Wayne David debates involving the Cabinet Office during the 2019 Parliament

Civil Service Impartiality

Wayne David Excerpts
Monday 6th March 2023

(1 year ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As I have said, there is work in progress to ensure that all the facts are identified, but I am not aware that there were any such discussions prior to Thursday last week.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Not that long ago, the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments found that the former Member of Parliament for Aberconwy, a former Defence Minister, committed a clear breach of the ministerial code by not asking for ACOBA advice when taking up a position. Can the Minister remind us what actions were taken against the former Member for a breach that was described at the time as totally unacceptable? What was done?

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman refers to a former Member of this House, a former Minister and a former member of the Conservative party—I think he had had the Whip withdrawn at that stage. I do not know what actions ACOBA took and I am not sure what actions it has available, because it is an advisory body. However, I think it behoves all of us who wish to respect the values of impartiality within the civil service and to respect the rules, to ensure that we follow them to the letter.

--- Later in debate ---
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend closes this urgent question by noting that it is not necessarily about Sue Gray and her actions. She is a public servant who has, for many decades, worked hard at the heart of government. It shows a miscalculation and a misstep by the Leader of the Opposition. I can only assume that it was inadvertent—I have to hope that. This matter has caused more problems, because in some people’s minds it has called into question the perceived impartiality of the civil service. That was a misstep and a mistake; the Leader of the Opposition should accept that and set out transparently what happened and when, so that we can have absolute clarity on what took place.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Rosie Winterton Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

You may make a point of order if it is relevant to what has just taken place.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David
- Hansard - -

It is relevant—it is a point of clarification that I ask for. In response to my question, the Minister strongly implied that the reason that the former Conservative Member for Aberconwy lost the Conservative Whip was that he did not consult ACOBA. That is not the case. He lost the Conservative Whip because he voted against the Government on a Brexit vote.

Rosie Winterton Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I assume that the hon. Gentleman would like me to rule on something. Would he like the Minister to clarify his point of order?

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David
- Hansard - -

You read my mind, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am happy to clarify. If that was the impression that I gave the hon. Gentleman, it was not my intention. The Conservative party took no disciplinary action in respect of that matter. It was a Brexit vote, as the hon. Gentleman will recall. I thank him for the opportunity to put that on the record.

Oral Answers to Questions

Wayne David Excerpts
Wednesday 18th January 2023

(1 year, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rishi Sunak Portrait The Prime Minister
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes an excellent and powerful point, and he is right to highlight that the Labour Mayor is imposing that tax on a public who do not want it. Expanding that zone is not something that communities want. I look forward to working with my hon. Friend to urge the Mayor to consider and respond properly to all views and stop that unfair tax.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Q4. During a period of 12 months, two of my constituents—a 10-year-old boy and a senior citizen—lost their lives after being attacked by dangerous dogs. Fatalities have also occurred in other parts of the country. It is clear that the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is woefully inadequate. The Government have commissioned studies and debated the subject at length, but they have done nothing. My question is: when will the Government take action on the issue of dangerous dogs?

Rishi Sunak Portrait The Prime Minister
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman raises a very important case, and I am very sorry to hear about the specific families he mentions. We recognise that dog attacks can have horrific consequences, and I want to assure him that we take the issue incredibly seriously. That is why we have established a working group between police, local authorities and other key stakeholders to consider all aspects of tackling irresponsible dog ownership. That working group will make its recommendations later this year, and of course, the Government will respond promptly.

Infected Blood Inquiry

Wayne David Excerpts
Thursday 15th December 2022

(1 year, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The direct answer is that finality will come only after Sir Brian has reported. That is expected during the course of next year, with the work to be completed by the end of next year. I know that seems an awfully long time to wait. Our job as a Government is to make certain we are ready to respond to those recommendations. That was why my right hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Penny Mordaunt), now the Leader of the House, commissioned Sir Robert’s report, and the onus is on us to make certain that we can act swiftly and effectively on the recommendations made.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Sir Brian’s report will be published next year. Rather than the Minister simply saying that the recommendations will be acted upon, can he give a firm commitment that the recommendations will be accepted and implemented?

