National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill
Robin Swann Excerpts(1 day, 10 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings
I agree with the hon. Member. I know that the Government are in conversation with GPs, but GPs are writing to us saying that they are seriously concerned.
The GP in Harston said:
“GPs cannot raise prices or operate at a loss.”
They have not had clarification or confirmation from the Government about how funding that is to be given to others in the public sector will be available to them. Just at the critical time when GPs are coming to their annual spending reviews and budgeting, the Government are bringing them this uncertainty. GPs do not feel that they are getting the right messaging or any kind of clarity that will save people’s jobs.
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
I thank the hon. Member for giving way; she has been generous with her time. Does she realise that this is not just a problem in England, Scotland and Wales? It is a significant problem in Northern Ireland, where we have already seen a high number of GP practices returning their contracts. At this time when the solution was meant to be to move to multidisciplinary teams, the increase in national insurance contributions for GPs as employers is putting additional stress on their contracts, given the amount of money they are receiving from central Government. In Northern Ireland, 75% of our domiciliary care and home care is provided by private suppliers, and this additional cost will be added to them as well.
Pippa Heylings
I agree with the hon. Member. In my constituency of South Cambridgeshire, we had the tragic situation of four much-loved, much-respected family doctors handing back their contracts. It happened at East Barnwell surgery, to the distress of those GPs and all their patients. That is because of the contract, and due to failures by the previous Conservative Government to understand in the GP funding formula what deprivation as well as age demographics mean in that contract. On top of that, the hikes in employer national insurance contributions have driven them over the edge.
The Chairman
I know that colleagues read about how we manage the Chamber, so they will know that I cannot put speaking limits on individuals contributing in Committee of the whole House. However, if the last two Members speak for around five minutes each, the Minister will have time to respond before we have to conclude business, so please be mindful of that.
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
I will shorten my speech on your guidance, Ms Ghani. I encourage all Members of the House to follow the example of the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) and sign up to the Antrim Guardian—a very good local publication from my constituency that carries good articles.
I rise to come back to the topic of the debate, employers’ national insurance contributions, because we have covered many subjects this afternoon. I support the amendments that look to alleviate the punishing implementation of, and increases to, employers’ NICs, especially for our family health service and social care providers. Unlike other speakers on the Opposition Benches who have looked to blame the Government for the increases, I do not think the Government are to blame. I think this is more about the Treasury than the whole Government.
I want to pick up on a point raised, I think, by the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson). I have a lot of respect and sympathy for the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, the right hon. Member for Ilford North (Wes Streeting). When he announced his 10-year plan for the national health service, there were three main platforms: to move from analogue to digital, to move from sickness to prevention, and to move from hospital to community. The increases to NICs for community-based health providers will put many of those services at risk and under pressure. This is where there is a disconnect between what the Government are trying to do and what they are actually going to do and achieve. I think that was the point described by the right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart). If we put the additional charges on our GPs, community pharmacies, opticians, domiciliary care providers and social care providers, that will come back, in a circular route, in how we fund our health service.
On the specifics for Northern Ireland, we are looking to transform and modernise a health service that has been largely underfunded and under pressure for quite a number of years, and trying to exist on single-year budgets since 2016. We are doing that by introducing multidisciplinary teams, where a general practice has a psychologist and a social worker all within its practice. General practices are asking for that to be extended across Northern Ireland, but the increase in ENICs will increase wage bills and pressures on the pharmacies and general practices that have already taken that step.
The right hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness also made a point about the introduction of social care within the health service. We already have that in Northern Ireland, and 75% of the provision is done by the private sector. One thing this House needs to address, especially those on the Labour Benches, is that when we talk about private provision, they are not organisations making massive amounts of money. In my constituency they are often family-run social care practices that look after two or three homes. Nearly all nursing and residential care homes are privately owned too.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point about the problems in the social care market. However—this is a point I have made before—a lot of that is owing to the fact that nothing has been done since Andrew Dilnot’s report in 2011. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman could point to where he has spoken out about that in the past.
