Holocaust Memorial Day

Debate between Stephen Williams and Baroness Primarolo

Thursday 23rd January 2014 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Stephen Williams)]

I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for North East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) for leading us in this debate. Many of his remarks had a profound effect on me. To summarise, he said that although the holocaust is in many ways a story of hopelessness and humiliation, it also provides many examples of courage, stoicism and, ultimately, the triumph of the human spirit.

I echo my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Lyn Brown)—she is my hon. Friend—in saying that it has been a privilege to listen to all the speeches that have been made in this debate. That is not always our experience in this Chamber, but everyone has listened intently to every word that has been said today. I have been moved by many of the remarks that colleagues have made. We have shared our different experiences, the ways in which we have encountered the holocaust and how we have responded individually. Perhaps more importantly, we have resolved to act together.

The British mainland escaped the horrors of Nazi occupation. Although some European Jews were able to flee here, most notably through the Kindertransport, for most of us the holocaust is not a family experience. I note that it is for some Members who have spoken, but for most of us, our witness and understanding has come through history, literature and perhaps film.

My first knowledge of the holocaust was as a 13-year-old watching the TV series “Holocaust” in the late 1970s. That spurred me to read the only book about the holocaust that I could find at the time, which was “Scourge of the Swastika” by Lord Russell of Liverpool, who was involved in the prosecution of Nazi war criminals. I have never forgotten the table of categorisation in that book for the Nazis’ targets for imprisonment and murder. We are all familiar with the yellow star and the armband, but less often mentioned are the colours and symbols that were used for Gypsies, Roma, Jehovah’s Witnesses and the disabled. I was most alarmed by the pink triangle for homosexuals, because at that age I was just coming to terms with what I was.

The first reason to remember the holocaust is to understand that minorities are our friends, our neighbours and our work colleagues. In the twisted minds of those who hold a prejudice, the minority could be ourselves. That is why we should be thankful that we live in a society in which human rights are upheld and in which minorities are our fellow citizens, not outsiders who are confined to legal or physical ghettos.

In recent years, mass knowledge of the holocaust has come through the films with which we are all familiar, but literature and celluloid are no substitutes for real-life experience and testimony. We have all mentioned speeches and visits to museums and monuments. I first went to Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1992, when frankly it was not usual to do so, during a visit to Poland while inter-railing. I will never forget it. There were very few visitors at that time, and when we followed the line to Birkenau, I climbed the gatehouse tower and looked at the scale of the camp. To those who have not yet been there I say that that is the memory that will live with them; the scale and the industrialisation of mass murder. I was there entirely on my own—no one else—visiting on a hot summer’s day in 1992, and it gave me my own time of quiet contemplation. It is not a visit I have ever wanted to repeat, but like the shadow Minister, I think it is perhaps something I should now do.

I have since been to Amsterdam and the Anne Frank House, and I have also seen the pink triangle memorial in that city—the only known monument to gay people who were murdered by the Nazis. In 2012, I went to Yad Vashem with the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel, and I was familiar with many of the historical displays there. My right hon. Friend the Member for North East Bedfordshire said that he was profoundly affected by the children’s memorial, and no one could not be. What most affected me was the hall of names, where one looks up at a cone of photographs—hundreds, perhaps thousands, of photographs of people who were wiped out by the Nazis, reflected in a dark pit below. I really could not hold it together on that occasion.

The holocaust is a unique event and must be remembered and understood, particularly by young people for whom it is an historical event that took place long before they were born. It is right for the Government to support that, and many hon. Members have mentioned that they work with the Holocaust Educational Trust, led by Karen Pollock. It facilitates school visits to Auschwitz, as well as talks in schools, such as those that took place in my constituency, to give young people a vivid account and an unforgettable memory. Of course the most powerful testimony comes from holocaust survivors, such as Auschwitz survivor Freddie Knoller, who is still speaking in schools at the age of 92.

Last Monday I joined several other people now in the Chamber—the hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside (Mrs Ellman) mentioned this—at the Holocaust Educational Trust annual Merlyn Rees memorial lecture, to listen to Thomas Harding tell the fascinating story of his Uncle Hanns and the arrest of the Auschwitz commandant, Rudolf Höss. Thomas Harding discussed how people can turn from being loving fathers to murderous monsters. We are all familiar with the phrase from that time and the excuse that was often used about following orders, but he said that that was perhaps better described as people surrendering their capacity to think to others.

In more recent massacres and genocides we have seen how easy it can still be for people in advanced societies to slip from civilised values into thoughtless barbarity, whether in Cambodia, Rwanda, Darfur, or the current horrific scenes in Syria, where reporters are using the holocaust as a context in which to explain a tragedy unfolding before our eyes. People can still all too easily be led into acts of cruelty and murder.

That is why it is right that this Government—as did the previous Government—support the work of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, led by Olivia Marks-Woldman. Its annual act of remembrance on 27 January, the date of the liberation of Auschwitz, will be marked around the country on Monday. This year’s theme is journeys, and those of us who have seen at Auschwitz the pile of leather suitcases will certainly appreciate the resonance. Next year will be the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. The Prime Minister has set up the Holocaust Commission, chaired by Mick Davis, president of the Jewish Leadership Council. That is because real-life memories are fading as people who remember the holocaust or who were told stories by their parents die. The work of the commission will be to consider how we can keep that testimony live and real, and ensure that those of the next generation comprehend the history, and also learn how to shape their future.

Next year will also be the 20th anniversary of another horrific episode in the history of Europe: the massacre of Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica. I was particularly struck by the two interventions from my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart), who served with NATO in Bosnia. Last year, my Department supported Ummah Help’s Remembering Srebrenica project. We will continue that support in the next year.

