Oral Answers to Questions

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Monday 2nd November 2026 Commons Chamber

[Matthew Pennycook]

Due to my quasi-judicial role in the planning system, I cannot comment on the detail of the emerging plan, and I am afraid I cannot meet my hon. Friend to discuss it. The plan, the sites included in it and the proposed main modifications have been subject to several rounds of consultations throughout the examination process. It is for the independent inspectors to consider the responses to the consultations and set out next steps.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Following this summer’s wildfires, we saw that the devolution of fire policy was no barrier to mutual aid co-operation between the UK Government and the Welsh Government. Can the Minister tell me how any additional air firefighting capability will be allocated fairly across the nations of the United Kingdom?

[Angela Rayner]

I commend the fire services across Wales, England and Scotland, given the challenges they faced. I know that aerial support was needed in Wales, and we looked at that as part of the wildfire summit that we held. We will continue to work with them and that aerial support will be available across the UK so that people can use it when they need it.

Rough Sleeping and Good Growth Funds

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Monday 26th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank my hon. Friend for making that important point. She is absolutely right: in many inner urban areas, we find a lot of people without recourse to public funds. It is vital that local authorities exercise discretion about local connections and people who have no recourse to public funds, which should not be a barrier to accessing support. Local authorities have to assess individuals based on their needs, including accommodation, and refer them to additional and appropriate services to help them.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

I recently attended a veterans breakfast at HMP Berwyn, the huge prison that serves north Wales and much of north-west England. I was told by representatives of veterans charities that arranging housing across the border—particularly for veterans, many of whom do not have family associations with local authorities—is particularly difficult. Could the Minister look into cross-border issues in relation to prisoner release, particularly across the border between England and Wales?

[Florence Eshalomi]

I am happy to look into that and come back to the right hon. Lady.

Wildfires: UK-Welsh Government Co-operation

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 13th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about learning from best practice across the United Kingdom.

I pay tribute to the firefighters of the South Wales fire and rescue service and the 22 other fire services around the country who came to Blaenavon’s aid in the summer. I also thank Torfaen county borough council, Natural Resources Wales, Gwent police and the 110 military personnel who helped to combat the wildfires. I also recognise those from the Blorenge Commoners Association, local farmers, businesses and constituents who rallied together over the summer to tackle this devastating event. I also thank the Wales Office Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff North (Anna McMorrin), for visiting Torfaen recently and listening to the concerns of local people. I say first and foremost, as I thank all those on the frontline, that we have to learn the lessons of this summer. I am afraid such fires will become more frequent, and putting in place a proper, structured response for next summer will be crucial. “Fire and Rescue National Framework for Wales 2026” identifies climate change as likely to increase the incidence and severity of weather-related events, and it highlights the possibility of wildfire risk shifting or extending.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

The right hon. Member is very kind in giving way.

Military assistance to the civil authorities was not available for the wildfires on the Rhinogydd, which burned for two weeks and were so substantial that they could be seen from space. Does the right hon. Member agree that it is welcome that the Prime Minister has indicated an interest in commissioning a UK-wide aerial firefighting capability, which would be accessible to devolved Governments? Would that be a good result from today’s debate?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I am certainly keen to have very substantial results from both this debate and the summit. The right hon. Lady is absolutely right to highlight the importance of that support and its availability across the United Kingdom.

In putting my speech together, I was assisted by local people. If I may, I will briefly quote some of them, because I think this is important. Anthony Watkins says:

“Unlike in the North of England and Scotland, the Fire and Rescue Services in Wales have less experience of tackling wildfires in large areas of peatland. Coordinating training with experienced firefighters in England and Scotland would provide invaluable expertise to the Welsh Services”.

Sara Warman argues for a new approach to land management. She asks the Welsh Government in particular to

“work alongside land managers to develop a dedicated Welsh Wildfire Strategy, provide meaningful post-fire recovery support, review fuel-load management policies, strengthen emergency response capability, and formally recognise commoners and graziers as operational partners in both wildfire prevention and emergency response”.

Indeed, co-operation—that word is in the motion—between the UK Government and the Welsh Government to equalise access to substantial recovery funding and resources is very important. At the moment, there are indeed disparities. To give an example, the permitted burning season in Wales is two weeks shorter than in England. Of course there will be distinctions, but the point, which has been made a couple of times now, about learning from best practice across the UK is absolutely crucial.

