Debate on the Address

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Wednesday 17th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Derek Twigg (Widnes and Halewood) (Lab)]

It is a real pleasure to speak in the King’s Speech debate, setting out Labour’s new programme for government after 14 years of disastrous Tory Government. It is also an honour to take part as the MP for the new constituency of Widnes and Halewood, in which I was born and bred.

The Prime Minister has made it clear that the Labour Government will be one of service, with a clear mandate to deliver the change that the country desperately needs. The King’s Speech shows that Labour plans to govern with serious solutions. Labour will make the difficult decisions needed to fix the basic problems facing the country. I am really pleased that we have made growth a central plank of the Government’s policy, including of course the development of an incredible industrial strategy. We must also address the serious and long-term productivity problem that the country has faced. I hope that the new Government will get on to that quickly, because it is really holding us back.

The new Labour Government of ours have a daunting job in tackling the many challenges facing the country after 14 years of mismanagement of our economy, epitomised by the disastrous Liz Truss Budget as well as the running down and underfunding of our public services. The NHS and social care are in crisis, with people dying because of delays in treatment. Waiting in hospital corridors is now the norm. Local authorities are also struggling to remain financially viable.

Rather than stick our heads in the sand or pull the wool over people’s eyes as the Tories did, Labour will be straight with people about the problems that we have inherited. The truth is, there is not a switch that we can flick to fix the country’s problems overnight.

This is a packed King’s Speech, but, as there is limited time to speak, I will focus on just a few areas. I really welcome the decision to bring rail services back into public ownership—to improve passenger journeys and deliver better value for taxpayers—and to establish Great British Railways. Anyone who has travelled on Avanti West Coast will know of the many and continuing problems it has had over a long period of time, whether it is the fact that trains are late or cancelled, the wi-fi does not work, they do not have any hot water or whatever. We know that it has been a failure, so I welcome a decision on that.

The announcement of a Hillsborough law is really important. It would place a legal duty of candour on public services and authorities. This Government are determined to rebuild trust, foster respect, improve transparency and accountability, and address the culture of defensiveness in the public sector. I pay particular tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Garston (Maria Eagle), who has worked tirelessly to get to this stage, and I am pleased that the Government have adopted it. Many colleagues worked with her and others on this particular policy. She and I go back many years and have worked closely with the Hillsborough families. I was at the Hillsborough disaster. We know how terrible the experience has been for those families, and the fight they have had over the years. The way that they were treated by the establishment is a scandal. I hope that they will be somewhat relieved and pleased to see this progress.

Tackling the mental health crisis and modernising the Mental Health Act to make it fit for the 21st century will help deliver the Government’s mission to see people live healthy lives for longer, and will put patients at the centre of decisions about their health. I also want to raise the massive challenge of children and adolescents’ mental health waiting lists and the service itself. I would like the Government to focus on that particular part. I am sure that every Member of Parliament here will have many constituents coming to them about this issue. We must also have a proper plan to try to do all we can to reduce suicides, particularly among young men. I welcome any changes and involvement from the Government.

A lot has been said about planning, but high streets have not really been mentioned. Many of us in our constituencies face real issues with high streets, which have been under massive pressure, with many shops closing down. There is a need for renewal and regeneration. I hope that the planning Bill will look at that. I welcome the reform of bus services. Particularly over the past 10 to 15 years, many communities have become more isolated because bus services have been cancelled or reduced. I hope that with this change in policy we can make some improvements to the many communities who feel isolated across this country, not least in my constituency.

In the King’s Speech, the Government made a clear commitment to NATO. They said that it remains unshakeable and that they will retain a strong armed forces, including a nuclear deterrent. I welcome that from the Prime Minister and the Government. The strategic defence review, which has been commissioned by the Prime Minister and will be overseen by the Defence Secretary, is very welcome as a root and branch review. Those of us who have been around here for some time and have had to put up with a Conservative Government who have let down the armed forces, putting this country’s defence and security at risk, will welcome this review. We must look at the situation: we have the smallest Army since Napoleonic times. Even a previous Conservative Secretary of State said that the armed forces have been hollowed out. We have a shortage of munitions. There are major problems with procurement and wasted money, which need to be addressed. I am sure that they will be a priority of this new Government.

