Security Vetting
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I made sure that the relevant inquiries were made so that I could put the full picture before the House. That is the approach I have taken, as Members have seen this afternoon.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
This is a humiliating day for the Prime Minister, and for the House, and for the whole country, yet still the Prime Minister is not being open with us. He is relying on some later inquiry, when the Cabinet Secretary told him in writing, in the official briefing, that he must seek vetting prior to the appointment of a political appointee. That is true, is it not, Prime Minister? And can you give a straight answer, just for once?
The Prime Minister
As I have said, the process was that the appointment was subject to developed vetting checks being carried out. Had I been made aware of the recommendation of UKSV, I would not have made the appointment. What I did after the event was ask Sir Chris Wormald to look back at the process, which he did according to and by reference to the Simon Case letter, and he assured me that the process had been carried out properly.
Middle East
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(2 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I can give my hon. Friend that assurance—that is what we have been doing particularly intensively in the past two or three weeks. We will continue to do so later this week when President Macron and I host the summit together.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
Going further and faster on renewables is entirely compatible with new licences in the North sea. My constituents can see that the Prime Minister has very little power to reopen the strait of Hormuz, but total power to order new licences for Jackdaw and Rosebank in the North sea. How can he stand there and say that energy independence is the goal while he tries desperately to get oil and gas from elsewhere, which he can do little about, and refuses to overrule his insane Secretary of State for Energy and ensure that we produce—[Interruption.] I withdraw that comment, Madam Deputy Speaker. How can the Prime Minister do so while refusing to overrule the crazy policies of the Secretary of State for Energy, who insists on not producing oil and gas here? It makes no sense. Prime Minister, get a learning, get a teaching—but make sure it is not with the Energy Secretary.
The Prime Minister
As I say, oil and gas will be part of the mix for many years to come. Decisions on Jackdaw and Rosebank will be taken according to the legislative procedure, which is the right way to do it. [Interruption.] We could legislate, but it would probably take longer. Oil and gas will be part of the mix, but in the long term, the only way to get energy independence is to go further and faster on renewables, which is what we are doing.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that case. Renters should have security and I condemn any unfair evictions. I am proud to be abolishing section 21, a practice that has pushed thousands of renters into homelessness. I will make sure that the Housing Minister looks at the case that she has raised.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
The Prime Minister
Fuel duty is frozen and it will be frozen until September. In the light of what is happening in Iran, of course we will look carefully at the situation. The right hon. Gentleman’s constituents need to know, and it is right that they know, that fuel duty is frozen until September—not fearmongering.
Middle East
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
Cameron and his family and loved ones must be extremely worried. If the hon. Member would pass me the full details of that particular case, I will make sure that we do whatever we can to assist Cameron and his family.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
The Prime Minister has made it clear that he thinks there was insufficient imminent threat to justify our going with our allies in the initial strike. But this is now after the act of war—after the attack on UK citizens across the middle east, many countries of which were not participating, and on British sovereign territory. That means we can join in and we could be involved in offensive actions if the Prime Minister so chose. Why is he choosing not to, and why is he pretending it is for a legal reason when that legal reason has disappeared?
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that. I was in his constituency just the other week, and we could see the impact that this measure would have on children in Peterborough where, as he said, 9,000 children are living in poverty. In his constituency, 5,500 children are living in poverty. We are lifting them out of poverty, and that is the right thing to do.
The Prime Minister
The Conservative party shamefully dragged hundreds of thousands of children into poverty, and they will pay that price for the rest of their lives. Conservative Members should be ashamed of themselves.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this matter. It is a deeply concerning time for the workers and their families in Falkirk. I agree with him, and we are working with mayors and local leaders to develop a pipeline of future orders for zero emission buses, which is an important aspect of this issue. The Minister for local transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), is hosting an urgent meeting of the bus manufacturing expert panel.
While Labour mayors in England are ordering Scottish buses, the SNP is ordering buses from China, just like it ordered ships from Turkey and Poland, not from Scottish shipyards. The SNP should be backing Scottish workers.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
Graham Stuart
Could the Prime Minister recommend a summer recess read, in order to take all our minds off the calamitous journey on which he and the Chancellor have embarked?
The Prime Minister
From looking at the Opposition Benches, I think most Conservative Back Benchers are already on their summer recess. We are very proud of our manifesto—it was a very successful manifesto, giving us a landslide victory—and now we are very proud to be implementing it.
UK-EU Summit
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(11 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I agree. I would remind the House that we have agreements in place with a number of other countries, some of which were actually negotiated by the Conservatives. I find it hard to believe that anybody in this House genuinely wants to make it harder for our young people to work, study and travel in Europe.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
We need 15 billion barrels of oil and gas between now and 2050; we are currently expected to produce just 4 billion. New licences would support tens of thousands of jobs in this country and tens of billions in tax revenue. Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the agreement on alignment on climate policies will not stand in the way of common-sense restoration of new licences in the North sea, so that we can produce the oil and gas we must consume in this country?
The Prime Minister
We have been clear about honouring new licences, and there is nothing in this deal that cuts across what we have said previously on that.