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a sincerely asked question, and I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s sincerity. I trust that he will understand my sincerity when I say that I am not in a position to give a carte blanche acceptance. He appreciates that no Minister can do that on behalf of the Government for a report they have not yet seen. Have we accepted the moral case for compensation? We have. Have we paid interim compensation? We have. Are we keen to make certain we are in a position to respond effectively when the report is published? Absolutely, we will aim to do exactly that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Wayne David Excerpts
Wednesday 16th November 2022

(1 year, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dominic Raab Portrait The Deputy Prime Minister
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my right hon. Friend. I think I followed the various steps of logic in that question. I understand her opposition to HS2. I think we have some very difficult decisions to make. They will inevitably involve a balanced approach. I will leave it to the Chancellor to set them out in the autumn statement tomorrow.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Q15. In my Caerphilly constituency, we have five food banks. One of those food banks is run by the Trussell Trust, and it has issued over 2,000 food parcels during the last six months. There is a question from the users of that food bank, which is: will the Government give a firm commitment to ensuring that benefits will always be enough to purchase essentials?

Dominic Raab Portrait The Deputy Prime Minister
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Member raises a really important point, and we are doing everything we can to support those who may be reliant on food banks or otherwise struggling to make ends meet. He can see that with the £1,200 cost of living support that is going to the 8 million most vulnerable households, the energy price guarantee and further measures for pensioners. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor will set out further measures tomorrow. Of course, as I have said before, the No. 1 priority is getting inflation down. We will not be able to do that if we follow the spending plans of the Labour party.

Home Secretary: Resignation and Reappointment

Wayne David Excerpts
Wednesday 26th October 2022

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

By and large, we use Government communications to conduct Government business, but, as I understand it, there is not a total ban on this; there may be certain circumstances, when things are nugatory, where other forms of communication are used. We all live in a digital age, where we need to have rapid communications. As the hon. Lady will be aware, a range of communications are legitimately entered into by Ministers, including in relation to their constituency or to political issues, that cannot and should not be conducted on Government mechanisms.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Last week, the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, the hon. Member for Bassetlaw (Brendan Clarke-Smith), who is in his place, said clearly to me, in response to a question, and to other Members that there had been a significant security breach by the Home Secretary and that this had led to her resignation. Yet the Home Secretary had implied that the real reason for her dismissal was a blazing row between her and the then Prime Minister. That was clearly not the case and not the reason for her departing Government. What does this say about the Home Secretary and the new Prime Minister?

Jeremy Quin Portrait Jeremy Quin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman will forgive me if I look, as to the rationale for my right hon. and learned Friend’s departure, at the text of her resignation letter, where she made it absolutely clear that she had made a mistake, she was sorry she had made a mistake and she felt it was appropriate in those circumstances to tender her resignation.

Departure of Previous Home Secretary

Wayne David Excerpts
Thursday 20th October 2022

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Brendan Clarke-Smith Portrait Brendan Clarke-Smith
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am happy to pass that question on to those at the Home Office so that they can provide the hon. Lady with the information she seeks. Of course, we remain committed to safeguarding children, whether they are in this country or those that this country has received.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

The Minister has referred to the former Home Secretary’s letter of resignation. In that letter, she said:

“the document was a draft Written Ministerial Statement...due for publication imminently. Much of it had already been briefed to MPs.”

Can the Minister confirm that that is the case? I suspect that it is the case, and if so, we all know full well what the real reason for her resignation was, do we not?

Brendan Clarke-Smith Portrait Brendan Clarke-Smith
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think I covered this earlier, but I am happy to repeat what I said for the hon. Gentleman’s benefit. Having this information in a personal email account and then sharing it outside Government does constitute a clear breach of the code. Members may wish to look at sections 2.14 and 2.3 if that would be helpful, but the Prime Minister has been clear that the security of Government business is paramount. That is why we hold Ministers to the highest standards, and that is why the Home Secretary tendered her resignation.

