Wednesday 15th June 2022

(1 year, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Order. As hon. Members can see, there is a lot of interest in this debate. The winding-up speeches will start no later than 4.45 pm, with 10 minutes each for the Front-Bench spokespeople. John McDonnell is next for five minutes, but to get as many people in as we can, we will then drop the time limit to three minutes.

--- Later in debate ---
Angus Brendan MacNeil Portrait Angus Brendan MacNeil
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for giving way. Is it not ironic, or does he not think it is ironic that, with a Prime Minister who talks about a higher-wage economy, the minute people start—

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Order. Can the hon. Gentleman face the front, please?

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. There is now a three-minute limit.

Mike Penning Portrait Sir Mike Penning (Hemel Hempstead) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

To go back to close to the final comments of the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Louise Haigh), she said she was looking for a firefighter—well, here he is. I was a member of the Fire Brigades Union when it was thrown out of the Labour party because we were too militant, so I have been around this circuit many times.

I found the speech of the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) quite frightening, because we can reverse that argument about the trade unions going back and getting ready for a fight. That is turning round to the British public and saying, “You voted Tory, so we’re going to punish you.” That feeling is as strong in my constituency now and in other parts of the country as it has ever been. This dispute does not need to take place, because it is too early to call this sort of strike. It is really early—we are right at the front. Why now? Why call a strike at such an early position? [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Angus Brendan MacNeil) has been chuntering away from a sedentary position for about the last two hours. Shut up! We are fed up with it.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Order. Let us be much more conciliatory—[Interruption.] That is my job, not that of the right hon. Gentleman. Let us be conciliatory and use moderate language throughout this debate. It doesn’t need any more heat.

Mike Penning Portrait Sir Mike Penning
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

What I am trying to get across is that there is anger here, on both sides, and my constituents will not be able to go to work, because people are on strike who did not have to go to work during the lockdown when the unions were getting their money. What is going on here is that we are being punished. My constituents are being punished by the Labour party, which will not come out against this strike.

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Order. Let us try an experiment and see whether we can get through the next three minutes without any shouting on either side. I call Sarah Green.

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

I remind hon. Members that everybody taking part in the debate is expected to be here for the wind-ups and should stay for substantial amounts of the debate and at least for the next two speakers after they have spoken.

--- Later in debate ---
Ian Lavery Portrait Ian Lavery
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I heard what the hon. Member was saying before, but these negotiations have been going on for two years. This is not just about train drivers; basically, it is about the cleaners, the people who work in the ticket offices—as he probably did—the people who work on the tracks, the people who look after people in the trains and the conductors. It is about the track and about health and safety; it is about everything connected with the rail networks. We need these people. These were the key workers. We need these people to support a strong, healthy and safe railway. We need to be careful what we ask for. There have been negotiations for two years now, and that is the frustration.

A letter was sent to the Secretary of State this morning, asking for discussions. He dismissed it, and at the Dispatch Box today he basically laughed when he was asked if he would be trying to facilitate arrangements to avoid the strikes. He laughed! Why does he not accept that the best way to address the situation is to get everybody around a table, lock the door and get it resolved? We are talking about health and safety, about compulsory redundancies and about inflation-proof pay rises. These are basic human rights, to be perfectly honest.

I just want to say: do not believe anybody who is criticising the RMT—do not believe for one second that they will not come for you. Do not think that they will not come for your job, your pensions, your income and your future. As Pastor Martin Niemöller said,

“First they came for the Socialists,

And I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,

And I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,

And I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for”—

--- Later in debate ---
Lee Anderson Portrait Lee Anderson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and I have been on strike a few times myself. Does he think that any Opposition Member who has received a donation from the RMT should put that money in a pot to help people who suffer during next week’s rail strike? Does he also think that other MPs who have stolen money from the mineworkers—165 grand in the case of the hon. Member for Wansbeck (Ian Lavery) —should pay it back?

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Order. Please withdraw that remark about stealing money.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

You have to.

Lee Anderson Portrait Lee Anderson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, he stole it.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

No, you have to. I implore you to withdraw the remark. Please, Lee, withdraw the remark and sit down.

Lee Anderson Portrait Lee Anderson
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I withdraw the remark.

--- Later in debate ---
Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Thank you.

Ian Lavery Portrait Ian Lavery
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. You have been in the Chair three times when the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) has made allegations. He withdraws his ridiculous remark and consistently comes back to say it again. As Deputy Speaker, you are not protecting the likes of myself. I need your protection.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Order. Do not make allegations against the Chair, ever. You saw how I treated Mr Anderson. You just leave it with me—I don’t need lectures on how to do my job.

Ian Lavery Portrait Ian Lavery
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will leave it there.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Thank you very much.

Richard Burgon Portrait Richard Burgon
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The only time we seem to hear Conservative MPs worrying about the future of our children, our public services, nurses, doctors and other workers seems to be when they are condemning a potential strike. Isn’t it funny that they do not seem to have this concern for working people at any other point?

Today, I was looking at an interesting letter, dated 27 May 2020, from the Secretary of State for Transport to the RMT. There was a handwritten flourish at the end of the letter in the handwriting of the Secretary of State, and it said:

“Thank you for your continued engagement with Chris Heaton-Harris and me as we try to bring services back together. Your members have been true heroes!”

