Business of the House

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Thursday 24th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Chris Philp]

It is rather telling that only one Government Member appears to be excited about the prospect of the Budget next week. They obviously know what is coming.

Let me start by congratulating Morgan Edwards on his appointment as director of customer experience and service delivery here in Parliament. He starts his role in December. Apparently he was previously employed at Legoland in Windsor. Quite why the parliamentary authorities thought someone with experience of presiding over squabbling juveniles was well suited to working here, I really do not know.

I have to say that the business has been a little thin in recent weeks. We have a general debate today and a general debate on Monday—we have had no fewer than 10 days of general debate so far. Yesterday, we had regulations that would ordinarily be taken in Committee, and business ended early on Tuesday. We expect that at the end of a Government’s time in office, but it is a little early for this Government to be running out of steam.

At this point in the 2019 Parliament, we had had 31 new Bills introduced; we currently have only 18, a third of which had been published or consulted upon previously, and those Bills that are coming forward are being rushed. The Employment Rights Bill, which had its Second Reading on Monday, has much of its policy deferred into regulations, to be debated in Committee at some point in the future, denying the full House the opportunity to properly debate those important issues.

When it comes to the winter fuel payment regulations, which we discussed previously, we should have had the report of the Social Security Advisory Committee before we debated and voted on that important measure. The committee has now finally written its report, and it says that it is concerned about the take-up of pension credit, that the Government’s forecasts of fiscal savings have question marks hanging over them and that we need a full impact assessment, which the Government did not bother providing. The committee has also called for specific changes to the regulations. Will the Leader of the House bring the regulations back to the House for us to consider again now that we have the committee’s report and it has recommended changes?

I believe that the Prime Minister is in Samoa attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit. Will the Leader of the House confirm that he will make a statement upon his return next week? I understand that one of the topics under discussion is the question of reparations. My view is that it is totally wrong to be demanding money, amounting to as much as £18 trillion, for sins—very serious sins—committed hundreds of years ago. Will the Leader of the House confirm that it is her view and the Government’s that it is totally wrong to entertain discussions about reparations in relation to things that happened hundreds and hundreds of years ago? I believe that is the Government’s position, and I believe the Prime Minister has ruled out even entering into discussions on that topic, quite rightly. Will she confirm that that remains the position of His Majesty’s Government?

Finally, I ask the Leader of the House to organise a debate on foreign interference in elections—an important topic that concerns us all, and something that Members on both sides of the House have criticised. I understand that more than 100 Labour party staffers are enjoying themselves in the United States in the presidential election that is under way. Ministers have claimed that this is all spontaneous and has all been organised and paid for by the staffers themselves, but that claim appears, to put it politely, grossly implausible now that it has emerged in a now-deleted social media post that the whole thing was arranged by the Labour party’s director of operations, Sofia Patel. She wrote in that deleted post that there were “10 spots available” for campaigning in the swing state of North Carolina, and she said,

“we will sort your housing”.

It looks to me as though that is being organised by the Labour party’s director of operations.

Does the Leader of the House agree that it is damaging to our national interest—this is a serious point—if the governing party, the Labour party, is organising interference or campaigning in another country’s election? [Interruption.] Does she agree that it will make it difficult for His Majesty’s Government to deal with the newly elected Administration in America if the other side wins, and that that will undermine our national interest? Does she accept that by engaging in organised campaigning in this way, Labour is putting party interest before national interest, and will she organise that debate? [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Please, I do not need further comments. I am sure Members are trying to catch my eye, but that is not the best way to do it.

[Lucy Powell]

I join the shadow Leader of the House in welcoming Morgan Edwards to this place. I am sure he brings great experience from Legoland that can be brought to bear in this Chamber.

I send my condolences to the family of Geoff Capes. As a child of the ’80s, I remember what a legend he was, and I believe his shot put record is still unbroken.

I take this opportunity once again to point the House to the call for views launched by the Modernisation Committee last week. Tomorrow, new limitations on MPs’ second jobs come into force. The House will remember that before recess, we voted to remove the exemptions on paid advocacy roles. I wanted to give Members time to adjust to the new rules, hence why they are coming into force tomorrow. That was a manifesto commitment and we are determined to restore trust in politics, raising standards and delivering on our manifesto commitments.

