Sir David Amess Adjournment Debate

Bob Blackman Excerpts

Thursday 12th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I congratulate the new hon. Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) on his maiden speech. It is clear that he will contribute to the work of this House in an incredible fashion. May I also pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) for opening this debate? I thank the Leader of the House for responding to my request at business questions last week to properly entitle this debate the Sir David Amess Adjournment debate. I persuaded Sir David to join the Backbench Business Committee purely by undertaking that we would always ensure a pre-recess Adjournment debate, to which he could contribute. His self-interest was clear even then.

It is fitting that this is the first Sir David Amess Adjournment debate since the release of the Grenfell inquiry report, because Sir David was my immediate predecessor as chairman of the all-party parliamentary fire safety and rescue group. The inquiry’s report is incredibly comprehensive and makes for terrible reading. I strongly suggest that all Members read at least the executive summary—the full report is of a daunting size. It is clear that Governments of all persuasions badly let down people in this country and, in particular, the people of Grenfell. The all-party group tried relentlessly to bring forward urgent changes to building safety, but they were refused. Jason Beer KC, representing the Department at the inquiry, even apologised on behalf of the Government for not listening properly to what the all-party group was saying. Sir David said, “If Government had listened to us, Grenfell would not have occurred.” I am glad he has been vindicated on that, but I am very sad that he was not here to hear that.

Deadly fires do not just happen; they are the result of a series of failures over a number of years on a number of levels. There were a number of alarming similarities between Grenfell and the King’s Cross fire, which claimed 31 lives back in 1987, although Sir Martin mentions it only once in his report. I remember it vividly; I was a commuter to central London at the time. Just as Sir Martin’s report has done, Sir Desmond Fennell’s report on the King’s Cross fire identified key failings over several years across many public bodies that could have prevented the fire from spreading out of control. The similarities do not end there; they include inadequate fire training, the use of unsafe materials and the failings of the London Fire Brigade. It is alarming how similar the two fires were, despite being dealt with by totally different Departments.

Sir Martin talks about improving the cross-government response. I wonder what would have happened if the lessons learned about unsafe building materials at King’s Cross been implemented across all Departments. I welcome the Government’s promise to respond to the recommendations within six months, but we need to get the ball rolling on the legislative changes that Sir Martin recommends sooner rather than later. It will take a long time to get the legislation right, to get it through Committee in both Houses and on to the statute book, and then to find the solutions to the problem of the regulatory gap as a matter of priority. We cannot wait six months for a White Paper. I urge the Government to consider at least that key point urgently. Let us get the legislation laid before this House as soon as possible.

That leads me on to the scandal of the remedial work required to fix buildings up and down the country that are still coated in dangerous cladding. The recommendation from King’s Cross to replace wooden escalators took until 2014 to be completed. Surely the cladding replacements cannot take 27 years as well, but the start has not been great. There is another question about this work: who will pay for it? I am adamant that it should not be leaseholders and tenants. They are the one group who have done nothing wrong, and I hope that the Government will address that point.

On Monday, I was pleased to be elected unopposed—that is a mode of election that I welcome—as Chairman of the Backbench Business Committee. It has terrific honorificabilitudinity. That leads me neatly to my tribute to my predecessor in the role. Ian Mearns served as Chairman for nine years, and as the Member of Parliament for Gateshead for 14 years. I am sure that the new hon. Member for Gateshead Central and Whickham (Mark Ferguson) will be as dedicated a servant to the people of that community, and I hope that my chairmanship will live up to Ian’s legacy.

My other role is chairman of the 1922 committee. You will remember the role well, Madam Deputy Speaker, having been vice-chairman. For the benefit of Members who are wondering when the Prime Minister will face a new opponent at lunchtime on Wednesdays, let me say that we have concluded the second ballot of MPs; further ballots will occur after the party conference, and there will be a new leader in November. I thank the officers on the ’22—a somewhat smaller team than in previous years—namely my hon. Friend the Member for North Cotswolds (Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown), who has been elected to the august role of Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, and my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers), for being so efficient in helping me with the ballots over the past couple of weeks.

Moving on to transport, this is the first opportunity I have had to talk about the new part of my constituency that came in after the boundary changes. I am sure that PARLYapp will be pleased to hear that I will not give a history of Queensbury from 1249 to 2024, but there are two interesting titbits on the history of Queensbury station. The branch from Wembley Park to Stanmore began life as part of the Metropolitan railway, in the final fling of the Met as a private venture. Government Members should perhaps note that all four of the tube stations in my constituency resulted from private investment and initiatives, not Government diktat. When Queensbury station was built around 90 years ago, there was no development in the area, and the company could not decide what to call it. The local authority adjacent to the area was Kingsbury, so naturally it was named Queensbury. That leads me on to a bittersweet point about Queensbury station.

