Debates between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle

There have been 11 exchanges between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle

1 Mon 13th March 2017 Budget Resolutions
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
2 interactions (984 words)
2 Tue 28th February 2017 The Government’s Productivity Plan
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
2 interactions (116 words)
3 Thu 26th November 2015 Airports Commission: Final Report
Department for Transport
2 interactions (278 words)
4 Mon 20th July 2015 Welfare Reform and Work Bill
Department for Work and Pensions
2 interactions (612 words)
5 Mon 7th December 2020 Oral Answers to Questions
Ministry of Defence
2 interactions (130 words)
6 Tue 10th November 2020 Armed Forces: Covid-19 Deployment
Ministry of Defence
8 interactions (258 words)
7 Mon 2nd November 2020 Oral Answers to Questions
Ministry of Defence
2 interactions (81 words)
8 Mon 6th July 2020 Oral Answers to Questions
Ministry of Defence
2 interactions (120 words)
9 Tue 12th May 2020 Oral Answers to Questions
Department for International Trade
6 interactions (233 words)
10 Wed 2nd May 2018 Windrush
Home Office
2 interactions (18 words)
11 Tue 27th February 2018 Department for Transport 2 interactions (741 words)

Budget Resolutions

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 13th March 2017

(3 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - Excerpts

Order. May I just say that we will introduce a six-minute limit, so if Members could stay tight to that, we will be able to get everybody in?

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin (Horsham) (Con)
- Hansard -

It is a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman), although I did not agree with a great deal of what she said. None the less, Scots have played such a valuable role in shaping the foreign affairs of the United Kingdom over such a long, protracted period, and, through that, those of the fifth largest economy of the world and, through that, the affairs of the world. I trust and hope they will continue to do so for many, many years to come.

It will not come as a great surprise to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, to learn that I am not much of a mountaineer, but I have been told by those who are that the most dangerous point in climbing any mountain is after one has made the stupendous effort and reached the summit, and one then begins the so-called “easy descent”. In fiscal terms, after nine long and difficult years, the House finds itself nearing the summit. The struggle to rein in public debt is an immense and ongoing undertaking, but, according to the OBR, public sector net debt as a percentage of GDP peaks in 2017-18—this coming year—and in every successive year thereafter it falls. Whatever the very real temptations, encouraged by some one-off factors this year, to slow further the pace of deficit reduction, we owe it to future generations to finish what we have begun.

We are now in our eighth year without a recession. Unlike others, Conservatives do not pretend that we can abolish the business cycle. It is critical to our domestic economy and to our standing in the world that we rebuild our financial firepower so that we can tackle anything that comes our way. The 2% of GDP on defence and 0.7% on overseas aid, to which my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary referred, give us great hard and, indeed, soft power, but our allies need to know that our commitments are real and sustainable.

It was frustrating to hear the passionate words of the right hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry). She bemoans efficiencies being made in the public sector, without recognising, in this Budget debate, how critical it is that we bring down the deficit and show our ability to act credibly abroad and to achieve long-term sustainable finances.

With our national debt topping out at some £1.8 trillion, our annual interest payments also represent the entire combined annual spend on defence and policing, as the Chancellor pointed out. That is why the proper, sensible husbandry of our resources is critical. Despite the huge increase in the national debt, we are currently spending the same on interest as we were 15 years ago. With the base rate bound to rise—something on which I agree with the hon. Member for Aberdeen North—that is not sustainable in the long term. The risk is compounded by demographic shifts, notably the retirement of the baby-boomer generation. Demographic changes are projected to increase the cost of the state pension by 40% and to drive up health and social care spending.

I recognise the efforts being made to enhance our productivity with T-levels; the half billion of extra spending on technical education for 16 to 19-year-olds; and the £300 million commitment to support the brightest research talent, including 1,000 new PhD places in science, technology, engineering and maths. Combined with transport spending, that will help to narrow our relative productivity gap.

Education is the key. I have literally studied line by line the financial projections of some of the schools in my Horsham constituency, so I can assure the Chancellor that, after years of being relatively underfunded, they run an extremely efficient and tight ship, with staffing costs often accounting for 85% of total spend. Schools in historically well-funded areas have much to learn from schools such as those in West Sussex and could potentially do more than is currently being asked of them. I am grateful for the Secretary of State for Education’s commitment to look carefully, as part of the fair funding consultation, at the minimum funding required by schools to deliver the standards and curriculum that students, and we, have every right to expect.

