Voter ID

Debate between Clive Efford and Rachel Maclean

Thursday 27th April 2023 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Maclean]

The hon. Gentleman makes a series of points that I do not accept. I do not recognise or accept in any shape or form the statements he has made on the Floor of this House that we are seeking to remove the right to vote. I think those were the words he mentioned. I remind him that 99% of young people already have a valid form of voter identification, and I have answered the question put to me on multiple occasions—it is just that Opposition Members do not like the answer.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

The Minister has said that people who are turned away at the desk by a qualified voting agent will have that fact recorded. However, if we are looking to understand what is going on as a result of the requirement for ID when voting, surely those people who are turned away by a meeter or greeter at the door must also be recorded, and it is important that the people doing that meeting and greeting are properly trained to do it? Will the Minister go away and give some thought to that point, which she has completely ignored? It will obfuscate any attempt to understand what is going on if people are being turned away at the door and not recorded.

[Rachel Maclean]

I have not obfuscated or ignored the point. I have been clear that the data on people who are turned away and who later return to the polling station with accepted ID will be recorded by a polling clerk or a presiding officer at the issuing desk. As has been discussed many times in this House, with the arguments rehearsed by many hon. Members, the greeters outside the polling station have an important role to play. However, I am sure that hon. Members can appreciate that, if someone decides not to exercise the right to vote, in a free and democratic society it is not for an agent of a local authority to ask intrusively why that person decides not to vote.

Violence Against Women and Girls: Police Response

Debate between Clive Efford and Rachel Maclean

Wednesday 22nd September 2021 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Maclean]

My hon. Friend is right to point to the importance of active and visible policing. The Government are committed to recruiting 20,000 new police officers for exactly that purpose. It is right that we have our officers out on the streets, where they can fight the crime that is affecting our communities.

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

On Friday evening, Sabina Nessa, a 28-year-old primary school teacher, was walking near her home in my constituency, in the Kidbrooke area, when she was attacked and murdered by a man who is yet to be identified. Our hearts go out to her family and friends.

Sabina’s murder highlights yet again the growing problem of violence against women and girls. The Victims’ Commissioner, Vera Baird, has described it as an epidemic and has endorsed the recommendation of Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary and fire and rescue services that violence against women and girls be given the same priority as counter-terrorism. Will the Government accept that recommendation, agree that the time has come to prioritise tackling violence against women and girls, and give it the resources it demands?

[Rachel Maclean]

Our deepest sympathies are with the family and friends of the hon. Gentleman’s constituent. It is precisely cases like those that have led us to prioritise violence against women and girls in such a vital way. That is why we have appointed a national policing lead so that we can put the issue at the heart of Government policy. That is the right way to tackle it.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Clive Efford and Rachel Maclean

Thursday 12th March 2020 Commons Chamber

[Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab)]

13. Whether he plans to make road network national policy statements compatible with the UK’s commitments on climate change.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Rachel Maclean)]

We take our commitment to climate targets seriously. We have one of the world’s most ambitious plans for reducing carbon emissions from our roads, and our infrastructure policy is entirely consistent with that.

[Clive Efford]

Does not the decision on Heathrow demonstrate that the Government need to upgrade their statements in the light of climate change, otherwise there is a danger that their massive expansion of road building will get bogged down in legal challenges?

[Rachel Maclean]

As the hon. Gentleman will know, the Court of Appeal judgment on Heathrow is a very complex issue. Our road policy contains many elements, including a plan for decarbonisation, funding to improve public transport and plans for road improvements. That balanced package is entirely consistent with reaching net zero, which is what the Government are committed to doing.