Points of Order

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Tuesday 21st May 2019 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Further to your own stricture during yesterday’s Defence questions, could you assist us further on the position of Northern Ireland veterans? As I understand it, we are due a written statement later today from the Defence Secretary on the position of veterans of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we still have no statement from the Northern Ireland Secretary in respect of those Northern Ireland veterans whose future is now very uncertain, as they do not know whether or not they are likely to be arrested, charged and prosecuted in respect of allegations made during the troubles in Northern Ireland. Surely the Northern Ireland Secretary should not be hiding from the House, but should be coming forward and making her announcement in the proper way.

[Mr Speaker]

As the right hon. Gentleman says, I did offer some strictures—as he puts it—to the House yesterday. My impression was that those strictures were not unwelcome, particularly as far as Back-Bench Members were concerned. At this point, I am not aware of any intention on the part of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to come to the Chamber to deliver an oral statement on the matter. However, the right hon. Gentleman, who speaks with very considerable experience and authority in this place, has made his concern clear. That concern was also articulated in the most unmistakable terms by a number of Members yesterday. There must be an opportunity for Members to question and probe the Secretary of State on this matter. If, therefore, an oral statement is not forthcoming, there are other tried and tested means of securing the presence of a Minister in the Chamber. I am quite sure that the right hon. Gentleman does not require a tutorial from me on that matter, and that sooner or later somebody will take advantage of that opportunity—probably sooner, rather than later.

Nuclear Power: Toshiba

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 12th November 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

The Secretary of State is a most cerebral fellow, and also unfailingly courteous, but there is a bit of pressure on time, so if he can zip through it, with that rapier-like brain of his, that would be greatly appreciated by the House.

[Sir Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we are to develop a nuclear industry with the skills and the supply chain necessary to deliver baseload electricity that is reliable and cost-effective, it really is essential to avoid the kind of long gaps in procurement—for example, between Sizewell B and Hinkley C—that we saw under Labour? Will he intensify his work to find a financing model that is equally attractive to our long-term funds as it could be to overseas investors?

NATO Summit

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 16th July 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Order. There is considerable interest, which is to be anticipated, but I make two points to the House. First, there is a statement to follow, in which there may well be considerable interest. Secondly, we have a substantial debate on the remaining stages of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill, necessitating brevity in this session, from Back Benchers and Front Benchers alike, and the non-participation of people who arrived after the Prime Minister had delivered her statement.

[Sir Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

Although the opening of accession talks with the Government in Skopje is to be welcomed, will the Prime Minister also confirm that, irrespective of Russia’s views, future membership of the alliance is open to any other country that meets the membership criteria, including other countries in the western Balkans?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 23rd October 2017 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon]

Absolutely, and smart and soft power are as important to us as hard power, which is why it is the Government’s ambition to continue to grow the defence budget, and the power and impact of our forces.

[Mr Speaker]

I note that the hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Tom Tugendhat) appears to be powered by wires. If he is subject to some sort of exterior propulsion, he may be setting a precedent for Chairs of Select Committees. We are very grateful to the hon. Gentleman, I feel sure—his attire will be closely followed in the future.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Michael Fallon]

There are regular reports to the House by myself, the Foreign Secretary and the International Development Secretary in a cycle of reporting and updating on the campaign in Iraq and Syria. I briefed Members of Parliament—I think the hon. Gentleman was present—at the Ministry last week.

The campaign is now changing, following the liberation of Raqqa and Mosul. British forces will be training further forward and are providing appropriate force protection for our personnel in and around coalition bases. I have today authorised the deployment of additional medical personnel to al-Asad air base, and extended the deployment of British engineers there for a further six months.

[Mr Speaker]

This question is a start, but there may be a statement, by one means or another, in this Chamber before very long.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Michael Fallon]

Absolutely. That is one of the things that distinguishes our armed forces from Daesh—the way in which it has unscrupulously used civilians to prosecute its case.

[Mr Speaker]

I think we should hear from a member of the Defence Committee.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 10th July 2017 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon]

That will become clearer after we leave, but we play an important part in Sophia, Althea and Atalanta not just because of our membership of the European Union but because it is in our national interest to help to deal with migration, to curb piracy off the horn of Africa and to help to stabilise the western Balkans.

[Mr Speaker]

On this question, I call John Howell.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 13th March 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

There were three questions, to be responded to with the legendary pithiness of the Secretary of State.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

The purpose of the alliance is defensive. Of course, the Americans want all its members to make a fairer contribution to its overall standing. The collective nature of our defence has been underlined by the fact that article 5 has been invoked only once before, in favour of the United States.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ruth Smeeth (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

We have obviously seen significant success in Mosul in recent months, and I am sure that the whole House joins me in sending our prayers and gratitude to those serving in our forces, but can you tell us what lessons we are learning from our success in Mosul, so that we can apply them effectively to the battle in Raqqa?

[Mr Speaker]

I cannot, but hopefully the Secretary of State can.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

I shall do my best, Mr Speaker. The campaign in Mosul is particularly complicated. West Mosul, in particular, is a very densely urban area—it is twice the density of east Mosul—so precision strikes in support of ground forces are all the more difficult for coalition aircraft, but as the campaign goes on, the use of precision air power and the training that the Iraqi forces have received make it more and more likely that they will, in the end, be successful, both in Iraq and, later on, in Syria.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 30th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon]

So far as our partnership with the United States is concerned, it is the broadest, deepest and most advanced defence partnership in the world, and my aim is to continue to strengthen it with the new Administration, particularly in the shared programmes we have on the joint strike fighter aircraft and in the reinstatement of our maritime patrol aircraft capability.

So far as European defence is concerned, I believe that the President’s remarks during the campaign and subsequently are a wake-up call to all of us in Europe to make sure that when we make these commitments, we honour them.

[Mr Speaker]

I am sure the Secretary of State meant graciously to congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton North East (Sir David Crausby) upon his knighthood, but as he did not, I do so on his behalf.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

It is a very high bar to imitate the accuracy and genius to which the right hon. Gentleman alludes.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

I am very happy to confirm the safety and effectiveness of our nuclear deterrent.

Trident: Test Firing

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 23rd January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

Especially in relation to Trident testing.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

I will do my best, Mr Speaker, but it might be quite hard. I hope you will join me in congratulating President Trump on his inauguration. Let me say how much our Prime Minister looks forward to meeting him later this week and discussing the importance of our NATO alliance to both our countries, and the importance of the nuclear deterrent within that NATO alliance.

[Mr Speaker]

What the Secretary of State said has real merit, but I was more inclined to congratulate the hon. Member for Newport West (Paul Flynn) on the ingenuity of his question.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Michael Fallon]

I agree with all three of my right hon. Friend’s propositions.

