Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con)
Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that with me. He will know that GCSE subject decisions are taken by the independent exam boards, but he may be interested to know that the Education Secretary has recently written to the exam boards asking them to consider introducing a GCSE in Ukrainian. I hope my hon. Friend will continue that campaign, and I am sure that it will get wide support from across the House.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
The outbreak of bluetongue and the subsequent announcement by the Welsh Government imposing a hard border for livestock between England and Wales leaves the livelihoods of many border farmers at risk. Their land often straddles the border, and farmers rely on moving livestock daily between both countries. According to the Farmers Union of Wales, by introducing mandatory checks the Welsh Government are creating a “wholly impractical” policy. I am reliably informed by my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) that a large majority of ewes are on one side of the border, while the tups are on the other, which will make breeding rather tricky. Will the Leader of the House ask Ministers to bring forward a statement about any work they are doing to create a more joined-up approach between England and Wales to protect farmers in these border counties? While she is doing so, can we have a statement on whether the Government will create a funded vaccination programme to protect livestock and livelihoods in the whole of the UK?
Lucy Powell
May I take this opportunity to thank my hon. Friend for all her leadership on this issue, and for bringing representatives of both Houses together last week to watch the very moving documentary with David Attenborough? That has had a profound impact on many Members across this House. She is absolutely right that we have to take action to ratify the treaty, and we are committed to bringing forward legislation before the end of the year—I hope it will be sooner. I am really pleased that the British Government have taken steps to ban bottom trawling in our protected marine waters.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business for next week, including the estimates day debates. I hope she will use her good offices to ensure that there are no Government statements on that day and that you, Mr Speaker, will have a very high bar for urgent questions.
Bob Blackman
We have three debates on each day, and I hope that we will be able to get a good debate on each of those subjects. On Thursday 3 July, there will be a debate on a motion on financial redress for 1950s women impacted by the Department for Work and Pensions’ maladministration of the state pension, followed by a debate on mobile phone theft, a subject that is raised frequently in this Chamber. On Thursday 10 July, there will be a debate on children’s health, and we are awaiting acceptance of the other debate.
I understand that the sponsor of the debate on Down syndrome that was due to take place this afternoon in Westminster Hall has withdrawn that application because no Minister was available to answer it, so there will be no debate. I hope that you, Mr Speaker, will use your good offices to make sure that that debate takes place, for the benefit of the sponsor and, indeed, the subject.
Next week in Westminster Hall, there will be a debate on Tuesday on the right to maintain contact in care settings. On Thursday, there will be a debate on the role of the RAF photographic reconnaissance unit during the second world war, followed by a debate on the BBC World Service. On Thursday 3 July, there will be a debate on the future of music education, followed by a debate on safeguarding children with allergies at school. The following week, on 8 July, there will be a debate on alcohol and cancer—which is a very topical subject during that week—and on Thursday, there will be a debate on state support for victims of terrorism, followed by a debate on London’s contribution to the national economy.
Not only is Saturday the longest day, but it is also International Yoga Day, and we are giving right hon. and hon. Members the opportunity to practise yoga this afternoon. Those Members who are not in the Chamber or Westminster Hall can come along to Committee Room 10. I guarantee to provide a place for every single Member who comes along, so that we can practise yoga, which is India’s gift to the world and is helpful when it comes to having a healthy and a long life.
Mr Speaker
Can I book Jim Shannon in? [Laughter.] The hon. Member mentioned the debate this afternoon. It is disappointing that there was no Minister available, which is why it was better to withdraw it on the Member’s behalf.
Lucy Powell
First, may I say namaste to the hon. Gentleman? I am a regular attender at Iyengar yoga in Manchester. Were I not wearing high heels, I might show him my tree pose, but I will save that for another day, or perhaps at the session later on.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for announcing the forthcoming business—it sounds like there will be a number of debates on topics that regularly get raised with me during these sessions. I am really sorry, Mr Speaker, about the unavailability of Ministers for the debate that was due to take place in Westminster Hall today. As I understand it, given that the Backbench Business debate in this Chamber is a health debate, that is occupying one Minister, and another Minister is involved in a Public Bill Committee, which has limited the availability of Ministers. However, we will ensure that that debate is rearranged. I offer my full apology to the House for the Ministers’ unavailability.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. Just to help the House, I aim to run this session for around an hour, so I am sure we can help each other by rushing through. Let us have a good example of that from Neil O’Brien.
Neil O’Brien (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston) (Con)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Although they did not mention it before the election, Labour is committed to abolishing every district and borough council in Leicestershire. It has also invited proposals to expand the city’s boundaries, and the Mayor of Leicester has put forward such a proposal. This is universally not wanted in Oadby, Wigston, Great Glen and the surrounding villages—in fact, thousands of people have signed a petition against it—so can we please at least have a debate in Government time on that proposal? Will the Leader of the House encourage the Local Government Minister not to allow this expansion of the city? It is not just the higher council tax; people want to keep their local identity. If the Government are going to go ahead with the proposal, will they at least allow people to vote in a referendum?
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I start by saying that the thoughts of the whole House and the Government will be with the families of those travelling on flight AI171 from Ahmedabad in India to London Gatwick, which has reportedly crashed. This is an unfolding story, and it will undoubtedly be causing a huge amount of worry and concern to the many families and communities here and those waiting for the arrival of their loved ones. We send our deepest sympathies and thoughts to all those families, and the Government will provide all the support that they can to those affected in India and in this country.
I congratulate Billy Boston on receiving a knighthood for his services to rugby league—during your birthday week, Mr Speaker. I know that as a former patron of rugby league, you felt very strongly indeed that it was about time rugby league was recognised in this way, and you might want to mention that later.
Given that I know it is of great interest to the House, I am pleased to update colleagues on the ratification of the BBNJ—biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction—oceans treaty. Our oceans are dying, and without urgent action they will be irreversibly destroyed. I am proud to confirm to the House today that this Labour Government will introduce legislation before the end of the year to ratify the high seas treaty and protect marine life around the world. We were all shocked by Sir David Attenborough’s film about the destruction caused by bottom trawling, which this Government will ban in protected British waters.
I am really happy, as ever, to debate the right hon. Member for Hereford and South Herefordshire (Jesse Norman) on the economy. He used to be a Treasury Minister and he is well read. He knows, I am sure, what every economist in this country knows, which is that for many, many years, the UK economy has been defined by low growth and stagnant living standards, because of our comparatively low productivity. That is because we have had years and years of under-investment in our infrastructure, in our services, in our regions and in our people. This Labour Government are finally putting that right with a 10-year renewal plan to rebuild Britain and address the productivity gap. I am not sure whether the Conservatives really understand basic economics, because they are showing no sign of it.
In my part of the world and yours, Mr Speaker, that has been particularly true. Towns and cities across the north and the midlands have been held back by woeful transport infrastructure that would be unacceptable to people in the south; held back by the lack of job opportunities near where they live; held back by poor, insecure and costly housing; held back because they are not getting the training and skills they need; and held back because their life chances are lower as a result of deep-seated inequalities.
That cannot be addressed overnight, and we are not pretending that it will be, but we have a long-term plan for renewal. That includes the biggest investment in affordable and social housing in 50 years; nuclear and renewable infrastructure transforming communities around the country; the north finally getting the rail connectivity it deserves; and every community getting better buses. Schools and hospitals are being rebuilt for the 21st century, based not on fictional budgets and economics but on actual plans to deliver them. We are addressing today’s cost of living crisis, too, with our warm homes plan to bring down bills, by extending free school meals and free breakfast clubs, with more free childcare, with a cap on bus fares and by increasing the wages of the lowest paid—with wages going up more in the first 10 months of this Labour Government than they did in 10 years of the Conservative Government. Finally, we continue to boost the NHS, which has already resulted in waiting lists coming down month after month.
The right hon. Gentleman wants to talk about choices, so let us talk about those choices. We would not have been able to set those things out if we had not made the difficult changes to taxes that we made in the Budget last year. He seems to want more spending for the police and defence—I think that is what he was saying—but he does not want to make the hard decisions about where the money will come from. He mentions yet again the 2.5% of spending on defence, which this Government are delivering, but he might want to remind himself of when defence spending reached 2.5% in the last 20 years. Was it in any of the 14 years for which his Government were in office? No, it was not. It was only when Labour was last in government that we reached the heights of 2.5%.
In contrast to the Conservatives’ fantasy economics, yesterday’s spending allocations were all within the envelope that we set out in the Budget last year, so we are really clear where the money is coming from. As ever, their economic argument is utterly incoherent. On the one hand, they say that we are spending too much, and on the other that we are not spending even more on police and defence. They criticise us on growth, yet they do not want the investment to turbocharge our productivity and, therefore, our growth. We are the party with a plan—a plan to renew Britain, a plan to raise living standards in every part of the country, a plan to get our public services back on their feet and a plan to give people the security they need in their homes.
