Lord Polak debates involving the Leader of the House
There have been 5 exchanges involving Lord Polak and the Leader of the House
| Mon 12th April 2021 | His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (Lords Chamber) | 3 interactions (880 words) |
| Wed 23rd September 2020 | Covid-19 (Lords Chamber) | 3 interactions (99 words) |
| Thu 25th June 2020 | Covid-19 Update (Lords Chamber) | 3 interactions (125 words) |
| Mon 22nd July 2019 | Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal) Bill (Lords Chamber) | 9 interactions (682 words) |
| Wed 23rd November 2016 | Royal Navy: Harpoon Anti-ship Missiles (Lords Chamber) | 3 interactions (85 words) |
His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
Lord Polak Excerpts(6 days, 9 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Leader of the House
Viscount Thurso (LD) [V]
My Lords, I am most grateful for this opportunity to support the humble Address to Her Majesty and join the expression of this House’s deepest regret and sympathy to Her Majesty and the Royal Family. All noble Lords who have contributed to this Address have rightly paid tribute to the unflinching support given by His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, to Her Majesty throughout her reign. Without doubt, that support has been a central plank in the success and stability of the monarchy over seven decades. I join all noble Lords in our expression of deep sympathy and sincere condolence to Her Majesty and the family. But in addition, His Royal Highness was a man of an extraordinary range of interests and singular talents, and it is to some of those—particularly on behalf of people in Caithness, where I serve as lord-lieutenant, as well as more personally—that I want to pay tribute.
For some 40 years, the royal yacht “Britannia” came to Scrabster each summer so that the Royal Family could visit the Queen Mother at her home, the Castle of Mey. His Royal Highness, an accomplished artist, often used the time to paint, and, indeed, to this day visitors to the Castle of Mey can see the works he gave to the Queen Mother hanging in the dining room. His ability as an artist was perhaps lesser known than some of his interests but none the less was a vital part of his character.
Another great interest was in innovation and engineering, and he made several visits to Caithness in 1957. One was to tour the new Dounreay, Britain’s first experimental fast breeder reactor facility—a technology in which Britain led the world at the time. His Royal Highness spoke knowledgeably with those on site and was deeply interested in what was happening. My father, who was there, often told me about it. An interest in and support for innovation, engineering and technology were the hallmark of all the work that he did.
On a personal level, I had the great privilege of being His Royal Highness’s host at a reception on your Lordships’ Terrace given by the Institute of Management Services, of which he had been president. The institute is dedicated to productivity and the study of methods of productivity and management. His Royal Highness was a highly engaged president who, as with all organisations he was associated with, took a keen interest in all the institute did. At the time, I was patron and had the task of making a presentation, which I did with what I thought were appropriate words. However, it was clearly too long, and he said loudly, but with a big smile, “Oh bloody well get on with it!”
While we mark his departure with great sadness, we also celebrate the long and remarkable life of a great polymath. We give thanks for a lifetime of support to Her Majesty, a lifetime of service to the nation, and a lifetime of encouragement to young people. His attitude was: get on with it. He made the most of the cards dealt and did not worry about the cards that were not dealt. That is an example to us all, and if we can live by that, it will be a fitting memorial to a long and productive life.
Lord Polak (Con)
My Lords, Psalm 133 begins:
“Hinneh mah tov umah na’im Shevet achim gam yachad.”
“How good and how pleasant it is that people sit together in unity.”
His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh has brought us together in unity as we pay our respects and celebrate a wonderful life. In so doing, I offer sincere condolences to Her Majesty the Queen and all the Royal Family, as was done throughout the country in synagogues last Shabbat.
I recall as a primary schoolboy the sheer excitement that Prince Philip was visiting our school, King David in Liverpool, arriving in a helicopter and landing on our football pitch—although it is true that many of us were most concerned that he might ruin our football pitch. Growing up in Liverpool, I was an active and proud member of the Jewish Lads’ and Girls’ Brigade, where participation and attaining success in the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award scheme was the pinnacle of achievement; over 25,000 members of JLDB over the years have been honoured to have been DofE award recipients.