National insurance contributions have been much discussed in the media. I welcome the Taylor review, and feel sure that later this year his report will outline many ways in which the Government can support the genuinely self-employed and clarify the position of the virtually employed. The self-employed population is higher than ever before and steadily growing. It is a simple matter of maths that such growth undermines the tax base on which future generations will rely.

The Government are introducing a package of measures: the changes to class 2 and class 4 NICs and the enhancement to pension provision for the self-employed are coming in over the next two years and cannot be viewed in isolation. Some 60% of those affected by the changes to NICs will gain. For those at the higher end of the earnings bracket, the impact is capped at around £600 a year, and the average annual additional contribution is £240 a year. Meanwhile, self-employed pension benefits will be enhanced by £1,800 a year—a benefit which, if purchased in the open market, would cost some £50,000.

Those measures will help to support the self-employed in retirement. They are progressive, while still ensuring that being self-employed has tax advantages. Of course we will support the entrepreneurs who will help to drive our country forward in the new post-Brexit environment, but by helping them to meet the costs of retirement while also narrowing the potential reduction in our tax base, these are proportionate, long-term steps in a Budget focused on the long-term financial health of the country, which I commend.

The Government’s Productivity Plan

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 28th February 2017

(3 years, 12 months ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - Excerpts

I call Mr Quin —[Interruption.] Mr Jeremy Quin.

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin (Horsham) (Con)
- Hansard -

I am most grateful to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for calling me. I was thinking long and hard about the wise words of the hon. Lady who preceded me.

This is a debate in which we are showing the way for the UK economy. Up until now, the debate has been of a very high quality, albeit with a relatively low number of Members present. It was opened by the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr Wright). It has been a pleasure to work under his joint chairmanship of the Select Committee investigation into BHS and Sir Philip Green. I believe there has been some news on that this afternoon.

Airports Commission: Final Report

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Thursday 26th November 2015

(5 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Department for Transport
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard -

The letter of 28 September to the chair of the Greater London Authority mentioned

“10 to 12 additional long-haul routes at the airport in 2040, an increase of 20%”

and defines

“a ‘daily destination’ as one seeing more than 360 services a year”.

These are the types of services required by CEOs regularly going to visit their clients and bringing them back to the UK.

I accept that today’s debate is not just about economic arguments—one third of the report details the environmental and local community concerns. Those issues were due to occupy a third of my speech, but, taking my lead from the Chair, I do not think that that would be welcomed. None the less, I would welcome the establishment of an independent noise authority, which could bring huge benefits to places all over the country that suffer from aircraft noise, including rural areas, which have less ambient noise and can be particularly badly affected.

Despite the remorseless and gallant campaign by my hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson), air quality in parts of our great capital is not what we would desire and must be improved. I believe that the Davies commission treated this issue seriously, and I recognise that, as stated by the right hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart), the most troublesome points are those by the M4 and the M25. I take it from the report that practical measures can be taken to improve air quality. I thank the Davies commission for its comprehensive and convincing report, and I look forward to the Government’s response.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - Excerpts

Order. If we can shave a minute off each Front-Bench speech, Adam Afriyie will get his five minutes.

Welfare Reform and Work Bill

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 20th July 2015

(5 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Department for Work and Pensions
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin (Horsham) (Con)
- Hansard -

It is a pleasure to follow the thoughtful and interesting speech of the hon. Member for Ogmore (Huw Irranca-Davies). He showed huge sincerity in his opposition to the Government, but during a couple of sections of his speech, I thought he might be joining us in the Lobby this evening, and I am disappointed that on this occasion he will not. I draw his attention to the words of my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Michael Tomlinson) and other hon. Friends who have pointed out that this is, in fact, the Welfare Reform and Work Bill. I thought the hon. Gentleman was getting there—surely we all support systems that work; surely we all want annual reports to the House on progress on full employment, troubled families and apprenticeships. There must be much in the Bill that hon. Members on both sides of the House can agree on.

The last Labour Government spent £170 billion in tax credits between 2004 and 2010. It is not unreasonable to ask whether that £170 billion, or at least some of it, could not have been better spent on measures that would change recipients’ life chances. That is particularly true since we know we have to live within our means, as my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) stated so eloquently—far more eloquently than I put it in my intervention on him. Between 2010 and 2015, the welfare reform that we achieved made savings of £60 billion, helping to halve the deficit and restore confidence in our public finances. In the same period, employment increased by no less than 2 million. In my constituency, the number of people who are unemployed has fallen by a third, and I am sure that similar statistics could be quoted by hon. Members throughout the Chamber if they chose to reel them off.