Mr Speaker
To follow on from what the Leader of the House and the shadow Leader of the House have said, all our prayers and thoughts go to the families of the London-bound aircraft that has crashed. Let us hope there is better news to come on that.
I was tempted by the Leader of the House when she talked about the knighthood for Sir Billy Boston. I just hope that it will be like London buses and we will see further knighthoods for rugby league—I look forward to none more so than the news of Sir Kevin Sinfield.
Let us try somebody from Yorkshire; I call Jon Trickett.
Jon Trickett (Normanton and Hemsworth) (Lab)
I very much associate myself with your comments about Kevin Sinfield, Mr Speaker, who is a hero for the whole nation and a great role model.
On the question of the north, the Leader of the House is right. In the great northern town of Featherstone, there is increasing irritation about the way in which the absentee and irresponsible owners of the former Junction pub are allowing it to deteriorate. It is now in a dangerous condition and I fear that somebody will be badly hurt. The process of dealing with dangerous structures is too long, too bureaucratic and too cumbersome. Please may we have a debate in Government time—I think lots of Members will have the same experience—so we can share our experiences and see whether the Government can push things forward?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend is right to raise the difficult issue of the Junction pub in his constituency. We all hear those stories time and again. We want to give local communities more powers to have the right to acquire such facilities, and for those powers to be exercised more quickly than they currently are. We are bringing forward legislation in that regard, but he might want to club together with others to get a debate on the issue.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
May I echo the thoughts and sympathies that have been sent to all those involved in the Air India crash that is being reported? I know that many British citizens will be affected, and our thoughts are with them.
I recently joined Essex police on a ride-along in my Chelmsford constituency to witness at first hand its vital work in our local communities to keep us all safe. Worryingly, Essex police has regularly raised with me that the national funding formula, known as the police allocation formula, is outdated and unfair. The funding that Essex police receives falls far short of the proportion of policing carried out by the force in a national context. Yesterday’s spending review did nothing to change that or to remove concerns about police funding overall. Indeed, the chairman of the National Police Chiefs’ Council said that in real terms, the increase in funding
“will cover little more than annual inflationary pay increases for officers and staff.”
He added that
“the amount falls far short of what is required to…maintain our existing workforce.”
If we want to keep crime off our streets and retain the experienced officers who do such vital work to keep us safe, surely we must give them the funding to match. Yesterday’s spending review did not do that. Will the Leader of the House therefore raise those issues with both the Treasury and the Home Office?
Lucy Powell
Access to banking and financial services remains a huge issue for many MPs across the House. I am pleased to hear that my hon. Friend has a new banking hub in Penistone, but I recognise that Chapeltown needs that service too. We are rolling out 350 banking hubs. Over 100 of those are already open. There was a well-subscribed debate on this issue in the House last week, but I will ensure that the relevant Minister gives her an update on the banking hubs in her constituency.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
A third of my constituents emanate from Gujarat, so my thoughts and prayers are with the families and relatives who are obviously concerned about the plight of the 242 passengers on that flight. I understand that the plane came down in a residential area, so the people who live there will also be affected.
I thank the Leader of the House for announcing the business for next week and for announcing the estimates days. Estimates day applications can be obtained from the Table Office or the Committee’s website. We welcome applications. They will close tomorrow at the rise of the House, and we will be considering applications for debates at our meeting on Tuesday at 4.15 pm. Anyone applying should expect to turn up and present their case. We intend to allocate three debates each day, with a preference given to those who were unsuccessful in the supplementary estimates days.
In addition to the business announced by the Leader of the House, in Westminster Hall next week, on Tuesday there will be a debate on hydrogen-powered aviation, and on Thursday there will be a Select Committee statement from the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, followed by debates on the role of careers education in improving social mobility and on Down’s syndrome regression disorder. On Tuesday 24 June, there will be a debate on the right to maintain contact in care settings. On Thursday 26 June, there will be a Select Committee statement from the Joint Committee on Human Rights, followed by debates on the role of the RAF photographic reconnaissance unit during the second world war and on the funding of the BBC World Service.
In recent weeks, I have raised the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh. I have also raised the atrocities in Pahalgam, but now things have come home to this country. Earlier this week, three young Indian boys were playing cricket in Headstone park. They were approached by three slightly older men. An altercation took place, and the three young boys were hospitalised, one with a fractured eye socket. We understand that the police are dealing with this as an aggravated racial assault. It took place between young Hindu boys and older Muslim men. The police are appealing for witnesses to come forward to see who the perpetrators are, and community leaders are trying to take down the temperature so that there is no escalation. But if this type of religious hatred is going to come to this country, we desperately need the Home Secretary to make a clear statement about what the Government will do to prevent it from happening. I ask the Leader of the House to facilitate that next week.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Order. My intention is for business questions to run until around 11.45, so if we can help each other by speeding through, that would be really good. I call Sir Roger Gale to set a good example.
Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)
The Government have pledged to enhance the record of the previous Conservative Government and uphold animal welfare. Retained European regulations currently prohibit the handling of chickens by their legs, but in their first act of animal welfare, the Government are proposing to pass regulations to permit that harmful practice. Will the Leader of the House ask the agriculture Minister to write to me—and place a copy of the letter in the Library —to explain why the Government are choosing to lower the legal standard rather than to uphold the law and protect animal welfare?
Lucy Powell
The Government are committed to introducing the most ambitious programme of animal welfare in a generation. I am not aware of the particular regulation that the right hon. Gentleman mentions, but I will ensure that he gets a full response from the Minister and that it is made available for everybody else.
Dave Doogan (Angus and Perthshire Glens) (SNP)
When the Bank of Scotland branch closes later this year in Pitlochry, the town will desperately need a banking hub. That is why I was disappointed that the independent assessor and Link assessed only access to cash, not access to banking. I challenged Link on that, and it said that that is because of the mandate set for it by the Financial Conduct Authority; so I challenged the FCA on that, and it said that that is because of the regulatory framework in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023; so I challenged the Treasury on that and asked it to change its regulatory framework and imposition on the FCA. The Treasury said it will not do that. In opposition, Labour tabled an amendment to the Financial Services and Markets Bill that would have mandated a survey of access to banking services, not just access to cash. Can we have a debate in Government time about how we fix this utter guddle?
Lucy Powell
Yes, we have just had a good debate on it! This issue comes up often—it has already come up today. We have banking hub deserts in Scotland and the rest of the UK. We are committed to addressing that with the opening of banking hubs. We will, I am sure, have ample opportunity as various pieces of legislation pass through the House to discuss any changes to regulations, but I will ensure the hon. Gentleman gets a proper response about those regulations.
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Satvir Kaur (Southampton Test) (Lab)
As it is World Environment Day, does the Leader of the House agree that while the UK has beautiful national parks, local parks and green spaces in urban cities such as Southampton are just as treasured and as valuable in bringing communities together and improving health and wellbeing, making such cities the great places that they are? Communities in my constituency enjoyed a week-long Urban Wild festival during the half-term holiday, as part of Southampton’s journey in becoming the UK’s first national park city outside London. Will she join me in congratulating Christelle Blunden in particular, but also the army of volunteers, friends of groups, charities and many more who champion our local nature every day and who are behind Southampton’s national park city campaign? Finally—
Mr Speaker
Order. Please sit down. This is a very important subject and I congratulate the hon. Lady—she did ask me at the beginning and it is fantastic news—but I have to get a lot of Members in today. So, please, I am sure the Leader of the House has grasped the message.
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend makes a compelling case for Southampton’s national park city status, and indeed for the fantastic contribution that green spaces, nature and wild places make to our cities, making places such as Southampton a great place to live.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
The Liberal Democrats warmly welcome reports that eligibility for free school meals is being extended to all children in England whose parents receive universal credit. This is a Lib Dem policy on which we have campaigned for a long time, and it is a positive first step to help to lift children out of poverty. Of course, there is much more to do. Among other much needed changes, we would point to the importance of fully funding the policy for schools and auto-enrolling eligible children to ensure that they get the support they need.