The focus has always been and will continue to be on Ukraine, and I was pleased to see the commitment to Ukraine in the King’s Speech. We face a real problem with Russia, China and North Korea and the threat they pose to world order and to democracies in particular. These are some big challenges that we must get to grips with. We must look again at our armed forces and how we can improve them, get better funding and, importantly, ensure that the funding they get is spent correctly and efficiently, and not wasted. That is important for the future.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for what he says about the armed forces. In Northern Ireland we have always had a large recruitment, both to the regular forces and to the territorials. Does he agree that when it comes to recruitment for Northern Ireland, extra money should be made available to ensure that those who want to join can do so?

[Derek Twigg]

I understand the hon. Member’s pitch for extra resources for Northern Ireland, but I think he will recognise that there is now a major recruitment crisis in the armed forces that has been ongoing for many years. It is not just an issue of recruitment; it is also about retaining good, experienced people. That is what we have to really focus on. I am sure the defence review will look at that. It is also about looking after our service personnel, ensuring that they have better housing and better facilities, and that their pay is right, and ensuring that we have proper services and support for our veterans. I agree with him that recruitment is a challenge. We have to sort that out, because it is weakening our armed forces.

I know that time is getting on, so I just want to say a couple of things in conclusion. We still have a cost of living crisis. Living standards were lower at the end of the last Parliament than they were at the beginning of the last Parliament, and the tax burden is at its highest rate for years. Our first King’s Speech will be a downpayment: just the start of the legislative plans that Labour will set out over the next five years. To transform our country, we will need to be patient and have focused work over a long period of time. As the Prime Minister has made clear, this will be a Government of service that will do things differently and properly. Rather than gimmicks and Bills that do not work, Labour will be focused on real change for working people.

Iran-Israel Update

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Monday 15th April 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his question. He will know that individual equipment and capability decisions will be made by a service chief, in conjunction with Ministers. I am happy to look at the point he raised, but we are increasing our purchases of F-35 aircraft and collaborating with Japan and Italy on building the next generation of fighter aircraft—something in which we are leading the world. It will be fantastic for British jobs here at home.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

I hope that, as the Prime Minister said, we can find a diplomatic solution, but we should plan for the worst. I note that the Prime Minister said in his statement:

“The threats to stability are growing—not just in the middle east, but everywhere.”

I may add that our armed forces are running very hot at the moment. Why did the Prime Minister not come here today to announce a significant uplift in defence spending to match the real and potential threats that we are now facing as a country? Is that not going to add to the insecurity for our country?

[The Prime Minister]

I refer the hon. Gentleman to my previous answer about the existing increase in our defence budget—not just over the last few years, but especially this year—in recognition of the increasing threats. I point out to him that we have remained the second largest defence spender in NATO over the past 10 years, behind only the US.

Action Against Houthi Maritime Attacks

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd January 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

My right hon. Friend is right to point out the link between Iran and the Houthis. We are alive to that and I discussed it with President Biden last night. My right hon. Friend will know that we have assets in the region and we are working closely with our allies to ensure maritime security, whether that is by interdicting arms or more generally ensuring the freedom of navigation. Diplomacy will also have to play a part, which is why the Foreign Secretary’s conversations with his Iranian counterpart are so important, but we remain alive to the risks and will do everything we can to reduce them.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister is right that to do nothing is not an option, but to do something there needs to be a strategy. If the attacks continue and there is continued disruption to maritime trade, does he have a plan B?

[The Prime Minister]

That is why we are working extensively with our allies, broadening the international coalition of support condemning the Houthis’ behaviour, and putting pressure on them in all different ways. It is important that military action is not seen in isolation: it sits alongside wider diplomatic and economic strategies. As I said, we will bring forward new sanctions measures, together with our allies, in the coming days.

Security Update

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Monday 11th September 2023 Commons Chamber

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

It is never the case that the United Kingdom Government trade off economic security for national security. National security always comes first in the approach we take, and we have seen action in response to the measures we have taken: for example, we have blocked Chinese acquisitions of companies in this country through the National Security and Investment Act 2021, so we are biting directly.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

How many requests have the Government received from security services’ chiefs in the past 12 months for additional resources to combat the Chinese security threat, and have all those requests been met in full?

[The Deputy Prime Minister]

The hon. Gentleman would not expect me to comment specifically on the agencies, but I can give him a general assurance that we have provided them with the necessary resources they need to combat all the threats that this nation faces.

