Shared Parental Leave and Pay (Bereavement) Bill

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

2nd reading
Friday 26th January 2024 Commons Chamber

[James Daly]

That is absolutely correct. Obviously there are bad employers, but the colleagues I know who run their own businesses, who value their employees, would certainly not resile from their responsibilities to those employees. I appreciate the point about legislation, but we must have faith that employers will rise to the challenge. I think very few employers—I am sure there are some bad examples—would resile from that challenge.

Before us we have a Bill that states Parliament’s clear view that a grave injustice must be remedied. It is an honest Bill that says it is the start of a journey, a discussion not only about how we can build on the Bill, but how flexible working and other employment legislation can develop and respond to the modern economy. I have severe concerns about flexible working from home. My local authority tells me that a lot of people are no longer working in the town centre, which is having a hugely detrimental impact on the high street. The Bill is part of sensible and pragmatic employment legislation, and part of an ongoing response to the modern economy and modern needs that understands the nuances and differences in people’s lives.

Any Bill that touches a person’s life in a positive way should be fought for, and this is a good Bill. I encourage the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake), to think about the points our hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) made about bereavement counselling. There is in my constituency a wonderful charity that deals with the consequences for parents of suicide and supports parents and carers in those circumstances. In this ongoing debate, we need to think about how the state can invest in services that give people the best chance to come to terms with horrific events. We are a good Parliament, ours is a good country, and this debate shows that. It shows humanity and reflects our belief that employers will rise to the challenge the Bill sets. I think Aaron and Tim will forever be proud of what has happened here today.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Monday 20th March 2023 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call Neale Hanvey—not here.

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

In 2021, only about 10% of rape allegations were referred by the police to the Crown Prosecution Service. The figure is even lower when we take into account other sexual offending. Has my hon. Friend ever received a satisfactory explanation from the police for such a lamentably poor referral rate?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Tuesday 18th October 2022 Commons Chamber

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

The Justice Committee —[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Alicia Kearns) is going to have to take her seat. She cannot just stand there while we are in the middle of questions.

[James Daly]

The Justice Committee, of which I am a member, published our report on IPP—imprisonment for public protection—sentences on 28 September. There was a very clear recommendation that all IPP prisoners currently in custody should be resentenced, something which I wholeheartedly support. Could I ask my hon. Friend to confirm the timeframe for the Government’s response to the Justice Committee report? Further, what immediate steps are being put in place to support IPP prisoners currently struggling in a custodial environment?

Pets (Microchips)

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

1st reading
Tuesday 12th July 2022 Commons Chamber

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision regarding pets with microchips; and for connected purposes.

This is the third time I have stood up to present this Bill—make of that what you will, Mr Speaker—but we keep going. I also stand here because of an important member of my family: not my wife Joanne or my two sons, who are in the Public Gallery today, but my black Labrador Bertie, who at the moment is happily in doggy day care in Bury. He is a much-loved member of my family. This is a Bill for pet owners and pet lovers who value their pet cats and dogs as members of their family.

My Pets (Microchips) Bill aims to bring into law two campaigns that are due to the efforts of others—Tuk’s law and Gizmo’s law. Gizmo’s law is a campaign that emanates from my own Bury North constituency, hence the reason I am proud to stand here. I pay tribute to Helena Abrahams, Wendy Andrew and the whole team at Gizmo’s Legacy, who have done an incredible job. Tuk’s law is a four-year campaign by Sue Williams and Dawn Ashley. It has been an honour to work with Sue and Dawn over a number of years on this matter, with the great assistance of Dominic Dyer.

What is my Bill about? Tuk’s law is a campaign to create a new law that would mean that veterinary surgeons would be legally required to scan for rescue back-up contact details on microchips and confirm that the owner of the animal is actually the person presenting the animal, prior to euthanasia, if the animal can be treated. The campaign highlights an issue that I was horrified by when I first became aware of it. We have a pandemic in this country of healthy dogs being taken to vets and put down or euthanised without any reference to their ownership or having their microchip scanned.

What is rescue back-up? It is registration on a microchip. Rescue organisations and breeders register their details on the original database as a secondary contact as part of the adoption contract or bill of sale. In times of vulnerability, the secondary contact is there to prevent the animal being unnecessarily euthanised and to alert the veterinarian that an alternate is in place. Tuk’s law calls for two things: first, to establish legal ownership, and secondly, for a legal requirement on the veterinary surgeon to scan for a rescue back-up.