Tributes to Her Late Majesty The Queen

Wayne David Excerpts
Friday 9th September 2022

(1 year, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Soon after the general election of 2001, there was a reception in Buckingham Palace. I had just been elected, and I attended along with several hundred others. Soon after I arrived at the banqueting hall, it was announced that the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh had arrived. After her entrance, the Queen moved around the hall, politely speaking to a number of the assembled guests. I was chatting to a Labour colleague but then I became acutely aware that there were hundreds of eyes focused in my direction. That was because the Queen had moved to my side and was obviously intent on speaking with me.

I introduced myself to the Queen in an uncomfortable way and we exchanged a number of pleasantries. I expected her to move on, but no, she was obviously intent on having a conversation with me—and what a conversation that was. I slightly awkwardly talked about the royal yacht and then went on to talk about the royal train. I recalled to Her Majesty how, as a schoolboy, I was excited to see the royal train pass near my home village of Cefn Cribwr. She was delighted by these comments and had realised by then that I was a thorough south Walian.

The Queen proceeded to ask me how Welsh devolution was progressing. These were the early days of devolution and I gave a diplomatic answer. She was pleased with that answer but then moved on to ask how I saw things with regard to the Assembly in Northern Ireland. Given that the Stormont Assembly was at that time suspended and the situation was extremely delicate, I gave a general response, explaining how difficult things were.

I will not say what Her Majesty’s responses were, but suffice it to say I was extremely impressed by her. She showed her overwhelming desire to seek peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland, but more than that, her comments showed impressive knowledge of complex issues and a real decency, integrity and compassion. These qualities were in evidence throughout her long reign and were clearly seen in all parts of the United Kingdom.

A few years ago, the Queen visited Ystrad Mynach in my constituency of Caerphilly. The people of the area will always remember her real warmth and genuine interest in them, but my memory of Her Majesty will always be how she had time for the children who met her. The Queen loved those children, and the children loved her.

Undoubtedly, Queen Elizabeth II was an exceptional monarch. We will miss her enormously. May she rest in peace, and God save the King.

Dangerous Dogs

Wayne David Excerpts
Thursday 7th July 2022

(1 year, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Last November a 10-year-old boy, Jack Lis from Pen y Bryn, Penyrheol, in my Caerphilly constituency was killed by a vicious dog. The dog attacked and killed Jack in a neighbour’s home. The dog was an American XL Bully. In the trial, which concluded last month, one of the defendants, in whose home Jack died, was sentenced to three years. The other defendant, the owner of the dog, received a sentence of four and a half years in a youth offender institution. The dog, called Beast, had been bought on the internet only a few days earlier.

There can be no doubt that the dog had huge behavioural problems and was not going to be kept as a normal pet. Indeed, the previous owner of the dog stated that he was selling the dog because he could not cope with it anymore, and the dog was described as “aggressive” in its “For sale” advert. Moreover, CCTV recordings showed how the dog threatened and tried to attack people on the street. It is worth noting that during the course of the trial, the man who owned the dog breached his bail conditions in a blatant way.

It is the view of Jack’s mother, Emma, who has been incredibly brave, that the sentences given to the two defendants were far too lenient. That is also the view of the local community in Caerphilly, and it is my view, too. An e-petition has been launched by Jack’s mother, and it clearly expresses the view of so many people about the leniency of the sentences that have been handed down. In response to the representations that Emma has made to the Attorney General’s Office, she has been told that it is not possible to refer these sentences to the Court of Appeal. Although the Law Officers have the power to ask the Court of Appeal to review certain sentences that appear to be unduly lenient, the power does not apply to sentences under the piece of legislation applicable here. I understand, however, that the Secretary of State for Justice has the power to add legislation to the scheme where a review can take place. Will the Minister therefore speak to her colleagues in the Ministry of Justice so that they can give active consideration to the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 being included in the scheme?

It has to be said that even if the sentences in this case were referred to the Court of Appeal, the sentences of the two defendants could not be changed, as there could not be a retrospective change. It is nevertheless important that we learn the lessons from what has happened in this terrible situation when we look to the future. It follows from what I have said that the sentencing guidelines should be rewritten and strengthened in the light of this case.