On moving to London in my early 20s, I was fortunate to meet and become friendly with a wonderfully kind man, Stanley Cohen OBE, of blessed memory. He was originally from Birmingham and was a successful businessman and generous philanthropist, but, most importantly, he was down to earth, plain speaking and just a thoroughly good man, supported by his equally wonderful wife, Joy. Stanley, via the diaries for business initiative started by His Royal Highness, became close to the Duke, and Stanley not only supported the DofE scheme significantly but persuaded his friends to join him. Stanley could be relied upon, but it seems to me that the friendship was also important to Prince Philip, for Stanley was not an airs-and-graces man; he was just the sort of straightforward man that Michael Hobbs, the Prince’s equerry, would call to join a dinner or a small function to ensure that a familiar, reliable and friendly face was in attendance.
In July 2000, as vice-chairman of the governors of Hertsmere Jewish Primary School, I had the honour to welcome Prince Philip to officially open the school. He had great pleasure in naming it the “Joy and Stanley Cohen Hertsmere Jewish Primary School”. What happened on that day, and the next, has always stayed with me; the Duke was nothing short of amazing. He stopped to talk to so many of the five year-olds who were waving union jacks on the pathway, welcoming him to the school. The official ceremony started late because he wanted to personally thank each and every one of those friends of the school who had made donations, and he joked that the reason that Stanley had a surgical boot on one foot that day was because someone had got their own back on Stanley as he was trying to raise funds.
In his memorable and witty speech, the Duke addressed the children and apologised that they had come for the occasion the day after school had broken up for the summer. He said, amusingly, to the parents that school holidays were a bit long and a bit of a bind, and as he pulled the cord to unveil the plaque he announced that the school was clearly open but was now “more open than usual”. But on the front page of the Times the following day was a headline that the Duke of Edinburgh bemoaned school holidays. This was unfair, untrue and missed the whole essence of the man. I note the wonderful and heart-warming coverage in the press over the last couple of days, but it was not always so.
As has been said, Prince Philip was ahead of his time in so many ways. The Times of Israel said that Prince Philip
“was perhaps the closest member of the … royal family to Jews and Jewish causes, and”,
as the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, said,
“in 1994 made a historic visit to Israel”,
although a personal visit,
“to honor his mother, Princess Alice … in Jerusalem”.
On that trip, Prince Philip also visited the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem to participate in a ceremony honouring his mother as a Righteous Among the Nations who saved three members of the Cohen family in Athens during the Nazi occupation of Greece. In his speech, Prince Philip said:
“We did not know, and, as far as we know, she never mentioned to anyone, that she had given refuge to the Cohen family … I suspect that it never occurred to her that her action was … special.”
I conclude as I began, for while the children were singing and entertaining the attendees at the school opening, they sang the popular song “Hinneh Mah Tov Umah Na’im”, Psalm 133. A number of tunes are sung to these words and, as the children sang the fourth melody, the Duke touched my arm and whispered to me. He said, “I recognise that Jewish tune”. I replied, “Indeed, Your Royal Highness. It’s the Flintstones”. He giggled like a schoolboy. He was able to share the excitement of the day with the children, parents and teachers—a day they will never forget, a day I will never forget, and a day His Royal Highness repeated for so many people thousands of times. Yehi zichro baruch: may his memory be a blessing.
Lord Triesman (Lab) [V]
My Lords, it is a sad honour to speak today in this tribute. Like all noble Lords, I express my deepest condolences to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and all members of the Royal Family. His Royal Highness Prince Philip is, first and foremost, a loss to Her Majesty and his family. It is a family loss above all.
It is also a huge loss to this nation and the Commonwealth. As a former Commonwealth Minister, I know how deeply he was respected through this unique family of nations. I have no doubt that many of the memories that we are sharing are personal, but they have to be seen in the setting of our collective memory. We have rightly reflected today on his contribution to national and international life, to the forces, to the protection of the natural world, to science, to intellectual life itself and to knowledge itself.