Independent Public Advocate

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Wednesday 1st March 2023 Commons Chamber

[Dominic Raab]

There are many good things in the right hon. Lady’s private Member’s Bill, but there is more we can do than just that, and there are some areas where, as she knows from her engagement with me—we talked about this at some length, and I am always happy to continue engaging—we take a different view. The most important thing, and I think my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) made this point well, is to make the advocate as effective as possible. I am committed to that, and I am committed to working with Members in all parts of the House.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

As you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, I was at the Hillsborough disaster. Along with my right hon. Friend the Member for Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle), I worked closely with the families, particularly in the lead-up to the decision of the independent panel, so we know quite a bit about the impact on families and what families and victims want. I came to this statement today when I saw its heading, about an independent public advocate, but I am going away not sure what “independent” means, because the Government have not set out clearly how independent it will be. It appears to me, from what the Secretary of State has said, that it will not be totally independent. I am surprised, given that there has been so much discussion in this Chamber, including with my right hon. Friend, that the Secretary of State has come here today and it is still a bit muddled. What does “independent” mean? If it is truly independent, it means that Ministers have no role in it whatever.

[Dominic Raab]

To be clear, on the right of initiative, which I know the right hon. Member for Garston and Halewood (Maria Eagle) has raised and included in her Bill, there could be different views as to its shape or scope, so that is something the Government will ultimately have the last word on. Frankly, what the hon. Gentleman said about the IPA not being independent is wholly wrong. We ought to be clear that, from the point of establishment in relation to a tragedy, the IPA will be wholly and entirely independent to serve the victims, the bereaved and the survivors, and only them. I could not be clearer on the subject.

Illegal Immigration

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Tuesday 13th December 2022 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

That is what our new legislation will deliver. It will make it unambiguously clear: if you come here illegally, you will have no right to stay and will be removed either back to your own safe country or to a safe alternative. That is the right system to have. It is the fair system to have. It means that we can concentrate our generosity and compassion on those around the world who most need it, which I know is the type of system that my right hon. Friend wants to see.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

We should not forget why we are here with the statement: it is because the Government have lost control of the asylum and immigration system and shown a degree of incompetence that takes some beating. Three years on, they have also failed to meet their manifesto commitment to take back control of the border with a new system that would give real control. Will the Prime Minister firm up his statement and confirm that he is confident that the whole backlog of initial asylum decisions will be removed by the end of next year? Will he tell us why he did not say anything about how long he expects it will take to remove from the country those asylum seekers who have failed in their applications?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, our plan is to clear the initial asylum backlog by the end of next year. It is about 117,000 on currently published statistics. The hon. Member talked about the Government and where we are, but he forgets to mention that if we look at what is currently happening across Europe, we see that the number of asylum claims in France and Germany is up by 50%, and that is because the global migratory patterns have completely and utterly changed. That is why the current system is obsolete and why we need to take steps to adapt to the new regime and ensure that we have proper control of our borders. That is what our reforms will deliver.

Seven Principles of Public Life

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Wednesday 7th September 2022 Westminster Hall

[Mick Whitley (Birkenhead) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Paula Barker) on securing this important debate. It could not be more fitting that we gather to debate the subject of standards in public life in the same week that a Prime Minister for whom the words integrity and honesty are alien was at last forced from office.

Optimists may hope that a change in leadership will bring with it a renewed respect for those most basic of principles that govern conduct in public life. However, anyone who has spent any time at all observing how the Conservative party acts in office would be far more sceptical. Indeed, the new resident of No.10 was more than willing to stand by her predecessor, the right hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson), as he tore up the rules, lied to the public and trampled over democratic norms. That proved to be no impediment in her assent to the highest office in the land. In fact, it undoubtedly helped her along the way.

While ordinary people have been confronted by the worst cost of living crisis in memory, Parliament has been consumed by a tawdry litany of scandals that have served to undermine public confidence in this place like never before. If the new Prime Minister is to convince a public who have had no say in choosing her that she truly does intend to work with them, she must make restoring faith in Government and Parliament a top priority. That must mean enshrining the Nolan principles at the heart of everything we do. Those seven principles are foundational in guaranteeing that public bodies work in the interests of those they are supposed to serve. However, the principles mean little without the appropriate mechanisms to ensure they are properly enforced.

We can talk about honesty all we want, but it means nothing when our Prime Minister can lie to Parliament and the wider public for months with total impunity.

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

Order. You cannot say lie.

[Mick Whitley]

Okay then, misled.

[Mick Whitley]

Well, I have said what I said. I will move on.

