Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(5 days, 15 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sir Alan Campbell
As my hon. Friend deftly points out, there is a fairly narrow tightrope to walk here. We need to ensure that the House of Lords gets its opportunity to scrutinise legislation, whatever it happens to be, in the way that it is constitutionally set up to; but there is a concern, shared by many Members of this House, about the effect that this scrutiny can have, especially when this place feels strongly about an issue. I think he is referring to the assisted dying Bill, which this House passed. As I have said before at business questions, I expect the upper House to take into consideration the fact that we, the elected House, supported it, and other measures.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Does the Leader of the House seriously think it is reasonable for the Government to announce a new framework that will have a profound effect on Mid Buckinghamshire—and indeed every constituency represented in this House, not least as regards food security—by written ministerial statement, rather than through an oral statement in the Chamber, which would allow scrutiny by Members from all parties? Will he reflect on that, particularly as Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Question Time continues to be just 40 minutes long, rather than a full hour? Will he ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to make a full oral statement in the House about the framework?
Sir Alan Campbell
I will consider that request. The hon. Gentleman makes a point that others have made about DEFRA questions; given the circumstances in which we find ourselves, they ask whether we should look at how much time Departments get for questions. That can change over time. We should make sure that the length of departmental questions reflect the circumstances. There is also a balance to be struck when it comes to oral statements in the Chamber. There are important matters that this House has to debate, and how many oral statements are necessary is a bit of a moot question. There are ways that he can find out the answers that he wants, other than waiting for an oral statement from the Government; for example, he could ask for a Westminster Hall debate.
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(1 week, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sir Alan Campbell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that matter in the House—he is a strong advocate, not just for his constituency but for the west of the very beautiful county of Northumberland. The Government are investing £24 billion in maintaining and improving motorways and local roads across the country. I join him in urging councils, such as Northumberland county council, to act so that our constituents can reap the benefits of that funding. As for the tempting invitation that he sends me, I will certainly look at my diary.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Liberal Democrat-chaired Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes fire authority has just consulted on closing Stokenchurch and Great Missenden fire stations and removing nearly a quarter of the fire engines from the Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes fire authority area. It is no surprise that the consultation responses are in and the public do not want to see those dangerous cuts taking place. Yet the papers for next week’s meeting of the fire authority seem to show that it will ignore the consultation and carry on regardless. May we have a debate in Government time about the duties on public bodies to listen to consultations? Otherwise, the public will just look at these things as token exercises rather than real, meaningful engagement.
Sir Alan Campbell
I understand public concern when issues such as those arise, and whenever possible, of course the authorities need to listen to residents. Should the hon. Gentleman seek a Westminster Hall debate, I am sure that others will seek to join him in that because there are common concerns in other areas of the country.
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(4 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
We are in a farming emergency with the family farm tax, the early cutting off of the sustainable farming incentive and the watering down of measures to prevent equipment theft from farms, yet this morning, Members across the House who wanted to question Ministers from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs were unable to do so because the Government persist in keeping DEFRA questions at just 40 minutes. Will the Leader of the House look at extending DEFRA questions to a full hour so that rural communities are not left behind?
Sir Alan Campbell
I will look at the hon. Gentleman’s suggestion, but as he knows, if one thing expands, something else is squeezed. I will look at that, but it might not be as easy as he suggests.
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sir Alan Campbell
I am sincerely sorry to hear about Phoebe’s situation; it must be very painful and worrying for her and her family. I will follow up with the Health Secretary, but I know that Ministers have received his letter, and he will get a response shortly. He may also wish to apply for a debate, but I will ensure that the House is updated when the comprehensive national cancer plan is published in the new year.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Liberal Democrat-chaired Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes fire authority has cooked up a dangerous plan to remove nearly a third of the fire engines from the area, including Haddenham. They are also fully closing Stokenchurch and Great Missenden fire stations in my constituency. Can we have a debate in Government time on the importance of not just local fire services but joined-up thinking, given that this Government wish to massively increase the number of homes built in Buckinghamshire and plaster our countryside with dangerous things like battery energy storage systems, which pose a huge fire risk?
Sir Alan Campbell
The hon. Gentleman will know that where housing is built, infrastructure is important, and we will want to make sure that it is included in any proposals. He is at liberty to apply for a debate in which to raise these matters. I gently point out that it is for the local authority and the local fire service to decide how they deploy their resources, but we are in this situation because his party left public services on their knees.