In advance of today’s debate, I also spoke to the South Wales fire and rescue service, which said that

“we need a sustainable approach to specialist capability and surge funding, together with stronger land-management and cross-government planning.”

The case I want to make today is about restoration, renewal and resilience. That extra support is needed very badly by my local community. I thank, first of all, Torfaen county borough council, which has already provided £50,000. We now need others to step up as well, and I will give one example. The North York Moors national park authority was awarded up to £3.2 million to recover from the devastating peat fires of 2025, through the nature for climate peatland grant scheme. The equivalent scheme in Wales is a lot smaller at the moment. It can award only about £10,000 to £250,000, so I urge the Welsh Government, in the first instance, to provide specific additional funding for the situation in Torfaen. Ministers in Cardiff Bay should look at how the money for the North York Moors national park authority was calculated, and provide fair funding for the peat fires that we have suffered in Torfaen.

I know that the UK Government are holding a wildfire summit to look at all the issues and, as the Minister would expect, I will be pressing the UK Government to provide appropriate support as well. When the Minister winds up the debate, I hope she can commit to co-ordinating on a regular basis with the Welsh Government, to MPs with affected constituencies being able to attend the summit, and to making sure that those on the frontline who have been affected have their voices heard.

--- Later in debate ---

[Florence Eshalomi]

I will come on to that point, but I agree with my right hon. Friend. One of the reasons that the Prime Minister is calling the summit is to address that issue and to consider the national capability to respond. We want to make sure that we do not have a situation where we have more wildfires.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

My understanding is that North Wales fire and rescue service commissioned the provision of military aid to the civil authorities, and the Welsh Government backed it up. We need clarity, but the fundamental point is that it appears that across the United Kingdom, we have a real shortage of trained pilots and the equipment they need to bring water to fire situations in remote places. I would be interested to hear the Minister’s response to that point.

[Florence Eshalomi]

I thank the right hon. Lady for raising that important point; those are key areas. It is about making sure we have the right people across the table when the summit is held. The summit cannot just be dictated by Whitehall; we must work on the ground with the devolved nations to make sure that the key people are around the table so that we can get the best solutions going forward.

Although fire and rescue policy is devolved, so each devolved Government is responsible for arrangements in their nation, the impacts and challenges of wildfires remain constant. We work in tandem as we face shared challenges. Tackling wildfires is a good example of where practical co-operation, drawing on mutual aid and specialist capability, sharing learning and co-operating on planning for complex incidents, can make a real difference. We saw the value of such co-ordination in Wales in the development of the national wildfire capability pilot earlier this year. The pilot established six specialist teams, with vehicles, equipment and expert training, that are ready to be deployed in response to significant incidents. Not only do the two teams from south Wales form part of this programme, but their expertise has been instrumental in increasing resilience across the UK.

Despite the advances, the severity of this year’s incidents exposes areas where arrangements must and can improve, including cross-border co-ordination, consistent data, forecasting public warnings, and the way that operational learning is shared. Aerial firefighting is another area that we need to re-examine, including how we most effectively utilise capability across the four nations. This is vital in ensuring that firefighters on the ground get the best possible support when the terrain, scale or accessibility makes their jobs especially difficult. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen and other Members have mentioned, the Government will hold a wildfire summit this autumn in response to these challenges, bringing together fire chiefs, the National Fire Chiefs Council, the Fire Brigades Union, and other key organisations, to turn the lessons from 2026 wildfires into action. It is vital to ensure that key organisations, local constituents and Members of Parliament are involved in that summit.

Holocaust Memorial Day

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Thursday 29th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

It is an honour to be here, representing my Dwyfor Meirionnydd constituents and Plaid Cymru, to remember, first, the 6 million Jewish children, women and men murdered in the Holocaust, and also the millions more murdered in the Nazi persecution of other communities, which many other Members have mentioned.

I hand my greatest congratulations to the hon. Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) on his excellent introduction, and to the hon. Member for Warrington North (Charlotte Nichols). We will bear in mind those words:

“history is someone else’s story; memory is my story.”

Of course, there has also been reference to our history in the United Kingdom. When we look abroad, it is very important that we know what has happened here.

As we commemorate the victims of the Holocaust, we remember other atrocities: the Holodomor in Ukraine, and genocide against the Armenians, and in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur. Forgive me, but that is not, and cannot be, an exhaustive list. There have been, there are and there will be other crimes of genocide. We cannot comfort ourselves by presuming that these events are consigned to history.

The convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide is the treaty that criminalises genocide. The definition is deliberately narrow:

“any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

We know that this is happening now, and that it will happen in the future. We need international bodies and the rules-based order to hold people to account for genocide, to define it, and to take criminal steps as necessary. We know that we need that, because we can look back and learn that from history.

In the noise and confusion of present events, we are required to call out genocidal actions, wherever and by whomever they are committed. It is our duty to be the watchdogs warning against genocide, be it in Myanmar against the Rohingya Muslims, in China against the Uyghur Muslims, or in Gaza against the people of Palestine.

The International Court of Justice is, as we speak, deciding on the application of the convention of genocide to Myanmar. This decision will be of immense significance in relation to forced displacement and Myanmar’s military attacks on the Rohingya. If the Court rules that mass deportation was a motive, not a defence, for genocide, that may become a precedent for a similar ruling against the Israeli Government; it is important that that is said today.

The theme for International Holocaust Memorial Day this year is “Bridging Generations”. It is a reminder that the responsibility of remembrance lives on through not only survivors, but their descendants, and all of us. It is also a reminder of our fragile link to the Holocaust. A 2026 study from the Claims Conference shows that approximately 196,000 Jewish holocaust survivors are still with us. They are a living testimony to the horrors imposed by Nazi Germany, and a lesson from history to never repeat those horrors. They are also ageing. The median age of Jewish holocaust survivors is 87. By preserving the link with our past, we can ensure its retelling. It is vital that we keep listening to and sharing their testimonies, so that future generations can understand how distortions of truth can lead to the greatest crime of all: genocide.

The manipulation of truth is a vital component of genocide. The Nazis played on prejudice and stereotypes to scapegoat and dehumanise people they regarded as subhuman. The Nazi regime also practised a propaganda of deception by hiding details about the “final solution”; there were press controls to prevent the public reading statements by the allies condemning Nazi crimes. One booklet printed in 1941 glowingly reported that in occupied Poland, German authorities had put Jewish people to work, built clean hospitals, set up soup kitchens, and provided Jewish people with newspapers and vocational training. The authority of the written word and the broadcast word was abused to manipulate the truth.

[Carla Denyer]

The right hon. Member is giving a most powerful speech. On her point about false narratives, I wonder whether she agrees that it is so important to distinguish between legitimate criticism of the actions of a state, and hate directed towards people because of their religion. It is worrying to have heard remarks in today’s debate—a debate on the Holocaust, of all things—that seemed to blur the line between those two things.

--- Later in debate ---

[Liz Saville Roberts]

The hon. Member makes an important point. I think that we can be sophisticated enough to call out the horrors of Hamas while criticising actions that may well be found in future to comprise genocide. We have not reached that point in law yet, but we in this place should be open to questioning received narratives.

Most Members here are trying to phrase our arguments in the measured way that the debate deserves. We are talking about horrific crimes against humanity in the past, and possibly in the present. That needs to be done in a balanced way. All of us are horrified by the actions of Hamas and the attacks in Manchester last year. At the same time, there are wider questions—how we find a balance, and how we, in our privileged position, use the language at our disposal to make sure that we are not pushing truth further and further into the undergrowth.

Jan Karski was a Polish Catholic diplomat who brought eyewitness reports of the true scale of Nazi atrocities to western leaders as early as 1942. He risked his life to alert the world to murder. Largely ignored at the time, Karski argued that

“the common humanity of people, not the power of governments, is the only real protector of human rights”.

His memory is a challenge to all of us who speak as public leaders.

If this year’s theme teaches us anything, it is to be alert to those who would distort the truth for their own ends. We must listen to genocide survivors and support those who shine a light on grave injustices, wherever they are. It is only through listening to testimony, and through our common humanity, that we can learn from the past and secure genuine justice for victims. We must stand against actions such as the terrible attacks in Manchester last year.

In an increasingly troubled world in which the rules-based order is threatened, we would all do well to remember that the genocide convention obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of the prohibition on genocide. Though the promise of “never again” has been ignored time and again, we must all play our part in listening and learning from the stories of the victims of genocide.

Community Engagement Principles and Extremism Definition

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 21st January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex Norris]

The Home Secretary will have the chance to talk about the counter-extremism strategy in due course, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that we have been looking at the early signs from that review, and these were talked about in December by my hon. Friend the Security Minister. To some degree these were about the places in which hate festers rather than about legislative changes.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Our thoughts today are with the families of those three poor little girls and with everybody who was hurt in that terrible event last summer. It is inexcusable that state agencies missed vital opportunities to intervene in this devastating case, including at three crucial points following Prevent referrals. These failings shine a grim light on the significant cracks in our public services, following years of spending cuts and underinvestment. Will the Minister join me in calling for the public inquiry to consider the role of austerity since 2010 as a contributing factor to these terrible failings?

