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

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 14th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his intervention. As he would imagine, I certainly have had discussions with the Church of England, and not just prior to the introduction of this Bill, but prior to the wider reform of the Lords in which the Government are engaged. Those conversations are hugely important, as is diversity. This legislation will extend the diversity—having women bishops in the House of Lords—that we have seen since the 2015 Act reached the statute book.

The Government’s view is that five years is an appropriate length of time to extend these provisions to consolidate the positive effect that there has been so far. I hope that this very narrowly focused and simple Bill, which will extend an Act that has achieved such positive change over the past nine years, will gain support from all parts of the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[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 ---

[Navendu Mishra (Stockport) (Lab)]

My speech will be very brief. I welcome the progress made by the House earlier this week in voting to pass the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill in Committee and on Third Reading. I also welcome the Government’s recognition of the importance of consecrating more female bishops and reflecting that composition in the other Chamber.

On a more local point, Stockport is famous for many things, one of which is the fact that the Church of England’s first woman bishop was the Right Reverend Libby Lane, who served as the Bishop of Stockport between 2015 and 2019. She was mentioned by the Minister and my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Marsha De Cordova). Stockport is known for many groundbreaking things, and that is just one of them. The Right Reverend Libby Lane now serves as the Bishop of Derby, and I want to place on the record my gratitude to her for all her work in Stockport and the various other places she has served. She was introduced to the House of Lords as a Lord Spiritual in July 2019, and she continues to do excellent and important work in the other place.

I usually do not speak in debates of this nature, but I recently met the Bishop of Manchester, the Right Reverend David Walker, at All Saints’ parish church in my constituency. We discussed many issues, including the contribution of the Church, not just in Stockport but across Greater Manchester and the north-west. He made me aware of the importance of this legislation and of the impact it will have, and I want to place in Hansard my thanks to him for highlighting that to me.

I thank everyone not just in the Church of England, but in all churches across my Stockport constituency and Greater Manchester, for all they do to provide not just spiritual guidance but all sorts of other things, such as food banks and support with a number of other issues.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

We now come to a maiden speech. I call Anna Gelderd.

[Anna Gelderd (South East Cornwall) (Lab)]

Meur ras—thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I begin by wishing His Majesty the King a very happy birthday—a sentiment that I am sure is shared on both sides of the House?

Standing here in this House, I am more aware than ever of the incredible privilege that it is to be here on behalf of South East Cornwall, a place that I love and am proud to call my home. I do not stand here alone; rather, I stand with those who came before me, inspired me or supported me. I am especially proud to be the first Labour MP to represent the area, a wonderful community filled with history, resilience and a deep local pride.

It is a love for the area and a steely determination to fight for its best interests that unites my predecessors and me. I pay tribute to Sheryll Murray for her work to champion public and rescue services and the local fishing industry, and to Colin Breed, who served before her.

I intend to represent our community by extending a hand to bridge political divides, and by serving with the determination and humility that I have seen illuminating the paths of all those I most admire in public service.

Today’s debate offers me the opportunity to mention in particular some of those women who taught me that I, too, could stand, including our late friend Jo Cox, and the formidable Harriet Harman, both of whom I have had the honour of working with.

South East Cornwall is a stunningly beautiful rural constituency, defined by the natural boundaries of the River Fowey in the west and the River Tamar in the East, ancient moorland to the north, and beautiful Cornish coastlines to the south, including the unique Rame peninsula, perfect for sea swimming, surfing and sailing. It is a place alive with history, from Restormel castle in Lostwithiel, to the historic harbour at Polperro, whose winding lanes whisper of a history of pirates and smugglers.

Our economy is a story of resilience, woven from the threads of small businesses, including in the market gardens of the Tamar valley, tourism, farming and an inshore fishing fleet that deserves more recognition and support. The market town of Liskeard, at the geographical heart of the area, provides important places for people to meet and form new enterprises, such as Wildanet. Most importantly, it is the perfect place to find a Barnecutts pasty—and, unlike other Members of this House, I do know how to eat a pasty properly.

We look both to the west across Cornwall, and to the east beyond the Tamar, for many crucial jobs. The dockyard in Devonport is particularly important to the towns of Saltash and Torpoint, where many local residents are employed. Torpoint is also home to HMS Raleigh, which provides exceptional naval training and serves as a deep source of local pride.

South East Cornwall has a proud cultural heritage, celebrated in long-standing community traditions such as the Gorsedh—held in Callington for the first time in 40 years—the Black Prince parade and the Saltash May fair. That heritage is expressed through the arts at Sterts theatre and arts centre, Calstock Arts, and Maker Heights.

Communities there are tight-knit, but they are often kept apart geographically by both distance and the lack of transport connections. But don’t get me started on transport problems in Cornwall, Madam Deputy Speaker —you can expect to hear from me again on that topic.

There are incredible people across the constituency who go the extra mile, with a community spirit found at Saltash Pride, in those working at food banks or in care homes, and at the Core, where I held my first surgery. It is a place rich in so many ways, but there are real challenges: above average rates of child poverty, fragile seasonal employment and house prices that are out of reach for many.

In my previous work, I have seen some of the big problems we face at home and abroad: the trap of extreme poverty that is so difficult to escape, the threat of instability and conflict, and the challenges posed by climate change. I have also seen the resolve and determination of people to overcome those same challenges, and I have been struck by how the hardest of situations sometimes bring out the very best of us. That spirit can be found in organisations such as the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, which I was so proud to work for, or at local events such as Liskeard Unlocked, which celebrated the town’s shared values of freedom, safety and solidarity with its twinned Ukrainian town of Kopychyntsi.

I know that caring for my mother throughout her prolonged and painful death from cancer—something that too many families face—has led me to this place. Without that experience, I would simply not be here. She told me to find solace in purpose, and I have. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] My family gave me a bedrock of certainty that anyone, anywhere, can make a positive difference. My grandad, injured in an industrial accident, would have me sit next to him on his green leather sofa after school to watch Prime Minister’s questions. I have no doubt that he would be shocked but proud that I stand now by these green leather Benches, which felt so very far away from our lives and experiences. Clearly, children’s earliest experiences are so formative, and early education is so pivotal—just look at the trouble that early experience has got me into now. I do not want where you are born to limit where you are going, or what you can do to be determined by who you know. Breaking down the barriers to opportunity is not a campaign slogan for me; it is a guiding principle, and what I intend to deliver for my community.

The beauty of our landscapes in our special corner of Cornwall is not just a backdrop to our lives; it is the backbone of our economy and integral to our identity and wellbeing. I am committed to supporting our farmers and our fishing industry—the lifeblood of our community. They provide our food security, and they have a critically important relationship with the landscape. I am committed to improving our transport links, which currently hamper growth and divide communities, and to securing better access to healthcare services and provision for special educational needs and disabilities in the constituency. I am also committed to preserving the rugged, distinct natural environment that so defines our region and brings huge economic value to our vital tourist industry.

Cornwall helped to power Britain’s first industrial revolution, and it now stands ready to lead the new green industrial revolution, harnessing new technologies and the aspirations of our young people to create a sustainable future. South East Cornwall is both a gateway to Cornwall and a bridge to the rest of the UK, as embodied by the Tamar bridge. I intend also to be a bridge for our community, and to work tirelessly to connect Cornwall with the resources, opportunities and support that it deserves, so I stand here, ultimately, with gratitude for the incredible people of South East Cornwall. I see generosity and determination that inspire me daily. That is why I am here, and it is why I am honoured to be working to connect our past and our present, and to help build our future together.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

The hon. Member for South East Cornwall gave a very authentic, powerful speech. She should be proud, as her mother and grandfather would be. We now come to the Front Benchers.

--- Later in debate ---

[Valerie Vaz (Walsall and Bloxwich) (Lab)]

rose—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. As many colleagues are interested in this debate, may I encourage interventions to be relevant to the debate that is taking place?

[Ms Oppong-Asare]

I give way to my right hon. Friend the Member for Walsall and Bloxwich (Valerie Vaz).

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Committee of the whole House
Tuesday 12th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Iqbal Mohamed]

That is a very important point. I agree that representation across the four nations is key, and that the balance between the two Houses and how they work together is also very important.

We have seen what happens when people feel alienated from their political system: they can gravitate to those with divisive answers. Unaddressed political grievances combined with a lack of faith in political institutions can be a toxic combination. Reforming the House of Lords so that it is fit and proper is not the sole solution to that problem, but is a key part of the solution. We in this House, as elected officials, have a duty to do the right thing at the right time in the right way to deliver the right outcome for our constituents and our country, and the right thing is to adopt the sensible and democratic amendments that have been tabled, and the right time to do that is now.

[The Chairman of Ways and Means (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Minister.

[Ellie Reeves]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am grateful to right hon. and hon. Members for taking the time to debate these issues in Committee, and I have listened to their contributions with interest. I am particularly grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell), as well as to other Labour Members, for providing a powerful voice in support of this important legislation.

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), who demonstrated on Second Reading that there is strong cross-party support for this first step in reforming the upper Chamber. I am also grateful to the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson), who has taken a surprising interest in these issues, and to the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart). I stress that we are grateful to all peers, including hereditary peers, who have committed themselves to valuable public service. I reiterate that there is no block to hereditary peers coming back as life peers if their party wishes to nominate them.

What has become clear during the course of this debate is that the Conservatives do not have a coherent position on House of Lords reform. It is not clear whether the Opposition Front Benchers want to retain hereditary peers; it is not clear whether they want faster and further reform; and it is not clear whether they agree with the amendments tabled by the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge. But what is clear is that they cannot agree among themselves about the Bill—more division and chaos.

--- Later in debate ---

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

I thank right hon. and hon. Members from both sides of the House for their scrutiny of the Bill throughout its passage. I am grateful to all those who contributed in Committee, as well as those who contributed to the lively debate on Second Reading last month. I also thank you and your colleagues for their chairmanship, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I thank Members on both sides of the House for their contributions, including my hon. Friends the Members for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) and for Leeds South West and Morley (Mr Sewards), the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson), my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell), the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart), my hon. Friends the Members for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) and for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), the right hon. Members for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes), for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison) and for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), and the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed).

This Bill is a matter of principle. It has been introduced to address an outdated and indefensible feature of our legislature, rather than as a criticism of any contribution made by individual Members. The Government have listened to the debates in this House with interest and I look forward to following the Bill’s passage in the other place, where I am sure there will be further thoughtful contributions. I thank my officials and the whole team who have worked on the Bill.

This House will send to the other place a Bill that fulfils a manifesto commitment, and our manifesto was very clear:

“The next Labour government will…bring about an immediate modernisation, by introducing legislation to remove the right of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords.”

That is precisely what the Bill does. It has a clear and simple purpose, a single focus, and it completes a process that started a quarter of a century ago. It sends a powerful message to people growing up in my constituency —in Blaenavon, Pontypool and Cwmbran—and beyond, right across the country: “You do not need to be born into certain families to make our laws.”

On Third Reading of the Parliament Bill—that landmark reform of the House of Lords—on 15 May 1911, the then Prime Minister, Herbert Asquith, said:

“I repeat, as I began, that our first duty, in view of the electoral and Parliamentary history of this measure, is to place this Bill on the Statute Book. It is stamped, if ever a measure was stamped, with the authority and approval of the electorate of the United Kingdom.”—[Official Report, 15 May 1911; Vol. 25, c. 1699.]

In that spirit, I commend this Bill to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Minister.

Income tax (charge)

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 31st October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

There is not one person on the Opposition Benches who is not concerned about the inheritance tax changes. If I am honest, I do not think there is one Member on the Government Benches who represents a farming community and is not also worried. The measure has been universally condemned by all the farmers I have spoken to, and I live in a farming community. The National Farmers Union, the Ulster Farmers Union and others are up in arms about this inheritance tax. The sum of £1 million draws everybody into that scheme, and because of that, we must vote against it. I say to those on the Government Benches: guys, you have got it wrong, and this time you will be condemned. When it comes to election time, the people who you have hurt will remember.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Please stop using “you”, Mr Shannon.

[Jeremy Hunt]

I thank my hon. Friend—I say “my hon. Friend” because he is a great friend to us—for what he has said and I could not agree with him more. When we talk about stability, anybody who has run a business knows that the most stable businesses in the country are family businesses that are passed from generation to generation. This is not just about farms, but about any small businesses that are passed down through the generations. This is a hammer blow to their plans to invest for the future.

I wish to move on, because the main argument that the Government make—I am sure that we will hear this from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster—is that all this is necessary to improve public services. We on the Conservative Benches want to say, right up front, that it is absolutely right to prioritise public services. As Health Secretary, I negotiated an increase in the NHS budget of £20 billion a year, and, in this year’s Budget, I increased it by a further £6 billion. Many times I said as Chancellor that I wanted to avoid austerity cuts to public services. We would have done so this time, not by using tax rises that harm working families and businesses, but by taking difficult decisions on welfare reform and productivity—decisions that were ducked yesterday.

--- Later in debate ---

[Pat McFadden]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention, although I have to say that his television viewing choices are a little bit different from mine. With regard to education, we have always said that we support aspiration for all children in every type of school.

Our growth plans are about far more than this Budget. They are about planning reform to get Britain building, a challenge that was ducked by the Conservative party year after year. They are about more clean energy for energy security. They are about private investment, with £63 billion of investment announced at our investment summit just a few weeks ago—investors are finally appreciating the stability that has come to the country after the chaos wrought by the Conservative party—and they are about reform of business rates to support our neglected high streets.

This is a big moment for the country. In July, the public did not vote to carry on as we are—they did not vote to continue with the plans of the Conservative party. They voted for change, and this is a Budget for change: not just change in policy, but facing up to the reality of what the Conservative party left behind. It is a Budget to stabilise the public finances, to help people with the cost of living, to begin to turn our public services around, and to start to rebuild Britain. It is a choice between investment and decline—a turning of the page after 14 years. It is a Budget that launches a new chapter for Britain, and we will be proud to vote for it in the Lobby next week.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

Do you not think the fact that you are supporting all the spending commitments but none of the tax rises is the reason that the Lib Dems will never be in government—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Sit down, please. The hon. Gentleman said “you” twice.

[Chris Vince]

rose—

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I am not going to allow the hon. Gentleman to continue.

