(6 days, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI am extremely grateful—[Interruption.] Oh, I beg your pardon.
I thought there was a doppelganger in the Chamber for a second, Mr Speaker.
A new Government can make political choices, and one would have thought that, in the week before Christmas, they would be positive choices—things that people could take home and feel grateful and happy about on Christmas Day. However, as has just been mentioned by the hon. Member for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck), millions of women throughout the country, 1950s-born women, have been affected, quite adversely, in respect of their state pensions. Many are in ill health, and are continuing to work in ill health. They lived in hope for many years during their protracted, passionate and very reasonable campaign for fairness and justice, and on Tuesday this week they were told that they were getting none of it. We have an ombudsman, which has made very clear, very fairly and decently, what amount should be paid in compensation, and has also made clear that the Department for Work and Pensions made errors at the time.
Since Tuesday, not only have we received emails, but Members of Parliament, particularly Government Members, have been deleting pages from their websites and Twitter accounts—the very pages that showed them campaigning out there with WASPI women, getting their photographs taken, doing videos, sending messages and so forth. Now they have no voice. They are frightened even to raise the issue in this House. May I therefore urge the Leader of the House and the Business Secretary to arrange a debate as soon as possible, a meaningful debate in Government time? No ifs, no buts; we all need to have our say on this.
My hon. Friend will know that the British Government engage in ongoing dialogue with Bangladesh and other countries. We expect to see democratic norms in Bangladesh, as we do in every other country, and they include press freedom and everything else. She might be aware that we have Foreign Office questions when we return, and she could raise this issue with the Foreign Secretary.
Mindful of the Leader of the House’s advice, I am suitably booted, I am speaking through the Chair and, of course, I have Chorley imprinted on my heart.
In that spirit, may I ask the Leader of the House for a debate on the WASPI women? I know she has said we can apply for a debate, and I was going to ask for something quite different, but given what the hon. Members for South Shields (Mrs Lewell-Buck) and for Dundee Central (Chris Law) have said, it is essential that when we have an ombudsman report of such seriousness—I have rarely seen one like it in my time in this House—we have the chance to debate it. If the Leader of the House does not offer a debate, I will apply to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, immediately following business questions.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman, and he is a very honourable Member. I am sure he is in the good books of not only Mr Speaker but the Deputy Speakers, and is certainly on their Christmas card lists, because he always has the right attire, always speaks through the Chair and always asks punchy, short questions.
On the serious issue that the right hon. Gentleman raises, I know that the strength of feeling is widespread and that people want to air their views. I am sure there will be time, as I am sure colleagues will apply for debates in the usual way.
(1 week, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberI am very well aware of how important small businesses are in Rossendale and Darwen. Over the years, I have enjoyed many a nice cup of tea and cake in Rossendale and Darwen, and I thought my hon. Friend was going to invite me. I am sure I will have one soon.
The Leader of the House may not be aware of this, but Vodafone franchises across the country, including in my constituency, have launched a High Court action because the company has cut remuneration without notice and with no justification, despite benefiting from Government payments during the pandemic to support struggling franchises. Can we therefore have a debate on how these soulless, heartless corporate businesses are costing livelihoods, oblivious of the consequences? These struggling franchises will close, and the workers will be sacked.
(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberAnd now, a final pithy question from Sir John Hayes.
Problem gambling first breaks people and then costs lives. It is a far cry from the weekly pools coupon of my father’s day, and it is devastating people in Lincolnshire and elsewhere. Given the announcement of a new £30 million statutory gambling levy, will the Leader of the House arrange a debate so that we can discuss how to guarantee that that money is spread fairly, and is not eaten up by organisations sponsored by the gambling industry?
The right hon. Gentleman is right to raise this issue. Online gambling in particular has completely changed the whole industry and increased people’s susceptibility to problems such as gambling addiction. This Government are taking forward the recommendations made previously to tackle the scourge of gambling, and I will ensure that the relevant Minister comes to the House at some point to talk about these issues.
(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberI certainly will share my hon. Friend’s congratulations to the WASPI women, who have shown themselves to be some of the most formidable campaigners this country has seen for a very long time, and to Angela Madden, his constituent. As he knows, the ombudsman’s report was published in March. It is a very serious, thorough and considered report that requires proper consideration from the Government. That work is being undertaken as we speak. I will ensure that Parliament is the first to know of the Government’s response.