[Alex Norris]

Again, I am afraid I cannot pre-empt what the Home Secretary is about to say, but the hon. Lady will have the chance to put that point to her soon. In our community strategy and our attempts to ensure that communities are resilient ones where people can live together in harmony, we are of course considering what was said in Dame Sara Khan’s review, and one of the underlying causes that she raised concerns about was austerity. We need to make sure that we have well-resourced public services. We also need to ensure that people do not feel that there is any division in the allocation of resources that is in some way targeted against them. We know that that should never be the case and would never be the case, so of course we are considering that as part of our communities work.

Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

3rd reading
Wednesday 10th January 2024 Commons Chamber

[Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)]

It is with a heavy heart, again, that I am participating in today’s debate. Throughout December, alongside the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury, I sought to shed light on the suffering of Christians in Gaza city, who include my own family. Let me express sincere gratitude to Members across the House who have approached me in the last few days to ask how they are. Although the media attention mitigated the immediate dangers, the plight of Gaza’s residents persists—living hand to mouth, drinking unclean water and wondering how on earth the world is letting this happen. I am equally concerned about the impact on the streets in the UK. We are seeing a rise in antisemitism and anti-Muslim hate, which is unacceptable and must be called out.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

I, too, extend my sympathies to the hon. Lady and her family. My own council Cyngor Gwynedd called for an immediate ceasefire last month. Echoing people’s concerns, it condemned both Hamas violence and Israel’s disproportionate attacks on civilians. The Senedd has also called for a ceasefire. The Bill will restrict members of Welsh democratic institutions from voicing their views, and I am sure the hon. Lady agrees that such restriction on free speech is a threat to our democracy across the nations of the United Kingdom.

[Layla Moran]

I absolutely agree. The Bill does not respect directly elected bodies and those representatives. The issue is also about the timing. The death toll in Gaza now exceeds 22,000, and over 100 Israeli hostages remain. I do not put those numbers side by side to compare, because every single individual lost or missing is a tragedy. The humanitarian situation has reached new depths. A doctor constituent of mine who is working in Gaza said that he has seen preventable deaths due to staff shortages, and the medical system has totally collapsed. We now have injured with nowhere to go.

Tomorrow, the International Court of Justice will consider South Africa’s case on Israel’s alleged violations and obligations under the genocide convention. I am sure I need not remind this House that it was precisely local government-led interventions here in the UK—which would be outlawed under the Bill—that pressured the Thatcher Government to add their support to the people of South Africa. Yesterday, the Foreign Secretary said that he did not agree with the ICJ case and

“I do not think we should bandy around terms like genocide”.

South Africa is not bandying around terms. The ICJ is precisely the court in which those allegations should be looked at. The principle is simple: the UK should not pre-judge the outcome of the legal case. It should back the process and the court itself full-throatedly.

I end by simply saying that the Liberal Democrats will continue to advocate for an immediate bilateral ceasefire, securing hostage release, delivering aid and working towards that precious two-state solution. Our response to this war will be judged by history. In a fractured world where democracies need to be strengthened and the international rules-based order helped, the Bill undermines local government, damages our global standing and divides our streets. This place should be a place where we unite, not divide people. Frankly, the Liberal Democrats believe that this debate should not be happening. We stand with humanity and peace, and it is for that reason that we will be voting against the Bill today.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Gove]

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to thank everyone who has spoken on Third Reading, including my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Miriam Cates), who was articulating the vital importance of recognising where antisemitism begins and where it ends. I also wish to thank those who spoke powerfully from a personal point of view: my right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers), who has only recently returned from Israel, of which she has been such a strong friend and supporter, and the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran). Our heart goes out to not only her family, but all those suffering in Gaza at the moment.