Those are the words of the Secretary of State for Transport, written in his own hand, to the RMT.

--- Later in debate ---
Grahame Morris Portrait Grahame Morris
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The feeling is very strong. I believe the margin was 71%, which is well above the Government’s threshold. Indeed, the treatment of the RMT Union and its members seems to be part of a wider agenda to weaken employment rights. I was one of many Members, including my friend, the hon. Member for Glasgow South West (Chris Stephens), and my hon. and right hon. Friends around me today, who were pressing the case for the Government to act on fire and rehire.

I was in the joint hearing of the Transport and the Business, Enterprise and Industrial Strategy Committees when we were taking testimony from the bad bosses of P&O Ferries who were boasting about their lack of consultation and their intention to drive down terms and conditions. We expect rather more from our own Government when it comes to the way in which the railway is being run. It is a huge and important national asset.

I want to put on record, so that there is no doubt, my solidarity with the RMT Union and with all the trade unions. Basic rights that govern pay and conditions at work were hard fought for and they were won through collective action; they were not handed out freely.

Let us not forget some of those appalling accidents at Ladbroke Grove, at Paddington and so on. One of the proposals that has been put forward is for 3,000 redundancies among people who maintain the tracks—

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Order. I call James Daly.

--- Later in debate ---
Zarah Sultana Portrait Zarah Sultana
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I absolutely agree. These tactics from the Government are to stop us talking about the fact that private rail companies take more than £500 million out of the railway system every year in private profits. It is the richest in the country who are truly raking it in, from the Chancellor, who is one of the wealthiest people in the country, to the record number of UK billionaires, one third of whom donate to the Conservative Party—[Interruption.] Tory Members can make all the sounds they like, but the facts are the facts.

That is all while working people are experiencing the biggest squeeze on living standards since the 1950s. Tory Members want us to believe that railway workers are the problem. They want us to blame refugees, not Tory cuts, for the crisis in public services and why they are at breaking point. They want us to think trans women are a threat to cis women. This House should be clear: the problem is not railway workers, it is not refugees and it is not trans women. The problem is this Tory Government and the billionaires who back them.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

Right. We have just over 20 minutes and there are 11 people standing to speak. If there is discipline, they will all get in; no discipline, and some people will not get in.

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

There are eight Members standing to speak and we have 15 minutes. Do the sums, if you want to be friendly to colleagues.

--- Later in debate ---
Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

I apologise to Mr Baynes, and I call Mr Butler. We will take the clock off for you, but please resume your seat at 4.45 pm.

Rob Butler Portrait Rob Butler (Aylesbury) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary on grasping the nettle not just of recognising the needs of a modern-day railway, but of acting to secure a sustainable, efficient modern-day railway. It was right that public money supported the railways during the pandemic, but it is surely also right that public money is now focused where it is most needed, not least in the NHS and education. Unlike the Opposition parties, the Conservatives recognise that there is not a bottomless pit of money—taxpayers’ money, I would add—and the answer to every question is not spend, spend, spend without thinking how we would manage costs or how we would improve productivity.

It was abundantly clear during the speech of the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Louise Haigh), that the Labour party has absolutely no answers, because she simply refused to take questions from this side of the House. I know that her Front-Bench colleague, the hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi), is about to speak, and I would ask him two very simple questions, so that my constituents are absolutely clear about the attitude of Labour Members. First, will they condemn the strikes—yes or no? A one-word answer should not be too difficult.

The shadow Secretary of State said that if Labour was in power, which I have to say is a thought that sends shivers down my spine, Labour would sit around the table with the unions. In that case, would Labour give in to all the unions’ demands, and if not, which ones would it reject? Just so we are absolutely clear, that is what she said she wanted to do. What would her stance be? My constituents want to know because the workers who need trains to get to their jobs next week, the pensioners who need to get to their hospital appointments next week and the schoolchildren who need to get to class next week cannot do so because of these totally unnecessary strikes. Will Labour condemn them?

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Thank you very much. I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---
David Linden Portrait David Linden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Standing Orders of the House state that a Member’s vote should follow their voice. No doubt people will have noted that the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) shouted “No.” Would he be in breach of the Standing Orders if he did not vote no?

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

I do not know who shouted “Aye” and who shouted “No,” but the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that the vote should follow the voice.

--- Later in debate ---
Claire Coutinho Portrait Claire Coutinho
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. I think the whole House would agree about the importance of declaring our financial interests. Will you guide the House on whether Members should have declared that the RMT had funded them individually, their constituency party or their general election campaign in 2019 before speaking in the debate?

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans)
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Lady for her point of order. It is not up to the Chair to determine whether Members should or should not declare any registrable interest. It is up to each individual Member to do so. Members should therefore reflect on what their circumstances are. Should anybody believe that another Member has not followed the guidelines, of course they always have open recourse to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards to make complaints.

Chris Stephens Portrait Chris Stephens
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. During the debate, a number of Government Members quoted other Members’ entries in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. Will you confirm that it was in order for hon. Members to declare those interests?

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

If I have understood the point of order correctly, it is about Members who have stood up and declared on both sides of the Chamber.

Chris Stephens Portrait Chris Stephens
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

indicated assent.

Nigel Evans Portrait Mr Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - -

Then yes, those who have done so are absolutely in order.