Lords Spiritual (Women) Act 2015 (Extension) Bill [Lords]

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 14th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

Let me start by saying how pleased I am to be speaking in support of the Bill on Second Reading. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Minister on his opening remarks. In 2014, the Church of England made it possible for women to become bishops. The usual process of appointing bishops to the other place meant that it would have taken many years for women bishops to enter the Lords. That is why the 2015 Act was brought in: to speed up the representation of women among the Lords Spiritual.

As we debate today’s short and narrow bill, I want to pay tribute to some of the women bishops who have made history. The Church of England’s first woman bishop, Libby Lane, took her place as the Bishop of Stockport in 2015.

[Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)]

Hear, hear.

[Marsha De Cordova]

Indeed. Now the Bishop of Derby, Libby Lane is known for her dignified and thoughtful leadership, and her advocacy for children and young people. The first female Lord Spiritual was Rachel Treweek, who entered the Lords in 2015. During her tenure, she campaigned tirelessly for prison reform, especially on how prison affects women and families. She has called for more race, class, gender and age diversity in the Church, and has pushed for a humane response to refugees. She has also looked at ways in which we can improve children’s sense of self-worth, value and confidence.

I also pay tribute to the Lord Bishop of London, Sarah Mullally, a former chief nursing officer who is deeply engaged with the community she serves. She has promoted the living wage and spoken up for our beloved national health service and for the most vulnerable in society, including the elderly and those facing persecution.

The 2015 Act sped up the entry of six women bishops to the other place. We now have 25 Lords Spiritual, seven of whom are women. I hope that I am making the value of those women bishops’ contributions in the Lords clear. They enrich debate and provide much-needed representation. The Lord Bishop of Chelmsford, Guli Francis-Dehqani, came to Britain as a refugee after her family fled persecution during the Iranian revolution. In the other place, she has carefully and intelligently worked hard to scrutinise policy on issues including housing, immigration and criminal justice. Like so many of her colleagues, she truly listens to the views of others, speaking with grassroots knowledge—most importantly about the region under her care.

The progress that we have seen in making the Lords Spiritual more diverse should be celebrated, but we know, and the Church knows, that another push is needed to make the Lords Spiritual representative and to bring them more up to date. That is particularly the case for women bishops from black, Asian and ethnic minority backgrounds, who make such an important contribution and are currently underrepresented in the other place, and more broadly in the Church.

[Adam Jogee]

On that point, I acknowledge the history-making nature of my hon. Friend’s appointment as the Second Church Estates Commissioner, which I hope demonstrates our commitment to diversity and representation.

[Marsha De Cordova]

I thank my hon. Friend. It is truly an honour and a privilege to serve in that position.

I want to acknowledge the trailblazing Bishop of Dover, Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the first black woman to become a Church of England bishop. She was the chaplain to her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and for nine years she was the chaplain to the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow—the first woman to carry out that role. Her presence as a leader in the Church is a call to young women from diverse backgrounds not to shy away from the work that they want to do. But the Bishop of Dover is not yet one of many. There is more work to do. That is why the Bill will help. It is a narrow Bill, extending the existing provisions for five years, which should get us closer to the Lords Spiritual better representing the make-up of our country. That is why I support the Bill, and I hope that Members across the House will do the same.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Ms Abena Oppong-Asare)]

I begin by congratulating the shadow Paymaster General on his appointment to his role. It is a pleasure to close the debate on this focused but most important piece of legislation. I have very much enjoyed listening to the thoughtful contributions made by colleagues from all parts of the House, and I will do my best to respond to them in the time available.

As the Paymaster General said in his opening speech, this is a straightforward but important Bill requested by the Church. It simply extends for a further five years the arrangements agreed by this House in 2015. Significant progress has been made since then in addressing the gender imbalance on the Benches of the Lords Spiritual, but I hope that hon. Members will appreciate that a short extension is reasonable and proportionate to ensure that progress continues.

Members have made important and interesting contributions to the debate. I put on record my congratulations to my hon. Friend the Member for South East Cornwall (Anna Gelderd), who told an incredibly powerful story about her grandfather and her mother. Her personal story will have touched the lives of many today, and I share her ethos of breaking down barriers. She made some important points in her speech, and I believe her constituents appreciate their hard-working Member of Parliament. As a graduate of the women-only Murray Edwards College, Cambridge, she joins the ranks of the many notable and brilliant women making their mark on public life. She has spoken about the influence that Jo Cox and Harriet Harman—inspirational women—had on her.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stockport (Navendu Mishra) speaks with great passion and knowledge. His constituency has played an important role in our story, because the Right Rev. Libby Lane, who was made Bishop of Stockport in 2015, was the first ever female bishop. Her consecration reminds us of the need for pioneers and trailblazers.

My hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova) has become the 43rd Second Church Estates Commissioner. I met her this week to discuss the Bill, and I know she will use all her political and personal skills to provide a bridge between Parliament and the established Church at a difficult time for the Anglican communion. She will be brilliant in that role. She spoke powerfully about female bishops, and particularly about the importance of diversity and under-represented groups. The Church is looking at that, and I know that she will be a champion of those issues. The shadow Paymaster General rightly asked why the five-year timeframe had been selected. We believe that five years is an appropriate time, and we will review the arrangements in collaboration with the Church of England closer to 2030.

The hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) has been a champion of diversity in the other place. She rightly asked whether we will be making wider progress. This Bill is narrow, and it is not part of the Government’s wider House of Lords reform agenda. It was requested by the Church of England, so that it can extend arrangements put in place by the 2015 Act. As she knows, that Act is due to expire in May next year, so it is important that we introduce the Bill now. As the first step in a wider reform, the Government have introduced the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, which I know the hon. Lady has spoken favourably about. That focused Bill will deliver the Government’s manifesto commitment to bring about immediate reform by removing the right of the remaining hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords.

The Government are committed to other reforms of the House of Lords, as the hon. Lady rightly mentioned, including the introduction of a mandatory retirement age and a participation requirement, and changes to the appointments process, as well as a strengthening the circumstances in which disgraced Members can be removed. There is also a long-term commitment to replacing the other place with an alternative second Chamber that is more representative of the regions and nations. Given the nature and potential scale of these reforms, the Government will engage and consult on the proposals, seeking the input of the British public on how politics can best serve them.

As my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General noted when he opened the debate, this year marks the 10th anniversary of the ability to appoint women bishops in the Church of England. It is also another important anniversary: it is 30 years since the first women were ordained as Church of England priests; 32 women were ordained at Bristol cathedral in 1994. Over the past 30 years, the Church has made significant progress in valuing the leadership role that women can play in the life of the Church. This Bill simply extends existing provisions to ensure that progress can continue.

[Marsha De Cordova]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her speech; she is setting out exactly why this small piece of legislation is so important. I also thank her for acknowledging that for 30 years, we have seen women being ordained. Does she agree that celebrating the progress that women have made, not only in this place but in the Church, is crucial? I am very grateful to the Government for bringing forward the Bill, so that we can get it through.

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to raise the importance of female representation, particularly in the Church. The long history of women’s progress in this country teaches us one thing: it cannot be left to chance. That is why it is so important that we pass this Bill. Women must organise and keep up the pressure, and institutions must change. Our Parliament must also change; between 1918 and 2024, only 693 women have been elected as Members of this House. The hon. Member for Richmond Park mentioned female representation in Parliament. As of July 2024, there are 263 women in this House, the highest ever number. Female representation is at an all-time high of 40%, yet even now, we still need progress to be truly reflective of our society.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that point. Racial diversity, as well as the wider representation of disabled people, are matters that I raised during a conversation with my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea in her new role, and with representatives of the Church of England. As my hon. Friend may know, it is for the Church to determine how bishops are appointed, and its representatives have mentioned that they are committed to increasing diversity among bishops. The Church is reviewing the pipeline for senior roles to encourage the greatest possible participation of under-represented groups.

[Marsha De Cordova]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, and all the interventions in this debate have been incredible. As she says, representation is something that the Church of England is now taking seriously. It led the way in setting up its racial justice taskforce, and it now has its racial justice commission that is working on this area. Representation is important, not just at the top of the Church but all the way down to the parish and diocese levels. We need greater representation, not just of women but of those from black and ethnic minority communities, as well as disabled people. I am sure my hon. Friend agrees that the Church has got to get this right.

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

My hon. Friend is right to raise that point. That is why I am delighted that she is in the role that she now holds—I know that she will champion this issue really well. Representation at all levels is important, and I will be looking to see what the Church of England does to strengthen its diversity in that area.

This Bill is about the role of a number of Lords Spiritual. It simply aims to extend the provisions of the 2015 Act to ensure that more female bishops enter into the House of Lords.

Black History Month

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Thursday 24th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

I completely agree. I mentioned how in the past different communities have come together alongside the African-Caribbean community, for example to fight the blackshirts, the National Front, and the British National party. These are the shoulders on which many of us stand. Alongside Bernie Grant and my fellow Ghanaian —and great friend—Lord Paul Boateng, they lit the path for so many of us to walk down.

I do not want the House to think I am only going to mention those of Ghanaian descent, even though we make the best jollof rice—do not let my hon. Friend the Member for Vauxhall and Camberwell Green (Florence Eshalomi) tell you any different. But there is one more Ghanaian person I must mention, as I always do in this month: Akyaaba Addai-Sebo, the co-ordinator of special projects for the Greater London Council, who organised the first recognition of this month in 1987. In the 1970s, he had seen the Americans celebrate black history and believed that Britain should do something similar.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

First, I congratulate my hon. Friend on her speech. She is doing a fantastic job and she looks amazing. I am not getting into the jollof rice argument, because I am Jamaican. She mentioned one of the founders of Black History Month, who was a constituent of mine. Does she agree that it is no coincidence that in 1987, when Black History Month was first launched by the GLC, this place also made history with the election of the first three black MPs: the Mother of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), Lord Boateng, and the late and very great Bernie Grant?

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that, and I am glad she took the cautious path by not saying that Ghanaian jollof rice is not the best—she knows it is. I echo her points and I will be paying tribute to those MPs later in my speech.

The stories we will hear this afternoon are our stories. We have come a long way since the 1980s, when we first celebrated Black History Month. We celebrate the trail- blazers today. I have mentioned the first black Mother of the House, the first black Minister and Cabinet Minister, Paul Boateng, and Baroness Lawrence. I must also mention Baroness Amos in the other place, who became the first black woman to serve in Cabinet. She is from my area, the borough of Bexley, and inspires me every day. Of course, no one political party has a monopoly on trailblazers; I know that Opposition Members will want to mention the black trailblazers from their own parties and political traditions.

