Debates between Karen Bradley and Chris Bryant during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Supreme Court Ruling: Abortion in Northern Ireland

Debate between Karen Bradley and Chris Bryant
Thursday 7th June 2018

(6 years, 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

Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend is right that the last time this matter was debated in Stormont—in 2016—the Bill was rejected. That is part of the reason why we have this case before us today. I have spoken to all the parties about this matter, and I will continue to do so.

Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A British Government in Westminster should not abrogate to themselves powers willy-nilly, but why are the Government adamantine about not intervening when human rights issues affect British citizens? It was the same in Bermuda: the Government refused to say anything about same-sex marriage being banned, but the Supreme Court in Bermuda decided yesterday that the British Government were wrong and that same-sex marriage should be reintroduced. What will happen here is that the Government will keep on losing legal battles. In the end, human rights are indivisible, so we do have to act and intervene.

Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - -

We need to go through the judgment, which is detailed, and consider it carefully. The way to resolve this issue has to be with Stormont; that has to be the place in which to resolve this.

Sky/Fox Merger

Debate between Karen Bradley and Chris Bryant
Tuesday 12th September 2017

(7 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend makes an important point, as did my hon. Friend the Member for Torbay (Kevin Foster). Those emails have filled up inboxes and distracted colleagues from important constituency casework. I have made this decision in spite of the lobbying, not because of it.

Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Good corporate governance in a construction company means that the directors of the company make sure that its building sites, for instance, are safe to work on. Good corporate governance in a supermarket company means that the directors make sure, for instance, that their staff do not sell alcohol to underage kids. One would think that good corporate governance in a broadcasting organisation would mean that the directors of the company would make sure that their organisation abides by good broadcasting standards, which is why I wholeheartedly support what the Secretary is State is doing today. Rupert Murdoch’s defence over phone hacking was, in the end, that his company was far too big for him to possibly know what was going on across the whole of it. That was not good corporate governance, and it could not possibly lead to good broadcasting standards.

Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - -

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the comments on corporate governance that I made in my statement: “I have outstanding non-fanciful concerns about these matters, and I am of the view that they should be considered further by the CMA.”

21st Century Fox/Sky Merger

Debate between Karen Bradley and Chris Bryant
Thursday 29th June 2017

(7 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

If the Secretary of State had sat in the High Court day after day, as I had to do as one of the victims of phone hacking, she would have heard endless examples and evidence—yes, real evidence heard in court before a judge—of the corruption that the Murdochs deliberately perpetuated in the British political system. The truth of the matter is that she cannot possibly now make a proper final judgment on whether the Murdochs are proper people to have any broadcasting licence in this country unless she hears more evidence in court in Leveson 2.

Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - -

The point is that that evidence was heard in court and Ofcom has looked at it as part of all the work it has been doing. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman takes up his points on fit and proper people with Ofcom.