[Mr Speaker]

I am sure it went down very well at the Oxford Union.

[Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West) (LD)]

The Prime Minister was asked nothing that compromised security; she was asked what she knew, and her refusal to answer that four times is an embarrassment not just to the Government but to the United Kingdom. Does the Secretary of State not understand that at a time when the Government are making cuts in virtually all areas, not dealing with this misfiring will make people believe that the huge price tag of Trident is not worth it, and that needs to be addressed?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 12th December 2016 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon]

We have continually examined options for getting aid into Aleppo, where people are now in the most appalling situation. It is almost impossible to get food or medicines in by airdrop, when the air defences are controlled by Russia and the Syrian regime and permissions are not forthcoming. We have looked at other options, such as using the airfield—but it is outside the control of the moderate opposition—and militarised convoys. We will continue to look at all kinds of options, but it is already very, very late for the people of eastern Aleppo.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Sir George Howarth. Where is he? I call Mr Bob Stewart.

[Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con)]

When I was a young officer serving in the British Army of the Rhine and in West Berlin, I made the assumption that article 5 was a trigger: if anyone attacked a NATO nation, every member would automatically go to war. I am wondering whether that is exactly right now or whether we have just a commitment to consult, which would take much longer than an automatic reversion to war.

--- Later in debate ---

[Vernon Coaker (Gedling) (Lab)]

May I press the Secretary of State on this issue? The question was about the discussions he has had with the President-elect, and his answer was that the President-elect “confirmed the importance of NATO”. What does that actually mean for article 5 and for the policies that President-elect Trump will pursue when he becomes President? NATO and the defenders of the west need to know the answers on that. What are the Government actually saying to President-elect Trump about what policies he should pursue, and what are the answers that the Secretary of State is getting? We need a bit more than “confirmed the importance of NATO”.

[Mr Speaker]

That was a lot of questions to which I am sure a dextrous and pithy reply will trip forth from the tongue of the Secretary of State.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

As I indicated, there have been two phone calls with the Prime Minister. The incoming President has not yet taken office, and his nominees for the different offices have yet to be confirmed, but there is a clear understanding between us and the United States Administration of the importance of NATO not simply to us here but to the United States itself.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Anne-Marie Trevelyan (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (Con)]

At a time when our RAF is at full stretch on operations, the Secretary of State will be as concerned as I was to hear the announcement that RAF Halton is to close, not because the long-term defence estate consolidation is not the right direction of travel, but because the closure seems to have been sprung on the civilian and military personnel in order to meet the local council land bank deadline. Will he reassure personnel about timescale and staff support so that the decision does not create a serious retention risk?

[Mr Speaker]

Notably in relation to operations in Iraq and Syria, to which I am sure the hon. Lady intended to allude but did not quite get round to doing so.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

Decisions on closing some of the bases and airfields that we no longer need have been taken on the basis of military capability and on the advice of service chiefs. I am sure that the whole House will join my hon. Friend, and indeed the hon. Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson), in paying tribute to the work of the RAF—both the sustained tempo of its operations, which is probably at its highest for more than 25 years, and the enormous job it is doing to keep our country safe.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fabricant (Lichfield) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State join me—I am sorry; I have lost my voice, which will please many people in this House. Will the Secretary of State join me in condemning those who have condemned in turn our deployment of troops in Estonia as provocative? Does he agree that the Baltic states themselves have welcomed it in the face of Russian aggression?

[Mr Speaker]

A very good croak indeed in the circumstances.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

My hon. Friend will have noted the leader of the Labour party’s call for a demilitarised zone between NATO and Russia. It will be interesting to hear at some point whether the rest of the Labour party agrees with that, because President Putin certainly would.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Michael Fallon]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

No response from the Secretary of State is required. The hon. Member for West Dunbartonshire (Martin Docherty-Hughes) had, a moment ago, a beaming countenance, as he obviously felt he had unearthed a crucial nugget. If he is satisfied with his prodigious efforts, I am glad to bring a little happiness into his life. We will leave it there for now.

Defence Estate

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 7th November 2016 Commons Chamber

[Sir Michael Fallon]

My right hon. Friend is right—it would certainly be something of that order. I am very clear that that investment on the Clyde would not have gone ahead in an independent Scotland because our warships are built within the United Kingdom, and of course we would not be building anti-submarine frigates to help protect the deterrent if the SNP had triumphed in the referendum and voted against the deterrent.

[Mr Speaker]

It has been solemnly pointed out to me that the question was some distance from the defence estate. Nevertheless, as I have had reason to observe previously, I am inclined, on the whole, to enjoy the creative licence of the right hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove), provided of course that it is exercised within reasonable limits. He got away with it today.

[Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)]

Can the Secretary of State assure me that this is not driven solely by the need to raise cash for the MOD and that the armed forces were actively consulted about alternative uses for the land that is being disposed of? Will he use every method of leverage possible to ensure that the homes that are built are affordable, both to buy and to rent? Will he acknowledge the concerns among service personnel about the future accommodation model and the potential impact on some service families?

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Davies (Brecon and Radnorshire) (Con)]

The Secretary of State’s statement will deliver a devastating blow to the people of Brecon. The town has been proud to host a barracks since 1805, and this country has been proud to receive from those barracks the servicemen and women who have defended this country. Today, as always, a large number of military and civilian personnel are based there, and they will be very concerned about the decision that has been announced. Within the barracks, there is a regimental museum, which hosts the display celebrating and commemorating Rorke’s Drift. As we all know, Rorke’s Drift was immortalised in the film “Zulu”. In the regimental museum inside the barracks, there is the largest collection of Victoria Crosses in this country. May I ask my right hon. Friend two questions? First—this was touched on earlier—will the Infantry Battle School in Dering Lines and Severn Bridge be unaffected by these cuts? Secondly, will he join me again—I repeat, again—in visiting the barracks to discuss what future role we can have?

[Mr Speaker]

The hon. Gentleman will know that my natural generosity got the better of me.

[Sir Michael Fallon]

Let me confirm again that the infantry training centre will not be disposed of. My hon. Friend makes the very important point that the barracks contains the Royal Welch Fusiliers Museum. I have visited the museum, and seen the memorabilia associated with Private Hook and others in the battle of Rorke’s Drift. The position is that the museum is currently negotiating a long-term lease with the Ministry in order to secure lottery funding for an extension. The lease has not yet been finalised, but it is likely to contain a clause enabling the trustees to purchase the freehold if and when the site is disposed of. I hope that is helpful to my hon. Friend, but I am very happy to discuss all this further with him.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 12th September 2016 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

It is always good to be able to find common ground with my right hon. Friend on a defence matter. I certainly confirm the first part of his question, and I will do what I can to convey the gist of the second part to the BBC, too.

