'm convinced we will discuss the further we do have the legislative weaponry to take the action necessary to deal with people who are encouraging people to commit fraud, both online and elsewhere. Turning to 23, 24, 39 and 40. These bring to scope the kinds of information necessary for fraud investigations the SFA and to compel certain types of special procedure material including banking records, or records of employment, in line with the policy intent.

Requesting this type of information is not new and occurs under its existing powers. These are moments in assure the PSFA and we can compel this information to support fraud investigations while ensuring important sections are replaced, those for excluded material and journalistic material. 30 and 31 seek to address two separate issues in respect of clause 67. The amendment 30, the provision in the bill, the powers granted to the PSFA under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1994, PACEY, are exempt from the application.

This will ensure that the cause does not interfere with existing PACE provisions. Enabling the bill to place measures to function as intended. Removing subsection 6, clause 67 which currently overrides existing self-incrimination protections on the PSFA's information gathering powers and PAYS powers. The common law principle of the self-incrimination in the usual way, under the information government powers and ensures the imposed powers are established in line with PACE powers. The central safeguards for the powers in the bill, related to the processing of information.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

There is a growing concern, on the use of automated decision- the use of automated decision- making, AI and algorithms. Whilst wanting to make sure we get the best results, will the Minister be able to commit to the transparency I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

think that we need, when it comes to AI algorithms going into this bill, to make sure that those most vulnerable in society aren't being unfairly hit. I thank the member from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member from Maidenhead for his intervention. I can give him that assurance, we do comply with all of the required standards around the location of such information. The government amendments of 25 and 26 relate to clause 9 and the act of 2002 to extend the Independent Office for Police Conduct, to include oversight of public sector for Di investigators, enabling them to consider the use of PACE powers and investigations. Clause 9 enables the Minister for the Cabinet Office to issue regulations conferring functions, on the director-general, in relation to these investigations.

The Police Reform Act 2002 sets out requirements for such regulations are made under that act, as drafted this section only applies to this section only applies to By a Secretary of State. As the Cabinet office has no Secretary of State, this section will not include the regulations which the Minister for the Cabinet Office can make under clause 9. And 26 correct that technicality that section 105 also applies to the Minister. Government amendment 25 simply removes reference to part two of the Police Reform Act 2002, within clause 9.1, as the bill will refer widely to the act and part two.

48 and 70 to provide a clear legislative framework for how DWP and the PSFA To the most appropriate law enforcement agency, including the National Crime Agency, or the serious fraud office. These moments will ensure the evidence is handled by the organisation best equipped to deal with the specific nature of the alleged crime, fostering interagency collaboration and reducing delays to investigations. Amendments are 27, 28, 29, 69, clarify the maximum amount to be deducted from a debtors bank by the PSFA and DWP, by a regular direct production order, clause 17 and in schedule five respectively.

These members ensure they can't be set at the percentage of what the person will reasonably be expected to receive each month. They provide flexibility to amend this. They will ensure that any deductions are fair and affordable and do not exceed the maximum percentage set out. Other factors, such as the ability to repay will be considered and mean that in most cases, the reduction amount will be lower than these rates. 75 and 76 will allow the PSFA to investigate and pursue enforcement action, in respect of the offences in a section 6 and seven of the fraud act, 2006.

Those offences involved possessing, making and supplying articles for use in fraud, against a public use in fraud, against a public These amendments enable the PF SA to tackle this. The new clause 17, 19, and 20 and amendments 32, 35, 42, 46 will seek to ensure the correct applications of the Paris in the second part of the bill to -- the parts in the second part of the bill to devolve benefits.

These were devolved to the Scottish parliament and government in Scotland but some can still claim under agency agreements on behalf of Scottish ministers until the Scottish government could administer the benefits themselves and these benefits are delivered in line with benefits in England and we'll with the intent to make sure the measures in part two apply to those delivered under agency agreements and with benefits in England and Wales and the new clause is 19 and 20 clarify the Secretary of State can only exercise new powers in the bill with devolve benefits when these are administered by the secretary of state on behalf of Scottish ministers and clarify the existing powers under the Social Security Administration act of 1992 are not changed by the bill.

Clause 17 and amendments 32 and 46 ensure existing information contained under the sections remain unchanged by the bill for Scottish ministers and this has resulted in the new drafting and the MPs have new information under the bill and that is where it is held. Amendment 35 clarifies the intention with devolve benefits and ensures the exemptions contained do not impact the powers under the 1992 Act.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I presume the Minister is clear and it requires the Scottish government to report back on progress on clamping down on benefit progress on clamping down on benefit fraud. The same should apply to the rest of the country and that is the rest of the country and that is the purpose of clause 13 which would require an annual report on the amount of money that has been amount of money that has been recovered from the process, as the Minister has outlined.

Will he Minister has outlined. Will he accept the new clause and comment on the reporting of fraud in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Scottish government? I assure him with regard to the Scottish government but I will Scottish government but I will resist the new clause to which he refers because there will be refers because there will be sufficient information in the accounts on our performance on fraud and error. Amendment 42 specifies and error. Amendment 42 specifies the functions of the independent person that can be appointed does person that can be appointed does not apply to devolve benefits unless they are delivered by the secretary of state under the agreement.

60 and 67 and meant the time required for compliance and this will match normal convention in Scotland. Amendment 43 ensures the new powers only apply to those benefits and the Secretary of State will recover devolved that under agency agreement. Clause 18 and 33 of the government are consequential amendments to the Social Security amendments to the Social Security and Fraud Act 2001 which ensure the powers are unchanged. 36, 37 and 38 seek to clarify exemptions in the seek to clarify exemptions in the DWP powers for the outcome and a key part of the gathering powers is the inclusion of personal information about users of particular types of free services such as advocacy and advice services and crisis support, for example when someone is fleeing from domestic abuse.

The intent is to make sure nobody is deterred from seeking the support that they need when they need it. The current example of this in the bill is not brought forward and that excludes certain information likely to be relevant to the fraud investigation relevant to the fraud investigation and for example prevents department from compiling information from housing associations such as the individual address or tenancy and this can be instrumental in proving or disproving suspicion of fraud.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The independent person is required and as a minister has just laid out, extensive powers are being laid out, extensive powers are being used and there is no pressure to adopt the recommendations and in adopt the recommendations and in places where it does not accept, will he commit to explaining why

**** Possible New Speaker ****

he's reached that conclusion? I would be very happy to report

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would be very happy to report to the House on the reasons why B would not do that and I am sure the honourable lady will understand that and it seems to be a reasonable request. Returning to my original point, the current drafting will be they can have this information from private landlords and estate agents but not from housing associations and the Arrow is equity in that that we seek to address with these amendments and clarifying the drafting and continuing to protect the identity of those using crisis support advocacy services.

The bill brings forward new information powers that the authorised officers can use to support an investigation into fraud and it sets out why the information must not be compelled and for example to protect the long-standing principle of privilege and separately the bill brings forward the powers of entry, search and seizure. Those tasked with investigating the more serious cases of fraud and it does so by bringing this under the remit of the police and the criminal evidence act. And by creating similar powers in Scotland for authorised investigators and this ensures the authorised investigators are governed by a similar legal framework to other law enforcement bodies granted access to use these types of powers.

Amendment 41 six to ensure the exemptions that the officers can compel are not applicable to authorised investigators when using the powers of entry and search and seizure and I wrote this, crucial evidence might be out of reach and slow down the response to fraud and this is important but the act which applies in England and Wales provides such restrictions and safeguards by enabling this to be compiled and this is coupled with similar examples for Scotland and this amendment ensures there will be no duplication.

The powers remain in line with existing conventions and correctly reflect the norms of the Scottish legal system. I turn to government amendments 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66. Paragraph 10 is scheduled and refers to definitions within the Police and Governance Act relating to confidential professional material, excluded material, items subject to legal privilege. 63 and 51 have specific definitions to avoid linking provisions which relate to Scotland or existing legislation applying to England and Wales. It ensures legal privilege and items subject to legal privilege, references contained within the schedule, are correctly defined for Scotland.

Amendments defined for Scotland. Amendments 61-66 are consequential to 63. 47 and 48 ensure the powers for the DWP on the pace taken by the bill in schedule four are aligned with police and other government departments like HMRC and provide clear legal framework for what evidence can be seized and how it should be handled. Amendments 47 and 48 mean investigators authorised by the DWP can seize items in relation to an offence, not just DWP offences, when undertaking search and seizure activities in England and Wales, meaning the prevention of any other offence if discovered in the course of a search can be seized when considered necessary from being destroyed or removed.

It ensures the law is clear on how it can be handled. Amendments 49, 50, 59 make similar provisions in Scotland to those I have described bills. 57, 58 clarify how investigators can prevent access to seized evidence from any offence if it may prejudice proceedings in Scotland by amending Inserted by schedule four of this act. It mirrors the provisions already in the bill as applies to England and. Amendments 53, 54, 55, 56 are minor and technical to protect inconsistencies in terminology.

34 is a minor technical amendment to provide the correct reference to powers in the Social Security and ensures the powers in Scotland aligned with England and will. Amendment 52 amends the period of time for a warrant to be exercised in Scotland from three months to one month and this ensures it is consistent with usual practice in Scotland. 70 ensures the court can do this having been disqualified to provide their licence as is already the case under the new debt recovery powers.

The Bill as drafted with a low payment and make sure an NI or EU licence can be disqualified but it limits the culpability of the person to produce the licence unless it was issued in great, undermining the power and causing initiative difficulties for the court and DVLA. Amendment 70 corrects this and ensures parity between Great Britain and European Union driving licences under the powers in schedule six. 73, 74, 77, 79, ensure the application period follows the period in which fraud can be investigated and that can be recovered in England and Wales.

Amendment 44 ensures that the possibility to get recovery powers is not subject to the 5-year time- limit from the Scotland Act 1973, making it clear the longer period of 20 years applies to such provisions introduced or amended by the bill. As I have set out, the intent behind the amendments is to ensure the delivery of the intended policy to ensure the application of the bill. Sure.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister and forgive me for waiting for what appears to me for waiting for what appears to be the end of his list because when his honourable friend asked him about the application of the humans Right act in this context, he said Right act in this context, he said it did not come into effect. My advice is different and we will be advice is different and we will be then see if anything changes but in then see if anything changes but in As light and article 14 with prohibition and discrimination.

Would he make the legal advice of the House available on this? It's incredibly important and central to the major criticism as well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have made clear that I am satisfied with the advice that I have received and we will make all have received and we will make all of the information we are required to available but he will appreciate I cannot give the undertaking to release all legal advice at this stage but I say I am confident there stage but I say I am confident there is no breach of article 8 and that has been explored as we have gone has been explored as we have gone through this process.

I want to through this process. I want to finish up by welcoming ongoing engagement with industry and stakeholders we have seen with this bill and we've made the effort to engage all interested parties and listen to their views and the feedback has been important in shaping the approach to the bill and it will continue to be so as the bill moves to the other place. I will make some quick remarks before I finish on the government amendments on the eligibility verification measure and the debt recovery powers.

Amendments two and five remove the measure entirely from the bill. This must be resisted and I think we have a fundamental disagreement about the proportionality of the measure and the concerns are misplaced. We have explored this at length at Bill committee and I appreciate where he's coming from but I disagree with he's coming from but I disagree with These powers will include robust safeguards and independent oversight to give confidence they will be used fairly and effectively. The Information Commission themselves has welcomed the changes are made to previous iterations of the eligibility verification measure which addressed many of the concerns he had with the previous government's bill.

I must also highlight the importance of this measure, from a fiscal perspective. This measure alone will save £940 million over the next five years and £500 million annually, once a fully rolled out. Similarly, amendment 11, honourable friend speaks to restrict the eligibility verification power to be used only when there is a suspicion of fraud. This would undermine the measure entirely, with existing information gathering sufficient evidence on how to deal with such. We do enable this power because it will enable better data sharing to help check if claimants are meeting the criteria for their benefit and to detect incorrect payments at an early stage, before any suspicion of wrongdoing.

It is not a power to be used to respond to suspected fraud. Information will not be shared with DWP if a claimant is guilty of any wrongdoing. White has been flagged by the bank and ascertain whether an incorrect payment has been made. That is why, following receipt of information from banks, DWP will make further enquiries to determine whether a benefit has been incorrectly paid and whether this is due to fraud, or error. It would be impossible for DWP to suspect fraud before it has even established that benefit has been incorrectly paid.

89, from the Member for Liverpool Wavertree would reduce the effectiveness of the proposed powers, within the bill. The department can already apply for 1/3 party Dettol and the production order is to become more public money order is to become more public money without using the courts time to stop it is highly unlikely the debtors who have repeatedly refused to engage with the Department and repay a voluntarily suddenly agreed to recovery taking place directly from their bank account. The information from banks, including bank statements, under this measure is a vital safeguard to establishing affordable rates, where someone has refused to engage.

It will also prevent further issues of a debtor than the use of courts, us ECJ or court costs and enables the Department to utilise regular as well as induction orders. With that, I will bring my comments to a close. I will bring my comments to a close. Responding to the contribution of colleagues in my closing remarks.
16:19
Rebecca Smith Portrait Rebecca Smith MP (South West Devon, Conservative)
-
-
Information notices. second time? Shadow Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I agree with the comments the Minister made about the work that the committee did. I think we had a very constructive if you weeks to get into some of the nitty-gritty on this debate. I have nitty-gritty on this debate. I have no doubt that the House will agree no doubt that the House will agree that fraud is not acceptable. Whether it is against individuals, organisations or the state, the money being taken is not their own money being taken is not their own when it comes to defrauding the when it comes to defrauding the government that is money that is being taken from every single taxpayer.

