(1 day, 21 hours ago)
Commons Chamber
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
First, I associate myself with the comments made about Oliver Colvile’s passing and the Aberfan disaster.
I wonder if we can have a debate about rhetoric colliding with reality. Earlier this week, we had the Chancellor, after years of telling us that we can make Brexit work, finally concede that things are not going so well on that front. In the same week, our resident patriots—people who are so passionate about Britain that they seek to import American politics to our shores—discovered that their latest pet project has hit the buffers as well. Reform’s department of government efficiency—or DOGE, as I hear teenage boys call it—has succeeded only in cutting the number of Reform councillors in Kent from 57 to 50. The latest spate of losses has come after Reform’s Kent county council leader conceded that there is not much waste to cut in local government and that it will probably have to put up council tax, just like everybody else.
As much as I enjoy watching populist promises go pop, there is a serious point to be made about local government being on its knees. As real-terms budgets have been cut year after year, demand has continued to rise. More elderly people require social care, there are more children with special needs, and more families are turning up at the council’s front door after becoming homeless. For many local authorities, the vast majority of their budget is now spent on services for these vulnerable people, leaving little left for the services that residents expect to see across their communities.
The Government’s fair funding formula was supposed to fix all this, but in some places, including my London borough of Sutton, it seems like it is set to make things worse. That is in no small part down to the fact that it utterly fails to take account of the real cost of housing, particularly in London and the south-east. Can the Government give us assurances that they intend to fix the problems with their current proposal, that they are going to listen to the feedback from London Councils and the Local Government Association, and that they will come back with a funding formula that works for local authorities?
I must say that a request from the Lib Dems to bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality shows how far they have come. On Brexit, the cost of that decision is becoming clearer, but I would point the hon. Member to the fact that the Government are seeking to achieve a better deal with the European Union, as we heard in response to the urgent question, not least for fishing communities such as my own.
On local authority spending, as I said to the shadow Leader of the House, the current system is broken. The Government are committed to fixing it, which the previous Government did not do. We do intend to make good on that commitment, and the hon. Member will have to wait and see what the outcome is. However, he is right that this is a concern not just for Members on his side of the Chamber, but for those on the Labour side, and the Government will bring forward our proposals in good time. Our intention is to make things better, and we will come back and explain in full how that is going to happen.
(1 week, 1 day ago)
Commons Chamber
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
I thank the Leader of the House for his warm welcome—it is a warmer welcome than I received online, where somebody compared me to a failed contestant on “The Apprentice”, which is a good start. I share the right hon. Member’s sympathies expressed about the synagogue attack in Manchester, as well as his tribute to Ming Campbell, which is greatly appreciated by Liberal Democrat Members. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman) for her service in this role, and I wish her well in her new job.
This past week we have been digesting news of the ceasefire in the middle east which, despite reporting, has nothing to do with President Trump’s candidacy for the Nobel peace prize and is all about the welfare of the people living in that region. There is indescribable relief that the hostages are now heading home and the bloodshed can come to an end. The immediate concern is that the ceasefire holds, and the hope is that there will be a just and sustainable peace in the region, including a two-state solution. As we look to the future, it is also important that we do not forget what happened before. A few weeks ago there was a UN report that a genocide had taken place in Gaza, and it is the international community’s obligation to establish the truth and hold those responsible to account. Will the Government, at the appropriate time, make a statement about how Britain will contribute to such an international process, so that justice and accountability for what happened in Gaza can be served?
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new role. I genuinely look forward to our exchanges, and to working with him on the Committees that we will both be on. He comes from a very good constituency pedigree, because Tom Brake, who served his constituency between 1997 and 2019, did the same job as he is now doing, including as Deputy Leader of the House in government. He will be a hard act to follow, but I genuinely wish the hon. Gentleman well. I also join him in thanking his predecessor, the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman), for her work, particularly on the Modernisation Committee. I did not get to know her particularly well, although we will continue to work on some Committees together.
In answer to the hon. Gentleman’s question, first I join him in welcoming the landmark first step of a ceasefire being achieved, and seeing the hostages released after so long and aid returning to Gaza. The Government are committed to playing a leading role in Gaza’s reconstruction, and the next stage of talks on the implementation of the peace plan. He is right to say that accountability and justice for everyone who has committed atrocities, including those involved on 7 October, is crucial. The Government’s long-standing position is that it is up to the courts to determine whether a genocide has occurred, and we will continue to support international law and its essential role in achieving justice in the region as we go forward.
(3 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
I join the Leader of the House in congratulating the Deputy Speakers on their birthdays, and in celebrating our armed forces.
Earlier this year, when the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions announced the welfare reforms, her argument to this House was that they were all about getting people back into work. That argument was undermined somewhat by the timing; in the spring statement the following week, we discovered that the £5 billion saving we achieve from the welfare reforms makes up fully half of the fiscal headroom that the Chancellor is relying on. When we take a closer look at the reforms, we find that most of the savings are generated by changes to the eligibility criteria for the personal independence payment. Entitlement to PIP is given to those in work, those out of work and those unable to work. It follows that many of those who stand to lose out as a result of the reforms will not be incentivised into work, because they will already be in work, or will be unable to join the workforce any time soon. No wonder, then, that when the Bill was published last week, there was condemnation from all sides of the House. If the books need to be balanced, we need to make sure that they are not balanced on the backs of the disabled.
The Leader of the House will be well aware of all the rumours circulating around this place that the Government are preparing to make concessions on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. What is the procedure for doing that? We understand that a reasoned amendment, if one is tabled, would kill the Bill off entirely. What are the options for the Government to make concessions? Will they have to withdraw the Bill and re-present it, or is there some other mechanism by which they can make compromises with their Back Benchers before next week?
I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his place. He has done a very good job of standing in for his excellent colleague, the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman), with whom I also enjoy working.
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that reform to the welfare system has to be done with compassion and be carefully managed. I am sure he also agrees that the system does need reform. He is absolutely right that PIP is not an out-of-work benefit, but a benefit that helps to support disabled people with their living needs. We have to ensure that it is sustainable for the long term, and is there for those who need it most. As I have said, we are listening closely to colleagues from across the House—including, I am sure, Members from his party—who have a lot of experience of dealing with the PIP assessment process. I am sure we all recognise that for too long it has been a box-ticking, degrading process that has not been fit for purpose. That is why we have been reviewing it and listening closely to colleagues. We want to get this right for disabled people, their carers and others.
The hon. Gentleman asks about the parliamentary process. As Leader of the House, with responsibility for legislation across the piece, I struggle to think of many Government Bills brought in this Session that have not been amended during their passage. Most Bills are amended, and those amendments are usually made in Committee and on Report. I am sure that this Bill will be considered in the usual way during its parliamentary passage.