The shadow Leader of the House again mentions winter fuel payments. I gently remind him once again that we published an equality impact assessment, which we were not required to do, but we were forthcoming with it. We brought forward to this House—I do not think this would have happened under the previous Government —a full vote on the measures, and they were clearly passed by this place.

The shadow Leader of the House asks about the Prime Minister’s visit to CHOGM. I can confirm that there will be a statement from the Foreign Secretary next week about that and other matters, and I look forward to the right hon. Gentleman asking some questions. The issue of reparations is important, and I am glad that he has raised it. We recognise the horrific impacts and the understandable and ongoing strength of feeling across the Commonwealth and other communities about these matters. He is right, however, that our position on reparations has not changed. At the conference this week, we are committed to working with our Commonwealth partners on the very pressing issues that we face today, and looking forward to the future, not looking to the past.

The right hon. Gentleman raised the issue of campaigning in the United States and elsewhere. I note that he wants a full debate on that while also questioning why we are offering full general debates on other issues; I am not sure whether wants that general debate or not. Campaigning abroad happens in every election. People do that in a personal capacity, as well he knows. This is a bit rich, really, coming from the Conservative party. Its would-be leaders have spent weeks debating and arguing over who would or would not vote for Donald Trump. The former Prime Minister Liz Truss went to the Republican national convention and spent her time there discrediting the sitting President.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Just to say, those others are not MPs, by the way.

[Lucy Powell]

I feel that it is a bit rich. It is for the American people to decide who their next President is and this Government are committed and determined to work with whoever wins that election.

The right hon. Gentleman then raised issues of business, which I will happily come on to. Today marks our 30th sitting day since we won that landslide general election victory. In that time, we have introduced 20 Bills—that is 20 Bills in 30 sitting days: over half of our King’s Speech programme has already been introduced. I remind him that that is way more than the coalition Conservative Government managed in the whole of 2010, which was the last time we had a change of Government. We have passed our first Labour Act in 14 years and made 34 statements to Parliament—more than one a day.

There is still much more to come, and I am sure the right hon. Gentleman wants to know about it—on planning, border control, education, mental health, crime and policing, Great British Railways, the Hillsborough law, buses and much, much more. He and I both sat through the last Parliament, although others here did not: we both know that at the end it really was a zombie Parliament, clocking off early on seven out of 10 days in its last year. The last Government had run out of ideas and could not agree on what to do and when, so they did nothing. They dithered and delayed on their own flagship legislation, and we are getting on with delivering some of the things that they failed to do.

For example, this morning there is the Football Governance Bill, which they long promised. We have reintroduced it, strengthening the position of fans and financial sustainability in the game. We are delivering where the previous Government did not. What about the Renters’ Right Bill, which the previous Government had long planned but never fulfilled? We have taken it forward. Perhaps the most disingenuous example of all is Martyn’s law. The then Prime Minister promised to introduce it by the summer on the day before he called a general election, knowing full well that he was not going to be able to introduce it at all. We have brought it in. Frankly, we have brought more change to this country in our 30 sitting days than the previous Government did in 14 sorry, sorry years.

If the shadow Leader of the House really wants to look at effective use of time, he might ask what his own party has been doing for the last few months. It seems to have taken three and a half months to whittle five candidates down to just two—not that anyone has particularly noticed. However, it is fair to say that we have seen a few signs of life in recent days. The Conservatives have finally shown a bit of oomph, a bit of what it is all about to be the party of opposition—they have taken a really principled stance: to stand against the abolition of hereditary peers.

[Lucy Powell]

My hon. Friend raises an important issue that has been raised a number of times during business questions. We want a society where every person receives high-quality, compassionate care at the end of their lives. It is a crying shame that the hospice sector relies so heavily on fundraising and voluntary support. We will continue to work closely with the sector to make sure that it can survive and thrive going forward.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)]

I welcomed the emphasis that the Leader of the House placed on the Modernisation Committee’s call for views. I am sure that many Members have been sidling up to her and saying, as they have to me, “Wouldn’t it be good if we could change this particular aspect of the way in which Parliament does things?” I am pleased to be able, now, to direct them to the Modernisation Committee’s website, where they can submit their own views, and I encourage them to do so.