I wish briefly to address one misconception, which is that this Bill acts as an effective restraint—a gagging clause—on free speech. The hon. Member for Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter) talked of faith groups being silenced and so on. As the explanatory notes make clear, individuals are in no way prohibited from expressing their view, however disagreeable we might find it, on the conflict in Israel and Gaza, or from expressing a view, which I would abhor, that the state of Israel should not exist. What is clear is that only public authorities, not individuals, are governed by this Bill. The hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) rightly drew attention to the importance of freedom of speech, not least on campus and with academic freedom at its heart. I can reassure him, and he can be reassured, that whatever other misgivings he has about this Bill, it is not a direct assault on the principle of free speech. It is simply, clearly and tightly drawn in order to ensure that public bodies, public authorities, cannot abuse the position that has been vested in them as corporate bodies to more broadly undermine the foreign policy of the UK or, particularly in this case, as has been pointed out by a number of hon. Members and indeed by the Opposition Front-Bench team, to give succour to an explicitly antisemitic campaign. Again, I stress there will be different opinions across the House about the best way of securing Israel and of securing freedom for the Palestinians. The fact that debates are so intense in this House reflects the care and passion that so many Members bring to that debate.

However, the Bill is explicitly about making sure that citizens in the United Kingdom, who have been targeted by explicitly antisemitic campaigns, get the protection for which the organisations that stand up for them have been asking. In the spirit of the Community Security Trust, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council, I hope that as many Members as possible—

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

On that point, will the Secretary of State give way?

[Michael Gove]

I will not as I have only seconds left. I hope that as many Members as possible will feel that they can support the legislation.

Ukraine Sponsorship Scheme

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Monday 14th March 2022 Commons Chamber

[Michael Gove]

Absolutely. It will be a national vetting process initially, with local authorities following up. As ever—this point has been made across the House—we have to balance two things: the speed with which people can be placed and the security of the setting in which they are placed. Our light-touch approach can ensure that we are not placing vulnerable individuals with anyone with any record of criminality. Subsequent to that, of course, there will be additional checks to ensure that the quality of accommodation and the basis on which people are housed is decent and fair.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

My local authority, Cyngor Gwynedd, has been inundated with warm-hearted offers of accommodation and support. It is concerned, however, that it is still being left in the dark. For instance, despite the announcement of a hotline for the public, Gwynedd Council has not yet been given a regional contact from the Government. What will the Secretary of State do to fix his scheme’s weaknesses in communications and ensure that there are no brakes from here in Westminster on Wales’s ambition to be a super-sponsor as a nation of sanctuary for Ukrainian refugees?

[Michael Gove]

In the conversations that I have had with the Welsh Government, they have been anxious about co-ordinating with local government in Wales and indeed civil society so that they can provide support. On the right hon. Lady’s point about the Welsh Government being a super-sponsor, I discussed exactly what can be done with Minister Jane Hutt alongside the First Minister of Scotland. If Gwynedd Council and its councillors require more information, my Department will endeavour to provide that. If she faces any challenges, I hope that she will contact me direct to ensure that her constituents are aware of how to help.

Budget Resolutions

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Monday 1st November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Mr Dirprwy Lefarydd. May I take the opportunity to congratulate the hon. Member for Peterborough (Paul Bristow) on his marriage?

The Government made a massive rhetorical commitment to levelling up Wales. We would want to support that, wouldn’t we? We would expect the Government, in fulfilling that commitment, to decentralise power from the Treasury, empower decision making closer to our communities and match rhetoric with resources. The Budget once again fails to do that. The Government scorn our Senedd, by which they snub our democracy.

The UK’s regional inequality is hardwired into the economy and the institutional decision making of the British state. While the Prime Minister has claimed that levelling up is about taking the pressure off parts of the overheating south-east, it should be about fixing the investment, income and opportunity inequalities that result in unequal standards of living. To put that into perspective, in London, productivity and earnings are between a third and a half higher than the UK average, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. In Wales, our productivity is at least 15% below the UK average and earnings are nearly 40% lower than those in London. In my home county of Gwynedd, local GVA per capita is nearly 30% below the UK average. We might think that that was deserving of levelling up, but Gwynedd was deemed by the Government to need no levelling up funding whatsoever.

Investment in research and development—we have heard some mention of that—which is a key driver of innovation and increases in productivity, has long been centred in London and the south-east, with expenditure per head in 2019 being £577, more than twice the amount in Wales. That inequality is not just expressed in economic terms. London and the south-east of England’s dominance is expressed everywhere, from the availability and quality of local transport links to support for local museums and galleries.

A startling statistic from the Chancellor, who doubled down on inequality in the Budget, is that between 2010-11 and 2017-18, cultural spending per head in London was £687—nearly five times the average in the rest of England, let alone Wales. Perhaps most important of all, that inequality is reflected not only in the quality of life, but in the very stuff of life itself. Those living in London can expect to live two and a half years longer than people in Wales.

