Call for General Election
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(3 days, 23 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward.
The petition presents itself as the voice of democratic urgency. In truth, it is something with which we are far more familiar, and something far less noble: it is nothing more than the collective stamping of feet, accompanied by the online equivalent of the call and response, “What do we want? And when do we want it?” We have all encountered this impulse before—or at least those of us who are parents have. It is an impulse pandered to by the Tory MPs who are present: the impulse of the toddler. But a democracy cannot be run like a nursery. This great country of ours, which they repeatedly let down over 14 years of decline, cannot be governed like one either. However loudly certain voices and views might be expressed, or however much they are featured on GB News or shared on Facebook late at night after half a bottle of wine, the truth is that we do not get something simply because we want it.
Mr Francois
Is the hon. Gentleman seriously saying—his attitude is unbelievably patronising—that the more than 1 million people across the UK who signed the petition are basically all children who do not know what they are doing? That is his implication, which is deeply insulting to 1 million-plus people, including our constituents.
Patrick Hurley
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention.
Back in 1983, when he was the Leader of the Opposition —[Interruption.] Members may remember Michael Foot—the right hon. Gentleman will never be the Leader of the Opposition. Michael Foot thought he was storming to victory back in 1983. “Look at this,” he said to John Golding. “I’ve got a rally here. There’s a thousand people cheering me on.” “But Michael,” John replied, “there were 122,000 outside saying you’re crackers.” A million people have signed the petition, but how many people voted in the general election? Well over a million people.
This Parliament was elected in a general election held under rules that were well known in advance, and those rules include a parliamentary term. Some Members might not like it, but it is true. The rules do not include a rolling plebiscite triggered whenever a sufficiently large group of people becomes bored, frustrated or impatient—or someone has shared a video clip with them on WhatsApp.
Robbie Moore
Will the hon. Member acknowledge that, in the history of petitions debates, the two most highly subscribed debates have been on petitions asking for a general election in this Parliament? Does he acknowledge that the fact that both those petitions were signed by more than a million people illustrates huge frustration at the Government and that people want them to change course?
Patrick Hurley
I acknowledge that a million people want the Government to change course.
The petitioners who have put their names to the petition say that the people want change, but they are not the majority of people in this country. There are tens and tens of millions of people in this country and only 1 million people signed the petition. Here’s the news: the people actually got change in 2024. Eighteen months ago, we got a Government who explicitly said they would not just go and put sticking plasters on the gaping wounds of the previous 14 years. We got a Government who explicitly said it would take a decade of national renewal. That is what we went to the people with 18 months ago, and that is what they were happy to vote for. We said it would take a decade to fix the country’s problems and the mess the Conservatives left us in.
The people who want change now are the very same people who want to go back to the years of stagnation and decline under the Conservatives—the years of austerity under Eric Pickles, George Osborne and Michael Gove, and, of course, the self-harming referendum that has done this country no favours whatsoever.
Mr Francois
The hon. Gentleman may recall that 17.3 million people voted in that referendum, peacefully and democratically, to leave the European Union. That is a lot more people than voted for Labour at the general election. If he is not prepared to respect the opinion of the million people who signed the petition, and as he is all about numbers today, will he respect the will of the 17.3 million people who voted to leave the EU? Or is that not a big enough number for him either?
Patrick Hurley
Those people voted in good faith and they were lied to by people like him—
Sir Edward Leigh (in the Chair)
Order. The hon. Member must withdraw that comment.
Patrick Hurley
I will withdraw it, but does the right hon. Gentleman respect the vote in 1975 on the exact same thing—staying in the European Community, as it was—which was overturned 41 years later? In every Parliament, at every moment, some people want change and others do not. Some want more spending and others do not. Some want radical reform and others want stability. The fact of merely wanting something to happen does not constitute a constitutional imperative. If it did, the Government would be paralysed. We would lurch endlessly from one election to the next, just like we did at the end of the last decade, incapable of governing because the Government were perpetually campaigning. That is evidence not of a democracy that works, but of a democracy that is failing, just like it failed in 2017 and 2019, and just like it failed when the Conservative party was partying while members of the royal family were dying.