The best way to tackle poverty and reform welfare is to ensure that everyone who can work has that opportunity. That is the best way to tackle poverty both in this generation and in the next. Under this Government, 387,000 fewer children are being brought up in workless households. That is hugely positive in enhancing the life chances of all our people. I am delighted that the Government are not only targeting full employment but ensuring, through the introduction of the national living wage and the targeted reduction of tax, that those working in lower-paid jobs get a fairer reward.

The proposal to reduce the welfare cap is right for two reasons. It will support a culture in which people know that work will always pay, and that it is the best way to maximise income and support a family. It is also right to redirect our support to enhancing life chances. The funds saved will go towards increasing the number of quality apprenticeships—I take the point made by the shadow Secretary of State that they must be quality apprenticeships, and I am sure that is what we will get. I know that enabling young people to achieve their ambitions is close to the hearts of all of us, on both sides of the House. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Amanda Milling) that that is an exciting feature of the Bill, which we should all support. The Government have overseen the creation of 2 million apprenticeships, delivering more apprenticeships in two years than Labour delivered in five. The Bill will take the aspiration further, with a target of 3 million apprenticeships.

I acknowledge much of what the hon. Member for Ogmore said, but there are great differences across the House in how we achieve our aims. We believe—

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 7th December 2020

(2 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Ministry of Defence
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think we will leave it to the Minister to answer.

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - -

I am most grateful, Mr Speaker, though the Secretary of State is raring to go.

Just to reassure the right hon. Gentleman, the specification has changed. It has changed because we now understand more about the carrier strike group and how we will deploy these important assets. It is on track, and we will get there. We have had two rounds of market engagement, and we may wish to do more market engagement. We have got a busy shipbuilding supply chain; there are a lot of orders going through. It is important that this is well based and well founded, and I want to make certain that we launch this competition successfully and, indeed, that it is concluded successfully.

Armed Forces: Covid-19 Deployment

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 10th November 2020

(3 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Ministry of Defence
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Parliament Live - Hansard - -

We are all grateful for the work that councils have done—be it Liverpool City Council or councils elsewhere in the country, they have had a huge task to meet. Hundreds of military advisers have been deployed through the local resilience forums, working with councils and other local authorities, and I assure the hon. Lady that we will continue to provide that support.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Parliament Live - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Let us head up to Lichfield—my word, we have the cathedral in the background—to Michael Fabricant, who is looking rather orange today.

Break in Debate

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Parliament Live - Hansard - -

My understanding is that work is being done on planning, logistics and how we would support the important role with a vaccine, but I really would counsel that this is still very early days on the vaccine, as the Prime Minister made clear yesterday. We are ready to assist on logistics and planning—thoughts, preparations and logistics—but this is early days still.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Parliament Live - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I call the Chair of the Defence Committee, Tobias Ellwood.

Break in Debate

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - -

I welcome what my right hon. Friend says about the support that is provided by the armed forces. He is absolutely right that we have a vast array of areas where we can support and provide assistance to other Departments. However, as he is very well aware, the process is that the civil authority comes to us to request assistance, and we always stand ready to receive such reports.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for three minutes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 2nd November 2020

(3 months, 3 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Ministry of Defence
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Parliament Live - Hansard - -

I think the hon. Lady is referring to the change from one outsourcing contract to another. We have gained a lot for the taxpayer from the existing contract, and hopefully more will be driven out in the future. We will do nothing that could endanger national security.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In order to allow the safe exit of Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for a few minutes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Monday 6th July 2020

(7 months, 3 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Ministry of Defence
Jeremy Quin Portrait The Minister for Defence Procurement (Jeremy Quin)
- Hansard - -

Just to reassure my hon. Friend, we have 169 sites of special scientific interest in the defence estate, and we care very deeply about that and our role as a good champion of conservation. My hon. Friend is assiduous on behalf of the jobs in his constituency, and defence jobs in particular. I fully appreciate his concerns on coastal erosion, but I am happy to reassure him that it is not currently considered a risk to submarine movements, although I am grateful for his ongoing interest.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members participating in this item of business and the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for three minutes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 12th May 2020

(9 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Department for International Trade
Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I do not know whether you got that, Minister; it was a bad line.

