Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(2 years, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
My Lords, I join all noble Lords across this House in offering my sincere condolences to the King, Queen Consort and all the Royal Family. When I was walking back yesterday evening, I noticed that all the bus stops had a photograph of the Queen where the advertisements normally are. As I walked past one, I heard a woman behind me say, “We could all learn a lot from her”, and her friend replied, “Yes, she was a class act.” She certainly was, and that embodies the spirit of what everyone in this Chamber has been saying over the last couple of days.
I should like to pay tribute as president of the Rare Breeds Survival Trust by sharing with noble Lords the strong interest of the late Queen and the wider Royal Family in native rare breeds. We have heard that Her late Majesty was incredibly knowledgeable about horses and she was a very experienced breeder. Her extensive breeding programmes made hugely important contributions to the survival of a number of our rare and native breeds, including highland and Shetland ponies at the Balmoral estate, fell ponies at Hampton Court and Cleveland bays as part of the carriage breeding programme at Hampton Court.
A number of breed societies have benefited greatly from her patronage, including the Fell Pony Breeders Association, the Highland Pony Society, the Cleveland Bay Horse Society and the Shire Horse Society. Her late Majesty kept fell ponies as a girl and enjoyed riding her native breed ponies. Only four years ago, aged 92, she was photographed riding one. I am sure we can all recall the beautiful photograph of our late Queen holding the reins of her two favourite fell ponies to mark her 96th birthday earlier this year.
The Queen’s work and actions on behalf of rare and native breeds are far too many to mention, but I would like to pick out one particular highlight. She was absolutely instrumental in saving the Cleveland bay horse breed in the 1960s. When she bought one of the few remaining stallions, she sparked a renewal of interest in the breed, which desperately needed help. The breed went from strength to strength. At the royal farms, Her Majesty also kept a variety of native cattle breeds, including highlands at the Balmoral estate and Jersey and Sussex cattle at Windsor.
All this is part of our Royal Family’s wider interest in native animals. The Queen Mother kept Orpington hens, Princess Anne keeps Gloucestershire Old Spot pigs as well as her own Orpington hens, and the Rare Breed Survival Trust has long been honoured by the patronage and wonderful support of His Majesty King Charles III, under his former title of the Prince of Wales. I hope I may have encouraged some noble Lords to look at keeping some rare breeds.
Our late Queen’s very practical, dedicated and immensely valued contribution to the survival of our native breeds is another example of her life of service to our country. We will always be immeasurably grateful for this service, her generosity and the remarkable legacy in this area that she leaves for the generations to come. Rest in peace.
Lord Glenarthur (Con)
My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Stephen, who spoke earlier, I live on what is often known as Royal Deeside. I know from a very brief journey home only yesterday that my deep sense of sadness at the death of the Queen is one shared by the entire Aberdeenshire community, rural and urban—a community of which the Royal Family is very much a part.
A deep loss is felt not only by those of us in the United Kingdom but, as other noble Lords have referred to, by others internationally. As an example, I will take one nation of the Commonwealth that the Queen was aware I knew well, and whose royal family I remain close to: Tonga. I know from personal messages the deep sense of sadness that its people feel. The late Queen was extremely fond of Tonga and its people; she kept in touch with the Royal Family and took a keen interest in the fortunes of that country.
On a personal note, as a former Army officer, I felt deeply proud that Her Majesty the Queen took the salute at my commissioning parade in 1963. I had the lucky honour to be an officer in the Queen’s Bodyguard for Scotland, the Royal Company of Archers, and to have participated in many royal duties in front of Her late Majesty, not least the unique Golden and Diamond Jubilee garden parties held at Balmoral. I thank God for a life lived to the full, for Her late Majesty’s deep and guiding faith, wisdom, sense of duty and steadfastness, and for the abiding inspiration that she has been to us all. May she rest in peace. God save the King.
Points of Order
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(7 years, 7 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sue Hayman (Workington) (Lab)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your advice and guidance regarding parliamentary protocol in the case of a Member writing to another Member’s constituents as part of an election campaign. The hon. Member for Copeland (Trudy Harrison) has written, as a Member of Parliament, to postal voters in my constituency on Conservative-branded paper ahead of the Cumbria County Council elections asking them to vote for the Conservative candidates. I know of postal voters in her own constituency who have not received any such letter from her.
This is the second time since her election to this place only two months ago that the hon. Lady has campaigned for the Conservative party in my constituency using her status as an MP without informing me. I did not make a fuss the first time as she was new to the House. However, she is now fully aware that in the British parliamentary system one Member represents a single constituency and conventions have developed so that one Member’s relations with her constituents are very much a preserve that other Members should not interfere with.