[Sarah Olney]

I am glad the hon. Gentleman has raised that point. I refer him to our general election manifesto in which, as I have already said, we set out a range of tax-raising measures, including reversing the Conservatives’ tax cuts on big banks and taxing the social media giants. There are plenty of ways that the Government could have raised taxes more fairly than by placing additional burden on small businesses, which will be the engine of economic growth.

Brexit is another reason why our economy is not growing in the way it should. I urge the Government to acknowledge the seriousness of yesterday’s report from the OBR outlining the continual damage that Brexit red tape causes UK businesses, and the OBR finding that weak growth of trading, exacerbated by Brexit, will reduce the overall trade intensity of the UK economy by 15% in the long term. We understand that rebuilding our relationship with Europe is a gradual process. However, we are disappointed that the Government have ruled out joining the single market in the future, even when relationships improve. We urge them to consider the breadth of benefits that a strengthened trading relationship with Europe would bring. The Liberal Democrats want to forge a new partnership with our European neighbours —built on co-operation, not confrontation—and to move to a new comprehensive agreement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Tom Collins to make his maiden speech.

[Tom Collins (Worcester) (Lab)]

As a boy, I remember walking to the shops with my mum and passing our nearest pub. Its name, the Lord Protector, confused me at the time, and I later learned that I share a home town with one Oliver Cromwell, so perhaps I should feel at home in this place. Having said that, I confess that the nearest pub to my first family home was The Cavalier. That is because I represent, and am proud to call my home, the faithful city of Worcester. Famous among historians as the site of both the first and final armed conflicts of the English civil war, Worcester is seen by many as the birthplace of modern parliamentary democracy, and that is fitting for our city.

Nestled on the great River Severn and in the shelter of the ancient Malvern hills, Worcester is one of England’s best kept secrets. Rooted in the beauty of nature, and richly decorated by a long and varied history, Worcester is a city deeply informed by the past, and with a record of deeply informing the future. Throughout its history, it has continuously expressed creativity, enterprise and innovation, and through the stirring music of Elgar, the creation of the world’s first combined hydroelectric power station, and even the establishment of the British Medical Association, the people of Worcester have been shaping the future of the world for millennia. We are home to Berrow’s Worcester Journal, the oldest newspaper still in print, and of course we manufacture Lea & Perrins’s famous Worcestershire sauce.

Having given a flavour of our city, I pay tribute to my immediate predecessor in this place, Robin Walker. Wherever I go, be it in this place or in my constituency, people consistently speak well of Robin, who won the affection of many with whom he worked. He worked with passion and dedication to improve education, and for that I offer my sincere thanks, and that of many others.

Worcester is home to many small and independent businesses that contribute hugely to our distinctive culture. During the election, I visited Spin the Black Circle and Script Haven, to give just two examples, as well as larger companies that are also expressing our nation’s creativity and shaping its future. I have been privileged to work with teams of talented people at Worcester Bosch, inventing the technologies of the future to grow and decarbonise our economy. If any Member would appreciate an in-depth discussion on heat pumps or hydrogen, I am always happy to indulge, being an enthusiastic engineer by background.

It is my belief that releasing innovation by investing in the talent, passion and skills of our emerging leaders, creators and problem solvers is key—key to our mission for growth, which is the guiding light of this Budget, and key to decarbonising our economy through industrial renewal, rebuilding our NHS, and putting people at the heart of all we do. Today, we are doing the vital work of fixing the foundations, because this kind of history-writing ambition is exactly what this place is for.

Worcester, and its incredible community of dedicated and talented people, is ready to deliver an exciting vision for the future, with our schools, colleges, and the Hive—one of the largest children’s libraries in the UK—ready to grow the next generation. The Budget’s commitment to taking the first steps towards the renewal of our schools, and especially its provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities, will be very welcome in Worcestershire.

With the University of Worcester continuing our heritage through teacher training, Worcester Business School and Three Counties Medical School, where prospective Prime Ministers can reliably capture a good selfie, as well as a wealth of innovative businesses and creatives in the digital space, including the Kiln, now hosting BetaDen, our community has the vision for people and nature to flourish. It is led by local people such as Worcester Environmental Group, our cathedral’s eco-group, and projects such as Bramblewood. It is a hub of culture, with arts at the Swan theatre, the Scala project and the Arches, and has a growing track record in disability sports, historic world-class cricket at New Road, our fantastic city football clubs, and hopefully soon the return of professional rugby with the Warriors. We are also very good in a tug of war!

Informed by the past and informing the future, Worcester has taught me that the key is to put people first, dream big, and unleash the creativity of diverse teams to shape the future. I came to politics with a passion to tackle climate change, see an end to modern slavery, and put leadership and vision back at the heart of politics. Let us remember that throughout the long history of this place, we, like Worcester, have never lingered on the past. As the Budget empowers us to do, let us continue always to fix our gaze with ambition, clarity, and focus on the creation of a bright and prosperous future.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Well done. Your family will be very proud indeed.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown]

I suggest gently to the hon. Gentleman that, whatever the number, if the change causes damage to the farming sector and the productivity of food production, it is not helpful, and nor does it raise much money. What we surely want is measures in the Budget and elsewhere to boost the productivity of our agricultural sector so that we can produce more of the food we eat ourselves, rather than importing it from the rest of the world. I encourage the Chancellor to release any impact assessment she has done on this measure. I hope that she will reconsider this proposal, although I doubt she will.

I now turn to a topic that I have mentioned many times, and one that I will continue to raise with the Treasury. The Chancellor has talked about the difficult decisions that she has had to make on tax and spending to promote growth. May I suggest one specific policy area, tax-free shopping, which has the potential to increase growth considerably? Since we left the EU, British people have been able to shop tax-free in European states. However, we have not given the same advantage to wealthy visitors visiting the UK to spend their money here and benefit our economy. That disincentive to visit the UK will be worse if visa costs are increased. I have talked to some of the bigger businesses involved in this area, and they are seeing that instead of visiting the UK people are going to Paris, Madrid or Milan to do their duty-free shopping. We are losing out as a result.

That whole new market, unique to the UK, is worth an estimated £10 billion annually in foreign spending and would generate more than £3 billion for the Exchequer, based on an Oxford economist’s report that said that for every £1 spent by visitors, 37p was generated for the Exchequer. The only thing stopping Ministers in the last Government looking again at this issue was the Treasury’s 2020 forecasts, which unjustifiably—in my opinion—predicted little or no impact on EU visitor numbers or spending levels. That led to the wrong conclusion that there would be costs to the Exchequer, even without all the other added benefits I have mentioned for hospitality, airports and luxury goods manufacturers, which would help the economy. All the data on actual spending supplied by real businesses proves the opposite.

My only ask of the Chancellor today is that she takes the cost-free decision to review the 2020 impact forecasts in the light of overwhelming real data and this time, unlike the last, ask the OBR to scrutinise the Treasury’s forecast impact of extending the scheme to EU visitors. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with Ministers, and I could bring experts with me to help the discussion.

As the new Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, I remind Treasury Ministers of the report produced in the last Parliament called “Lessons learned: a planning and spending framework that enables long-term value for money”, about how the Treasury should focus on getting the best value for every £1 of taxpayers’ money spent. The PAC will scrutinise the whole of the Government’s expenditure and help them to get better value for money.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

We have another maiden speech, from Margaret Mullane.

[Margaret Mullane (Dagenham and Rainham) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for allowing me to contribute to this debate with my maiden speech. It is the honour of my life to be standing here, in this historic place, at the heart of democracy, representing the communities of Dagenham and Rainham, the place where I was born and raised.

I was well and truly made in Dagenham, and I am also the first woman to represent the seat since the boundaries were redrawn in 2010, when the old seat of Dagenham inherited the communities of Rainham, South Hornchurch, Elm Park and now Beam Park. I am proud to join the long list of political women from Dagenham, such as the Ford machinists whose battle paved the way for the Equal Pay Act in the ’70s, and now our very own Holly Ridley, Labour’s new general secretary.

I must take this opportunity to pay tribute to the inexhaustible work of my predecessor, Jon Cruddas, who always put the needs of local people first and was, I know, a very well-respected Member of this House for his very thoughtful contributions. His presence will be missed by honourable colleagues in Westminster and by the people of Dagenham and Rainham, not least for his community-led approach to parliamentary politics. He always brought people with him, displaying integrity and compassion, and I have committed to continuing in that vein.

When people think of Dagenham and Rainham, they think of industry and the era of great British manufacturing —the Ford factory, Sanofi-Aventis and May & Baker, which created one of the first antibiotics, saving many thousands of lives during world war two, including that of Sir Winston Churchill when he suffered with pneumonia. People also think of council housing. The Becontree estate, one of the most ambitious social housing projects in the world, built during the interwar period, marked its 100th anniversary in 2021 and is still a source of great pride. People also think of working-class solidarity: the communities that were forged on the factory floor, in the clubs and at the docks; and the indomitable spirit of the women machinists whose famous fight paved the way for the Equal Pay Act 1970 and for a strong trade union voice in our area.

Dagenham and Rainham has a rich past, and it is now my job to ensure that it has a bright future, full of opportunity and promise, built on the back of a new deal for working people. It has not always been politics for me; I have worked in insurance and in a call centre, and was a barmaid at the Dagenham Trades Hall.

I know how precarious work can be in areas such as Dagenham and Rainham, and it was the miners’ strike that drew me into politics. Seeing secure jobs stolen away, the injustice of Orgreave and the heart being ripped out of working-class communities by decisions made in Westminster, I knew then that I wanted to be a voice for working-class people. That is why I welcome the Government’s commitment to making the Hillsborough law a reality, creating a level playing field for people in places such as Dagenham and Rainham when tragedies sadly happen—like in 2015, when four young men were murdered by a serial killer. The Independent Office for Police Conduct found that mistakes were made during the investigation, and nearly a decade later I continue to work with the family of Jack Taylor, seeking the justice they deserve.

It is not only justice that working-class communities such as Dagenham and Rainham seek; they want more police on our streets to tackle the scourge of knife crime, particularly around transport hubs such as Dagenham Heathway, Elm Park and Rainham. We want thriving town centres, an NHS fit for the future—one where you can get a GP appointment—jobs you can raise a family on, council housing, infrastructure, good public services we can all rely on and representatives who serve with integrity.

The devastating fire at the Spectrum building in my constituency in the early hours of Monday 26 August will not have escaped the attention of the House. That has yet again brought to the fore the safety of residents in high-rise blocks across the country. Thankfully, a combination of brave residents and the rapid response from the London Fire Brigade meant that there was no loss of life on this occasion. I want to take a moment to thank our emergency services for their amazing work and our community in Dagenham for their overwhelming response to this tragedy. Local businesses and residents rallied around to help families who had lost literally everything. That is who we are in Dagenham and Rainham, and I could not be prouder as their representative in this House.

There is a long way to go before we have a level playing field, but in the meantime I will dedicate every moment I spend in this House to raising living standards and attracting opportunities for my constituents. The work has already begun. In a matter of months London’s biggest film studio will be complete, bringing skilled work in the creative industries to a new generation of young people, making hope possible. That has only been made possible under the local stewardship of Labour, guided by Jon Cruddas, who brokered the agreement when Sanofi-Aventis vacated the site, and Barking and Dagenham council, which secured the deal with Hackman Capital Partners to develop it.

As with all things, there is good news and bad news, and there are still a lot of battles that need to be fought. There is a patch of empty land at Marsh Way where c2c trains should be taking customers from their new neighbourhood on the Beam Park estate to Fenchurch Street in 20 minutes, as promised by developers. I am determined to make sure that promise is made good. Since discovering that this crucial infrastructure has been derailed, it is Labour representatives who have been fighting for a green light to get it delivered.

I have always been a champion of council housing at traditional social rents, and I will continue to do that in Parliament. That is why I welcome the Government’s commitment to build a new generation of social and affordable homes. I also welcome the commitment to put in the essential services that communities desperately need. I will always beat the drum of infrastructure. As we build—there is a lot of development planned for Dagenham and Rainham—we must ensure not only that the homes are affordable, but that there are schools, GPs and dentists, transport options, leisure facilities, green spaces and the amenities needed to thrive.

There are many new challenges in Dagenham and Rainham, but there are also historical challenges that need resolution. The ongoing fires at the illegal landfill on Launders Lane in Rainham are not only a scandal but a public health risk, and I will be fighting tooth and nail to extinguish them once and for all. The health of my constituents is paramount. That is why I am in regular contact with the chief executive of the Barking, Havering and Redbridge university hospitals NHS trust, offering my support to get our local NHS back on its feet. Our local NHS has ambitious plans to expand the emergency department at Queen’s hospital, and I will be doing everything in my power to make that a reality.

At the election, I promised that I would help local communities to shape the future of Dagenham and Rainham. From the Daggers boxing club to local faith groups, businesses, working men’s clubs, and amazing local charities such as Dagenham United and the Ship in Rainham, everyone plays a part in building a future for Dagenham and Rainham. That includes Barking and Dagenham and Havering councils, which is why I will be a constant voice asking for a revised funding formula for local authorities, so that they have the resources they need to transform lives.

I will finish as I started. It is the honour of my life to stand here representing my community and to be given the opportunity to serve. I am fiercely proud of Dagenham and Rainham and, building on the legacy of those who stood here before me, I will always be on hand to fight for the communities who call my constituency home. Thank you.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I do not doubt that the hon. Lady will be a strong advocate for her constituency.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab)]

Does the right hon. Member accept that the Conservative Government’s decisions to reduce gas storage and to fail to invest in the NHS over long periods made dealing with those crises considerably worse?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Before the right hon. Member responds, interventions are a healthy part of debate, but the hon. Lady should draw the attention of the Member by speaking loudly in asking for an intervention.

[Sir John Whittingdale]

Every country in the world faced enormous challenges. The record of the Conservative Government in tackling those challenges bears comparison with any other country. That cannot be diminished. I will say a little bit more about the NHS in particular as I move forward with my remarks.

I saw that Alastair Campbell tweeted in defence of this particular Budget. He said:

“It was a very Labour Budget”.

I would certainly agree with that. It put up spending massively, borrowing massively and tax massively—to that extent, it was a very Labour Budget. In the first 30 minutes of the Chancellor’s speech yesterday she did not actually make any announcements; she simply tried to justify some of the measures she was going to introduce by talking about the fictitious black hole. The shadow Chancellor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Godalming and Ash, has already adequately exposed why that is a fiction, and the Office for Budget Responsibility was unable to find any evidence for the figures that she quoted.