Another important lesson from this terrible case is that the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is woefully inadequate and inappropriate to deal with the issue of dangerous dogs. The attack on 10-year-old Jack Lis is truly tragic, but attacks by dangerous dogs are not a rare occurrence. In the past 10 years alone, more than 20 people have died after being attacked by a dog. Each year, some 200,000 people are attacked by dogs in England alone. In Wales there have been more than 200 incidents involving dangerous dogs during the last six months or so. In Gwent, which includes Caerphilly, between September 2021 and February 2022, 69 dog attacks were reported to Gwent police, three of which were on children aged 17 or under.

The main piece of relevant legislation is the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, which applies to England, Scotland and Wales. It was under that law that the two defendants I referred to earlier were convicted and sentenced. They were found guilty of keeping or allowing a dog dangerously out of control where death is caused. As I said, the operation of that part of the Act could be significantly improved by strengthening the sentencing guidelines, but there also needs to be a fundamental rethink of the law as it applies to dangerous dogs.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this debate. He rightly says that the law is specific to England, Scotland and Wales; it is a devolved issue in Northern Ireland, but the situation is similar. For example, about six or seven weeks ago, a constituent of mine was out walking with their young dog, which was attacked by three or four other dogs. The dog had to be put down. That is another example of legislation that does not work. To address that issue, my constituent had to bring a private court case against the person, which added to the trauma.

I understand that the hon. Gentleman is trying to bring forward a change in the legislation, which hopefully the Minister can review and consider. When that is done, will he share the information with the Northern Ireland Assembly and the devolved Administrations, so that we can all have better legislation, not just for his constituents—I am sorry to hear their tragic story—but for all of us across this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Member for his support. Although the Act does not apply to Northern Ireland, there are arrangements in place. It is a serious issue in Northern Ireland, as it is in the rest of the United Kingdom. I will certainly liaise with him when I pursue the matter further.

Only four specific breeds of dogs are banned in the Act: the pit bull terrier, the Japanese Tosa, the Dogo Argentino and the Fila Brasileiro. Incredible though it may seem to many, the dog that attacked Jack Lis, an American XL Bully, is not listed as a dangerous dog—but I am not calling for that particular breed simply to be added to the list. There are many types of dogs, including cross breeds, that people could argue ought to be on the list, but there are two fundamental problems with that approach. First, because there is more and more cross-breeding, it is virtually impossible to maintain any kind of legislation that contains an up-to-date list. Secondly, proscribing certain breeds of dogs gives the erroneous impression that only listed dogs are dangerous, and it does not take into account how a dog is kept and trained. It has been said that most dogs have the potential to be dangerous if they are not trained properly.

We need to fundamentally change our whole approach to so-called dangerous dogs. Rather than relying on breed-specific legislation, which is clearly inappropriate, the Government ought to bring forward legislation based on a totally different approach to the issue. I know that the Government have done a lot of work on it, and I contributed to a Westminster Hall debate on it only a few weeks ago. The response of the former Minister, the hon. Member for Bury St Edmunds (Jo Churchill), to that debate was encouraging, and I hope that the Minister will take us a bit further forward today.

The Government’s starting point has to be an acceptance that there is a lack of any real evidence to support a breed-specific approach to protecting the public. I believe that there is a large amount of independent research, funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which lays the basis for a quite different approach. It shows that simply looking at a dog’s breed is not an appropriate criterion for assessing that dog’s risk to people. I know that the Government are fully aware of the conclusions of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee inquiry, which states that the current dangerous dogs legislation fails to protect public safety and also harms animal welfare. This is also the view of a whole range of organisations that have come together under the dog control coalition. These organisations include the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Dogs Trust and the Kennel Club.

It is now over 30 years since the Dangerous Dogs Act was passed, and going beyond this Act, it has to be said that the legal framework for dealing with dog bite incidents is very complex, with a number of different laws applicable depending on the circumstances surrounding the incident. However, the breed-specific legislation has another fundamental weakness, which is the fact that it is to a large extent reactive in character. I believe that it is better to approach this issue of public safety before harm is caused, rather than responding to the consequences. Prevention has to be the watchword. That is why I want a comprehensive and fundamentally different approach to the issue.

