Emergency Summit on Knife Crime

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Friday 22nd March 2019 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. On 12 March, I asked the Home Office a written question seeking the time it takes for emergency travel document applications to be secured for a person in immigration detention. I was told that the information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, during a sitting of the Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Public Bill Committee, the Minister for Immigration told us that the average time it takes to get travel documents for people in immigration detention is 30 days. As I am sure you are aware, Mr Speaker, my amendment proposing no more than 28 days’ detention has signatories from across the House, including Tory and Democratic Unionist party MPs, so there is great interest in the Government’s arguments on this issue. Can you advise me on how to ensure that the background data that the Minister relied on to make that claim in Committee is available to MPs seeking to evaluate her claim?

[Mr Speaker]

Strictly speaking, Government make a judgment about whether they can provide an answer. It is not a matter of order on which the Chair can adjudicate. That said, if I understood the hon. Gentleman’s point of order and he has previously been given an indication in a Committee sitting of average waiting times, it seems not unreasonable that he should then put down a question seeking to ascertain the facts on that matter. Therefore, my advice to him is really twofold. First, at the risk of irritating the House, I would repeat my general advice in matters of this kind: persist, man. Persist. Persist. Keep asking the question. The hon. Gentleman might wish to put it in a different way—or possibly even to a different Department, although I doubt it—and to try to persuade the Minister, perhaps privately, of the reasonableness of the inquiry. Beyond that, it is open to the hon. Gentleman to seek to use freedom of information legislation to secure the response that hitherto has been denied to him. I hope that he will profit from my counsels and that it will not be necessary for him to raise the matter again, but if it is, I am sure that he will.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Thursday 25th October 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We are running slightly late, but I want to accommodate the last two questioners.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

18. What estimate he has made of the volume of legislation that would be required in the event of the UK leaving the EU without a deal.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Tuesday 3rd July 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I do not know what the hon. Gentleman knows about Oxfordshire, but we will hear from the fella later. We look forward to it. A sense of anticipation is developing in the House.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

7. What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government on changes in the level of funding for local government since 2010.

Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill: Committee Stage

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Tuesday 19th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan]

What is the Conservative party’s position in relation to the upper House? Why are you stuffing it with the unelected when you are trying to cut the elected?

[Mr Speaker]

I have not been stuffing the upper House for anybody. I am not doing that. The Government can answer for their own position, of course.

NHS Long-Term Plan

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Monday 18th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

I call Mr Afzal Khan.

[Afzal Khan]

Will the Secretary of State clarify how this money will be divided between the regions? Children growing up in the north, in constituencies such as mine, have vastly different life chances from their counterparts in the south. We do not want this funding to reinforce the north-south divide.

Private Members’ Bills: Money Resolutions

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Thursday 17th May 2018 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

I seek leave to propose that the House should debate a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely the expectation that the Government table a money resolution to a private Member’s Bill that has received a Second Reading. Private Members’ Bills represent one of the few legislative powers that are open to Back Benchers, but the Government are making a mockery of the private Member’s Bill process. Refusing to bring forward a money resolution for my Bill amounts to an abuse of Parliament, and Members should urgently have the chance to debate it.

My private Member’s Bill passed its Second Reading unanimously. Through points of order, business questions and an urgent question last week, Members have made it clear that they wish the Bill to be debated and scrutinised in Committee. The Government’s actions are profoundly undemocratic. This is a minority Government who nevertheless seem willing to defy the will of the House.

The Government are running roughshod over parliamentary procedure. Money resolutions have historically been formalities, introduced as a matter of course after Second Reading. Indeed, in multiple representations to the Procedure Committee, the Government committed to this approach. Five months on from the Second Reading of my Bill, no resolution is in sight, however. Statements from Ministers suggest that one may never materialise. The Government have leapfrogged two Bills that were behind mine over it, and those have now been given money resolutions. The only logic here is that this is about what is in the Government’s interests.

My Bill on constituency boundaries gets to the heart of the balance between Back Benchers and the Executive. Cutting the number of MPs without reducing the number of Ministers will increase the proportion of MPs on the payroll, making it more difficult for Back Benchers to challenge the Government.

I believe that the original decision to reduce the number of MPs was politically motivated. The Conservative party stands to win a greater proportion of the seats in a smaller Parliament. By refusing to allow my private Member’s Bill to progress, the Government are abusing their executive power for their own party’s electoral gain. Ministers all but confessed to this when they said they would wait until the Boundary Commission had reported before making a decision about my Bill.

The Government are defying the will of the House and overstretching their executive power in the service of their party’s electoral interests. Members deserve a chance to debate this issue and restore some integrity to the private Member’s Bill process.

[Mr Speaker]

I have listened carefully to the hon. Member’s application, and I am satisfied that the matter raised is proper to be discussed under Standing Order No. 24. Has the hon. Member the leave of the House?

Application agreed to.

Private Members’ Bills: Money Resolutions

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Thursday 10th May 2018 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Leader of the House if she will make a statement on the Government’s policy on introducing money resolutions for private Members’ Bills.

[Mr Speaker]

Before I call the Leader of the House to respond to the urgent question, and in conformity with the recent trend of acknowledging and celebrating birthdays, I am disclosing to the House, because I have been informed, that the Leader of the House’s birthday is on Sunday, so we wish her a happy birthday.

Office for Students: Appointment

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Monday 8th January 2018 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

I call Afzal Khan.

[Afzal Khan]

Toby labelled Islam a “deeply misogynistic religion,” and he referred to the choice of some Muslim women to adopt the hijab as forced by male oppression. At a time when many more young British Muslim women are entering higher education, do the Government consider it appropriate to appoint such a person to the Office for Students? What is the likelihood that Toby Young will command the respect of Muslim women in higher education who wear the hijab?

[Mr Speaker]

The hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell) looked almost inconsolable not to be called. It is true that I was looking in her direction at an earlier stage and might very well do so again, but it would be a pity to squander her at too early a stage of our proceeding. I am saving her up.

Universal Credit Roll-out

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Tuesday 24th October 2017 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan]

I only have one more short point; then I will see if the hon. Lady can have another opportunity.

The second point is that rent arrears are higher among universal credit claimants, young people cannot receive payments towards housing costs, and claimants need to borrow money before they receive their first payment, and all of that is contributing to a higher risk of eviction and homelessness. Will the Minister commit to addressing these issues?

[Mr Speaker]

Has the hon. Gentleman completed his speech?

[Afzal Khan]

indicated assent.

[Mr Speaker]

I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I call Lucy Frazer.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Afzal Khan and John Bercow

Monday 16th October 2017 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

Applications for international students and other immigration applications cost hundreds of pounds, and errors are common. When the Home Office makes such errors, it puts constituents and citizens in unnecessary distress, but there are no consequences for the Department getting critical decisions wrong time and again. Will the Minister explain where the profits from visa and other visa-related applications are going and how much of the fees received pay for these services? What will he do to improve such a terrible service?

[Mr Speaker]

That was an extremely scholarly academic inquiry to which an extremely pithy response is required—not beyond the competence of a graduate of the University of Buckingham in my constituency, I feel sure.