An election is not a comfort blanket to be demanded whenever politics becomes difficult or the previous Government’s chickens come home to roost. There is a tendency in debates such as this to treat an election as though it is some kind of harmless release valve. It is not. A general election is disruptive, expensive and all-consuming. It stalls legislation, freezes decision making and turns Parliament in on itself. That is necessary at the right moment, but it is not something to be done after 18 months simply because people have run out of patience.
Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)
I am genuinely quite baffled that so many Conservative and Reform MPs are here, given that they have missed important debates in this House on things like employment rights. To be fair to the Conservatives, they went to the debates on VE Day and VJ Day; there were no Reform MPs at those debates. What does my hon. Friend make of that?
Patrick Hurley
It looks like Reform MPs turn out only when there is something in it for them.
We should be honest about what the petition represents. It is not a considered proposal for the better governance of this country. We can tell that by the way Opposition Members are giggling behind their hands on the other side of the room. The petition is not accompanied by a constitutional argument for changing this place to make it better, nor by any sort of legislative necessity. It is simply an expression of dissatisfaction at how long it has taken the new Government to fix the problems that were left behind after 14 years of chaos, division and decline caused by the Conservative party. There were years of economic stagnation, a referendum of such consequential proportions that the economy has barely grown since 2016, and a Tory Government who were more concerned with looking after themselves than with looking after the most vulnerable in this country.
Patrick Hurley
It doesn’t look like it.
If adults behaved in their working lives the way the petition urges Parliament to behave—abandoning responsibility at the first sight of trouble, and demanding resets whenever outcomes failed to please them—we would call it irresponsible and childish. We would not reward it. Democracy requires more than just knee-jerk, reflexive wanting. To indulge every demand for an immediate election is not to respect the voters, but to infantilise them. The House should do better than that.
Lee Anderson
Nowhere on the leaflet did it say we were going cut council tax, so the hon. Gentleman should maybe read it again.
This Government have stolen money off the workers by not increasing the income tax thresholds—something they promised to do—and they have given that money to the shirkers. By shirkers, I mean that these are able-bodied people—the bone-idle, basically. They refuse to go to work. In fact, they stay at home all day and sponge off the state—[Interruption.] Labour Members are shaking their heads. In fact, the only work some of these shirkers do is go out once every five years and deliver leaflets for this lot—great work if you can get it.
Our farmers have been attacked, our pensioners have been robbed and we have been locking people up for social media posts. And let’s not forget puberty blockers—these are medical trials on children. Everyone on the Government Benches who supports that should hang their heads in shame.
The Government are ending the automatic right to trial by jury—shameful. They allow Islamist thugs to dictate police policy on the streets of Birmingham. They have turned a blind eye to Islamists threatening to kills Jews on the streets of London. They voted against having a national inquiry into the mass rape of young girls in Labour-controlled areas—absolutely shameful. Each one of them should be absolutely ashamed.
Patrick Hurley
If the hon. Gentleman is genuinely concerned about the rights of the children of this country, will he support cracking down hard on Elon Musk and X?
Lee Anderson
I think X has to clean its act up—that is simple, and I think we all agree with that. It is interesting that all these Labour MPs complain about X, yet they are all on X every day making silly comments—you could not make it up, Sir Edward. If they had any scruples or backbone they would all come off X, but I suspect that not one of them will; they will carry on.
Kevin Hollinrake
That last point is complete nonsense. I was going to agree with the hon. Member that generally Government borrowing is higher because of where interest rates are. The most important thing we can do is get inflation under control to reduce the cost of debt. But the reality is that our margin above the rest of the world is higher than it has been for years; I am sure the hon. Member will not dispute that fact.