Robin Swann
When I was Minister of Health in Northern Ireland—for four years—I looked to the Dilnot report, and I tried to introduce parts of it there because of the differential that exists: in our system, health and social care services are the overall responsibility of the Department of Health. I know what point the hon. Member may have been trying to make, but I think he failed to make it directly in that intervention. The impact of not only the Dilnot recommendations but the introduction of employers’ national insurance contributions on those services would actually run counter to anything that Dilnot was recommending, because he was talking about a funded, integral part of domiciliary care as part of the health service, which we already have, but that would put pressure on our health services at the moment.
Farming and Inheritance Tax
Robin Swann Excerpts(2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Maya Ellis
As the Minister pointed out, many farms will not be affected by the measure and it will not have the impact that Opposition Members are leading people to believe.
We have an opportunity to support our farmers, as I touched on in my response to the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart). I have sat down with farmers in my community and worked through the issues. They have taken their own tax advice. For example, there is a farm in my constituency that is worth around £3.6 million, so it will be liable for around £12,000 a year in inheritance tax over 10 years. However, if we are able to increase that farmer’s profits by £20,000 a year, by reducing energy prices, increasing British-supplied procurement so that 50% of public sector food comes from those farms, and providing a better health service that ensures all members of the family can be strong and well to work, that is the opportunity. Yes, we need to make our tax structures work better—that is fixing the foundations—but the real aim and prize is increasing the opportunity for farmers, so that they have the stability, investment and real sense of purpose and mission that allows them not just to survive, but to thrive.
Independent Schools: VAT and Business Rates Exemptions
Robin Swann Excerpts(2 months, 1 week 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
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
I thank the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this debate. I want to bring up a specific Northern Ireland and constituency-based concern. When the addition of VAT to special schools was first proposed, I was contacted by the administrator of Newtownabbey Independent Christian school. I want to quote what he informed me:
“We receive no revenue or capital funding from the Department of Education to run our school therefore our parents have no choice but to pay fees when, out of religious conviction, they chose to send their children to our school. We are not an elite school, nor do we practise academic selection in any form. We believe this policy lacks fairness. Some of our school parents are on low incomes, demonstrated by pupils being entitled to free school meals. An added cost of 20% will deprive them of their religious based choice to send them to a Christian School.”
That is important not only in a Northern Ireland context, but in the context of this Government’s intention to add VAT to independent school fees, because under section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, public authorities must
“have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity”.
Adding this VAT fee to a religious-based school deprives the protected characteristic of religious belief. The administrator also believes that the addition of VAT may well be an infringement of parents’ religious freedom and liberty. Article 2, protocol 1 of the European convention on human rights states:
“No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”
Dame Caroline Dinenage (in the Chair)
Order. We have to move on to the next speaker.
Winter Fuel Payment
Robin Swann Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mims Davies (East Grinstead and Uckfield) (Con)
I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the hon. Member for Wycombe (Emma Reynolds), to her place and wish her well. It is a pleasure to close the debate on behalf of His Majesty’s official Opposition, but sadly that is where any pleasure at being at this Dispatch Box on this matter ends.
We have debated a clear and stark choice made by the new Labour Government, the Prime Minister and his “This black hole is what made me do it” Chancellor. It is a patently poor political choice that is wrong-headed and frankly a disgrace. It is a blatant choice for union paymasters while axing key support for 10 million pensioners. It is a reward for Labour’s funders. None of that was in the manifesto or on election leaflets—it is pure subterfuge and hoodwinking.
No charity or group fully backs this measure, given the timescales and its cack-handed and draconian delivery. The Government can bluster and say with the faux anger we heard earlier that they have been acting with the hand they were given. They can say that they simply had no choice and that this was a necessity due to the fantasy inheritance they were allegedly left. Let us look at the facts. UK unemployment sits at 4.1%, sterling is up against the dollar and growth is outpacing inflation. Despite some loyal speeches from new Government Members and passionate speeches from all around the Chamber, Labour Members know—many of them were blank, mute, absent or perhaps even stunned—that Ministers are targeting our pensioners with so little notice.
As the nights draw in, higher winter fuel bills loom. To dress up this measure under the cloak of financial necessity is staggering. It is a costly mistake from the Treasury under the Labour Chancellor that the DWP will have to shoulder, moving staff swiftly to cover the incoming impact of those applying for pension credit. What about those who had planned to pay for their pre-Christmas tank of off-grid oil with their £300 of expected support? The demand surge for pension credit must be met in both cost and delivery, and DWP Ministers will be scratching their heads about where the resource will come from for the reported surge in pension credit applications.
