Modernisation Committee Report: Access to the House of Commons
Chris Vince Excerpts(6 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Leader of the House, the shadow Leader of the House and the Liberal Democrat Chief Whip—I have no doubt that she will thrash me in the London marathon in 10 days’ time—for starting the debate. I join the Leader of the House in paying tribute to the former Leader of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), who chaired a number of the meetings when I had the pleasure of sitting on the Modernisation Committee. I recognise the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis), who often talks about this subject with such passion. He makes vital points, particularly with regard to Changing Places toilets. I hope the House Administration is listening. I am sure the Leader of the House is listening, too.
I would like to thank all hon. Members who participated in the evidence sessions, in particular my hon. Friends the Members for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova) and for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball), and the hon. Members for South Northamptonshire (Sarah Bool) and for Torbay (Steve Darling). I should also personally thank the former Member for Harlow for his contribution. He said during the evidence session that he found it so difficult to spend long periods of time in debates that he would come in, make an intervention and then leave—so I have learnt something from him! In all sincerity, he made a really important point.
The shadow Leader of the House made the important point that accessibility issues must not impact on the ability of MPs to do their job in this House. It is also vital that prospective MPs are not put off standing for election because they see this place as being inaccessible. Whatever my political differences might be with Robert, I recognise that he was a brilliant MP for Harlow, and I seek to emulate him in the work he did. It would have been a real tragedy if he had been put off standing for election in the first place because he felt that he could not access democracy in the way that he was able to do.
This matter, however, is not just about us MPs. It is important to recognise the contributions from Clerks, MPs’ staff, House staff and Members of the other place. There is a danger that those of us who do not have accessibility issues do not truly appreciate the challenges for those who do. I thank the Clerks who brought together this important report. Before I make specific reference to parts of the report, I would like to say that, like everybody in this House and the other place, I want us to get this right and for everyone who works in this place not to have barriers to doing their jobs as effectively as possible.
As many Members have mentioned, the report is in three parts: the built environment, procedures and communication. As it rightly recognises in the first instance, there is a realisation that the estate is comprised of a complex combination of buildings that were constructed in a patchwork manner, and that that built environment can create physical and psychological challenges for its users. It is important to recognise that.
One conclusion on accessibility is that we need to learn from disabled people about their experiences of visiting and engaging with Parliament. Again, I think we can have cross-party agreement on that. As briefly mentioned by the Leader of the House, my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge made reference to the challenges of opening doors, including in Portcullis House. Portcullis House is nowhere near as old as this building, so there is no excuse for such challenges, particularly in relation to toilet doors. We heard a lot about the toilet doors in Portcullis House.
I am pleased that there has been positive action to make the estate more accessible, but I urge, as the report does, the establishment of an accessibility group to include disabled MPs to consider the wider issues. I would add to that, on the back of what my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford said, the need to think about disabled visitors to this place and how their voices can be heard, too. On page 22, the report talks about safety and security being the main focus of the House of Commons administration. We would of course all agree with that, but it should not be at the expense of accessibility. Nor does it need to be if we think about how the space supports everybody in it.
On procedure—I promise I will not make my speech too long, Madam Deputy Speaker; I realise that I have gone on for quite a bit—I am someone who has grown to enjoy the procedures of this place. I am a relatively new MP, but as Members across the House will know, I spend quite a lot of time in the Chamber—my place on the Bench is slightly more worn than those around it. I have really enjoyed other MPs coming to me and asking questions about procedure—it has made me feel quite important. However, procedure and how this place works should not be a big secret. Making sure that everybody—particularly those who have accessibility and reasonable adjustment requirements—understands the procedures is really important. I echo what the report says about the importance of formal and informal routes for MPs who require reasonable adjustments, which is essential.
There has been a lot of talk about call lists. Actually, I have found a great solution to the issue of call lists, as has the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon): if a Member talks a lot, they end up getting called last—although I have not been on this occasion. Although call lists do change, the compromise solution could be that Members who have reasonable adjustments can be told where they will be in the list, and then the rest of us can proceed as normal. I think that would be a fairer way to do it. It deals with the issues that those who do not want call lists have raised.
I agree with the usefulness of in-person voting—although I think the Health Secretary might not agree with me, as I have lobbied him during quite a number of votes about issues that affect Harlow—and I think it is important that we have it. However, I recognise that in situations where we have up to 12 votes in a row, as we had this week, there can be real challenges for people who need reasonable adjustments. I absolutely support the point that has been made about proxy voting, the potential use of a digital system and the recommendation about reasonable adjustment cards.
I turn finally to language. I do not want to sound like too much of a traditionalist, but I do like the fact that we have traditional parliamentary language. I think the shadow Leader of the House got it right earlier—and that is not just because he is a Conservative. We want to keep some of those traditions, but we want to make it accessible, too. There is absolutely an achievable compromise to be made between simplification and remembering the customs and history of this place.
I have spoken far more than I expected to on this issue, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it is really important to me and to my constituents.
Chris Vince
Do you want more? Okay. [Laughter.]
To finish, I will say that it is hugely important that democracy is not just for the few. It is so important that everyone has the opportunity to take part in this country’s democracy, and this place is a beacon for democracy in this country like probably no other; actually, it is a beacon for democracy across the world, if we are honest. I do not want there to be barriers for anybody working here. That is hugely important for MPs as it is for Members of the other House, Clerks, House staff and the people who work for us as MPs.
I welcome this report. I think it is the start of a conversation, not the end. I hope we can move forward so that there can be more Members in this place like my predecessor who feel confident and comfortable to participate in the democracy of this country to the fullest amount.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) for his pithy contribution to the debate—
Adam Jogee
Finishing too early is not always a good thing.
I start by extending my condolences to my constituent and great friend back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme, Rosi Monkman, whose mother died in County Waterford in the Republic of Ireland yesterday. I pay tribute to her mother, Mrs Morrissey, and to Rosi, her husband, their sons and all the family.
As there were so many pithy contributions before me, Madam Deputy Speaker, and we have until 5 o’clock, I would like to place on the record my respect for Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. As was discussed in business questions, next Tuesday will mark the 100th anniversary of Her late Majesty’s birth, which is a fitting opportunity for us to remember, reflect and give thanks for a long life of service to our United Kingdom and the Commonwealth.
This is an important debate, and I hope people do not think that the number of colleagues present means that it is not taken seriously. I am grateful to all members of the Modernisation Committee from across the House for their work, and for taking on the most Herculean task of making this place fit for the 21st century and creating the best means for us to deliver for the people who sent us here. I will focus my comments on part 2 of the report on procedures and processes, and within that on pages 2, 25 and 30, as well as page 11 of the response.
I would like to acknowledge the work of my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell) while she served as Leader of the House— I suppose I should declare an interest as her former Parliamentary Private Secretary. I acknowledge the Leader of the House of Commons, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Sir Alan Campbell), for picking up the baton and running with it.
As my office staff would tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, as would my wife and family, I am in many ways an analogue politician in a digital age—or, now, an AI age. I much prefer the written word and signing letters by hand over putting some app on my phone to record 30 seconds of myself speaking into a screen. In many ways, it might seem odd that I have taken such a close interest in both this report and the recent report from the Procedure Committee on proxy voting, and, more generally, in the measures being taken to open our national Parliament to all who work here and bring it into the 21st century.
Like my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince), I broadly like the customs and practices of this place; they are age old and they broadly work. Indeed, they have been adopted by nations across the Commonwealth that have developed their own Westminster systems, such as in the Caribbean, Australia, Canada and on the African continent. I would not, therefore, advocate for radical changes that would change how we do things, but I am willing to advocate for sensible and respectful changes that would allow us to do our jobs more properly and effectively.
Everyone has good days and bad days at work and at home. That is the nature of the world that we live in. It has always been that way, and that is not going to change. At work, some things go well; in our case, sometimes we win, and then we hope to keep on winning. It is those victories that allow us to serve in this place—and what a pleasure and privilege it is to do so.
However, as we speak for our people, tackle injustices wherever we find them and work every day to get things done, no Member of this House should be forced to choose between family and doing our job of honouring the trust of the local people who sent us here and holding Ministers to account. The fact that I was forced to make such a choice on Friday 20 June 2025 is something that will stay with me forever. It remains, I am sad to say, the worst day I have had in this job.
My wife received a phone call on 15 June to tell her that her father had taken unwell after many years of living with Parkinson’s. By the following Tuesday, it appeared that he was reaching the end of his life, and that if we wanted to say goodbye, we had to get there as soon as possible—and so we did.
On Friday 20 June, this House was considering the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill—an issue of the utmost importance to all of us and to our constituents. Whatever our views, we all wanted to have our voices heard and to be able to take part in this most important of debates. I asked my Whips if a proxy vote could be sorted so that I could represent my constituents and also be with my family, but was told that because it was a private Member’s Bill, a proxy would not be possible, and therefore the only option available to me was to seek my own pairing arrangement with a colleague in the House. To say I was cross is an understatement, but I took on board that response and went on my way to find my own pairing arrangement.