How do we get growth? We do not go about it the way Members on the Government Benches are talking about. I listened to the hon. Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson), who made a good speech about the priorities of his constituents and what he is doing. But, as with a number of other Members, when it came to achieving growth all he talked about was long-term spending and infrastructure—I am not saying that is not important—or certain allocations of cash from the Government to those areas. What Government Members are not talking about is where growth is really driven from: small businesses. Governments do not create jobs— not sustainably. The only thing that creates growth and increases the number of jobs in our economy is small businesses. That point has been notably absent from the comments of Government Members.
Patrick Hurley
If the hon. Member knows how to get growth and bring up the GDP of the country, why has the economy been stagnating since 2010? Why did he not do anything about it?
Kevin Hollinrake
The UK economy went through many challenges, of course, some of them caused by Brexit; the reality is that a change like that was bound to have a short-term effect—but only a short-term effect. The country grew faster than Germany and France during that period of time. The reality is that we were the third-fastest growing economy in the G7 over that period.
To go back to where we are today—[Interruption.] If only the hon. Member for Southport would accept, rather than chuntering from a sedentary position, that the reality is that small business drives growth and the number of jobs in the economy. Business confidence in July 2024 was plus five, according to the Institute of Directors; today it is minus 66—one of the steepest falls in history.
I speak as someone who has not been a politician all his life. I have done this for 10 years; in the 30 previous years, I started a small business that grew into a large business. I have been through the ups and downs. What the country needs, and what those businesses need, is confidence and stability of policy making.
Kevin Hollinrake
I will make some progress. What have we seen in terms of that policymaking? We have seen U-turn after U-turn. My hon. Friends the Members for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) and for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin) mentioned the number of U-turns. [Interruption.]
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Darren Jones
The Government agree with the principle of the hon. Member’s question. As I said to the House earlier, we want to reduce the layers of bureaucracy and to be able to deliver more action and fewer words. That is why we are taking action to close arm’s length bodies and other institutions. Most significantly, we have announced that we will close NHS England and bring decisions back into the Department for Health and Social Care for Ministers to make.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Nick Thomas-Symonds)
My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate for infected blood victims, and he can rest assured that I will continue to drive progress as quickly as I possibly can. That is how we have got to the stage where over £1.8 billion-worth of offers have been made, and I will continue to drive that progress quickly.
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Kanishka Narayan
I thank my hon. Friend for an important and timely question. It is important because I have been in the room with Ian Russell, the father of Molly Russell, and I have seen the tireless resilience with which he and the Molly Rose Foundation have campaigned to protect children online. It is a timely question because, in memory of cases like Molly Russell’s, suicide prevention must remain front and centre in our minds. That is precisely why, in the first week of this new ministerial team, the Secretary of State announced that self-harm content is now a priority offence. Ofcom has requested risk assessments from over 60 services, including smaller but high-risk platforms, and I know it is actively enforcing compliance as well.
Patrick Hurley
I welcome the Minister to his place.
Yesterday, I sponsored a drop-in event here in Parliament with Parent Zone to highlight the “hit pause” campaign, which aims to teach people to recognise conspiracy theories and misinformation online. Does the Minister agree that although we can make online platforms more accountable in other ways, these kinds of initiatives should be widely available to help equip people with the means to protect themselves when the tech companies fail to take responsibility for the content on their platforms?
Kanishka Narayan
I am grateful for this chance to put on the record that even when others have put their interests first, my hon. Friend has always put Southport above everything. In doing so, he has inspired many of us from across the House.
Media literacy includes critically evaluating information. It is a key skill in helping people to be protected from harm online, and I know that the technology companies play a crucial role. We welcome collaborative initiatives like Parent Zone’s “hit pause” programme, and I encourage all platforms to continue to expand their work to embed media literacy into their product design.