Madam Deputy Speaker, you may know that I have long campaigned for the interests of the British nuclear test veterans, young men who, long before our lives, devoted part of their young life to witnessing the first nuclear test, following which their blood and urine was tested, presumably to see the effects that radiation had on them. Those records have been declassified, yet are not clearly available to remaining veterans and not available at all to their loved ones. May we have a statement on the matter from the Secretary of State for Defence, who, I understand, is not unsympathetic? The Prime Minister, when he was Leader of the Opposition, promised those veterans accountability and justice. They deserve nothing less.
The plight of the nuclear test veterans is one that gathers wide support across the House. In fact, it was raised just last week with the Prime Minister, in his statement on the G20, by my hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey). He reiterated his personal commitment, and that of the Secretary of State for Defence, to working with the families and the veterans themselves to look at issues around records and other matters, such as medals. I will ensure that the House is informed of any progress in this area.
(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend should be standing steadfastly at the front of the campaign to save his local post office, because such local post offices provide vital services for constituencies such as Redditch. I know that Post Office officials closely followed much of what I said in business questions last week, so hopefully they will have heard what he said today. As I said last week, the Post Office is in need of serious cultural change and it has not been fit for purpose for some time. I do not see the case for closing Crown post offices as part of that change.
The shocking arrest of Allison Pearson, The Telegraph journalist, has caused outrage, as the Leader of the House knows, and as most recently expressed by her distinguished Back-Bench colleague, the hon. Member for Blackley and Middleton South (Graham Stringer). Will the Leader of the House arrange for the Home Secretary to come to the House to address this attack on free speech, which is wider and deeper than Allison Pearson’s arrest? The Director of Public Prosecutions has said that he “had no idea” what non-crime hate incidents are and that he had “to look them up” in the light of her arrest, and yet 11,600 such “crimes” have been recorded. Does the Leader of the House understand that, far from being the antithesis of a civilised society, the right to alarm, to disturb and, yes, to offend is the essence of an open society? If I did not alarm, disturb and offend every Maoist, Marxist, Bolshevik and belligerent Islamist, I would feel I had failed.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that question. The offences he talks about were actually introduced a couple of years ago under the previous Government—not by the current Government—by the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp) who is now the shadow Home Secretary. The right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) is absolutely right that we have to consider the balance between free speech alongside protecting people who suffer from the wrong end of abuse and misinformation and disinformation online which, as we saw over the summer, can cause real damage in our communities if left unchecked. That balance is one I am sure the police and others are grappling with on a daily basis.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI am extremely grateful to the right hon. Lady for the clarity and diligence she showed when dealing with the end of life debate that we will have later this month. She will be aware that there are profound concerns about the length of time for Second Reading, notwithstanding her point, simply because of the number of Members who will wish to participate—I anticipate a very large number indeed. We may see speeches reduced to two or three minutes, which really is not appropriate for a subject of this kind.
The right hon. Lady will also be aware that “Erskine May” is clear that, when nominating Public Bill Committees,
“in the case of bills which divide the House on cross-party lines”,
it is vital that the Committee of Selection should “have regard” to the composition of the House. In those terms, will she—either now or subsequently if she needs to refer to Erskine May—make absolutely sure that, as the Bill goes through the House, that balance will be retained, so that we get the best possible legislation? Nothing is more important that legislating to make lawful the entitlement to take life.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that question. I took some time in my opening remarks to explain these matters, and I recognise and understand people’s concerns. As I said, a Second Reading debate lasting five hours would be longer than that of many substantial Bills. The Second Reading debate on the Online Safety Bill, which was huge and long anticipated for five years, was reduced to just over two hours, because of earlier statements and so on. Five hours is a good amount of time for Second Reading, notwithstanding the points that he raised.
On Committee selection, the right hon. Gentleman is right that, should the Bill pass Second Reading, it will be for the sponsoring Member to put forward names for that Committee. He is right that the guidance on nominating those Members states that that must reflect the party balance in the House, and it should also reflect the balance of views on the Bill. As I said, the Bill would then return to the full House for remaining stages, including Report and Third Reading, which would all have time for debate and a vote.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI know from my own constituency that such matters are raised all the time. Fire cover, and having adequate fire officers, is very important to local communities. Budgets have been cut in recent years and I know that Home Affairs Ministers take that very seriously. Home Office questions are coming up shortly, and I am sure that my hon. Friend would get a good response.