While it was nice to gain Queensbury, it is yet another tube station in my constituency without step-free access. Those who follow these debates closely will know that I have raised the issue of Stanmore station before. It is in dire need of a lift, as it has about 3 million passenger entries and exits a year. I continue to bang the drum and to point out to the Mayor of London, Transport for London and the Department for Transport that Stanmore is not step-free. In fact, it forces disabled users to wheel themselves through a car park and up a steep ramp on the other side. Even one of our great Paralympians cannot do it unaided. It is completely inadequate as a step-free entrance, and a public lift is badly needed, so that the 48 steps that people are “meant” to use while entering or exiting the station can be circumvented. I am disappointed that my pleas seem consistently to fall upon deaf ears, but here is a warning: I will continue to campaign until we get a lift at Stanmore station and the other stations in my constituency.

We are all conscious in this House of the escalating situation in the middle east. There is a clear and present danger that if terrorists remain in Gaza, there will be no long-term resolution to the conflict; indeed, Hezbollah, Iran and the extremist forces in the middle east could be dragged into a full-scale war with Israel, which none of us wants. I am therefore concerned about several U-turns by the Government, which I want corrected. Many of us who are friends of Israel are alarmed by the message that is sent by the Government’s suspending 30 arms licences. It gives the impression that, in the Government’s eyes, Israel and Hamas are the same, but let us be clear: they are not, and the Government should not treat them as such. I am chair of the all-party parliamentary group on UK-Israel, and as we come to the one-year anniversary of the 7 October attacks, which were the largest loss of Jewish life since the holocaust, Israel needs the UK’s support, not censure.

On 25 June, Labour said that if elected, it would proscribe the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as many of us had called on the Conservative Government to do for a number of years. On 8 July, The Guardian reported that this Government would not proscribe the IRGC as a terrorist group, which is a complete U-turn. I am concerned that anything but proscription is simply a cop-out, particularly given that Israel-Iran tensions are escalating.

There needs to be Government action on defence spending. We had commitments from the previous Government to raising defence spending, first to 2.5% of GDP and then to 3%. We now seem to have a road map from the Government towards spending 2.5%. Given the challenges that our defence industry faces, we need to take appropriate action.

My Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 from the last Parliament mandated the Government to establish a supported housing advisory panel within 12 months of the Act being passed. The sifting date was listed as 31 July, but nothing has been heard since. As of 30 August, that is overdue, and technically that puts the Secretary of State in breach of the law. I urge her to get the job under way and to ensure that we set up the panel.

I am conscious that other colleagues want to contribute, so I will mention only one or two other things. On the potential free trade deal with India, the last Government promised it by Diwali—they forgot which year—but both sides decided to put negotiations on hold because of elections here and, of course, in India. Those elections are now over, and the Governments have settled into place, so let us get on with the job of getting the free trade agreement that everyone wants.

At business questions, I mentioned the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which I wholeheartedly supported in the last Parliament. Javed Khan’s review on achieving a smoke-free 2030 ought to be implemented in full. I hope that the Government will take on board the various cross-party amendments proposed to the Bill, so that we can get over any objections from the industry and progress that legislation swiftly.

I am delighted that the Government have taken forward the plans for a Holocaust memorial and learning centre in Victoria gardens. I strongly support that. I also chair the all-party group on Holocaust memorial. We recently heard from Holocaust survivor Eve, who reiterated our plea to get the memorial built before the survivors unfortunately pass away. We are seeing huge increases in antisemitism; that is clearly a scandal.

There has not been a Government statement on Bangladesh. The Government in Bangladesh have been displaced and there is a human rights catastrophe, particularly for the Hindu population, yet we have heard nothing from the Government. I hope that we will hear what the Government will do to safeguard Bangladeshi citizens.

Finally, on a local issue, I turn to Edgware Towers. There is a proposal in the neighbouring constituency to build 29 blocks of high-density multi-storey flats, the tallest of which would be 29 storeys; 20 would be above 20 storeys high. That is in a cramped area. Most important is the proposal to build a bus garage for 100 electric buses under a 29-storey tower block. Given the fires that have taken place on electric buses, the consequences are unthinkable. The London Fire Brigade has objected, and this proposal should be ruled out of order straightaway at planning application.

I thank all colleagues in the House, those in the other place, the staff on our teams, the security teams, the catering teams and everyone else who plays a key part in keeping everything afloat. I also wish everyone celebrating it a very happy Rosh Hashanah. As ever, I end by paying tribute to my great friend and colleague. We all miss you, David. I hope that everyone has a good recess, enjoys their party conference and finds some time to relax with friends and family.

[Several hon. Members rose—]