As we speak today, there is no legal requirement for vets to do that, but there should not be unfair criticism of the veterinary profession. During the time I have been presenting these Bills to the House, a voluntary code of conduct has been entered into by the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. I am extremely grateful for the step it has taken, but the problem remains. Euthanasia remains solely at the discretion of a veterinarian and is not a legal requirement. Animals can still be subjected to unsubstantiated accusations of health or behaviour issues and there is no obligation to seek verification or alternative options to euthanasia. With rising veterinarian and insurance costs, economic euthanasia is likely to rise in the near future, and the rescues’ and breeders’ commitment to the safety of their animals’ long-term needs has to be acknowledged and should be acted on in all circumstances.

The rescue back-up provision allows time for comprehensive assessments, healthcare checks and rehoming support, and guarantees that any life-ending decision is based on the animal’s best interests, with all facts and alternative options known. For any dog owner in this place, the idea that our animal, as a healthy animal, could be taken and euthanised without our consent, for whatever reason, and without a second option being sought, is something that legislation needs to remedy. This campaign is backed by of thousands of people throughout the country.

As I said, Gizmo’s law is a proud Bury North campaign. Gizmo’s law is about the other end of the life spectrum. It is about cats that are sadly deceased. All too often in hon. Members’ constituencies and boroughs throughout this country, if a cat is sadly involved in an accident or dies by whatever means, if the local authority is called in, the step that is generally taken is to put that animal, without reference to the owner and without microchipping it, into landfill. That is not acceptable. Cats are part of our families—part of who we are. I know you would completely agree with that, Mr Speaker.

Gizmo’s law is a fully funded campaign where each local authority in the country will be provided with a scanner and legally required to bag the cat that has been killed in tragic circumstances, to record where it was found, and to scan the microchip and search the six databases that are open to cats that have been microchipped. That would allow cat owners to be reunited with their much-loved pet. If an animal is part of your family, it does not matter which stage of its life it is at—you want to know what has happened to it.

That requirement is not greatly bureaucratic or time-consuming. It is cost-neutral. It is simply asking local authorities to scan a microchip and to contact owners. There truly cannot be anything unreasonable about that. Sadly, however, I have numerous examples of councils throughout the country that simply ignore this, and the cat is thrown into landfill with the owner knowing nothing more about it.

This is about the Berties; it is about all the cats; it is about everyone who views animals as having as much right as any other member of the family. This is a passionate campaign. I have the honour to stand here but I go back to Helena, Wendy, Sue and Dawn—to all those people who every single day are going out loving, protecting and caring for their animals.

This is hopefully a matter that the Government can take further. If the Minister were given an opportunity, he would talk about the consultation on the issue that closed in May. The Government are taking positive steps in respect of looking at the issue of microchipping. I am incredibly grateful for the work of Ministers throughout the period I have been trying to persuade them of the merits of this legislation. It is part of a conversation that will hopefully bring Tuk’s law and Gizmo’s law into statute.

[Mr Speaker]

Can I just say that Attlee is fully supportive of what you are trying to do?

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered,

That James Daly, Mark Eastwood, Jim Shannon, Saqib Bhatti, Sir Gavin Williamson, Anthony Mangnall, Mark Logan, Aaron Bell, Jake Berry, Damien Moore, Nickie Aiken and Paul Bristow present the Bill.

James Daly accordingly presented the Bill.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 28 October, and to be printed (Bill 139).

Online Safety Bill: Programme (No. 2)

Ordered,

That the Order of 19 April 2022 in the last Session of Parliament (Online Safety Bill: Programme) be varied as follows:

(1) Paragraphs (4) and (5) of the Order shall be omitted.

(2) Proceedings on Consideration and Third Reading shall be taken in two days in accordance with the following provisions of this Order.

(3) Proceedings on Consideration—

(a) shall be taken on each of those days in the order shown in the first column of the following Table, and

(b) shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the times specified in the second column of the Table.

Business of the House

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Thursday 24th March 2022 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We did not get stuck on the points, so I call James Daly.