The Duke of Edinburgh’s Award somehow missed me as a teenager, unlike the many hundreds of thousands of my contemporaries who enjoyed so many new experiences. But as a keen climber and mountain walker myself, I was persuaded to take part and to observe from a suitable alpine distance a group of 16 year-olds pick their way across the icy slopes of Mont Blanc in pursuit of their gold badge. Our role was just to keep our distance and keep a weather eye on their progress without being seen. A weather eye is the right description; the weather closed in. The youngsters were fine. Those observing them from about 500 metres higher had eventually to be guided off the mountain. When I described this to His Royal Highness some years later, he found it hilarious and clear evidence that not having been an award holder in my own right had all but sealed my fate on that mountain. Kindly, he then quickly turned to me and said he wanted to know which animals I had seen apart from the humans, who were probably the least interesting.
I hugely admired his interest in higher education. His detailed knowledge of science and technology were directly integrated into his passion for a diverse group of institutions. Whether Cambridge, Edinburgh or London Guildhall, he saw no hierarchy. I recall that at all three he told audiences that the city they should most focus on was Liverpool. It was the hard-working endeavour of Liverpool which he extolled, a lesson for universities in the City of London or the huge historic institutions in Edinburgh and Cambridge.
He was always grounded, a great combination of intellect and practicality. Most of all, it is important to remember his directness, his plain dislike of pomposity and his down-to-earth personality. I do not think you find people who relate to anyone so personally and get such feedback from their warmth unless it is what they experience from the person providing it. That was Prince Philip’s way.
Allow me, if I may, to share one more memory. When President Lula of Brazil made his state visit to the United Kingdom in March 2006, there was the usual carriage parade passing a ceremonial platform in Horse Guards. The welcoming party included Prince Philip, my very good friend Charles Clarke, then the Home Secretary, and me substituting for the ailing Jack Straw on behalf of the FCO. It was bitterly cold, with flurries of icy rain. Charles and I had arrived early and thought we should not wear overcoats, so we left them in the pavilion. Prince Philip arrived really properly dressed, in the warmest coat possible, and asked us, as both of us were shivering uncontrollably, whether we were completely mad. To put it in his words, he said that he thought we were “certifiable”. We all laughed at the absurdity of this, because we were absurd, and he would not let us forget it. Whenever Charles Clarke and I had the honour and the fun of meeting His Royal Highness, he never failed to ask, among many gales of laughter, whether we had recovered yet from the pneumonia and pleurisy we must surely have as a result of our own foolishness.
Fun is not unimportant in leadership, as the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley of Knighton, said. Great leadership—bringing people to and through change, understanding the future, its possibilities and challenges—is so much more effective with humour, energy and straightforward irritation at anything pompous or showy. I respectfully thank him, and I am sure we will all miss him.
Covid-19
Lord Polak Excerpts(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Leader of the House
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Con)
I am sorry if the noble Baroness did not think I gave due weight to that response. As I have said, we are very concerned to ensure we have scrutiny. We have ensured that each SI has undergone full scrutiny, in line with the parent Act, and worked around the appropriate parliamentary procedures. At this point I also thank the House authorities for all the work they have done to help us ensure we are a Covid-secure workplace. I hope noble Lords, while finding it frustrating, will continue to appreciate that we are working in a hybrid way and doing remote voting in an attempt to make sure that as many noble Lords as possible can continue the important work we do in this House in scrutinising legislation.
Lord Polak (Con)
Following the lead of the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Rochester, I thank the Government for the clear, helpful and sensitive guidelines given to the Jewish community for celebrating Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year, last weekend. It was Rosh Hashanah, but not entirely as we have always known it.
As more local lockdowns will inevitably follow, bringing difficulties for people and businesses—perhaps even a good crisis to exploit, were I the shadow Education Secretary—can my noble friend the Leader of the House explain what extra help will be given to businesses which find themselves in local lockdown areas?