At the same time, errors unfortunately do happen. They might be accidental by the claimant or they might be accidental by the Ill intention, errors can still be costly to the taxpayer and the impact is on some of the most vulnerable people, in our country. The question then is how best to tackle fraud and error in the welfare state and the public sector. While we welcome any of the principles behind this bill and indeed as there is no doubt going to be mentioned this afternoon, much of it builds on the work that the Conservatives were doing, before the general election, last summer.

We do have concerns that it has been rushed through. There are gaps in the legislation where it is not tough enough, it fails to be a strong deterrent to make potential fraudsters think again and does not sufficiently safeguard the public's money. And on the other there are parts of the bill where there is not been sufficient operation. Which are incredibly vague and it is unclear what the implications will actually be for those involved or whether the benefit justifies the cost. This must also be seen in the context that even after the government's questionable welfare reforms, the sickness benefit bill is forecast to hit nearly £1 billion, by the end of the decade.

Vastly more than we spend on defence, more than schools and more than we spend on policing. So this is why we have tabled a number of amendments to seek to address these points. I will speak to new clauses 21 and eight, on the so-called six clauses. 21 and eight so-called six clauses. 21 and eight so-called six clauses. 21 and eight It shows people how they might It shows people how they might be able to make fraudulent claims for benefits, including the personal independent payment which does not require medical evidence but doesn't need a self-assessment made.

Advice offered as we have already heard can include using specific buzzwords and providing a template claims and online guidance on passing questions at the interview stage to fortunately inflate the value of claims. We do not want to target people who are providing a genuine advice and guidance to how the welfare system and other public authorities work. That is very different from providing insistence and encouragement to commit fraud and encouragement to commit fraud which is not acceptable. We recognise the vital whether not- for-profit organisations such as Citizens Advice, right across the country and indeed in my own constituency of South hams, Citizens Advice South hams in Plymouth, groups like improving lives, who do much to so taught those seeking to claim what they are entitled to.

However the online sick influences and need tackling. The Minister did query, the fact why a new clause was only looking at a seven year prison sentence is another similar clauses had a 10 year sentence. This new clause in these new clauses 21 and eight have they also put forward a 10 year sentence to bring them in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

line. In the government's response to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In the government's response to my question about the sick influences. The government said there are legislation in place. Do there are legislation in place. Do we know how many have taken place. we know how many have taken place. That would make an inference of what we need to do to say whether or not the system is actually working on not. My suspicion is we knew this not. My suspicion is we knew this piece of legislation to make sure that we can hold them to account.

I that we can hold them to account. I thank my honourable friend to his question, his intervention and I would echo his concern that we are not seeing those existing powers and utilise enough and I would ask the Minister, perhaps in his summing up if you could give us some further information about how that is being used in reassurances that it will be used to further if these new clauses are not successful today for the. It would send a clear message to sickfluencers that what they are doing is not only morally wrong, but is also illegal.

Something that is this clear, provide them with no alternative than to realise that they are going to be caught. She the Government choose to continue to oppose or amendment, because they believe the powers already exist, I would be grateful if the Minister could, at the very least set out how the Government will ensure that the legislation they believe are ready tackle since crime is utilised to the full, particularly with regard to the DWP, his new clause of 75 and 76 refer specifically to the PSFA.

The powers can be used more fully to tackle DWP claims, to be the deterrent we want it to be. After today's debate, sickfluencers are left in no doubt that the full weight of the law will be used against them as they actively before the state. Clause 9, new clause 9 is on powers of arrest and whilst we also welcome measures in the bill first announced by the previous government to give DWP investigators greater powers to aid with their investigations, such as search and seizure.

The must be appropriate safeguards around that. We do believe that this would then bring benefit fraud investigations in line within HMRC. That is very welcome. We want to go further and address other shortfalls in the DWP powers. New clause and I would add the power of arrest to the powers even to DWP investigators and resolve the seemingly illogical current position that the government was to give DWP investigators the power to enter and search premises, seize, retain and dispose material. Retain sensible material and use reasonable force, but not to arrest someone if the evidence shows it is necessary.

The committee highlighted that the police will be able to carry out the arrest function, on behalf of the DWP, should it ever be necessary. We would question whether that is a sustainable position to hold and believe our new clause will ensure that we do not add an additional burden onto the police. This is not without precedent and will bring the DWP in line with the approach taken to serious organised crime across government, such as at HMRC and the gang masters in the authority. Our new clause channel liability orders and seizure of assets is something that we are concerned about.

We want to ensure that the DWP can do , fraudulently claimed, even when that money is no longer sitting in a bank account. It cannot be right that someone can use that money to buy expensive cars, flatscreen TVs or other luxury assets which the state cannot then recover from them. New clause 10 will therefore give the Secretary of State powers and to apply to the courts to seize assets where someone has been found responsibility of fraud and the funds are not recovered, in order to repay the state.

In a similar vein to our sickfluencer clause, we believe these additions are needed to send the strongest message to those who are knowingly defrauding the system that they will be caught and they will have to pay. New clause 10 doesn't just give powers to seize assets to the Secretary of State, it actually says that she must use them to. We have included this as the DWP have said they can already do this. We know through written parliamentary questions in the last five years, wings haven't been used, although they could make use of the Proceeds of Crime Act.

We believe there must be an explicit expectation that assets will be seized and that we need a new clause 10 to ensure that this is achieved.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will give way. It is great to hear that she is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is great to hear that she is taking tough action against benefit fraud after failing. Longer fraud after failing. Longer sentences, including corruption, those that committed the crime.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

those that committed the crime. I found the honourable member for his intervention, but I do not think that is what we are actually debating, it is certainly not part debating, it is certainly not part Clauses 11, 12 and 20 are on the impact on banks. We have concerns about the lack of detail in the bill when it comes to the eligibility verification mechanism and the requirements that will be on banks and other financial institutions. Today we do not have the statutory code of conduct, we do not know what it will cost banks, we do not know the results of any pilot schemes and we do not know whether the amount recovered will be more than what it was to administer.

Had you been in our committee would have known that the code of conduct is probably the most recently commented thing and the Ministers did a huge amount to reassure us it was forthcoming. I do not want to sit from the frontbench, but there we have that. You have to look at the Hansard for the committee. I never look at the committee. I never look at the It was regularly raising committee and we did get assurances, continually from the Ministers but we still lack their detail at the moment.

We have therefore tabled a number of amendments to get clarity on these, including to require the government to publish their statutory code of conduct, with the banks information on the testing to date. An impact assessment on the And an amendment to allow banks to challenge the expansion of these powers, if a cost that would be incurred exceed a preagreed amount. When I banks and financial institutions want to help tackle fraud but measures must be proportionate and not unduly burdensome, or it risks resources are being diverted from tackling other types of funds required to meet these requirements.

We cannot simply assume they will do what is right. We need an incentive to do it too. Amendments 16, 17, 18 and 19, the need for a First-tier Tribunal. The bill also takes significant powers from the Secretary of State, giving them the power to review decisions that they do, the Cabinet office and public sector authority played. Changing the appeal body from the Minister for the Cabinet Office, to First-tier Tribunal, ensuring there is not just independent oversight, but an effective independent channel, of appeal against information that does not just go back to the same organisation that issued the organisation that issued the Is Is on Is on whistleblowing.

Is on whistleblowing. If Is on whistleblowing. If we Is on whistleblowing. If we are serious about cutting a fraud and error, we also need to have confidence in our whistleblowing procedures for Civil Service staff. I've experienced first hand, at the very start of my career what it is like to see public sector abroad being committed but to feel the pressure of wanting to act, but not knowing what would happen to me or indeed my career if I had done the right thing. It is perhaps one of the biggest regrets of my life.

In December 2023 the National Audit Office published a report investigating whistleblowing in the civil service, setting out what further improvement is required. The election came before the Conservatives were able to act but we hope the new government will now take forward a new clause 6 to review the whistleblowing processes in relation to public sector for stop elsewhere in government, new protections have been proposed to NHS whistleblowers, but that should not be the end of the government's ambition. They must have its own house in order as they come after fraud in the general public and I would at least like to hear a national audit office report.

I'm nearly there. 14 on vulnerable customers. We must not forget the impact of fraud, error and recovery on vulnerable people. In the absence of details provided to the bank about how their eligibility verification necklace and would work, we have concerns about the potential risks of de-banking for vulnerable customers and those in receipts. Clause 40 will require the Secretary of State to consider the impact of this bill on vulnerable customers access to banking and ensure that access to banking is I will take this moment to note support for several Liberal Democrat amendments and those that consider the impact of financial exclusion and those at risk of domestic abuse.

Overall, the bill comes with the right intentions to tackle fraud and error and the eye watering sums that have been mentioned but we have significant concerns the amendments seek to address and hope the government will support them but it is clear that even if the bill passes, it will not be enough to bring forward an error to zero on its own and we must set out the accident will be taken on enforcement in the use of AI and technology and social media to keep pushing and make clear to fraudsters they will not succeed while protecting vulnerable people from error.

If the become complacent and fail to deliver those measures, I am afraid it will not deliver the results that we all need.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before I Kovinic speaker, I will be coming to the Liberal Democrat be coming to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson immediately after them. -- Before I call the next speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

-- Before I call the next speaker. I welcome the return of this to the House and was happy to speak at the second reading when I welcomed
16:33
Gill German Portrait Gill German MP (Clwyd North, Labour)
-
-
the second reading when I welcomed the crackdown on fraud because every pound lost to fraudulent claims could be spent on vital public services, services at my constituents rely on and the recognition and action in response to the £7.1 million of fraud in error payments 2022-23 in Wales alone went up by £0.6 million since the previous year. These fine tuning is important and the amendments that speak to the correct application and the devolution settlements and the intended intent and the application in part three and the amendments that have been put forward will do just that.

I was glad to be a member of the Public Bill Committee who considered this in more detail and I add weight to the comments made about Harry that committee progressed and the way that it was helpful to committee members. The points made by the ministers and the explanation of expansion served us well and has brought us here today and the distinction between intentional fraud and accidental individual error is an area I spoke on at the second reading and I am pleased the amendments we have heard speak to those with regard to that and proportionality and the crucial safeguards will be strengthened to make sure no one is pushed into undue financial hardship because of debt recovery, including strict checks on recovering payments.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Indeed, I will give way. I thank the honourable lady for a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable lady for a giving way and I take the point about the need for strengthening and about the need for strengthening and I wonder if this being brought forward before we have had the report from the independent review into the allowance means that we are into the allowance means that we are extending the powers of the DWP before we had the opportunity to look at what is necessary to the Department.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This bill speaks to protecting vulnerability where we see it and it is a bill of last resort and so it is a bill of last resort and so it is aimed at people not engaging with the DWP on fraud and error cases in a way that we hope carers are aware a way that we hope carers are aware of the problems that have gone on will be engaging and I do not will be engaging and I do not believe it will engage them in the way that has been set out by the member and I think they bill will protect climates by enabling early protect climates by enabling early dialogue to spot them sooner and stop dead through the initial stop dead through the initial mistakes and it is clear that these are powers of last resort for those who have refused to engaged and cannot be and that is an important point to emphasise and puts the power is in line with those that already exist for HMRC and the Child Maintenance Service and puts the importance of public money on an equal footing.

The behaviour change comes as a wider expected benefit and this also welcome and encourages debtors to negotiate the plan ahead of the measures of last resort and, importantly, it will deter organise fraudsters and those looking to become involved by removing the frame of this is a victimless crime. It is anything but. It robs all of us vital money for public services and we will not shrug our shoulders at the party opposite did during the rising tide of fraud during the pandemic.

Benefit fraud is not a victimless crime and tackling it through this bill is long overdue. I've been reassured throughout the process at the Bill committee and report states that those with genuine difficulty and navigating the system have got nothing to fear from the bill and it will raise the awareness of the importance of early dialogue at an early stage. My concerns on the complexity of the system itself which I advised that the second reading remains but that is for another day and I will continue to fork -- focus on this as a member of the Select Committee.

I welcome this bill and the fine tuning through government amendments. I was pleased to serve on this through the public bill committee. I'm happy to support the government amendments put to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

House today. Liberal Democrat spokesperson, Steve Darling. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I start by assuring the member from I start by assuring the member from South West Devon at my office have talked me out of mentioning the Waitrose cheesecake that was a hot topic throughout the bill committee. topic throughout the bill committee. On a more serious note, I would like to explore particularly the
16:39
Steve Darling Portrait Steve Darling MP (Torbay, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
to explore particularly the challenges that we have within the bill and as it has been said, fraud can only be a bad thing and it robs the public purse. We must make sure the approach is proportionate and that is where the rubber is for us as Liberal Democrats. I would like to make sure we focus on the COVID crisis. All of us went through that and some others were in the hotseat. I was the leader at Torbay Council at the time and it felt like you were in the eye of the storm of some challenges.

I am afraid to say that for many of us in the chamber, it feels as though the Conservatives were asleep at the field with the levels of fraud taking place during the pandemic. -- wheel. The fact that £10 billion worth of fraud occurred around PPE is shocking. £16 billion occurred around support for businesses and although it is extremely important that we supported those businesses appropriately, the safeguards were limited. One businessman said to me that it was as if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had got handfuls of £50 notes and filled carrier bags across the town centre and said to the criminal element to come and help themselves.

The reality is that this money could have and should have input to produce. In my own constituency, my hospital is crying out for investment, Torbay Hospital, and we have the sewage scandal where we could have had the support of the environment agency. Then there is the cost of living crisis and we could be supporting people and the money could be helping to support this. An area that my colleague, my good friend, has alluded to already is the Carers Allowance crisis and the real challenge with over 136,000 people affected by this.