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(10 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden
The right hon. Gentleman has great experience in this area, and I respect his judgment very much. He will also have seen the world rapidly change before our eyes in recent weeks. The leadership task when the world is changing so fast is to understand the change, respond to it and explain it. I believe that in the decisions the Prime Minister has taken in this area in recent weeks he has fulfilled those obligations in full and in a way that this House is proud of.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Georgia Gould
I know how hard my hon. Friend works for his constituency, and I very much understand his concerns. My understanding is that there are no changes expected at the Smedley Hydro site in the first instance. The Government Property Agency is actively working with the Home Office and NHS Digital to understand the future workforce requirements, but I would welcome a conversation to discuss that further.
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Peter Kyle)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on getting on the Order Paper twice today—it would be a good day for him to buy a lottery ticket. I can assure him that the new digital centre exists to serve Departments and the wider public sector. The Government Digital Service enables Departments to deliver digital public services that work for everyone.
Patrick Hurley
Good public services are dependent on reliable and easily accessible and available underlying data, such as postal addresses. However, address data is complex and expensive for UK businesses to access. Given the importance of that data to public service delivery and economic growth, will the Minister commit to reviewing the terms under which UK address data is made available to support growth?
Peter Kyle
My hon. Friend raises an important point. Following the privatisation of Royal Mail in 2014, the postcode address file—the definitive list of UK postal addresses—became a privately owned data asset. He will know that this afternoon we have the Second Reading of the Data (Use and Access) Bill, which will be a great step forward for the use of data in the public and private sectors. He will also know that we have committed to creating a national data library, which will use data in a radically new way for the benefit of the country and public sector users.
Feryal Clark
The right hon. and learned Member will know that there is an ongoing consultation looking at clarifying the copyright and AI issues. There will be a speech this afternoon on the Data Bill that will cover the issue in more detail. As he will also know, the consultation ends on 25 February, after which we will review its responses to see what we need to do.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Peter Kyle)
Britain is leading the world when it comes to embracing AI. I have just got back from the Paris AI action summit; the companies that I met there were genuinely excited about our AI opportunities action plan and optimistic about how we are using AI to build a smaller, smarter state. The new Government Digital Service that I launched last month will harness the power of technology to deliver efficient, convenient public services designed to work for working people.
Patrick Hurley
In recent months it has become obvious that some social media companies’ algorithms are run not in the pursuit of a commercial imperative but in the service of the political interests of their host country. Can those politicised social media firms be treated as such, to protect the national interest?
Peter Kyle
I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s question and for the leadership that he has shown in his community in Southport during extremely difficult times. The Online Safety Act 2023 applies to all users and includes measures to tackle misinformation peddled by foreign states. He has a specific challenge in his community, and I am very willing to meet him and members of his community to hear directly of the impact that these issues have had.
US Steel Import Tariffs
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Alexander
To give a sense of quantum to the House, about £400 million-worth of UK steel exports go to the United States. That represents, if I recollect accurately, about 10% of UK production, so the hon. Gentleman is entirely right to recognise that this is a significant moment. We take that very seriously, which is why we are engaging in dialogue with both the workforce and the owners of the various steel producers here in the United Kingdom. More broadly, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne) alluded to, we want to avoid a significant escalation. We saw retaliatory measures taken under the first Trump Administration. It feels to me that this is an opportunity for the UK to exercise a cool head and a clear-eyed sense of where the national interest lies. These tariffs will not be imposed until 12 March, which gives us time to undertake the dialogue that is already under way, to reach a judgment on the basis of the analysis that we have already done, and to ensure that our interlocuters in Washington and elsewhere are engaged in a constructive and mature dialogue.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
It is quite evident that tariffs will have a negative impact on the UK economy. Among all the palaver in the imposition of tariffs, the impact on workers—on their jobs and livelihoods—is often forgotten. In formulating a response to the proposed tariffs, I ask that we work closely with trade union representatives to ensure that the workers are not forgotten in all of this.
