Debates between Jim Dickson and Rachel Reeves during the 2024 Parliament

Middle East: Economic Update

Debate between Jim Dickson and Rachel Reeves
Monday 9th March 2026

(1 week, 5 days ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The best way to reduce prices for businesses and families in all our constituencies is to de-escalate and ensure that vessels can get through the strait of Hormuz, and that is our focus. But what this crisis, as well as Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, shows us is that we have to wean ourselves off oil and gas. We are better placed now than we were when Russia invaded Ukraine because we get more of our electricity through contracts for difference than we did then, and we are less reliant on gas prices to set our overall energy prices, but this shows that we need to do more to invest in both nuclear and home-grown renewables so that we are not so reliant on imports. However, as I said in my statement, I met North sea oil and gas leaders last week to talk about how we can support them during this time to ensure that we have access to the reserves we need.

Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I thank the Chancellor for her statement. It is vital for residents in Dartford and across the country that they know the Government have their back when it comes to fuel bills going forward. Does she agree that the economic stability she set out last week in the spring statement means that the economy and consumers are much less vulnerable to the price shocks coming from the middle east than they otherwise would have been?

Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are in a better position than we were when Russia invaded Ukraine for two reasons. The first is our macroeconomic situation. For the first time since 2019, our deficit is below 5% of GDP. It came down by 1 percentage point of GDP just this year, and the OBR has forecast that it will fall every year, which gives us a bit more of a buffer. Of course, I set out how the headroom against the fiscal rules—both the stability rule and the investment rule—had increased at the spring forecast compared with the Budget. The other way we are better prepared is that more of our electricity comes from contracts for difference, which are not linked to the volatile and rising gas prices. That means that bills will be less affected, but I come back to the point that de-escalation will have the greatest impact on my hon. Friend’s constituents in Dartford and people elsewhere in getting their bills down.

Spending Review 2025

Debate between Jim Dickson and Rachel Reeves
Wednesday 11th June 2025

(9 months, 1 week ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Blackpool will benefit from the affordable homes programme, free school meals for children and the roll-out of breakfast clubs. It also stands to benefit from the increase in the local transport grant—a fourfold increase compared with the plans we inherited from the Conservatives.

Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

People in my constituency will hugely welcome today’s statement—not just the investment in public services such as schools and the NHS and in new homes, but the commitment to investment in transport infrastructure. People in Dartford are sick and tired of living with the terrible congestion caused by the Dartford crossing as well as the collapsed Galley Hill Road in Swanscombe. Can the Chancellor reassure me that as a result of the spending review not only will families be better off, but Dartford will be helped to get moving?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Jim Dickson and Rachel Reeves
Tuesday 3rd September 2024

(1 year, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to remind us of the dire inheritance that this Government face. The previous Government made spending commitment after spending commitment with absolutely no idea of how to pay for them. From road and rail projects to A-levels and the Rwanda deal, we saw £22 billion of unfunded commitments. We will fix the foundations of the economy, rebuild Britain and ensure that working people are better off. We will fix the mess that the last Government left.

Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Will the Chancellor confirm that a state pension increase will be announced at the Budget and that it will be equivalent to wage growth, inflation or 2.5%—whichever is higher?

Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Government have committed to the triple lock not just for this year, but for the duration of this Parliament. That means that pensioners are £900 better off than they were a year ago. Based on September earnings and inflation data, we will uprate pensions next year by whichever is higher: 2.5%, inflation or average earnings. We are ensuring that pensioners get the pensions that they are entitled to and have contributed to.

Public Spending: Inheritance

Debate between Jim Dickson and Rachel Reeves
Monday 29th July 2024

(1 year, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

Under the previous Government, no applications were being processed and so nobody was being sent home. We will process those applications and send people who have no right to be here back home.

Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I thank my right hon. Friend the Chancellor for her excellent statement, putting public finances and public services back on their feet. Having seen how extensive this Tory cover-up has been, with unfunded commitments in multiple Departments, does she agree that it is not just her predecessor as Chancellor, but every member of the last Cabinet who is complicit in that cover-up?

Rachel Reeves Portrait Rachel Reeves
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I do not believe that any member of the previous Cabinet could not have been aware of the scale of this cover-up and the scale of the overspending. They should hang their heads in shame. Instead of coming to this Chamber today and issuing platitudes, they should have done the right thing and apologised to the country.