That is the population of the Torbay Unitary Authority Area affected by this - £250 million of cost on those people. And as Liberal Democrats we fear that this could make it even tougher for those who have challenges around the Carers Allowance. You don't have to take it from me that the benefit system is broken. We have the Secretary of State for the DWP who says the benefit system is broken. We have the Chancellor saying the benefit system is broken and also we have the Prime Minister is saying the benefit system is broken.

If there is agreement in government the system is broken then why are we adding more to this edifice? It is adding more to this edifice? It is built on a foundation of sand but we are looking at piling more responsibilities on without looking for true and positive culture change within the DWP that we need to see. Colleagues have alluded to the bill and areas of debate. I would like to touch on a few key areas of that and where we have concerns as Liberal Democrats, the opportunity for Orwellian levels of mass surveillance of those with means tested benefits that are proposed within the bill because grave concerns.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wholeheartedly agree with him at this point. There are something like 9.8 million people falling like 9.8 million people falling directly under the reach of the bill directly under the reach of the bill and the carers, landlords, and others. I would think the number of others. I would think the number of fraudsters in that is very small and fraudsters in that is very small and therefore we will probably put over 9 million people under unnecessary surveillance and he is right to call

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this away. Thank you. I concur with my colleague and another area of core concern is the lowering of the bar and taking money out of people's bank accounts and the opportunity of withdrawing driving licences away from those who are offenders. Again, as we alluded to, it is the best practice document that is missing. That was alluded to on a number of occasions. It is difficult to understand the true... The true nature of this bill if you do not know what the guidance is going to look like.

Also the fact we have got some real challenges around the powers of King Henry VIII and the Arrow are elements of this bill that should be written within they are not there and there are real issues the iron and the fact the Secretary of State will be... Excuse me. The fact they will be able to appoint their own independent reviewer of the bill, we welcome the reviewer but not effectively marking your own homework by making the appointment yourself.

The fact that we have, from Big Brother watch to age UK and the multitude of charities highlighting concerns like the breakdown in trust that this bill could bring and amplifying challenges around people with disabilities and potentially acting on some of the most vulnerable people in society, people with learning disabilities, and causes of great concern, what we would like to see is a real culture change and in the Liberal Democrat manifesto, we talked about codesign and working with people claiming benefits and making sure the system is a better fit and more fit for purpose and taking a more relational approach rather than adversarial and that is the way forward as far as we are concerned.

Again, I would like to return back to the investigation that is ongoing into carers which is not set to report back until the summer. The government are rushing ahead with these proposals. I would suggest that you do not back these proposals until we hear back from the findings and stupid lessons can be learned. Thank you, Madam Deputy be learned. Thank you, Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak in support of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I rise to speak in support of the members 10, 11 and 12 that are tabled in my name. I would like to start by placing on the record my start by placing on the record my thanks to the Minister for transformation and his willingness transformation and his willingness to engage in discussion around the terms of this bill. This has been
16:47
Neil Duncan-Jordan Portrait Neil Duncan-Jordan MP (Poole, Labour)
-
-
terms of this bill. This has been extremely helpful and I wanted that to be placed on the record. I would also like to make it clear that in no way am I amendments seeking to undo, or frustrate the government's legitimate aim of recovering public money from fraudsters. We absolutely need to do that, to ensure that criminal behaviour does not undermine the benefits, the legitimacy, or the standing of our welfare system. The bill rightly seeks to tackle organised crime and online fraud.

But also, worryingly ushers in a dangerous new powers, compelling claimants to trawl

**** Possible New Speaker ****

through financial information, even where. Am grateful to my honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Am grateful to my honourable friend for giving way and I support his amendments. The fact is though, his amendments. The fact is though, isn't it that millions of people, innocent people with no suspicion at innocent people with no suspicion at all around their behaviour will now all around their behaviour will now be subject to intrusion into their bank accounts. Isn't it odd that the £40 billion of unpaid tax, by tax avoiders, where there is also access to bank accounts is rarely used.

In the last year I have seen only a thousand people have their banks investigated, after 300,000 separate people were suspected of tax avoidance. Is it not the case then that this legislation appears to treat wealthy tax avoiders differently from the poor.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for his contribution. In fact it is the very poorest in our society which very poorest in our society which are going to be affected most by this legislation. So banks will be able to trawl for financial able to trawl for financial information, even where there is no suspicion of wrongdoing. That is the key point in this debate. The very key point in this debate. The very poorest, disabled people on PIP, older people in Pension Credit, carers and those on Universal Credit will have less rights to privacy, effectively than everyone else.

And I am deeply concerned about the slippery slope of compelling banks slippery slope of compelling banks

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to act as a arm of the state. I'm extremely grateful to the honourable member for tabling this honourable member for tabling this amendment. We have the finest legal system, in the world and one of the principles that exists is that the principles that exists is that the presumption of innocence. The current bill, as are tabled undermines that fundamental undermines that fundamental principle and of course it is principle and of course it is something that is going to raise

**** Possible New Speaker ****

something that is going to raise stress, anxiety and undermine, the vulnerable people in our society. Does the honourable member agree that that is the position of this current government. I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for his question. I'm going to address that shortly, in my speech. It is not the purpose of the banks to act not the purpose of the banks to act as an arm of the state. It sets a very dangerous precedent and we need to be aware of, in this House. We also know that organised crime also know that organised crime groups responsible for over seven responsible for over £7 billion worth of large scale of fraud will worth of large scale of fraud will divide a detection by spreading funds across multiple accounts, beyond the reach of the algorithmic scan that is going to be used to flag overpayments.

It will be welfare recipients who are caught up in the bank surveillance, regardless of whether they are suspected of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

fraudulent activity, or not. I thank my honourable friend for giving way and I would like to giving way and I would like to congratulate him on the eminently reasonable and common sense way he is approaching at this debate. I would like to congratulate him on would like to congratulate him on his amendments number 11. Does it seem to my honourable friend, as it seem to my honourable friend, as it seems to me that this takes place in a wider context, whether tightening a wider context, whether tightening of eligibility, personal independence payments are being proposed, we are moving towards a hostile environment for benefit hostile environment for benefit claimants, particularly disabled benefit claimants, weather can end up treating benefit claimants as suspects, automatically.

And would he agree with me that it is right for us to oppose. The Conservatives wanted to do this I put down a motion signed to that effect. We have to post this now. The best way to resolve this is by the government accepting my honourable friend's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

eminently reasonable... Order, a very long intervention.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, a very long intervention. Perhaps better going back to Neil Duncan Jordan.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Duncan Jordan. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for his intervention. I'm going to cover the connection between this piece of legislation and the Green Paper,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

very shortly. At the honourable member for being generous. The outcome for the being generous. The outcome for the individual disabled person who is concerned about was that the vast majority commit no fraud. At all of these measures are implemented. They are not effective, because they are are not effective, because they are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not committing any crime. I think this bill introduces as I've tried to explain some very I've tried to explain some very fundamental changes to the very nature of our welfare system. It introduces some very fundamental changes to the nature of our welfare system and its use.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A signatory. If the state, if the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A signatory. If the state, if the banks have an error rate of at least 1%, that means there will be 10,000 innocent people or more dragged

**** Possible New Speaker ****

through the system. I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for his intervention and it brings me onto my next point, which is at the onto my next point, which is at the risk about the Horizon style scandal on a massive scale, given the sheer volume of accounts that are going to volume of accounts that are going to be scanned and that is glaringly obvious, I think. These new powers obvious, I think. These new powers also strip those of the fundamental principle, the point that my honourable friend made earlier, namely the presumption of innocence.

Amendment 11 would ensure the government can tackle fraudsters but limit a eligibility verification notice to places where welfare recipient is suspected of wrongdoing and not merely of error. This is a proportionate and necessary safeguard to prevent the corruption of our welfare system, from a safety act which is meant to offer dignity and support to those in need, into a punitive system access and help comes at the cost of your privacy and civil liberties. I would like to move on to amendments 10 and 11, now.

The bill also grants the Department at Draconian powers and to apply to a court to have people stripped of their driving licences, if they have an outstanding debt. Whether for overpayment. Amendments 10 and 12 remove this power from the bill. They are fairer, there are fairer and more effective ways to enforce the law. Analysis of the bill has shown this measure will be used where assessment teams that a financial reduction would cause hardship. If it would, the debtor could face losing their licence.

That is not justice in my opinion. That is called being poor. I have heard the claims that this will be a last resort, when the debtor has failed to engage over a period of time. This overlooks the fact that non-engagement can be a symptom of hardship, not wrongdoing. Many welfare recipients, including those with mental health conditions and caring responsibilities find it difficult to navigate the complex bureaucracy of that Social Security system. And maybe unfairly gleaned as not having engaged with the DWP.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is important to have a better legislation. I do not think there is anyone of us in this chamber, as an MP he has an spoken with the MP he has an spoken with the constituent who is in a vertically made a mistake. The complexity of the paperwork. The reams of questions you have to answer, for most people it is just beyond their most people it is just beyond their ability. Does he share my concern and the concern that this system, if it continues to be complicated will inadvertently drive people into something they're not responsible for.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The complexity of our system leads and lends itself to errors, by leads and lends itself to errors, by ... Difficult. During the committee stage of the bill, several witnesses stage of the bill, several witnesses explained that people have a variety explained that people have a variety of reasons, not knowing where to get help. Simply being overwhelmed by the whole process of facing multiple the whole process of facing multiple debts. I hope the Minister will therefore provide further reassurance on the specific point about amendments 10 and 12.

Finally, all of these challenges will only be made worse in my view if the government proceeds with its planned cuts to disability benefits, affecting over 3 million families outlined in the recent Green Paper. Previous governments stripped our welfare state to the bone, over 14 years of cuts. The same people are already far more likely to be destitute and relying on food banks. Piling cuts onto a failed system will not repair our welfare. The government must pause for thought, meet with disability organisations to build a fairer system with their consent and confidence.

Our welfare state needs to provide support to those who need it and the change we promised as a government must mean a more compassionate and caring society, one that enables, rather than penalises. These are the values that set us apart from the previous government and we shouldn't forget it.
16:58
Esther McVey Portrait Rt Hon Esther McVey MP (Tatton, Conservative)
-
-
I would be grateful if members would try to confine themselves to 5 also when it's for their speeches.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like to speak in support of a new clause 11, the publication of results of pilot schemes. Make it of results of pilot schemes. Make it no mistake, this bill allows for an expansion of state powers. It would expansion of state powers. It would permit mass financial surveillance permit mass financial surveillance of the public. It is a massive overreach by the state, so of course it needs close scrutiny. It needs it needs close scrutiny. It needs it needs close scrutiny.

It needs the publication of those pilot schemes and then they must be analysed. I put this into context. Before the Cove and years, fraud and error, across the tax and benefit system was at an all-time low. Then, in 2020 after state imposed lockdown and that is that another massive state intervention, unprecedented financial support was set up for millions of people. This support was set up in a rush of panic, grow, I exclude myself from this, but there were very few people that opposed this and it opened up all new sorts of vulnerabilities in the system.

This system was only set up because of a blanket state-mandated from the state. It was the state that opened on those fraud vulnerabilities and it was the state that saw through intervention will also leave the public paying a very high price. And as Big Brother Watch is the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill introduced an unprecedented system of massive financial surveillance, create a second-tier justice system for people of the poverty line, undermined the presumption of innocence, result in serious mistakes, risking the freedoms and funds of the country's elderly, disabled and poor and Britain's once a fair welfare system will be turned into a digital surveillance system.

I've said it before and I said again, lockdown was an experiment inflicted on the British people, without the consent and that experiment failed, this bill will be another such experiment. On the We should not be surprised we saw the increase in the amount lost to fraud in the system. When there is a knee-jerk reaction to crisis, there will be serious repercussions and when the state takes extra powers and they are unchecked, many inequities flow and the bill is another example.

There seems to be an unwillingness to talk about this. There is collective denial about the reality of what lockdown did to the country and the dark consequences we are suffering. We need to admit mistakes and learn from them. It is the only way we will not make such mistakes again of mass state intervention. That state intervention and the one size fits all approach lacks the detail of planning and lacks tried and tested vehicles of delivery and safeguards. The massive intervention by this proposed bill, at the very least, needs further testing, piloting, and the publication of the results and those results being analysed.

I have no faith in this government that it will have done the homework that is required to implement this and not without good reason. There's without good reason. There's government does not have a good a good record on impact assessments and doing homework before major pieces of legislation are introduced like the winter fuel payment, the follow from that, the VAT on skills the impact and the taxation and devastation on the farming community and the food security and the increase in national insurance contributions and the impact on business and employment.

We are seen the failure of not doing impact assessments and thoroughly working things out. Much more detailed work needs to go into a change of this enormity and the power is ineffective and disproportionate to the revenue the government expects to raise. The government's own estimate is that less than 1.4% of the estimated annual loss to fraud and error will be back. Talk about using a hammer to crack a NUT. This is power for the sake of it and an unnecessary grab of power from the people.

Today sees the threat unchecked and untested going forward and on the horizon we have other forms of state intervention, global intervention and new International health regulations and now is the time for people in this House to have these conversations about massive state intervention and by we don't want that. In conclusion, don't want that. In conclusion, ironically, isn't it, that the Draconian legislation used for lockdown led to high levels of fraud, error, millions of people on benefit.

It is supposedly now going to be solved and corrected by yet another massive state of a rich and Draconian legislation. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want... Sometimes in these debate you are dragged towards the front bench and I've given up on
17:05
John McDonnell Portrait Rt Hon John McDonnell MP (Hayes and Harlington, Independent)
-
-
front bench and I've given up on that and I want to get on my record why I am concerned about dysregulation and why I support the new clause 11. -- This regulation. We pre-face what is said about tackling fraud and following up to the speech of the honourable lady, during the COVID process, I think I was the first MP to raise the issue of the massive fraud going on with bank loans and I will do Chancellor and various ministers and received back responses which were almost dictated by the banks and security measures put in place and that this was being administered effectively and we discovered, I think it was £9 billion, or £13 billion recovered and saw I'm very wary about making sure public expenditure avoids levels of fraud that we saw during that occasion but I am concerned about this piece of legislation itself because I think that we are taking huge steps constitutionally, legally, with regard to civil liberties, and some of these points that people have made...