Let us be clear: tax and spend is a matter of choice. It was the choice of this Government to break all the promises that they made at the last election. It was their choice to break their manifesto commitments not to increase national insurance contributions. They said that they would not increase tax on working people, but in many areas the measures that they have introduced will have a significant impact on working people.

The denial that there was a tax bombshell to come is extraordinary, given that they subsequently announced a £40 billion one, which will result in the tax burden in this country rising steadily to what will be the highest ever on record. Yet this is a Government who took office saying that their priority would be to fuel growth. I can say to the Minister that he cannot fuel growth by punishing the businesses that will be responsible for creating the jobs and wealth of the future. The Office for Budget Responsibility’s forecast following the Budget shows that growth is forecast to fall steadily.

I want to speak about one or two of the tax choices that have been made—they, too, are a matter of choice. It was up to the Chancellor to decide how to raise the extra revenue. Even before the Budget, we already heard of one extremely damaging, painful decision—the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance—to save money by taking it away from pensioners across the country. I have received many emails expressing great disappointment that the Chancellor pressed ahead with that measure and did nothing yesterday to reduce its impact.

It is primarily businesses that will pay the price in this Budget. The increase in employers’ national insurance contributions is estimated to cost them £25 billion, which represents £615 more for every single employee of a business over the threshold. What is the result? If the cost of employing people increases, that can have only two consequences: lower wages and fewer jobs. Each of those will hit working people. On top of that, businesses will face an increase in the national minimum wage. That will hit the businesses that are already finding it hardest to survive. It will impact on the care sector and the hospitality sector—already under enormous pressure. The decision to increase the national minimum wage for young adults by 16% will make it even harder for those people to find jobs.

Just 10 days ago the Government heralded the investment summit, which was supposed to persuade international investors that this was a country they should want to invest in. Yet a week later, we have higher capital gains tax and higher stamp duty, and a war declared on non-doms. Instead of investment coming into this country, already we are seeing the flight of people living here—the entrepreneurs on whom our future success depends are leaving in droves.

[Sir John Whittingdale]

The investment summit announced a lot of investment for which the Conservative Government were actually responsible. Let us wait and see. The Budget was yesterday. Businesses will have to look very carefully at their plans, but I do not expect them to do so in a mere few hours. I am happy to have this debate with the hon. Gentleman again in a few weeks’ time once we have seen the impact of the measures that have been announced.

There are two specific measures that I want to touch on because they have a particular impact on my constituents. One of them, which has been mentioned a number of times in this debate, is the removal of agricultural property relief. The Country Land and Business Association estimates that that will affect 70,000 businesses. Family farms in particular will feel the impact worse. It is hardly surprising that the president of the National Farmers’ Union has said:

“This Budget not only threatens family farms but will also make producing food more expensive… The shameless breaking of those promises on Agricultural Property Relief will snatch away much of the next generation’s ability to carry on producing British food, plan for the future and shepherd the environment.”

This is a measure that the Labour party said it would not introduce, but it has broken that promise and is now proposing to introduce it, with enormous damage not just to farmers but to food security and our environment.

The second measure that I would like to touch on—[Interruption.] Madam Deputy Speaker, I see you have acquired Speaker’s cough. I will heed your warning, but I want to mention VAT on private schools. In my constituency I have three small independent schools: Heathcote school in Danbury, Elm Green in Littleborough and Malden Court school. The parents who send their children there are not rich; they make huge sacrifices. In Essex we are very fortunate to have really good grammar schools. Those parents make that sacrifice to help their children hopefully get into the grammars, but they will not be able to continue if there is 20% increase in fees as a result of the imposition of VAT. They will withdraw their children and those schools will be threatened with closure. The consequence is that the children will need to be placed in state schools, which are already under huge pressure. My constituency is growing rapidly, and there is enormous pressure on schools. This will simply make it worse. This policy is simply vindictive and will do enormous damage.

Very quickly, I note that the Minister for Secondary Care, the hon. Member for Bristol South (Karin Smyth) has come back into the Chamber, and she would be disappointed if I did not say that I welcome the hospital building programme in the Budget and the announcement of new money. However, once again I reiterate that a hospital in my constituency is threatened with closure. We have been promised a new one for 30 years or more, under both my Government and the Government before that. She was good enough to see my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel) and me the other day, so that we could make the case. If she does hold this money, I hope that she might be able to direct some of it to my constituency.

This Budget is one of the worst I have heard in all my time in this place. It will do enormous damage. I am grateful for this opportunity to put that on the record.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call Jon Trickett.

--- Later in debate ---

[Wendy Chamberlain]

I absolutely agree. Whenever I have that discussion with farmers, they want to support climate and nature—they want to do the right thing—but they need support to do so.

As I say, the overall funding envelope for farmers is for the Scottish Government to deliver, and I am confident that my Scottish Liberal Democrat colleagues in Holyrood will be making the case for them to do so. In his intervention on the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) talked about how the number of farms affected will be small, but the issue is that the Government promised last year not to do anything in relation to agricultural property relief, yet that is what is happening. I am already being contacted by local farmers who fear that this will be the death of their and other families’ farms. It is important that we remember that it is not just about those farmers; it is also about the infrastructure and the wider communities that they support, such as vets and other facilities.

We should not forget tenant farmers, either, because they are some of our most vulnerable. I know that because I worked with some of them prior to the election in relation to the roll-out of universal credit. That system is not fit for purpose for farmers. The Work and Pensions Secretary is no longer in her place, but I will be coming back to her on that issue. We need to ensure that we provide that support.

Until very recently, I wore multiple hats, because I had far fewer colleagues. Now that I have more of them, I have given up my Department for Work and Pensions hat, but I welcome the changes to carer’s allowance. I would like some clarity about the carer support payment in Scotland, which is a devolved benefit that is currently being rolled out. I have not seen it in the notes that I have looked at so far, but perhaps it will become clear in the coming days whether that is included in the block grant that is coming to Scotland, or whether there will be additional consequentials.

To conclude, there are things in this Budget that I absolutely welcome, but, as always, there are unintended consequences, on which I hope the Government will listen to us.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Gregor Poynton to make his maiden speech.

[Gregor Poynton (Livingston) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to speak in today’s debate. First, I pay tribute to my hon. Friends the Members for Worcester (Tom Collins), and for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane), who have proudly shown the best of their constituencies in their maiden speeches today. I pay tribute to my predecessor, Hannah Bardell. Hannah has diligently supported our constituents over the past nine years, whether by addressing the Broxburn floods, assisting homeowners affected by RAAC, advocating for those affected by the infected blood scandal, and championing LGBTQ+ rights. On election night, she was incredibly gracious—a spirit that has continued, as Hannah and her team have gone above and beyond in passing on cases and helping my team to get settled. She said to me on the night, “It’s all about the constituents,” and she has been true to her word. Hannah said in her speech on polling night that she intends to be back in some form. Of that I have no doubt. I just hope it is not too soon.

My constituency is called Livingston, which is understandable, as that is the biggest town in the constituency and the county, but the constituency is so much more than that; it includes towns and villages such as Breich, Dechmont, Ecclesmachan, Uphall, Longridge, Broxburn, Bents, Stoneyburn, Addiewell, Kirknewton, Wilkieston, East Calder, Mid Calder, West Calder and Fauldhouse, each rich with history and a distinct community spirit. The area’s economy and population was initially boosted by mining, of coal in the west, and oil shale in the east. The landscape still bears witness to this history, with the bings that remain. That is why it was important to me that the Chancellor announced in yesterday’s Budget that we are delivering on our manifesto commitment to return the investment reserve to miners. We are handing back £1.2 billion to former miners and their families. In fact, 144 former miners in the Livingston constituency will receive an average increase of £29 per week in their pension. For those who would like a further insight into Scottish oil and the shale oil industry, there is the Almond Valley visitor centre, which brings to life the first truly commercial oil works in the world, and celebrates the West Lothian chemist James “Paraffin” Young’s work and discoveries.

However, the biggest growth in the area was in the 1960s, with the creation of the new town of Livingston. Many from Glasgow and the west of Scotland ventured east because of the promise of improved housing and job opportunities. That entrepreneurial spirit is still alive in Livingston, which is the home of high-end manufacturers like Wyman-Gordon, biotech companies like Valneva, Glenmorangie’s bottling plant, Paterson’s shortbread factory, Mitsubishi Electric, a designer outlet village, Sky, and numerous small and medium-sized enterprises, which are the lifeblood of our local economy. Now that I have highlighted Pateron’s shortbread and Glenmorangie, I am expecting a visit from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland—all in the name of promoting Brand Scotland, of course.

As I prepared to give this speech, I sought inspiration from the maiden speeches of two previous MPs for Livingston: Robin Cook and Tam Dalyell, who knew a thing or two about speaking in this place. Even in their maiden speeches, they set themselves apart with their wit, intellect and fire for social justice. Tam Dalyell used his experience as a school teacher to outline practical reforms that could be made to the education system, and Robin Cook, a former chair of housing on Edinburgh City council, made a plea for more and better housing. I took from them that you should talk about what you know, and if I can maintain that for my whole parliamentary career, I think I will be doing rather well. Tam Dalyell and Robin Cook are two giants of Scottish Labour politics, who, in their different ways, made a mark in this place. We new Scottish Labour MPs must now make ours.

There is a Scottish Labour thread of history in this place, from Hardie, Maxton, Lee and Dewar to Cook, Brown and Darling. Living up to that is an impossible task, but try we must, because in that trying and effort is the opportunity to make a change. The idea of being a Scottish MP in the Parliament of the United Kingdom is important to me. I am Scottish, and I am British. I do not see these identities as contradictory, but they are different. Given that all four nations are part of the United Kingdom, and have been, in some cases, for hundreds of years, it would seem logical that the UK identity would subsume all, but that is not so.

The idea of Scotland is powerful. It has stood the test of time, and it means different things to different people in the Borders, the highlands, the island communities, the east, the west, the central belt, urban areas and rural areas, but there is a common fabric of what it means to be Scottish, and it binds us together, whether we were born into being Scottish or chose to make our home in Scotland. This is part of who we are, and having Scotland as one of the four nations makes our country greater than the sum of its parts.

The theme of today’s debate is “fixing the foundations”, because over the last 14 years our country has not been on secure foundations. The chaos of the last 14 years across the UK—and particularly the last 10 years in Scotland, where there has been a focus on the constitution, not the day job—has made our country feel less secure and life feel too precarious for far too many. Families are one mistake, a piece of bad luck or a decision that is no fault of their own away from disaster. That is no way to live. That is why this Budget—which ensures a pay rise for over 200,000 of the lowest-paid Scots, letting more families keep more of their hard-earned cash—is important for families right across the Livingston constituency.

I wanted to come to this place to make sure that everyone, no matter their background, can thrive. That is what drives me and my politics. Having grown up in a working-class family in a working-class town in central Scotland in the ’80s and ’90s, I have seen what happens when people have opportunities and security, and what happens when they do not. My father worked in a plastics plant in Grangemouth for over 35 years, providing our family with stability and dignity through unionised work. Without it, I would not be here today.

There is hope for the future. Yesterday’s Budget marks the end of the era of austerity, and raises much-needed cash for our public services. This Labour Budget delivers the largest budget settlement for the Scottish Government in the history of devolution. It means there is an additional £1.5 billion for the Scottish Government to spend in this financial year, and an additional £3.4 billion next year. This is a significant increase in investment to ensure that we have the funding available for Scotland’s NHS, schools and public services. It is now for the SNP, which has lost its way in recent years, to get a grip and spend the money wisely.

I recently visited the Larder, a social enterprise providing solutions to poverty through learning opportunities and access to high-quality, affordable food. It supports young people for whom traditional academic settings have often not worked, helping them to build skills and confidence. The Larder has had huge success in turning lives around, so it can be done. We have the people and drive to build stronger communities. We have a Government who are on the side of working people, and we should not rest until everyone in this country has the opportunities that they need to build a more secure life for themselves and their families. That is what I resolve to spend my time in this place doing, on behalf of people in the Livingston constituency.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call my constituency neighbour, Mims Davies.

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

I congratulate all hon. Members who have made their maiden speeches. May I wish the hon. Member for Livingston (Gregor Poynton) well in his time in this place?

I agree with my right hon. Friend the Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) that the failure of the Budget, and its long preamble, mentioning covid and the war on our continent, was very stark. However, I would like to start on a positive note. I am the 380th woman elected to Parliament, and it was truly a historic moment to see the first female Chancellor at the Dispatch Box. She said that it would give hope to other women who were watching, and I absolutely agree. I just hope that our businesses, and sectors such as hospitality, feel that hope.

It was very pleasing to hear the announcement of the compensation schemes for infected blood victims— my constituent Robert, in East Grinstead, has been campaigning very hard on that—and for victims of the Post Office scandal, which will be welcomed by many of my constituents. It is also pleasing that fuel duty has been frozen, and I thank all my hon. Friends and campaigners who made sure that there was support in this area of the family finances. I am pleased about that, and, indeed about the cladding interventions. There is a welcome boost for funding for special educational needs and disabilities, and something for the dreaded potholes, although we have yet to find out how far that funding will stretch.

However, 10 independent schools are in peril in my constituency, and their food providers, staff and many others are very worried about where they will go if they are displaced. There is no funding in this Budget to deal with such displacements. I would have welcomed more support for the Sussex wine sector; I am sure that you would agree with me on that, Madam Deputy Speaker.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. That point was not about the consumption of wine; I have many vineyards in my constituency, as the hon. Member does.

[Mims Davies]

It is very important to support people working in the wine sector. Viticulture is alive and well in Sussex, Essex and across the country. If the train drivers’ needs have truly been satisfied, the services from East Grinstead to the capital simply must improve. That is my plea to the Southern rail service.

Despite the leaks and the pre-Budget announcements, it came as something of a shock to hear the full announcements in the Budget yesterday. There can be no mistake: the cost to the country is very dear. According to the OBR, the direct and indirect costs amount to £52 billion. The new Labour Government cannot escape the fact that, in their first Budget in 14 years—as they keep reminding us—they are set to raise taxes by a staggering £40 billion. Taxes will be at their highest level since 1993, and that builds on the winter fuel payment debacle. Despite Labour Members’ glee and their waving of Order Papers, when they go back to their constituencies or open their emails, they will see a very different story. Their constituents, like mine, will face the largest tax burden in our history, and working people will pay the price, as the Chancellor has now agreed.

