Business of the House

Debate between Mark Pritchard and Lucy Powell

Thursday 17th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the issue of water rescue services, especially at this time of year, when people—particularly young people—are out and about. I am pleased to hear he had such a good time visiting the Red Watch firefighting service in his constituency. I think that would actually make a very good topic for debate—maybe when we get back after the summer.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

If I asked the Leader of the House, “1666—what happened in that year?”, I am not quite sure—[Interruption.] There we are: the great fire of London. In fact, it was also the last time anyone in Parliament was fined for lying to Parliament. Of course, there is the ministerial code, the Nolan principles and the contempt of Parliament procedures, but there has not been a fine since that year. For Members and non-Members alike, where is the deterrent? What is the incentive, even, for telling the truth to this place? Ministers, of course, can be brought back to the House to correct the record, but for people giving evidence to Select Committees, for instance, there really is a gap at the moment. Is it not time we put fines on a statutory basis for Members and non-Members alike so that we can be assured that people are incentivised to tell the truth and, should they be tempted not to tell the truth, there is a deterrent?

[Lucy Powell]

The right hon. Member obviously did not see me on last year’s Christmas special of “University Challenge”, where I did answer a question on 1666—which, for the record, I got right. That aside, he raises a very serious issue. He knows that knowingly misleading Parliament and this House carries with it the most serious of consequences. We found that out in the last Parliament, when a sitting Prime Minister found to have misled the House and was forced out of office as a result. No higher punishment could have been found. That investigation was done by the Committee of Privileges. There are many ways for Members to hold Ministers to account for the things that they say at the Dispatch Box, and for other Members to hold people to account—whether that is through points of orders, questions, interrogation, requiring people to correct the record, or, indeed, making complaints to our very high standards regime and, of course, to the Privileges Committee.

Business of the House

Debate between Mark Pritchard and Lucy Powell

Thursday 8th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

I do love the sporting questions from my hon. Friend, for which he gets quite a lot of cut-through. I join him in supporting all those from Beckenham Rugby Club on what sounds like a great day out.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

May I welcome the UK-US trade deal and congratulate the Prime Minister on it? It is very much in the national interest, although the devil is in the detail. May we have a debate on that trade deal and the concerns of British farmers about chlorinated chicken, hormone-treated beef and antibiotics in pig farming? Will the Leader of the House assure the House, Shropshire farmers and British farmers that British agriculture is safe with this trade deal?

[Lucy Powell]

We can assure the right hon. Gentleman of that. There will be a statement to the House later today—these issues are still unfolding—but he is right to praise the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade for the amazing work that they have done to get us to this point. He will be aware that the issues of food standards and agriculture have been red lines for the Government in those trade talks, and he will get the details later today.

Business of the House

Debate between Mark Pritchard and Lucy Powell

Thursday 1st May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

That is a relevant question given the one that came before about the Climate Change Committee report published this week. I join my hon. Friend in thanking the Scottish fire and rescue service. Yes, in winter the danger is perhaps flooding, but these fires and wildfires are a stark reminder that, as we enter the summer months, wildfires are one of the symptoms of climate change, and we need to support our fire and rescue services in tackling those issues, as well as take long-term steps to reduce and minimise the impacts of wildfires.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

Thankfully, there is mostly consensus across the House on a two-state solution, but I am not sure that that consensus applies in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. There appears to be a slight emerging difference between the Minister for the middle east, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), and the Foreign Secretary on the timing of the recognition of the Palestinian state. The Minister said a few days ago that the recognition needed to consider practical things on the ground such as legal, governance and security, while the Foreign Secretary has suggested over the past 24 hours that recognition should come before a settlement on a two-state solution, so there seems to be some confusion. Given the importance of the Palestinian people having a stable and secure future without Hamas, may we have an urgent debate about the two-state solution, and will the Leader of the House assure us that, when recognition of a Palestinian state comes, we will have a full debate as well as a vote?

[Lucy Powell]

Let me reassure the right hon. Gentleman: there are no differing opinions on this in Government—we are as one. We absolutely want to see a two-state solution, which is the only-long-term political solution for the middle east, and that includes a recognised and safe and secure long-term state of Palestine. As he says, getting to that recognition will not happen overnight and is not totally straightforward. The Government are absolutely committed—it was in our manifesto—to recognising the state of Palestine. I will ensure that Ministers always come to the House, as they have been doing, to update Members on any developments, with proper debates, statements and votes on these matters where necessary.

Business of the House

Debate between Mark Pritchard and Lucy Powell

Thursday 19th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Lucy Powell]

I would be delighted to join my hon. Friend in congratulating his constituents on working as a community to get the fibre broadband connection that rural communities such as his so desperately rely on—it really is the fourth utility. He is right to point out that the previous Government’s roll-out of broadband in rural communities was far too slow. We have science questions when we return, but I will certainly consider his request for a debate.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

Could we have a debate on putting children at the heart of public policy? In her statement, the Leader of the House mentioned children and the emerging Bill. She will know that there is an equality impact assessment in pre-legislative scrutiny, and that there can be no discrimination on the basis of age. There have been two dominant themes in these business questions so far: Herefordshire—as a Herefordshire boy, I am delighted by that—and children. I hope that the Government, across Departments, will consider a potential new policy that will look at policies, Bills and laws and how they impact children.

[Lucy Powell]

I welcome the right hon. Gentleman’s comments. We are absolutely putting children at the heart of our policy. We have a mission to ensure opportunity for all and that every child has the very best start in life, to really galvanise all the different Departments and places across the country, and Secretaries of State, including the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, are working closely on a child poverty taskforce. Putting children first is at the forefront of this Government’s mission. I look forward to working with the right hon. Gentleman on delivering that.