(3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Charlotte Cane (Ely and East Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) on securing this important debate. I agree with much of what she said in her speech, and much of what other hon. Members have said.
My hon. Friend’s constituency shares many similarities with mine: they are a comparable size, have a comparable population, contain much farmland and have scattering of medium-sized settlements. In my case, those settlements include the city of Ely, which is home to over 20,000 residents. According to Ofcom’s coverage map, the entire city is covered by all mobile network operators, with at least “good outdoor” coverage. Given such confidence, I invite Ofcom inspectors to Ely, where I will challenge them to catch even a single bar of mobile signal in the city centre. They will be sorely disappointed. Instead, the Government could look at data gathered by a number of different independent sources that reports remarkably poor mobile service in areas of my constituency that Ofcom claims are covered.
Alternatively, the Government could simply listen to local people. They would hear from local business owners in Ely market square who cannot get a signal for their card machines; residents, such as my constituent Alan, who has tried to install a smart energy meter in his home on four occasions, each unsuccessful because of insufficient mobile signal, which is not only irritating but means he cannot get the cheapest fuel options that are available only to people who have working smart meters; or the new restaurant in the middle of the city centre that cannot take orders because it cannot get internet or mobile signal.
Rather fittingly in a debate about mobile connectivity, the major failure in the Government’s approach thus far appears to be a total lack of communication and connection with the lived experiences of citizens on the ground. The Government claim that mobile coverage has reached 96% of the country, but thousands of my constituents in Ely and East Cambridgeshire—and, I am willing to bet, in almost every other rural constituency—would beg to differ.
Given the way that the Government are assessing coverage, serious doubts are raised over the sincerity of their connectivity goals overall, including the roll-out of the shared rural network. Although that is due to be complete by this time next year, the Government seem to have minimal capacity to direct investment and new infrastructure to reach their goals, relying instead, as we have heard, on the mobile network operators, who put commercial interests above the interests of our constituents.
One of those commercial operators is O2. My constituent, Martin Ferdinando, contacted O2 over 40 times. He was offered a handset, a new 5G SIM, an escalation to the ombudsman and, in the end, a £125 goodwill payment. Does my hon. Friend agree with me that our constituents do not want such “goodwill” payments and that what they want is a functioning mobile system, which would be developed if we had a proper shared rural network?
Charlotte Cane
I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Our constituents do not want compensation or apologies: they want a mobile signal that they can rely on. How can they have confidence that their digital connectivity will improve if Ofcom does not engage with a reliable reporting system to direct investment in response to on-the-ground need? Conversely, there is bit of my constituency that allegedly has no connectivity, but every time I go there I have no problem getting a mobile signal, so ironically there are some places where the signal is better than Ofcom thinks.
In an era when public services are increasingly moving online, rural and digitally excluded populations risk becoming increasingly isolated. Good mobile connectivity must be considered a basic necessity and not an object for compromise. It is especially essential for accessing emergency services, defibrillators and on-call healthcare, a major concern for the many farmers in my constituency who experience lower-than-average health outcomes and work in more accident-prone environments, yet have very limited connectivity.
I think the Government would agree with me that we should move towards greater access to healthcare in the community, foster social connection and ensure safely policed neighbourhoods. However, key to each of those is guaranteeing the rights of all, including those in rural areas, to swift and ready access to mobile signal. More than that, it also means a reliable process of reporting and mapping the real-terms coverage and capacity of mobile networks.
Fundamentally, improving rural mobile connectivity must start with genuine two-way communication. Will the Minister now agree to overhaul Ofcom’s coverage maps so that they are tied to real-time data, and to revise the coverage goals of the shared rural network accordingly so that my constituents, and the many others we have heard about, can finally get an assurance that a reliable connection is on its way—and soon?
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Charlotte Cane (Ely and East Cambridgeshire) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on securing the debate and on his excellent opening speech. Indeed, his speech and all the speeches we have heard today have been really enthusiastic, and that is the whole point of these science centres: to generate enthusiasm. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) about how his enthusiasm for astronomy ended up with his becoming a vet, so we do not know precisely where that young person will end up, but giving them that enthusiasm gets them exploring and thinking about STEM and maybe, ultimately, what career they might do. The Liberal Democrats believe that curiosity and engagement in STEM subjects should be encouraged from a very early age.
We all know that science, technology and engineering will forge the future of this country, by generating advanced technologies, rethinking national infrastructure and making strides in new medical treatments, yet we face a serious shortage in STEM skills. Science and discovery centres play a central role in engaging millions of young people around the country every year, and lighting that spark of enthusiasm could hopefully form the foundation of their future careers. I agree that the Centre for Alternative Technology is a fantastic place, and it gives many examples of how we can all live more sustainably through things we can easily do in our own homes.
As we heard earlier, it is very good that this debate has found a Minister to respond, because, like many people, I was shocked that there does not appear to be a Department wanting responsibility for these wonderful places. I suggest that DSIT grabs it with both hands, before somebody else does.
I am proud to host, within my constituency of Ely and East Cambridgeshire, Cambridge Regional College, Cambridge science park and the Cambridge science centre. Like the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, I do not have a university in my constituency, but I have three around it; the science park hosts many of their spin-outs, and the science centre is what is encouraging young people to study STEM subjects, either into apprenticeships or through to university.
Cambridge science centre will soon begin its “building a better future” programme, which will engage young people in STEM by considering real-world problems that our communities face into the future—things such as house building, energy, transport and green technologies. They are all critical to the lives of young people, and it is exciting to consider the potential of science centres in building local skills to tackle issues within our area. However, Cambridge science centre told me that it has serious concerns over, in its words,
“the growing chasm existing between innovation in STEM sectors and younger people”.
It wants to play a key role in making sure that our young people know what is going on in STEM, with all the new developments—and there are some exciting, cutting-edge ones in my constituency—but it needs money and support to do that.
Science and discovery centres are clearly a national asset, with an important role to play in growing our STEM skills base, investing in national renewal and rebuilding our reputation as a leader in science and innovation. As we have heard, they are also important local assets, connected to the local industries and skills needs of the area, and able to mobilise the enthusiasm of local young people for STEM towards tackling the problems facing their communities into the future. I hope that the Minister can give us an update on which Department will be responsible for the science centres, and for developing a coherent strategy with funding. Will the Minister agree to fully engage with science centres across the country on a plan to ensure that the education and engagement of young people keeps up with the pace of change in science, technology and engineering?
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Charlotte Cane (Ely and East Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) on bringing us this important debate. Ely and East Cambridgeshire has many beautiful listed places of worship. They form part of the fabric of our villages and towns, and of course Ely cathedral watches over Ely and the fens and villages for miles around. Their congregations work really hard to maintain these buildings, not just for their own place of worship, but for the benefit of all of us, whether regular congregants, people who go just for special occasions or, as we have heard, people who use them as hubs and for events—or just because they are absolutely stunning buildings, part of the fabric of our heritage.
I used to help to assess a related grant scheme, so I have seen how hard these congregations work to raise money. Obviously, they do cake sales, book sales and all sorts of things, but one of the most inventive ones was guessing where the cow was going to lay her first pat in the field. Asking those people to raise an extra 20% is a significant ask and, as we have heard, it will stop many of these schemes going ahead.
I ask the Minister to extend the listed places of worship grant scheme and to consider, preferably, making it permanent—or, if not, extending it for a significant period of time. That is because these are capital projects that take a lot of planning, and it takes years to raise the money required. People need to know that this scheme will be there into the future to help them to make vital repairs.