I have had complaints from constituents, some of whom are now confused about who their Member of Parliament is. My constituency office is receiving phone calls from constituents who think that this must mean that the boundary changes have gone through and that I might no longer be their representative. As far as I am concerned, this is unacceptable. Mr Speaker, I would be grateful for your comments and advice on this serious matter.
Sir Oliver Heald
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Has it not always been the case that if a Member writes, on Conservative party notepaper, a political message to anyone, that is in order, and that it is only a problem if someone represents themselves as an MP for a particular constituency using our stationery?
Sue Hayman
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. To clarify, the letters were signed “Trudy Harrison, MP”, and across the top it said “MP”. She described herself as an MP. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. We cannot and will not have a debate on the matter. The hon. Lady was courteous enough to give me advance notice of her intention to raise this point of order, for which I thank her, and I have attended both to the substance of what she has said and to the remarks of the Minister.
I must say to the hon. Lady that, disquieting though the experience might have been, and relatively irregularly though it might occur, it is not clear to me that the hon. Member for Copeland (Trudy Harrison) has broken any convention. It is certainly a convention to notify another Member of an intention to visit his or her constituency in a political public capacity. It is also a very well established convention that a Member of Parliament should not purport to represent or offer to represent people who are not her or his constituents. [Interruption.] Order. Writing, however, in a campaigning context on party notepaper, though it might not happen very frequently, is not—and I have some experience of these matters—a demonstrable breach of a long-standing convention.
I say to the hon. Lady, whose concern I treat very seriously, that I appreciate that concern, but it seems to me that courtesies between Members of the House, which are important, are best arrived at and adhered to by informal discussions between colleagues. It is not desirable that they should ritually be attempted to be resolved by being raised on the Floor of the House with the Chair. That is to say, to be clear, that they are not matters of order but matters of informal agreement and understanding. It is much better if such understandings can be reached between neighbouring colleagues.
Domestic Abuse Victims in Family Law Courts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(8 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
The right hon. Lady knows that I have no jurisdiction over press notices and press releases on Committee reports, but as she has made good use of the Chamber today, I am sure that all the newspapers and the media that are looking on will have taken notice of that, and I am sure it will be highlighted. It is not a point for the Chair, but it is certainly on the record now.
Sue Hayman (Workington) (Lab)
Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am concerned about the lack of information that we are getting from the Government about how the funding that we are giving Yemen is being managed. May we have a report? When was the last time a British diplomat visited Yemen? We need to put on the record that we are not getting proper reporting back on what is happening there with our funding.
Mr Deputy Speaker
Once again, that is not a matter for me, but it is on the record. The hon. Lady made the point clearly about British diplomats going out there. I am sure the Leader of the House will have noted that. It is also a point that can be raised at business questions. The hon. Lady has taken advantage of the opportunity and put it on the record.
International Women’s Day 2016
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(8 years, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Valerie Vaz
I absolutely agree.
The second issue I want to raise is the closure of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs offices in Walsall South. Some 90% of the 60 jobs that will be lost are done by women. They have been offered jobs in Birmingham, but they have caring responsibilities, so they need to stay local. There is also the issue of higher travel costs. The Public and Commercial Services Union has worked out that when 50 jobs are lost, it costs a local economy £1.5 million. That is too much for Walsall to take. If the Government are serious about tax evasion and tax avoidance, they need local staff who have the institutional memory to help people with their tax affairs. The staff build up the skills over the years, which helps them to get promotion through the civil service.
Valerie Vaz
Would my hon. Friend mind if I do not? I am running out of time.
On Saturday morning, more than 500 people in Walsall town centre signed a petition to ask the Minister to look again at this dislocation of women’s lives and stop the relocation to Birmingham.
Internationally, there may have been a fantastic victory in Burma for the National League for Democracy, but the Burmese army has used rape and sexual violence against women for decades as part of its warfare against ethnic minority groups in the country. Many victims were gang-raped and many were killed, and United Nations reports have described rape and sexual violence as “widespread and systematic”. The Burmese army accounts for 25% of the Burmese Parliament. We must keep up the pressure to get rid of the army from the Parliament in Burma.
In Delhi, there was an outcry following the gang rape, assault and murder of Jyoti Singh on a bus. Leslee Udwin’s film “India’s Daughter” showed the devastating impact of Jyoti’s murder. Who can forget the late Sue Lloyd-Roberts’ interview with the cleric from Gambia in which she challenged him about female genital mutilation, or the Nigerian girls who were kidnapped almost two years ago this April?