Mr Alexander
I am happy to give that assurance. I should probably declare an interest as a member of the Community trade union. I can assure the House that trade unions—whether Community, the GMB, Unite or the other representatives of steelworkers—have been a central part of the dialogue that we started in July. Frankly, we inherited a situation in which there had been significant under-investment in steel capability in the United Kingdom for many years. We are backing up that commitment to dialogue with an act of commitment to public funds, and we are doing so in dialogue with the workforce as well as with the companies themselves.
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
Questions based on what we are actually doing are usually better than made-up fantasy questions. What did the Tories deliver in 14 years? Low growth, a stagnant economy, a disastrous mini-Budget and a £22 billion black hole. And now, the Leader of the Opposition wants to give me advice on running the economy. I do not want to be rude, but no, thank you very much.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
The Prime Minister
May I begin by paying tribute to my hon. Friend and his Southport constituents They have shown extraordinary courage and resilience as they try to rebuild from the devastating tragedy and loss of earlier this year. We will ensure that the people of Southport are supported now and in the years to come. The Budget is designed to fix the crucial services that his constituents rely on, including through £1.3 billion of new funding for local government, and investment in safer streets and in the future of our NHS. That is the direction in which we are taking the country.
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Nick Thomas-Symonds
I invite all right hon. and hon. Members to go on the gov.uk website, which gives the details for the Infected Blood Compensation Authority. I urge people with an interest to register with the authority, which is already sending out newsletters. However, right hon. and hon. Members are also very welcome to write to me at the Cabinet Office about specific cases. I will of course look into those cases and ensure there is a response.
Patrick Hurley
I welcome the urgency with which this Government have moved this important issue forward, especially now that we know there is a timescale for applications being opened. Will the Minister update the House on when victims can expect to receive their final compensation payments?
Nick Thomas-Symonds
As I have indicated to the House, I expect the Infected Blood Compensation Authority to make its first payments before the end of the year, and to start payments to the affected next year. The Government are moving as quickly as they can to ensure that people receive the compensation that, frankly, is long overdue.
Oral Answers to Questions
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(1 year, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ms Oppong-Asare
I thank the right hon. Member for his question. As I said, it is important that, as a Government, we work strongly together across the UK. As the Prime Minister mentioned on day one, he will be working with his devolved Government counterparts, and he has announced a Council of the Nations and Regions. That will include our working across all civil service departments to make sure that we learn from the lessons of the past.
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
The Minister without Portfolio (Ellie Reeves)
The commitment to a mission-led Government sets out a new approach to governing that is focused on the outcomes that will make a meaningful difference to people’s lives. It means a new way of doing government that is more joined-up, breaks down silos and pushes power out to communities. Earlier this week, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster sat as deputy chair on the first mission board on growth, chaired by the Chancellor. As part of our plans to deliver mission-based government, we will hold further mission boards as we approach the summer recess.
Patrick Hurley
I thank my hon. Friend for her reply. Earlier this month, the Prime Minister announced that he would personally chair new mission delivery boards to ensure that Labour’s key manifesto pledges are implemented. But if we want to deliver our manifesto pledges effectively, we are going to need effective communication between central Government and devolved bodies. Could my hon. Friend tell me what steps are being taken to ensure that devolved Governments are involved in the new Government’s mission delivery process?
Ellie Reeves
I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and he is right to point out that we have started to deliver on our promises. For example, the Chancellor launched our national wealth fund just this week. He is also right to say how important it is that we work with the devolved Governments to deliver missions. The Government have set out our intention to work closely with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as metro mayors and local council leaders in England, to deliver the missions. One of the Prime Minister’s first actions was to meet all the First Ministers on his tour of the UK. We know that meaningful co-operation will be key to delivering change across the entire United Kingdom.
Debate on the Address
Patrick Hurley Excerpts(1 year, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for calling me to make my first speech as part of this important debate.