I will also highlight, once again, something that is raised in business questions nearly every week: special educational needs. In March it was reported in the media that the Government will produce a White Paper on special educational needs to address the crisis in schools for children with special educational needs and disabilities. We are hearing rumours that this White Paper may be delayed until the autumn, or possibly until next year. Children with special educational needs are still without support, parents are still battling with local authorities, schools are still struggling to cope, and councils are still left staring at the prospect of a £5 billion deficit next year from SEND being added to their budgets. Will the Leader of the House implore the Government to, at the very least, provide a timescale for publishing the White Paper?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend makes a compelling case. Of course, comedy is no joke when it comes to the economy. [Interruption.] I try my best, Mr Speaker, but I am obviously not as good as those at Craic House in my hon. Friend’s constituency. She makes a great point, and I am sure that Ministers will have heard her call today that the comedy sector is a vital part of our cultural and creative industries, and we will do everything to support it.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
I thank the Leader of the House for making time this week for the debate on dementia, which was well attended, with a time limit imposed on Back-Bench speeches. However, I think she owes an apology to the proposers of the debate on the Thursday before we rose for recess, when the debate was curtailed at the Government’s response so that they could make a statement, after which you, Mr Speaker, had to adjourn the House for an hour, after individuals who wanted to speak were unable to do so, before the Government finally made a statement.
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, next Thursday there will be a statement from the Business and Trade Committee. I am glad that the right hon. Lady has continued the experiment of having Backbench Business debates after Government business, with the Windrush Day debate, which I am sure will be well attended, and indeed the estimates days that have been announced. Applications are now open, and we will consider them at our meeting on 17 June. We will give priority to the Departments that were not chosen for the estimate day debates earlier this year.
In addition, the business in Westminster Hall next week is as follows: on Tuesday there will be the debate on the United States Agency for International Development’s pause on funding and its impact on UK international development; on Thursday there will be a debate on legal recognition of humanist marriages, followed by a debate on long-term conditions; on Tuesday 17 June there will be a debate on hydrogen-powered aviation; and on Thursday 19 June there will be a debate on the role of careers education in improving social mobility, followed by a debate on Down’s syndrome regression disorder.
Over the weekend and earlier this week, we had our first cross-party delegation from India for many years. It included parliamentarians from all religions, and I know that many MPs and Members of the House of Lords had the opportunity to meet them. Two things came out of that delegation loudly and clearly: first, that the uneasy truce that exists between India and Pakistan could at any time be violated if further terrorist actions emanate from Pakistan; and secondly, that India is reaching out for support from the west on security and defence measures, and we must assist it. May we have a statement next week, probably from the Foreign Secretary, on what we in this Parliament will do to support India in its need to quash terrorism?
Lucy Powell
As ever, I thank the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee for announcing the forthcoming business and arranging for the estimates day applications to be opened up. I am sorry that he missed our last session before the recess. Perhaps he was not aware that I congratulated him and said that I hoped he had not had much sleep—I know that he had been out celebrating Tottenham winning some silverware for the first time in quite some time. That was a very good excuse not to be here. I was asked at that session about the Backbench Business Committee debate the previous week, and I made it clear that what happened was not of our own making. It was a challenging situation: we were having to deal with a press conference that was being hosted by the President of the United States and, of course, he was not that interested in the goings-on in Parliament that day, but we were keen to make sure that a statement was brought to the House at the earliest opportunity. That is definitely not an experience that any of us wants to repeat, if at all possible.
I thank the hon. Member for mentioning the delegation of Indian parliamentarians. I was hoping to meet them myself, but I was unable to do so on this occasion, but I hope to do so in future. He is right that our relationship with India is important, which is why this Government are so pleased that we have agreed an unprecedented trade deal with India. There are also, as he says, security and other issues between India and Pakistan, and this House has been kept updated on those matters and I shall make sure that continues to be the case.
Mr Speaker
To help Members, we will run business questions to around 11.45. We can help each other by moving quickly, so I call Leigh Ingham to provide a good example.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
Two amazing young women in my constituency, Liz and Grace, are part of the team from Newport high school for girls who this week competed in the Young Enterprise finals. Liz, Grace and the rest of the team set up a company from scratch, designed and manufactured a unique product and have made more than £2,400 in profits, all while doing their A-levels. As co-chair of the women and enterprise APPG, I am proud to see this home-grown talent. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating them, and may we have a debate on supporting the next generation of women to become involved in enterprise?
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
May we have a debate in Government time on the three flagrant breaches of the ministerial code committed by the Defence Secretary on Monday? For the record, the Opposition received their copy of the strategic defence review mid-afternoon, the media received it at 10.30 am, and defence companies received it at 8 o’clock in the morning. Within minutes, there were share price spikes in a number of defence stocks.
Section 8.11 of the “Ministerial Code” clearly states:
“where commercially sensitive material is involved, no copies should be made available to the media before publication.”
Mr Speaker
I gently say to the right hon. Gentleman that I understand he wants clarification, but a business question from a Front-Bench spokesperson on his own subject is not normally accepted.
Lucy Powell
Thank you for that, Mr Speaker, but I am happy to address some of the issues in that question, albeit from the right hon. Gentleman sitting on the Back Benches.
I gently remind the right hon. Gentleman that the process that was followed by the Ministry of Defence, which included making available in advance security briefings for Opposition Members and others, as well as a reading room, was exactly the same process that was followed in previous SDRs. [Interruption.] He may want to look at that. I understand that his Front-Bench boss, the shadow Defence Secretary, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), was offered that briefing and to go into the reading room—a briefing that he declined to take up. That is what was followed, as on every other occasion. That is why I said earlier that the Defence Secretary, who takes his commitments to this House incredibly seriously, wants to ensure that, for this and all future Governments, there is a process to agree so that on future occasions everybody can be clear about the expectations of timings and how things can be followed.
Lucy Powell
The hon. Member highlights just a few of the very moving and powerful impacts of that documentary, which I am sure many people have watched. It is hard to not be moved by the scale of the challenge, and the destruction in recent years, but also by the hope in that documentary that the oceans can quickly recover if we are all willing to take the steps necessary to protect it. That is why I am delighted that the Environment Secretary is going to the UN summit later this week, and it is why the Government are committed to ratifying the ocean treaty in good time.
Mr Speaker
Let us see if we can speed things up and get everybody in. If not, people will miss out.
Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)
My constituent, who has lived here for 10 years and is from Ukraine, was joined by her parents, who were fleeing the conflict. They set up a bank account when they arrived here and tried to transfer some of their money. The bank immediately shut down their bank account, which also resulted in my constituent’s bank account being shut down. There must be a number of people in this situation; it is no way to treat people who are fleeing conflict. Can we have a statement from the banking Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wycombe (Emma Reynolds), so that we can find out exactly what is going on here, and force the banks to treat people with a bit more respect?
Lucy Powell
Women’s sport has been raised a few times this morning. It will always make a popular topic for a debate, but I join my hon. Friend in congratulating her constituent and encouraging others.
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend raises the really important issue of empty listed buildings and how they could be brought back into use and made better use of. I will absolutely ensure that a Minister gives him a full reply.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
Meur ras bras, Mr Speaker. New data from the Office for National Statistics on sickness absence rates was published yesterday. As a Cornish MP, I am particularly concerned that the south-west has the highest sickness absence across the whole of the UK. Sickness absence follows poverty, and Cornwall’s poverty figures have been masked by wealthier pensioners moving there, meaning less support per capita from central Government. Does the Leader of the House agree that remote coastal areas, like Cornwall, need fairer funding settlements than those that we have had in recent years to lift people out of sickness and get them back to work?
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in thanking all those who work with Tough Enough To Care, and thank him for highlighting the important work that it does. It is still absolutely shocking that the biggest cause of death for men under the age of 50 is suicide, and the work of Tough Enough To Care and others is vital in addressing that.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can the Leader of the House grant a debate in Government time on a more robust range of censure and sanction options for serious breaches of the local government members’ code of conduct, including suspension and removal of councillors? I know of recent incidents in which, despite egregious behaviour by councillors elected unopposed, those councillors remain in post, regardless of the wishes of their community and their council.
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in thanking Gordon Moody and Redditch United football club for all the work they are doing to support people.
Government Announcements
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Leader of the House of Commons (Lucy Powell)
I hear your statement, Mr Speaker. I responded to an urgent question on a similar matter on 14 May. I reiterate the commitments I gave then. The “Ministerial Code” is clear:
“When Parliament is in session, the most important announcements of government policy should be made in the first instance in Parliament.”
That is an important principle that the Government stand by and uphold.
Since that last urgent question on 14 May, the Government have made a number of important oral statements to the House, on the infected blood inquiry, on the cross-Government review of sanctions implementation and enforcement, on the charging of individuals under the National Security Act 2023, and on the legal aid cyber-security incident. The Prime Minister has updated the House on the three trade deals that we have struck in the national interest, the Foreign Secretary has updated it on Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the Justice Secretary has responded to the sentencing review, and the Defence Secretary has made a statement on the future of the Diego Garcia military base.