History is not just a moment in time studied for curiosity or even for leisure; it also gives us lessons we should learn. Not learning those lessons is a warning about the future. I will end my remarks by quoting a survivor of Buchenwald and Auschwitz, Elie Wiesel, who went on to win the Nobel peace prize:

“To forget a holocaust is to kill twice.”

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)]

Before I call Alistair Burt for the closing remarks it would be remiss of me if I did not welcome the hon. Member for West Ham (Lyn Brown). I believe it is the first time she has spoken at the Dispatch Box as a shadow Minister. I am sure all Members look forward to future speeches, given the power and commitment with which she delivered her speech today.

Finance (No. 2) Bill

Debate between Stephen Williams and Baroness Primarolo

Thursday 18th April 2013 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Williams]

If you are going to quote from independent reports, you should not quote—

[The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means (Dawn Primarolo)]

Order. I am not quoting anything.

[Stephen Williams]

The hon. Lady should not quote from reports selectively. Perhaps she should go on to say that the Institute for Fiscal Studies says that the top decile of income earners has been hit hardest by the combination of Government tax changes.

Living Standards

Debate between Stephen Williams and Baroness Primarolo

Monday 5th March 2012 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Williams]

I have already given way twice and I am on a time limit.

The same arguments apply as when the Government had to take tough decisions on whether to raise out-of-work benefits in the comprehensive spending review and the last autumn statement, and those benefits were raised by the high consumer prices index of 5.2%. Child tax credits have also been raised by 5.2%; that is £135 extra this year. As the Minister said earlier, there has been £390 extra cumulatively so far since the general election. Difficult decisions are being taken on the reform of tax credits. The Liberal Democrat manifesto explicitly said that we thought there was scope for the reform of poorly focused tax credits. In 2010, nine out of 10 families with children received tax credits and, even after the difficult reforms we are introducing in these tough fiscal times, six out of 10 families will still receive tax credits.

Child benefit is another area in which the Government have to make a tough choice. If the Labour party’s message is that it opposes even that tough choice of withdrawing child benefit from the richest families in the country, where on earth is it going to find the cuts? I look forward to hearing, in all the Labour speeches between now and 10 o’clock, what alternative cuts would be made to replace that cut in child benefit. The cliff edge of the higher rate tax threshold is difficult. We all acknowledge the anomaly that was expressed in the extreme by the hon. Member for Wansbeck (Ian Lavery) regarding the earnings of two people in a household. The Deputy Prime Minister confirmed this morning that we are looking for ways to smooth that withdrawal of benefit from those who are marginally over the threshold; we will have to wait until the Budget to see the outcome of those discussions.

The Government are introducing other measures to support families with children. This morning, I visited a secondary school in my constituency, St Mary Redcliffe, and on Friday I visited the City academy in my constituency as well. Both those schools and all the other schools in all our constituencies are benefiting from the introduction of the pupil premium. Parents who are working need support with child care, and the Government are introducing 130,000 extra places for two-year-olds.

At least this motion mentions pensioners. The last time we had an Opposition motion on living standards, it neglected to mention pensioners at all. That was hardly surprising because the Government had just announced the largest cash increase in the state pension since it was introduced by Lloyd George and Asquith in 1908. The Government have a triple lock in place to ensure that pensioners always receive an increase. We will not have the embarrassment of 75p pension rises in future.

The Government are taking action on tax avoidance. I note that the motion says that everything Labour wishes for, whether on child benefit, child tax credit or working tax credits, is somehow going to be paid for through tax avoidance measures that are unspecified in the motion. That would have more credibility if Labour had voted in favour of the tax avoidance measures introduced by the Government in the last Finance Act, rather than voting against them. I want to see more action on tax avoidance in the Budget, such as a general anti-avoidance rule, and I look forward to hearing what the Chancellor has to say—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)]

Order.

Amendment of the Law

Debate between Stephen Williams and Baroness Primarolo

Wednesday 23rd March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Williams (Bristol West) (LD)]

I understand that the bank levy is about £2.5 billion a year. The Chancellor announced recently that the levy, which was £1.8 billion in its first year, would be increased to £2.5 billion, and today it has been confirmed that the banks will not benefit from the reduction in corporation tax and that the levy will be increased.

Another issue connected with the banks is what we should do with our ownership, as taxpayers, of Lloyds Banking Group and the Royal Bank of Scotland. That is an issue with which the Government will have to deal at some point in the next few years. A couple of weeks ago I published a pamphlet, with CentreForum, which suggested that the shares should be given to the people so that the state could recover the £67 billion that was invested in the banks bail-out in 2008. The citizen should enjoy the upside: the citizen should enjoy the growth in those shares in the future. I hope that my Treasury colleagues will look favourably on that proposal as they decide what to do with the legacy from the last Government.

The Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition Government have dealt with Labour’s toxic legacy, but Labour Members seem to be still in denial about the problem. They have not acknowledged its existence, let alone shown any sign of contrition for their role in the deficit. The Leader of the Opposition produced some very good jokes today—I will give him that—but he could at least have made an apology. We have started to clear up the mess. Today’s Budget sets in train a plan for a Britain that is fairer, with a stable economy and a low-carbon future. It recognises the need to help households with their budgets now, and to give them confidence that the economy and their country are back on track.

Several hon. Members rose—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)]

Before we move on, I have to announce the result of a Division deferred from a previous day. On the question relating to a stability mechanism for member states whose currency is the euro, the Ayes were 310 and the Noes were 29. Therefore, the Ayes have it.

[The Division list is published at the end of today’s debates.]

I shall call Mr Dan Jarvis next, who will be making his maiden speech, and I remind hon. Members of the normal courtesies that should be extended when hearing a maiden speech.