Levelling up is therefore about far more than the economy; it is about improving life itself in those communities all too often dismissed and ignored by Westminster. Against a challenge of such a scale, any Government would struggle, and there were indeed several welcome measures in the Budget. It was a relief to learn that the shared prosperity fund is to happen after all, and that Wales has received investment through the levelling-up fund.

Yet the spending review also confirmed the loss of the £370 million that Wales would have received annually if we had remained part of the EU—funding that this Government are unprepared to match even though they had it in their 2019 manifesto. Sadly, the Budget also confirmed the UK’s indefensible intervention in Welsh and devolved affairs. While of course I welcome efforts to improve numeracy, such a programme, which oversteps into a devolved competency, should be achieved through devolved settlements and not unilaterally decided by one part of the UK. I remind the Chancellor that the EU worked with the devolved nations and let us, rather than some distant Whitehall bureaucrat, set our own funding priorities. We do not need Westminster to teach us that these sums do not add up.

Employment Rights

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 8th June 2021 Commons Chamber

[Paul Scully]

It is great to hear that example of my hon. Friend’s constituent, because that is exactly the kind of flexible, dynamic economy that we are talking about. Someone can come from the shop floor and go right the way to the top of their business. My hon. Friend is absolutely right, as was said in the debate on the Trade Union Act 2016, that unions can now be held to account, alongside other regulators. There are strictures looking at unions to make sure they do a good job for their members.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC) [V]]

Diolch yn fawr, Dirprwy Lefarydd. Today’s smoke-and-mirrors announcement—rhetorical, rather than under- pinned by legislation—amplifies this Government’s ongoing failure to introduce a new employment Bill to protect workers’ rights. As we continue to struggle through the pandemic, one thing has become clear: the current approach to bereavement leave and miscarriage leave is insufficient and depends too much on the good will of the employer. Will the Government now consider making paid bereavement leave and paid miscarriage leave an employment right from day one?

[Paul Scully]

We will continue to work with the right hon. Lady and other colleagues to look at the various issues around neonatal leave and carer’s leave, for example. We have also introduced bereavement leave for newborn children and will look at what more we can do in the employment Bill. She talks about rushing towards legislation, but that should never be the first port of call. It is partnership with employers, employees and government that will ensure a flexible economy that works for everybody.

Learned Societies at Burlington House

Liz Saville Roberts Excerpts

Tuesday 8th June 2021 Westminster Hall

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC) [V]]

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Lefarydd. I, too, would like to thank the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton) for securing this debate, and for his campaign. I am pleased to add my voice to the campaign to secure the long-term future of the learned societies at Burlington House.

Others have eloquently discussed and will continue to discuss the importance of the work of the other learned societies based in the scientific and cultural hub of Burlington House, but it is the Society of Antiquaries and its connection to Wales, through the Welsh Fellows Group, on which I would like to elaborate.

The Welsh national group has long been one of the most accurate and effective fellows groups in researching the historic environment and promoting the understanding and appreciation of Welsh heritage. The group also organises antiquarian events, outings and lectures, helping fellows who live throughout Wales to remain engaged and involved in the full activities of the fellowship, in addition, of course, to the London programme. Past events have included archaeological lectures at Cardiff University and annual field weekends in Wales, such as the 2016 trip to Sir Fynwy, where the programme included visits to castles at Hay-on-Wye and Usk, Llanthony abbey at Abergavenny and Clytha House and gardens.

The relationship between the Welsh national group and the parent society is of real practical value. It promotes the interests and the results of the Welsh group’s work on the international stage. It also provides networking opportunities for members and helps to maintain an effective flow of knowledge and understanding of heritage issues and policy between London and Wales.

Members of the Welsh group have testified to me about the essential value of the central and special location at Burlington House for the achievement of the society as a whole. To go briefly off record into my personal experience as a child, I remember the delight of attending exhibitions at Burlington House. It is a really special place. It brings different experiences to different people. The United Kingdom as a whole would be the poorer if we were to lose it. The relocation of Burlington House would be not only financially damaging for the society, but culturally damaging for Wales.

I call upon the Government to do something that I would have thought would be essentially conservative for a Conservative Government—to conserve an affordable and sustainable arrangement that allows the learned societies to remain at Burlington House and which, in doing so, allows them to preserve their unique record of history, discovery and heritage, and to continue their work in promoting and strengthening historical learning and research as it relates to Wales.