The tradition is that you are innocent until proven guilty and that is the legal principle from the Magna Carta onwards. The investigation powers are usually triggered by an element of suspicion at the legislation rides roughshod over that 1000-year tradition and the issue of privacy and the reality is, whatever assurances we are given about the compliance, I have my doubts, but this is the introduction for the first time I have seen of mass

**** Possible New Speaker ****

surveillance on an issue like this. I thank him for giving way. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for giving way. The honourable member go straight to the point I tried to raise. 25 NGOs point I tried to raise. 25 NGOs support the amendment and it is support the amendment and it is almost certain that this will end up in court if we go down this route. I think we will have issues with privacy.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

privacy. Follow the track record of his predictions on issues like this and predictions on issues like this and he has been proven right on virtually every occasion. I agree. In addition to mass surveillance, the extent of the information that can be sought and can be admitted from this legislation, I think it is extremely wide-ranging and open to challenge. What has annoyed me is that we are introducing compensation in advance of what we were promised in terms of code of conduct and reparation.

We have no idea how this will work out in practice but within the code, it was, if members recall, as set out, it was about how the system would operate in detail at every level with the information seeking the powers etc are. Don't worry, the other place will receive ducts that is not our responsibility. We don't know how the independent persons as I described are to be appointed either or how they will operate or the point raised by the member opposite about reports and recommendations and how they are implemented and who they will be accountable to and if there is a role of accountability to the House.

In the past, when we have introduced legislation like this, it short-circuits the traditional mechanisms we have and aid has, time and time again, led to miscarriages and that is exactly what we are facing here and the reference has been made with regard to the model and we have learnt nothing from where we made those errors themselves and what seems to be happening here is discriminatory and we are choosing working-class and targeting them.

If there is a group of people, a class of people that we wanted to target, that we knew had a record of fraud and who had a record of cleaning for the things that they should not have done, here we are. The expanses scandal has demonstrated that if there is one group of people we should examine more closely, it is members of Parliament. I want to talk briefly, and I will be quick, about the impact. From the constituency point of view, as an MP for 28 years, this is my experience.

In my constituency, I meet lots of people who don't claim the benefits that they should, that they are entitled to. Often they are older people but others as well. Why don't they do that? It is the stigma attached to claiming benefits and what we are doing in this legislation is adding more, aren't we? A bit more stigma to act as a disincentive to those who qualify and should be coming forward and that terror of error and the fear of risking being penalised for clearing a benefit that you might not be entitled to our an error occurs and you have been paid too much and there is real fear among my constituents about when the miscarriages said.

Another point is most of the constituents to come to surgeries have tried everything else by the time that they get to us and they have the most chaotic lives and they are the ones who could sanction time and time again, not for deliberate acts but because they have mental health issues or something in their life prevents them from attending an interview on applying for jobs or that sort of thing and they will be dragged into this system again. At the moment, they come to ours because most they come to ours because most agencies have been shut down because of cuts and they come to us in desperation and I think this will make people more desperate and deter people who should be claiming from claiming and cause hardship on penalties to those who are least deserving and that is why I think it is a poor piece of legislation and I don't think it will take long before we are Pacheo to amend this legislation and restore some elements of civil liberties and protection for the purist in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

society. We have a limited time limit of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

four minutes. When it comes to public money, everyone knows about the importance of preventing fraud. The fact the of preventing fraud. The fact the benefit system could be exploited benefit system could be exploited loosens the cement but but in history there is a track record of poor recovery measures. It will never see the £1.5 billion that is expected of it. I asked, will the award of legislation ever match the scale of imposition on civil liberties and RB really going after the right targets? We all want to catch deliberate and professional fraudsters but they are precisely the people who are astute enough to change tactics, set up separate bank accounts and avoid suspicion, as the honourable member alluded to earlier.

Instead, the innocent and
17:14
John Milne Portrait John Milne MP (Horsham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
accidental climates will fall into the trap. The implicit assumption is the trap. The implicit assumption is we should trust in the DWP as an error free organisation across the error free organisation across the entirety of the massive reparation. The make mistakes. They make The make mistakes. They make mistakes all the time. And found they know that they have and have they know that they have and have been told so, they are capable of making the same mistake again. In making the same mistake again.

In Horsham, my constituency, Anthony and his husband were accused of providing this information to the DWP and being overpaid by £10,000 as a result. Anthony protested without success and after a long fight, it went to appeal at the tribunal wasted no time in deciding in his favour and it was an open and shut case. Earlier this year, they were migrated over to Universal Credit migrated over to Universal Credit and after they confirmed details for correct, they were overpaid again and then they sought to claw the money back.

It was their mistake but Anthony pays the penalty. The DWP has rules but real life does not run in straight lines. Real life is messy. How could we possibly rely on the DWP to mark its own hole when we know that there are just four fraud advisers for each regional office to handle the cases and the frontline staff. There are some checks and balances in the legislation but what is needed is a profound cultural change within the DWP and that is much harder to achieve.

The common experience of people who have to deal with them on a daily basis is that they are always looking to catch you out. Years and years of rhetoric under a succession of Conservative governments have convinced people to regard the DWP as their enemy, not their friend and if anything, this bill digs the hole a little deeper. What concerns me most is the extreme overconfidence. It assumes government agencies always get things right and that individual citizens are to be automatically treated as options of suspicion.

The government was resistant to any amendments except its own during the committee stage so I very much hope that they will reconsider today and accept the Liberal Democrat amendments as Liberal Democrat amendments as
17:16
David Pinto-Duschinsky Portrait David Pinto-Duschinsky MP (Hendon, Labour)
-
-
I rise to speak against them as a two, four, five, six, eight and Forwarding the benefit system affects us all. It costs us as a country almost £1 million an hour. It takes money from the most vulnerable in society, it undermines the legitimacy of public support for our Social Security system. Yet many of the amendments simply do not recognise the need for this legislation. Some, like amendments to and nine would string the bill by preventing us from gathering key information.

Others like eight, five and six, the effectiveness of the bill in making its powers more difficult to use. Others, like four and new clause 12 and 15 would seek to delay its effects. These amendments, however differently proposed also for from the same mythology, they failed to take fraud seriously. We have had a number of speeches today and yet we are yet to hear any serious practical suggestions about how we might tackle fraud. They say they are concerned to protect the vulnerable but I say to them gently, they can offer no proposals on how to prevent the fraud stealing from the needless and our society.

I know many are coming from a genuine place concern about how to strike the right balance in protecting the public purse, on the one hand and privacy and rights of claimants on the other. And I say to them, I think the bill gets the balance right. The the bill gets the balance right. The powers it provides... I've got limited time, I will make progress. The powers are proportionate, measured and safeguarded. It is a mark as we heard from the Secretary of State, the second reading debate that the Information Commissioner has stated that the bill, as currently drafted has addressed the previously stated concerns.

The powers are proportionate and necessary to fight the evermore sophisticated fraud we are facing. Over the last decade financial institutions have extensively overhauled the use of technology and data and the approach to the evolving of fraud threat. The government has not. It is illuminating but perhaps not surprising that the while Social Security fraud has risen dramatically post Covid, the financial service sector, including credit card fraud has actually fallen, and according to UK Finance. The public sector has paid a steep price for not modernising its antifraud approach and a failing to adopt industry best practice.

It is a gap that this bill seeks to address. But most of all, the measures in this bill are crucial for protecting the vulnerable and safeguarding the legitimacy of the system itself. Our Social Security system rests on public consent and a belief that money is a fairly spent. Fraud and error chips away at the social contract. It takes money from those who need it most. The public across the country expect us to take action. There is nothing progressive whatsoever. The only people who benefit are the criminals who exploit our system, and those that wish to undermine its role as a cornerstone of a civilised and fair society.

The sake of the most vulnerable, for the sake of the taxpayer, the sake of fairness of the system itself, I hope the system will join me in supporting the bill will join me in supporting the bill and voting down these amendments. Thank you.
17:20
Kirsty Blackman Portrait Kirsty Blackman MP (Aberdeen North, Scottish National Party)
-
-
There continues to be a many problems with this bill, and you problems with this bill, and you Is having extensive conversations with Scottish Government, a number of amendments, as a result of that. I welcome the communication between the two. I would urge the Minister to ensure that the DWP have extensive conversations in advance of the welfare bill so that we do not have government amendments at report stage, for how the bill interacts with the Scottish legislation, the Scottish systems.

In terms of the different amendments that are down on a new clause 1, it is completely fair to wait until a review has been done. I do think there needs to be a significant look into this. And clawing back money from people, without seeing the results of that could be incredibly problematic. I would be happy to support that amendment. In terms of support that amendment. In terms of the comments around... I have concerns that the way that the amendment is drafted, I understand the Shadow Minister has tried to draft it, so as to exclude those people who have given advice that it might unintentionally catch some of those people that providing the advice.

I am a keen to support -- not keen. I would be worried about the genuine people being caught in it. I do understand she has attempted to carefully drafted in order to try to avoid that. In terms of amendment 11, I would be more than happy to support, the SNP will support this. The suspicion of wrongdoing, the member from Hayes and Harlington made, I was actually going to mention the propensity of MPs. Previous MPs to do so. In terms of looking at who actually cost the taxpayer a significant amounts of money.

If the government were to sit there and say we know we can hold millions of pounds in offshore trust funds, for example, quite often dodge tax and say we are going to Seville all of their bank accounts. Then I imagine there would be some sort of rising, particularly from some of the more wealthy people that we are aware of. Because the government is saying it is cool, we are all expected to assume that this is fine. It is not. It is not fine, it is an absolute imposition on people's lives.

It is looking at, it is treating everybody, as has been said by a number of people, like they are fraudsters. Looking at the amount of money that is set to be saved by this, the government is going to save less money annually, on this than the DWP makes an overpayment annually. Surely, rather than imposing on so many people's civil liberties, cracking the official error overpayments, which would save more money, would be a better place to begin, in terms of doing this.

It is absolutely daft. The new clause 7 that has been proposed by my colleague from Brighton Pavilion, I completely agree with, particularly in terms of expectation that people could understand they have been overpaid. The constituent contacted me and they have a letter telling them they are going to be migrated to Universal Credit. They are terrified they are going to be deported, because the word migrated was used in that letter that they receive. They do not understand the language that has been put to them by DWP.

Given the fact that Universal Credit is so incredibly complicated to calculate, there are so many people calculate, there are so many people that could not reasonably have been expected to understand they were being overpaid and therefore DWP should be taken that into account. should be taken that into account.
17:24
Peter Bedford Portrait Mr Peter Bedford MP (Mid Leicestershire, Conservative)
-
-
Nobody else bobbing on the Fraud and error in our public services. I welcome the current government's continuation of the work of the previous government to protect taxpayers money and uphold the integrity of our welfare system. The amendments proposed by the official opposition do not undermine the bill, they actually enhance it. Are amendments to the bill preserve the fundamental element of fair proportionality. While strengthening the tools at our disposal to tackle wrongdoing. In this spirit, I rise to speak in support of new clause 8 and new clause 21.

New clause 8 is a measured and unnecessary proposal. It simply brings the Department for Work and Pensions in line with other government bodies, such as HMRC and the Child Maintenance Service, which already have the power to issue arrest warrants for cases of serious fraud against the state. Why should it lack these enforcement capabilities? When the crimes that they deal with are just as serious. The taxpayer enters into a contract with the state. A contract based on trust, responsibility and accountability. My constituents in mid Leicestershire pay their taxes and quite rightly expect that those who cheat, lie or exploit the system or face the consequences.

We, in this House are the guardians of that social contract. If the public believe that we are turning blind eye to fraud or failing to act decisively that trust begins to erode. The social contract itself can be put at risk. The legal actions must have legal consequences. In supporting new clause 8 the government concerned a clear and unequivocal message, fraud and deceit have no place in our society. Turning to new clause 21 stop it is a recently been highlighted that individuals are using social media to promote ways of defrauding the system.

Including the motor ability seen. This is deeply troubling. While positively my own question on this. The current version of the bill does not go far enough. Unless the government supports are amendments it will be fiddly to take the concrete steps needed to address this evolving form of deceit. This House has an opportunity today, an opportunity to work across party lines to further strengthen the bill to stop an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to protecting the social contract between the Government and those governed.

Let us resolve to reduce fraud, to restore public trust and to ensure that our system at work works for those and not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

those that seek to abuse them. Under the previous Conservative government, fraudsters got away with government, fraudsters got away with claiming billions of pounds of claiming billions of pounds of Carers Support Fund, 39.8 billion a year went uncollected due to tax year went uncollected due to tax evasion and other criminal activity. While vulnerable members have seen their benefits cut, our public services and investment. It is not
17:27
Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney MP (Richmond Park, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
services and investment. It is not right the public spending has been misplaced into the pockets of fraudsters. I'm therefore grateful for many of the measures in this bill which will work to reduce. I have concerns about some of the broader measures in this legislation, regarding the powers for DWP and the potentially intrusive impact this would have on the civil liberties of citizens. I wish today to speak in a new clause of 23, tabled by the Member for Torbay. This amendment would require a report to Parliament within six months of the causes and cost of public sector for, during the Covid-19 pandemic.