First, may I thank the right hon. Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale) for his contribution? May I also pay tribute to all those who are making their first speeches today? I wish them well today and for the remainder of this Parliament, and I hope that we each manage to repay the trust that our new constituents have placed in us.
I am led to believe that certain conventions apply to Members’ first speeches. I wish to assure the House that I will abide by those conventions. Accordingly, I wish to pay sincere tribute to my predecessor, Damien Moore, who diligently served Southport for the past seven years, paving the way for a new Government to ensure that the town’s best days lie ahead. I wish him nothing but the best for the future.
I also wish to refer to another of my predecessors as the MP for Southport, somebody already mentioned in today’s debate. At the 1865 general election, William Gladstone was elected as one of the three Members for the South Lancashire county constituency, which took in both Southport and my original hometown of Prescot. As I am sure Members will appreciate, this fact helped me somewhat over the past 12 months or so in drawing a link between where I was born and where I now represent in this House.
I expect that I am not alone among new Members in having been rather overwhelmed over the past couple of weeks by the mountain of email correspondence that we have received from constituents and others since being elected.
I can, though, take some comfort in the fact that my inbox refers solely to the much smaller constituency of Southport, rather than to the whole of the South Lancashire constituency that William Gladstone represented. I can only imagine the additional stresses and strains on Members in Gladstone’s day if they, too, had had access to a Parliamentary email address.
As well as being part of the same old county constituency, both Prescot and Southport were also within the boundaries of the old hundred of West Derby. This fact was brought further to my attention when the Boundary Commission announced during the last Parliament that the new Southport constituency would, from now onwards, also contain Tarleton and Hesketh Bank, two beautiful villages on the south coast of the Ribble. As a result of this change, I researched at my local library whereabouts the boundary of the West Derby hundred was, hoping that I would be able to say that Tarleton and Hesketh Bank had, many years ago, also been under the same county division as Southport. Alas, this was not to be. After quite some hours of research, I realised that the information I was looking for had actually been staring me in the face all along. It appears that the boundary between the hundreds of West Derby and Leyland lay along—would you believe?—Boundary Lane, and that Boundary Lane is situated in a hamlet called Hundred End. It is a lesson, I think, in not ignoring the obvious when it is right there in front of you.
My predecessors in previous Parliaments have talked about how they have felt that Southport has sometimes been taken for granted or taken advantage of, and so have subsequently sought to discuss and elevate divisions between the towns of the local borough. I wish to assure my constituents that I will take a different approach. Instead, I will work to ensure that our country’s new Government will not look to cause divisions with our neighbours, whether they be other countries thousands of miles away or even other towns just a few thousand yards away. Instead, I will work with colleagues to ensure that the Government will look to unite our country in the task of national renewal, because the politics that I believe in is a politics of the common good—a politics where each of us looks out for the wellbeing of the other, rather than tries to do others down.
Many towns and villages in this country have seen better days than over the past few years. Southport is no different. Whereas other areas have had, for instance, much-needed housing not built, or much-needed transport links not implemented—two issues that I am pleased to see the new Government are planning to address—Southport’s problems have manifested themselves in the temporary closure of the town’s much-loved pier, and in the town centre, whose main streets need more than their fair share of love and attention. I promise to work with colleagues in this House and beyond to fix these issues.
The new Government’s priority on economic growth is entirely the right approach. Unless we get the trend rate of growth back to pre-2008 levels, our task in this Parliament of reducing poverty will be much harder. The Government have my full support in their approach. I wish it to be known that I will do my utmost to make sure that Southport’s best days lie ahead of it, that the decline of recent years will be arrested and that the town’s fortunes will be turned around, and that I will work with good people of good faith to bring that about, no matter what their party affiliation. With that, I would like to thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for allowing me the opportunity to make my first speech in this place. I thank the House for the manner in which the speech was received.
Several hon. Members rose—