[Mr Speaker]

Very prudent and wise of the Secretary of State, I am sure.

[Steven Paterson (Stirling) (SNP)]

An article in The Times today on the welcome news of the ceasefire in Syria states:

“The US and Russia have agreed to work together to target Islamic State and the FSF”.

Will the Secretary of State provide more detail on how that would work in practice, how the UK will be involved and how we can ensure that such co-operation results in no civilian casualties?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 27th June 2016 Commons Chamber

[Emily Thornberry]

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer and his generous words. I shall pass on his comments to the new shadow Secretary of State for Defence when he takes up his post this afternoon; they are typical of the way in which he and his office have worked.

One particular concern that many people have is the implications of Brexit for our border controls. What will happen to our border control at Calais, what will happen to the common travel area with Ireland, and will the co-operation we currently receive from our European counterparts in respect of tackling illegal immigration be maintained? How will we go about resolving these issues? Will the armed forces play a role in that, and in what way can we keep our borders safe and secure?

[Mr Speaker]

My arithmetic may be faulty, but I counted six questions, to which I know the right hon. Gentleman will give a single pithy response, because we must make progress to other hon. Members who also have questions on the Order Paper—something it would have been good to remember earlier.

[Michael Fallon]

I will do my best, Mr Speaker, noting that the hon. Lady has postponed her defence review because she said it was

“important that the Labour party sticks together and is united”.

I leave it at that.

The Royal Navy will continue to play its part in assisting Border Force and other organisations—the European Union and NATO—in dealing with people smuggling and illegal migration, as the hon. Lady asks.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 18th April 2016 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am very happy to write to the hon. Lady about the number of meetings that may or may not have taken place. Let me be clear, however, that the programme is now under way and it is time she made up her mind as to whether she will support it or will we be taking a message to our allies, including the President of the United States, who visits on Friday, that the Opposition are no longer prepared to support a deterrent that they have always supported in the past?

[Mr Speaker]

I dare say that we will find out who thinks what when the vote comes.

[Emily Thornberry]

I asked the Secretary of State specifically about the SSRO and the Successor programme. I appreciate that he does not know the answer, so let me tell him that there have been no meetings—I have a letter here from the Ministry of Defence. The SSRO was tasked with saving at least £200 million last year through its scrutiny of MOD contracts. However, because the Secretary of State will not allow it to do its job properly, it has agreed savings of only £100,000. Why is it not being allowed to scrutinise the Successor contract? Is it because, as the Department has said:

“The government needs a safe space away from the public gaze to allow it to consider policy options… unfettered from public comment about”

their “affordability”? That is not good enough. We demand that the Secretary of State reverse the decision and open up the Successor programme to the independent scrutiny that it requires.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

I always enjoy my appearances before my right hon. Friend and his colleagues on the Select Committee. It is not always easy to reconcile the dates he offers with some of my international travel commitments but I will certainly have another look at the diary today.

[Mr Speaker]

We all know that the Secretary of State is a very busy man with many commitments and a very full diary, but the House’s Committees are very important, and I am sure that he will not forget that. Get it sorted, man.

Royal Naval Deployment: Mediterranean

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 7th March 2016 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

Lives have been lost already. Thousands drowned in the Mediterranean last year, and several hundred drowned this winter. However, I hope that the hon. Lady would not decry the contribution that we are making. The Royal Navy saved lives last year, and it will be saving lives this year through the operation that was announced today.

[Mr Speaker]

Let us hear from a cerebral inquisitor. Yes—Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg.

[Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) (Con)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his characteristic courtesy in coming to the House in person to answer the urgent question. Is this not a very interesting case study of the difference between the European Union and NATO? NATO manages to get on and save lives in a problematic situation for which the EU must take at least a large share of the blame, and which has been exacerbated by the consequences of Chancellor Merkel’s decision. While NATO is there, actively doing things, the best—the most mealy-mouthed meeting of murmurating Ministers—that can be provided by the European Union does nothing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 29th February 2016 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

The United States followed standard procedures, and made a formal request to use our bases. Once we had verified the legality of the operation, I granted permission for the United States to use our bases to support it, because they are trying to prevent Daesh from using Libya as a base from which to plan and carry out attacks that threaten the stability of Libya and the region, and indeed, potentially, the United Kingdom and our people as well. I was fully satisfied that the operation, which was a United States operation, would be conducted in accordance with international law.

[Mr Speaker]

With exemplary brevity—Tom Brake.

[Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)]

In what level of military involvement do the Government believe the British military must engage in Libya before the Prime Minister will bring any decision regarding military intervention in that country to the House?

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Resume your seat, Secretary of State. I appreciate the earnestness and commitment of the hon. Lady, but questions must be about Government policy, for which Ministers are responsible—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Be quiet, Mr Bridgen! Ministers are responsible for Government policy, not that of the Opposition. On the Government’s policy, the Secretary of State will comment; on that of the Opposition, he will not.

[Michael Fallon]

Let me confirm that this Government are committed to spending 2% of GDP on defence every year in this Parliament. The defence budget will rise by 0.5% above inflation every year of this decade and additional funding will be made available to the armed forces and intelligence agencies through the joint security fund. We have the largest defence budget in the European Union and the second largest in NATO, and this investment keeps us safe.

[Mr Speaker]

A model of the genre to be circulated without delay to all members of the Cabinet.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

Alcohol misuse and dependency continue to create serious health risks, including those that can lead to loss of life, in the armed forces, where its use is three times higher than in the civilian population. It is now a year since the Defence Select Committee highlighted the fact that the Government’s alcohol strategy for the armed forces had made no noticeable difference. What steps is the Secretary of State now taking to set targets to manage alcohol consumption patterns and to address this serious issue?

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

As I said earlier, it was a pleasure to be the first Defence Secretary to visit the islands for more than a decade and to meet many of the 1,200 service personnel who are based there and to confirm our investment programme of £180 million over the next 10 years. Unlike the situation with the Labour party, nobody can be in any doubt about our commitment to the right of the islanders to determine their own future, and not to have it bargained away by a possible Labour Government reaching some accommodation with Argentina.

[Mr Speaker]

Alex Cunningham. Not here.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

No.

[Mr Speaker]

Last but not least, I call Mr Philip Hollobone.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

Since the parliamentary vote on Syria at the beginning of December, there have been 319 RAF airstrikes against Daesh in Iraq and 43 RAF airstrikes against Daesh in Syria. As we are meant to be targeting the head of the snake, why have there been seven and a half times more airstrikes in Iraq?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 13th July 2015 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

With respect, I do not think it is lip service that, as I said, we have committed nearly £1 billion to building the next generation of frigates in Scotland. We are already building offshore patrol vessels in Scotland. Scotland is getting the bulk of the work on the two aircraft carriers. It will be home to one of our three fastjet fleets, and it will constitute the entire home submarine base of the Royal Navy. Scotland does very well out of the defence budget inside a United Kingdom.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am very grateful for the Secretary of State’s reply, but we are pressed for time.