This afternoon, the full conclusions of the important strategic defence review will be published and laid before this House first, with a significant statement from the Defence Secretary to follow. I am satisfied that this Government are coming to the House regularly to keep Parliament informed. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. I am not satisfied, and I think that is the key. Back Benchers on both sides should rightly hear it first. I do not care how many announcements have been made in the House; it is those that have not been made here that we should be talking about.
Lucy Powell
As I have said, the Defence Secretary will make a statement this afternoon, and I am satisfied.
I recognise that there are times when we make a judgment on when an oral statement is needed, balancing that with the rest of the day’s business and other factors, but in nearly all instances a written statement is also made, and that is an appropriate mechanism for updating the House. As well as making 153 oral statements during the current Session, we have made 673 written statements.
As I said before the recess, the ministerial code makes it clear that when Parliament is in session, announcements should be made to the House. Let me gently point out that we have only just returned from the recess—as of an hour ago—and before the recess we were at pains to ensure that the House was updated on the subject of the Diego Garcia military base before it adjourned.
The Government and I take our obligations to Parliament very seriously, Mr Speaker, and I will continue to work with you and colleagues throughout the Government to make certain that important announcements are made to the House, and that Members from across the House have ample time to consider issues and ensure that the Government are scrutinised effectively.
Jesse Norman
Is that really the best that the Leader of the House can do—an “I speak your weight” autocue recitation of points that she has made in her three previous attempts to deal with occasions when the House has been embarrassed and disregarded over the last three weeks alone? It was a hopeless miscue of a response that bordered on a contempt of Parliament itself—yet another attempt to change the subject, blame others and distract attention from the latest fiasco. Evidently the defence of the realm is not important enough to merit making its way up the list of priorities in the Government’s media handouts. Lord Robertson himself, as you have said, Mr Speaker—and I am amazed that you had to intervene on the Leader of the House during her own remarks—would be ashamed and embarrassed to think that this was being done in his name.
Just three weeks ago, the Leader of the House had to be dragged to the House over the Government’s briefing on the immigration White Paper outside the House. That came just days after they had done the same in respect of prisoner recall, the UK-US trade deal and, of course, the Chagos islands. That followed instances involving tuition fees, planning reforms and even the fiscal rules, on which you, Mr Speaker, had to reprove and chastise the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Now we have seen the unhappy sight of the Secretary of State for Defence, no less, extensively briefing the media on the decisions to deploy airborne nuclear weapons and build the next generation of submarines, before coming to the House. Perhaps, as I have said, they were not important enough to merit a mention beforehand.
Journalists have been able to read the strategic defence review since 10.30 am, while the Opposition were prevented from seeing the document until five minutes ago, precisely in order to avoid parliamentary scrutiny. All this is manifestly in breach of the ministerial code, the Nolan principles and, of course, Labour’s own manifesto, demonstrating the Government’s arrogance and complacency and their disdain for the House and for democratic accountability, and this from—the clue is in the title—the Leader of the House, whose job is to protect and safeguard the House and its Members. Unfortunately, her obvious floundering just now made the point far better than I can.
When did the Leader of the House know about these announcements, and what steps did she take to prevent the media briefings and ensure that the announcements were made to the House of Commons first? Will she now apologise for yet another high-handed Government decision for which she alone is fully responsible, in this instance, to the House?
Lucy Powell
It is nice to see the right hon. Gentleman in his place and respecting Parliament today—that is not always the case.
As I have said before, I believe strongly that the Government should be and have been making the most important announcements to the House when Parliament is in session. We have made more oral statements than the previous Government did in their entire last Session—we have made 154 statements in 140 sitting days, compared with their 72 in 101 sitting days—and we have made many written statements and answered parliamentary questions. We had the statement on Diego Garcia on the day that the deal was signed, despite difficulties with the timing. We had a statement on the US economic deal on the day that it was signed, and the Prime Minister updated the House after the EU trade deal.
As I have said, the SDR has now been given to the Opposition and is being laid before the House. There will be time for colleagues to scrutinise it and to question the Defence Secretary on it this afternoon. The Government responses to the sentencing review and to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s report on the women’s state pension age, as well as many other major announcements, such as the upgrade in defence spending, were all made to the House first.
I am curious to know whether the shadow Leader of the House raised these important issues with the previous Government when he was a Minister or a Back Bencher, because I remember many, many occasions when they disrespected this House, and I do not remember hearing his voice at the time. I remember when the Procedure Committee, I and many others wanted the then Foreign Secretary, Lord Cameron, to be accountable to the House of Commons. The previous Government did nothing about it, and I do not remember the right hon. Gentleman saying anything about that. I recall the then Culture Secretary announcing the end of the BBC licence fee and, separately, the privatisation of Channel 4 on Twitter, with no intention of coming to the House to explain those major policy changes.
The previous Prime Minister, on the first day of a very long recess, announced that he was scrapping the Government’s net zero targets—he did not come to the House to explain that. He also announced the scrapping of High Speed 2 during a conference recess and never came to the House to account for it. During covid, one of the Conservatives’ many Prime Ministers announced major changes to our way of life to the media and not to Parliament, such as the 2020 winter lockdown—he did not come here to talk about that—and the covid vaccine roll-out. When he closed the borders and then reopened them, he announced it to the media and not to Parliament. Let us not forget that the Supreme Court found that Parliament was illegally prorogued by the previous Government. Do you remember when the former Prime Minister was found to have misled Parliament? There is no greater disrespect to Parliament.
Rather than upholding the ministerial code, the previous Government ignored breaches of it time and again, with reports sitting on the Prime Minister’s desk and nothing being done about them. We, by contrast, have strengthened the ministerial code. [Interruption.] The right hon. Member for Rayleigh and Wickford (Mr Francois) laughs from a sedentary position, but we have given the independent adviser on the ministerial code the power to instigate his own investigations. Therefore, we have strengthened it.
Not only did the previous Government disrespect Parliament; they did not have enough for Parliament to do. They had a threadbare King’s Speech, with banning pedicabs the pinnacle of their ambition in their last year in government. Now that they are in opposition, they seem to be carrying on the same and hardly turn up for work. They could have used any one of their Opposition days to raise these issues, but they did not. They have many other parliamentary devices at their disposal, and they do not use them. They were a zombie Government, and now they are a zombie Opposition. The next time they bring forward an urgent question, they might want to check their own record before giving us lectures.
Mr Speaker
Order. May I thank the Leader of the House for reminding me of the mistakes of the previous Government in not coming to the Floor of the House? I would have hoped that this Government had learned from the mistakes that have just been highlighted. To try to defend what you criticise is not a way forward.
I am trying to ensure that Members on both sides of the House are allowed to question Ministers first, rather than watching announcements on Sky News. It is interesting that the SDR has been offered to journalists but that the Members here have not had the chance to see it. I agree with the Leader of the House, and I thank her again for reminding me, but let us now see the Government treat this House in the way that I expect.
Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)
Will you take a point of order now, Mr Speaker?
Mr Speaker
No, I will not, because we have to wait till the end, as you well know, Sir Roger, as one of the most senior Members.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
I think my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House is right to remind us of the many breaches of this rule by Her Majesty’s Government when the Conservative party was in power. However, in the middle of this mud-slinging, let me raise a still small voice of calm. The current Prime Minister pledged to be more transparent, open and proper in government. Will my right hon. Friend go back to the Cabinet and remind it that proper scrutiny in this House first, with untrammelled questions for an hour or more at a time, is more scrutiny than the Government would get in a press conference and is the proper place to do this? I hope she will take that message back, so that statements such as the one we are about to hear are given on the Floor of the House first.
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. As she will know from the many times I have said it before, I do regularly remind the Cabinet that this is an important aspect of being a Cabinet Minister, or indeed a Minister. We are doing our very best to make sure that there are regular oral statements to this House on important matters and that they are brought here first. In the absence of an oral statement, there is a written ministerial statement, of which notice is given the day before so that colleagues have ample time, as she says, to properly scrutinise all these announcements.
Lucy Powell
I thank the hon. Member for that. I will make no apology for the fact that we are doing lots of things—we are making lots of announcements, and we are delivering the change the country voted for—and that does bring with it competing demands. As I say, when the House is in session, statements and updates will be made to this House first. Sometimes that will be via a written ministerial statement and sometimes it will be by an oral statement—it depends.
We also have to balance statements with the rest of the day’s business. I would point out to colleagues that we have an important Second Reading debate today, with dozens and dozens of Members down to speak. We are now having two urgent questions before a very important statement and then other business as well. We do have to balance these things in the House’s interests, but the statement is being made to the House today. The Defence Secretary will shortly be in his place, and I am sure he will spend a long time answering questions on it.