This would include an account of any fraudulent payments, review of procurement practices and are encoded, including contracting for supplies and the role of political appointments and personal connections in procurement decisions, as well as an assessment of the adequacy to prevent falling as public authorities for stop I would mention that as a member in this parliament and previous, much has already been undertaken, by that committee and would be very worthwhile of the Minister to take and look at some of our reporting, on those topics.

If the failings are found, the amendment would require an outline of corrective actions including a statement of this House, to acknowledge its findings is that our actions planned to ensure that failings are not repeated. As an alarming low level we must be taking all possible steps to ensure integrity and the highest possible standards in governance. The cronyism, rule breaking and sleaze scandals of the last Conservative government did huge damage to public trust and politics politicians in the country. This amendment has accepted that an increase of accountability and I urge the Minister to accept it.

I'm glad to see the government introduce measures that will crack down on instances of fraud. I have grave concerns about some of the broader measures in this legislation, which would lead to an unacceptable increase in intrusion on individual privacy. That is why you'd like to speak to amendment to, to revoke clause 74. This amendment would remove the requirement for banks to look into relevant claim as bank accounts will stop some measures raise-significant concerns considering the privacy of individuals. Constituents are alarmed at some of the powers that could be introducing this legislation.

I believe the fraud must be rooted out a more should be done to prevent fraud happening in the first place. It is unnecessary and inventive step which I urge the government to refrain from taking. I am concerned about the powers granted in this bill, it enables the government to have direct access to bank accounts, even enabling a DWP to withdrawal of funds and driving licences. This is particularly serious when it comes to vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, disabled people. Those living in poverty.

I welcome the government's commitment to cracking down on fraud. They have been clear failures by the previous Conservative government, during the Covid pandemic, which we saw highlighted with the procurement scandal and the bypassing of the usual procurement rules. It is essential that there are proper rules in place to ensure the public spending is carried out in an effective and efficient and transparent way and am glad to support new clause 23, which would strengthen transparency and accountability on this issue. However, grave concerns about intrusive powers this legislation introduced have been expressed across the House today, particularly those that allow the government to have banks and other financial institutions to share client data.

I urge the Minister to accept this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

amendment and withdraw this clause from the bill. Just looking around the chamber
17:31
Siân Berry Portrait Siân Berry MP (Brighton Pavilion, Green Party)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just looking around the chamber at Joanna Baxter, I think I am looking at this inaccurately, I shall go to Sian, Chambery.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

shall go to Sian, Chambery. There is a lot I could say. New clause 7 will remove official error clause 7 will remove official error from the most punitive measures to stop I spoke against the whole suite of intrusive legislation and the second part of this bill, a second reading. I still oppose it now. I was pleased to serve on the public bill committee and supporting other amendments, they also backed alongside members from both sides of In both these places, I described how this bill in my view does treat already stigmatised benefit claimants as suspect noncitizens via blank intrusion and surveillance.

I think it's absolutely wrong that this legislation goes through in this form. I think the first part works, the second part is absolutely out of order. New clause 7 however in my name is very shortly about fair play. It would bring in a test for the recovery of Universal Credit overpayments caused by official error into line with regulation 100 error into line with regulation 100 in bracket to (WHERE the claimant could realistically have been a spate to realise there was an overpayment.

And make no mistake, mistakes by the DWP can have huge financial and psychological impacts on people who are receiving benefits, and the risk of harm is particularly acute for those official error overpayments which individuals literally have no way of anticipating. So can I also point out that new clause 7 is also to an amendment proposed by Labour front benches during the passage of the welfare reform act back in 2012 when the government first started to recover Universal Credit overpayments at all.

So turning to other few important amendments, I want to restate my support for the men's two and five. They see disapply remove totally indefensible bank spying powers. I also want to express my support for amendments 10 and 12 in the name of the honourable member football. These rallies seek to do away with the driving this collocation powers which have previously I have opposed to. I do want to put on record my support for amendment 11, which quite rightly limits the banks powers to cases with existing suspicion of wrongdoing.

I'm as well pleased that the honourable member Liverpool Wavertree has taken forward amendments eight and nine that I moved in committee stage. And I and my green colleagues will also be voting for and see one in the name of the honourable member Torbay and carer's allowance and lessons learned. It matters when we treat people who need a safety net as suspect. It matters when governments invade privacy in a blank intrusion that affects older people, disabled people, and other minorities in a disproportionate way.

And the matter is that the powers proposed today extend to punishing and impoverishing citizens for our own departments mistakes. Treating the with humanity and due process should be the default setting, not these intrusive new blanket laws, and I hope Parliament will ask ministers to dial up the competence, dial down the stigma and think again today. the stigma and think again today.
17:34
Ann Davies Portrait Ann Davies MP (Caerfyrddin, Plaid Cymru)
-
-
(SPEAKING IN WELSH) after the past few months, it's been one thing after another for the vulnerable, the sick and disabled people. The recently announced cuts to welfare will affect 6% of the population in Wales according to policy and practice. Punishing the sick and disabled. And this bill adds to that punishment by increasing state financial surveillance on welfare recipients. This bill is full of intrusive measures from granting access to three months of bank statements to allowing direct deductions from bank accounts without court orders and under provision of police powers to enter and search property.

And that's not just my opinion. New mothers charities and organisation from Age Concern to the Child poverty action group support Big Brother swatch recommendation to oppose eligibility verification powers under clause 74 for example. Similar powers were previously proposed under the former Conservative government and consider the potential breach of privacy and the Human Rights Act. Labour MPs at the time were amongst critics of these powers, and is disappointing actually to see so few Labour MPs here today.

But thank those who have actually spoken up once again. I'm glad to see the amendments such as amendment eight and nine tabled by the honourable member for Liverpool -- waiver tree and tabled by the honourable member from Paul that seek to address these concerns, including omitting or removing powers to compel banks to provide sensitive financial information. Because even though this provision is causing real anxiety and distress, such as for my constituents Simon and his family. His daughter who receives PIP due to a long-term effect of brain cancer as a child and his son, who suffers from psychosis and schizophrenia, both are extremely worried about the government accessing their private financial decisions.

It's already affecting their day-to-day life and decisions. And when I wrote to the government, outlining his concerns before this bill was published, I was told that Bill is not designed to cause distress or undertake covert surveillance of disabled people or any benefit claimant. But that's obviously not happening is it? But combined with restricting Winter Fuel Payments and refusal to abolish the two-child cap, sweeping Welfare cuts, people disproportionately feel they are being targeted. This is the reality that the Labour government must accept and address.

This bill further stigmatises people who are supposed, we are supposed to protect, those who are entitled to stay support while already suffering following recent UK Government decision. And as members of Parliament, is our job to better people's lives and to ensure that everyone in our community feels supported. We are here to serve, to serve all our constituents, which includes the vulnerable, the elderly, the disabled and infirm. We are not here to cause further distress and hardship. We need to ensure that constituents have the access to the help and the services that they need.

Sadly, this bill does the very opposite of that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That's the end of the Backbench contributions. We come to the contributions. We come to the Frontbench, and I believe the shadow Minister will like to say a few

**** Possible New Speaker ****

words. With the leaf of the House, I will just make a few additional will just make a few additional comments if I may, and its providing a perfect opportunity to respond to some of the points made specifically about the conservative amendments or about the conservative amendments or new clauses today. The first one I
17:39
Rebecca Smith Portrait Rebecca Smith MP (South West Devon, Conservative)
-
-
want to touch on briefly was to the honourable member from Hendon who quite rightly was on a short time limit on his speech and was not able to take any interventions, but I just wanted to speak to the points he made in terms of including our new clauses, for example new clause 12. He rattled off the other numbers really quickly so forgive me that I didn't hear all of them but I believe it was included new clause 12 and 15, and his application was that those additional clauses that we've tabled would delay the bill being put into law, and just want to say I don't believe that would be the case because as each of them is worded, it would imply it would be after the bill when the actors been put into power, so just those additional safeguards around the cost indications for banks, annual reporting and the implantation of an anti fraud and error technology.

Additional safeguards and points we think would make the act even better, should be passed today rather than something we were hoping would essentially be wrecking amendments. So wanted to say regardless of the others you might have included, the honourable member in his list, hours are certainly not in that vein. The other comments made by the honourable member for Aberdeen North, particularly around our new clause 21, and the honourable member said she was very slightly unhappy about the concern that there might be those who are genuinely seeking to help benefit claimants to get what they are entitled to could inadvertently get caught in the net of this legislation, and I think I would say that again that's not our intent.

It was to ensure that only those who are seeking to push people to commit fraud would be caught, and where some of those citizens advice services are as mentioned earlier, improving lives Plymouth who are looking to help people claim what they are entitled to, they would not be caught in this new clause because they would only be involved in error if there was a mistake made rather than fraud. So appreciable the honourable member said, but feel that actually what we were intending is not that.

And I believe the wording of our new clause would cover that. As it needs to be said. Just two other points, there was a concern that was raised during the committee stage which was around the extent of the bank accounts that are searched and the fact that what is not tackled in this act in our view our other bank accounts that those who may be committing fraud are in possession of, which would not be checked by this act, and so therefore we probably need to go further in the future to make sure we are tackling everything to make sure that fraud is properly dealt with.

And just in a light-hearted moment if I may, I've been reading the payback of this debate, will see plenty of references to cheesecake, and I just thought I should imply why that is what happened. There was concern raised during the debate about the fact that this bill would see individual transactions in a bank account, assessed and perhaps judged and that therefore everyone would feel terrible if they had bought a cheesecake from Waitrose or in other shops available. And that would be a problem for people in the future.

So just to anybody wondering why we were talking about that, it's about having transactions checked, and the Minister at the time very kindly reassured us all that this bill will not be checking individual transactions. It would just be dealing with the benefit payments someone is receiving and whether they have capital that is they have capital that is potentially in that they should be having whilst also taking benefits. I will leave the debit ahead that is helpful. helpful.
17:42
Andrew Western Portrait Andrew Western MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Stretford and Urmston, Labour)
-
-
We come to the final windup the Minister. the House, I will begin by thanking all honourable members for their contributions, and for the time I have, or try to respond to some of the points that have been raised. I have listened closely to concerns set out by a number of members across the House, and I will of course ensure that those taking forward as the bill regresses forward to the other place. However for today I will be resisting all non-government amendments.

If I may make some initial comments on the contributions of several members who spoke before turning specifically to the next amendments and new clauses, so in her opening contribution, the opposition spokesperson member for South West Devon spoke as did the Member for Mid Leicestershire on how this bill built on the work that the previous administration had sought to bring forward on the tackling the fraud and error. I have to say I consider that a fairly generous interpretation of the work of the previous government, not least because they had absolutely no powers set out that I can find anywhere on the Public Sector Fraud Authority and tackling fraud across the public sector and moreover nothing on debt recovery.

The only evidence that we can find any new powers that the previous government was seeking to bring forward is in the eligibility verification space. I accept they sought to do that, albeit that they did that in a rather botched fashion. Subject to significant criticism and with none of the safeguards over set in place that are now built into this bill. I absolutely agree with her that this government cannot and will not be complacent in tackling fraud. I just gently say that having allowed fraud and error to spiral to £9.7 billion in the welfare system at the time of the last election, I fear that the same could not be said of the previous government.

The honourable gentleman from Torbay Liberal Democrat spokesperson spoke of a broken welfare system. I don't want to be drawn into a debate on that. But I would certainly say that an approach to tackling benefit fraud and error is certainly a part of any problem that the Department does phase. And would spend some time, and I will do so later on when I turn to the amendment specifically addressing the point from my honourable friend the Member for Paul. Largely articulated in his Amendment 11 around the eligibility verification measure.

He and other members, the member for Aberdeen North, my right honourable friend from Hayes & Harlington spoke to the impact this would have on the very poorest, giving them less rights to privacy than everybody else. I understand their concerns but I do have to say gently to members that that is not my interpretation because we have already established in this place the right of government to receive information from private organisations, including banks and building societies or data that points to financial standing.

So France's HMRC only received data on every interest-bearing account in the country. So this is not an unprecedented power. Typically, HMRC send out 550 notices to data holders covering 130 million accounts. And 100 notices to card acquiring service providers with HMRC receiving 20 million lines of data on card sales. So understand the concerns of honourable members, but I would challenge gently the extent He also set out, and this was alluded to by my honourable friend from Hayes and Harlington, a horizon type event.

I want to assure the house of a very clear difference. Because the horizon scandal emerged because evidence had been taken from a single source. That will not be the case here. We will of course receive flagged information from banks of a potential breach of eligibility criteria. However, this will not be the source of evidence that is sufficient to prove fraud. What that will do is trigger a look at that account, and if there is not an obvious reason why somebody may be potentially in breach of eligibility criteria that will trigger a human investigation that will look at a range of sources of evidence to establish the reason why.

Only then would there be any suggestion that fraud, or indeed error, has occurred. Because they can be legitimate reasons for somebody, for instance, having an amount of capital above the amount allowed by their benefit. For instance, in Universal Credit where the amount is £16,000, let's use the example someone got a payment as a result of the horizon scandal or the infected blood scandal, they would then be exempt. I do understand the concerns, but I do think it is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

distinct from the Horizon scandal. Social security payments,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Social security payments, stopping until the human investigation happens.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

investigation happens. I'm happy to provide that assurance, she stole my next. I am assurance, she stole my next. I am able to say categorically that this is a data portion only, no decisions is a data portion only, no decisions will be taken as a direct result other than a decision to look further into an account and further into an account and potentially initiate a human investigation if needed. I also wanted to say a little more about amendments 10 and 12, but my honourable friend put forward, with regard to driving licences.

He rightly set out in his speech that welfare recipients may not be able to engage with the department. I want to say for the record that nobody in receipt of benefits or paid through PAYE employment will be in scope for these powers, and therefore the power to suspend drivers licenses. So anybody who we do seek to remove the driver's licence of we will have made at least four attempts to contact them, at least for further attempts through our debt enforcement team, have established their ability to repay by looking at three months bank statements.