Let me turn to younger voters and those keen to get on the housing ladder. Stamp duty is back for first-time buyers. One of my Conservative councillors in Copthorne and Worth highlighted this morning that the purchase of two rental properties has fallen through because the margins were already very tight. Yesterday’s decisions mean that two couples will now not be homeowners.

In Handcross and Pease Pottage, one of my councillors, Mr Prescott, mentioned the Budget of broken promises. His organisation will face a cost of £70,000, it will lose two people, and the delivery of programmes will be stopped. That is the reality of these decisions. Small businesses—often those that are women-led, such as salons—will see the impact of the national insurance rise. I will be interested to see the effect across all sectors, particularly as the measures are a clear breach of the Labour manifesto. Despite Labour’s retrospective revisionism, the effect will be felt right across the land. On every radio station that I listened to on my way in this morning, the dismay across sectors, affecting real people’s lives, was everywhere.

The national insurance rise affects charities and organisations, such as our hospices and air ambulances. As the shadow Chancellor said in the media this morning and again here today, picking the pockets of business, charities and organisations is not cost-free. The Institute for Fiscal Studies confirmed that the rise will hit the lowest-paid workers through lower pay, and the OBR has said that it will hit employment. So much for not raising taxes on working people. Two manifesto commitments have been broken.

[Mims Davies]

Nobody here wants any negatives for their constituencies from the Budget, least of all for health services. However, I have family in Wales who have been living under a Labour Government, and they know the reality of what is coming down the line.

Let me build on the questions I have had from constituents this morning. Family businesses are directly affected. A local funeral directors group with national reach said that it believes that the Treasury has its figures wrong on the impact of the changes to agricultural property relief and business property relief. The cap and the 20% rate must surely be a simple mistake, the group writes. To meet the inheritance tax bill and pay their liability, firms will have to extract capital, incurring a 38% dividend tax rate, which is above the proposed 20% rate of reduced IHT. Given that capital gains tax is at 24%, it makes no sense for family businesses to pass on their shares to family. They will simply have to sell them or their business. I have been implored to ask those on the Treasury Bench to ensure that the Government consult and listen to family businesses, at the very least.

The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster talked about Conservative Members opposing the Budget. We are opposing it. It is anti-choice, anti-growth, anti-business—particularly anti-family businesses—and anti-aspirational. It is focused on more borrowing. Disgracefully, as has been said, it pits the public sector against the private sector. Happy Hallowe’en, because everybody here knows that this is the ghost of a Labour Government of the past. They are back and haunting every single constituency.

I represent a rural constituency, and it is clear that local farmers will be hit by the changes to inheritance tax—we just need to read the messages from the NFU today. I am afraid that the subterfuge and the hoodwinking of the farming community will be felt not just by Opposition Members, but across everybody’s communities.

I recently read out in Westminster Hall the words of a local farmer, whose concerns were purely about business confidence at that point. The same farmer wrote to me again this week—I remind the House that farmers are working people, and they work 365 days and 52 weeks a year—to say:

“My family’s farm and estate are currently economically viable but there is no chance that they would ever produce sufficient cash flow to make it possible for us to cover any significant amounts of inheritance tax. If we are struck by excessive taxation we will no longer be able to produce 7,000,000 litres of milk per annum or timber for the nation. The heritage of 200 years could be gone.”

Farmers across my constituency are stunned. This is a hammer blow for family businesses, as the shadow Chancellor said, and we will oppose the Budget. It does not fix the foundations; it is a set of dangerous ground works.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Maya Ellis to make her maiden speech.

[Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. My journey here comes via almost 10 years in local government, as an officer working on economic development and regeneration. I grew up among passionate socialists, but I also saw the investment that small businesses all around me put into their local areas, so I am delighted to be making my maiden speech, as the first Labour MP for Ribble Valley, in this debate on a Budget that truly harnesses the best of both social policy and great British enterprise. We need both, and we need them to work together.

For a young woman, full of dreams and wanting to change the world, sometimes our day-to-day can feel a pretty restrictive place to be. Anyone who has felt held back in their ambition will know that it can take just one or two people to believe in you, to make all the difference to whether you carry on or give up. I cannot possibly name all the people who helped me get here, but you know who you are, and it made all the difference that you never questioned for a second that I could do this.

It is so easy to quickly take for granted that we are speaking in a debate on a Budget presented by the first ever woman Chancellor of the Exchequer. She will know as well as I do that as fairytale as our journeys may seem at their high points right now, the prejudices and obstacles that we faced, and that women face every day, are still far too high. I have said it to many women, and I will say it to any listening now: you are as smart and as capable as you think you are; do not let anyone convince you otherwise. We need your fire.

I have been in Westminster a few months now, and one thing I hear people say frequently about my predecessor, the right hon. Nigel Evans, was how much he loves and cares for this place that we stand in today. Mr Evans worked incredibly hard and diligently as Deputy Speaker and on the restoration and renewal programme board. We are very lucky to have this well-managed centre of debate and challenge in the UK, and I am grateful to Mr Evans, and to all those who work here, for upholding our exceptional standards of democracy.

I promised Mr Evans on the night of the election that I would take care of the Ribble Valley constituency that I know we both love. I can already safely say that I will likewise show this incredible institution of Westminster and our strong democracy the respect and protection that I know we both value so highly.

I am one of those exceptionally lucky MPs who have lived in their constituency most of our life. It means that I know it like the back of my hand. For better or worse, it also means that I encounter situations like I did the other day, when one of my old Brownie leaders called me over while doing the school run to raise an issue about local social housing—I am on it, Jan, I promise.

My constituency of Ribble Valley is a patchwork of our country’s history and its future. We remember the battle of Bamber Bridge, when locals stood up against white GIs to welcome black US soldiers into their pubs—a brilliant example of the inclusion and multi- culturalism that makes this country great. In Samlesbury, we have produced planes to protect the country since world war two, and I am delighted that progress on establishing the National Cyber Force in my constituency is well under way. It will lead our country’s research, develop our future security and build our skills in cyber.

People are often surprised by the size of the Ribble Valley constituency. Its boundaries have changed over the years, but it currently reaches from the Lancashire-Yorkshire border, with picture-perfect villages such as Tosside, Rimington, Waddington, West Bradford and Chipping, through to the lively suburbs of Preston, taking in Fulwood, Bamber Bridge and Walton-le- Dale, and almost reaching the Ribble estuary at the Irish sea.

I see the breadth of my constituency as its depth. We have wonderful places to live, though much could be done to keep them safer and kinder. We have great transport links, with the M6 running through, and it is only two hours to London on the train from Preston. We also have utterly stunning countryside, including a large part of the trough of Bowland, where the late Queen said that she would have loved to retire.

Strong communities are so important to me, and both the rural and urban areas of my constituency are made up of villages that come together to create celebrations such as the Lostock Hall carnival and the Broughton scarecrow festival just last week.

Right in the heart of my constituency is my home village of Ribchester, where my family have lived since 1961 and where I am now raising my family. I must pay a quick tribute to the people of that village. From the amateur dramatic society and the church to the Brownie unit and the parish council, the village showed me the best of what it means to be British. I look forward to this Government easing the burden on families, so that they can spend more time contributing to the amazing communities that we all need to thrive.

The only person I know who loved Ribble Valley more than I do was my dad. He travelled the world, living in big cities and in communes, dreaming of new ways to live our lives, but I recently found a letter that he wrote to himself at age 21, in which he spoke of the strange pull back to our beautiful little corner of the world, where he chose to raise his family and, without knowing it, raised the Labour MP he dreamed of it having.

It is my deepest sadness that my dad did not live to see me standing here, but I know that he relished every heated debate we had at the dinner table and, along with my mum—one of the most intelligent women I know—I think my dad had an eye to what he was preparing me for. He was the biggest feminist I have ever known, and, in me, I think he raised the second biggest.

A lot of my career has involved working on innovation policy, which has collided over time with my passion for social justice. I think we all need a vision to look towards, and I want us to be ambitious that our rapid advances in technology and automation should translate into greater rewards for workers. I would like to think that it is not too utopian to hope that we will move to a standard four-day working week in my lifetime.

So much of what our society needs does not necessarily cost money, but it does cost time—time to give our children focused play; time to truly rest our bodies so that they do not crumble far too early; and time to live slowly and to grow our own food, to reduce the huge demands on this Earth. Technology can give us time, if that is where we choose to channel the benefits.

Before I finish, I will touch on my utmost priority as a Member of Parliament: working families. We need to make life much more tenable, more affordable and, dare I say, more joyful for parents, who want to contribute to our country while also raising good humans. It is also critical to me that we make sure the children have the lives, support and love they deserve.

We have a vision for an innovative and high-growth economy, but we do not get innovation without diversity of thought. This Parliament is the most diverse in history, and I, as one of those new diverse Members, am able to be here with my mental health just about intact only because my husband took three months of paternity leave with both our children. This meant that, when an election was called two days after I was selected as the Labour candidate, I did not have to spend a single second handing childcare over to him; he already knew how to change a nappy, what to pack in a bag and the books my children want to read at bedtime. I fully believe I would not be standing here now if he had not taken paternity leave. That opportunity should not be rare.

Forgive me for speaking in a hetero-normative context, but that is my personal experience. We know that few dads take up paternity or parental leave, which means that many women cannot dream of putting themselves forward for political office, as I did. Knowing that my husband can confidently care for my children gives me time to think, to organise and to dream. Too many women are still unable to do this because their mental load fills every bit of additional brain space they have.

We need the ideas and dreams of mothers and parents to propel our businesses, our public services and our society. I was delighted to join the campaigning organisations Pregnant Then Screwed and The Dad Shift earlier this month to try to shift the dial on parenting equality. I hope to see some truly ambitious step changes as our Government review paternity leave over this coming year, not only to create a new vision of fatherhood in this country, but to unlock the dreams and plans of mothers, which we have been so desperately lacking but which are so desperately important. I send a huge thank you to my incredible husband for holding the fort at home, and for being the foundation of my standing here today.

Finally, I want to acknowledge that it takes a lot of bravery to be a girl or a young woman today; it always has. It is relentless, scary and exhausting, especially for those with caring responsibilities or facing additional prejudices. There are a million reasons to give up, and a million times I almost did, but please do not give up. I can promise you this: brave girls grow up, and one day you might stand here and be the one in charge.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

That was very inspirational.

Black History Month

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Thursday 24th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[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.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dawn Butler]

I thank my hon. Friend for her excellent plug for the conference on Sunday, and I will be there. The thing about resetting the narrative is that we have to learn. We have to educate ourselves, and there is nothing wrong in that. There is also nothing wrong in changing our mind. There is nothing wrong in having one position and then learning something new and understanding—for instance that reparations is not just about money—and then changing our mind.

Slavery destroyed the African economy. It stripped Africa of its people and also stripped Africa of its riches. There is a narrative that Africa is poor because of corruption and we must help these poor African children. I would like to change that narrative and say that Africa is rich. Africa is rich in natural resources ranging from arable land, water, oil and natural gas to minerals, forests and wildlife. The continent holds a huge proportion of the world’s natural resources, both renewable and non-renewable. Africa is home to some 30% of the world’s mineral reserves, 8% of the world’s natural gas, 12% of the world’s natural oil reserves, 40% of the world’s gold and up to 90% of its chromium and platinum. It has the largest reserves of cobalt, diamonds, platinum and uranium and 10% of the planet’s internal renewable fresh water source. So I want everybody to consider the narrative that Africa is rich and it has had its wealth stolen.

Africa is also a net creditor to the rest of the world. As my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) said, there are lots of big numbers being mentioned such as that $777 trillion needs to paid in reparations. Most recently Dr Michael Banner, dean of Trinity College Cambridge, claimed Britain owed £205 billion in reparations. Patrick Robinson, leading judge at the International Court of Justice, declared that the UK should pay $24 trillion for its involvement in slavery. There are a lot of figures and that is a lot of money, but at the end of the day some things will be easy to compensate. It is not just about money. We could give back artefacts and the bodies of freedom fighters and stolen jewels and precious metals wherever they may be. We could make good the land and seas ruined by oil spills, correct the education of history, compensate land and home owners, and cancel the debt. There are lots of things that can be done to make sure we have reparations.

I realise that it is complicated to calculate what is owed, but we must not forget that in order for slavery to continue people put a number on other people’s lives; people were sold for money. If it could be done then, it can be done now.

The first homo sapiens on earth—modern humans—are thought to have evolved in Africa around 300,000 years ago, and it is fascinating reading about the different continents and about Africa and the middle stone age and how they developed different tools and painting and where they came from. It led me to write a poem about being of the first ones that seems to have upset quite a few racists, and I say to them that they should not scroll through my social media feed unless they want to get upset.

This is my poem.

So you wanted to see me broken

Head bowed and tears in my eyes

More fool you you didn’t realise my strength is powered by your lies.

You are the wrong one

The violent one

The weird one

Whereas I, I am the chosen one of the first ones

You see this skin I am in

This beautiful mahogany brown

This skin you don’t like I believe

So why try so hard to achieve

By burning yourself by the sun

For me there is no need

Because I am the chosen one

I am of the first ones

I know I am black and beautiful

An African freedom fighter

My skin is my protection

And you my friend don’t matter.

Because I am the chosen one

As I am of the first ones

So you wanted to see me broken

Head bowed and tears in my eyes

More fool you, you haven’t realised

My strength is despite your lies.

No one should shy away from the truth even if it hurts and is painful. Slavery has always been wrong, and that is why we have a modern slavery Bill which has started in the other place. We should remind ourselves that knowing the truth is not the same as hate. This is not hate speech; this is love speech. This is the way we right the wrongs of the past and look forward to the future.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Liberal Democrats spokesperson Josh Babarinde.

--- Later in debate ---

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his fantastic speech, and I thank all the other Members who have spoken for theirs. They have really struck a chord.

The Windrush flows through the town of Witney and the rest of my constituency. The Empire Windrush was named after the river, so many in my constituency have a connection, which they honour, to that boat, which brought so many people to this country. I think many people in the constituency remember that everybody was invited—we in this country asked for help at the end of world war two, and that help was given—but too many in this country forget that. Black History Month does a great service in reminding us who asked for help.

I also want to give credit to the Government, because the Windrush compensation scheme—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. [Interruption.] Order. Both of us cannot be standing, and I am not going to be seated. You need to sit when I am standing. This is an intervention, not a speech, so I have no doubt that you are coming to a conclusion.