Since the general election in July, we can celebrate the most diverse Parliament in our history, making this House look and sound far closer to the diverse communities we represent. Such representation matters. If the nation’s children look at our Parliament and do not see women and men who look and sound like them, then they will assume that Parliament is not of them or for them; they will assume that the rulers are one thing and the ruled something else. I do not need to tell the House how damaging that is to democracy, or how populists thrive and democracies die. It is not about ticking boxes; it is about ballot boxes.

I said we have come a long way—and we have—but the path of progress does not run straight and true. Progress can be reversed and set back. Social media provides a new platform for old hatreds. The scourge of racism is given new life through social media—each one of us faces it every day online. In our communities too, racism is real, and the struggle against it is real. It is not just overt racism; it is also the damaging effect of racism in our institutions. It is the routine micro-aggressions that black MPs and black staff face every day, and the hateful language in parts of our media. It is when the successful black business executive is mistaken for the cleaner, when the qualified jobseeker is blocked because of their surname, or when the political candidate is told, “This seat is not for the likes of you.”

That is why this Government are committed to breaking down barriers to opportunity as part of our mission-led Government, and why we strive for opportunity for all in education, work, public life, and in every community and part of the UK. I believe that the Government’s wide-ranging legislative programme will start to address many of the injustices that scar our society. The Bill on equality in race and disability will introduce mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting for employers with over 250 employees. We will reform the Mental Health Act 1983. Currently, black people are 3.5 times more likely than white people to be detained under that Act, and over seven times more likely to be subject to a community treatment order. We must urgently address this issue.

We will also tackle the abhorrent maternal health gap. In England, the risk of maternal death is nearly three times as high for black women and twice as high for Asian women as it is for white women. It is a grave injustice that there are such stark inequalities in maternal outcomes, and this Government are committed to closing the maternal mortality gap.

In so many other areas, the Government are making changes that will improve lives. Earlier in my speech, I mentioned the Windrush generation; we have been calling for justice for those treated so terribly by previous Governments, including the full implementation of the recommendations of the Wendy Williams review. I have called for that in the House multiple times, and I am pleased that today, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has announced that the Government will fulfil their manifesto commitments in full. We will appoint a Windrush commissioner to oversee compensation and act as a trusted voice; we will establish a new Windrush unit in the Home Office to drive things forward; and we are injecting £1.5 million into a programme of grant funding for organisations to support people’s applications for compensation. This will speed up and clarify processes that have been shamefully slow and difficult. We will continue to listen to the voices of Windrush, honour their contribution to this country and seek redress for the scandal that has engulfed so many of them. At last —after too long—the Windrush generation will see some measure of justice.

I am proud to open this debate, but I am not satisfied with where we are. We have a long way to go. Yes, I am interested in black history, but I am also interested in black futures. That is why we need lasting change, real reform, solid progress, and a never-ending quest for justice.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I, too, wish Baroness Lawrence a very happy birthday.

I congratulate the Minister on such a positive opening speech. How wonderful it is to have this discussion in the main Chamber! I have been working with the hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) on the all-party women in Parliament event, and I am delighted that joint working between Government Front Benchers and Back Benchers has brought this debate to the Chamber today. I am particularly pleased to see the number of people who are keen to be here on a Thursday—that is fantastic, and I look forward to the contributions from across the House.

The theme of this year’s Black History Month is reclaiming narratives, and it is vital for every member of society to recognise the achievements of black Britons and the contributions they have made to our country and to the world. All of us as MPs have amazing constituents and friends who educate and inspire us, and that will be highlighted in today’s debate. It takes me back to my best friend from school, Genevieve. She educated me about what it was like to flee her country, Uganda, with just a passport, and what it had meant to her and her future to go through such a harrowing time with her family.

We need only look across the fields of sport, entertainment, culture and politics to see how much of a contribution black Britons are making. We see that most clearly in today’s celebration. I agree with the Minister that looking forward to the future is vital, but Black History Month takes us back to the 1980s, which was when my friend Genevieve and I met. It was established in 1987, and not only has it grown as a movement; it has led to real debate and reflection. I am sure that this House will do it justice this afternoon, and that we will note just how far the UK has come and how different it is as a country from when Black History Month was established. We have heard from the Minister about the historic moment when three black MPs were elected to this House in the 1987 general election, and the difference that made. The right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott) was elected in that year, and we celebrate her being the Mother of this House.

As for my party, the oldest political party in the western world, the fact that we could be led by a black woman is a testament to the arc of change that we have seen—that is no doubt in part due to the trailblazing of the right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington—and, indeed, she would be our fourth female leader, although there is another one available. [Laughter.] You know what I mean. Other members of the black or mixed-race heritage community have joined our Benches, and there are some we dearly miss. Bim Afolami, in particular, made an important contribution in this place for our party. As the Minister said, looking at the Chamber today and at Prime Minister’s questions, we can see the breadth of representation. I think it is fair to say, despite where we are as a party, that there is more to do, and we are all keen to inspire that work and to work together on it.

Turning to the contribution in the field of sport, people can just watch any football match to see black Britons making their mark. Whether it is Sterling, Saka or Rashford, these are household names in the English team, although I will show my age by admitting that my favourite is Ian Wright.

[Marsha De Cordova]

As the hon. Lady is talking about sport and football, it is only right that I pay tribute to my brother, who is a premier league footballer—Bobby Reid-De Cordova. He is doing an incredible job, and I am incredibly proud of him because of what he demonstrates, not just on the pitch but in the communities within which he has served.

