Debates between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans during the 2019-2024 Parliament

Points of Order

Debate between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans
Monday 29th April 2024

(7 months, 3 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Lady for giving notice of her point of order. Clearly the Chair is not responsible for the answers of Ministers, but those on the Treasury Bench will have heard the point of order and will make sure that the Minister is able to respond to her.

Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler (Brent Central) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I seek your advice on how we in this House can ensure that the National Security Online Information Team investigates the Facebook groups that Greenpeace exposed at the weekend, of which the Tory mayoral candidate, Susan Hall, is a member. People have put on this group that they plan to kill our current Mayor, Sadiq Khan. How can we make sure the Government are investigating that?

Points of Order

Debate between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans
Monday 4th September 2023

(1 year, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am sure the House is incredibly grateful that the hon. Lady has done so in such a speedy fashion.

Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler (Brent Central) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is important to note that anything said in this House is noted by Hansard in perpetuity. Can you please clarify whether it is in order for Members of Parliament to ask for their family history to be forgotten? The family of former MP for Eddisbury Antoinette Sandbach were deeply involved in the slave trade and amassed wealth as a result of this brutality. The former Member has threatened the University of Cambridge with legal action after an historian spoke of her ancestors’ role in the slave trade. While her recent public apology for their role is welcome and necessary, those who sit in this House should not use their position to silence those who shine a light on the horrors of the past.

On a related point, Mr Deputy Speaker, do you also agree it is important that Members co-operate fully with any research into parliamentarians’ links to the transatlantic slave trade?

Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill

Debate between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans
2nd reading
Monday 16th January 2023

(1 year, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 View all Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler (Brent Central) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Minister has said that it will cost the Government £28 billion to settle the dispute with our public service workers. The Institute for Fiscal Studies predicts that it will actually cost the public a significantly lower figure, £14 billion, to meet the public sector demands. Is there a way in which we can get the Minister to correct the record on the Floor of the House?

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Lady for her point of order. The Chair is not responsible for the content of any speeches, be they ministerial or Back-Bench contributions, but it is well evidenced that if any Member finds out that they have unwittingly misled the House, they must correct the record at the earliest possible opportunity.

Coronavirus Act 2020 (Review of Temporary Provisions) (No. 3)

Debate between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans
Tuesday 19th October 2021

(3 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler
- Hansard - -

The Act has always been presented on the Floor of the House as an all-or-nothing Bill; MPs never have an opportunity to change, amend or scrutinise it, so I think that the Secretary of State is just a little misleading in how he is presenting it to the House today.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Unintentionally misleading?

Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler
- Hansard - -

Unintentionally misleading.

Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities

Debate between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans
Tuesday 20th April 2021

(3 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler
- View Speech - Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Minister has a responsibility to Parliament to answer the question. The Minister has given a statement, and she is supposed to answer the question. She has not answered this question.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a continuation of the question, as the hon. Lady knows.

Contingencies Fund (No. 2) Bill

Debate between Dawn Butler and Nigel Evans
Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler (Brent Central) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

It is correct that a contingencies fund Bill is vital when the Government need to react, especially during the pandemic, but it relies on trust. Trust requires transparency, truth and honesty. Most colleagues in this House will have noticed the Conservative party’s habit of gaslighting the nation over the past decade. “We’re all in this together,” Osborne and Cameron said, before axing the safety net that the poorest in our country relied upon. I recently read a quote that said:

“We’re not all in the same boat, but we are going through the same storm”—

some of us are in yachts, some of us are in boats and some of us are in dinghies and just holding on.

Recently, Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak promised to take care—

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I have to correct my hon. Friend—I will put it that way. Please do not refer to current serving Ministers or other Members of Parliament by their names.

Dawn Butler Portrait Dawn Butler
- Hansard - -

My apologies, Mr Deputy Speaker.

The Prime Minister recently promised to take care of the nurses who sat at the nation’s bedside during one of our darkest moments, before offering them an insulting and paltry 1% pay rise—a real-terms pay cut. The question of cronyism is no different. Ministers on one hand claim that they did nothing wrong. They say that Opposition Members are stirring up fake news, and that we are not patriotic if we dare to question their actions and how they are spending public funds, yet when the evidence is too powerful and shocking to ignore, when it is so stark that the Government have to respond, they say that their mistakes can be excused because they were rushing to procure vast amounts of equipment in a national crisis. Both those things cannot be true, so which is it? Which do they believe?

Of course, the country is willing to accept that mistakes were made, but that was a long time ago—a year ago, in fact. Ministers must have the humility to admit their mistakes and errors, and work with the Opposition to ensure that the current situation, which has eroded many people’s basic trust in democracy, is never repeated. Supporting this amendment is a start.

The truth is that the evidence is overwhelming: as Byline Times has calculated, more than £900 million in coronavirus-related contracts has been awarded to firms that have donated to the Conservative party—a huge return on their donations. The country’s purse is not the Government’s piggybank. Countless more deals have been awarded to former Government advisers, chums of Dominic Cummings and former drinking pals of the Health Secretary. Ministers may dispute why so many deals have been awarded to firms with close ties to the Conservative party and senior Government figures. Some of those firms were not even suitable or equipped to deliver what was needed.

The reason could be the Government’s infamous VIP lane, which meant that some firms with links to Ministers, MPs and officials were 10 times more likely to win contracts. Some of it could be down to the old boys network—who knows? We still do not know, but we should know before we continue to trust the Government. Some Ministers may know what is going on and why, and what the cause is of this rampant cronyism, but all Ministers and Conservative Members must recognise the basic facts: vast amounts of public money have been spent and wasted on firms with Tory and Government connections. People across the country are angry and disillusioned.

The Conservatives’ own constituents, and constituents of Members on both sides of the House, are questioning why the Conservative party has abandoned its belief in the basic principle of accountable, transparent public spending. It is imperative that Ministers and officials figure out the root cause of this rampant cronyism, admit their errors and safeguard public money so that, in the future, it cannot end up in the hands of Conservative donors.

Some in the Conservative party might say that the money is not wasted because some of the money that has been given to companies is finding its way back to the Conservative party through donations, but that is wrong and corrupt. If I am wrong in what I am saying, the Minister, when he gets to his feet, must admit the mistakes and errors made.