Mims Davies
I will give way to the hon. Gentleman if he can tell us why he thinks this is a good idea.
Robin Swann
I can assure the shadow Minister that I do not think it is a good idea. On the point that she and others have raised about no assessment having been done, I represent Northern Ireland, where 49.5% of homes rely solely on oil for heat. Does she think that the Government realise the additional pressures that will be put on Northern Ireland pensioners following the decision? Our Minister for Communities announced today that 306,000 people will lose the payment.
Economy, Welfare and Public Services
Robin Swann Excerpts(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
It is with honour and humility, and a sense of trepidation, that I rise to make my maiden speech. I think of those who have spoken here before and the gravity and seriousness of the issues that have been debated and discussed. I hope that this Parliament is no different in how it discharges its duties, and that we in this intake of new Members live up to those standards. I congratulate the many new Members on their maiden speeches, which have set a high bar.
Like everyone else in this House, I wish to thank sincerely those who placed their faith and trust in me by electing me. I am indebted to the electorate of South Antrim for the support that I have received from across the entire community—indeed, entire communities—in my election to this place. I also thank the dedicated campaign team who supported me during what was an honourable campaign.
I pay tribute to my predecessor, Mr Paul Girvan, not just for his tenure as a Member of this House, but for his time as a Member of the Northern Ireland Assembly and as a local councillor. South Antrim has moved between Paul’s party and my Ulster Unionist party on a number of occasions. With that, I carry the privilege and honour of returning the UUP to this place after a seven-year absence, and the charge and responsibility of bringing a moderate and reasoned Unionist voice from Northern Ireland, in my party’s tradition of working positively and constructively with all to achieve the best outcomes for all our people, and of working across this House to strengthen our Union and to deliver a Union for all.
I turn now to my constituency of South Antrim. I want those here this evening to know what a fantastic part of our country it is. Like so many constituencies, it has a mix of main towns—Ballyclare and Antrim—and a range of what were once small villages but are growing into large villages, such as Toome, Doagh, Crumlin, Randalstown, Templepatrick, Ballynure and many more. Much of the constituency is a large and productive rural area, while part of the expanding urban area of Glengormley is merging with north Belfast in Mossley and Mallusk.
South Antrim is home to industry, research and cutting-edge business in large and small employers. Indeed, I look forward to working with the Chancellor and her Government in further supporting those businesses through the Bills in the King’s Speech, and especially through the national wealth fund. South Antrim is the base of Belfast international airport, which I believe has a real opportunity if it gets its much-needed rail link and the further expansion of Aldergrove and our Royal Air Force base. That is why I believe that we also need a UK air transportation strategy, which I may raise later in the Adjournment debate—if the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) will take an intervention from me!
South Antrim’s agricultural sector is another pillar of our community and contributes significantly to our local economy. Our annual Antrim agricultural show celebrates that agricultural heritage by bringing together farmers, producers and visitors from across the country and showcasing the best of rural life and promoting a strong sense of community. It is on this Saturday at Shane’s castle, and I would encourage and welcome anyone who wants to attend.
Loch Neagh—the largest freshwater lake in the British isles—is another jewel in South Antrim’s crown, but it is currently struggling because of neglect, like many of our waterways. However, the Stormont Executive’s new recovery programme is in place, and I hope that—with national support, given the need for action on our waterways—Loch Neagh will once more be a tourism and recreational attraction for visitors from far and wide.
A number of issues debated over the past few days will have a direct impact on the people of South Antrim, Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom—none more so than the future and support that the Government will offer our national health service and those who rely on and work in it. The Government have the opportunity to reverse the past years of neglect. Health may be devolved, but that does not mean that we in this place can abdicate all responsibility for our national health service. We have the excellent Antrim area hospital in my constituency, but it needs resource and support to develop its potential. As a former Health Minister of Northern Ireland, I know that we have plans to deliver better services, but change needs recurrent resources, which have been lacking in recent years. I look forward to working with this Government to rebuild our national health service.
I know that I am speaking to the converted on how great South Antrim is, because I have been overwhelmed by the number of Members from across the House who have approached me to tell me of a relative or friend who lives in my constituency. Indeed, I look forward to representing them and all my South Antrim constituents in this place.