Oral Answers to Questions

John Bercow Excerpts

Wednesday 14th December 2016 Commons Chamber

[Chris Skidmore]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising the excellent debate that took place in the other place on 5 December, in which 61 noble Members took part over six hours. It was clear that there was a consensus among all political parties, as there is a consensus among all political parties in this House, that the size of the Lords is an issue that will have to be addressed. Our manifesto commitment set out very clearly that it was not a priority. When it comes to the boundary changes, our manifesto commitment to reduce the number of constituencies from 650 to 600 is critical as it will save £66 million across a Parliament and, crucially, equalise constituencies that for decades have remained unequal.

[Mr Speaker]

I do not think anyone is concerned about the size of Lords, but possibly they are about the size of the House of Lords. It is quite important to be accurate about these matters.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that while reform of the House of Lords might not be a priority at the moment, if their lordships try to frustrate the will of the British people over Brexit, reform of the House of Lords should become a top priority?

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Skidmore]

I am not sure about the toilets issue, but the Labour peer, Baroness Taylor of Bolton—a colleague of the hon. Gentleman with whom I am sure he often agrees—commented that while there are 845 Members of the House of Lords, average attendance is around 497. I am not sure what that does to the situation with the toilets.

Let us come back to the boundary changes. The hon. Gentleman has been around for a long time. He knows that when we look at the size of the constituencies in this House, we see that some have 95,000 constituents and some have 38,000. That discrepancy was first picked up on by the Chartists—he may have been around at that time. Two hundred years ago, a working-class organisation demanded change and we are the party that will deliver it.

[Mr Speaker]

We are very grateful to the Minister for his history lesson, which I accept he is in a good position to provide, but we must move on.

[Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)]

We have heard a great many words from the Minister. Why can he not understand that it is simply untenable to have a bloated revising Chamber with substantially more Members than this elected Chamber? This comes at a time when, as we have heard, he is ploughing ahead with his plans to reduce the size of this place. He might not think that reform of the House of Lords is a priority, but their lordships do, so what is he going to do about it?

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Skidmore]

I sat in on my hon. Friend’s ten-minute rule Bill, which I listened to with intent, but while the Government are absolutely committed to first past the post as an electoral system, as set out in our manifesto, we need to ensure that the conduct of elections set out in legislation is carefully managed.

[Mr Speaker]

John Cryer. Where is the feller? Dear, oh dear.

[Danny Kinahan (South Antrim) (UUP)]

T9. I appreciate that this is a devolved matter, but surely there has to be a process for the Cabinet Office to hold the Northern Ireland Executive to account when £400 million of all our money is being wasted on the renewable heat initiative?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. There is far too much noise in the Chamber. We have heard the question, but I want to hear the Prime Minister’s answer.

[The Prime Minister]

I join the hon. Gentleman in wishing everybody a happy Christmas. I will of course have an opportunity to do that again on Monday, when I am sure the House will be as full for the statement on the European Council meeting. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Funny, that seemed to come from this side of the House but not from the Labour side. I have to say that the Foreign Secretary is doing an absolutely excellent job. He is, in short, an FFS—a fine Foreign Secretary.

[Amanda Milling (Cannock Chase) (Con)]

Q4. Rugeley has a really bright future ahead—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I want to hear the voice of Cannock Chase.

[Amanda Milling]

Rugeley has a really bright future ahead, but only if we are ambitious, bold and visionary in our redevelopment plans. Will my right hon. Friend outline how the Government’s industrial strategy can create the conditions that will help us to build a sustainable local economy and highly skilled jobs for future generations?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

For the benefit of those observing our proceedings from outside, I should state that the Prime Minister was, of course, referring to the outstanding parliamentary rock band MP4.

[Jeremy Corbyn]

I applaud the work of MP4, but for the benefit of air quality I am not a member of it! I thank the Prime Minister for her answer.

Social care is crucial. It provides support for people to live with dignity, yet Age UK research has found that 1.2 million older people are currently not receiving the care they need. Will the Prime Minister accept that there is a crisis in social care?