[Charlie Maynard]

I am. I thank the Government for their Windrush compensation scheme improvements, and I look forward to their moving much more speedily than the previous Government in delivering them.

[Josh Babarinde]

My hon. Friend’s point is very well made. I welcome the news that a Windrush commissioner will be appointed to help address the injustice that my hon. Friend so eloquently discussed.

I hope that I have illustrated, by spotlighting black excellence, what wonder and opportunity await us as we lift our black community. I wish to reclaim the narrative that a rising tide of racial equality truly lifts all ships. It is incumbent on all of us in this House to play our part in making that happen.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

First, because I want to continue having my breakfast in the Tea Room, I wish to pay tribute to Godfrey and Margaret. Secondly, there is no doubt that anybody watching the debate will see so many trailblazers and people making history, and it is fantastic for me to be in the Chair to witness that too. I call the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to follow the first black Liberal Democrat MP, the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde). We have talked about historical trailblazers, but we are all privileged to serve alongside trailblazers like him.

I want to talk about another trailblazer. It is such a joy to see the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare), take her place and her space at the Government Dispatch Box. I congratulate her on making such an awesome speech. We were long overdue seeing a woman of Ghanaian descent at that Dispatch Box. I think we can all agree: what a woman! [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]

We are surrounded by inspirations. It was a real honour to be able to listen to and learn from my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler). Yes, black fashion should be shown at its best and in all its glory, which is why I was happy to offer my very limited skills with an iron today.

It has been a privilege to hear the powerful contributions of colleagues so far. Black History Month is always a time when I know I will learn something new, hear something from a different perspective and share a fire and a renewed commitment to right far too many wrongs. Yes, Black History Month is a celebration—of course it is—but black history has been scarred by injustice. Sadly, that injustice is not confined to the history books; it is the lived experience of many of our colleagues and the people we represent. If we do not act, it will be the experience of future generations as well.

Not only are these disparities not confined to the history books, but they are not confined to one area of life. From work to pay, from education to health, all areas of society need to improve to ensure that we stop history repeating itself and ensure that equality is consistently aimed for and one day, hopefully in our lifetime, actually delivered.

We know of many brilliant black campaigners who have devoted their lives to campaigning for equality in this country, from the Bristol bus boycott campaigners Paul Stephenson and Roy Hackett to Baroness Lawrence, but we also know that far too many have died waiting to see the change that they need and deserve. At least 53 people who were victims of the Windrush scandal have died waiting for compensation for the injustice that saw the Home Office wrongfully deny British citizens, mostly from the Caribbean, access to work, healthcare and benefits. In the worst cases, people were threatened with deportation despite not only having the right to live in the UK but, as has been mentioned, playing an integral part in rebuilding our country after the war.

As the Minister said, our history and black history are intertwined. The Windrush generation should have been cause for gratitude, not scandal and hostility. Commitments to re-establish the Home Office’s Windrush unit and appoint a Windrush commissioner are incredibly welcome, but we also need assurances that lessons have genuinely been learned and that any future changes to immigration law will ensure that we never see another iteration of the Windrush scandal. I would welcome further detail on how the Home Office is working with victims to speed up the delivery of compensation to those who are still waiting.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East excellently outlined, black people face inequalities throughout their lives, in healthcare, employment, access to services and opportunity, to name just a few examples. That has been a focus of the Women and Equalities Committee, and I hope it will continue to be. In 2023, the Committee reported on black maternal health inequalities following the release of data showing that black women were more likely than white women to die in childbirth. Worryingly, the Committee found that black women were more likely to experience treatment that fell below acceptable levels and lacked dignity and respect, and that the needs of the patient were often ignored.

I have been lucky to meet inspirational campaigners such as Tinuke and Clo from Five X More. They continue to work with black families and healthcare providers to secure improvements, but change is too slow. In his recent review, Lord Darzi found that inequalities in maternity care persist, noting that black women are still almost three times as likely as white women to die in childbirth. That is not to mention the racism that many black healthcare workers have reported facing in their jobs and institutions. It sadly comes as no surprise to anyone that in any workplace, if you are black, you have to work much harder to progress and face additional burdens and discrimination.

Fear of discrimination can prevent black women from seeking support from their employer during times such as the menopause, making it difficult for women to access appropriate support or have their symptoms taken seriously. There is a double whammy of being an older woman and a black woman, and the Committee found that, as a result of that intersectionality, the difficulties faced by women undergoing the menopause were compounded for black women.

In September, I participated in a panel event organised by the Labour African Network discussing healthcare inequalities in the UK. I was struck by many of the contributions, but particularly by those of Davina Brown, a race ambassador in the GMB union—I declare an interest as a member—and a leader in the area of empowering black women in the workplace. She noted that black women face more criticism and insecurity in work than their white colleagues. In the NHS, the largest employer of women in the public sector, depending on the NHS trust, black women can be up to four times more likely to be involved in disciplinary proceedings.

Healthcare is not the only industry where the intersectionality of gender and race means that women sadly face additional barriers to protections, support and progress. As has been mentioned, black women are woefully under-represented in popular Olympic sports such as swimming, diving and cycling, as are black men, leading to a vicious circle where children grow up finding it hard to envisage themselves competing in those areas. As we heard from the Minister, if we do not see ourselves in others in positions of power or success, how can we envisage that for ourselves? We must have stronger pathways that specifically encourage black girls and young women to realise their potential and follow their ambitions in sport.

In football, we see a much more diverse picture; many of the current England men’s team are from black or mixed heritage backgrounds. However, the way they are treated by the press and the public—a notable example being the players who missed penalties in the 2021 men’s Euros final—shows the huge risk posed to those who play at the highest and most visible level. In women’s football, the diversity in English players leaves much more to be desired. I am grateful for the Football Association’s investment in reaching girls from diverse backgrounds, including through its Discover My Talent programme. However, with black and mixed race players held to much higher standards of behaviour than their white counterparts, and at greater risk of online hate, many of us worry how their future talents will be received.

The music industry is another area where equality is desperately lacking. In its report “Misogyny in music” last year, the Women and Equalities Committee heard evidence that black women are often overlooked for promotions and have their qualifications questioned. How many times have brilliant black MPs in this Chamber had to justify why they are here, been told that they are in the wrong lift, been confused with other MPs or even been handed a handbag to carry? I would have hoped that things would be different in areas such as sports and the arts that are so much more diverse and so much younger than politics, but even there, progress is far too slow. Data from Black Lives in Music shows that black women in the music industry are on average paid the least, and that they are paid 25% less than white women—that is shocking, but wait for the next one—and 52% less than white men. Nearly half of the black women the group corresponded with said that their mental wellbeing had significantly worsened in the music industry, and a fifth sought counselling because of racial abuse.

As a result of the inquiry, the Committee called for section 14 of the Equality Act 2010, which provides protection from discrimination on the basis of a combination of two relevant protected characteristics, to be brought into force, as well as for the introduction of ethnicity pay gap reporting. It is very welcome that the new Labour Government have committed to introducing both measures. We look forward to scrutinising progress in the year ahead, but any update the Minister has on those two vital commitments—ethnicity pay gap reporting and intersectionality protections—would always be welcome.

That is where I want to end, on hope—on the hope that things will not always stay the same, and that we can move forward together. As Charisse Beaumont, chief executive of Black Lives in Music, told the Committee,

“Unless we break or tackle racial discrimination, we cannot really tackle everything else”.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Ben Obese-Jecty.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am grateful for someone recognising the difference between me and my friend the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde)!

I do not like talking about race. I do not like talking about the colour of someone’s skin, with the innuendo that often accompanies it, not because it is awkward and not for any lack of pride or identity, but simply because it is so rare for the context to be positive, as well as because of the inevitable abuse from those on the left that follows any contribution from Conservative Members. Sometimes the distance between the two sides of this Chamber is far greater than just two swords’ lengths.

My father met my mother in 1969 when they were teenagers, he the son of the Stool Chief of Apirede-Akuapem, Nana Oboni Ayim Nyarko III, she a white girl from West Sussex who worked in the local bank. Neither of them was a toolmaker or worked for the NHS, but I doubt that anyone will be surprised to learn that 1969 was not the cultural epoch of inter-racial relationships. It was hard—much harder than anything that I have ever had to go through. They faced prejudice that I could never imagine. But, as one might expect, they had the strength to persevere, and I am hugely proud of them because they are still together. This Christmas eve, it will be 55 years since they met, and they are still going strong. They blazed a trail that I, and thousands like me, have been able to follow. They never asked for any recognition or, I am sure, expected to receive any, but they absolutely grizzed it out, and I would not be standing here today if they had not lasted the course. Reclaiming the narrative started with their story and others like theirs.

Too often, we talk about life as a black Briton through the filter of injustice. We obsess over slavery and reparations, over grievances and micro-aggressions, over systemic and institutional racism. We unintentionally drip feed an invective of nihilistic victimhood and exculpable underachievement, and then we wonder why some find it so easy to look down on the black population, and why some within it are so unwilling to do their share of the heavy lifting.

We risk reinforcing a “them and us” narrative that tells black Britons that they are second-class citizens. We lazily accept a media landscape that revels in promoting the very worst aspects of black culture, repeatedly valorising criminality and violent gangs and exploiting negative stereotypes for commercial gain, without ever really holding to account the companies that happily do so. It is one of the contributing factors to the milieu that feeds concerns around stop and search on the one hand, and children carrying knives on the other. It is for all of us in this House to reclaim that narrative, recognising that it is not the historic narrative that we are saddled with, but a current one to which we are voluntarily yoked.

We have a responsibility in this House, whether we like it or not, to be role models for those who follow us. We who have the confidence, the talent or the simple good fortune to find ourselves in this place have shown that race need no longer be a barrier to success. We must recognise that. Reclaiming the narrative starts with those of us who are privileged enough to be a visible representation of what is possible. Not through all-black shortlists or well-meaning but clumsily implemented pushes to increase diversity that inevitably come at someone else’s expense, but because we earned it. I would never want to think that my success was in any way manufactured because somebody took pity on me because I am not white. Nor would I want that for anybody else.

Being black does not stop anyone from being selected in a rural Conservative seat, being the London mayoral candidate or running for the leadership of historically the most successful political party in the world. I am hugely proud to be British, to have served in the British Army and to be here now on the green Benches. I hope that others can feel that this country is one that they are proud to serve, too.

Generously, I will leave the last word to the Labour party, and in particular to the first black Cabinet Minister, Lord Boateng, on his promotion to Chief Secretary to the Treasury:

“My colour is part of me but I do not choose to be defined by my colour.”

For me, as somebody who does not like to talk about their race, that is one sentiment that makes the gap between the two sides of the House a little less than two swords’ length.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

We now come to a maiden speech from Liam Conlon.

[Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)]

I congratulate the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare), who has been a friend of mine for many years, on securing the debate. This is the first time we have had a Black History Month debate in Government time. We are incredibly proud of her and everything that she is doing. I thank those who have spoken so far—my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler), the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde), my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) and the hon. Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty)—for their brilliant contributions.

It is an honour to make my maiden speech in Black History Month, and I know that this debate will be welcomed by many of my constituents in Beckenham and Penge. We are proud of notable locals such as former children’s TV presenter Baroness Benjamin of Beckenham, Windrush lawyer and campaigner Jacqueline McKenzie, and my friend Michelle De Leon, the CEO and founder of World Afro Day.

Beckenham and Penge is a new constituency, so I have two predecessors I would like to thank. Colonel Bob Stewart served Beckenham for 14 years. He also served our country as the commander of UN forces in Bosnia, where he was deservedly awarded the distinguished service order. I would like to extend my very best wishes to Bob and his family.

I would also like to thank my good friend the Minister without Portfolio, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham West and East Dulwich (Ellie Reeves). She has served our communities in Penge, Clock House and Crystal Palace with an unrivalled dedication for the past seven years, and she leaves a strong legacy that I will strive to build on. It would be remiss of me to mention one of the Reeves sisters without paying tribute to our new Chancellor, who is the first female Chancellor. The Chancellor and the Minister without Portfolio both attended Cator Park School for Girls in Penge. When I visit local schools, I always talk about them—they are an inspiration to so many girls and young women in my constituency, and we are incredibly proud of them.

When Colonel Bob Stewart made his maiden speech, he described Beckenham by saying:

“Politically, it is a fabulous place. It has been a Tory hotbed for ever.”—[Official Report, 26 May 2010; Vol. 510, c. 215.]

Once upon a time that was true—we count John Major among our former residents—but 14 years on, I am delighted to update the House: today it is in fact the Labour party that has the strongest connections to my constituency. Beckenham and Penge is home to not one but two former general secretaries of the Labour party, who oversaw two of our greatest victories, in 1997 and 2024 respectively: Lord Tom Sawyer and the mighty David Evans. We also have the longest serving chair of the parliamentary Labour party, Lord Cryer, and a former general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, my good friend Lord Monks. I can tell hon. Members that knowing that all those people were watching me as a candidate was one way to keep me out campaigning in all weathers.

Beckenham and Penge is a rich tapestry of distinct and diverse communities. It stretches from the SE20 postcode in Crystal Palace, where no fewer than 19 world records have been set—it is the spiritual home of UK Athletics—and where there is a historic park, grade 1 listed dinosaurs, and Crystal Palace Bowl, in which Bob Marley played his largest ever UK gig, all the way through to the beautiful BR postcodes of Shortlands, West Wickham and Beckenham, where former resident David Bowie launched his music career. I am incredibly proud of my London Irish identity, so it is special to represent the only place in London with a Gaelic place name—Penge, meaning “edge of the woods”.

Coming back to the subject of today’s debate, I should say that there has always been a lot of solidarity between the Irish and Caribbean and African communities in London, who encountered a shared experience of discrimination. As has been mentioned, they were invited to this country to staff our NHS, build our roads and help make our country the great place it is to live. They were often met with discrimination, including signs on windows that read “No dogs, no blacks, no Irish”. That shared experience of living on the edge of society caused trauma but brought about solidarity between those communities. That solidarity is important, and it represents the best of Labour values, too.

Each place and community in Beckenham and Penge has its own history and story to tell. Although our communities are diverse and distinct, we are also connected and united by shared values of solidarity and care, and the belief that everyone should be able to fulfil their potential and that we are stronger together than alone. Those are the values that shape my political outlook, too. They come from an understanding of society rooted in my experience of the NHS as a teenager, and of disability ever since.