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Con)
Businesses in England required to close due to local lockdowns or targeted restrictions can now receive grants worth £1,500 every three weeks. To be eligible for the grant, a business must have been required to close due to local Covid-19 restrictions. The largest businesses will receive £1,500; smaller businesses will receive £1,000. Payments are triggered by a national decision to close businesses in a high-incidence area. That is specific help for businesses within local lockdowns but, as I alluded to in answer to the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, we are keeping the broader package of national support under review. That is why we have introduced things such as the £2 billion Kickstart Scheme, paying employers £2,000 for every apprentice they hire. There will be national measures and those specific measures I mentioned for local lockdown areas.
Covid-19 Update
Lord Polak Excerpts(9 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Leader of the House
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
I am sure that, like me, the noble Lord has seen pictures of the England cricket team being tested this morning as they went into their bubble in advance of their series against the West Indies. That is happening and it is a small step in the right direction. The noble Lord will know that testing capacity has increased to over 200,000 tests a day and that around 8 million tests have been delivered through our testing programme, so nationwide testing is moving in the right direction. That will be critical as we start to unlock the economy further. The noble Lord is right that a series of schemes have been in place during the lockdown. The Chancellor will be making further Statements in this area in the next couple of weeks.
Lord Polak (Con)
I, too, have some sympathy with the view of the noble Lord, Lord Newby, on cricket. There is no doubt that the return of first-class sport on TV is important for morale around the country. I noted that in the debate on the Statement in the other place, the honourable Member for Dartford called on the people of Britain
“to do their patriotic best … and go to the pub”.—[Official Report, Commons, 22/6/20; col. 1176.]
There is indeed timely and welcome news for restaurants and pubs in this Statement, but does my noble friend agree that, while acknowledging that there has never been a textbook to follow, the Government should be commended for their efforts to protect people’s livelihoods via the job retention scheme and other measures?
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
I thank my noble friend. While I entirely agree with him about professional sport returning, as Norwich City fan the return of the Premier League has not been a happy experience so far, but let us hope a corner has been turned. My noble friend is right. It is great news. It is welcome that parts of the economy that we want to see unlocked are doing so. Of course, 1.1 million employers have used the job retention scheme, which has protected 9.2 million jobs. That has been an extremely important help. From the start of August workers will be able to return to work part-time, and as we slowly unlock the economy and open up key elements of hospitality and other sectors, we want to see that people can start to get to back to their working life and people can enjoy the services that they provide.
Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal) Bill
(Committee: 1st sitting (Hansard): House of Lords)Lord Polak Excerpts
(1 year, 9 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Leader of the House
Baroness Stowell of Beeston (Non-Afl)
My Lords, there is another amendment in this group in my name, but I am afraid it is nothing to do with the Holocaust memorial, so forgive me for changing the topic. It is about co-ordination of major programmes and projects.
At Second Reading I raised the need for clarity on responsibility and accountability for all the major programmes of work ongoing at the Palace. As we know, we currently have the roof works, there is the masonry project and Big Ben, and soon to start will be the Northern Estate. My concern is the scope for confusion and the potential for all manner of things to go wrong if there is not a single body responsible for all these separate programmes to make sure they are co-ordinated properly.
Clause 1(1) makes provision for the sponsor body and the delivery authority to be responsible for building works beyond the restoration and renewal project itself. Since the Second Reading debate, I was pleased to receive a letter from the noble Earl confirming that responsibility for the Northern Estate will soon transfer to the sponsor body, so one of those major projects will now be within the remit of this new body. That is very welcome. I have also learned since Second Reading that within the House authorities, Strategic Estates is responsible for the other projects which are expected to be completed before the decant.
None the less, I have tabled my amendment because of the scope for things to go wrong when these big works eventually commence. I would like some reassurance from the noble Earl, or from the noble Baroness the Leader of the House, that the Strategic Estates team has a formal responsibility for proper engagement with the sponsor body on all these projects; and that if there is any question that responsibility should shift to the sponsor body in the best interests of the future of the Palace of Westminster in the round, it will be considered swiftly. I would also be grateful if the Minister could let us know to whom Strategic Estates is accountable. If there was to be any change in responsibility for those major projects which could impact on the restoration and renewal project itself, which decision-making body would make that decision?