Ukraine
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
Yes, of course. That is a really important issue, and it should not be overlooked as we discuss the very many issues here. It is a moral outrage, and I think I speak for the whole House in saying that.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
I, too, congratulate the Prime Minister on his composure and leadership, but, as his hon. Friend the hon. Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) said, we have to ensure that we have the resources in place to tackle this. The whole of western Europe is in the same difficult financial and demographic position. Will he look again at finding the means to deliver on our promises? His leadership and rhetoric have been fantastic, but going forward we will need the hard power to back them up.
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Member is right. That is why the conversation over the weekend has been about the specific issue of a security guarantee in Ukraine, but also, importantly, the wider issue of how Europe steps up more generally in its own defence spending, capability and co-ordination. That is an important part of the discussion. We should not just focus on the question of the security guarantees; they are part of the argument, but they are not the whole argument.
G20 and COP29 Summits
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(1 year, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
Yes, I do. To attend the Armistice Day in France was a special and important—[Interruption.] I am sorry? I was saying that it was a very special and moving occasion, on which we remembered all those who lost their lives for our freedoms. I am not sure why the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden) wanted to chunter through that. We were able to collectively reflect on all those who lost their lives, not only in the first world war, but in every conflict since. We should never lose sight of the fact that many of those whom we lost are buried in France, and it was a very special moment to be there.
Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)
John Prescott was a remarkable climate diplomat, and a funny, moving, and strangely mesmerising speaker, but he was also aware that while ambitious climate targets are necessary, climate action is essential. On that point, I understand that the hydrogen allocation round 1 agreements are ready to go. Can the Prime Minister commit to getting those agreements issued to companies, so that we can get the hydrogen economy going before Christmas, together with the jobs that go with it?
The Prime Minister
I want this initiative to proceed at pace; it is a really important initiative. There is no silver bullet here. We need to work across all areas to reach the goal of clean power by 2030, and we will continue to do so at pace.
Debate on the Address
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(1 year, 9 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I do welcome this, and I know that it is an issue across the whole House—I do not think there is a single Member who does not care about child poverty. The point of the taskforce is to devise a strategy, as we did when we were last in government, to drive those numbers down. It cannot be a single issue, but one that crosses a number of strands, and we will work with people across the House in order to tackle it. What matters is the commitment to drive those numbers down. That is what we did when last in government, and we will do it again.
The Prime Minister
I will make some progress and then give way.
I respect the tone of the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution, but I cannot stop my mind from wandering back to nine months ago when he was at this Dispatch Box. His great political hero, Nigel Lawson, once said, “To govern is to choose.” Every day serving the people of this country is a chance to make a difference for them. The last King’s Speech was the day when the veil of his choices slipped, and we all saw his party content to let our country’s problems fester and to push aside the national interest as they focused almost entirely on trying to save their own skins.
We will have time over the weeks, months and years ahead to debate the measures in this King’s Speech and the choices of this Government, but I defy anyone on the Opposition Benches or elsewhere to look at the ambition and purpose of our intent and not to see a return to the serious business of government. No more wedges issues; no more gimmicks; no more party political strategy masquerading as policy. This is an agenda focused entirely on delivering for the people of this country—legislation for the national interest that seeks only to fix our foundations and make people better off, and to solve problems, not exploit them.
The Prime Minister
I will just make some progress.
With each day that passes, my Government are finding new and unexpected marks of their chaos: scars of the past 14 years, where politics was put above the national interest, and decline deep in the marrow of our institutions. We have seen that in our prisons, writ large. We have seen it in our rivers and seas, even worse than we thought. We have seen it in our councils, pushed to the brink by the previous Government and now unable to deliver even basic services to children with special educational needs. We have already taken the first steps on so many of the priorities we put before the British people. The work of change has begun, but we know—as they do—that national renewal is not a quick fix. The rot of 14 years will take time to repair.
Graham Stuart
I am grateful to the Prime Minister for giving way. He talks about priorities. Of course, people in rural communities around the country see the vast majority that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has assembled, and they are afraid. They see a manifesto in which just 87 words are about farming. They see a King’s Speech with no mention of rural communities or priorities. Will the Prime Minister please take this opportunity to reassure people in rural and farming communities that his Labour Government will take notice of them?
Mr Speaker
Order. Interventions are one thing, but this is not the best time to actually make a speech.
EU Withdrawal Agreement
Debate between Keir Starmer and Graham Stuart(7 years, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for International Trade (Graham Stuart)
Support the deal!
Keir Starmer
The cries to support the deal would have a lot more authority if those on the Government Benches were supporting the deal. The Government are utterly split on this. Last Wednesday’s no-confidence vote exposed the fracture, and there is no point pretending it is not there.
Over the summer, the previous Brexit Secretary published 106 technical notices setting out the Government’s case for preparing for no deal. They did not get a huge amount of attention at the time, but it is worth reading and re-reading them, as my team and I have done, and as the Institute for Government has done. Those technical notices make it clear that the Government’s managed no deal would require the creation or expansion of 15 quangos, further legislation in 51 areas, the negotiation of 40 new international agreements with either the EU or other countries and the introduction of 55 new systems and processes. That is the analysis of the 106 technical notices—the Government’s own assessment.
The case I am making is that the argument that there should or could be no deal on 29 March is completely lacking in any viability whatsoever. The very idea that there could be legislation in 51 areas, 40 new international agreements, 15 new quangos and 55 new systems and processes in the next three months only has to be spelled out. That is not my assessment; it is the Government’s own assessment. It is not credible to pretend that that can be done by 29 March.