[Richard Drax (South Dorset) (Con)]

While I warmly welcome the 2% of GDP we have committed to spending on defence, which is excellent news, we must not be complacent, because although the quality of what we are ordering is brilliant, for future events—perhaps, God forbid, a serious and more widespread conflict—we are still down on the quantity.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 8th June 2015 Commons Chamber

[Brendan O'Hara (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)]

In the forthcoming SDSR, what cognisance will the Secretary of State give to the fact that in last month’s general election a clear majority of the Scottish electorate voted for parties that put opposition to Trident at the forefront of their manifesto and that 57 of 59 Members returned from Scotland do not want Trident renewal to go ahead? What cognisance will he give to the fact that the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Churches and the Scottish trade unions are also opposed to Trident—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We are immensely grateful to the hon. Gentleman.

[Michael Fallon]

Successive Governments have supported the renewal of our nuclear deterrent that has helped to keep this country safe, and we are committed to replacing all four Vanguard submarines with new submarines that will serve this country until at least 2060. The deterrent is a major employer. Thousands of jobs are at stake in Faslane, in the hon. Gentleman’s own constituency, so I hope that he will consider the consequences of his policy on his own constituents.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

Let me assure the hon. Gentleman that the in-year savings that we have been asked to find for the current financial year are way below the original demand of the Treasury. They do not affect the 2% target that we are continuing to meet, they will have no effect on manpower numbers or on current operations—I have just explained to the House that we are extending one of our current operations in Iraq—and they will have no effect on the baseline of defence expenditure before the negotiations begin in the autumn. These savings will fall on some in-year expenditure on travel costs and on consultancy, and we will defer some spending on infrastructure and equipment from this financial year to the next—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We are deeply obliged to the Secretary of State, but the answer is too long. We have to move on.

[Richard Benyon (Newbury) (Con)]

We are all waiting for the National Security Council risk assessment that the Government are carrying out at the moment. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that there will be an intellectual and coherent thread from that through to the strategic defence and security review, and from that to the comprehensive spending review?

Falkland Islands Defence Review

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Tuesday 24th March 2015 Commons Chamber

[Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con)]

If an Argentine Government were foolish enough to give instructions to a military officer to invade the Falklands—they had better get the message that that would be very foolish— Mount Pleasant airfield and Mare harbour would be vital ground. May I suggest—I am not asking a question, but making a statement with which I hope the Defence Secretary will agree—that the Falkland Islands Government and the Governor are also vital ground, and should be protected as well?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I think that counts as a question. The hon. Gentleman is being too hard on himself.

[Michael Fallon]

I sense that my hon. Friend is inviting me to agree with him, and I do agree with him. The Governor and the Falkland Islands Government are a key part of the democracy that is the Falkland Islands, and a key part of the Falkland islanders’ ability to determine their own future, as they have just done.

Service Personnel (Ukraine)

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Wednesday 25th February 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mr Skinner]

No, Mrs Thatcher did to get more oil during the pit strike—

[Mr Speaker]

Order.

[Michael Fallon]

It was a mission to help the Libyan people get rid of a dictator and give them the chance of choosing a better future. Obviously, we would want to see the situation in Libya improve.

This is a closely defined training mission. We think it is right to respond to the call for help. If the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that we should shun such a call, I cannot agree with him.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 23rd February 2015 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I have set out our planning assumptions for the current defence budget, but I still think we ought to hear exactly what the Opposition’s plan is. Are they going to match our £34 billion a year, or are they going to cut it? Is it match or cut? [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Not very statesmanlike. Mr Jones, you aspire to be a statesman. I have sought to encourage and nurture your ambitions. [Interruption.] No, he says from a sedentary position. Don’t be so unambitious, man, for goodness’ sake.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

May I wish my hon. Friend a very happy birthday?

As I said, Her Majesty’s Government have gifted some 40 heavy machine guns with spares and some 480,000 rounds of 12.7 mm ammunition, in addition to 49 tonnes of non-lethal assistance, which was directly supported with training on machine guns. Most of the requests for equipment we have received are of types that British forces do not normally use, but through our strategic air transport capability, we have been able to work with other countries to deliver more than 300 tonnes of weapons, ammunition and equipment from mostly east European—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. So many distinguished colleagues; so little time to hear them.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 12th January 2015 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

What is different is that the Leader of the Opposition, who was challenged on this just a week ago, spoke only about the need for the least-cost deterrent, without repeating—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I know that the Secretary of State can generally look after himself, but Members must not seek to shout him down. I always facilitate full exchanges on all these important matters, but the Secretary of State must be heard.

[Michael Fallon]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is a very important matter. The Leader of the Opposition did not repeat Labour’s previous commitment to what matters, which is a continuous-at-sea deterrent. What we cannot have is any kind of part-time deterrent, which would rely on our enemies being part-time as well.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Fallon]

In stark contrast to the previous Government, our defence budget has been properly managed and has enabled us to keep this country safe. We are determined to support Future Force 2020. The hon. Gentleman’s question might be better directed to the shadow Defence Secretary, who last week told The Times:

“Army 2020 isn’t working and Labour will not take it forward”,

although last year he said that

“we support the rationale behind…Future Force 2020”.

[Mr Speaker]

Last but not least, I call Mr Duncan Hames.

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

Allied warplanes cross the skies above Syria while Assad’s helicopters drop barrel bombs on the civilian population. How can this apparent indifference help us to prevent the civilian population of Syria from turning to the ISIL militia?

Al-Sweady Inquiry Report

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Wednesday 17th December 2014 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who, of course, brings to this House very direct experience of the battlefield and the instant decisions that have to be taken on it. He has particular knowledge of the obligation on our soldiers—which they accept gladly—to do their very best, when the battle is over, for the wounded and for those detained.

[Mr Speaker]

I think the hon. Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart) was asking the Secretary of State to agree with him, and the Secretary of State did agree with him. The hon. Gentleman is therefore now, I am sure, doubly happy.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 24th November 2014 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

My hon. Friend has been pressing me on this issue for some time and I can confirm today that while the Clyde will become our main submarine base from 2020, HMS Torbay and HMS Trenchant, which are both due to decommission shortly, will remain at Devonport in order to minimise disruption to their crews and the crews’ families.

[Mr Speaker]

I am taking a relaxed attitude, the House should know, because there is protected time for subsequent business and I cannot bear to see colleagues disappointed unnecessarily.

Points of Order

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 24th November 2014 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Defence (Michael Fallon)]

indicated assent.