Mr Speaker
I am sure that criticism was not aimed at me for granting two UQs. The reason I have granted two UQS is that the Government did not come here first with the strategic defence review. If they had, we would not be having the UQs and there would be no pressure on time.
Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)
Trust, integrity and transparency must be the watchwords of our politics, but those principles were worn extremely thin under the previous Government. What steps is the Leader of the House taking to redouble our commitment to trust and integrity, because our constituents expect no less?
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee.
Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)
I think the word the Leader of the House was looking for was “sorry”. There is much in this place which, as we know, is complicated and arcane, but the ministerial code is crystal clear on this point. The job of the Leader of the House is to represent this place and Back Benchers of all parties around the Cabinet table to make sure that this place hears things of such vital importance first. As important as public transport is, may I suggest that the defence of the realm is a little more important than the Government’s buses Bill, which will have no Divisions this evening? Will the Leader of the House please tell us why she thinks No. 10 is getting this so wrong and what she is doing to try to put it right?
James Cartlidge (South Suffolk) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your advice on the following, as I seek to set the record straight. At the weekend I became aware of an email sent to a group of journalists from the Ministry of Defence, which stated:
“We will have a reading room open for you from 1030 to Horse Guards”
on Monday.
“You will have the opportunity to read through the full embargoed SDR publication”.
After seeing that, I emailed the Secretary of State’s office on Sunday afternoon and asked whether, given that journalists would see the publication at 10.30, we could be sent a copy at 9 am. They refused. They told us we would get a copy of the statement—that is, the oral statement to the House—in the usual way. I then repeatedly asked the Minister for the Armed Forces, who is present in the Chamber, if we could get a copy of the SDR. He refused. I have now been told something else, which is that representatives of industry were allowed to see the SDR at 10.30. This is a multibillion-pound industry that is highly market-sensitive.
Mr Speaker, can I ask your advice on this point? As I understand it, the Vote Office has multiple physical hard copies of the strategic defence review, which I have not read at all, my colleagues have not read and no other parliamentary colleagues have read. It was given to me only as I came into the Chamber, so obviously I have not been able to read it. Journalists have had five hours. It is unacceptable. Can I ask if the Vote Office could, exceptionally, be asked to release it now?
Mr Speaker
I am going to come to that, but there are a couple more points. I am very disappointed. If the industry has seen this strategic defence review when Members of this House and members of the Defence Committee have not seen it, something has gone fundamentally wrong here. I really believe we need the answers. It is up to the Leader of the House, and I do not want to press her, but it might be worth her going away and getting some answers and coming back to the House. The fact that journalists, as well as defence people who have skin in the game, have been allowed to see it before MPs makes me very concerned.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. You may have noticed that I briefly exited the Chamber to see whether copies of the SDR were available in the Vote Office, and I was told, quite rightly, that no, they would be made available immediately after the Secretary of State had made his statement. If we were to have the press conferences the day after statements—not the day before, or on the same day—everybody would have time to read the report, we would have an initial stab at it, with very little sight of it on the day, and then we could go into it in more detail subsequently, as we usually do.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I have just seen the headline in The Telegraph that dropped at just after 10 o’clock this morning which says, “I’ve read the Defence Review”. This journalist must have been fully briefed and handed a copy of it, long before anybody else. Surely that is an abuse.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I wonder if the Minister wants to correct the record because, yes, I was offered a private briefing this morning, but it was absolutely clarified that I would not receive the SDR until the Minister stood up. I received it 40 minutes ago.
Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Given the seriousness of the issues—the defence of the realm is the first duty of Government, as we know—is there any merit in you, sir, considering suspending the House to allow those who are to be called to speak on behalf of their respective parties at least the courtesy that has clearly been extended to industry leaders and journalists? I believe that there is a precedent for that.
Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. Is there any way we can have a list of the commercial companies who have had sight of the review ahead of anybody else, because commercially sensitive decisions might be made that impact the defence industry and give people a market advantage?
Mr Speaker
You make the point that I was hinting at before. I am very concerned that people who have skin in the game may be able to take advantage of what is in the report. I hope that no trading has been done on the back of it, because that would be a real concern. I find it quite appalling that Members still do not have the report. The Leader of the House could, if she wishes, suggest that we allow the report, so that Members have the chance to read it. It is totally out of order that we know the report is sat there and could have been made available, but nobody has been given the chance to read it. Rather than my suspending the House—time is tight—people could go and collect a copy of the report now, and could be reading it before the next urgent question. Does the Leader of the House agree?
Lucy Powell
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. My understanding—I will check with the Defence Secretary—is that these things are normally published when the Secretary of State sits down; it is a bit like the Budget. I understand that the Opposition Front Benchers have a copy of the report now. The Defence Secretary is here; I do not know whether he is happy for it to be published earlier.
Mr Speaker
I was offered a briefing this morning, but I had already read it all in The Times; the only thing I was not offered is a copy of the strategic defence review. Business and the media have seen it. Who else might come out of the woodwork who has seen it? It is only right that Members of this House should now have an opportunity to see it, so that their questions can be informed by what is in the review. Secretary of State, are you happy to ensure that?
The Secretary of State for Defence (John Healey)
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. We have followed—[Interruption.] You want an answer from me, Mr Speaker, and I will certainly give you this: we have followed the procedure from the last defence review, when the shadow Defence Secretary, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), was a Defence Minister. I was the shadow Defence Secretary at that time. We had no advance copy of the defence review. We were not offered a briefing, which I have offered him and the other Front Benchers. I am really concerned to ensure that the House has proper access to the report, but we have been following convention. You are quite right, Mr Speaker, that copies of the defence review are in the Vote Office, as is established procedure. They would normally be made available when I sat down after my statement. In these circumstances, following your encouragement, I suggest that Members of this House be given access to them in advance of my statement.
Mr Speaker
I thank the Secretary of State for that, and I am sure that Members will receive their copies as we speak.
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
Absolutely. May I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the Prime Minister for his determined, consistent and stoic leadership in this area, which is bringing dividends to this country, and will ensure future prosperity and growth through the trade deals that he has agreed to?
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
Let me make some additions to the business that the Leader of the House has announced. Next Thursday, there will be a Select Committee statement from the Work and Pensions Committee. On Thursday 22 May there will be a debate on access to NHS dentistry, followed by a debate on dementia care. In Westminster Hall, on 13 May, there will be a debate on the impact of churches and religious buildings on communities. On Thursday 15 May there will be a debate on funding for Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Global Fund, followed by a debate on World Asthma Day. On 20 May there will be a debate on pensions for people living overseas, and on Thursday 22 May there will be a three-hour debate on the EU-UK summit.
Yesterday, the renowned charity, StandWithUs, published a report on antisemitism on university campuses. Dozens of students have given their testimony to the failure of universities to protect them and their rights. They have come out with a series of recommendations, including sanctions against universities that failed to protect students and an independent inquiry to get to the bottom of why universities are not protecting students. Can we have a statement next week from the relevant Minister on what is going to happen to make sure that Jewish students are protected on our campuses?
Robbie Moore (Keighley and Ilkley) (Con)
Baby Jack was just 16 months old when, on Boxing day 2022, he passed away from sudden unexplained death in childhood, which was incredibly heartbreaking. It is something that unfortunately we just do not know enough about. I want to commend Jack’s parents, Cheryl and Darren from Silsden, whom I have met. They have been fund- raising on this issue ever since that fateful day. This weekend they will be taking on their biggest challenge: cycling from Leeds to Liverpool along the canal. I hope that hon. Members across the House, including the Leader of the House, will join me in sending our thoughts to Cheryl and Darren and their eldest son Louis on their fortitude and determination, and wish them the very best of luck in their cycling challenge this weekend.
Lucy Powell
I am sure the whole House will join me in sending the very best to Cheryl and Darren with their fundraising activities this weekend. I am really sorry to hear about the sudden death of Baby Jack—what an awful thing for any parent to go through. That they have been able to turn that into fundraising and campaigning is truly commendable. I look forward to them hopefully passing through Manchester on their way from Leeds to Liverpool.