Let me tell you what happened to me. When I was 13, the day after we broke up for the summer holidays in year 8, I had an accident in which I shattered my right hip. That led to irreversible damage to my knee and spine. From that point onwards, I was unable to walk for four years. I was taken to the Royal London hospital and later to the Royal National Orthopaedic hospital. At the Royal London, I was incredibly fortunate to be placed in the care of Dr Mark Paterson, one of the best orthopaedic paediatric consultants in the country. Mark performed nearly 10 major surgeries on me as a teenager. I was then transferred to the Royal National Orthopaedic hospital where, as a sixth former, I became one of the youngest people in Britain to have a hip replacement.

Throughout those years, I spent nearly as much time on NHS children’s wards as I did in the school classroom —so much so that I had to drop most of my GCSEs to focus on my core subjects. I was then forced to go back a year at school. Every year, hundreds of children in Britain are admitted to long-term care in NHS hospitals, just as I was, but although it is in many ways a grim reality, my experience of NHS children’s wards, especially the Grosvenor B ward at the Royal London hospital, was that they are also places of great hope, deep compassion and world-class care.

Today I want to say thank you to the countless NHS staff and volunteers who helped me throughout those years. They quite literally got me back on my feet, and paved the way for me to become the first in my family to go to university. To the consultants, surgeons, physios, junior doctors, nurses, receptionists and hospital cleaning staff: thank you. I will pay my gratitude to you forward by using my voice in this place to fight for the NHS, just as the NHS fought for me.

But my experiences on leaving hospital also shaped my understanding of the world around me. I realised at first hand, at a young age, the million different challenges that disabled people face every day, and how invisible they are to anyone else. Today, disabled people are among the most marginalised in Britain. There is a disability employment gap in this country of 29%. Only one in four disabled children has access to sport at school, and millions of disabled people in this country face the indignity of not being able to access public spaces, or even board a train. I do not need to read a briefing to know what that feels like. It is why representation matters, and why I am determined to make my voice heard, as one of the disabled MPs in this Parliament.

I hope that when my successor comes to make their maiden speech, Beckenham and Penge will be an even better place to live; that our NHS and public services will be available to everyone, whenever they need them; and that we will be living in a society that is fairer and more inclusive of disabled people, and in a country that recognises its diversity as a strength to be celebrated and championed. I will work hard to make those things happen, for as long as I am lucky enough to represent my community in this place.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

That was a memorable maiden speech. I call Siân Berry.

--- Later in debate ---

[Siân Berry]

I absolutely agree with the hon. Member about education. As for his point about reparations, the echoes of this injustice will not simply fade away; we need to talk about it and take action.

Let me end by talking about one more injustice. Jay Abatan was murdered in Brighton outside a nightclub in January 1999. No one has ever been convicted for his killing, and his brother Michael, who was there on the night Jay was attacked, has spent 25 years campaigning for justice. I have met him several times over the past year at community events, and at a vigil on the anniversary of Jay’s death. Sussex police have apologised to the family for how the case was handled, but I know that Members supported my predecessor’s early-day motion expressing concern about the fact that Jay’s murderers have still not been brought to justice. I hope I can rely on the same support from Members here for any action that I take on the Abatans’ behalf, for the echoes of this injustice, too, will never fade until we take such action.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I now call a fellow Brummie, Paulette Hamilton.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Alaba]

My hon. Friend’s result was declared 20 minutes after mine, and we became Southend’s first black MPs.

It is really important to talk about reframing narratives. Black history has too often been seen through the prism of the transatlantic slave trade and the American civil rights movement, so I want to talk about how black British history has affected the United Kingdom. Including black people harmonises history better and more accurately, improving community cohesion and economic prosperity. By telling a more accurate story and referencing the African diaspora’s impact on society, we can do just that—we reframe the narrative.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

No doubt the Mother of the House will be referenced throughout the debate; it is best not to refer to Members by their names, but by their constituencies or, in this case, as Mother of the House. I now call Jacob Collier to make his maiden speech.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Burton-Sampson (Southend West and Leigh) (Lab)]

I wish to start by thanking the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare), for securing this debate—the first that we have had in Government time—in the name of the Prime Minister. I thank, too, my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) for all the work that she has done in encouraging this debate into the House. I also wish to recognise my hon. Friends the Members for Beckenham and Penge (Liam Conlon) and for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) who made their maiden speeches today, and everybody else who has contributed to this debate. My stomach is telling me that it would be remiss of me not to also recognise Margaret and Godfrey. [Laughter.]

Black history is my history, but, as so many have said today, it is all of our history in this country. The fact that, this year, the theme is reclaiming the narrative, celebrating the changemakers, is not lost on me. This debate is needed so much after the riots that we saw in this country over the summer. I am so pleased that that division did not get its way in this country and that this Government acted quickly to stamp it out. Communities, including my own in Southend West and Leigh, came together and said with one voice, “Division does not belong here.”

Madam Deputy Speaker, if you will bear with me for a moment, I wish to share a bit of my narrative. Some often say that I am the human form of the United Nations, and I shall give the House a bit of an idea as to why that is. My mum is white. Her father—my grandad, David Sampson—was half-Scottish, half-French. Then we move to my nan, Ellen Hansen, who was half-Cornish, half-Danish; her dad was half-Dutch. Then we move on to my dad. Edmund Danns, his dad, was from Berbice, a sugar plantation town in British Guiana. As we have heard from so many, Edmund took up the call during the second world war to join the British Navy. By 1941, he was one of 42 people who had joined the British Navy from British Guiana.

After the war, he continued his career on the sea and joined the Merchant Navy. It was at a stop in Liverpool that he met my grandmother in 1956. She was Irene Bedford, and her dad was a gentleman called Siar Bofferd, who became known as Edward Bedford, or Buffer to his mates. He came from Liberia. Edward arrived in Liverpool as a seaman, and it was there that he met his wife, Mary Kelly. Have a guess where she was from—yes, Ireland. Members can now start to see how I embody the United Nations. Edward remained in Liverpool, and, during the war, he served in the Royal Navy, as many did, including those in the black community. These people were giving their service to this country, and that was happening well before the second world war.

In the 1960s, my nan and grandad married. My nan, Irene, was subject to terrible racism in Liverpool, which happened in so many black communities throughout these lands. Edmund had to give up sailing, because he was concerned about his wife’s safety, so he took a job in a factory. Members can only imagine the racism that Mary Kelly experienced in 1925. She was an Irish immigrant married to a Liberian gentleman—they had black children.

Unfortunately, we all know that discrimination and racism have continued through the years. Yes, things have got better, but they still very much exist. I, along with many Members, have experienced this racism just simply because of the colour of my skin. The assumptions that have been made about me because of the colour of my skin are simply unacceptable. It is even worse today, as we see the effect of online racism. My hon. Friend the Member for Brent East has been very clear about the impact that that has had on her and so many others.

Interestingly, because I was brought up in a one-parent family, with my white mum, in a very white community in Liverpool, I saw myself as part of the white community. I did not really explore my black culture. The kids at school showed a little bit of racism towards me, but in the main, they did not see my colour, which meant that I did not see my colour. It was only once I left school and entered the world of work that that racism really became prominent.

I was very fortunate to work at the Maritime Museum in Liverpool in 1997. I was an actor at the time, believe it or not, and I took on a small part in an exhibition about emigrating to the New World. It was an absolutely brilliant exhibition in its basement site, and just next to it was a very small exhibition: just a couple of stands with some information. That was the slavery museum—it was so small that you would miss it. But by 2007, the Maritime Museum had created the International Slavery Museum, which took up the whole third floor of the building. I am delighted to hear that by 2028, that museum will have been significantly expanded. It is a permanent memorial to the struggles that can never be forgotten, and my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Riverside (Kim Johnson) is so lucky to have it in her constituency. I hope we can all go up there and see the new museum in 2028 once it is built.

Many of us in this Chamber and in this country have never been subject to slavery or apartheid, but that does not mean that we have not suffered. We have heard today about the suffering that so many people have experienced. We must not forget the contribution that black people have made to our society to make it the great British society that it is today. I am talking in particular about the Windrush generation, who we have heard so much about already. They helped to rebuild this country. They took up positions in transport, in domestic services, in hospitality and most notably in the health service. I am delighted to hear about the creation of the Windrush commissioner: those victims’ voices have to be heard, and they have to get the compensation that they rightfully deserve.

Representation is so important. As a young black kid, I often did not see representation above me in positions like this. We have already recognised the Mother of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), alongside two other Members elected to this place in 1987: they were the first black Members to be elected to this place since the last one left here in 1893, almost 100 years earlier. That was Peter McLagan, a Scottish MP, and he was one of only four black Members who had sat in this place before 1987. But look at today: 14% of people in this place are from ethnic minorities, 41% are women and almost 10% are LGBTQ+ Members. We are now a Parliament that is much more representative of this country. Just as the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) thanked his party for its work to ensure greater diversity, I thank my party for its work in getting us here today.

Regrettably, that representation is not the same everywhere. In business, as of March this year, there were zero FTSE 100 companies that had a black chair, a black chief executive officer, a black chief financial officer or a black chief product officer. Black employees hold just 1.5% of leadership roles in UK private companies, despite making up about 4.2% of the population. We have to remove the barriers to opportunity. Does the glass ceiling exist? I do not know, but there is something stopping people getting through. We need to help people break through it, if it does exist. This Government’s new office for equality and opportunity and their equality, race and disability Bill are a good start.

I thank those who like to create cohesive communities, including many in my constituency of Southend West and Leigh. I have a little message for those who ask, “When are we going to have white history month?”. Let me tell you: you have white history month every day: it is in your school curriculum, it is in the museums and it is everywhere around you. We need the same for Black History Month, because we belong here just as much as everybody else.

We need to learn from the past to drive a better future. In this place, we need to ensure that the laws and the changes we make create opportunities for all, no matter what their background is. I urge the Minister to ensure that equality and opportunity are at the heart of our Government’s five missions. Everyone should be given the opportunity to live their best life—their most authentic life—to the max.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Jenny Riddell-Carpenter to make her maiden speech.

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

There are many valuable contributions still to be made during the course of this debate. I just want to remind Members to be mindful, during the debate on the infected blood compensation scheme, that the contaminated blood products group litigation is still before the courts. The resolution relating to matters that are sub judice does not apply when the House is discussing legislation, as we are doing today, but I would none the less invite Members to exercise caution and avoid any unnecessary comments on active legal proceedings.

I now invite the Liberal Democrat spokesperson to speak.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)]

I am conscious of your warning about the sub judice rules, Madam Deputy Speaker, as there is ongoing litigation on this issue, but I hope and believe that nothing I say in my brief contribution will in any way overshadow the prerogative of the courts.

This has gone on for far, far too many years. I have dealt with two constituents in particular, both of whom came to my constituency surgery to explain to me as their Member of Parliament what they had gone through and how it had affected them—and it clearly had, in both cases. I hope the House will forgive me if I judge that it is not right to go through their cases in detail, but they were both extremely polite and eminently reasonable in what they were asking for, and both were deeply frustrated by how long the process had taken. I will send them both a copy of the Government’s regulations and, because they are rather complicated, a copy of the explanatory notes, which I hope they will find to be of as much use as I have. As result of this afternoon’s proceedings, I hope not just that they will be able to achieve some financial redress, to which I am certain they are absolutely morally entitled, but that they will be able to achieve some peace of mind, because it is very clear to me that both those people’s lives have been materially affected by the issue. One of them said to me, “It’s not about the money. I just want to be able to bring this to a close.” I hope that the House will understand that sentiment. If hon. Members had heard it in the way I heard it face to face, I am sure they would have been as convinced as I was.

I want to say a few brief thank yous, because, as we all know, this has been a very long and complex journey—not just for those who were affected by the scandal, but for those who have had to deal with the consequences many years later. This was not the national health service’s finest hour, and it took a great deal of campaigning by many people to get the system to put its hand up and admit that something had gone wrong—in fact, dreadfully wrong. Had it not been for the persistence of some of those individuals, we would not be having this debate this afternoon.

However, someone had to deal with the consequences. I pay tribute to two brilliant public servants: Sir Brian Langstaff and Sir Robert Francis—there were others—who have both, in their own way, had to attempt to exercise what one might call the judgment of Solomon in dealing with this extremely detailed and complex issue. They have both done their country a service.

I also commend my right hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (John Glen) and the former right honourable Member for Horsham, who is no longer a Member of the House. When they were in government, they both attempted to deal with this very complex issue. Having had some private conversations with the former right honourable Member for Horsham, with whom I served on the Defence Committee in the previous Parliament, I know that this matter preyed on his mind and that he really tried to do his best.

My last thank you goes to the current Paymaster General, who is clearly trying to achieve a resolution as speedily as possible and who has dealt with this issue in a very empathetic manner this afternoon. I speak for two constituents, but I am sure that we all have constituents who have been affected by the scandal, and many people across the country will be grateful for the way in which he is evidently attempting to handle it. I wish him godspeed in all his endeavours. This went on for too long and affected too many people but, hopefully, at last, we can collectively begin to put this right and give those people not just redress, but some sort of peace of mind.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I know that a few Members who were not here for the opening speeches have just turned up. If they can make their way to the Chair, I can have a conversation with them about contributing to the debate.

--- Later in debate ---

[Clive Efford]

The right hon. Gentleman would be most welcome, and I will pass on that information. I was hoping to tease someone out by saying that! It is an honour and a challenge to follow on from the excellent leadership of my right hon. Friend and colleague, the Member for Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham (Dame Diana Johnson). She will be an extremely tough act to follow. She was forced to stand down from the role because she was appointed to the Government.

I welcome the progress that the Government are making and I welcome today’s regulations. For many, however, the victories that were celebrated when Sir Brian Langstaff made his final report and Sir Robert Francis was appointed to lead the Infected Blood Compensation Authority, were, rather than the beginning of the end, mere milestones on a path with many miles still to go. The fear among many campaigners is that the Cabinet Office, which was responsible for delay and obfuscation over decades, is now back in charge of the compensation scheme.

I know that the Minister is earnest in his wish to see the victims of this scandal given the justice they deserve, and that he understands that we are where we are because the campaigners refused to be silenced. They took on the establishment and won, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham and I cheered them on and promised to deliver for them without equivocation should we get into government.

There has been progress, and we welcome today’s regulations, but for too many the euphoria has been replaced by frustration, leading to anger and a growing fear of betrayal. That stems from the fact that the campaigners feel that they are excluded from the process they brought into being. Decisions that they insisted should not be made without them are being made without the openness and candour the Government are legislating for. The Government have an excellent opportunity, ahead of that legislation, to show what candour means in public office. That is particularly true of how the tariff has been arrived at.