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
In 2023, my private Member’s Bill received Royal Assent, becoming the Equipment Theft (Prevention) Act 2023. In order to bring it into force, some statutory instruments had to be introduced. Police forces up and down the land, as well as police and crime commissioners, hailed it as a major step forward in preventing agricultural equipment theft and, indeed, power tool theft, as was envisaged in the original debate on the Bill. Yet last week, I had a letter from the Policing Minister telling me that the contents of the Act would be hollowed out, with the requirement for immobilisers on quad bikes removed and only forensic marking required for GPS units. That is a bad let-down for rural communities up and down the land, so can we have at minimum a statement, or better still a debate in Government time, to explore what this Government’s real approach is to rural crime? Without the full provisions of the Act, it is a free ride for the criminals.
Several hon. Members rose—
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(9 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
If my hon. Friend will forgive me, I will never tyre of hearing about the great events in Members’ constituencies, and this sounds like a wheely good one. [Interruption.] No? Okay, we will do better next time. I thank her for raising that event.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
The Government’s own projections showed that their vindictive education tax would drive 3,000 children out of private education. The latest data shows that the exodus is already 11,000, with projections saying it will get worse. May we have a debate in Government time to find out why the Government’s projections were so horrendously out, and the cost to the state sector of now having to educate those children?
Lucy Powell
As the hon. Gentleman knows, the numbers he describes are within the normal fluctuations of these things. I am not clear whether this Conservative party supports getting more teachers into our state schools. As a result of the changes we have made to VAT on private schools, we have got over 2,000 more teachers in our schools this year, with more to come. It is vital to get more teachers into state schools, which educate 94% of young people in this country.
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Order. I want to get as many people in as possible, so please keep questions short.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Unitary council elections, county council elections and mayoral races are taking up a lot of the headlines at the moment, but in local government, there is an often regrettably forgotten subset of incredibly hard-working people who offer to serve on parish and town councils—people like Nic Brown, who, after 25 years, is standing down from Chearsley parish council in my village. The amount of work that people put in for no remuneration, just for love of a place, is extraordinary. In a lot of parish and town councils in my constituency, not only are the elections uncontested, but there will still be vacancies after next Thursday. Can we have a debate in Government time to thank everyone who puts themselves forward to serve on a town or parish council, and to discuss how we can encourage more people to come forward to serve their community through those councils?
Lucy Powell
I join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to all those who serve on our town and parish councils—often, as he says, for little reward, in one sense. Our communities need them, and they are vital. As he will know, we are bringing forward changes to local government, because we want to ensure that people can represent their area and deliver the kind of change and services that people want. That is why we have the devolution Bill coming forward.
Scrutiny of European Statutory Instruments
Greg Smith Excerpts(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
Scrutiny of the laws that we make and that bind us is very important, and it is exceedingly important when the origins of the laws are not within our own parliamentary framework. Of course, in the part of the United Kingdom from which I come, Northern Ireland, in over 300 areas the laws are made not by this House or the Stormont Assembly, but by a foreign Parliament that we do not elect—the European Parliament. That underscores the huge importance of effective scrutiny.
In so far as this motion slightly improves the situation, it is welcome, but I need to make three or four points. Is the inference of this motion that there has been no scrutiny of these matters since the demise of the European Scrutiny Committee in or about April of last year? If so, a vast swathe of laws have obviously gone unscrutinised. The former Chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee told this House in March 2023 that, in the two years from 2021 to 2023, 640 EU laws had been imposed on Northern Ireland. How many have been imposed since, and how many of them have been scrutinised?
Since Northern Ireland is the region most affected by many of these laws, I have to register my disappointment that not a single Member from Northern Ireland was proposed for the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee. That is a huge failure to give those I represent some confidence that scrutiny is taking place and is effective.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Does the hon. and learned Gentleman agree with me, as someone who sat on the European Scrutiny Committee in the last Parliament, that it is no surprise that the Labour Government do not want to scrutinise this legislation coming from the European Union, because for much of the last Parliament, with the exception of the former Member for Dagenham and Rainham, Jon Cruddas, the Labour Members on the then European Scrutiny Committee never turned up?
Jim Allister
I hear what the hon. Gentleman says and I do not gainsay it. If that is so, it is a very poor reflection on the interest in scrutiny.