It was clear at that time that my father-in-law was not going to get better, so I asked colleagues in my party and on the Opposition Benches if they would pair with me. I asked the promoter of the Bill, who said that she was not able to help. I asked another colleague—whom I will not name, although I think it is important that I say this—who said that she could not help me because she was doing the numbers for the pro side, and she would therefore be “gleeful” that I could not be there, as it would be one less vote against the Bill.
Given the stress and hassle it causes, no colleague should be forced to find their own pair when a loved one is dying. That is insane and, frankly, inhumane. If a teacher cannot be at work, we get a supply teacher—we all remember the days when a supply teacher was in charge. How that cannot happen in the mother of Parliaments is inexplicable.
We must get a grip of the proxy voting system. Nobody wants to let people off or change how we do things in a radical way, as I said at the beginning of my remarks. We do not want to stop people being here to vote, but we need to be sensible, compassionate and respectful. We need to get a grip because nobody should be forced to experience what I had to.
Having failed to get a pair, despite trying really hard to do so given that my father-in-law was still on the journey to the end of his life, and having spoken to my family, I came to vote on that Friday, because if I had not, my constituents would not have been represented in that debate. As I left this place to go back to my wife and in-laws, my wife called to tell me that her father had died. I will never forget that phone call. I received it only because I was unable to get a proxy or a pair. That remains the worst day that I have had in this job.
The Leader of the House, the shadow Leader of the House and the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) said that all Members should be able to do their jobs properly, and that is true, but it should not come at the expense of our family commitments—not least as a loved one reaches the end of their life. It is not lost on me that we were voting on assisted dying, but I was given no assistance by this House, or by the powerful people in it, to do my job and be with my family when they needed me most.
Nobody wants a sob story—I fully accept that—but this is my experience, and I hope that we will look at how we can do things differently so that nobody has to experience what we have. We need to consider the eligibility rules for Members seeking a proxy; in my view, the current rules are far too narrow. I read the Procedure Committee report, and I hope that, together, the Procedure and Modernisation Committees will be able to get us to the right place sooner rather than later. I say this not to seek sympathy but to be helpful, so that we finally make our Parliament compassionate and fit for purpose.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sir Alan Campbell
I cannot confirm who will be leading the Ukraine debate tomorrow, but I said a moment ago that the Prime Minister will be meeting the families tomorrow, so that probably answers that part of the hon. Gentleman’s question. In terms of the Chagos legislation that was scheduled for next week, as I have said I am expecting, hoping for and intending there to be minimal disruption, so while we will not get on to that important matter on Monday, it will not be long after that.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Leader of the House for his statement. While I am here, may I thank the victims Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), for her incredibly hard work on this issue? The Public Office (Accountability) Bill is hugely important, so I understand why the Leader of the House has taken this decision. Will he confirm that any changes made to the legislation will be thoroughly consulted on with the families of those who were tragically lost in the Hillsborough disaster? Will he also confirm that we will continue to ensure that we reach out to victims and their families when we look at dealing with such legislation in the future?
Sir Alan Campbell
I confirm that the Government and Ministers do continue to speak with stakeholders, particularly the families. A great deal of effort has been put into that both by hon. Friends on the Back Benches and Ministers; I commend them for that. If there are lessons to be learned, we will learn those lessons, such is the progress of legislation; and for future Bills, if there are lessons to be learned, I am sure that we will have done so.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I was not expecting to be called quite so soon, Madam Deputy Speaker, as you can probably imagine.
Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Jo Doyle, the new headteacher of Sir Frederick Gibberd college in Harlow, on her recent appointment? As the Leader of the House knows, the school has suffered a number of issues. It was forced to close down after being open for only four years because of the modular construction that was used, with students taught being in portacabins and—at one point—even in marquees. Despite that, mainly due to the hard work of the teachers, the school has continued to thrive and its young people have been very successful. I am looking forward to working with Jo and her team to ensure that it continues to thrive.
Lucy Powell
Maybe my hon. Friend is becoming one of Madam Deputy Speaker’s new favourites— rightly so. I congratulate Jo Doyle and all of those at Sir Frederick Gibberd college on the fantastic work they have done to turn the school around and provide such a quality education to young people in Harlow.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(10 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating those at Eccles RFC and Boothstown FC on all the great work that they do. Grassroots sport is often raised at business questions, so I am sure that it would make a popular topic for debate. We are committed to the “This Girl Can” campaign. I am sure that girls’ grassroots sport would also be a popular topic for debate.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I want to thank a teacher called Chris—[Laughter.] No, not this one! Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating Chris Leeding of Newhall primary academy in Harlow on achieving a Pearson teacher of the year silver award for his clear dedication and passion for supporting children in Harlow, both in classroom teaching and in encouraging them to write to their local MP?