It is only then when we seek to deduct from that bank account, an individual has removed the funds that we know they have, we would then seek a consideration. We would look into the possibility of suspending their drivers licence. Even then, because this is very much a last resort power, we would seek to agree an repayment plan with them right up to the end. The court would reset payment terms were a drivers licence to be suspended. It's worth saying also it's always a suspended decision subject to compliance with a repayment plan, affordably set by the court.

When I say this is a power of last resort, I hope that assures colleagues of all of the many steps that are in place before we reach that point. And most importantly of all, that this does not apply to current benefit recipients or anybody paid via PAYE employment. The member for Tatton mention new clause 11 around the publication of pilot schemes. I would like to clarify for the House that we are not proposing any further pilot schemes as a result of introducing this legislation.

Two pilot schemes have already taken place, so we know this works. We will be adopting the test and learn approach so we can scale this up. But the question of whether this is a mechanism that will yield information that is helpful to us in our enquiries something settled by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the previous government. Does the Minister have all the information and details of the only pilot schemes the government is prepared to do, have they been published in their entirety?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

published in their entirety? Information of that nature was published prior to Second Reading and is available to members. Turning specifically to the amendments that specifically to the amendments that have attracted the new clauses, that have attracted the most attention in have attracted the most attention in the debate today. New clause 1, from the Liberal Democrat spokesperson the member for Torbay. It pertains to Carer's Allowance. May I start by paying tribute to the millions of unpaid carers across the country.

This government values carers highly and recognises the vital contribution they make everyday. Like others, I see that in my constituency work week after week, and I am in or of all they do. This government inherited a system where busy carers already struggling under a huge weight of responsibility have been left having to repay huge sums of Carer's Allowance, sometimes worth thousands of pounds. We need to understand exactly what went wrong so we can set out our plan to set this right.

That's why we launched an independent review of overpayments, we would be delighted -- investigating how overpayment allowance is being occurring, and how to reduce risk of these problems occurring in the future. The independent review is now underway and is anticipated to conclude this summer. But we are not sitting back, we are taking action now. We continue to review and improve our communications with carers to make it as easy as possible for them to tell us when something changes in their life that could affect their entitlement.

Moreover, this government introduced the largest ever increase in the earnings limit since Carer's Allowance was introduced, with the weekly Carer's Allowance earnings limit increasing to £196 from 7 April this year. It is now pegged permanently to 16 hours.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Clearly, many carers have been

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Clearly, many carers have been affected by overpayments. It comes as a shock to many who are trying to work to bridge that gap between work to bridge that gap between Carer's Allowance and their families costs, it has a significant impact costs, it has a significant impact on their mental health. Does the Minister share my gratitude to Liz Minister share my gratitude to Liz Sayce to the work she is doing, providing clarity for the many

**** Possible New Speaker ****

providing clarity for the many carers trying to juggle family care and work. I absolutely agree with my honourable friend's comments Liz Sayce is doing fantastic work and I look forward to her review in due course. Turning specifically to the context my contents of new clause 1, it is expected to arrive at its conclusions this summer. It would be irresponsible for me to commit in advance to doing everything, this will need to be given careful consideration when provided to department.

I do not believe this amendment would have the effect. This amendment would prevent the recovery of under powers in this bill, but the DWP would still be able to recover Carer's Allowance overpayments three deductions of benefits or PAYE earnings. This would place carers in an unequal position in regards to overpayment recovery, with recovery depending on if they were in receipt of benefits or in PAYE employment or not. Even as I believe the amendment as it was intended, suspending all overpayments until the review is concluded would be disproportionate.

There are existing safeguards and protections for those including repayment plans and exceptional circumstances the option to waive the debt. Turning then to new clause 21, as was spoken to by the opposition spokesperson the member for Southwest Devon. I will make some reference also to new clause 8 in just setting out my view of this, because these seek to create new offences, new clause 8 poses a new offence. It's my view this is covered already making it unnecessary.

The common law offence and conspiracy to defraud regardless of whether the fraud is against public authorities or anybody else, it's already in existence. The introduction of governments amendments to clause 70 to bring offences, of possessing, making and supplying articles of the use of fraud together with the existing offences of existing and encouraging found in the Serious Crime Act 2007 section 44 to 46, the scope of the issue the committee members were concerned about where a person seeks to commit fraud through internet videos can be tackled with this.

I've already taken an intervention on this earlier but I'm short of time. Having stayed for the whole debate Mikati state that the whole debate I might be more willing to do so. Sorry, an intervention. It is my view that we simply need to enforce existing law, similarly with new clause 21 this seeks to amend the Social Security act, it's not my view this is necessary, it's covered by the fraud act 2006 and Serious Crime Act 2007. The honourable Lady did ask for assurance we will use the powers we do have.

As I said earlier in response to interventions from honourable members, I have commissioned work within the Department to look at how we can further use the powers we do have. It is not my view that historically we take advantage of that. Turning to new clause 10, we do want to ensure government has access to a wide and proportionate range of recovery powers so we can recover money from those who have the means to pay but refused to do so.

However, new clause 10 is not required as equivalent action is already provided for through existing legislation of the DWP, and by clause 16 of this bill for the PSFA. All 16 clarifies the PSFA is able to seek alternative civil recovery through civil courts, in addition to the direct reduction orders and reduction from earnings orders in this bill. This could include viability orders as things stand. I think I have largely covered amendment 11. But in closing, I just want to make a few observations about amendment eight and nine, tabled by my honourable friend for Liverpool Wavertree, spoken to by other members.

In my view these would reduce the effectiveness of our debt recovery powers, as proposed in the bill. So they are not something I can agree to this point. But I do know and recognise the importance of dialogue with customers, all the way through the journey of debt recovery. As I set out in response to concerns of my honourable friend from Poole about the revocation of somebody's driving licence, we will seek to engage at all stages of the journey if we identify any vulnerabilities we would cease recovery, and at all stages we would look to agree affordable repayment plans.

In closing, I hope I have addressed the majority of points raised by honourable and right honourable members. I would like to thank them again for their contributions today. I would also like to thank the witnesses who gave their time to the committee, those who provided written evidence and finally extend my thanks to the clerks, house staff and civil servants who contributed to the passage of this bill. For too long, too little effort has been made to get a grip on public sector, resulting in the unacceptable levels we see today.

But with this bill we are taking the powers to act and finally take the fight to the crooks and con artists. From criminal gangs attacking our welfare system to COVID fraudsters who stole from hard-working people in a time of national emergency. This bill is critical, it will save us billions of pounds, it is part of a broader package in the Department to save £9.6 billion for the DWP by 2030. I hope all members will feel able to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

support it today. The question is that government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that government new clause 17 be read a second time, as many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye". Of the contrary, "No". The "Aye". Of the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. The question is that the government new clause 17 be added to the bill, as many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye". Of the contrary, "No". The ayes have it, contrary, "No". The ayes have it, the ayes have it. I just need a the ayes have it.

I just need a We now come to government new clauses 80... Page seven. Under the order of the House, I must now put the questions necessary to bring proceedings and consideration to a
18:01
None Portrait Division
-

conclusion. We come to government new clauses 18 to 20. I call the new clauses 18 to 20. I call the Minister to move new clauses 18 to 20 formally. The question is that new clauses 18 to 20 be added to the new clauses 18 to 20 be added to the bill. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. New clause 1 has been selected for separate decision. I called Liberal Democrat spokesperson to move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

formally. Move formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that new clause 1 be added to the bill first As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Division! The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Tellers for the ayes are Zoe Franklin and Will Forster.

Tellers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lock Lock the Lock the doors.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order Order order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order order. The ayes to the right, 73. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left, 255. The ayes to the right, 73. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right, 73. The noes to the left 255. So the noes have it, the noes have it. Unlock.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

New clause 10 has been selected for separate decision. I called the opposition spokesperson to move new clause 10 formally. New move formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

New move formally. The question is that new clause 11 be added to the bill. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Division! Clear

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that paper. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye", of the contrary, "No". The Tellers for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The ayes to the right, 101. The noes to the left, 258.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left, 258. The ayes to the right, 101. The noes to the left, 258. The noes have noes to the left, 258. The noes have it, the noes have it. Unlock. New clause 21 has been selected for separate decision. I called the opposition spokesperson to move new clause 21 formally. The question is that new clause 21 be added to the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye", of the The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order paper.

As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye", of the contrary, "No". Tellers for the Lock Lock the Lock the doors. Order Order order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right, 95. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left, 257. The ayes to the right, 95. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right, 95. The noes to the left, 257, said the noes noes to the left, 257, said the noes have it, the noes have it. Unlock. I called the Minister to move amendments 23 to 31, 76, 75, 32 to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

43, 79, 78, 77, 74, 73, 44, 72 and 45 formally. Move formally.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question as the government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Question as the government amendments 23 to 31, 76, 75, 32 to 33 -- 43, 79, 77, 43, 44, 72 and 45 be made. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." I think the ayes have it, the "No." I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Amendment 11 has been selected for separate decision. I called Neil Duncan-Jordan to move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the amendment formally. I beg to move. The question is that amendment 11

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that amendment 11 be made. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, Members Members should Members should be Members should be seated. Members should be seated. The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." Tellers for the ayes are Chris Hinchliff. Tellers for the noes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Locked Locked the Locked the doors.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The ayes to the right, 85. The noes to the left, 238.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

noes to the left, 238. The ayes to the right, 85. The noes to the left, 238. The noes have noes to the left, 238. The noes have it, the noes have it. Unlock. I call the Minister to move amendments 46
18:51
Liz Kendall Portrait PUBLIC AUTHORITIES (FRAUD, ERROR AND RECOVERY) BILL THIRD READING Rt Hon Liz Kendall MP, The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Leicester West, Labour)
-
-
the Minister to move amendments 46 to 74 -- 270, formally. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye", of the contrary, "No". The ayes have the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. Consideration, completed Third it. Consideration, completed Third Reading. Kings consent. Minister to move Third Reading.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

move Third Reading. I begged to move the bill be now read 1/3 time. This Labour government was elected on a mandate for change. To create more good jobs in every corner of the country. Drive up living standards for working people, and get our vital public services back on our feet. In delivering our plan for change means ensuring every single pound of taxpayer money is wisely spent, and goes to those in genuine need. And that is what this legislation will help deliver.

With the biggest ever crackdown on fraud against the public purse. It is unacceptable that the Conservative government allowed fraud against the public- sector to spiral to £55 billion a year, including a staggering £7.4 billion a year on benefit fraud alone. And it is unforgivable that they failed to ensure the Public Sector Fraud Authority was fit for purpose, or to properly update the DWP's antifraud powers for 14 years. When you think of all the new ways fraudsters and scam artists rip people off, including by using data and technology, this simply beggars and technology, this simply beggars belief.

And today we say, no more. Our bill updates the powers of the Public Sector Fraud Authority so it can effectively fight fraud across the public-sector on behalf of government departments and public authorities. And it makes vital upgrades to the DWP's fraud powers as well. With new powers to investigate fraud. So for the first time our serious and organised crime investigators can apply to the court for a warrant to search the premises of suspected fraudsters and sees evidence. Updated powers to gather information so we can compel third parties like airlines to give us information, and so we can require it to be delivered electronically so we can tackle fraud as quickly as possible.

Our new eligibility verification measure, so we can get crucial data from banks and financial institutions to check if people are getting money they are not entitled to. Like having more savings than they are allowed, or if they are fraudulently claiming benefits abroad when they should be living in the UK. The bill extends financial penalties to people who have fraudulently claimed any type of DWP claimant, -- payment, like grants and loans not just payments. And it gives us new powers to get money back from people who can pay but have repeatedly failed to do so.

Bringing our powers in line with other parts of government, like the child maintenance service and HMRC. And all of this being done in a proportionate way. With measures tightly defined in legislation. Strong safeguards, independent oversight with annual reports to Parliament, and codes of practice which we will bring forward at committee stage in the other place. I want to thank my honourable friends, the Minister for transformation and the parliamentary's for the Cabinet Office, full steering the bill through its committee stage and report stage.

Supported by excellent civil servants and house of commons staff. I also want to thank all members of the Public Bill Committee, and from right across the house, for their detailed questions and thoughtful scrutiny of the bills measures. They have done this country a good service, because this bill provides us the tools we need to tackle modern fraud in the benefit system and across the public-sector. Helping to save £1.5 billion over the next five years as part of the DWP's wider action to save a total of £9.6 billion from benefit fraud and error.

Because people who work hard and play by the rules, people who depend on our public services and on vital benefits, they deserve to have trust and faith in the system and they are rightly angry when they see people abuse it. Our position is clear, if you knowingly defraud the benefit system or cheat public services, whether you are a large or small company, a criminal gang or an individual, we will find you, we will stop you, and we will get our money back.

This Labour government will restore trust and fairness in the system, and ensure every pound of public money delivers for the British people and our country. I commend this legislation to the house.
18:56
Helen Whately Portrait Helen Whately MP (Faversham and Mid Kent, Conservative)
-
-
The question is the bill be now

**** Possible New Speaker ****

read 1/3 time. Every penny of taxpayer money

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Every penny of taxpayer money lost to fraud or error is money wasted. So we on this side of the wasted. So we on this side of the house support many of the measures outlined in this bill, not least outlined in this bill, not least those that continue the hard work of my colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions prior to the general election. The government has a responsibility to ensure every penny it raises in taxation is well penny it raises in taxation is well spent.