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

You need to withdraw it. You cannot say that.

[Mick Whitley]

I withdraw it then, reluctantly.

Talk of accountability is equally hollow while efforts are still under way to frustrate the ongoing work of the Privileges Committee. We often talk about the need for culture change in Parliament, and rightly so, but if we are to begin the task of rebuilding faith in public life in earnest, we must accept that broader structural reform is also needed.

When it comes to standards in public life, the Government have for far too long been allowed to mark their own homework. We saw with the case of the former Member for North Shropshire that when the rules have become inconvenient, Members have been free to try and change them as they please. That can no longer stand. The time has come to accept that ministerial and parliamentary standards need more rigorous and, most importantly, independent enforcement. That is why my party is calling for the Prime Minister to be stripped of her sole authority for enforcing the ministerial code and for an independent integrity and ethics commission to be established to ensure that the very highest standards are followed in public office. That is why the independent ethics adviser, of whom the Prime Minister has said she has no need, must be made truly independent. Finally, that is why we need to give serious consideration to the growing calls to make misleading Parliament a criminal offence.

The process of restoring confidence in our Government will be long and difficult. It will mean accepting that the way things have always been can no longer continue, but if our constituents are to have any faith in the Government’s ability to work in their interests in the difficult times ahead, that is essential.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

I intend to call the Front Benchers, starting with the SNP, no later than 3.30 pm.

I remind hon. Members to consider the language they use during the debate. We are debating the seven principles.

--- Later in debate ---

[Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)]

Thank you for calling me to speak in this debate, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Paula Barker) on securing it.

What an important debate this is to have on the first day of a new premiership. The timing could not be more appropriate. I share the disappointment of other Members that there are no Conservative Members here, except the Minister—I am glad to see her in her place—for this very fundamental debate. Shockwaves have just gone through our political system. The premiership has changed because of an erosion of standards, yet the Chamber is not absolutely packed. Conservative Members should be looking at themselves and the system, and making changes.

I hope the new Prime Minister and her team are watching and that this debate serves as a reminder that this House cares deeply about ethics and standards. Members have made some really fantastic speeches. I encourage anyone reading this in Hansard to go back and read the earlier speeches.

My hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree spoke about the erosion of trust in politicians caused by the scandals and sleaziness under the previous Prime Minister, and about the need for a new system to restore integrity. My hon. Friend the Member for Birkenhead (Mick Whitley) said that the new Prime Minister must make restoring trust and confidence in politicians a priority of her premiership—I agree.

My hon. Friend the Member for Batley and Spen (Kim Leadbeater) spoke about the link between standards in public life and the loss of faith in the political system, and about the seriousness of this debate and the need for respect for each other in this House. We must set an example here by upholding the highest standards, which will then be followed throughout the rest of the country.

My hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda (Chris Bryant) highlighted Ministers’ persistent failure to register interests on time and the opaqueness of the system, which goes against the principle of openness. Who is paying for freebies? Who is meeting Ministers? He spoke about the need for the Committee on Standards’ new code of conduct to be taken up, and I hope it will be next week.

My hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard) spoke about the importance of standards. I met the young people who came from Plymouth yesterday, and I was really struck by their integrity, openness, transparency and leadership, but I was disappointed to hear of their loss of faith in politicians, which is reflected across the country.

I have no idea how MPs are able to have a second job. Today is the 1,000th day since I was elected, and it has been really tough. Every day, I have been delighted to be a Member representing my constituency and standing up in public life, but I do not know how I would fit anything else in. On the issue of Members’ safety, people feel this is not a safe place to work and that causes them to count themselves out of standing to come to this place, and we lose an immense wealth of talent because of that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury) highlighted the cronyism, the suspension of Parliament and a list of things that have happened to bring us to this debate. The failure to uphold standards and their undermining have meant that the system has lost public trust. This is a crisis.

When it comes to ethics and standards, and to trust, the Government need to be placed in special measures, and I hope to hear from the Minister about what special measures will be taken to bring us out of this system. Instead of the seven Nolan principles, we have seen scandals, bullying, back-covering and cronyism. We have seen poor behaviour by MPs acting with impunity. We have seen what is said in the House, and what happens in Downing Street, bringing us to this place. It breaks my heart when I stand on doorsteps every weekend and people say, “You’re all the same.” The undermining of the seven principles by some Members undermines us all and all the work done by decent MPs, and it allows improper influence to undermine our very democracy.

