(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons Chamber
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
It is a privilege to speak in this debate on defence readiness. Like others, I am disappointed by this Government’s delay in bringing forward the long-promised defence readiness Bill, both because of what that means for the security of our nation and the implications for the hundreds of my constituents who work in the defence sector. I want to talk, however, about readiness more widely.
The Government are right that energy security is national security. A country that cannot power itself cannot defend itself. I represent a constituency that has the potential to deliver a great deal of clean power to support that security. However, this Government are not delivering on that promise. Ministers often speak of a golden age of nuclear and name Sizewell C, Hinkley Point C and Wylfa. I remind Ministers, as I have done in previous debates, that any honest list of that golden age must include Oldbury. Oldbury sits in my constituency, and has a community that knows nuclear and a site ready for the next generation.
But nuclear on the horizon does not help constituents struggling with their bills today. Energy prices are crippling households and the businesses that employ people. In the past two years, we have seen the loss of hundreds of manufacturing jobs in my constituency with the closure of the Beko factory and Billington steelworks. The remaining businesses tell me that our energy prices are deterring them from expanding. Decisions taken in the last Session have made running a business harder, not easier, and there is little sign in the proposed Bills of the Government changing that. We cannot build resilience in defence or anything else if the industrial base that sustains it is hollowed out. Without local supply chains, we will be vulnerable to interference in our energy grid and other forms of parallel warfare.
More needs to be done to ensure that we have a skilled workforce to support that industry. Thornbury and Yate has no dedicated technical further education provision. Young people who want to train as electricians, welders, nuclear technicians and wind turbine engineers at a further education college must travel out of the area, often by buses that do not run when they need them. The south-west aerospace and defence cluster on our doorstep, employing tens of thousands in skilled, well-paid jobs, stands ready to absorb the local talent we are not yet training. A constituency that sits between a nuclear site, a tidal estuary and one of the country’s largest aerospace and defence clusters should be exactly the right place for fresh technical skills provision. Put the clean energy jobs of the future in young people’s hands and let them tackle a challenge from their own community.
Industry needs infrastructure to support it, too, whether that is investing in a permanent solution for the old Severn bridge, which HGVs are not currently allowed to cross—which is having a massive impact on hauliers—or investing in the redevelopment of Yate station in what is a closing window of opportunity, as the adjacent land has become available. I have raised this point with the Prime Minister and I raise it again today, and I would welcome a meeting with the Rail Minister.
We also need resilience in our public services, like education and health. I have spoken a lot in this House about SEND issues, so now I will talk about health. My constituents are not waiting for structural reform to the NHS; they are waiting for a GP appointment, for an NHS dentist taking new patients and for elective procedures that would let them go back to work. Structural reform is necessary, but it is not by itself sufficient. I urge Ministers to direct the savings to our constituents in a visible way.
I will judge this Government by results in my constituency. Can a young adult get a bus to a technical college and train for a clean energy job? Can a local business afford to hire people after its energy bills, business rates and tax costs? Can a constituent access the medical care they need when they need it? Can Oldbury be part of the golden age that this Government have promised? Sadly, the Government’s proposals in the King’s Speech represent more incrementalism at a moment that calls for seriousness—more fiddling around the edges, with consequences not just for this Government’s reputation but for my constituents’ living standards and the security of the country that we are all sent here to defend.
(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Al Carns
It is a delight to see a Member from the hon. Member’s party sat in the Chamber during a statement on a defence subject—it is a first. I remind him of the capability that we have seen as this Russian operation takes place. The UK has deployed assets to map and track it, and then expose it. That, in fact, is one of the best deterrents, because no longer can Russia or indeed Putin claim that an operation or sabotage that took place was not them. That was the whole purpose of that operation, which has been fantastically conducted by the best Royal Navy in the world. Remember, it is not just the ship or the aircraft; a whole plethora of individuals—in fact, 500 people—sat behind this operation, conducting it, and it was successfully prosecuted.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
I would like to return to the issue of UK maritime services facilitating the export of Russian energy, which I raised in this Chamber three months ago. Does the Minister not see the irony that, at a time when we are all grappling with how we fund our own defence, the Government are still letting UK plc bankroll Putin’s war machine—a war machine that is mapping our infrastructure? What action do the Government plan to take to stop it?
Al Carns
We have taken some of the most extensive action on sanctions of any country, sanctioning thousands of individuals and enterprises, and we will continue to do so as long as that money is fuelled into the illegal and barbaric war in Ukraine.
(5 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend is entirely right that the long-term commitment we and other nations have made to Ukraine is not just about our military support or the deployment of a multinational force into Ukraine; it is about the financial support Ukraine will require for the long term. We are certainly interested in the proposals that she has been championing. Led by the Treasury, this Government have been in discussions with those who are developing such proposals, and we will continue to hold those discussions, because such proposals will potentially play a significant role in contributing the sort of financial investment that we must see in Ukraine for the long term.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
The UK remains one of the chief facilitators of the export of Russian gas, with UK-owned or UK-insured vessels having enabled the export of £45 billion-worth of Russian gas since the start of the war. Will the Secretary of State finally agree to ban the provision of all UK maritime services for the transport and insurance of Russian gas exports?
Where there are grounds for us as a nation and a Government to take action, particularly where we can do so alongside close allies, we have done so. We have done so against individuals, organisations and vessels, and we have sanctioned 544 ships that are part of the Russian shadow fleet operation. Wherever there are grounds to do more, we will look at that, but I will not get into speculation on hypotheticals about future potential moves that we might make on economic sanctions.
(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberI have met representatives of Aeralis on a number of occasions, as have my senior officials. The MOD has provided the company with considerable support as it develops its concept of a modular aircraft with digital design. The Department remains engaged with Aeralis, and with the sector as a whole, to seek a solution that will generate the combat air pilots of the future. We have begun considering what aircraft will replace the Hawk fast jet trainer, which is currently in operation in the Royal Air Force.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
I welcome last week’s written statement confirming that the cases of many of the Triples—the Afghan commandos who served shoulder to shoulder with UK special forces—will be reviewed. What guarantees can the Minister offer that those individuals will be protected, wherever they are, and that their evidence will be heard by the public inquiry relating to Afghanistan?
We concluded phase one of the Triples review last week, in which there was an overturn rate of approximately 30%. The second phase will consider where we hold records relating to top-up pay. On the second part of the hon. Lady’s question, if anyone globally has any evidence that they feel should be submitted to the Haddon-Cave inquiry, the Government encourage them to do so. There is no geographical limit on who may submit evidence, and we are working through Afghan relocations and assistance policy cases to ensure that everyone gets the correct decision, based on their circumstances.