Debates in this place are increasingly punctuated and populated by references to outside bodies, from the Environment Agency to Network Rail, and from the Migration Advisory Committee to the much mentioned Office for Budget Responsibility. None are elected or accountable to the people we serve—we do not really know who they are. May we have a debate on the increasing blob activism that threatens the separation of powers? We know about judicial activism, but this activism is just as dangerous. Those bodies wield immense power, and Ministers elected to govern should not be stymied, hampered, cowed or chastised by people with no democratic legitimacy.
The right hon. Gentleman is well known as a blob activist himself—[Hon. Members: “Oh!”] I do not mean it that way. I mean against the blob: I am sorry to be misinterpreted. If he is referring to the important financial—[Interruption.] This will start me off laughing now—
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think the Leader of the House needs a few moments to calm down.
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberThis Government have taken more action than many in suspending licences for arms exports, because we are upholding international law and we are following the legal advice that we have received. That is why we have suspended approximately 30 licences to the Israel Defence Forces for arms that may be used in the current conflict and would be in breach of international law. I anticipate that the Foreign Secretary will come to the House, hopefully next week, with a further update on the middle east.
In a righteous echo of St Matthew’s Gospel, the elimination of vicious, violent criminal Chris Kaba reminds us that those who live by weapons die by the same. Further to yesterday’s statement, there are real doubts about the fitness for purpose of the Crown Prosecution Service and the Independent Office for Police Conduct. Can we have a debate on whether those organisations have become so infected by a kind of bourgeois, liberal, doubt-fuelled virtue-signalling that they have lost the will to defend the law-abiding majority from a criminal, wicked minority?
The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Home Secretary came to the House yesterday and announced new steps that we will take to protect our armed police officers. It is welcome that we have cross- party support for those measures, some of which will be included in forthcoming Home Department legislation. I am sure that we will have ample time to debate them further then.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend for his question. The issues of flood resilience and flood preparedness get raised in this session frequently, and I anticipate that as we get towards the winter months, when flooding becomes more frequent, they will be raised more often. We have launched our flood resilience taskforce to turbocharge the delivery and co-ordination of flood defences, but this issue would make a very good topic for a Back-Bench business debate or another debate.
No one in this House was among those who went to the South Pacific in the 1950s and ’60s to witness the first nuclear tests, but some of us have met the old men who did so as young men, unknowing of the dangers they faced. After a very long campaign, the former Prime Minister Boris Johnson agreed that those men should be granted service medals, and the current Secretary of State for Defence has agreed that the eligibility criteria should be widened because many of the people who went have not got their medals. Given that the Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey)—with whom I have worked—my right hon. Friend the Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick) and others are desperate to ensure that the men get what they deserve, will the Leader of the House arrange an urgent statement? We owe these veterans, many of whom are dying, that honour, a duty and our thanks.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this important matter. I have followed the issue of nuclear test veterans closely, and I know that it has been raised in this House many times. A recent documentary shone a light on these issues as well. I will certainly raise this matter with the Ministry of Defence, and we have Defence questions coming up soon. I will ask the MOD to come to the House and give us an update.
(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend is a long-standing and powerful advocate for mining communities in his constituency and beyond, and is absolutely right to say that we have a clear manifesto commitment to put this injustice right. I will ensure that the relevant Minister has heard his question and that he gets an appropriate response, and I am sure we will have further announcements in due course.
It is a delight, Madam Deputy Speaker, to serve under your benevolent stewardship.
The House may know that I am not an advocate of unbridled, anarchic freedom. I know the harm men can do with unfettered free will. Nevertheless, the ability to speak freely is the mark of a civilised, open society, which is why the last Government introduced a higher education Bill in the light of woke tyranny. I am disappointed that the right hon. Lady, who I know is a diligent servant of this House, would allow such legislation to be rescinded, yet the Government have said that that is exactly what they will do. They are going to reverse the advance we made, so will she allow a debate on free speech? For George Orwell, as she may know, said:
“If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that question. This Government have been clear that, in support of our world-leading global university sector, we want to end the culture wars that have ensued against our fantastic universities. As the MP for two globally leading universities, I know that that message and change of tone have been widely welcomed in the sector. I am sure that, at Education questions next week, he may want to raise the issue of the Bill.