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I am delighted to hear about the bagpipe musicians from my hon. Friend’s constituency going to New York. That sounds like a really fantastic visit. I thank him for raising it here and join him in congratulating them on their endeavours.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
I have a beautiful four-year-old black labrador called Shadow and one of my favourite things to do, to get some exercise and clear my head, is to take her on a long walk. With the weather so gorgeous yesterday morning, I headed to Hylands park, a stunning 574-acre country park that straddles two constituencies, including mine. It is run and maintained by Chelmsford city council park staff with the help of a small army of amazing volunteers. Early in the morning, the only people we usually see are dog walkers, so there was nothing unusual about hearing dogs barking in the distance as I meandered through the woods. But it turned out that yesterday was no ordinary morning and the dogs were barking because their owner, Rebecca, had been knocked over in a canine encounter that had left her with an obviously dislocated knee. Another regular dog walker and I stayed with Rebecca, distracting her from the pain while we waited for the ambulance crew to arrive.
I would like to state for the record today just how brilliant the paramedics and hazardous area response team—otherwise known as HART—were in helping Rebecca. It was truly a privilege to observe close-up and at first hand as they put to use their vital skills and training: keeping calm, administering much-needed pain relief and eventually popping Rebecca’s knee back into place.
Will the Leader of the House join me in acknowledging and thanking the wonderful people working on the frontline of the East of England ambulance service and, indeed, all ambulance services across the United Kingdom as well as all the staff who support them, from the emergency service call handlers right the way through to the trainee paramedic technicians? They support us in our hour of need, and we never know just when that hour is coming.
Lucy Powell
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in welcoming and supporting the football regulator Bill. She is right that communities like hers in Luton, and the many communities represented across the House, strongly support the football regulator Bill, which will put fans right back at the heart of our national game, where they should be. That is why I was so surprised that the Conservatives, having really pushed and led on the issues that the Bill addresses, at the last minute set their face against this important Bill. It is shocking and shameful. I also join her in wishing Luton Town the very best in striving to secure their championship place when they play West Brom this weekend.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, on Thursday 22 May in the Chamber there will be a debate on access to NHS dentistry, which is a very popular subject among colleagues. In Westminster Hall next Tuesday, there will be a debate on parking regulation; it will start later in the day, due to our later hours in the Chamber. On Thursday 8 May, there will be a debate on cold and damp homes, followed by a debate on the potential merits of Government support for small abattoirs. On Tuesday 13 May, there will be a debate on the impact of churches and religious buildings on communities. On Thursday 15 May, there will be a debate on funding for Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Global Fund, followed by a debate on the right to maintain contact in care settings. On Tuesday 20 May, there will be a debate on pensions for people living overseas.
At the moment, we are running at more than five applications a week, which we are adding to our waiting list. By my calculations, given that we have five opportunities for Backbench Business debates on a Tuesday and Thursday in Westminster Hall, and two opportunities in the Chamber, those applying now will get a debate sometime from 17 November. Can I urge colleagues who are thinking of requesting a debate to get their request in early, particularly if they are time-sensitive? We can then attempt to grant them. Obviously, any extra time that the Leader of the House can allocate to the Backbench Business Committee would be warmly welcomed. If she could give us an update on when estimates day debates are expected to take place, that would help us considerably in framing the debates.
Today is a glorious day, the first day of May. It is Maharashtra Day and Gujarat Day, which commemorate 1 May 1960, when those two states were created. Later today, after business questions, Members have the opportunity to join us to celebrate Gujarat Day in the Grimond Room in Portcullis House. I hope that the Leader of the House, and you, Mr Speaker, will wish all Gujaratis and Maharashtrians a very happy day as they celebrate their national days. Some 37% of my electorate emanate from Gujarat originally, so I am an honorary Gujarati and will celebrate with them today. I hope that the Leader of the House will join those celebrations.
Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill: Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Leader of the House of Commons (Lucy Powell)
I beg to move,
That:
(a) at this day’s sitting any member of the Panel of Chairs may take the Chair as Deputy Speaker when requested to do so by the Speaker, without any formal communication to the House;
(b) at its rising this day this House do adjourn until Tuesday 22 April; and
(c) the following provisions shall apply to the proceedings on the Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill:
Timetable
(1)(a) Proceedings on Second Reading and in Committee of the whole House, any proceedings on Consideration and proceedings on Third Reading shall be taken at this day’s sitting in accordance with this Order.
(b) Notices of Amendments, new Clauses or new Schedules to be moved in Committee of the whole House may be accepted by the Clerks at the Table before the Bill has been read a second time.
(c) Proceedings on Second Reading and in Committee of the whole House, any proceedings on Consideration and proceedings on Third Reading shall be brought to a conclusion, if not previously concluded, at 2 pm at this day’s sitting.
Timing of proceedings and Questions to be put
(2) As soon as the proceedings on the Motion for this Order have been concluded, the Order for the Second Reading of the Bill shall be read.
(3) When the Bill has been read a second time:
(a) it shall, despite Standing Order No. 63 (Committal of bills not subject to a programme order), stand committed to a Committee of the whole House without any Question being put;
(b) proceedings on the Bill shall stand postponed while the Question is put, in accordance with Standing Order No. 52(1) (Money resolutions and ways and means resolutions in connection with bills), on any financial resolution relating to the Bill;
(c) on the conclusion of proceedings on any financial resolution relating to the Bill, proceedings on the Bill shall be resumed and the Speaker shall leave the Chair whether or not notice of an Instruction has been given.
(4) (a) On the conclusion of proceedings in Committee of the whole House, the Chair shall report the Bill to the House without putting any Question.
(b) If the Bill is reported with amendments, the House shall proceed to consider the Bill as amended without any Question being put.
(5) For the purpose of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph (1), the Chair or Speaker shall forthwith put the following Questions in the same order as they would fall to be put if this Order did not apply:
(a) any Question already proposed from the chair;
(b) any Question necessary to bring to a decision a Question so proposed;
(c) the Question on any amendment, new Clause or new Schedule selected by the Chair or Speaker for separate decision;
(d) the Question on any amendment moved or Motion made by a Minister of the Crown;
(e) any other Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded; and shall not put any other questions, other than the question on any motion described in paragraph (15)(a) of this Order.
(6) On a Motion so made for a new Clause or a new Schedule, the Chair or Speaker shall put only the Question that the Clause or Schedule be added to the Bill.
(7) If two or more Questions would fall to be put under paragraph (5)(d) on successive amendments moved or Motions made by a Minister of the Crown, the Chair or Speaker shall instead put a single Question in relation to those amendments or Motions.
(8) If two or more Questions would fall to be put under paragraph (5)(e) in relation to successive provisions of the Bill, the Chair shall instead put a single Question in relation to those provisions, except that the Question shall be put separately on any Clause of or Schedule to the Bill which a Minister of the Crown has signified an intention to leave out.
Consideration of Lords Amendments
(9) (a) Any Lords Amendments to the Bill may be considered forthwith without any Question being put; and any proceedings interrupted for that purpose shall be suspended accordingly.
(b) Proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments shall be brought to a conclusion (so far as not previously concluded) one hour after their commencement; and any proceedings suspended under sub-paragraph (a) shall thereupon be resumed.
(10) Paragraphs (2) to (7) of Standing Order No. 83F (Programme orders: conclusion of proceedings on consideration of Lords amendments) apply for the purposes of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph (9) of this Order.
Subsequent stages
(11) (a) Any further Message from the Lords on the Bill may be considered forthwith without any Question being put; and any proceedings interrupted for that purpose shall be suspended accordingly.
(b) Proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement; and any proceedings suspended under sub-paragraph (a) shall thereupon be resumed.
(12) Paragraphs (2) to (5) of Standing Order No. 83G (Programme orders: conclusion of proceedings on further messages from the Lords) apply for the purposes of bringing any proceedings to a conclusion in accordance with paragraph (11) of this Order.
Reasons Committee
(13) Paragraphs (2) to (6) of Standing Order No. 83H (Programme orders: reasons committee) apply in relation to any committee to be appointed to draw up reasons after proceedings have been brought to a conclusion in accordance with this Order.
Miscellaneous
(14) Standing Order No. 82 (Business Committee) shall not apply in relation to any proceedings to which this Order applies.
(15) (a) No Motion shall be made, except by a Minister of the Crown, to alter the order in which any proceedings on the Bill are taken, to recommit the Bill or to vary or supplement the provisions of this Order.
(b) No notice shall be required of such a Motion.
(c) Such a Motion may be considered forthwith without any Question being put; and any proceedings interrupted for that purpose shall be suspended accordingly.
(d) The Question on such a Motion shall be put forthwith; and any proceedings suspended under sub-paragraph (c) shall thereupon be resumed.
(e) Standing Order No. 15(1) (Exempted business) shall apply to proceedings on such a Motion.
(16) (a) No dilatory Motion shall be made in relation to proceedings to which this Order applies except by a Minister of the Crown.
(b) The Question on any such Motion shall be put forthwith.