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin [V]
- Hansard - -

As I emphasised in response to the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Patricia Gibson), Citriodiol is a natural product—it is a natural extract of lemon eucalyptus oil—and it is readily available to the public as an insect repellent. We know that it was efficacious in the past, and the view was that if it was efficacious against SARS in the past, it may have properties that are useful against covid-19, but we have been very clear that that is not as a result of tests. It is very early days. Those tests are ongoing. If they prove that there are positive properties, that will be shared. However, this is just one very small element in a range of protections provided to our armed forces personnel, including appropriate PPE and all the appropriate hygiene and other instructions that are widely shared and widely known.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We need to speed up the answers as well.

Break in Debate

Jeremy Quin Portrait The Minister for Defence Procurement (Jeremy Quin) [V]
- Hansard - -

We remain closely engaged with our strategic suppliers and continue to monitor the impact of covid-19 on the defence sector during this difficult time. We are engaged with defence primes and with SMEs, directly and via the prime contractors. As I said, the sector employs 119,000 people directly, and we are committed to its success.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We now go up to sunny Manchester and Lucy Powell.

Windrush

Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Wednesday 2nd May 2018

(2 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Home Office
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - -

rose—

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

2 May 2018, 2:40 p.m.

Order. I think the right hon. Lady has given notice that she will not be giving way.

Department for Transport

(1st reading: House of Commons)
Debate between Jeremy Quin and Lindsay Hoyle
Tuesday 27th February 2018

(2 years, 12 months ago)

Commons Chamber

Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Bill Main Page
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin (Horsham) (Con)
- Parliament Live - Hansard - -

27 Feb 2018, 6:14 p.m.

Notwithstanding the weather, the House should be basking in the warm glow of success, at least as regards productivity. I am delighted to say that, just at the point when the Office for Budget Responsibility threw in the towel and gave up, we embarked on the first period of sustained improvement in productivity for seven years. Maintaining that is critical, and, as has been agreed on both sides of the House, part of the answer is improvement in our infrastructure.

I am delighted that we have more than £460 billion in the pipeline for infrastructure investments, and over half of that will be coming from the private sector. I sincerely hope that part of it—I beg to differ from the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury) here—will be the expansion of Heathrow; we have talked about that enough and we need to get on with it, but I will not go further into the debate on that with the hon. Lady, given the time limit today. I am pleased that since the financial crisis we have, notwithstanding the other pressures, maintained the investment in our infrastructure, which has exceeded in terms of GDP percentage that of France and Germany over the period.

I listened carefully to the proposer of the motion, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull North (Diana Johnson), and I agree that this is a national challenge. I went through the details of this, and I warmly welcome the TransPennine route upgrade, think it is a smart move to make smart motorways of the M60, M62 and M6, and, burrowing into the detail, support the £100 million being spent on the Tees Valley A19. What will please the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth is the £14 million being spent on cycle lanes in Gateshead and Newcastle. Those are all examples, both very small and very large, of the Government acting to ensure we boost our productivity and make this a better place to live across the country.

Above all, the establishment by this Government, with £260 million of funding, of Transport for the North is a good move; it will create proper and good national advocacy through that body. One might wonder why I am saying that as a Member for a Sussex constituency; I do so because it serves the interests of Horsham and the whole of the country if our economy and our growth are broadly based.

I am pleased to represent a constituency in one of the most productive parts of the country, however, and, while we recognise the need to have growth across the country, we must also recognise the need for that most productive part of the economy, London and the south-east, to continue to succeed, and for that engine to keep humming. That, too, is in the national interest.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Claire Perry) said, when she was rail Minister, that the best way to get the country’s productivity going was to make certain that Southern rail worked. She was right then, and it is still true now. We have for too long neglected infrastructure expenditure on our commuter lines in the south-east.

I had two key points to make. One was about digital railways, which has been amply and brilliantly made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (John Redwood), so I do not need to wax lyrical on that in the minute remaining to me. But I must refer again to Southern rail. I welcome the investment going into London Bridge and the Balcombe tunnel, which has been there since 1840 and is used daily by Thameslink. I would welcome that as part of an ongoing programme proposed by the Brighton Mainline Alliance, which I sincerely hope it will force through. We must upgrade Windmill Bridge junction and develop East Croydon station. That alone would lead to £6 billion of improvement to the national economy, if we can get our lines working correctly through the Southern region. I say to the Minister that as part of this we need extra station capacity between Horsham and Crawley; I look forward to renewing my conversations with him in the future. Being able to help other Members is always an aspiration of mine. With that, I conclude my remarks.

Lindsay Hoyle Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Sir Lindsay Hoyle)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The time limit will have to come down to three minutes. I was hoping every speaker could have given 20 or 30 seconds, but unfortunately that did not happen.