[Mims Davies]

I thank the hon. Lady for that contribution —I have a brother myself of whom I am extremely proud, so I get that. There is something slightly less competitive in that relationship sometimes. I pay tribute to him and his work, and, above all, his skill.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure and a privilege to take part in this debate on the Floor of the House in Government time for the first time ever. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for East Grinstead and Uckfield (Mims Davies) for her excellent speech. It is a pleasure to co-chair the all-party parliamentary group on women in Parliament. Talking about footballers, Raheem Sterling is from Brent—a proud Brent boy—as is Rachel Yankey, and they do amazing things in the community.

I thank the Minister for her moving and excellent speech. I am sure the Nigerians would disagree about jollof rice, but I will try not to get too involved in that. As she said, she is the first woman of Ghanaian decent at the Dispatch Box. I remember that when I stood at that Dispatch Box in 2009, and I was the first black woman ever to stand there as a Government Minister, it was so moving and I almost felt as though I had the weight of history on my shoulders. I congratulate her on that, and also on the Windrush announcement. That is a phenomenal announcement, and a lot of people today will be very grateful for it. I would like to thank Wendy Williams, Jacqueline McKenzie, Martin Forde and Patrick Vernon for all the work they have done on Windrush.

Reclaiming narratives is important for this Black History Month, because it is not about explaining black history, but about reclaiming some of the narratives out there changing some of the assumptions. I always remember a teacher saying to me at school, “Don’t assume, because when you ‘assume’ you make an ‘ass’ out of ‘u’ and ‘me’.” When I met Pam, whose family owned a cotton farm in Mississippi for over 100 years, I was expecting all these stories about uprisings and everything, and she just told me about the entrepreneurship, the sustainability and the fair pay. I was so enthralled by her story—mytunika.com—that I purchased the shirt I am wearing today, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) for helping me iron it.

The thing about business is that it is easy for someone to make huge profits if they do not have to pay people, if they do not have to provide accommodation, if they do not have to treat them fairly and if they can treat them as if they are nobody. No one with a conscience or any compassion would say that is a good business model, but six years ago, in 2018, I received a message, as did everybody else in the country, to inform me that we had finished paying the reparations owed. The message said:

“The amount of money borrowed for the Slavery Abolition Act was so large that it wasn’t paid off until 2015. Which means that living British citizens helped pay to end the slave trade.”

I was absolutely shocked when I received that message. I thought, “I won’t consent to my taxpayer’s money paying slave owners compensation.” The British Government paid £20 million, which was 5% of GDP at the time, and that is now the equivalent of about £100 billion. This money was paid to compensate slave owners for lost capital associated with freeing slaves—40% of the UK’s budget. So there is a precedent for paying reparations for slavery; it has just been paid to the wrong people.

[Marsha De Cordova]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her speech, and I must say her shirt is lovely. She is making a vital point about reparations, and does she agree that while it is important that we look to the future, we must also have that discussion about reparations, because both she and I are descendants of those who were enslaved?

[Dawn Butler]

I thank my hon. Friend. I understand that the Prime Minister has said we have to look to the future and that he is dealing with 14 years of corruption and mismanagement by the Conservative Government, but we do have to consider reparations because it is the right thing to do. This question makes me wonder whether it would ever be conceivable that this decision would be made today. Would we pay traffickers for their loss of trade? Would we pay pimps for their loss of trade? It is a ridiculous assertion.

So I thought to myself, who made this decision and how was it made? Obviously, it was made in Parliament. Back then there were no women, no black people, no people of colour; it was just white men and they made that decision. And we only finished paying nine years ago, so it is still very current.

While the British Government have not disclosed a complete list of the recipient individuals and firms of bonds related to compensation for slaves, researchers at University College London have compiled a list of over 46,000 current individuals and groups who have received Government payouts related to the abolition of slavery. Many powerful British families, including current business and political elites in the United Kingdom, are among the recipients uncovered by the UCL team. So when we hear the arguments that to make our money—to make our millions—we just have to work hard and pull ourselves up by our boot straps, that is not quite the full story. That is why the narrative needs to be reset, and structures created in order to uphold a white supremacist view need to be revisited and restructured.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Wednesday 4th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

We will obviously look at all the recommendations and report back to the House, but we need to look at the wider issues too. Access to risk assessments is an important issue that we are considering. There should not be gaps. One of the benefits of a general debate is that it will be an opportunity to raise these and further points, which we will take away and consider.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

Today my thoughts are with the victims, the survivors, the families and the entire Grenfell community. The systemic dishonesty and many other injustices meant that the people of Grenfell were treated like second-class citizens. Successive Governments, the local authority and industry knew about the risks, but they failed to act.

As Sir Martin said, the deaths that occurred were entirely avoidable. Seven years on, no none has faced criminal proceedings and there are still thousands living in homes wrapped in unsafe cladding. I welcome what the Prime Minister has said today, I welcome the way he delivered his statement, and I am thankful that the Government will implement the phase 1 recommendation to ensure that every disabled person living in a high-rise block has a personal evacuation plan specific to their needs, but when the Prime Minister returns to update the House, it is vital that those living in unsafe homes have clear deadlines for when the flammable or unsafe cladding will be removed, so that they can have a decent night’s sleep.

[The Prime Minister]

I agree that the work is going too slowly; we need to push that work on, with clear timetables to ensure it is done. In response to the first part of my hon. Friend’s question, the wording of the report, which says that the deaths were entirely “avoidable”, must be chilling for all the family members and the community at large.