[Mr Speaker]

I was not aware that we were, but the nod of the Secretary of State’s head perhaps provides the hon. Gentleman and the House with the succour that he sought.

Willenhall Crown Post Office

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Wednesday 26th March 2014 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am certainly going to pass the hon. Gentleman’s kind invitation on to the post office Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff Central (Jenny Willott), and perhaps she can go and see for herself and establish beyond any doubt whether the location is optimal. Of course, I stand to be corrected by the hon. Gentleman, as he will know it far better than any of the Ministers, but it is my understanding that it is not on the main high street. All I have seen is a photograph of the location, but let me pass on his very kind invitation and we will see whether my hon. Friend is able to find time in her diary to take it up herself.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. May I just say to the Minister of State that we wish his hon. Friend the post office Minister an early recovery from her indisposition, but in the unfortunate event that it were to be lengthy, which we very much hope will not be the case, the Minister of State could always consider taking responsibility for the invitation and attending in her stead, and I am sure he would anticipate that with enthusiasm?

[Michael Fallon]

The House always benefits from your interventions, Mr Speaker, and thank you for your kind good wishes to my hon. Friend. I think the House has already guessed that my hon. Friend would normally have been answering this debate. I receive a number of kind invitations from all quarters of the House to visit, and I will certainly consider a visit to Walsall when I next draw up my regional visits programme.

The commitment I have outlined demonstrates that the Post Office has a plan that sustains and improves services. It is a plan that sees the introduction of new products and services. This is not a return to the closure programmes seen under the last Administration.

Alongside the plans to modernise and improve the Crown network, we are also delivering our network transformation programme, which is seeing the modernisation of up to 8,300 post offices by 2018. That includes Bloxwich post office in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, which has converted to the new main model. The customers of that branch can now access Post Office services between 8.30 in the morning on their way to work and 7 o’clock in the evening on their way home. Across the UK, more than 3,000 sub-postmasters have signed up to convert, and nearly 2,000 branches, such as the one in Bloxwich, have already converted and are open and operating.

In 2010, we set out our commitments to the post office network in our policy statement, “Securing the Post Office network in the digital age”. I stand here three years later and tell the House that we are delivering on those commitments, and we will continue to deliver. We said then that there will be no programme of post office closures under this Government and there is not—and nor will there be. We said that we will provide £1.34 billion for the Post Office to modernise the network—we are providing that money and the Post Office is modernising. In November last year, we announced a further £640 million funding package to enable the programme to be extended to modernise and protect the whole network by 2018.

We said that we want to see the Post Office become a genuine front office for Government, and the company has so far won every contract it has bid for in the past three years, including the vital Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency front office contract. We said that we will support the expansion of accessible and affordable personal financial services through the Post Office, and we are doing so. My hon. Friend the Member for East Dunbartonshire (Jo Swinson) was delighted to be one of the first people to open a Post Office current account last year when the company began a pilot in East Anglia. We also said that we will create the opportunity for a mutually owned Post Office. We have held a public consultation on that, and the company, alongside its stakeholders, is engaging the public to agree its public benefit purpose.

In summary, this Government’s track record on the Post Office speaks for itself. We remain committed to the network and we are continuing to invest in it to secure its future. The proposals of the Post Office to seek a franchise partner in Willenhall will ensure that the hon. Gentleman and his constituents will continue to benefit from continued and improved access to vital post office services.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Before I put the Question on the Adjournment, the hon. Member for Devizes (Claire Perry) has a point of order relating to the Division at 3.23 pm, in respect of which she was a Teller.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Thursday 6th March 2014 Commons Chamber

[Richard Graham]

On my last trade envoy mission to Indonesia, I arranged for a film to be made of about a dozen SMEs that were with me before, during and after the mission in order to show it at later seminars across the country to convince small businesses that they can export successfully to far-away growth markets. Does my right hon. Friend agree that such low-cost films made by different trade envoys in different markets could be an attractive tool to encourage SMEs to export?

[Mr Speaker]

I have just learned something new. I did not know that the hon. Gentleman was a trade envoy, but I do now and I am pleased to learn it.

[Michael Fallon]

I agree that films can be a useful way of helping businesses to understand the benefits of exporting. My hon. Friend will be interested to hear that UKTI is producing a series of “Exporting is GREAT” videos based on companies that feature in its campaign. There are currently four videos for Cundall, Angloco, Serious Games and for Lye Cross Farm, which exports cheese to France.

[Mr Speaker]

It is always useful to have a bit of additional information.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Thursday 23rd January 2014 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Michael Fallon)]

With permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer this question together with Question 5.

[Mr Speaker]

Unfortunately not. It is perfectly reasonable for the Minister of State to seek to do so, but the attempted grouping falls because I fear that the hon. Member for Derby North (Chris Williamson) is not present in the Chamber.

[Michael Fallon]

I was hoping there would be some interest in this question.

We believe that value for money should be assessed over the long term and should consider not merely the proceeds from the initial sale but the value of the taxpayer’s retained stake in Royal Mail and the reduced risk to the taxpayer and the six-day-a-week universal service of a stable company with access now to private capital.

EU Funding (Rotherham and Barnsley)

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 1st July 2013 Commons Chamber

[John Healey]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think that the Minister was suggesting that I had misled the House, when in fact what I had told him was that the patterns of actual spend in the European regional development fund funding for the final years of this current programme are broadly similar right across the range and have not sharply dropped as the original plan envisaged.

[Mr Speaker]

I was listening and I thought the Minister was saying that he did not want the House to be misled. I am sure that he would not accuse any Member of misleading the House, because he would be in breach of our procedures if he did. The Minister was not suggesting that, was he?

[Michael Fallon]

I certainly was not, Mr Speaker. I just wanted to make it absolutely clear that in each of the past three years the allocation has been €20 million and for each of the next seven years it will be €23 million. I cannot call that a cut, and if other colleagues can, I am extremely puzzled.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Thursday 6th June 2013 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am sure my hon. Friend will understand that I cannot comment on any specific wind farm proposal that is subject to the local planning authority and potentially to the Planning Inspectorate and Ministers, but as he will shortly hear in more detail from the unstarred question which I think you have allowed, Mr Speaker, the planning guidance is to be clarified to ensure that the visual impact of turbines, the cumulative impact of turbines and local factors are taken more clearly into account before consent is given.

[Mr Speaker]

The Minister got the U right, but the U is not for unstarred; it is for urgent.

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

I welcome local authorities being allowed to make their own decisions on the merits of wind turbine applications. Does the Minister agree that setting excessive minimum separation distances, as proposed in a private Member’s Bill in the House of Lords last year, or more recently by Wiltshire council, only serves to deny local communities the chance to have their say?

Energy Bill

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 3rd June 2013 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change (Michael Fallon)]

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

[Mr Speaker]

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Government new clause 9—Capacity market rules: procedure.