I also thank the Leader of the House for presenting the business programme. I note that several days have been provided for the Budget debate, to which I am sure we are all looking forward—although I am not totally convinced that the shadow Leader of the House and the official Opposition are looking forward to it. If reports in the media are to be believed, they had the opportunity to change the timetable for their leadership election so that the new leader might be able to respond to the Budget, but it appears that they were not too keen on that idea. Perhaps they were not entirely confident of their own ability to respond to the Budget, but we shall see what happens.

Many of the questions to Ministers from Members on both sides of the House are regularly being answered with a rather frustrating, “Wait until the Budget.” However, while many of us understand that there are good reasons for the fact that detailed responses often cannot be given ahead of the Budget, time is ticking on, and the seasons do not really seem to care about the Government’s timetable. Winter is fast approaching, but our NHS does not have the funding that it needs to fully support local health services. According to figures from the House of Commons Library following work commissioned by the Liberal Democrats, 12-hour wait times at A&E have been going up and up throughout the country. I am extremely worried about what that means for my constituents, and I am sure that other Members will be concerned about theirs.

The Royal College of Emergency Medicine has previously estimated that long A&E delays led to about 14,000 excess deaths last year, which means that 268 people have been dying, unnecessarily, every week because they are having to wait too long to be seen. It really is a matter of life and death, and that is unacceptable. Yes, it is another damning indictment of the last Conservative Government’s failure to get a grip on healthcare in this country, but it is what we do right now that really matters. Make no mistake: it is a choice, and we can choose to fix this.

While the Liberal Democrats are calling for a wider funding boost for the whole of the NHS, we cannot keep lurching from winter crisis to winter crisis. Will the Leader of the House call on the Chancellor to create a new ringfenced fund—

[Mr Speaker]

Order.

[Marie Goldman]

A ringfenced fund that takes account of the average emergency winter funding for the NHS—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. One of us is going to sit down, and it certainly is not going to be me. The hon. Lady has already taken three minutes. She should not start speaking faster and more loudly just to try and stop me. She must come to an end now, and do so very quickly.

[Marie Goldman]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Will the Chancellor set aside money to be spent on building up winter resilience and winter-proofing the NHS?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question, and she is absolutely right. The people of Gaza have endured 12 months of this conflict and are suffering from a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. Over 100 hostages are still being held by Hamas in truly awful conditions, which is why this Government are absolutely clear that the fighting must stop now. We need an immediate ceasefire and the release of all the hostages. We need much more aid and support to get into Gaza, and we need long-term peace and stability. The Government are working at pace with our international partners to achieve those ends, and there should be a statement on this matter in the coming days.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am looking forward to the magical words “business to be nominated by the Backbench Business Committee” in future weeks. I think there is one remaining member of the Backbench Business Committee to be appointed, which prevents us from meeting, so I urge the House to get on with that. May I suggest to the Leader of the House that it would be helpful if she announced the business to be held in Westminster Hall at these sessions? That would elevate the status of Westminster Hall debates.

Today we have seen the Charity Commission publish a damning report on Mermaids, which concludes that the charity’s poor governance has led to mismanagement. That has serious implications following the statutory inquiry into not only Mermaids, but other charities that look after vulnerable children. Could we have a statement from the Government about what action they will take to ensure that vulnerable children are protected, and that charities do not mismanage the resources they are provided with?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lucy Powell]

In my short time in government, I have seen at first hand the exemplary work that our civil servants do every day. Much of the time they do it quietly and secretly and do not get the credit, so it is great that my hon. Friend has raised the matter on the Floor of the House.

It is up to individual Departments to negotiate with their trade unions on pay rises. I think the average award this year is 5%, but my hon. Friend is right that, working together with our partners in the trade union movement, we can end industrial action and support people getting higher wages and better working conditions.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

I have served for several years on the programme boards for restoration and renewal. The existential threat to this building is fire. I have raised on several occasions, as I know others have, the importance of installing a water mist system, installing more fire doors and making sure that they all shut. This is such an important issue. I do not demand an immediate answer, but will the Leader of the House try to persuade the authorities that rather than having endless debates on whether to decant, we need to protect this building with a water mist system? The modern systems are designed so that they will not even damage paintings, but they could save the building.