Iran-Israel Update

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Monday 15th April 2024 Commons Chamber

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

While globally the attention is rightly focused on Israel and Iran, and we are all in agreement that the next step has to be de-escalation, the situation in Gaza is worsening every day. More than 33,000 lives have been lost and more than 1 million will now be facing imminent famine. The UK almost stands alone in not restoring funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. Will the Prime Minister tell us when he will set out a clear path for funding to resume?

[The Prime Minister]

Together with our allies, we are reviewing the interim findings and are discussing appropriate next steps. Many partner countries have suspended funding to UNRWA after what happened, which was shocking. In the meantime, we are considerably increasing our own aid into the region and welcome the commitments from Israel recently to increase the flow, opening new checkpoints at the port of Ashdod, the Jordan land corridor and Kerem Shalom, but we now want to see those commitments followed through. We all want to see more aid getting in and that will be a focus of our conversations with Israel.

Action Against Houthi Maritime Attacks

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd January 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

The Transport Secretary has been engaging extensively with the industry. My hon. Friend will have seen the statements from leading shipping companies after last week’s strike, saying that they welcomed action being taken to restore security. I also point him to Operation Prosperity Guardian, a coalition of more than 20 countries. More are now sending assets into the region to ensure the safety of all civilian and commercial shipping through the Red sea. It is a critical economic strait, but there is also a principle at stake, which we must defend.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

The war in Gaza and the situation in the middle east are worsening every day. We know that more than 25,000 people have been killed, including 10,000 children, not to mention about 135,000 children suffering from severe malnutrition. We know that the only way to de-escalate the violence in Gaza and the crisis in the Red sea is by securing an immediate ceasefire—not a pause, but an immediate ceasefire. Why will the Prime Minister not commit to calling for this, so that we can see an end to this humanitarian catastrophe and the killing of innocent children?

[The Prime Minister]

I point the hon. Lady to my previous comments on that topic, but I will also just highlight that we have trebled our aid commitment for this financial year. We are working with partners in the region to increase the amount of aid going into the region. I discussed that with President Biden yesterday, because we recognise the humanitarian impact that the conflict is having. The UK is playing a leading role in getting more humanitarian aid into the region. As I have said, right now we will work with the Americans on opening up Ashdod so that we have a new maritime corridor to increase the flow.

Oral Answers to Questions

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Wednesday 13th December 2023 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. We are investing £3 billion in dentistry. The NHS dentistry contract was reformed last year to improve access for patients, and around half of all treatment was delivered to non-paying adults and children. The number of adults seen has gone up by 10% and the number of children seen has gone up by 15%, but my hon. Friend is right that more needs to be done, which is why the Government will bring forward the dentistry recovery plan in due course.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

Q5. There are 12 days until Christmas, and hundreds of families in Battersea are worried, not about being able to buy gifts for their children but about whether they can afford food and heat due to the Tory cost of living crisis. This year, over 4,300 emergency food parcels have been provided in Battersea by the Wandsworth food bank, which has told me that it is bracing for the worst winter yet. What is the Prime Minister doing to ensure that families do not go cold and hungry this Christmas?

[The Prime Minister]

We care deeply about making sure the most vulnerable in our society get the support they need through the winter, which is why we increased welfare by record amounts earlier this year. We supplemented that with £900 in cost of living payments for the most vulnerable. It is why we have provided energy bill support for those who need our help the most. Pensioners in the hon. Lady’s constituency and elsewhere will receive up to £300 alongside their winter fuel payment. Indeed, that support will last not just through the winter but into next year, because we are deeply committed to helping those who need it. This Government have a track record of delivering that help.

Tributes to Her Late Majesty The Queen

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Friday 9th September 2022 Commons Chamber

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

It is an honour to speak not only on my own behalf but on behalf of my constituents and to pass on their condolences. The passing of Her Majesty the Queen is a great loss for the royal family and for our country. As our longest-reigning sovereign, our remarkable Queen dedicated 70 years of her life to serving our country. She devoted her life to the betterment of this country, and today we celebrate her service and express our thanks for her steadfast leadership. The Queen was a role model and touched the lives of so many in her own unique and distinguished way.

Over the course of the Queen’s reign, there was great transformation and progress in the world, yet she served as a constant and reassuring figure during periods of change and provided us all with a sense of security. She was incredibly resolute and principled, and she had a work ethic and a commitment to duty and service that she placed above all other considerations. Even in her 90s and in the days before her death, she was still working and serving our country.

The Queen’s strong and abiding faith in God was the golden thread that guided her work and her commitment to respecting everybody, appreciating difference and serving people. Across Battersea, people will be reflecting on her selfless service and leadership of our country. She visited the constituency on many occasions, including the then children’s home on the Winstanley estate and, of course, Battersea Dogs & Cats Home. We all know how passionate she was about animals and their welfare, and that was shown by her patronage of the home. As staff at the home have already said this week, they were so lucky to have had such a valuable relationship with her. But she was not just our Queen, as we can see from all the global contributions and tributes that have come her way.

As I close, my thoughts and prayers are with His Majesty King Charles and the royal family. May Her late Majesty rest in peace and rise in eternal glory. God save the King.

Covid-19: Public Inquiry

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Tuesday 19th April 2022 Westminster Hall

[Mr Virendra Sharma (in the Chair)]

I will call Marsha De Cordova to move the motion and then the Minister to respond. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30-minute debates.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the covid-19 public inquiry.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma. I begin by saying a huge thank you to many organisations, including Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice, Disability Rights UK, Sense and the Royal National Institute of Blind People, for all their tireless hard work in this area supporting the many people who have been impacted by the pandemic.

