All 3 Debates between Mark Pritchard and John McDonnell

Civil Service Pay

Debate between Mark Pritchard and John McDonnell
Tuesday 7th March 2023

(1 year, 9 months ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Indeed, there are a lot of passionate feelings on both sides of this debate.

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

There was a flippant remark from the Minister with regard to meeting PCS members. I just remind him that PCS members in my constituency—two Border Control staff—died during the pandemic because of covid. They sacrificed their lives keeping this country safe.

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This is a serious debate about people living in poverty.

--- Later in debate ---
Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

The Minister can choose to respond or not, because he has concluded his remarks. If he wants to intervene, he can, but it is entirely down to him. The hon. Member who moved the motion can continue for the last minute and then allow me to put the Question, or can talk out her own time, which will mean the Question is not put. She can make that decision. [Interruption.] Order. The right hon. Gentleman should know, as he has been here for a very, very long time. I have been very patient with him.

Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Whether or not the right hon. Gentleman thinks he has been here too long is entirely a matter for him. He will come to order, thank you.

Benefit Sanctions

Debate between Mark Pritchard and John McDonnell
Tuesday 13th December 2022

(2 years ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the Minister give way?

Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Order. Is the Minister giving way?

Guy Opperman Portrait Guy Opperman
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No. I have one minute left to address this debate. In November 2018 the Work and Pensions Committee specifically said that the Committee agreed with the Government that the principles of conditionality and sanctions were an important part of the welfare system.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Glasgow South West on securing the debate. The Government have been utterly clear that we are fully supportive of all people who are on benefits.

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Just answer the question!

Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Order. The right hon. Gentleman is very experienced in this place and should know better. If the Minister is not giving way, he should not be speaking.

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I can tell the Minister—

Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Order. We are running out of time. Minister, I think the hon. Member for Glasgow South West would like to hear replies to his questions at least.

EU Membership: Economic Benefits

Debate between Mark Pritchard and John McDonnell
Wednesday 15th June 2016

(8 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With the greatest respect, I ask the hon. Member for Perth and North Perthshire (Pete Wishart) to listen to my speech before he comes to a judgment on this matter.

I believe that the economic arguments for remaining are overpowering, but the polls and the feedback from the doorstep confirm that immigration is a key motivating factor for some people in different parts of the country. Let me deal with some of the economic arguments around migration. I admit that I do not come to the debate on immigration completely objectively. I am the grandson of an Irish migrant. My grandfather’s generation of Irish migrants and subsequent Irish migrants built many of this country’s roads, railways and homes. They staffed the factories while many Irish women were the nurses who formed the backbone of the NHS and the teachers who taught in our schools. They all contributed to making this country’s economy the fifth largest in the world. That is what migrants overwhelmingly do. Over the last decade, migrants from new EU member countries contributed £20 billion more in taxes than they used in public services and benefit payments. More than 52,000 EU migrants work in our NHS. With labour shortages reported in key sectors such as construction, it is migrant labour that helps to fill the gap. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors’ recent surveys show that a lack of skilled workers is already hurting the delivery of infrastructure projects.

Let us admit, however, that genuine concerns have been expressed about the impact of migration on wages and employment, as my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr Skinner) suggested. Those concerns should not be dismissed. Research presented by Oxford University’s Migration Observatory has demonstrated that migration has not had the impact of reducing wages except in a small proportion of the workforce: those at the lowest end of the pay scale. This has to be addressed, and that is why Labour is calling for greater protection for this group of workers. Yes, reforms are needed with regard to the free movement of labour, to introduce greater protection of wages and employment rights and to halt the undercutting of wages and employment conditions. In government, we will renegotiate to give effect to those changes.

Other concerns have been expressed at the pressure placed on our public services by migration. The reality is that our public services struggle to cope with existing demand because of the austerity measures, the cuts and the chronic underfunding forced through by this Government over the last six years. But there is an argument that where pressures on public services increase in a particular area, funding must be made available to respond to that increased demand. That is why Labour has consistently argued for a special migration fund to assist those communities where demand increases. We condemned the abolition of the fund that was set up by Gordon Brown, but we welcome the Prime Minister’s statement today that he is exploring the establishment of a fund of that sort. We also want to seek further European funding to support this initiative, and that will be on our agenda.

Mark Pritchard Portrait Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Does the shadow Chancellor agree that being an EU citizen in the United Kingdom might be an uncomfortable experience at the moment, particularly in the light of the language and tone being used by one of the leaders of the Brexit campaign, Nigel Farage? Does he also agree that if we were to remove those EU citizens and put in place the 50,000 cap proposed by Nigel Farage, we would see an exodus of people who work in our care homes, our hospitals and our schools? That would have a real impact on our ability to deliver public services. Is it not the case that we are an open and tolerant United Kingdom?

John McDonnell Portrait John McDonnell
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I find some of the statements that have been made reprehensible and irresponsible, because they do not weigh up the impact of the policies being advocated on our public services and our economy.