(17) The start of any debate under Standing Order No. 24 (Emergency debates) to be held on a day on which the Bill has been set down to be taken as an Order of the Day shall be postponed until the conclusion of any proceedings on that day to which this Order applies.
(18) Proceedings to which this Order applies shall not be interrupted under any Standing Order relating to the sittings of the House.
(19) At today’s sitting the Speaker shall not adjourn the House until:
(a) any message from the Lords on the Bill has been received and any Committee to draw up Reasons which has been appointed at that sitting has reported;
(b) the Speaker has notified the Royal Assent to any Act agreed upon by both Houses.
(20) At the conclusion of proceedings the Speaker shall adjourn the House without putting any Question.
I do not intend to detain the House for long, as we have an important debate to follow, but may I put on record my thanks to you, Mr Speaker, for agreeing to recall Parliament today? As ever, you have been incredibly accommodating and understanding. You recognise the scale and urgency of what we need to do today, and I know that these are very important matters to you personally, and to the House as a whole. May I also thank the House staff, who have responded quickly and professionally to facilitate this extraordinary meeting of the House, and all those colleagues who are here at such short notice?
We meet in these special circumstances because the Government need to act decisively, at pace and with urgency to ensure that the steelworks blast furnaces of British Steel are maintained and kept going, saving thousands of jobs and securing our domestic production of virgin steel. The Secretary of State for Business and Trade will shortly set out the powers that he needs to do this, through the Steel Industry (Special Measures) Bill, published online this morning.
If the House agrees to this business of the House motion, the arrangements today provide for Second Reading, Committee, Report and Third Reading to be considered by the House until 2 pm. The House will then wait to consider any message from the Lords today, before adjourning again until Tuesday 22 April. I also send our thanks to Members and staff in the House of Lords for returning today. Members may be aware that the Lords sit from 12 pm for a “take note” debate on the Government’s proposals, before being expected to consider all stages of the Bill today.
I hope all Members can work together constructively today on the passage of the Bill, and I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for facilitating this important request. I hope all Members will agree to this motion, and I commend it to the House.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
I associate this side of the House with the remarks that the right hon. Lady has made about staff coming in today. We are incredibly grateful to them.
I am sure we are going to hear a lot today about urgency, moving at pace and the rest of it, but the truth is that the Government have made a total pig’s breakfast of this whole arrangement. The fact is that anyone who has been paying any attention to this story over the past few months has known that this was coming down the track. The House was sitting—[Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. We have come back on a Saturday; that does not mean it is “Crackerjack” day. We are going to listen.
Alex Burghart
The House was sitting on Monday and on Tuesday, and on those days my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) raised these issues. The fact is that the Government make bad deals for Britain when negotiating, and, as ever, they are making a bad deal. It is a huge discourtesy to the House that we saw this Bill only 90 minutes before the start of the sitting. Far-reaching powers are being given to the Government—powers not seen in legislation, really, in the past 40 years. I very much hope that the Government will apologise for the way that they have done things, for having taken their eye off the ball yet again, and for having negotiated badly for the British people.
Question put and agreed to.
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I am really sorry to hear about the redundancies at Sky, which will affect my hon. Friend’s constituents, as well as some of mine nearby. He is doing his job as a constituency MP by raising this important matter on the Floor of the House. I am sure that the company will have heard his concerns about the announcement being communicated via the media before employees were told. That is just not acceptable. One of the reasons why we are bringing forward our Employment Rights Bill is to ensure that workers have more rights in these circumstances, and that employers have an obligation to ensure that redundancies are handled sensitively, and with regard to people’s long-term interests.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
On 15 April, we will mark the 36th anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster and remember the 97 people who tragically lost their life on that dark day, as well as their families’ subsequent fight for justice. Last September, the Prime Minister gave a commitment that the Hillsborough law would be introduced in Parliament before we reached this anniversary. A duty of candour for public servants and public bodies is long overdue, and will help stop future cover-ups. It is vital that the legislation delivers on the commitments made to Hillsborough families in a meaningful way. Can the Leader of the House give an update on whether the legislation will be introduced before we rise for the Easter recess? If it will not, when we can realistically expect it?
Lucy Powell
I join my hon. Friend in congratulating the Whitburn brass band, the Scottish brass band champions, and wish them all the very best in the UK-wide national brass band championships. If I may say so, she is doing a fantastic job of blowing the trumpet on behalf of her constituents. [Laughter.] It is Easter. I wish the band all the best in the championships.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
On the business that the Leader of the House announced, I have to say it is disappointing that we do not have Backbench Business on 24 April. My reading of the business that day is that the Bill is uncontroversial and we are likely to finish early, but we will be denied the opportunity to have a debate on St George’s day, which is of course on 23 April, or a debate on Parkinson’s Awareness Month, which is April.
We are contemplating organising three 90-minute debates on 1 May, which is local election day. Colleagues may wish to be campaigning elsewhere, but that would at least allow debates on some of the motions that we have in the queue. It would help if the Leader of the House could confirm when estimates day will be in May. By my reckoning, there are only around four possible dates, and our Committee has to advertise the opportunity for people to apply for an estimates day debate, and then choose the debates.
On Tuesday 8 May, there will be a Westminster Hall debate on the persecution of Christians. When we return on 22 April, there will be a debate on residential estate management companies; I remind colleagues that we will sit Monday hours on that day, so the debate will start at 11.30 am, rather than at 9.30 am. On Thursday 24 April, there will be a debate on Lesbian Visibility Week, followed by a debate on the trading relationship with the European Union, which will be quite topical, given the tariff arrangements that have just been announced. On Tuesday 29 April, there will be a debate on compensation for criminal injuries.
Most of our allies, including the United States, have indicated their objection to the reappointment of Francesca Albanese as the UN special rapporteur on the occupied territories. This is a woman who has attempted to justify the atrocities on 7 October 2023, and repeatedly excused the atrocities committed by terrorists, yet she is apparently going to be reappointed by the UN. Our allies have called this out, but there has been total silence from the Foreign Secretary and nothing from any of our Ministers, so may we have a statement on how the Government will instruct our representatives at the UN to vote? Indeed, will they register their strong objections to her reappointment?
Mr Speaker
Just to help the House, I think we will say that these questions will last another hour or thereabouts. Hopefully we will get everybody in, if we help each other. Let us have a good example from Dave Robertson.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
Nether Stowe school in my constituency—my old school—has just completed a consultation on closing its sixth-form provision. This has caused a huge amount of stress for kids who are prepping for their GCSEs. They do not know where they will be able to do their A-levels. The other school sixth forms in Lichfield at Friary and King Edward are already heavily oversubscribed, so there is a risk that we will lack academic places for people to do A-levels when they reach 16. A month ago, I asked Conservative-controlled Staffordshire county council to share its planning for how many sixth-form and academic places we need in Lichfield. It has completely failed to provide that information. I need to know that there is a plan, so that everybody who reaches the age of 16 can take courses that are appropriate for them. Will the Leader of the House arrange for me to meet the relevant Minister urgently to discuss post-16 provision in Lichfield?
Lucy Powell
I will try to keep my answers short, Mr Speaker. I am really sorry to hear about the closure of Nether Stowe school’s sixth form. I know that A-level provision is a challenge in many areas, and it sounds like it is in Lichfield. I am sure that Baroness Smith, the Minister responsible for further education, will be happy to meet my hon. Friend, and I am happy to arrange that meeting for him.
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
I thank my hon. Friend for raising this issue. I am hugely sympathetic to families who have suffered from hormone pregnancy tests. She will be aware that Baroness Cumberlege’s independent review highlighted the healthcare system’s failure to listen to patients’ concerns around those tests. She will also be aware that the causal links have been reviewed many times, but I will ensure that Ministers get back to her with a full update.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
As Members of Parliament, we have many issues that demand our attention, but few that can be more important than ensuring children are well fed with healthy, nutritious food. I am sure that Members across the House wish that all families are able to provide that every day for their children, but we must face the tragic reality that many children go hungry. In government, the Liberal Democrats were proud to introduce universal free school meals for infants. We ensured that every child could access a healthy lunch each day, because when children go hungry, they make less progress and have poorer behaviour and health outcomes.
A free school lunch may be the only healthy cooked food that some children get, or even their only meal of the day. That is shameful in a country such as England. That is why we have tabled amendments to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill that would increase the after- tax threshold for free school meals to £20,000 a year, expanding eligibility for free school meals to a further 900,000 children. We are also committed to introducing auto-enrolment for those who are eligible for free school meals, ensuring that children are automatically considered eligible when their parents apply for relevant benefits or financial support.