Lord Polak (Con)
My Lords, I would like to bring us back to my noble friend Lord Cormack’s amendment. I have great respect for my noble friend, who sits beside me and advises me on the procedures of this House; perhaps he is not doing such a great job, but I thank him for that. The noble Lord, Lord Carlile, talked about some Holocaust memorials that he has been to, but for me the most iconic one is the one right in the centre of Berlin. If your Lordships have not been to that one, I urge you to go because the memorial is all above ground, while its learning centre is entirely underground.
Lord Carlile of Berriew
I have been to the site in Berlin. Does the noble Lord not agree that it is on a much bigger footprint than is postulated for Victoria Tower Gardens? It is a rectangular site, occupying a great space, which is very different from what is proposed here.
Lord Polak
I will come on to the actual footprint of the site in a minute, if I may.
The noble Baroness, Lady Deech, raised the issue of security. I just pose the question: what does it say about our society that a Holocaust memorial is deemed a security risk? That is the sort of society we now live in, which is very concerning to me. I also take issue a little with noble Lords using this sort of amendment to the Bill to raise objections to the establishment of the memorial on that site. I know that I am northern and I like people to be straightforward. If this amendment were about just objecting to the site of a memorial, I would have preferred its wording to be clear and unequivocal in saying so. I do not know of any Jewish communal event or building that has been stopped or withdrawn because of security concerns. Thank God that in this country, measures are always put in place by successive Governments and successive leaders of the police, whether it be the Met Police here or the police in Manchester and other areas. They have always shown support and understanding by working closely with the CST—the Community Security Trust.
This reminds me of when I was the education director of the Board of Deputies back in the 1980s. I remember questioning the then president of the board, Lord Janner—he was not Lord Janner then but was subsequently made a Peer. I asked him what would happen if somebody were to daub the stone in the Dell in Hyde Park? What would happen if somebody came and put something on it, a swastika or whatever? I remember that his words to me were: “Stuart, you’ll roll up your sleeves and we’ll clean it up”. Those are important words, because it would be a great shame and sadness if a memorial such as this did not happen because we were worried that it could cause problems. I am not an expert, but surely Westminster is a heavily policed part of town, so why would a memorial at this site be an additional risk to the place we are in?
I do not want to pre-empt the words of the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, but I hope a memorial in the learning centre will stand next to Parliament as a reminder to all throughout the nation of our responsibility to remain vigilant against intolerance and bigotry. Setting history’s worst example of the disintegration of democratic values against the greatest emblem of Britain’s aspirations for democracy will stand as a permanent reminder of the responsibility of citizens and politicians, in a democracy, to be vigilant and responsive whenever and wherever those values are threatened. The trustees have ensured, and will ensure, that all precautions are met and the relevant people consulted.
The memorial will require just 7.5% of Victoria Tower Gardens—that leaves 92.5% untouched— and, as a result, the drainage, planting and gardens will be improved. Existing paths will be replaced, the playgrounds enhanced and there will be a new café. There will be many reasons to love the park. Members of the public should be able to go about their daily lives and that includes visiting all high-profile places in Westminster.
Lord Adonis
My Lords, I have played no part in previous deliberations on the location of the Holocaust memorial. I have listened to the discussions very much for the first time. I say at the outset that I understand some of the points that the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, has made. I also strongly identify with the points that the noble Lord, Lord Polak, has made. What is unacceptable about this amendment is that something as big as the location of the Holocaust memorial is not being decided by a planning authority, but by a back-door route as an amendment to this legislation. This is a national memorial at the heart of London.
By the way, it has taken a long time to set this up. It should have been set up a generation ago, but, as this is a national memorial, it is of such importance that Parliament should decide, and on an express vote. If this is still unresolved—and, from listening to the debate, perhaps the Leader will tell us that it is more resolved than appears—there should be a procedure for Parliament to decide on the location, on a positive vote of both Houses, taking account of all the issues, including those which have been raised on security and accessibility, and on the aesthetic elements by the noble Lord, Lord Carlile. What he said about the Berlin memorial was interesting. This is a hugely important decision that the nation should take, from looking at what other nations have done with their memorials and how ours matches up.