Not only is this fair to taxpayers who work hard, it goes to the principal that must be at the heart of our system, that government support should go only to those it is intended for. Any penny that doesn't undermines the system, it erodes public trust and support, and it put support for some of the most vulnerable in society at risk. That's why in government we did the groundwork for the sections of this bill that sees banks cracking down on fraudsters, recognising that while the state should never be able to see what you spend your money on it should be able to check whether you are entitled to the money you are claiming.

The amendments we have tabled to this bill today are constructive, so I am disappointed the government has chosen not to support them. Rather than giving you help to claim something you may need and should rightly receive, videos online tell people how to game the system. We want taxpayers to get their money back even if it's already been spent. Why should we tolerate people abusing social media platforms to help others commit fraud? Been people treat the tests that are there to make sure support goes to those who need it.

People who have spelt -- spent they'll gotten gains before the government gets to them. We are clear both those things should be tackled, sadly Labour have shown themselves to be on the side of the fraudsters instead. As I said at the outset, we back the overall purpose of the bill, and much of the content. But I hope the right honourable lady's colleagues in the other place will take note of the constructive approach we have taken and the arguments made. Particularly those made so articulately by my honourable friends from south-west Devon earlier today, and in committee.

I look forward to seeing this bill improved between now and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

when it may become law. The question is that the bill be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the bill be now read the third time. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye", of the contrary, "No". The ayes have the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. That concludes that bit of business. I will let the business. I will let the frontbench... They must leave the
18:59
18:59
19:01
19:03
Richard Holden Portrait Rt Hon Richard Holden MP (Basildon and Billericay, Conservative)
-
-
chair Liam Lawrence Smith for their speed in conducting the recruitment and making a recommendation to the Prime Minister in March. The government supports Paula Sussex appointment to this role as we believe she has the ability and believe she has the ability and experience to lead the PHS, bringing insights from her time in the public insights from her time in the public and private sector. Therefore, in accordance with section 1 of a Parliamentary commission act 19 six to seven, and section 1 of the Health Service Commissioner's act 1993, I commend Paula Sussex to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

1993, I commend Paula Sussex to the House for the role of Parliamentary and Health Service Commissioner. The question is as on the order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

paper commander called the shadow Minister. I am pleased to rise to speak

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am pleased to rise to speak today in support of this important motion concerning the appointment of motion concerning the appointment of the next Parliamentary administration and Health Service Commissioner England collectively Commissioner England collectively known as the ombudsman. This office is one of the cornerstones of is one of the cornerstones of accountability in our democracy. It exists to ensure that when individuals are let down by government departments or the NHS, that their voices are heard. Their complaints can then be fairly investigated and where appropriate, the address is delivered.

In short the investment plays a vital role in protecting the rights of ordinary citizens, especially the most vulnerable amongst us, and I'm sure members on all sides of the House if they have not used the ombudsman already will at some point be referring one of their constituents to them. I certainly have myself. This appointment comes at a critical moment. Our public service, particularly NHS, are under real pressure. Complaints relating to delays, miscommunication, administrative is unfortunately becoming more common and is in that context that the role of the ombudsman is not just reactive.

It must be proactive in identifying systemic failings and recommending improvements to prevent harm before it occurs. We on these benches have carefully considered the proposed candidate and believe they bring with them a strong track record to the role, a deep understanding of institutional accountability and a proven ability to lead with integrity. And it was great to have the chair of the public administration and Constitutional affairs committee as part of the selection process. We must have confidence that the next Commissioner can act independently of both government and party politics, guided only by the principles of fairness, and the interest of the polling.

So let me say this, the effectiveness of this role does not lie in its visibility
19:05
Simon Hoare Portrait Simon Hoare MP (North Dorset, Conservative)
-
-
but in its vigilance. The ombudsman must be diligent, thorough and fearless in pursuit of justice, particularly for those who may feel powerless in the face of large institutions. This role is not an easy one, it requires judgement, easy one, it requires judgement, patience and empathy and the readiness to confront uncomfortable readiness to confront uncomfortable treats as well. We believe the nominee has these qualities and will serve the public with distinction. serve the public with distinction. Therefore, we support this motion for the sake of those who rely on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the services and for the sake of the government. Simon Hoare. Could I begin by echoing what the Minister has said in congratulating her for the work she has done in stepping in and in an interim role in fulfilling that job with great distinction as she has done over the recent period? Can I also thank through the Minister, the Prime Minister and indeed the wider Cabinet office for the speed with which they have responded to the recommendation from the interview panel, which is my right honourable friend from the Shadow frontbench has mentioned, I have the great pleasure of sitting on as the representative of the House as chairman of the public administration and Constitutional affairs committee.

Just two things I wanted to bring to the attention of the House. If I may. The first was that Paula Sussex underwent a preopening hearing by the committee last week, and they were very impressed with her, she is reported to our meeting who scrutinise the work of the woodsman for the that was the role I recused myself from the obvious reasons but it did want to rise to assure through you, the House I think it's been echoed by both the Minister and my right honourable friend, I am absolutely convinced that we selected the convinced that we selected the standout candidate on what was a very competitive and well-qualified very competitive and well-qualified field.

I think she felt the job with great distinction. Used the data available to help drive improvements available to help drive improvements to public service and as every recognises, Robinson champions the interests and concerns of our constituents.
19:07
19:07
None Portrait Petitions
-

The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it, the ayes have it. We now go on to the presentation of public petitions. Petition, Ben Goldsborough.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I rise to present a petition concerning the future of allotments in Wyndham, signed by 391 allotments in Wyndham, signed by 391 residents of South Norfolk. The residents of South Norfolk. The signatures reflect the strength of feeling in the town about the importance of these much loved growing spaces. The decision by Anglian Water to end the lease of Anglian Water to end the lease of this land risked tearing up decades of community gardening and friendship and pride. It's clear from the response of local people from the response of local people that it's just not about the soil and sheds comments about the social and sheds comments about the social fabric of Wyndham.

It's fine to this issue is brought before the House so that those in positions of power understand what this land means to those who attended. The petition states the petitioners and residents of constituency of South Norfolk declares that the allotment is of Wyndham are saddened by the ending of the lease of the land by Anglian Water to Wyndham town Council which will result in the allotment plot will result in the allotment plot losses. The petitioners therefore call to end the areas full to and the petitioners remain et cetera.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Allotments in Wyndham. Petition, John Lamont.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition, John Lamont. Thank you first arise to present this petition from my constituents to the House of Commons which was put together by the wild goat conservation group, particular David conservation group, particular David Thwaite and Gail Brown, and I note that the petition calls for the colour of wild goats online are more colour of wild goats online are more and Newcastleton Hill to stop. I want to record my thanks over the 4,300 people across the United Kingdom who have signed a similar online petition on this matter and to my right and befriend the Member for Dumfries, Clydesdale and Tweeddale his support.

The petition declares that wild goats have roamed Langholm Moor and Newcastleton Hill for hundreds of years and play an important part in the biodiversity and natural history of Scottish borders. Oxygen conservation who own the land they roam have callously started the coal this ancient animal without consideration of their historical and emotional significance for the local community. The petitioners therefore request the House of Commons to urge the government to make representations to the Scottish government on their behalf to encourage them to stop the cull of wild goats online are more and Newcastleton Hill and ensure the survival that this ancient animal in the Scottish Borders by granting them national protect status.

And

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition, Petition, protection Petition, protection of Petition, protection of primitive

**** Possible New Speaker ****

species in the Scottish Borders. Petition, Peter Swallow.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition, Peter Swallow. Thank you. The Acoustic Couch is a fantastic inclusive community run a fantastic inclusive community run grassroots music venue in the heart of Bracknell, and contributes richly to the culture and economy of our to the culture and economy of our town. The current venue which houses town. The current venue which houses the Acoustic Couch is under a car park that is no longer structurally sound and it will therefore be closed from the end of 2025. Bracknell Forest Council have been working with the Acoustic Couch to identify possible alternative endings, but sadly no affordable and accessible location has yet been identified.

Grassroots music venues play a huge role in communities across the country, but have faced substantial difficulties in recent years. I know the government recognises the need to protect their invaluable contribution to our
19:11
19:12
Monica Harding Portrait Monica Harding MP (Esher and Walton, Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this House do now adjourn, and I call Monica Harding for the adjournment debates.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Harding for the adjournment debates. Thank you. There is no issue in my constituency of Esher and Walton my constituency of Esher and Walton that demonstrates more the inertia and the failure of the previous political leadership than the problem of overstated wrecked and abandoned boats that have been left to proliferate along the banks of the Thames for the last decade. So I'm pleased to have this opportunity today to bring to attention of the House and of the Minister. Each important as a river community.

The Thames forms are boundary with London. It's waters have brought Vikings, Kings to have the core and its loved by my constituents first we have rowing clubs, most important which generate home-grown Olympians. The age of Viking Sea Scouts swimming groups. We have Riverside businesses who contribute our local economy and provide residents and tourists with access to the most famous river in our land. All of these are activities have been impacted by the sunken, wrecked and abandoned boats alongside unlicensed overstated boats.

They like my entire constituents lengths from the distance through mouldy and down into Walton on Thames. There are wrecked vessels, half sunk and resting on the banks opposite on the Banks Opposite Hampton Ct, Palace, visible to the hundreds of thousands of tourists who visit. Next door there are overstated boats. One constituent described as a small village. It is Dickensian. The overstated boats are almost always unregistered. They turn up more, and then stay for months, sometimes years. In addition to this impunity, they generate litter and waste.

Some boats apparently operate as air B&Bs. Others have erected fences. They fenced off pieces of public land putting up keep out and private signs along the tow path. Public land and intimidating residents. Stretches of land from the riverbank our riverbank, enjoyed the centuries by my constituents have become no-go areas, characterised by drug use and antisocial behaviour.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I commend the honourable lady for bringing this forward? I spoke to her beforehand to get her thoughts on what she hopes to thoughts on what she hopes to achieve. Like the envelope you have a constituency equally as nice as hers. But I can well understand the hers. But I can well understand the desire to stay with the advantage of the lovely locations throughout the the lovely locations throughout the Thames River. However, it is taken advantage of and prevented others advantage of and prevented others from enjoying it.

Does the honourable and learned lady not agree that we must have regulations in place which allow for reasonable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in place which allow for reasonable enjoyment, yes without people taking advantage? My Lords befriend makes the main point of what I want to say today, which is about regulations and who is accountable for this. One resident has told me how in the past few years, my neighbours and I have been subjected to constant harassment including threats of physical harm, theft of property, firing of catapults, fly-tipping, doc file and antisocial behaviour first -- dog fouling. This is profound unfair my constituents, residents who pay their taxes have lost the river as they know it.

Rowing clubs, boat hire compatible companies even are unable to launch -- unable to launch first residents who take out those are unable to. The Molesey regatta which has been a fixture of my committee since 1867 and which I declare an interest as an honorary president has been required to alter the course of its brace. In October a single cleanup of one stretch of the riverbank populated by these boats yielded The Environment Agency failing to get a grip with the situation over the years has meant that the number of boats has steadily risen.

At the last count the tally was approaching 250.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In Maidenhead the local authority and generous individuals have taken and generous individuals have taken matters into their own hands, and have been able to get rid of many sunken boats along our stretch of sunken boats along our stretch of the Thames. The EA has regarded owners of land being responsible, but lots of repo bank owners -- river bank owners are not known, we don't know who they are. This causes don't know who they are. This causes delays and costs.

Does she agree it delays and costs. Does she agree it is time for the Environment Agency to step up and take responsibility, because they should be supporting our communities rather than trying to pass responsibility on two unknown landowners.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is absolutely right. The sense of frustration and disappointment of frustration and disappointment with the Environment Agency in my constituency is palpable. In a highly visible problem goes highly visible problem goes unaddressed year after year, as it has decade, when a situation is allowed to deteriorate it creates a sense of disappointment and sense of disappointment and frustration, and it undermines the faith people having government to deal with the things that affect people's day-to-day lives.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people's day-to-day lives. I totally recognise the frustrations and problems she is having with the relevant supervisory authorities to pay heed. In Brecon we have a similar issue in terms of we have a similar issue in terms of the canal might potentially run dry, following Welsh water's decision to start charging the Canal trust for the water it extracts. And yet, no not the relevant authorities have responded to our requests for a meeting. Does she agree that in instances like this it would be helpful to have the Minister whose department is implicated to pay

**** Possible New Speaker ****

attention and come to Brecon and find a solution. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for his intervention, I would like the Minister to come to my constituency first! But I do appreciate your desire as well. My predecessor, a desire as well. My predecessor, a previous Deputy Prime Minister, previous Deputy Prime Minister, brought the former environment secretary to see for herself. They committed to the permanent removal of these boats, nothing happened. Yet another Conservative broken promise. Even my predecessor was not interested or he was ineffective. Like many things, I had hoped that the new government would bring change.

I wrote to the newly appointed Secretary of State and the CEO of the Environment Agency as soon as I was elected, asking for action. At that point there were 180 boats. I was pleased with the Minister's reply, acknowledging that the EA as the navigation authority along the nontidal Thames were committed to managing the situation and delivering a detailed action plan laying out clear steps for enforcement. I was assured EA officials wish to regain the trust of the community. As a result of that letter the EA toad away to the largest and longest stay boats, hurray.

The housing department of the local council joined with the police and Environment Agency to respond to any homelessness issues. My local council are ready and willing to do their part, but they are frustrated that the EEA are not doing theirs. The enforcement success in the autumn should have marked the beginning of the renewed energy and action with a long-term plan finally to get to grips with the problem. But instead it was followed up with almost nothing. And the situation has deteriorated since.

