Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Transport

Oral Answers to Questions

Peter Grant Excerpts
Thursday 30th June 2022

(2 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Peter Grant Portrait Peter Grant (Glenrothes) (SNP)
- Hansard - -

Will the Secretary of State explain why it is that when essential goods such as fuel are in short supply the price has to go up, but when essential workers are in short supply, their wages are expected to go down?

Grant Shapps Portrait Grant Shapps
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As I have explained to the House, a pay rise was already on the cards, and it is false to have called a strike on the basis that there would be a pay freeze. The pay freeze had ended. It is also untrue to say that there needed to be wide-scale compulsory redundancies. Indeed, we had a voluntary redundancy programme, where 5,500 members of staff came forward, and we only accepted 2,500 of them. This strike has been called on the false pretences that I have described. It is time to end the strike and ensure that people get back to work, and it is time for those on the Opposition Benches to condemn the strikes.

--- Later in debate ---
Grant Shapps Portrait Grant Shapps
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have provided £5 billion to TfL. What the Mayor does with that money and how he spends it is his choice. As I mentioned a moment ago, rather than doing the difficult things—for example, tackling the pension fund that his own review says requires tackling—he is cutting buses for Londoners, and that cannot be right.

Peter Grant Portrait Peter Grant (Glenrothes) (SNP)
- Hansard - -

T7. The right hon. Gentleman used to be a pilot. He is now the Secretary of State for Transport and therefore responsible for making sure that air transport on these islands complies with the law. Does he accept as a fact that Inverness airport specifically asked the National Air Traffic Service if it was okay to let that flight go, and that it was told that, yes, it could? Does he also accept that his Department did nothing to intervene? And does he accept that it was a weakness in the sanctions regulations that led to any dubiety at all as to whether that flight should have been grounded?

Grant Shapps Portrait Grant Shapps
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, no and no. For clarity, I will write to the hon. Gentleman and put a copy of the letter in the Library, explaining how a notice to airmen, as it used to be called—it is now called a notice to aviation—operates. As soon as it is issued, it is the job of the aviation organisation or pilot to obey it. There are no ifs and buts—a NOTAM is a NOTAM. It does not matter what anybody else says—that is what has to be followed. I will illustrate that in a letter to the hon. Gentleman, and I hope we can put this issue to bed.