Debates between Layla Moran and Michael Gove during the 2019-2024 Parliament

Building Safety and Social Housing

Debate between Layla Moran and Michael Gove
Thursday 6th July 2023

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Gove Portrait Michael Gove
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that. I know he has a lifelong interest in social housing and cares very deeply about the fates of tenants in those conditions. I would never say that we have done everything that we should. I do believe that significant progress has been made, not least in remediating high-rise buildings and making sure that everyone who should plays their part. I will say a little bit more about it in a moment, but he is right to focus on how, when it comes to fire safety, it is not just the external cladding, which was of course the principal cause of the fire at Grenfell, but internal safety measures that we need to look at. Has progress been fast enough? No. Does resource need to be allocated? Yes. So I do agree with him that more requires to be done.

I was reflecting, just before that very helpful intervention, on the particular fate that disabled residents faced at Grenfell, and the vital importance of making sure that we have personal emergency evacuation plans in place. I hope to be able to update the House with the Home Secretary in due course.

As the hon. Gentleman has pointed out, a broad range of issues affect building safety overall. Of course, one finding of the Grenfell Tower inquiry will inevitably be a recognition of systemic failures in the way in which we dealt with building safety, because the public, residents and indeed the Government put their faith in the building and approving of high-rise blocks and in the construction products being supplied for those high-rise blocks. We believed that the law was being followed and that the right thing was being done, but this trust was misplaced and abused. Industry profits, as we now know, were prioritised over safety and the safeguards that should have been observed were flouted.

We are now, with the help of all parties in this House, fixing the broken building safety system and we are seeking redress. I have been clear that those responsible—those at the apex of the building industry—must take responsibility. As of today, a total of 49 developers, including the 10 largest house builders, have signed our developer remediation contract, and I am grateful to them for showing such leadership. All developers that have signed the contract now have a legal duty to get on with remediation.

Layla Moran Portrait Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
- Hansard - -

As I am sure the Secretary of State knows, one key recommendation of the Hackitt review was to set up the Building Safety Regulator. So he will understand the concern when amendments have been tabled to the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill giving the Secretary of State powers to scrap the building safety regime via a statutory instrument. If the No. 1 thing that the state needs to do is to keep its citizen safe, can he explain why those amendments have been tabled, and under what circumstances he would use that power to get rid of that regulator without proper scrutiny in this House?

Michael Gove Portrait Michael Gove
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I absolutely would never do anything to undermine the position of the Building Safety Regulator. Indeed, I have been working with colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions and the Health and Safety Executive to make sure that we have the right team in place, the right person as regulator and the right powers for the regulator. All the legislation that we are bringing forward—not just the previous building safety legislation, but the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill—is designed to strengthen the hand of the regulator. I would be delighted to talk to the hon. Lady in greater detail outside this House to provide reassurance.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Layla Moran and Michael Gove
Thursday 27th May 2021

(3 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Gove Portrait Michael Gove
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend makes a very important point. We are currently reviewing, as part of preparation for new procurement legislation, exactly how we can ensure that there is a higher proportion of apprenticeships in contracts that Government allocate as well as making sure that the civil service extends the use of apprenticeship schemes, of which he has been such an effective champion.

Layla Moran Portrait Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

If his Department will make it its policy to allow publication of the conclusions of recent independent investigations into potential breaches of the ministerial code.

Michael Gove Portrait The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Michael Gove)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The independent adviser on Ministers’ interests publishes an annual report setting out the work he has undertaken.

Layla Moran Portrait Layla Moran [V]
- View Speech - Hansard - -

This week, the Home Secretary said on “The Andrew Marr Show”:

“I think at this stage…this isn’t about breaking codes and things of that nature. We’re all just getting on in government doing very difficult jobs actually.”

Given that the ministerial code sets out an overarching duty on Ministers to comply with the law, does the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster agree that even if a Minister does have a difficult job, they should follow both the ministerial code and obey the law?

Michael Gove Portrait Michael Gove
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

That seems to me a very good point—yes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Layla Moran and Michael Gove
Monday 4th May 2020

(4 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Gove Portrait Michael Gove
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making that point. We will co-operate not just with our European neighbours, but with other countries in the fight against covid-19. He is right to say that the Prime Minister is joining the call today to ensure that we can support the effort to secure a vaccine. The effort to secure a vaccine is necessarily an international one. We will of course look pragmatically at how we can co-operate with our European friends and partners, but participation in the European Medicines Agency would involve, certainly at the moment, the acceptance of the European Court of Justice’s oversight, and that is not something the British people voted to do.

Layla Moran Portrait Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
- Hansard - -

What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on a potential extension to the transition period.

Michael Gove Portrait The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Michael Gove)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As I think Members will appreciate given previous exchanges, the Government will not be extending the transition period. Indeed, Parliament has legislated to prevent Ministers from agreeing to such an extension. The Government will therefore continue to negotiate a new fair trade deal with the EU, the process of which will conclude by the end of December.

Layla Moran Portrait Layla Moran [V]
- Hansard - -

A YouGov poll released this weekend showed that half the population now think that the transition period should be extended, versus 35% who think the Government should press ahead. The public know that kicking the economy when it is down, especially with a no-deal Brexit on top of a covid crash, is in no one’s best interests. The right hon. Gentleman said just now that there was a deal, but he knows full well that that is the withdrawal agreement and not the future deal that will determine the trade relationship. No deal is still on the table, so will the Government consider asking for even a short extension to avoid a no-deal Brexit, or are they intent on putting ideology before pragmatism?