Covid-19 is the worst public health emergency and global health pandemic we have faced in a lifetime, having devastating effects globally. Here in the UK we were not exempt, with over 150,000 lives lost, which was one of the worst death rates. Having significant and unequal human and economic effects, the pandemic disproportionately impacted women, including pregnant women, as well as children, disabled people, and black, Asian and ethnic minority communities. Moreover, people’s class or where they live has an impact, exposing and exacerbating the inequalities as well as creating many new ones.

The pandemic severely tested this Government’s preparedness, resilience and co-ordination, but there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that the Government were not prepared for the pandemic and they lacked any credible strategy or plan to mitigate the situation. How they responded to the unprecedented challenges they faced raised a wealth of questions. The Government resisted mounting calls and pressure for a public inquiry until May last year. There needs to be a comprehensive investigation into all aspects of the pandemic and into the Government’s response to establish the facts, rebuild trust with the British people, hold power to account and learn lessons to ensure that the mistakes made will never happen again. The Government said that the inquiry would start in spring this year—here we are—but they have recently confirmed that public hearings will not begin until 2023. That is not good enough and is a huge blow to everyone, including the bereaved families who need justice and answers.

We know that there will now be two inquiries: one by the UK Government and one by the Scottish Government. Both inquiries will look at a wide range of issues, including the use of public health powers and expertise, such as medical evidence, restrictions and the wearing of masks, and health and social care policy, such as PPE availability, care homes, Test and Trace, and the vaccination roll-out. They will also look at the financial impacts, including statutory sick pay—or the lack of adequate statutory sick pay—public sector procurement safeguards, furlough and business support.

While the inquiry seeks to cover a wider range of areas, I strongly believe that the failure to include specific reference to disabled people is a grave omission. When I asked the Minister in February whether the inquiry would have a specific focus on disability, she replied, “Yes”. However, without explicit inclusion in the inquiry’s terms of reference, how can disabled people have confidence in the inquiry and confidence that lessons can and will be learned? So, today I will focus my speech on the impact of the pandemic on disabled people.

Between January and November 2020, of the 50,888 covid-related deaths in the UK, 30,296 were of disabled people or of someone with an underlying health condition, which accounts for six in 10 covid-related deaths. And that is not just any old data; it is data from the Office for National Statistics. During that same period in 2020, the risk of death involving covid was 3.1 times higher for disabled men than for non-disabled men, and the risk for disabled women was 3.5 times higher than for non-disabled women.

That deeply concerning disparity must be examined and must form part of an inquiry, as I believe it is the one thing that we really need to learn the lessons of, and why. Disabled people were one of the groups who were disproportionately impacted the most by the pandemic, and that remains the case now. Disabled people and their families have suffered the worst form of hardship and loss, and they really were an afterthought, including on—but not limited to—issues related to the labour market and employment, the move from working at home to hybrid working and so on, and the risks associated with face-to-face working, particularly for people living with sight loss. There are also the issues around education and learning, and for young people and children education and learning were incredibly challenging, but there were also issues when it came to accessing goods and services within the covid regulations. I have heard of so many instances at the start of the pandemic when many people who are blind or partially sighted could not even access food deliveries.

That is why, early on in the pandemic, I set out 10 clear asks of the Government, in order to alleviate some of the pandemic’s worst effects. However, in the words of one woman who has multiple disabilities:

“Thousands, if not millions, of disabled people lost their support network, which set back progress and caused so many other issues. Whether that is health or social care, we are human beings and deserve to have as much support as anyone else.”

She could not be more right.

Also highlighted in the report by Sense last year, which was entitled, “ Locked Down and Abandoned: Disabled People’s Experiences of Covid-19”, were the necessities of daily life that were involved, whether that was in education, employment, social contact, exercise, accessing food and essential supplies, medical and social care, financial support, testing kits and PPE. We know that three in four disabled people believed that their needs were overlooked, and that they have not received enough support.

That is why I believe that disabled people must be at the heart of this inquiry—yes, to learn the lessons and to be prepared for the future, but also to tackle some of the deep-rooted inequalities once and for all, and to ensure that the needs of disabled people are properly understood and prioritised.

Why is that important? First, we know that disabled people were unable to access essential support, including essential financial support, and services in the community. The introduction of the Care Act easements under the Coronavirus Act 2020 contributed to a cut or reduction of essential social care support, at a time when support should have been enhanced.

The social care system was not fit for purpose prior to the pandemic—I think we would all agree with that—and required significant investment and reform. However, despite the expiration of the easements, social care support has not returned to pre-pandemic levels. One of the worst practices was the blanket use of “do not attempt resuscitation” orders. Many families believed that they were being applied without their informed consent, and no system was in place to prevent people from not receiving lifesaving care just based on their underlying health condition. It prompts the question: why did the Government not do enough to identify the groups that were at greater risk during this pandemic?

When it comes to financial support, nearly 2 million ill and disabled people were excluded from the £20 uplift that was applied to universal credit, leaving many having to make difficult choices. The financial impact is only being worsened by the cost of living crisis. Those in receipt of social security benefits have faced a real-terms cut in support, which will push them further into poverty and hardship.