For the campaigners, it is like they have won the war, only to see those they vanquished put in charge of delivering the peace. There is growing unease that this is leading to the same tactics as before: delays, lack of information about how decisions are arrived at and lack of communication from the Cabinet Office. That lack of communication is causing people to look to small charitable organisations for advice, as they struggle to understand the complex compensation process. Will Ministers commit to providing support to those organisations, so that they can continue that work, as was recommended by Sir Brian Langstaff?

I understand that the Infected Blood Compensation Authority is starting to engage with the Haemophilia Society and campaigning groups about the process and technical matters, but there is an urgent need for much more engagement than has happened thus far. We are told that the Infected Blood Compensation Authority intends to settle 20 cases by the end of the year. Why only 20? How will they be selected? The victims call these the Willy Wonka golden tickets. In the meantime, while these 20 cases are completed, another 14 people are likely to die—one victim dies on average every four days.

Justice delayed is justice denied. When Sir Brian Langstaff published his interim report in April 2023, he appealed to the Government to get on with the compensation scheme, because he was alarmed that so many people were dying without receiving the justice they deserved. That makes it imperative that people, whether infected or affected, receive the interim payments without delay. Regulations for those affected by the scandal will not be published until March 2025—yet another year on from Sir Brian’s final report. Yet again, justice is delayed; yet again, victims will die without receiving compensation.

These are people who have suffered unspeakable harm: bereaved parents who lost children; bereaved children who lost parents and suffered bullying; bereaved partners who could not have families or who were advised to abort babies for fear they may have HIV; siblings who were bullied; and siblings who, under the tariff, are currently ruled out because they were over 18. There is so much more.

It is not possible to deal with these cases without understanding each individual’s circumstances and the suffering they endured through so many years. What is needed is a bespoke system that meets individuals’ needs, but that requires far more engagement than is currently happening. The lack of engagement with victims is leading to a lack of understanding about how decisions are reached and how compensation is calculated, fuelling mistrust in the process. Many victims, whether affected or infected, have lost their faith that the full extent of their suffering will be recognised through the compensation scheme. Indeed, some campaigners have concluded that their suffering will not be recognised through the compensation scheme and that they must return to court to get the compensation they deserve.

Those suffering from hep C do not understand why their experiences mean they receive different treatment from those with HIV. That requires urgent explanation. Again, the scale of the suffering needs to be looked at case by case, and there needs to be greater engagement, so that both sides understand the concerns. Why are people with hep C being offered much lower rates of compensation unless they are near death?

Similarly, the additional payments for those experimented on, of £10,000 or £15,000, have been met with widespread derision. My constituent, Mr Lee Moorey, was a pupil at Treloar school. Having read his testimony to the inquiry, I share his sentiments. Will the Minister guarantee that that will be looked at?

We need to remind ourselves of the scale of the scandal and just how many people have died without justice. All along, people have had to fight to get justice, but they will only believe in justice if they have faith in the process. That requires the decisions to be made about them to be made with them. We have to restore their faith in the process. I understand that Sir Brian Langstaff has kept his inquiry open so that he can keep a watching brief. It would be a shame if the Chancellor, the Paymaster General or even the Prime Minister found themselves summoned before him.

Finally, my right hon. Friend promised that there will be a full debate in Government time on the scandal. When will that take place?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the spokesperson for the Scottish National party.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alison Bennett]

I do agree. My hon. Friend is right that ensuring that compensation comes forward is of the utmost importance. I am sure it will be coming forward, but the urgency with which it does so is the key point here.

I end by emphasising the anguish that Graham and countless other victims still hold and carry with them every day. It is deep-seated, and it will not go away until the matter is settled and the payments are concluded. Urgency is now required to right this 40-year wrong.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Katie White to make her maiden speech.

[Katie White (Leeds North West) (Lab)]

It is an honour to make my maiden speech, particularly on this critically important debate on the infected blood scandal. I ask the House to allow me a temporary shift in tone, so that I can celebrate the community that sent me here.

Like many hon. Members’ constituencies, the constituency I have the privilege to represent, Leeds North West, is a new seat with a long history. I am sure most Members know where Leeds is, but I describe it as being right at the heart of the UK. I am deeply grateful to the thousands of voters who have put their trust in me, and as I said on election night, regardless of how they voted, I am determined to represent and serve our community in this place.

I begin by paying tribute to my immediate predecessors, both of whom are still Members of this House. I thank the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew) for being gracious and friendly and for his commitment to our community, especially Guiseley, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel) and his fantastic team for their commitment to our community and to tackling climate change. I also pay tribute to those who came before: Greg Mulholland, Paul Truswell and the late Harold Best, who all have a continued presence in the constituency. Those esteemed gentlemen have all fought for our communities, and I am honoured to stand on their shoulders, but I say “gentlemen” for good reason: I am proud to be the first woman ever to represent Leeds North West, the place where I was born and raised, as were my parents before me. Seeing more women elected to Parliament than ever before matters. It matters to the women and girls across our communities—to Alice in Otley, Navdeeb in Adel and Chloe in Horsforth. We have not had enough female MPs in my home city, but we are making up for lost time. Leeds now boasts the first female Chancellor ever, so there is progress, friends, progress.

Leeds North West has an incredible history. The stunning Norman church in Adel dates back to the 12th century; it is where my parents were married, where I was christened, and where my grandfather lies at rest. Further west is Otley Chevin. Members may not yet have had the chance to visit Otley Chevin, but we would not be here without it. The stone from the Chevin provided the foundations for this very Parliament when it was rebuilt in the 1840s. It should not be a surprise that it is Yorkshire that keeps this House grounded.

In Leeds North West, our feet are always planted firmly on that bedrock, but our eyes remain on the horizon, ready to embrace the future. Our constituency is a vibrant hub of entrepreneurship and creativity, a legacy that continues to thrive today. Abraham Moon in Guiseley, a fabric company established in 1837, still supplies international fashion houses today, while EMIS—which began in the 1980s in Horsforth—now flourishes in beautiful Rawdon as the leading provider of data support to the NHS. We are home to West Yorkshire’s only airport, Leeds Bradford, and I was pleased to meet with Jet2’s chief executive officer Steve just this week to discuss how the aviation sector can innovate to decarbonise. Should Members wish to stop for a bite to eat, they should look no further than the thriving bars and restaurants of vibrant Horsforth. It is a constituency bursting with joyful community fairs and fetes, from Guiseley festival to Yeadon carnival and from Rawdon summer gala to the Arthington and Bramhope shows —that last one comes complete with a human fruit machine.

There is no stronger pride than Yorkshire pride, and our community spirit is a great source of strength. However, as in many places, people are feeling overwhelmed and concerned about their future and that of their children and grandchildren. Many of the people I have met on the doorstep also feel let down—let down by politicians and by the institutions they have put their trust in over decades. The infected blood scandal is the most extreme and harrowing example of such systematic failure: people placed their trust in doctors and the Government to protect them, and that trust was betrayed. I am proud that this Government and this Prime Minister will introduce a duty of candour law to prevent future cover-ups like the infected blood and Post Office scandals.

I also share deep concerns about the other great challenges facing our community. Mental health figures are horrifying. The Global Mind Project has revealed that the UK has the highest rate of mental distress in the world and ranks second worst in overall mental health. People are working harder, yet getting unhealthier and unhappier, and of course, the climate and nature crisis looms.

We need things to change; the country voted for change, and it is change that propelled me into politics. My journey began with the climate crisis. We know that if we get it wrong, we face disaster—particularly for the most vulnerable among us—but if we get it right, we unlock enormous opportunities for our society. In 2003, I joined the local Leeds branch of Friends of the Earth and launched a campaign for the UK’s first climate change Bill. Everyone told me that it was impossible; that it was too ambitious and too radical. There was no way that the Treasury would ever allow a carbon budget—but, friends, they did. We turned that campaign into the fourth most supported campaign in Parliament’s history, with cross-party backing from Members across the House. The last Labour Government turned that Bill into an Act in 2008, under my right hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster North (Ed Miliband), whom I am honoured to be working with again. Under this Act, Britain decarbonised faster than any other rich country. This Act has now become a global benchmark adopted by other nations—and that, I say to my hon. Friends, is what global leadership looks like.

Why am I sharing this? It is because politics must be about real change or it is about nothing. I want to serve our community, and improve our schools, healthcare and public services. When I think about change, I think about my grandmother, Marjorie Simms. She challenged the status quo. She lived in Horsforth in the1950s. There were not that many women driving then, but Marjorie did. There were not that many women wearing trousers, but Marjorie did. Majorie developed breast cancer, and most parents in the 1950s avoided talking to their children, but Marjorie showed them her mastectomy so they could understand. She died at 43, the age I entered Parliament. Majorie did things differently and her spirit lives on in me. We have seen too much promise and too little delivery in recent years—endless debates about challenges, but a lack of energy for real solutions. Politics should be about action, not just words.

The seeds of change can be seen within our communities. As a Government, our role is to water them and create the conditions for them to flourish. Leeds North West is willing to play its role in full. We have the leaders, we have the ideas and we have the “get stuff done” attitude that personifies Yorkshire—like the students I met recently at Ralph Thoresby and Green Meadows or the cadets in my constituency, who are ambitious about the difference we can make; like the Horsforth shed set up a couple of years ago by ex-teachers based on the national men’s shed model and supporting male mental health, but expanded to include many other vulnerable members of the community; like those from Otley 2030 who decided they wanted to be a beacon of hope and created a living laboratory in the town to create climate friendly and sustainable solutions where people and nature thrive; and like Brian who, after a death in Morrisons car park in Guiseley, set up defibrillators all over the community so that lifesaving equipment is on hand and there is a network of community activists servicing them. Let us not forget the gold medal Olympians in our community—the Brownlee brothers and the cyclist Tom Pidcock—who inspire us all with their dedication and achievements. We are indeed a hotbed of world-class talent.

People in Leeds North West do not wait for change to come to them; they make it happen. They are the doers and the problem solvers, and I will play my role in that same way. I will champion the green agenda by focusing on practical solutions that carve a British path towards a successful green transition. We will leverage our strengths, whether it is world-leading research, supporting our best business minds, or unlocking the public and private investment needed to turbocharge a green economy. I will support the health of our community—mental health, physical health, community health—and I want to support our entrepreneurs and creativity to grow our region. I promise to be a ferocious champion for my community, my beloved Yorkshire and our country, and I will do it with joy. It may recently have become more fashionable across the pond, but I have been measuring with joy for years, and there is always space for a little more joy.

Finally, I promise to listen, learn and reflect. No one has all the answers, but all of us have some of them. I commit to working constructively and collectively. I will endeavour to arrive with curiosity and non-judgment, because if we want to change the way we do things, we must start in this moment, in this place and with these actions.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Having been a student at Leeds, I look forward to an invitation.

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 15th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Alan Gemmell (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)]

rose—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Just before the intervention is taken, I must mention the reference to “you”. Surely you are not responding to a question that I have just asked; you are speaking to the Chair. Please continue, Sir Ashley.

[Sir Ashley Fox]

I am happy to give way to the hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Alan Gemmell).

--- Later in debate ---

[Sam Rushworth (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman seems to be operating on the premise that all hereditary peers are Conservatives. Why does he think that people with entrenched privilege are naturally Conservative?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Interventions are made by colleagues who have been contributing and spending time in the Chamber and not just wandering in; the hon. Member got very lucky just then. Mr Rosindell, please go ahead.

[Andrew Rosindell]

I say to the hon. Gentleman that it is quite the opposite. There are many Members of the House of Lords—life peers and hereditary peers—who take the Conservative Whip but who frankly act like independents, doing what they believe is in the interests of our country. That can be said for many on the Labour side as well. He will find that there are many more rebellions and people voting in different ways in Parliament in the Lords than in the Commons, because they are there to serve and they do not face re-election. For that reason, they are not subject to the usual pressures —lobbying, the Whips and all the rest of it—that we are all subject to, and that is why having that element is so important and is part of the mix that makes up the success of our Parliament.

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call Chris Curtis to make a short contribution.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

No notice was given of a point of order, but go ahead.

[Jim Allister]

Is there no etiquette in the House about somebody who has sat through the entirety of the debate being gazumped in the calling list by somebody who has recently arrived?

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Thank you so much for pointing that out. Unless colleagues have been bobbing from the beginning, they are unlikely to be called—there are colleagues on the Government Back Benches who will not be called in this debate—but it is absolutely right that those belonging to the party that forms a majority in the House tend to be called earlier. You are most definitely on the list and will be called shortly. I call Chris Curtis to continue.

[Chris Curtis]

I rise to make a few brief points in this incredibly important debate. The most important point—one that we have still not spent enough time discussing—is the basic one that people should not be in this place on the basis of the hereditary principle. It is incredibly important that we move away from that for a variety of reasons, which I will come to. I will not pretend that the legislation goes as far as many of us would like it to —although, at the moment, most of us Labour Members think that elections are a pretty good way to decide things.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

We have had a lively debate and some wonderful maiden speeches. I noted some telling and impressive phrases—phrases that I think very few in this House could disagree with. Yet the House, in its actions, implements that which it disagrees with. What were those phrases? One Member talked about the need to move to “a more democratic form of government”. Good. Someone else mentioned “strengthening democratic rights”. Good. Another Member talked about “advancing democratic control”. The hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Ellie Chowns) said that “unelected lawmakers should not be a thing”. Good. However, the phrase that struck me most poignantly was about the principle of electing those who govern us.

This House has spent an afternoon debating the rights and wrongs of having hereditary peers, but there is a part of the United Kingdom where the primary issue is not whether the legislature has the right make-up but why 300 areas of law are made by a foreign Parliament. Those laws are made not by this House or the other House, or by the legislative Assembly in Stormont, and that is the product of the protocol agreement made by the previous Government and continuing to be implemented by the current Government.

Laws affecting fundamental issues, that govern most of our economy, that govern our entire agrifood industry and that control much of our environment are not made in this House—they are not made with the contribution of hereditary and non-hereditary peers—but by foreign politicians who no one in this nation elects. [Interruption.] Someone says, “Wrong debate”. It is not the wrong debate when we are talking about the fundamentals of what it means to have democratic legislatures. There is nothing more fundamental than the principle that we should be governed by those we elect.