Government new clause 10—Capacity market rules: further provision.

New clause 5—Expert panel—

‘Schedule [The Expert Panel] has effect.’.

New schedule 1—

‘The Expert Panel

1 Regulations shall establish a panel of experts (in this Act referred to as “the Expert Panel”) in accordance with paragraphs (2) to (6) below.

Duty to consult

2 (1) Regulations made by virtue of paragraph 1 shall provide that before—

(a) any contracts for differences are entered into under Part 1; or

(b) any investment contracts are entered into under Schedule 3

the Secretary of State shall seek advice from, and the opinion of, the Expert Panel in relation to the matters specified in sub-paragraph (2) below.

(2) The matters in relation to which advice and opinion is to be sought from the Expert Panel are—

(a) any advice provided to the Secretary of State by the national system operator;

(b) the financial and other terms on which it is proposed a contract for difference or an investment contract be entered into;

(c) whether the agreed strike price (or equivalent) and the term of the contract represents value for money for consumers; and

(d) whether, in all the circumstances, it is appropriate for the CFD Counterparty to enter into the relevant contract.

(3) Where the Secretary of State proposes to disregard in whole or in part any of the advice or opinion provided by the Expert Panel, he shall be under a duty to ensure the Expert Panel is provided with his reasons for disregarding or disagreeing with the advice or opinion and place a copy of the reasoning in the Library of the House.

3 (1) provide that it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State and the national system operator to provide the Expert Panel with all such information as it may require;

(2) require the Expert Panel to provide the Authority and Parliament with details of any advice and opinion provided under this Part;

(3) require the Expert Panel to publish minutes of its meetings; and

(4) permit the Expert Panel to publish such information as the Expert Panel thinks fit about the advice it gives.

Membership etc. of the Expert Panel

4 The members of the Expert Panel shall be appointed by the Secretary of State and shall comprise a Chairman, a consumer representative, a representative of the Committee on Climate Change, a representative of the Authority and such other members as the Secretary of State may decide.

5 (1) In appointing persons to be members of the Expert Panel, the Secretary of State must secure, so far as practicable, that the Expert Panel—

(a) is independent; and

(b) is comprised of technical, academic, economic, legal and such other experts necessary to give the informed advice required.

(2) The Expert Panel must not include any person who is—

(a) employed by an eligible generator, or who has been employed by an eligible generator in the previous 12 months;

(b) employed by an electricity supplier, or who has been employed by an electricity supplier in the previous 12 months; or

(c) employed by the national system operator.

(3) The Chairman and every member of the Expert Panel—

(a) shall be appointed for a fixed period, specified in the terms of their appointment, but shall be eligible for reappointment at the end of that period;

(b) shall not serve on the Expert Panel for longer than eight years in total;

(c) may at any time be removed by a notice from the Expert Panel to the Secretary of State following a majority vote.

Committees and other procedures of the Expert Panel

6 The Expert Panel may make such arrangements as they think fit—

(a) for committees established by the Expert Panel to give advice to it about carrying out the Expert Panel’s functions, providing such committees only include persons who are members of the Expert Panel;

(b) for regulating its own procedure and for regulating the procedure of committees established by them, including timescales of giving advice, as it sees fit;

(c) as to quorums and the making of decisions by majority.’.

Amendment 162, in clause 5, page 4, line 42, at end add—

‘with predominating weight given to (2)(c) the cost to consumers.’.

Government amendment 52.

Amendment 163, in clause 6, page 5, line 21, at end insert—

‘(c) which is a public document and will be made available, together with all related documents, by the Secretary of State and the parties to the contract.’.

Amendment 23, page 5, line 28, at end insert—

‘, with the exception of electricity generated from nuclear power stations’.

Amendment 32, page 5, line 29, at end insert—

‘ “Biomass” means fuel used in a generating station where—

‘(a) at least 90 per cent of its energy content is derived from relevant material (that is to say, material which is, or is derived directly or indirectly from, plant matter, animal matter, funghi or algae), and

(b) if fossil fuel forms part of it—

(i) the fossil fuel is present following a process—

(aa) to which the relevant material has been subject, and

(bb) the undertaking of which has caused the fossil fuel to be present in, on or with that material even though that was not the object of the process; or

(ii) it is waste and the fossil fuel forming part of it was not added to it with a view to its being used as a fuel.

“Qualifying combined heat and power generating station” means a combined heat and power generating station which has been accredited under the CHPQA.’.

Government amendments 53 to 60.

Amendment 33, in clause 10, page 8, line 28, at end insert—

‘(10) A direction may not be given under this section to a fossil fuel or renewable energy plant with a rated capacity of 15MW or greater that use any biomass unless they are—

(a) a qualifying combined heat and power generating station; or

(b) an operational carbon capture and storage plant.’.

Government amendment 61.

Amendment 24, in clause 11, page 8, line 37, at end insert—

‘(3) Payments offered under a contract for difference relating to the supply of electricity generated by nuclear power must not exceed payments offered under any contract for the supply of electricity from renewable sources.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (3)—

(a) the calculation of payments must include both the strike price and the duration of the contract;

(b) renewable sources are defined in accordance with Article 2 of Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources.’.

Government amendments 62 to 65.

Amendment 152, in clause 17, page 11, line 6, at end insert—

‘(2A) In determining for the purposes of an order under subsection (1) whether the maximum cost provided for by the order has been reached, or a cost greater than that maximum would be incurred, a cost is to be taken into account if, and only if, it has been incurred, or is to be incurred, in connection with low carbon electricity generation.

(2B) The Secretary of State may give a direction suspending the effect of an order under subsection (1) for such period, and in relation to costs of such description, as are specified in the direction.

(2C) Before giving a direction under subsection (2B) the Secretary of State must consult such persons as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate.’.

Amendment 164, in clause 18, page 11, line 33, at end insert—

‘(i) All consumers of electricity upon whom the costs of the regulations will fall.’.

Amendment 27, page 11, line 35, at end insert—

‘(3) Before making regulations under this Chapter which relate to nuclear electricity generation, the Secretary of State must ask the National Audit Office to carry out an examination of and produce a report on whether the terms of the contract for difference offer value for money.

(4) The Secretary of State may ask the National Audit Office to carry out an examination and produce a report on the terms of a contract relating to non-nuclear generation.

(5) The National Audit Office report and recommendations must be published one month before a contract is laid before Parliament.’.

Amendment 48, in clause 21, page 12, line 40, at end insert—

‘capacity may be secured by capacity auctions or by the establishment of a strategic reserve or by other means’.

Amendment 165, in clause 22, page 13, line 15, after ‘agreement’ insert—

‘is a public document to be made available, together with all related documents, by the Secretary of State and the parties to the agreement; and’.