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating Chris from Harlow—not him, but the teacher he mentions. As we have heard, teachers do amazing work for all our young people, and we send our gratitude to them daily.
Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme
Chris Vince Excerpts(10 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
The establishment of the Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme, known as the ICGS—the first scheme of its kind in any legislature in the world— was an important step forward in tackling inappropriate behaviour in Parliament. Its establishment was agreed in 2018 with cross-party support.
The ICGS provides a dedicated, independent mechanism for handling complaints of bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct in both Houses. It deals with those complaints assiduously and anonymously, with a professional, well-resourced team, and has a range of appropriate sanctions and mechanisms at its disposal. The ICGS works alongside the independent expert panel, which determines appeals and sanctions for cases that have been brought against Members of Parliament. These arrangements ensure complaints are investigated fairly, objectively and to a high standard.
The ICGS has been an important driver in establishing higher standards and improved culture in Parliament and we should all support it. I thank the ICGS for its continued work, and in particular the contribution of its director, Thea Walton, who will be stepping down from her role later this year.
Last year, Parliament published the findings of an independent review into the effectiveness of the ICGS, conducted by Paul Kernaghan. The review broadly praised the ICGS’s performance, with Kernaghan being clear the ICGS is making a difference to standards in Parliament, and has demonstrated its ability to hold people to account for unacceptable behaviour. He said that the ICGS is something
“the parliamentary community should take pride in”.
The review found that the scheme has continued to take positive steps to improve timeliness and the quality of its service. Of course there is always more work to be done. It should rightly have the ambition to be the gold standard in workplace grievance schemes. In total, the review made 26 recommendations. Of those, eight have already been delivered, and a further eight will be taken forward should the motion before the House be agreed. Work on the remaining recommendations is under way. These are recommendations from an independent review of the independent grievance scheme of this House: they really should not be contentious.
Kernaghan’s first recommendation is to consolidate the various policy and procedure documents into one policy document and one procedure document, and that the existing ICGS assurance group should become a permanent ICGS assurance board.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I am looking through the document and the Opposition’s amendments. Two of the amendments that they have put forward talk about the size of the ICGS assurance board and, in particular, adding two members. Is it the feeling, from the evaluation of the independent process, that the board is actually the right size and that we do not need those amendments?
Lucy Powell
I certainly do not think that we need the amendments. The assurance board is made up of representatives of both Houses, the HR department and other appropriate people, which is as it should be. It also includes a Member of this House, who I think will be contributing shortly and who is also a member of the House of Commons Commission. The make-up of the assurance board as proposed is right.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
I am pleased to support this motion, which, as the Leader of the House says, has come about as a result of the Kernaghan review, an independent review of the ICGS published just last year. The review’s recommendations included the creation of an ICGS policy framework, and the formalisation of the ICGS assurance group into an assurance board with responsibility for the creation of and future changes to an ICGS processes document. The motion is designed to implement those recommendations, and I am happy to support it.
The public are understandably fed up with what many perceive as accepted poor behaviour from those elected to represent them. The ICGS is designed to help restore trust by ensuring that poor behaviour is dealt with swiftly and appropriately, but that cannot happen if MPs are constantly marking their own homework. If it is thought that there are attempts to manipulate the system, or to wriggle out of tight spots for political gain, we will have no chance of regaining the trust that has been eroded, particularly over recent years. That is why I am so disappointed to see the amendments that have been tabled. After so many years of trust being eroded, we need to find a way to win that trust back, and that is what this scheme does.
Let me go through the amendments to explain what I mean. Amendment (a) would, among other things, remove the right to make collective complaints, making it harder for complainants with the same issue to support each other in coming forward. It would also prevent the ICGS from accepting a person’s complaint if it was substantially the same as a complaint they had previously withdrawn. That would worry me, as I do not find it hard to imagine a scenario in which a complainant is—how shall I put this?—encouraged to withdraw their complaint, perhaps following promises of improved behaviour, but then feels the need, and has the courage, to raise the issue again. That amendment would prevent them from being able to come forward again.
Amendments (b), (c) and (d) appear to be a rather blatant attempt to stack the membership of the assurance board, so that it can be politically manipulated. Amendment (e) trashes the recommendation from the Kernaghan review that the ICGS assurance board should be able to approve ICGS procedures. The Kernaghan review clearly recommends that the assurance board should be able to create and make changes to ICGS procedures. That is to speed up a process that the Kernaghan review found to be unduly cumbersome and impacted by political considerations.