This is despite months and months of advocacy and regular meetings with EEA in which I have had again and again heard about their intention to clear the boats. They have consistently over promised and under delivered. I was promised a survey of abandoned vessels before comprehensive removals. And a long- term strategic enforcement plan as April you'd to making progress in the spring. Well, it is spring now but both documents were endlessly delayed. Last month the EA finally produced the survey but it was presented so confusingly the council found it almost useless.

And I'm now told the EA can't resource any of it. Then, when the plan came, it was manifestly insufficient. In today's letter you referenced this document, the Thames waterways, the Minister references this document, the Thames waterways enforcement plan. I have read it, it runs 10 pages and makes one minor mention of taking action to reduce the number of unauthorised and unregistered boats, which should have been the central focus. As one of its tactical objectives the plan promises to develop a clear and tactical plan.

Yet another promise, no plan. The document also marked a dramatic rollback of previous ambitions. It has an almost complete lack of measurable targets, metrics or accountability mechanisms. There is in other words no way to assess the progress of the EA in delivering outcomes against agreed objectives or on key concerns, like the number boats removed, registration offences, or rubbish cleared. And in fact at our last meeting the area manager suggested the problem had become so big it was too expensive to fix.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the honourable member and my constituency neighbour for giving way, because rivers have for giving way, because rivers have two banks and we share the other one. I would like to congratulate one. I would like to congratulate the borough council and EEA and police for doing such a good job on the Spelthorne side, would like to offer my support to the honourable offer my support to the honourable member for Esher and Walton in her endeavour to make her side of the river better.

Any assistance we can

**** Possible New Speaker ****

river better. Any assistance we can give we would of course do so. I'm very grateful for my neighbour, the honourable member for neighbour, the honourable member for Spelthorne, and I would love to work with him, with the Environment Agency and our relevant borough councils, and the police, to fix this problem.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It's such an important debate, and I entirely share her and I entirely share her frustrations in terms of these boats. It affects many of my constituents not only in Weybridge constituents not only in Weybridge but across the constituency. I'm sure she will come to this at some point in her speech, but would she agree given the nature of rivers working together with myself, the member for Spelthorne, the member member for Spelthorne, the member for Maidenhead, to get together a group with the Minister so that group with the Minister so that rather we push these boats on we can tackle it moving forward.

It would be a positive step forwards.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have no intention at all of pushing the boat down to his constituency, I want them gone. constituency, I want them gone. There can be nothing more powerful I think to our shared constituents than to CR's working across party in order to fix this problem. The BBC has picked up on this story this has picked up on this story this morning, the EA gave a statement to morning, the EA gave a statement to BBC radio Surrey in which they claimed to be taking firm, lawful and proportionate action.

This is and proportionate action. This is manifestly not the case, it is not firm nor proportionate. It also said the current situation highlights the need for a more sustainable, systemic response, and pledged a longer term approach. This is the same hotair we have been hearing for years and years. Waffling on about the need for long-term plans while the situation deteriorates. This is all in all a sad indictment of the poverty have ambition, and competence in a body charged by taxpayers with protecting our waterways.

It is hard to overstate my constituents disappointment at the ceiling inability of the Environment Agency to deliver results, even against objectives they set themselves or against the objectives the Secretary of State set. This is the endless cycle, the most basic promises made to residents, the council or to me, that are jettisoned after months of brief prevarication. -- Of prevarication. I worry from the Minister's letter to me this afternoon that nothing will change, apart from her very kind ask of the Environment Agency to review their enforcement approach, and her commitment to strengthening the EA's approach.

I am keen to hear from the Minister how she intends to follow- up on these points. However, I was deeply frustrated to read much of the letter repeated what icon among residents and the council have been hearing from the EA for months and years. Promises of more plans, more joined up working, recognitions of past disappointments and the need for change. The agency has lost the trust of my constituents, it is at rock bottom. What is needed is far greater oversight, ministerial if necessary, and for accountability against specific and deliverable goals.

I recently attended a public meeting with residents of Hirst Park and Molesey that was Packed to the Rafters, and it was a Friday night. With constituents so deeply upset and justifiably, it's a sense that the public realm is incapable of solving problems, even the most egregious and obvious, the ones people and businesses see and feel every day. The Prime Minister and members of the government have spoken repeatedly about the need for rebuilt trust in the state, to rebuild its capacity and to show that people the system can work and achieve things.

Something we have found particularly frustrating is the difficulty of attaching any accountability at all to anyone, at any point, despite failure after failure. A failure to act deprives these people who I am privileged to represent, the people who play by the rules, and pay for public services, of the land, peace and natural beauty they have always enjoyed. So I am asking the Minister to give this matter her personal attention, and to work with me to solve this as a matter of priority.

I would like to work with me to show the people of Esher and Walton that good politics makes things better. Boats listed as wrecked and abandoned should be cleared immediately. Doing this quickly and forcefully, rather than piecemeal, removes one of the permanent risks of these boats, that a change in river conditions could dislodge the vessel and transform them into immediate hazards. Clearing overstayed boats requires legal steps. It is vital this work is consistently and properly resourced. Taking a start and stop approach isn't an option because many enforcement mechanisms, unlocked by serving initial notices on boats, must be done in a certain period of time.

Betting opportunities disappear sets everything back to square one. The local police and the local council are ready and eager to help, and have put resources aside to do their part. So will the Minister commit personally to drive forward meaningful action on this issue, through the Environment Agency and DEFRA, to provide the necessary energy and resources to
19:28
Emma Hardy Portrait Emma Hardy MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice, Labour)
-
-
give me a point of contact for her department to coordinate the work. And to meet with me here or in my And to meet with me here or in my constituency where the problem can be seen, to discuss the progress we be seen, to discuss the progress we can make together. The problem of overstayed boats and sunken boats should not be intractable. Everyone should not be intractable. Everyone can see the problem, the solution is obvious. It is time to show that we collectively can deliver.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

collectively can deliver. Always a pleasure. I congratulate the honourable member on securing this important debate, and welcome the contributions from the two members opposite. It is very nice in an adjournment debate to see cross- party working on an issue of local,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

there. I understand you will have heard the point made about the lack of supervisory authorities, will she write to the Welsh Minister responsible and asking to look into

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the case of the Brecon canal? Obviously water is a devolved

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Obviously water is a devolved matter, I don't want to get into in issue on devolution powers where I would instruct a Welsh Minister about what they should and shouldn't be doing. I would maybe encourage the honourable member to right back to the Welsh Minister and may be copied in the Secretary of State for Wales, that might be the way. Rather than a Minister here telling a Minister in another government what they should be doing. We have heard much this evening about the benefits our rivers and canals bring to people in our constituencies, and very eloquently articulated by honourable members.

We've had about the Vikings, about Olympians, we had about how important the waterways are to everyone. I was pleased to hear the enforcement success in Walton, but not so pleased to hear the progress hasn't been where it should have been. I will come to that. Our waterways are an asset to our country, national heritage and provide many benefits. People live on them, and use them for leisure and recreation as well as their historical value. I provided green corridors as well as contributing to the growth of local authorities, such as through domestic tourism.

We had quite a lot about that this evening. The honourable member eloquently spoke about the beauty and tranquillity of the river in her constituency, it is one of the most majestic rivers as it winds its way along. Our navigation authorities have an important role to play in the future, I play tribute to them all as they take their waterways for all users on a daily basis, sometimes in quite difficult circumstances. They were held to ensure that we are resilient to climate change and preparing for net climate change and preparing for net zero transition and flood measures.

The honourable member has spoken about overstayed boats. And the about overstayed boats. And the illegally moored or sunk. She is knowledgeable about the these issues, I was concerned to hear the account of antisocial behaviour and abuse coming to people trying to enjoy the river ways. She also described the interactions she has had with the Environment Agency as the navigation authority for the nontidal River Thames and other local authorities in the area seeking to find a satisfactory resolution to the situation. I'm pleased to hear the comments about the willingness of the local council and the police to work together on this issue.

I recognise the seriousness of the issue in her constituency and others. The understandable strength of feeling locally about these and the need for visible coordinated action to So I can assure her that the entire agency understand this and are looking to develop their specific actions towards resolutions, but I note the point she's made about having the livability of that plan and being seen to be taking action. I just want to mention just in fairness the wider context which the environment agency is working in when it comes to enforcement.

Obviously any enforcement has to be within the law and care for and proportionate. Their powers are discretionary landowner ones, not statutory duties, meaning limitations for actions on private land and where enforcement would cause disproportionate harm.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Really grateful for her giving way first I've had countless way first I've had countless meetings with the EA and Elmbridge about trying to deal with problems. Particularly in Weybridge. The she

**** Possible New Speaker ****

think the EA has since sufficient powers to address it? Do we need to change the laws of this can be dealt with? I thank him for his health

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for his health intervention. That is something, informed by the environmental agency informed by the environmental agency that they do. But that's something I want to take away as a point and naturally question them on, is this a question of needing different powers or are there powers that can be found, from the council or the police working together, but I will take the point.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the Minister. These are points that I have brought up with the Environment Agency and also with the Environment Agency and also with the council. They do appear to have the statutory powers to do it. It's whether they have the will to do it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

whether they have the will to do it and the resourcing to do it. And that's the sticking point. Hopefully I will come to addressing some of the things that they want to do, but obviously where a boat is a home, especially in a boat is a home, especially in cases of potential vulnerability, the agency, environment agency need the agency, environment agency need to work with local housing and safeguarding teams to assess welfare concerns, which is why it's so important, and welcome her comments about the council being willing to work together.

So this is the question of where powers are available to remove the boat but obviously if there are people at risk of becoming homeless, the situation becomes more complicated.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As I described, when the two largest overstated boat that had largest overstated boat that had occupants on it were removed, the council were there providing support council were there providing support for the council and the police were there. There was no problem with the manoeuvres that took place on that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

day. I'm really pleased to hear that, and I was really pleased when she mentioned that in her speech as an mentioned that in her speech as an effective example of agencies working together to achieve the same aim. So the agency must use its aim. So the agency must use its resources to ensure effective enforcement along the entire 144 mile length of the river and busily points be amazed that we don't want to move a problem somewhere else. Where similar pressures exist, balancing cost and benefit of course against other priorities.

Where removal is necessary, they've got to be done with the safety parameters of the river and when that is flowing fast, obviously the removal may be temporary or suspended. So I can hear the point made this evening that the pace of progress by the environment agency in taking appropriate action is not as quick as wanted. I've heard that. But it is looking to the long-term rather than a series of short-term measures. They have used time staff resource and financial investment, been deployed in Alberich but here the point that it's not at this be the honourable lady would like.

So they have included specialist offices, legal teams and contractors with over £150,000 spent in 24/25 in enforcement operations, ongoing legal action, vessel removals in the Ambridge area. Several derelict or sunken vessels have been removed between Hampton Court and Shepperton and legal proceedings are continuing following a court rolling covering part of the Ambridge bank downstream of sunblock which is being appealed. -- Sunblock. Trespass notices have been given when necessary and he her point about some of the awful behaviour and littering that we've heard examples of.

The agency has also removed by accumulations from local authority land. So it has published the strategic framework on 1 April through enforcement on the whole of the 144 mile stretch of river and the environment agency informed me they've developed in Alberich specific compliance and enforcement plan that has been shared with local partners for input. However, in light of the concerns raised by the honourable member and her constituents and the honourable gentleman opposite, the environment agency is developing a longer term land management strategy to reduce reliance on enforcement and create more system outcomes instead.

So these include the feasibility of additional lawful mooring agreements for registered voters, supporting local authority duties for homelessness and housing, and biodiversity enhancements to deter trespasses in sensitive areas. So looking ahead the agency will be strengthening collaboration with our bridge council, Surrey police and committee partners unnecessary enforcement actions as well as continuing current enforcement deployments over the coming months. More widely, it certainly case that the landscape around management is complex as the -- as illustrated first when changing use of waterways over time new challenges have emerged around residential mooring and the challenges need to be taken into account in shaping future regulation and planning.

Helpful suggestion I think made of whether or not some of the honourable members wanted to come together as a group and discuss this. And so in response to the honourable lady, if that group was to be convened and I was to be invited to that said group, I would be happy to attend a meeting with the group to talk about what more can be done. So in closing, I hope I have assured the honourable members as a government be very much value our inland waterways and the very good work of the navigation authorities to ensure the many benefits it brings to 70 people.

I hope too I provided reassurance that the Environment Agency is determined to ensure that its approach to enforcement is fair, proportion and will deliver tangible lasting outcomes where the impact is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

most acute. The question is that this House do now adjourn. As many as are of that opinion say, "Aye." Of the contrary, "No." The ayes have it,
19:44
19:44
19:45
19:45
19:45
19:45
19:45
19:45
19:46
None Portrait Q8. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of Great British Energy on job creation in industrial communities. (903848)
-

19:46
19:46
19:47
19:47
19:48
19:48
19:49
19:49
None Portrait Q9. What steps he is taking to support the nuclear power sector. (903849)
-

19:49
19:49
19:50
19:51
19:51
19:52
None Portrait Q10. What steps his Department is taking to help reduce industrial electricity prices. (903850)
-

19:52
19:53
19:53
19:53
19:53
19:54
None Portrait Q12. What assessment he has made of the adequacy of the resilience of the national grid against the potential disruption of offshore energy infrastructure. (903852)
-

19:54
19:55
19:55
19:56
None Portrait Q15. What steps he is taking to ensure that local authorities have adequate resources for energy efficiency upgrades for council leaseholders and social homes. (903855)
-

19:56
19:56
19:57
19:58
19:58
19:59
None Portrait Q16. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the opportunities for industry through the National Wealth Fund. (903856)
-

19:59
19:59
20:00
20:00
20:00
20:01
None Portrait Topical questions: Energy Security and Net Zero
-

20:01
20:02
20:02
20:02
20:02
20:03
20:03
20:04
20:04
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page