Secondly, the failure to include disabled people in policy and decision making meant that decisions were made that led to devastating consequences. For instance, not identifying vulnerable groups resulted in many being unable to access support. If a person was not classed as clinically extremely vulnerable, their support was restricted. The rigid list that was compiled meant that the vast majority of disabled people were left without support, including those with motor neurone disease, and blind and partially sighted people.

Thirdly, inclusion and accessibility were neither considered nor adhered to. Something as basic as producing inclusive information in accessible formats did not happen. That should have been the bare minimum. Throughout the pandemic, communicating key messages, information and guidance with the British people was vital, yet the daily press briefings that we all tuned into did not have any British Sign Language interpretation for deaf and hard-of-hearing people. Imagine if, during those discussions and meetings when decisions were being taken, there was input from disabled people or the organisations that work with them and represent them: just maybe, things could have been different quite early on.

Many testing sites were inaccessible. Home testing kits were, and frankly still are, inaccessible. There was a requirement to read barcodes, and instructions were not available in alternative formats. I know from my own lived personal experience the difficulties of having to use those testing kits. Goodness knows, I could not redo those boxes and send them back—it was impossible.

Finally, mental health and emotional wellbeing were tested to the limit for many disabled people. Prior to the pandemic, disabled people were already experiencing greater levels of loneliness and isolation, and the pandemic only exacerbated that. Two in three disabled people said that their mental health worsened during the pandemic.

Overall, I believe that the treatment of disabled people was well under par. That is why I consistently called for the Government to carry out and publish quality impact assessments, but my pleas went largely unheard. The one time they did publish an impact assessment, it was four months after the enactment of the Coronavirus Act. The inquiry must investigate the lack of impact assessments produced and gain a fuller understanding of what data and evidence was used when introducing policies. Government actions and decisions could have prevented the many devastating consequences that disabled people faced. The inquiry will consider any disparities evident in the impact of coronavirus, including those related to protected characteristics as set out under the Equality Act 2010, but it must also look at how protected groups intersect and the greater and wider impacts, and consider why there was not sufficient thought and planning for those groups.

The inquiry should take a human rights-led approach, such as that set out in the terms of reference for the covid public inquiry in Scotland. The omission of reference to the Human Rights Act 1998 in the UK inquiry has not gone unnoticed. I urge that it is added following the consultation process. I hope the Minister can say in her response why the UK Government took the decision not to include that Act. Does she agree that the only remedy would be to ensure that the inquiry gives due consideration to it?

As with all public inquiries, this one must be fully accessible to the public. Documents have still not been published in accessible formats, including easy read, which is not right. The website should have other formats—not just PDFs, but HTML and Word. It should not be on the user to contact the inquiry to ask, “Please can you send me an accessible version”. Such versions should be available alongside all the other documents. Again, this goes back to basics. To build trust and confidence in the inquiry, the terms of reference should state that an accessible communications policy will be implemented. That would go a long way.

I would really like the Minister to say that all parts of the covid inquiry, including hearings, will be accessible and inclusive, including all audio and visual forms of the inquiry, and for her to confirm that British Sign Language interpretation will be available. Millions of deaf and disabled people would benefit, but it would also show that the inquiry seeks to be accessible.

Will the Minister tell us why there is yet another delay? As I have highlighted, there has been mounting pressure and increasing calls for an inquiry. For public hearings to only begin in 2023—another year for people to wait—is frankly not good enough. We have a chair, but the inquiry has not formally started, and a letter from the Prime Minister is required for it to do so. That must happen now, so that no more time is wasted before we learn the lessons from the mistakes that were made.

When the terms of reference are ready and published, I hope that there will be specific reference to disabled people. I think I have given a pretty decent overview of the impact on disabled people: they have been impacted the worst and the most, and due and proper consideration should be given to them. I ask the Minister to encourage the Prime Minister to establish a panel, made up of experts with experience, to support the chair of the inquiry. She will not be surprised to hear me say that that panel should include disabled people and those who were affected by the pandemic.

Finally, will the Minister give assurances that, when preparing for future pandemics—I am sure the Government will do, are doing or have done that, but I would like her to confirm it—disabled people will not be hammered, disadvantaged and dehumanised, as they have been? I need her to give assurances today that that will never happen again.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Wheeler]

I thank my right hon. Friend for asking those questions. In just a minute I will come to an answer for him.

Importantly, the terms of reference require the inquiry to listen to the experiences of those most affected by the pandemic, including bereaved families, and to investigate any disparities evident in the impact of the pandemic and our responses. This point is crucial, because the draft terms of reference are explicit that the inquiry must look at the protected characteristics in particular, as the hon. Member for Battersea asked me more than once. I confirm that those are age, disability, race, sex, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, gender reassignment, and religion and beliefs. Each of those important issues is already in the scope of the inquiry’s terms of reference.

As I have said, it is vital that we get the terms of reference right, which is precisely why the Prime Minister asked Baroness Hallett to consult on the draft. That consultation opened on 10 March and closed on 7 April. Over the course of four weeks, Baroness Hallett and her team travelled to 11 cities across the UK and spoke to more than 150 bereaved families. They also heard from sector representatives, including those representing children, people with disabilities, and frontline and key workers including funeral directors—I will ensure the list has been extended to other frontline workers—about a range of equality issues.

People have shared their views online as to what the inquiry should investigate, what it should look at first and whether it should set an end date for its hearings. Those responding have offered their suggestions on how people who have been severely impacted by the pandemic, or who have lost loved ones, can be given a voice and be part of the inquiry. By the time the inquiry’s consultation concluded, over 20,000 individuals and organisations had responded. That is an incredible level of response, which demonstrates the depth of feeling held on this matter and the importance of getting this work right. I have no doubt that the views expressed here today on refinements to the terms of reference will also have been made through that process.