If I have understood the situation correctly, construction is not going to start imminently. It sounds unlikely, given the other work that is going to happen on the site. Perhaps the noble Lord will correct me but, if that is the case, Parliament should decide what happens with this memorial. We should not leave it to Westminster City Council, by using an amendment to the Bill in this indirect way.
Break in Debate
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
I am afraid that because this project does not relate specifically to the R&R programme, I do not have that information. But I am sure I will be able to find out and will write to the noble Lord.
My noble friend Lord Cormack raised the issue of the decant. We will come to that in a later group so, if it is okay with noble Lords, I will now turn to the amendment tabled by my noble friend Lady Stowell.
Lord Polak
For the record, I forgot to mention that I am a trustee of the Holocaust Memorial Charitable Trust. I apologise for not saying that at the beginning of my contribution.
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park
My noble friend’s amendment would obligate the House authorities to consult the sponsor body about major works to the Parliamentary Estate which sit outside of R&R, if they are likely to have an impact on delivering the programme. Noble Lords will be aware that the Strategic Estates team is a bicameral service, accountable to the clerks of both Houses and to the relevant domestic committees. In the case of this House, those are the Services Committee, the Finance Committee and ultimately the commission. At present, the shadow sponsor body sits within the House authorities and under the Strategic Estates team, which means that both parties have a head start in looking ahead and being aware of what ongoing projects might have an impact on R&R.
My noble friend’s amendment is to Clause 6, which concerns the parliamentary relationship agreement that the House authorities and the sponsor body will have to sign once the sponsor body is formed on a statutory basis. This agreement will set out the arrangements to hand over the Palace for decant and to hand it back once the Palace has been restored. It will also cover issues relating to staff transfers, insurance, security and the control of data, among other matters.
In the light of its purpose, we consider that this agreement is the natural place for the House authorities and the sponsor body to determine how they will keep each other informed about ongoing estate works which might affect the R&R programme and provide the clarity that the noble Baroness, Lady Scott of Needham Market, rightly said was important. As this agreement already has to cover “consultation and co-operation” between the sponsor body and the corporate officers of the House, we do not think it is necessary to prescribe in this Bill what that consultation and co-operation should cover.
Ian Ailles and the two clerks currently co-ordinate estates projects through the Parliamentary Estate and public realm oversight group. Once the sponsor body is established, if Parliament and the sponsor body wish for this group to continue to play a co-ordinating role, it would then need to be covered by the parliamentary relationship agreement. In addition, if, over the course of the R&R programme, it became apparent that there was support for current separate House authority estates programmes such as the archives project to fall under R&R, the Bill makes provision for this under Clause 1.
Adding another project to R&R could happen but only with the agreement of the commissions of both Houses, the sponsor body and the delivery authority. As was discussed during this debate, that is precisely the process that is currently being followed to integrate the Northern Estate programme, which includes Richmond House, into the R&R programme. The reason it was not included from the beginning is that the NEP predates important decisions on R&R.
I hope that my response reassures my noble friend, and I ask that he withdraw his amendment.
Royal Navy: Harpoon Anti-ship Missiles
Lord Polak Excerpts(4 years, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Leader of the House
Earl Howe
My Lords, Royal Navy ships habitually work in task groups with a range of offensive and defensive assets. A task group can be made up of a number of different platforms, including submarines, surface ships, helicopters and, from 2021, our new Queen Elizabeth carriers. In turn, those platforms host a variety of complementary capabilities, such as anti-surface warfare, air defence, intelligence and so on. It is important to look at the overall context.
Lord Polak (Con)
My Lords, sometimes in these debates we forget about our service men and women. At the end of September, HMS “Portland” was docked in Dar es Salaam, and I had the honour of meeting Captain Paul Stroude, the commanding officer. HMS “Portland” was patrolling the difficult waters of east Africa in a brilliant fashion. While we have this debate, will the Minister join me in paying fulsome tribute to our brave and skilful members of the Royal Navy for their outstanding service across the globe?