Government amendments 101 and 102.

Amendment 29, in clause 22, page 13, line 21, at end insert—

‘(2A) Electricity capacity regulations may not make provision in respect of fossil fuel plants.

(2B) For the purposes of subsection (2A) “fossil fuel plant” means an electricity generating station which satisfies the conditions in Chapter 8, Section 42(4)(b).’.

Amendment 28, page 13, line 23, at end insert—

‘(3A) Capacity agreements may not be made in respect of nuclear electricity generation.’.

Amendment 49, page 14, line 6, at end insert—

‘(e) conferring on the Secretary of State the power by regulation to introduce a system of strategic reserve of supply; and

(f) conferring on The Secretary of State by regulation the power to designate a nominated person to hold and manage the Strategic Reserve on his behalf (“the Strategic Reserve Operator”).’.

Government amendment 103.

Amendment 50,  page 14, line 9, at end add—

(a) A person is eligible to be designated as the Strategic Reserve Operator if the person is—

(i) a company formal and registered under the Companies Act 2006; or

(ii) a public authority, including any person whose functions are of a public nature.

(b) The Strategic Reserve Operator must contract with the System Operator for the circumstances under which the Strategic Reserve Operator supplies power to the System Operator.

(c) The Secretary of State must approve the drawing up of any contract between the System Operator and the Strategic Reserve Operator and may from time to time vary the terms of the contract should circumstances require.

(d) The Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a reasoned case for any change of content under subsection (5).

(e) Strategic Reserve regulations may make provision for payments to be made by electricity suppliers or capacity providers to a settlement body for the purposes of enabling the body—

(i) to meet such descriptions of its costs that the Secretary of State considers appropriate;

(ii) to hold sums in reserve;

(iii) to make payments to the Strategic Reserve Operator for the purpose of securing and operating Strategic Reserve capacity.’.

Government amendment 104.

Amendment 166, in clause 27, page 15, line 40, leave out ‘may’ and insert ‘must’.

Government amendments 105 to 107.

Amendment 94, in page 23, line 5, leave out clause 38.

Amendment 151, in clause 38, page 23, line 34, at end add—

‘(5) The Secretary of State may not exercise the power under subsection (1) if the consequence would be to raise the price of electricity for consumers.’.

Amendment 153, in clause 41, page 25, leave out lines 35 to 42.

Amendment 154, page 27, leave out lines 9 and 10.

Amendment 155, page 28, line 17, leave out ‘may’ and insert—

‘must, so as to make good the shortfall,’.

Amendment 156, page 27, line 14, before ‘make’, insert—

‘and insofar as subsection (12) applies must,’.

Amendment 157, page 29, line 8, leave out subsection (6).

Amendment 158, page 29, line 7, leave out ‘(10)’ and insert ‘(9)’.

Amendment 159, page 34, leave out from line 8 to end of line 37 on page 35.

Amendment 160, page 36, leave out from line 1 to end of line 46.

Amendment 161, page 37, leave out lines 18 and 19.

Amendment 167, page 36, line 5, leave out ‘the costs’ and insert ‘the publicly substantiated costs’.

Amendment 168, page 36, line 8, leave out ‘the income’ and insert ‘the publicly substantiated income’.

Amendment 169, page 36, line 24, at end insert—

‘(g) the costs to consumers’.

Amendment 170, page 38, line 10, leave out

‘A certificate purchase order may provide for’

and insert—

‘A certificate purchase order will require at least the same level of information as required under the Renewables Obligation and may provide for’.

Amendment 171, page 38, line 37, leave out ‘may’ and insert ‘must’.

Amendment 172, page 38, line 38, leave out ‘subsection (3)’ and insert ‘Section 32X’.

Amendment 95, in page 42, line 27, leave out clause 42.

Amendment 173, in clause 42, page 42, line 28, at beginning insert—

‘Unless the Secretary of State or the Regulator permits otherwise in the consumer interest,’.

Amendment 174, page 42, line 31, leave out ‘7.446’ and insert ‘8.760’.

Amendment 179, page 42, line 35, at end insert—

‘( ) Section 42(1) is not to apply in relation to CCS plant until completion of the commissioning and proving period that shall last no longer than 3 years.’.

Amendment 150, page 42, line 36, leave out ‘2044’ and insert ‘2029’.

Amendment 96, in page 43, line 41, leave out clause 43.

Amendment 175, in clause 43, page 43, line 43, at end insert—

‘or significant risk of other disadvantage to the consumer.’.

Amendment 97, in page 45, line 14, leave out clause 44.

Amendment 98, in page 45, line 32, leave out clause 45.

Amendment 99, in page 46, line 36, leave out clause 46.

Amendment 176, in clause 50, page 50, line 16, leave out

‘As soon as is reasonably practical’

and insert ‘Within one month’.

Amendment 177, page 50, line 16, leave out ‘five years’ and insert ‘one year’.

Government amendment 66.

Amendment 178, page 50, line 31, at end insert—

‘(d) assess and detail the impact on electricity prices to the various classes of consumers of the measures described in the Act.’.

Government amendments 119 to 125.

Amendment 21, in clause 121, page 92, line 15, leave out from ‘objects’ to end of line 17.

Amendment 22, page 92, line 17, at end insert—

‘(f) requiring a licence holder to ensure that—

(i) customers on prepayment meters shall be charged the lowest tariff available from that licence holder;

(ii) no more than 20 per cent. of each payment made goes towards meeting outstanding debt.’.

Government amendments 126 to 133, 68 and 134.

Amendment 26, page 106, line 40, in schedule 2, at end insert—

‘(2A) Before entering into an investment contract, the Secretary of State must ask the National Audit Office to carry out an examination of and produce a report on whether the terms of the contract offer value for money.

(2B) The National Audit Office report and recommendations must be published one month before a contract is laid before Parliament.’.

Government amendment 71.

Amendment 25, page 107, line 43, in schedule 2, at end insert—

‘(6A) An investment contract may not include provision to underwrite or provide state guarantees for all or part of the construction costs of nuclear generation plants.’.

Government amendment 72.

Amendment 9, page 108, line 24, at end insert—

‘( ) For the purposes of paragraphs 1 and 2, information is “confidential information” only if it constitutes a trade secret.’.

Amendment 8, page 108, line 26, leave out paragraph 3.

Government amendments 73 to 90.

Amendment 148, page 119, line 13, in schedule 4, at end insert—

‘(iii) substantial pollution abatement equipment dealing with oxides of sulphur, oxides of nitrogen, heavy metal emissions or particles is fitted to the generating station.’.

Amendment 149, page 119, line 39, leave out ‘42(5)(b)’ and insert ‘42(6)(b)’.