As regards Scotland, any inquiry set up by the devolved Administrations may only consider devolved matters. This inquiry will ensure that the whole of the UK can learn the right lessons for the future, and in doing so it will seek to avoid duplication with any inquiry set up on a devolved basis.

The inquiry is now collating and analysing all the responses it received. Baroness Hallett has said that she will make recommendations to the Prime Minister on the final terms of reference in May. In the interests of transparency, Baroness Hallett has committed to publishing a summary of the consultation responses received and the many meetings she has held.

Once the Prime Minister has received Baroness Hallett’s recommendations, he will consider them carefully before finalising the terms of reference and making a further statement. As regards the date when the public hearings will start, the important thing is that the inquiry will begin its formal work this spring, once the terms of reference are finalised. As the Prime Minister has always said, from that point the process, procedure and timing of the inquiry stages will be for the independent chair to determine, and it is right that we respect that.

[Marsha De Cordova]

rose—

[Mrs Wheeler]

I will finish by saying that Baroness Hallett has set out that her investigations will begin once the terms of reference are finalised. She has said that she intends to gather evidence throughout the year, with public hearings beginning in 2023. The actual inquiry will start before that, but the hearings will begin in 2023. Baroness Hallett has made it clear that she will do everything in her power to deliver the recommendations as soon as possible.

[Marsha De Cordova]

rose—

[Mrs Wheeler]

I have only a couple of minutes left. This has been a valuable debate. I hope I have been able to offer reassurance regarding the inquiry’s draft scope, which is very wide and covers the details that the hon. Member for Battersea asked for, and about the breadth and extent of the consultation process that will no doubt lead to further refinements from other frontline workers.

I extend my thanks to every individual and organisation who took the time to engage with the consultation process, whether online or in person. Their views will be crucial in getting the inquiry’s terms of reference right, in how it is run, and, in due course, in shaping our understanding of how the pandemic has impacted families and communities across the UK, and ensuring that the right lessons are learned.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Thursday 24th February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)]

10. When the public inquiry into the covid-19 pandemic will begin.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

19. When the public inquiry into the covid-19 pandemic will begin.

[The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Mrs Heather Wheeler)]

On 15 December, the Prime Minister announced the appointment of the right hon. Baroness Heather Hallett as chair of the public inquiry into covid-19. The inquiry is set to begin its work in spring 2022.

[Mrs Wheeler]

I sympathise fully with the hon. Gentleman. He has told us about his family bereavement many times, and we have all been very moved by those comments.

The inquiry will play a key role in ensuring that we learn the lessons from this terrible pandemic. To do that, we must get the terms of reference right. When the Prime Minister appointed Baroness Hallett as chair, he said he would consult her and Ministers from the devolved Administrations on the inquiry’s terms of reference, and he said that Baroness Hallett would then run a process of public consultation and engagement before the terms of reference are finalised.

To give an update, the Prime Minister has now consulted Baroness Hallett and the process of consulting the devolved Administrations is well advanced. The next stage will be to ensure that those most affected by the pandemic, including those who have sadly lost loved ones, can have their say. This process will begin and conclude very soon.

[Marsha De Cordova]

I associate myself with the earlier comments. My thoughts and prayers are with the people of Ukraine right now.

Throughout the pandemic, disabled people and those with underlying health conditions accounted for six in 10 covid-related deaths. Shockingly, when the Prime Minister declared the end of all covid restrictions and measures on Monday, there was no plan for how he would support and protect some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Have the Government not learned any lessons from the last two years? Will this public inquiry have a specific focus on the disproportionate impact of covid on disabled people?

[Mrs Wheeler]

I associate myself with the hon. Lady’s comments about Ukraine. South Derbyshire and the Derby area have a very large diaspora of Ukrainian-related families, so my thoughts and prayers are with them today.

To answer the hon. Lady’s question, and I will try to answer questions in my new role, I believe the answer is yes.

Covid-19 Update

Marsha De Cordova Excerpts

Wednesday 19th January 2022 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

My right hon. Friend has a great deal of expertise in this matter. I thank all frontline staff and others in the NHS for what they have been doing. He is right in what he says about how tired people are; they are exhausted, but they are also working heroically and doing an incredible job. It is because there are 17,000 covid cases that we need to remain cautious, despite what we heard from the Opposition Benches. We do need to remain cautious, and we do need to make sure that we continue to recruit for our amazing NHS. There are now 44,000 more healthcare professionals than there were in 2020, and that is as a result of the recruitment by this Government.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

We know that the vaccine still remains one of the best defences against this virus, but over the past month we have seen a slowing in the booster vaccination rates. Will the Prime Minister update the House as to when he expects a completion date for the booster vaccination, and will he also set out a plan as to how he will encourage take-up of the vaccination among certain groups, particularly young people?

[The Prime Minister]

The hon. Lady makes an incredibly important point and I am grateful to her. There is a job of work for all of us to do in reaching out to certain groups. At the moment, it is not actually hesitancy but apathy that is the problem. Omicron is seen wrongly to be a mild disease, so people are not getting the vaccine in the way that they might. We need to break down that apathy in those groups, and we are doing everything that we can to do that. The numbers are rising the whole time, but we want them to rise faster.