A number of years ago, there were dog licences. The Government really ought to examine the possibility of reintroducing dog licences, but this time we should not simply see them as an easy way for Government to have an additional source of revenue. The money received should be used for a whole range of initiatives, including tackling the behavioural problems of certain kinds of dogs that lead to dog bite incidents. Resources could also be provided for dealing with stray dogs and for helping to fund dog training. Let us not forget that, at the moment, dogs have to have microchips by the time they are eight weeks old. Licensing could be an extension of this and a significant elaboration of it.

I am pleased that the RSPCA Cymru agrees with the approach I have outlined. As animal welfare in Wales is devolved to the Welsh Senedd, I look forward to having a constructive dialogue on this issue with Hefin David, the Member of the Senedd for Caerphilly, and the Welsh Government. Crucially, however, I also believe that an effective assessment needs to be made of potential and actual owners of dogs. At the moment, anyone in any circumstances can purchase virtually any kind of dog. I believe that local authorities should have a key role to play here. Local authorities also ought to have the statutory responsibility for ensuring that dogs are kept and housed properly, and that their owners are ensuring that their dogs are correctly and appropriately trained.

In addition, there needs to be firm control on the buying and selling of dogs. To return to the tragic case of Jack Lis, the dog that killed him was purchased on Facebook not long before the attack. Such purchases cannot be allowed to continue. That is why I would urge the Government to prevent the sale and purchase of dogs in this way.

Today, many of my remarks have focused on the tragedy of Jack Lis, and I want to pay tribute to his family, especially his mother, Emma. She has been enormously brave during this whole difficult time. Nothing can bring Jack back, but all of us need to do our utmost to prevent similar tragedies in the future. I look forward to the Minister’s reply and I encourage her to be as positive as possible.

Standards in Public Life

Wayne David Excerpts
Tuesday 5th July 2022

(1 year, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Michael Ellis Portrait Michael Ellis
- Parliament Live - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Lady mentions her constituents and mine and the focus on cost of living, but I am afraid that the Labour party has requested and been granted numerous hours in this House, which I have had the honour of responding to from this Dispatch Box, not to ask about or debate cost of living, but to debate personalities. I ask her to bear in mind, if she is asking about the time of this House, what her party has been focusing on—and it is not the global cost of living crisis.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Parliament Live - Hansard - -

The events of the past week show that the Prime Minister is sadly lacking ethics. Will the Minister confirm that it is still the Prime Minister’s intention not to appoint an independent ethics adviser?

Michael Ellis Portrait Michael Ellis
- Parliament Live - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have no idea what the hon. Gentleman is referring to. I do not recall at any point anyone’s saying that that would be the case. I cannot confirm something that I do not know to be the case. In fact, on the contrary, the Prime Minister is focused on ensuring that proper mechanisms are in place to uphold all standards in public life.

Sue Gray Report

Wayne David Excerpts
Wednesday 25th May 2022

(1 year, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Boris Johnson Portrait The Prime Minister
- Parliament Live - Hansard - - - Excerpts

As the hon. Gentleman knows, Baroness Hallett—Heather Hallett—has been appointed to head the inquiry, and he can expect developments soon.

Wayne David Portrait Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
- Parliament Live - Hansard - -

It is absolutely imperative that the British public are told the whole truth. Everyone hopes that there have been no redactions or changes to the report. Indeed, Downing Street said that its intention was to publish the report in full, in its entirety, unchanged. Did anyone in No.10 receive a copy of the report yesterday, and were any requests made for sections to be removed or altered? Were any changes made, following requests, to the section relating to the gathering in the No.10 flat on 13 November 2020?

Boris Johnson Portrait The Prime Minister
- Parliament Live - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I received the report—I had not seen it before— shortly after 10 o’clock this morning. On the hon. Gentleman’s second point about the events on 13 November, I have addressed those several times.