(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberI am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will make his points about the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829, and the discrimination against Jews under the provisions from the 1860s, which banned them from doing certain things, in the debate, if he is able to. The difference is that we have a Catholic Prime Minister, so it is key that nothing gets in the way of him taking part in any deliberations. I am sure that the House is keen to make these changes to outdated legislation.
There is a report suggesting a way forward on restoration and renewal. I have committed to bringing forward a motion on the subject, because I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman: it is time that we got on with this work. There is not full agreement across the House about what that means, but it is important that we get a debate. He should not believe everything that he is told, or reads, about any postponement. The purpose is not to postpone restoration and renewal; the reality is that it has been postponed for far too long. The longer we postpone it, the more it costs not just to keep this place functioning, but to eventually get round to doing something about it.
However, I admit that my approach has not been to rush into this work, or to get the House to rush into it, because I want consensus, if we can get it. That is the best way of going forward. There is not a consensus, but we can work toward one. I want to build in as many safeguards as possible. For example, I would like to see the outcome of the inquiry by the Public Accounts Committee. Quite rightly, MPs will ask, “How do you ensure that this work will provide value for money, if you decide to do it?”. On timing, all I would say is that we need to get on with this work, so watch this space.
The Albert bridge in Battersea has been closed for more than eight months, amid safety concerns. That is causing severe delays and disruption to my constituents and businesses alike. Bridges in Battersea and across London play a vital role in keeping London moving, so can we have a debate in Government time on how we can make our bridges a strategic asset under national Government oversight?
My hon. Friend may want to make that point directly either to Ministers in the Department for Transport or, if we are talking about essential infrastructure, to the Cabinet Office. I can help arrange that for her. She could also seek a debate on the subject, because I am sure that there are colleagues across the House, not least from London, who will share her frustration about what is happening. They could then hear from a Minister on how the Government could best resolve the matter.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThe hon. Gentleman will know that this is a really important matter for the Government, and we are making progress in all sorts of ways, but I accept that there is further progress to be made. He may wish to apply for either a Backbench Business or Westminster Hall debate, though the Government do update the House when necessary on these matters. On services not being properly funded by the SNP Government, I repeat what I have said before: the SNP Government have had the best settlement ever, and it is just not appropriate for them to not fund services of such critical importance to his constituents.
I have several constituents who are retired civil servants and are still waiting to receive their pension statements and their pensions. This is causing a lot of worry, distress and, in some cases, financial hardship. What is deeply concerning is that when this is raised with Capita, it is pretty laid-back about it; frankly, it shows little empathy and no urgency in trying to resolve the matter. Can I press the Leader of the House for a Government statement setting out what concrete steps the Government will take to address this—in my view, Capita should be relieved of these responsibilities—and, importantly, to ensure that my constituents can begin to receive their pensions? Many have given tens of years of service to this country; they deserve to be paid and treated with respect.
My hon. Friend will know from the support across the House on these matters that the service levels following the move to Capita have been completely unacceptable. The Government’s priority has been to stabilise service and give former civil servants, who rightly need to be treated better, the service that they deserve. I understand the strong feeling about this. She might want to raise the matter again at Cabinet Office questions next week. The Government and the Department are not being shy in coming forward with statements to the House about what remains a very difficult issue.