We need to do more than just have a hashtag, and that is where Governments come in. Almost every major piece of legislation that has improved the lives of working women has been introduced by a Labour Government: the Work and Families Act 2006, which extended the right to statutory maternity leave to a full year for all employed women, regardless of length of service; the introduction of paternity leave in 2003; and legislative protections for women and mothers under the Equal Pay Act 1970, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Equality Act 2010. Everybody knows how brilliant Sure Start centres are in helping local children, mothers and fathers in our communities. We need to save them.
Education is the key. As Gandhi said, if we educate mothers we educate society. Women cannot wait for the trickle-up to promotion—there needs to be positive action. Marin Alsop, who in 2013 was the first female conductor of the last night of the Proms, admitted to being
“quite shocked that it can be 2013 and there can still be firsts for women”.
Let us hope that by this time next year, women’s place at the highest levels will be commonplace. We owe it to future generations.
State Pension Age (Women)
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(8 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sue Hayman (Workington) (Lab)
I want briefly to talk about the situation of two women who have contacted me. The first was born in July 1953 and expected to retire at 60. This initially increased to 62 years and three months. She had no problem with that because she had been given plenty of notice and agreed with the gradual move towards equality of retirement age for men and women. Then, of course, with no warning, the retirement age was increased, so she now has to wait until she is 64 before she gets her higher state pension. The injustice is in the way it has been done—on a sliding scale—which means that some people in her class at school will get their pensions almost two years before her, despite their having worked for the same length of time and the same number of pension years. My constituent is still working but says she is fortunate because she has a good civil service pension. She is deeply concerned, however, that many other women rely on their state pension and now find they have to wait for many more years to get it, as discussed this afternoon.
Another constituent of mine is in that unfortunate position. She worked for 20 years as a secretary, and although the male workers in the company were automatically enrolled in the company pension scheme, women were not. It was very different for women in those days. My constituent has arthritis and is continuing to work as a cleaner because she simply cannot afford not to. She also agrees with pension reform to equalise the retirement age. That is not a problem for women; it is the way it is being done that is so very upsetting. Younger women have had to time to adjust to, and plan for, these retirement dates and the changes. Women such as my constituent, however, do not have that opportunity.
I am willing to give the Government the benefit of the doubt and say that perhaps they did not understand just how many women would be affected. I can accept that, but what I cannot get my head around is why they are refusing to look at it again. To me, this is simply callous. You know so many women are being affected; you could look again; you could listen; you could change things—[Interruption.] Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker.
I ask the Government to look again at the people who have been disproportionately affected. They should listen to what those people are saying and get up and do something to help.
Oral Answers to Questions
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(9 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Vara
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to note the integration of the two sites in her constituency, which are within half a mile of each other. In 2013-14, 170 courts and tribunals—more than a third of the total number—were empty for more than half their available hearing time. The current court estate is clearly inefficient and underused. Our reform programme is an opportunity to create a modern, more user-focused and efficient service that better serves the taxpayer.
Sue Hayman (Workington) (Lab)
Workington court in my constituency is one of the courts up for closure. I want to ask the Secretary of State about the impact that that will have on my constituents getting to courts. He recently said that when looking for courts up for closure:
“What we tried to do was to make sure that the time it will take for any citizen to travel to court remains less than an hour.”
Currently, it takes less than half an hour for 83% of my constituents to get to court.
Sue Hayman
I will be very quick.
If the court is closed, 58% will take up to two hours if they have a car, and 43% will take over two hours by public transport. Does the Minister consider that acceptable, and will he look at it again?
Mr Vara
May I first assure the hon. Lady that this is a consultation and that no decisions have been taken so far? We want to be modern and to move into the 21st century, during which many people will simply not have to travel to courts, whatever the distances. We are moving to using video conferencing facilities, particularly for victims and witnesses. Courts are already doing that with prisoners, so the travel element will diminish.
Oral Answers to Questions
Baroness Hayman of Ullock Excerpts(9 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sue Hayman (Workington) (Lab)
T5. Most women entering prison serve very short sentences. Last year, 58% were serving six months or less. Twenty years ago, this figure was only a third. As 82% of women who enter prison under sentence have committed a non-violent offence, why is this figure increasing?
Caroline Dinenage
The decision to impose a custodial sentence is of course one for the independent judiciary. The law requires that a custodial sentence be passed only where an offence is so serious that neither a community sentence nor a fine will do. The courts take into account all circumstances regarding the offence and the offender. It is important to remember that just because an offence is not violent, that does not mean that it does not have victims—multiple victims—and that it is not serious.