Chris Vince
I am just trying to get my head around the amendments. Is the hon. Member suggesting that we avoid these amendments, because we want to ensure that there cannot be political influence over the decisions being made, such that, as she says, those who have committed these terrible acts somehow get away with it?
Marie Goldman
Indeed. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, because I completely agree. Unfortunately, what he suggests is what some of these amendments are designed to do, and that is why I cannot support them. They are an attack on, and a blatant attempt to manipulate, the system, and that is totally wrong. In short, I fully support this motion and do not support any of the amendments. I encourage Members from all parts of the House to do the same.
Government Announcements
Chris Vince Excerpts(10 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I am certainly sorry if members of the media have been given sight of the SDR ahead of Members of this House. My understanding is that it is being published for the first time in this House today. As I said earlier, we have put on a statement; that was always our intention. We were always going to have a major statement today on the SDR and that is indeed what we have done. Even though there is other important business today, MPs from across the House will have ample opportunity—I am sure they will take that opportunity—to scrutinise the Defence Secretary not only today but on future occasions via Select Committees and elsewhere.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I declare an interest, as a member of the Modernisation Committee. I thank you, Mr Speaker, for standing up for us Back Benchers and for granting so many urgent questions—I say that as someone who speaks in most of them on behalf of the people of Harlow. Does the Leader of the House agree that part of the Government’s remit is to modernise and to bring back trust in politics? Will she outline what she has been doing to that end and the work that the Committee has been doing to make this place more accessible?
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for all the work he does on the Modernisation Committee. He will know that one of the remits we have set out for the Committee is to ensure more time for Back Benchers to scrutinise Government business. That is a key part of modernising Parliament, and it will ensure that this Chamber is, and will be in the future, the real crucible of national debate that we want it to be. I am sure we will see that today and on other days.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(11 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
For the final question, I call Chris Vince.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—and congratulations to you on that. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the players, staff and volunteers of a team often known as the “non-league Man City”, Harlow Town football club, on its promotion from the Thurlow Nunn first division? And as I have time, will she also wish the club luck to do the double in two weeks’ time in the league cup final?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend may be last, but certainly not least. I certainly join him in congratulating Harlow Town football club—maybe they have a Haaland as well, if they are bit like Man City—on its promotion and wish it the very best of luck in the league cup final in two weeks’ time.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman has not yet been successful in applying for an Adjournment debate, but the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), who chairs the Backbench Business Committee, and Mr Speaker are both in their places and have, I am sure, heard his plea. The future of the UK Health Security Agency, which does great work, is of national importance. I will ensure that he gets an update at the earliest opportunity.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I am honoured to be called after the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen). I thank the Leader of the House for mentioning Young Carers Action Day, which was yesterday. The hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) and I took an open-top bus tour with some young carers and got hailed on. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating my constituent Danielle, who won a prize in the national Show Racism the Red Card poetry competition for her poem “Like a Butterfly”, and does my right hon. Friend recognise the importance of creative writing in breaking down barriers and challenging division?
Lucy Powell
Absolutely, I join my hon. Friend in congratulating Danielle on writing an award-winning poem and all the young carers in his constituency and beyond. I heard on the radio this morning that AI thinks it can now do creative writing for all of us, but I am sure it cannot beat Danielle and the creative writing endeavours of young people.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. A number of Members have already raised digital literacy with me today and how we can do more to tackle misinformation and disinformation online, especially for our young people. That would make for a very popular topic for a debate, and I will ensure that my hon. Friend gets an update.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to the longest serving leader and second-ever chair of Harlow council, Tom Farr, who passed away on Tuesday? Tom devoted so much of his life to serving the community of Harlow as both a councillor and a secondary school teacher, and also as the chair of Harlow primary health trust.
Lucy Powell
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to Tom Farr and his life of dedicated service to Harlow and to Harlow council. I also take the opportunity to thank my hon. Friend for joining the Modernisation Committee.
Business of the House
Chris Vince Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
This is not something I am aware of; I have not come across a park home in my constituency, but the hon. Member raises an important point. It would make an extremely good application for an Adjournment debate, but in the meantime, I will ensure he gets a full ministerial response about park homes.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
Over the Christmas recess, I was lucky enough to visit South East Harlow Sports and Youth Association, a fantastic grassroots organisation that supports young people in my community to get access to sport and thrive. Can we have a debate in Government time on how we can support such grassroots youth organisations to ensure they survive and thrive and support young people in our communities?
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating South East Harlow Sports and Youth Association for the great work it does. He is right to raise the vital role of grassroots sport facilities. That is why this Government have set aside budgets for them to continue and flourish. He might want to raise this issue with the Secretary of State in questions next week.