Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Rosie Cooper and Thérèse Coffey

Monday 19th October 2020 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse Coffey)]

The 2020-21 universal credit increase was included in a package of welfare measures worth around £9.3 billion this year to help people with the financial consequences of what has happened with the covid-19 pandemic. I continue to work with the Treasury on the best ways to support those receiving benefits. I share the view of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor that we must act in a way that recognises social justice, and that is the motivation of those on the Government Benches.

[Rosie Cooper [V]]

Does the Secretary of State still intend to end the suspension of the minimum income floor for self-employed universal credit claimants, which is due to expire on 13 November?

[Dr Coffey]

That policy is still under review. Clearly, this is a matter of discussion, because the regulations do come to an end. It is important to recognise that we have different measures happening around different parts of the country. We do need to try to take a national approach to the overall policy, but as ever, we trust and empower our work coaches to make the best decisions for the claimants they are helping, usually to help them get back into work.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Rosie Cooper and Thérèse Coffey

Thursday 28th March 2019 Commons Chamber

[Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab)]

T2. The Government declared in response to the Somerset flooding that “money is no object”. This week, ground investigation works are starting on a £40 million flood risk management scheme for Preston and South Ribble. Will the Minister explain why a maximum bid of £1.3 million is available for the flood defence grant-in-aid fund for a project that cost £9.7 million to deliver, as outlined in the Lancashire County Council report regarding Hurleston brook, known as the Jacob report?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Dr Thérèse Coffey)]

The House will be aware that we increased the amount of money being spent on flood defences between 2015 and 2021—£2.1 billion across those six years—better to protect more than 300,000 homes. The hon. Lady will be aware that there are formulas for how we can allocate money to projects. My right hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Richard Benyon) opened up the doors with a partnership funding approach, which is largely working. However, I am very conscious that the hon. Lady is doing diligent work on behalf of her constituents to get better flood protection.

Future Flood Prevention

Debate between Rosie Cooper and Thérèse Coffey

Monday 27th February 2017 Commons Chamber

[Dr Coffey]

I recently met my right hon. Friend to discuss that matter. I also met several other people who have not spoken in today’s debate to discuss the challenges of flooding in their areas, including the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Rosie Cooper), who now wants to intervene.

[Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab)]

Will the Minister look at the major builders, such as Redrow? They connect new homes into the system knowing that they should include one-way valves and so on, but they do not. That causes the system to flood, leading to water bill payers paying the cost. Developers should be paying the bill, not putting new homes at risk.

[Dr Coffey]

The hon. Lady speaks with passion on this matter because it has affected properties in her constituency. I stress to her and to my right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (John Redwood) that the Environment Agency does work with local councils. The guidance for new developments in the national planning policy framework is clear. Not only has the Environment Agency’s advice been accepted in 98% of applications, but there is a clear duty to consider the risk to existing housing stock. I am aware of the specific situation to which the hon. Member for West Lancashire (Rosie Cooper) refers, and I have passed it on to the Department for Communities and Local Government so that it can consider how to make things clear both in planning permission and in planning enforcement.