[Michael Fallon]

I rise to speak to Government new clauses 8, 9 and 10, and Government amendments 52 to 66, 68, 71 to 90, 101 to 107, and 119 to 135. I should also like to respond to the amendments tabled by hon. Members. I ask the indulgence of the House if my speech is necessarily fuller than it might be so that I can do justice to each of the six main areas in the group, namely the transparency of investment contracts; the counterparty arrangements; the capacity market; nuclear power; other issues including biomass, emissions performance standards and the costs of electricity market reform; and consumer tariffs.

I thank Opposition Members and other hon. Members for their contributions in Committee. The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker), said at the time that the Bill needed clear accountability and that Parliament must have the information it needs to scrutinise the delivery of electricity market reform properly.

New clause 5 and new schedule 1 seek to establish an expert panel to scrutinise electricity market reform. Let me assure hon. Members that development of the contracts for difference and investment contracts will be informed by close consultation with relevant experts. We have already taken a number of steps in that regard, which is why I suggest that new clause 5 and new schedule 1 are unnecessary.

Our decisions on strike prices for CFDs will be informed by analysis from the National Grid. The robustness of that analysis will be scrutinised by an independent panel of technical experts who will report to the Government. Their report will be published. Any divergence of opinion between the panel, the Government and National Grid will be reported and explained. Given the existing role of the panel of technical experts, I do not see a wider remit for another expert panel to look at CFDs.

I agree that investment contracts should be subject to rigorous scrutiny and the best available advice, which they will be. For investment contracts relating to renewables projects, I am minded to use the draft CFD strike prices informed by the robust process just outlined. For other low-carbon technologies, which are bilaterally negotiated, specialist advice will be sought as appropriate and there will be rigorous scrutiny. For example, for Hinkley Point C we have appointed technical and financial specialists to advise on whether any proposal represents value for money. We will publish details of that contract when and if it is negotiated.

Growth and Infrastructure Bill

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Tuesday 23rd April 2013 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Before I call the Minister, I have to tell the House that the original message from the Lords was defective, so Commons Bill paper 162 did not include the amendments in lieu proposed by the Lords. This has now been rectified and a revised Bill paper 162 is in the Vote Office. The first motion therefore relates to the Lords amendments in lieu 7B and 7C, as on the revised Bill paper.

After Clause 4

Development orders: development within the curtilage of a dwelling house

[The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Michael Fallon)]

I beg to move,

That this House agrees with the Lords in their amendments 7B and 7C in lieu of Lords amendment 7, to which this House has disagreed.

[Mr Speaker]

With this we will consider the motion that this House insists on its disagreement to Lords amendment 25 but proposes amendments (a) to (e) to the words restored to the Bill by that disagreement.

[Michael Fallon]

I thank their noble Lordships and Members of the House of Commons for their thorough and thoughtful consideration of the Bill. There are two main issues before us.

Let me begin by introducing the revised approach to the Government’s proposed relaxation of permitted development rights for home owners. During our consideration of Lords amendments in this House last week, the Secretary of State gave a commitment to reflect on the representations made and to adopt a revised approach. We have reflected carefully on the points raised by Members here and by noble Lords in the other place in their detailed deliberations on the issue, and in particular on the concern that adjoining neighbours would not have an opportunity to make representations on such developments.

In expanding the permitted development rights for domestic extension, the Government propose to adjust the balance between home owners and local authorities, to make it easier and cheaper for families to make room for growing teenagers, or indeed for elderly parents who wish to come and live with them. Those changes reflect the Secretary of State’s recognition that a requirement to make a planning application is out of proportion to the wider impact of development. That is an important principle.

However, we have always said that it is important to balance the benefits against the potential impact that extensions can have on neighbours. Having listened to the concerns expressed, we tabled an amendment which was agreed by their Lordships yesterday without a Division, to ensure that adjoining neighbours will be consulted when the new rights are exercised. We drew inspiration for the amendment from the 2007 “Quality of Life” report by my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Zac Goldsmith).

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Thursday 21st March 2013 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am looking forward to attending the FSB’s annual conference with the Secretary of State in the hon. Gentleman’s constituency tomorrow, and to hearing more about how it applauds what was in yesterday’s Budget. I hope the hon. Gentleman will be there, too.

On the regional fund’s allocation for the east midlands, this is a competitive fund. There are no specific targets for each region and 19 bids have been selected in the east midlands. Subject to finalising the award I mentioned, the Leicester and Leicestershire LEP programme will support SMEs across the hon. Gentleman’s constituency with 25% capital investment grants ranging from £25,000 up to £150,000. I hope he will encourage—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The answer is too long.

[Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD)]

The regional growth fund has certainly attracted interest in Wiltshire, with bids from Melksham’s Cooper Tires and the Corsham Institute. Whether it brings sustainable energy solutions or exploits the digital economy, is this not a welcome diversification of Wiltshire’s economy?

Growth and Infrastructure Bill

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Monday 5th November 2012 Commons Chamber

[Tristram Hunt]

rose—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The Minister of State is not giving way. He gives every indication at this stage of wishing to plough on, and that is his entitlement.

[Michael Fallon]

Of course we will listen in Committee to the debate on each clause, but the Labour party is going to have to be a lot more persuasive than it has been this afternoon.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Thursday 6th September 2012 Commons Chamber

[Michael Fallon]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for what she says, and I am happy to look again at the matter. The Government are working with the Royal Society to see what can be done to encourage more women into engineering, and specific help is available from Government to help with engineering training, particularly for the automotive industry.

[Mr Speaker]

The hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Meg Munn) has provided an object lesson to new Members in how to shoehorn one’s own question into someone else’s, and we are greatly obliged to her.

Civil Service Reform

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Tuesday 19th June 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Michael Fallon) has an intriguing approach to indicating his desire to be called—he raises his eyebrows in a very pointed fashion—but I can assure him that I was going to call him anyway.

[Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

Is it fair that businesses outside London and the south-east must compete for staff against public offices whose pay and conditions are set nationally? If local pay works so well and flexibly for the Courts Service, why would we be squeamish about extending it?

Government Spending Cuts

Debate between Michael Fallon and John Bercow

Wednesday 26th May 2010 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Understandably, there is intense interest in this subject, with a very large number of Members wishing to contribute. If I am to have any chance of accommodating even a significant proportion of those who are standing, I require from each Back-Bench Member a single, short, supplementary question. I know that there will be an appropriately economical reply from the Chief Secretary.

[Michael Fallon (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend accept that although there were, obviously, extenuating circumstances on Monday, it is always best if these announcements can be made to Parliament first? Will he also confirm that the economic recovery is unlikely to be jeopardised by cuts to the cost and bureaucracy of quangos? It is far more likely to be put in danger by a Government who would simply sit on their hands for the next 12 months.