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

Many hon. Members have constituents who have travelled to the Polish-Ukraine border as part of the humanitarian efforts to support refugees fleeing Putin’s brutal illegal war. Those with whom I have had the opportunity to speak identified real concerns regarding the safeguarding processes in place to protect vulnerable refugees. I have been told of reports of women in particular being brutalised and attacked by criminals and, horrifyingly, being the victims of sex trafficking. Will my right hon. Friend make time for a debate to allow Members the opportunity to discuss how the international community can work together to find solutions to this horrifying problem?

[Mark Spencer]

I had not heard those reports myself, but what my hon. Friend has raised is extremely disturbing. I thank him for his question and I will bring this to the attention of the Home Secretary and raise it with her on his behalf.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Tuesday 13th April 2021 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Yes, but unfortunately Jonathan Gullis is not here. You managed to jump in before James Daly could speak. Not to worry. We will go to James Daly.

[James Daly]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Encouraging an active lifestyle is a crucial part of tackling the obesity challenge that our country faces. Does my hon. Friend agree that local authorities, working with partner agencies, should invest in iconic community venues such as Gigg Lane in my constituency to house a wide range of public health services and provide inspirational settings for young people to take part in sport, no matter what their background or personal circumstances?

His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Monday 12th April 2021 Commons Chamber

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

On 21 October 1954, it was a rainy cold day in Bury, but thousands lined the streets of the town to welcome Her Majesty the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh on their visit. There is a wonderful Pathé newsreel recording the event, but the day lives on in the minds of those who were there. Iona was a young pupil who, with her classmates, stood open-mouthed, watching through the railings on Knowsley Street, as Her Majesty and His Royal Highness emerged on to the balcony to open the brand-new Bury town hall. She told me today of the

“complete and utter excitement to see the Queen and the Duke.”

Pat was 10 years of age, and remembers to this day where she stood with her friends, facing the town hall, with rain pouring down. She said that

“no one had televisions, the Queen and Duke seemed like distant figures, so to be able actually to see them in our town was an indescribable thrill and something I will never forget.”

From the smiles and excitement at those days 67 years ago, the people of Bury, Ramsbottom and Tottington have had the Queen and the Duke as constants in their lives. They have seen Prince Philip live a life of duty to our country and every part of it—a man who was a loving consort and everlasting support to Her Majesty the Queen, but who was also determined to make a positive difference. He was a naval hero, a founder member of the World Wildlife Fund, and a champion of science and technology.

There are many other achievements too numerous to mention, but Prince Philip’s legacy continues to inspire young people through the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award scheme. In Greater Manchester, 11,000 young people are currently taking part in the DofE, and it was the Duke’s passion for education that brought him to Bury again, in 1976, to visit pupils at Bury Grammar School. It was reported that

“he talked and joked easily with a surprisingly large number of boys, who were astounded and gratified that even the fortunes of Bury FC had not entirely escaped royal notice.”

He was a truly great man, famous for a wonderful sense of humour, as comfortable running international organisations as talking with young people about their local football team. Together with my constituents in Bury, Ramsbottom and Tottington, we give our very sincere condolences to Her Majesty the Queen, and may His Royal Highness Prince Philip rest in peace—a life well lived.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Can I make an appeal to everyone? If you want to get people in, you have to try to help one another.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Thursday 11th February 2021 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Let us head up to the north-west with James Daly.

[James Daly [V]]

[Inaudible.]

[Mr Speaker]

There is a little hiccup, I think. We are definitely going to have to move on.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Wednesday 16th September 2020 Commons Chamber

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 16 September.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Prime Minister; congratulations on the christening.

Planning Process: Probity

Debate between Lindsay Hoyle and James Daly

Thursday 11th June 2020 Commons Chamber

[James Daly (Bury North) (Con)]

While the Conservative Mayor in the West Midlands is getting homes built by making the best use of brownfield sites, the Labour Mayor in London keeps missing his housing targets and the Labour Mayor of Greater Manchester proposes ripping up the green belt against the wishes of my constituents. Is it only the Conservatives that are able to get it right on housing?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Unfortunately, we need to get the question right. The Urgent Question is certainly not about Manchester, and certainly not about that. [Interruption.] I think it is for me to decide. It might be helpful if Members were to go and read what the Urgent Question is about, and then we can link the two. I call Rachel Hopkins.