All 6 Debates between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle

Water Industry: Financial Resilience

Debate between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle
Wednesday 28th June 2023

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Lord Cryer Portrait John Cryer
- View Speech - Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think the Minister may have inadvertently misled the House. She said clearly that Thames Water has not been paying out dividends. The reality is that Thames Water has not been paying out dividends in the usual way, but it did pay dividends last year to the parent company, so it has been paying out dividends.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does the Minister wish to respond?

Business of the House

Debate between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle
Thursday 24th June 2021

(3 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will just put on the record Derian House Children’s Hospice in Chorley, which provides a high-quality service to support families.

Lord Cryer Portrait John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Leader of the House will be aware of the continued internment, persecution and torture of Chinese Muslims at the hands of the state in that country. This is not a criticism of the Foreign Secretary, because he has come to this House and made a number of statements on the situation there, but not for quite a while, and on the basis that the situation in China is not only not getting any better but certainly getting worse, from everything that we can gather, may we have a statement or even a debate before the summer recess?

Covid-19

Debate between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 16th March 2020

(4 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. I will let this run for about one hour, so if we can speed up questions—[Interruption.] It might helpful if we try to help each other and not hold each other up.

Lord Cryer Portrait John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Many of us have thousands of constituents who are either on zero-hours contracts or are self-employed. I have raised this question before, but unless the Government can offer those people some sort of minimum income guarantee, they will quickly be facing repossession and homelessness.

Business of the House

Debate between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle
Thursday 23rd January 2020

(4 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Cryer Portrait John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

The Leader of the House will be more aware than most that the situation on the perimeter of the Estate becomes extremely threatening at times, with abuse and threats to Members, and particularly women Members in my experience. Has he given any thought to the reintroduction of Sessional Orders?

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

They don’t work.

Point of Order

Debate between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 19th July 2011

(13 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Cryer Portrait John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The House will be aware that on 8 July, the Prime Minister held a press conference during which he said that he had instructed or commissioned a private company to do a basic background check on Andy Coulson, but he did not mention the name of the company. Following the statement made by the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport at the beginning of the following week, I asked for that name to be released. However, it was still not released, so I tabled a written parliamentary question later that day, for answer on the Thursday. On the Thursday the answer did not come back. It has still not come back today, and No. 10 is refusing to issue or release the name of the company that carried out the basic background check. Is there any way that we could encourage the Prime Minister to fulfil a basic duty?

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

What I can say is that it is not for the Chair, and my advice would be to go and see the Table Office. However, I am sure also that No. 10 will have heard the point that the hon. Gentleman has raised, and there will be an opportunity tomorrow to catch Mr Speaker’s eye.

Points of Order

Debate between Lord Cryer and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 24th May 2011

(13 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

What has been said is on the record for everyone to see. I assure the hon. Gentleman that I will refer the matter to Mr Speaker, and that he will look at what has been said today.

Lord Cryer Portrait John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker, of which I have given Mr Speaker notice. Every Member of this House is doubtless aware that yesterday, the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (John Hemming)—I use the word honourable in its broadest possible sense—named a premiership footballer who is at the centre of the super-injunction row. A lot of people in this place and outside it find it difficult to see the exact public interest in naming that footballer, and I think that it was an act of gross opportunism by a politician on an ego trip. Can you, Mr Deputy Speaker, reiterate the traditional attitudes of the House towards such gross abuses of privilege?