Not only do we have this lacuna in scrutiny of a year or more; we have the very unsatisfactory position of there being no transparency—there is no public list of all the imposed EU laws. It does not exist, from what I am told. How can it be right for citizens in any part of this United Kingdom to be governed by laws when there is not even a list of all those laws? I look to the Government for a commitment that there will at least be the transparency of publishing a list of all relevant regulations that are imposed—and “imposed” is the correct word—on Northern Ireland from a foreign Parliament.
Some may say, “Oh, but doesn’t the Stormont Assembly have a Democratic Scrutiny Committee?”, and, of sorts, it does, but on 2 February the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland wrote to the Speaker of the Northern Ireland Assembly informing him of the types of laws that will be reported to the Assembly, and it does not include all laws. We have the so-called Stormont brake, which applies only to any law amending an existing EU law. We have applicability motions, which can apply to any new law, but we do not have any right of scrutiny within the Northern Ireland Assembly of what we would call statutory instruments. There simply is no capacity to scrutinise them.
We recently had a troubling example of such a statutory instrument. Commission implementing regulation 2025/89 creates a situation where, for the first time in any part of this United Kingdom, and with no consultation with our consumers or our elected representatives, we now have an authorised EU law whereby mealworms and insects can be included in food products. That EU law has been imposed upon Northern Ireland without any scrutiny in Stormont or in this place. Would that type of EU implementing regulation be on the agenda of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, or would it just pass under the radar, as has been happening for so long?
Vast swathes of important law are not classified as devolved under the protocol arrangements, so they are never scrutinised in the Northern Ireland Assembly, nor can they ever be scrutinised. Nothing that arises under the EU’s customs code, under its VAT regime or under state aid is devolved. Those matters are reserved to this place. Regulations are made from time to time on the customs code, which is the most offensive of all the protocol arrangements, because it is the one that says, “Northern Ireland is to be treated as EU territory. GB is to be treated as a third or foreign country, and thus the goods coming from GB to Northern Ireland—coming from a third country—have to be subject to the rigours of an international customs border.” All that arises under the EU’s customs code, and none of that can be scrutinised in Northern Ireland. None of it has been scrutinised in this House, either.
Business of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I think we can agree that we are all a bit partial to some lovely fish and chips. Ronnie’s Sussex Circus Fish Bar sounds like one place we should all be visiting. I congratulate them as well. My hon. Friend might want to raise the issues she mentions in the Adjournment debate next Thursday, which is a great opportunity for people to raise issues to do with Christmas, and I am sure we will have good attendance. Invitations to local eateries are always welcome.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I am sure that the Leader of the House will agree that we should always acknowledge and congratulate Great British sporting success stories and that every Member was glued to their television on Sunday to watch McLaren secure its first constructors’ championship since 1998. Will she join me in congratulating McLaren, that Great British icon, on its success? Also, to make up for the apparent lack of acknowledgment from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, can we have a debate on the value of motorsport to the British economy?
Lucy Powell
I would rather not talk about sport today, as a Manchester City fan. Anyway, I certainly join the hon. Member in congratulating McLaren. My son is a big Formula 1 fan and has all the McLaren gear, so it does not go unnoticed in my house. McLaren is a Great British icon and on behalf of the Government, I congratulate it.
Leader of the House
Greg Smith Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Written CorrectionsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Greg Smith
… Will the Leader of the House get the Chancellor to come to the Dispatch Box, so that we can have an informed debate about the actual impact the family farm tax will have on the constituents of all Members of the House, including her own Back Benchers who represent rural seats? Her colleagues can then decide whether they stand with their party or with the farmers.
Lucy Powell
We are absolutely clear and the figures are absolutely clear, because they are based on actual claims for agricultural property relief that have been made in recent years. Those figures show that around three quarters of claims would be unaffected by the changes we have made. Does the Conservative party accept the principle that 40% of the total value of agricultural property relief comes from ownership of the top 7% of claims by land value? Do Conservative Members think that is a fair system? Is that fair to young farmers trying to get into the industry? Do they support the additional £6 billion we have put into farming as a result of the Budget? They cannot support the funding going in if they do not support the measures needed to raise that investment in the first place.
[Official Report, 21 November 2024; Vol. 757, c. 400.]
Written correction submitted by the Leader of the House of Commons, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell):