Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd April 2019 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Rory Stewart)]

I am delighted to be able to remind the House that PAVA spray is an incapacitating spray and that it can be safer, when dealing with acts of extreme violence, to use a spray rather than pulling out a baton or rolling around with someone on the ground. We need to use these sprays in a moderate, controlled fashion, but they can reduce extreme violence in prisons and protect our prison officers, so we are proud to be rolling them out.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

T6. In South Tyneside, disabled claimants are having to wait over 12 months for a tribunal, and 80% of those appeals are successful. What discussions have the Minister and the Department had with the Department for Work and Pensions about this flawed decision making?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Lucy Frazer)]

I am happy to answer the hon. Gentleman’s question. I met the previous Minister for Disabled People twice to talk about how the DWP can get decisions right first time, and I have already spoken to the new Minister to follow up on those discussions. There were 3.8 million decisions made on the personal independence payment in the last year, of which only 10% were appealed and only 5% overturned. However, it is absolutely fundamental that the decisions should be got right first time and that only those that are more questionable should come through the system.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 5th February 2019 Commons Chamber

[Rory Stewart]

As well as ensuring that people are searched at the gates, we are investing more in netting and grilles. We are also investing a great deal more in staff training and support. Last week, I was lucky to be able to visit Newbold Revel, our prison officer training college, to see the passing out parade of the new set of individuals who are bringing standards to those 10 prisons.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

Violence in prisons has reached record levels, with assaults on prison officers up by 30%. When will the Government realise that their cuts are causing this crisis in our Prison Service?

[Rory Stewart]

The assaults on prison officers are genuinely shocking. That is why we have doubled the sentence for such assaults, and why we are investing in perimeter security. It is also why I have said that if I do not bring down the incidence of that violence, including assaults on prison officers, I will resign.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 18th December 2018 Commons Chamber

[Rory Stewart]

It is a very serious problem. As my right hon. and learned Friend has pointed out, almost half the prisoners have a reading age of under 11. Perhaps 25% of prisoners have a reading age of six. There is an enormous amount that we can do and that is where the education and employment strategy comes in, which is about making sure that the education is relevant and leads to a job.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

T10. The Tories have cut £1 billion off the legal aid budget to the poor. This has meant a cut of 99.5% in the number of people receiving legal aid for benefit cases. Will the Tories sleep well at Christmas knowing that they are starving the poor?

[Lucy Frazer]

Various changes were made as a result of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. As the hon. Gentleman will know, we are undertaking a significant review. My Department has met with more than 100 organisations or individuals to discuss the changes that were brought in and my Department will be reporting in the new year.

Civil Liability Bill [Lords]

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

2nd reading: House of Commons & Money resolution: House of Commons & Programme motion: House of Commons
Tuesday 4th September 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

The Government talk about reform of the justice system, but I am afraid that on the Opposition Benches we just turn around and say, “Here we go again!” Once again, the Tories are putting more barriers between workers—ordinary people—and access to the justice system. At the same time, they are helping their friends in the finance industry.

The employment tribunals farce has already been mentioned; thankfully, following work by the trade union movement, it was overturned by the courts. Then we had cuts to legal aid—another disgrace. Last year, it was found that there had been a 99.5% reduction in the number of people receiving legal aid for benefits cases. The Tories are pricing hundreds of thousands of people out of the legal system.

This Bill is known as the “whiplash Bill”, but it should really be called the “bogeyman Bill”—it is just a smokescreen to create a bogeyman so that public support can be gathered to increase the profits of the insurance industry. We are told that it will save the insurance industry millions and that that money would be passed on to customers. The same was said in 2013, when a fixed fee regime was brought in for more minor accidents. Costs to the insurance industry were slashed and damages to claimants were reduced as solicitors charged a success fee as part of their damages. The claimants got less and the insurers paid less.

Despite that reduction in costs to the insurance industry and the fact that the number of claims has reduced since 2013, premiums have continued to rise. How is that? Will the Minister explain? The number of motor industry claims has gone down by 17% since 2017 and is now at the lowest level since 2010—that is from the Government’s own figures, which show the biggest annual fall on record. Claims are down, damages are down, but premiums are up. Why? The profits of insurance companies such as Direct Line went up by almost 50% to £600 million last year; Allianz’s jumped 26% to £121 million. This is not a poor industry that needs the Government’s help. Profits are up, yet premiums are up. Why? Let the Minister explain.

When the insurance industry promised to reduce premiums by £35 a case earlier this year, it took less than a week for it to backtrack because of the discount rate that has been mentioned. The point is that the industry has promised to reduce premiums in the past, but has never, ever delivered. These reforms will do exactly the same: reduce the number of claims and access to justice. The insurance companies will be the winners again.

We are told that the reforms will reduce the number of fraudulent claims, which everybody would welcome, but it is important for us to understand a few facts. Insurance companies make their money by taking as much as they can in premiums and paying out as little as they can in damages. It is important for them to convince people that they are getting a bad deal because of fraudulent claims. They say it openly—“We are forced to put up premiums. It’s someone else’s fault and we are sorry but you’re going to have to pay for it.” That is the bogeyman syndrome.

The insurance industry would like us to think that we are in the grip of a compensation culture—that people are getting thousands of pounds for trivial accidents. The poor insurers have no choice but to put up premiums, they want you to think. That is not true and the Government have not brought forward a shred of evidence to prove it. It is a fantasy propagated by the insurance industry to promote profits. To succeed in any claim, people have to convince a judge that what they are saying is correct. The suggestion that any insurer would pay out a claim that it knows to be fraudulent or trivial is ridiculous—they are champing at the bit to expose and publicise fraudulent claims, to add fuel to the fire of the insurance industry’s myth of a compensation culture.

The reason behind it all is to make more money, and the Government are helping. Mark my words, further down the road there will be another bogeyman—a new excuse to raise premiums. Watch carefully: whose fault will it be next? This is all part of the Government’s policy of holding back the advancement of ordinary working people while helping the finance industry in the City. Whether it is the constant interference with people’s benefits—implying that they are skivers and need to be sanctioned—stealing the pensions of the WASPI women, or reducing access to the justice system, it is all the same: attack, attack, attack on the rights and livelihoods of ordinary people, while boosting the profits of the wealthy and the privileged.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 5th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

My antennae tell me that the Minister will be writing to the hon. Member for Kettering (Mr Hollobone) with further and better particulars, and I am sure that hundreds of colleagues will eagerly await a copy of that letter finding its way into the Library of the House.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

5. What assessment he has made of trends in the level of personal independence payment appeals that have been successful at tribunal.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Lucy Frazer)]

I am aware of the important issue that the hon. Gentleman highlights. I recently met the Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work to discuss how our Departments can work together, and I was pleased to see that the Department for Work and Pensions is taking several measures to ensure that it gets decisions right the first time.

[Mr Hepburn]

Does not the fact that two out of three appeals in the north-east are successful prove that the privateers that the Government employ to carry out PIP assessments in the first place are not fit for practice by callously letting down disabled people and ripping off the taxpayer?

[Lucy Frazer]

The DWP is taking a number of measures to ensure that it gets decisions right the first time. It has recruited an extra 150 presenting officers and is taking feedback from the tribunals to ensure that the reconsideration process is as effective and as right as possible.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 25th April 2017 Commons Chamber

[Elizabeth Truss]

I completely agree with my hon. Friend about the effect that such drugs have on people both outside and inside prison. One of our key priorities was to roll out testing, which we did by September, to detect such substances and eliminate their use in prison.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

T10. Under this Government, poor people have had their legal aid cut by 40% and thousands upon thousands of people have been denied an employment tribunal because they cannot afford it. Are the Government proud to be on the side of the rich, the powerful and the bad bosses?

[Sir Oliver Heald]

It is, of course, a union campaign to talk about employment tribunal fees. Let us be clear that the number of people taking up cases about the workplace has increased, not gone down—it is up to 92,000. Those people are being helped by a free service from ACAS, which the Labour party used to support. Fewer cases are going to tribunal because of the work of ACAS.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 1st July 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Vara]

It is vital that we have the necessary discussions with other Departments. We are working on that, at pace, to ensure that we get the best possible outcome for those at the end of that chain.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

Does it not tell us everything we want to know about this nasty Government—doing a rotten deal with Tory funders in the City to the detriment of dying people?

[Mr Vara]

The hon. Gentleman does neither himself nor his party any credit by using such language. A document has been made public and no deal was done with it—that is the fact. It would help the House if the hon. Gentleman dealt with facts rather than supposition.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2014 Commons Chamber

[Damian Green]

As the hon. Gentleman says, the homicide service will deal with those who have been bereaved by homicide over the past few years, but more money has gone to local police and crime commissioners, and they can commission additional services, which may well include some of the groups that I know are worried about the services they are providing to more distant victims of homicide. I can assure him that I am equally concerned about that, but the PCCs will deal with them.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

14. What recent representations he has received on compensation for people with pleural plaques.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Shailesh Vara)]

We have received a small number of representations on pleural plaques over the past few months, including some from Members of Parliament on behalf of their constituents.

[Mr Hepburn]

Does the Minister agree that the current system of compensation for pleural plaques is grossly unfair? People with pleural plaques living in Scotland or Northern Ireland qualify for compensation, but those living in England or Wales do not. Does he think that is unfair, and is he going to do anything about it?

[Mr Vara]

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that there are different legal jurisdictions, which means that there will occasionally be differences. In the light of the current medical evidence, the Government do not consider it appropriate to overturn the House of Lords judgment that the condition of pleural plaques is not compensatable under the civil law.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 15th May 2012 Commons Chamber

[Mr Vara]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that comment. This is an independent commission and it is not for me to say what it will eventually conclude, so I am afraid that we will simply have to wait for the final outcome.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

17. What recent representations he has received on arrangements for compensation claims by people with pleural plaques.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Jonathan Djanogly)]

We have received a number of recent representations on pleural plaques from Members of Parliament sent on behalf of their constituents.

[Mr Hepburn]

Now that the devolved assemblies of Scotland and Northern Ireland have seen sense and are going to compensate pleural plaques victims, will the Minister follow suit? If not, why not?

[Mr Djanogly]

The Government understand that it could be seen as unfair for compensation to be available in one part of the UK but not in another, but the civil legal systems in Scotland and Northern Ireland and that in England and Wales are separate and there will inevitably be differences in the law.

Oral Answers to Questions

Stephen Hepburn Excerpts

Tuesday 11th January 2011 Commons Chamber

[Mr Blunt]

The contract with Clearsprings to provide private rented accommodation to defendants on bail and prisoners released on home detention curfews who are otherwise without an address expired on 17 June 2010. A new three-year contract to provide a similar service was competitively tendered and awarded to Stonham, a registered housing charity. That contract commenced on 18 June 2010. Stonham does not manage any properties under that contract in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Mr Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow) (Lab)]

Will the Minister clarify whether the homicide victims fund is still in operation, and if so, what size is the pot and when will Ministers be giving charitable organisations the green light to put in a bid?

[Mr Blunt]

The homicide victims fund is still in operation. I will write to the hon. Gentleman with the precise number and the details of how it will be funded next year.