The position of all the hereditary peers in the House of Lords may be indefensible—that is my own inclination —but at least they are United Kingdom citizens making laws for United Kingdom citizens. My constituents live under a regime in which many of the laws are made not by United Kingdom citizens and not by those elected by us, but by those elected in Hungary, Estonia or wherever.

This comes down to practical illustrations. Just a few days ago, a statutory instrument about pet passports was laid in this House that imposes not a UK law, but an EU law. It means that any Member of this House or any citizen of Great Britain who wants, for example, to come and visit the wonderful Giant’s Causeway in my constituency and bring with them their best friend—their dog—must, subject to EU law, have a pet passport, have it inoculated according to EU demands, belong to a pet scheme set up under that law and have the documentation inspected.

I am using this debate to draw the attention of the House to the fact that, yes, it is right and necessary that we debate the apparent anachronism of hereditary peers, but there is a far more compelling issue that this House should be preparing to address. I will be bringing a private Member’s Bill to this House that will give it the opportunity to address those issues, and when I do, I hope that the same enthusiasm for basic democratic principles will be shown for the principle that we should be able to elect those who govern us.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Minister.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ben Coleman]

We are talking not just about today but about what happened 25 years ago. Looking back at today’s debate, has my hon. Friend been struck, as I have, by Opposition Members’ saying that this reform has come too soon, that there has not been enough discussion, that it will cause dire consequences and that we should be looking wider? Those are not arguments from today but from 25 years ago. Does she not think that the Conservatives should be straight and not just fluff things—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. Interventions should be short.

[Ellie Reeves]

My hon. Friend is right. Listening to some of the contributions today, it is not clear where Opposition Members stand. They talk about reform being too fast and then not fast enough. They talk about it going too far, and then not far enough.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Wednesday 4th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my right hon. Friend for making that point. On the debate, it is important that as much information as possible is made available and that we are able to deal with the questions that Members of this House have raised. That is why we are looking at the date of that debate. I wanted it to be as soon as possible, but I do not want it to be so quick that Members will be frustrated because they will rightly want information or assurances that need a little bit of working through. I will try to make sure that that happens. The safety of buildings that are not at the specific height is among the issues that we have to consider here. We are all well aware of these very troubling cases, and they have to be part of the debate.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Ghani)]

That concludes that very serious statement. I will give those on the Front Bench some time to vacate the Chamber and allow the new Ministers to take their seats.

Draft Reporting on Payment Practices and Performance (Amendment) Regulations 2024

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Monday 18th March 2024 General Committees

[The Minister for Industry and Economic Security (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the draft Reporting on Payment Practices and Performance (Amendment) Regulations 2024.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer.

The draft regulations were laid before the House on 10 January. The Government have declared 2024 to be the year of small businesses. Small and medium-sized enterprises are the backbone of our economy, making up to 99.9% of UK businesses, employing millions of people and enriching our everyday lives. So far this year, we have further improved our Help to Grow campaign and established a Small Business Council, and today we are here to extend the Reporting on Payment Practices and Performance Regulations 2017.

Tackling late payment is critical to the UK economy’s growth and productivity; 56 million hours are wasted each year by businesses chasing late payments, and small businesses are being let down. Late and long payments contribute to an estimated 50,000 UK business closures each year. The Reporting on Payment Practices and Performance Regulations and the Limited Liability Partnerships (Reporting on Payment Practices and Performance) Regulations 2017 were introduced to bring transparency to the payment practices of large businesses. The regulations require businesses above a certain size threshold to publish information twice yearly on their average payment times, how frequently they pay suppliers late, and their standard payment terms. Those regulations and the transparency they have brought mean that payment times across the UK have gone down. That is good news. We want to continue that trend by extending the requirement to report and to improve transparency through the introduction of new metrics.

Last year, my colleague the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake), who is the Minister for small business, launched a consultation seeking views from the public about the existing regulations and how we can improve them. Trade associations and businesses across the economy endorsed our proposals to extend the regulations and to introduce new reporting requirements. I will now briefly outline the draft statutory instrument.

The first objective of this draft instrument is to extend the 2017 regulations beyond the expiry date of 6 April this year until 6 April 2031. The extended 2017 regulations will be subject to a further statutory review in April 2029, before their new expiry date. In 2017, the regulations were to sunset without extension, which would remove payment time transparency entirely. Without these reporting requirements, we would deprive small businesses of crucial information that helps them to decide who to enter into business with, and arms them in renegotiation of payment terms that suit.

The second objective of the draft regulations is to require large companies and limited liability partnerships in the scope of the 2017 regulations to disclose additional information and report to new payment performance metrics. One of the new metrics is that businesses are to be asked to state the value of the invoices paid during the reporting period. Small businesses told us that they wanted even more clarity about how large businesses act. The other new metric is a requirement for businesses to report on the percentage of invoices that they dispute. Small businesses are concerned that the practice of raising frivolous disputes to avoid making payments on time is becoming more common, so we are taking action to address that.

The third objective of the draft regulations is to clarify the reporting requirements when supply chain finance is used by large businesses. This amendment will change reporting to make sure that the use of supply chain finance by businesses is more accurately reflected in the reporting data.

I thank the 137 respondents to last year’s consultation on the draft regulations. They included small and large businesses, as well as representatives of trade bodies, who provided us with the support that we need to extend and improve the reporting requirements. I hope that the Committee can see the benefits that the regulations will provide.

[Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) (Con)]

I support the idea of disclosure of invoices that are disputed. Businesses in Amber Valley commonly tell me about that pretty naughty trick to avoid paying—people just pay late because they dispute the bill. What will the data published show? Will it literally show, for example, that this person disputed 10% of their invoices? Will it show how many of the disputes were resolved with full payment being made, showing it was a scam? Or will it just show that straight percentage, which might be quite meaningless?

[Ms Ghani]

My hon. Friend makes a very good point, which reflects the strain that can be put on small businesses when payments are delayed, although the issue of scams may be a little bit outside the scope of the draft instrument. This is fundamentally about ensuring that we have the right framework in place, are encouraging good practice, and doing what we can to bring down payment times. Already, payment times have been brought down to, I believe, 35.6 days. This affirmative instrument will drive that good effect even further. I commend the draft regulations to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ms Ghani]

I am grateful for the contributions made by colleagues across the Committee, and of course for their support. We are all incredibly keen to do everything we can to support small and medium-sized enterprises. Some very good questions have been raised.

Both I and my hon. Friend the Minister for small business consistently champion small businesses, and we believe that this legislation is critical in applying pressure and encouraging large businesses to improve their payment culture. Likewise, the draft regulations will arm small businesses with even more information than before about the behaviours of their customers, thereby equipping them to decide who they do business with and helping them to negotiate better terms with their customers.

I will quickly address some of the questions raised by the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Bow, and my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley. On giving small businesses more authority, we have established a Small Business Commissioner, and in our prompt payment and cash flow review we have committed to giving them increased powers to tackle businesses that persistently pay late; however, that will require primary legislation and depends on the legislative timetable. We have chosen to prioritise the extension of the existing reporting requirements to ensure that they do not expire, but we remain committed to fulfilling the actions to improve payment practices across the UK that we set out as part of our review.

Another point was raised about providing more authority, especially how we empower small businesses beyond the regulations. Of course, we have the prompt payment code, and this instrument will increase its effectiveness and provide more information for small businesses that will help them better manage their cash flow and negotiate payment terms; it also strengthens the powers of the Small Business Commissioner and equips them better to deal with businesses that pay late.

This instrument is really good news. The 2017 regulations would have sunsetted without this extension, and that is why we are here today. It is our aim to end the practice of late and long payments. We want to make the UK the best place in the world for both large and small businesses to operate. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Financial Assistance to Industry

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Monday 18th March 2024 General Committees

[The Chair]

It may help if I clarify from the Chair that what we are debating in this Committee—for up to 90 minutes, as Members will be aware—is the content of the motion in the name of Ms Ghani, which is listed on the Future Business section of the Order Paper. The House itself will be asked to pass the motion without debate after the text has been reported from this Committee later today.

[The Minister for Industry and Economic Security (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the motion, That this House authorises the Secretary of State to undertake to pay, and to pay by way of financial assistance under section 8 of the Industrial Development Act 1982, a grant or grants exceeding £30 million and up to a total of £75 million to BMW to support the production of electric Minis at Plant Oxford.

It is an honour and a privilege to do this under your chairmanship, Mr Pritchard.

The UK’s automotive sector is a global success story, contributing £14 billion to the UK economy annually, with some of the highest productivity levels among the major European automotive-producing nations. The sector currently employs 182,000 people in manufacturing, with an estimated 780,000 jobs supported by the sector in the wider economy. Major global companies such as Jaguar Land Rover, Nissan, Toyota and BMW have a significant manufacturing presence in the UK.

On 11 September 2023, BMW announced a £600 million investment in its Oxford plant for the production of two new electric Mini models, to start in 2026. BMW requested £75 million of funding from His Majesty’s Government via the exceptional regional growth fund to support that £600 million investment. It is that Government funding that we are debating now.

The exciting decision by BMW to invest in the future of the UK’s automotive sector is a prime example of how industry and Government are working together to meet new challenges. BMW’s investment in new tooling and machinery, and in re-training and upskilling of employees, will create and safeguard jobs in its Oxford and Swindon facilities and in the wider supply chain.

This support to BMW builds on our existing winning formula, which has delivered significant investment success. I am confident that BMW’s decision is among the first of many such investments that will drive the future of the sector in the UK. This Government will continue to work towards maintaining the competitive environment necessary to stimulate growth and productivity in the sector and ensure that the UK continues to be one of the most competitive locations in the world for automotive manufacturing. I commend the motion to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ms Ghani]

I thank the hon. Lady for her contribution to this debate. As she says, we are discussing a large sum of money—although of course the larger sum is the £600 million overall investment, which is key to ensuring those supply chains continue and that we remain the most stellar place to come in and invest in the auto sector.

Beyond that £600 million, the largest sum is the settlement we received from the Treasury in the last Budget but one for the advanced manufacturing plan, under which £2 billion will be allocated to the automotive sector. We have a fantastic automotive sector here in the UK, and the commitment made by this particular company, like so many others, speaks of their huge confidence not only in their workers, but in the supply chain.

This investment comes on the back of some fantastic successes to date, including the Tata Group’s £4 billion investment in a new gigafactory, which will be one of the largest in Europe, Nissan and Envision delivering up to £2 billion of new investment in Sunderland, with two new electric models, and Ford’s £380 million investment to manufacture electric drive units. I am pleased that the hon. Lady has made clear that the Opposition are not objecting to, but welcoming, the support being provided.

I turn now to a couple of points the hon. Lady raised, starting with the Competition and Markets Authority’s report. Those reports are published and we respond to them. We submitted our assessment to the CMA, as is our legal obligation, and the CMA did not recommend any adjustment to the grant award. We have reviewed its recommendations thoroughly and updated our internal documentation accordingly. We are satisfied that the award meets the subsidy control principles, and that is supported by the evidence.

On the issue of support for the company, the grant was assessed and tested in accordance with the Government’s Green Book appraisal guidance, which provides a framework for ensuring that due diligence is done. That included a rigorous assessment of the minimum Government intervention needed to swing the investment decision in favour of the UK and scrutiny by the Industrial Development Advisory Board. Those initiatives and frameworks are independent, to ensure that decisions receive due diligence. On top of that, there was third party due diligence by KPMG.

This Committee is meeting today because we are providing substantial support of up to £75 million, but we must not forget that the overall package is £600 million. I confirm that the Government will continue to support the automotive sector by giving businesses the confidence to invest and innovate in the UK. This grant is just another example of that.

Question put and agreed to.

Business and Trade

Nusrat Ghani Excerpts

Tuesday 12th March 2024 Ministerial Corrections

[Gerald Jones]

SMEs in Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney tell me of their frustrations around exporting goods and now the Government have scrapped the trade show programme, which was set up to support British businesses to attend events and win overseas orders. Will the Minister tell the House and the thousands of businesses that rely on that vital support when there will be a replacement?

[Ms Ghani]

UK exports are increasing. Using current prices, they are up by £21 billion compared with 2023.

[Official Report, 7 March 2024, Vol. 746, c. 943.]

Letter of correction from the Minister for Industry and Economic Security, the hon. Member for Wealden (Ms Ghani):

An error has been identified in my response to the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney (Gerald Jones). The reply should have been:

[Ms Ghani]

UK exports are increasing. Using current prices, they are up by £21 billion compared with 2022.

[Feryal Clark]

We are lucky that Enfield North has quite a lot of small and medium-sized businesses, but they are suffering because of the cost of spiralling bills and no Government support. Does the Minister think it is the lack of a Government industrial strategy or the lack of individual support for exporters that is most holding our businesses back?

[Ms Ghani]

That is an extraordinary statement, because in the hon. Lady’s constituency the greatest level of exports is from professional and business services, and those exports are increasing not only to the EU but to countries outside the EU.

[Official Report, 7 March 2024, Vol. 746, c. 944.]

Letter of correction from the Minister for Industry and Economic Security, the hon. Member for Wealden (Ms Ghani):

An error has been identified in my response to the hon. Member for Enfield North (Feryal Clark). The reply should have been:

[Ms Ghani]

That is an extraordinary statement, because in the hon. Lady’s constituency there are exports of professional and business services, and those exports are not only to the EU but to countries outside the EU.

[Gareth Thomas (Harrow West) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Office for Budget Responsibility said yesterday that exports, including from SMEs, will fall even more than expected this year; growth in exports will be less than 1% in each of the next three years; and other countries will not be hit the same way. There have been cuts in the funding to help businesses start exporting and there has been no deal with the United States, no Diwali deal with India, and no veterinary agreement with the EU to cut red tape and slash costs. What does the Minister think is the best explanation for the Government’s dismal performance on exports so far?

[Ms Ghani]

…When it comes to exports, we are exporting not only into the EU but outside the EU. As I said earlier, professional and business services are increasing outside the EU by 19%.

[Official Report, 7 March 2024, Vol. 746, c. 944.]

Letter of correction from the Minister for Industry and Economic Security, the hon. Member for Wealden (Ms Ghani):

An error has been identified in my response to the hon. Member for Harrow West (Gareth Thomas). The reply should have been:

[Ms Ghani]

…When it comes to exports, we are exporting not only into the EU but outside the EU. As I said earlier, professional and business services exports increased outside the EU by 23% in the 12 months to September 2023.