Does the Leader of the House agree that no child should go hungry in 2025, and will she ask the Government to embrace cross-party working to support the Liberal Democrats’ long-standing calls for free school meals when the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill returns to Parliament next week?
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, if we are given Thursday 3 April in the Chamber, there will be a debate on the impact of digital platforms on UK democracy, followed by a debate on access to sport and physical education in schools. It would be helpful if she indicated whether we will get Tuesday 8 April, the day before the recess, and the date for estimates in May.
In addition, on Tuesday, there will be a debate in Westminster Hall on retrospective accountability of the construction industry, which many colleagues are concerned about. On Thursday, there will be a debate on the prevention of drugs death and, in response to the hon. Member for Stourbridge (Cat Eccles), the first anniversary of the Hughes report on valproate and pelvic mesh. On 1 April, there will be a debate on eating disorders and on Thursday 3 April a debate on waste incinerators, followed by a debate on Government support for Thames Water. On 8 April, there will be a debate on persecution of Christians.
Today is Purim, when Jewish people throughout the world celebrate their deliverance from the first attempt of genocide of Jewish people at the hands of the then Persian empire. Tomorrow is Holi, when Hindus throughout the world will celebrate the deliverance of Vishnu from Holika, the evil witch who was consumed by fire. For colleagues who are going to Holi festivals for the first time, I advise them not to wear business attire because colours will be thrown and they will be coated in various different colours, and they will probably not be able to clean the clothes afterwards.
Will the Leader of the House join me in wishing Jewish people everywhere chag Purim sameach and all Hindus happy Holi?
Lucy Powell
I absolutely recognise what my hon. Friend describes. I recently met the Canal & River Trust. I am not sure whether there is a canal that connects her constituency to mine, but I could definitely get on a barge and go from my constituency to hers—
Lucy Powell
And to yours, too, Mr Speaker—we are very well connected in our region in that regard.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right: canals not only provide the blue space that many of our towns and city centres need, but offer tourist attractions and many other assets. We should support the work of the Canal & River Trust.
Business of the House
Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right; the flood assets we inherited were in the poorest condition on record after many years of under-investment. That is why we are putting more money into flood assets and have launched the floods resilience taskforce. I will ensure that my hon. Friend is kept updated on how those things will affect her constituency.
Marie Goldman (Chelmsford) (LD)
As the Leader of the House has already noted, today is World Book Day, and I would like to say a big thank you to Barnes Farm primary school in my constituency for inviting me in yesterday to open its brand new library. One in seven state primary schools in the UK do not have a dedicated library or reading space, and almost 1 million children in the UK do not have a book of their own. As such, it was wonderful to meet year 5 students and representatives of Barnes Farm student council, who were very enthusiastic about their new library. It is fantastic to know that those students will have access to such a facility for a long time to come.
At Prime Minister�s questions on 8 January, I raised the plight of community pharmacies. They are struggling to stay afloat due to the unfair terms of their NHS contracts, which often mean that they have to buy drugs that they dispense for more than the NHS reimburses them. The Prime Minister asked me to follow up with more details, which I did that afternoon. Despite chasing, I am yet to receive a reply from the Department of Health and Social Care, to which my inquiry was passed.
Community pharmacies cannot wait. The National Pharmacy Association projects that nearly 1,000 pharmacies will close by the end of 2027. There is no guaranteed funding for Pharmacy First beyond the end of this month. This is a critical issue that the Government need to address urgently. I know that the Leader of the House takes seriously the timeliness of replies from Ministers and Departments, so will she let the House know what further steps she is taking to ensure that issues such as protecting our vital community pharmacies are given the swift and full attention they deserve?
Lucy Powell
My hon. Friend is a great advocate for his constituency on this and other matters. Flooding affects his area, as it does many others. As I have said, this Government are finally turning the oil tanker around when it comes to our flood resilience. I will ensure that the relevant Minister hears his call today. We have had regular statements and debates on flooding, but I will ensure that we continue to have them.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
Mr Speaker, I thank you and your Deputies for facilitating the estimates day debates yesterday and allowing the maximum number of people to contribute. When we come to the full estimates�in May, we believe�if we can be advised of the dates so that we can do the processing of the applications, that would be appreciated.
In addition to the business that the Leader of the House has announced, if we are given Thursday 27 March, there will be a debate on St Patrick�s day and Northern Irish affairs, followed by a debate on the 10th anniversary of the Modern Slavery Act 2015. We now have a queue of debates for the Chamber that will last until the summer recess. We will be grateful for every Thursday and any time that can be given, particularly if the House is going to rise early on Government business.
In addition, the business in Westminster Hall on Tuesday 11 March will include a debate on the governance of English rugby union. On Thursday 13 March, there will be a debate on educational opportunities for young carers. On Tuesday 18 March�with your agreement, Mr Speaker�there will be a debate on free school meals. On Thursday 20 March, there will be a debate on British Sign Language Week and Government support for the tourism industry. On Tuesday 25 March, there will be a debate on the retrospective accountability of the construction industry. On Thursday 27 March, there will be a debate on the prevention of drugs deaths, followed by a debate on the first anniversary of the Hughes report on valproate and pelvic mesh.
Yesterday, the External Affairs Minister from India, Shri Jaishankar, was attacked when he was leaving a public venue where he had been addressing an audience of Indian people in this country. He was attacked by Khalistani thugs. That is against the Geneva convention, and it appears that the police and the security forces failed to ensure that he was made safe. That is an affront to democracy, and an affront to our friends and allies in India. We need to make sure that does not happen again. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the Home Secretary or an appropriate Minister makes a statement to the House about what protection we will have to ensure that visitors to this country are safe?
Mr Speaker
Order. Many Members are here for the International Women�s Day debate, so I expect to run business questions until about midday.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
The Budget turned the world, or at least the future of family farms, upside down. Ever since then, we have seen mounting evidence of the impact that the changes to inheritance tax, business property relief and agricultural property relief will have on family farms. That evidence has come from the industry, from industry experts and from tax experts. There is also mounting concern among Government Back Benchers about the impact that the changes will have on farmers in their constituencies up and down the country, and that concern is reflected on our own Benches. Given the impact on family farms and the future of food security in the country, will the Leader of the House please consider granting a debate in the Chamber on the family farm tax and what we can do to mitigate its impacts?
Lucy Powell
I know that you have strong views on these matters, Mr Speaker, as president of the Rugby Football League�views that I share. My hon. Friend will appreciate that I cannot comment on particular nomination applications, but I share his concern, as I know you do, Mr Speaker�you often take the opportunity to share it with us�that rugby league, which is a great northern sport, should get better recognition in our honours system.
Mr Speaker
We must wish Billy well. He is the greatest convert from rugby union who came to rugby league. Nobody has ever scored tries like Billy Boston.
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
May we have a debate on access to banking services in small towns and rural communities? For years, big banks have treated loyal customers very badly�they have shut branches and reduced services, especially in more rural and remote areas, such as my constituency in the Scottish Borders�and last weekend I had to contact cash machine providers because Selkirk and Eyemouth ran out of cash. Will the Leader of the House back my call so that the residents of small towns and rural communities can get access to the cash and banking services they need?
Lucy Powell
I will absolutely join my hon. Friends in celebrating Emily Rizk�s fantastic work and her achievement. I will also join my hon. Friend in agreeing that youth services and centres, which have been completely hollowed out in recent years, play a vital role in supporting young people, keeping them out of other activities that we might not want them to do. That is why we are committed to the Young Futures programme and many other initiatives.
Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)
I declare my interest as vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary media group and chair of the all-party parliamentary group on freedom of speech.
Last month I found myself in somewhat rare agreement with the Chancellor when she challenged Britain�s regulators to create a regulatory environment that unlocks innovation and investment. Our media is one the sectors in which we have seen really good growth over the past few years, with huge diversification right across the sector, but there is a concern about the attitude of regulators, which might undermine that growth potential.
I think specifically of cases highlighted recently in an opinion piece by my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin), in which Ofcom fined GB News 10 times more for doing a question time event with the Conservative party leader than it fined another channel for broadcasting antisemitic tropes. I worry that that attitude towards policing the media, which seems to focus more on politics than prejudice, may act as a barrier to others coming into the sector. Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate on the media sector, the role of regulation and freedom in our sector?
Lucy Powell
I think the right hon. Gentleman began by saying that he found himself in the unusual position of agreeing with the Chancellor. Fear not; I do not think he and I will find ourselves in the unusual position of agreeing on much any time soon, but I respect his views on many things. Our regulators play an important role. We absolutely support free speech, but we also ensure that there is fairness and balance in our media and that we protect people from disinformation and misinformation and from some of the problems we have seen.