Because of all that has happened, it is no wonder that the former ethics adviser felt overworked. Government Members—not in Westminster Hall today, but elsewhere— will be quick to assert that the Prime Minister will turn over a new leaf and that we have a new moment and a break from the past, so that we can start afresh. Deep down, however, they know this is a fiction, because the Prime Minister propped up her disgraced predecessor as he misled the British public and corrupted Downing Street. The actions of the former Prime Minister cast a long shadow and, whether she likes it or not, the new Prime Minister is darkened by it. That is why action on standards, and explaining that action to make it transparent what changes are being made, is so important.

It is already clear that the Johnsonian tradition of believing that the rules do not apply to those at the top will be kept alive and well under the incoming Administration unless there are changes. Instead of pledging to restore standards in public life after years of Tory sleaze and scandal, the Prime Minister is threatening to trample all over them. During the leadership campaign, she was asked multiple times to commit to replacing the ethics adviser. At Prime Minister’s questions earlier, her answer to one of the questions was a simple yes. That is what was needed for the question of whether she will appoint an ethics adviser. Her response should have been yes, but she did not commit to appointing an ethics adviser, which is extremely worrying. The Prime Minister has already appointed a whole new senior leadership team and political advisers, but an independent adviser on ministerial interests was conspicuously absent from the list. Like her predecessor, she seems to think she does not need one. To use her own words, that is a disgrace. If only the Prime Minister cared as much about standards in public life as she so evidently does about pork markets and cheese.

The incoming Prime Minister would do well to remember that it is because of her predecessor’s disregard for the seven principles that she now finds herself with moving vans outside No. 10. She should know, and I am sure she does know, that getting rid of the ethics adviser is a blank cheque for corruption. Corruption is a big word, but it does not arrive in any country or place of work with a big bang, saying, “Hello, I’m corruption.” It creeps in unannounced, it corrodes and infects politics. It is about small decisions, larger ones and things that are done behind closed doors that are not known about. It is often small and unseen. It is insidious, and it infects slowly. That is why a line must be drawn and the system must be changed, because it is not working.

Senior civil servants are also worried, which matters for the whole delivery of Government. When the last ethics adviser resigned, Dave Penman, the general secretary of the FDA—the senior civil servants union—said that

“confidence in the process has been severely damaged. If the prime minister does not intend to replace Lord Geidt, then he must immediately put in place measures to ensure a civil servant can, with confidence, raise a complaint about ministerial misconduct.”

We cannot just leave a vacuum at the top. As pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for Rhondda, the position of ethics adviser is not an optional extra. The ethics adviser performs a key administrative function that enables openness, honesty and transparency. With the post vacant, there is no one to whom new Members can give their full list of interests that may be thought to give rise to a conflict with a Minister’s public duties. With whom will they register that? There is no one to investigate possible breaches of the ministerial code. There is no one to advise the Prime Minister on the code, which is a substantial and highly important document for upholding the seven principles, and there is no one to take up existing investigations.

Labour believes in the seven principles. When we are in Government, we will clean up politics by establishing an independent ethics and integrity commission to ensure the transparency and accountability that have been woefully lacking under the Conservatives. We would make appointments at speed, but we would go further. We have called for an expansion of the scope of the statutory register of lobbyists and a ban on MPs taking up lobbying jobs for five years after leaving office.

Not only does Labour believe in the Nolan principles, the public does, too. The former Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the right hon. Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Ms Dorries), said that voters don’t “give a fig” about the ethics adviser. I hope that no new Ministers share that view because voters do give a fig. This is unacceptable. I would counsel the new Prime Minister and her Cabinet not to insult the British electorate by being complacent about standards. They do give a fig about honesty and integrity.

I will end by asking the Minister several important questions, which I have asked several times in different places but have never had a straight answer for. First, can she confirm whether ongoing investigations launched by the previous ethics adviser will now be completed? Can she confirm whether there will be an interim position or a role holder for the ethics adviser? Labour’s motion to the House in June called for this replacement to be put in place within two months. It has been well over two months now, but no interim position or ethics adviser has been put in place. Has the Minister spoken with the new Prime Minister about what she plans to do with the role? I am sure the Prime Minister has been very busy, but this is a high priority. Is she aware of the key accountability functions not being performed because there is no adviser, and how outdated is the record of ministerial interests now? Who is holding Ministers to account in the interim?

With no ethics adviser and no obvious backstop in place, Ministers are free to do as they please without consequence. It is a blank cheque for bad behaviour. It is a bad start for the new Administration. It may be an attractive position for the Government, who have always found the rules to be incredibly inconvenient, but it is not attractive or acceptable to the British public. The seven principles of public life have been the cornerstone of our democracy for 25 years. There was a time when they were treated as sacrosanct by all Prime Ministers, Ministers and Governments—whether Labour or Conservative—because those seven principles are British principles.

The public do not ask for much from us—well, not all the time. They do not ask for perfection in their politicians, but they rightly expect that we act in the public’s interests at all times and never in our personal interests. It is that simple. Labour understands this. This is a time for a reset on public standards. I hope to hear from the Minister about—that word—delivery. The Government must deliver not only an effective system that stops power corrupting, but one that inspires and sets the best example to the country of action in public life.

[Derek Twigg (in the Chair)]

Before I call the Minister, I remind her to leave a few minutes at the end for the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Paula Barker) to wind up.

Sue Gray Report

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Monday 31st January 2022 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Any drug taking would be excessive. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman should direct that question to the Labour Front Bench.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

We have heard a lot about prejudging things today, but we only have to look at paragraph iii of the general findings for mention of

“failures of leadership and judgment by different parts of No 10 and the Cabinet Office… Some of the events should not have been allowed to take place. Other events should not have been allowed to develop as they did.”

I do not think that that is prejudging anything; it is very clear. There is only one person in charge at No. 10 in totality, and that is the Prime Minister. Let me remind the Prime Minister why this rule breaking and the way No. 10 behaved matters. Let me quote a constituent. This is from one of a number of emails I have had from constituents who have lost loved ones. She said:

“We received a call at 11.15pm on 29th May saying mum was deteriorating. Both my sister & I drove to the home and I spent the night sat on a chair outside her bedroom window watching her die! All I could do was sob & shout to her and tell her that I loved her. I couldn’t even hold her hand”.

That is why you should go, Prime Minister.

Oral Answers to Questions

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Wednesday 24th February 2021 Commons Chamber

The Prime Minister was asked—

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab)]

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 24 February.

[The Prime Minister (Boris Johnson)]

This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall have further such meetings later today.

[Derek Twigg [V]]

Halton Borough Council ran out of funding for discretionary covid isolation payments despite the strict criteria for eligibility. Just 171 constituents have been helped. The council has applied for further funding, but what the Government have offered will not be enough. Other constituents failed to qualify for help due to the criteria set by the Prime Minister’s Government. Will he look again at this and bring forward a properly funded scheme so that no constituent is in a position where they cannot afford to isolate? We need this to happen if we are to continue to drive down covid-19 infections.

[The Prime Minister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman and pay tribute to the work of everybody on Halton Council for everything that they have been doing throughout this pandemic. I know it has been very tough on council officials—and, indeed, on everybody else. Central Government have put in another £4.3 billion to help councils throughout the pandemic. We will continue to support our local authorities and he will be hearing more from the Chancellor next week.

Covid-19

Derek Twigg Excerpts

Wednesday 6th January 2021 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

Absolutely, and I thank my right hon. Friend and her fellow Blue Collar Conservatives for that initiative. It was entirely right, and those corporations—those supermarkets—were entirely right to return that cash. I can tell her that overall when we look at the Government’s support packages, we see that they go overwhelmingly towards the poorest and neediest in society; they are fundamentally a very, very progressive package of measures.

[Derek Twigg (Halton) (Lab) [V]]

Cancer treatment has again been delayed; even though four-week delays are associated with increased mortality, many cases were delayed for longer than four weeks in the first lockdown. Today, the Health Service Journal reports that the NHS is having difficulty in agreeing payments with private providers for surgery and treatment. Will the Prime Minister take action to stop any profiteering and ensure that private providers use their capacity for NHS patients requiring urgent surgery? Will he also urgently bring a detailed plan to this House on how the Government intend to ensure that cancer patients get the treatment they need in good time?

[The Prime Minister]

Yes, I certainly can. One of the reasons for wanting to keep covid under control in the way that we hope to do with this lockdown is, of course, to allow the NHS to continue with cancer treatment and other vital services. The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point about the need for all provision now to be dedicated to fighting covid or providing essential services for the British public, and he can expect to hear more about the way in which we intend to co-operate with private providers.