(6 days, 10 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend for raising that, and we will obviously consider her invitation. Defence spending already supports more than 430,000 jobs across the United Kingdom and I recognise the contribution made by the workers in Barrow and Furness.
I am not across the details of the right hon. Member’s case, as she will understand, but I am in favour of making sure that we can have the infrastructure and the houses we need to grow our economy. One of the problems we had over the past 14 years was an assertion or rhetoric that we wanted homes and infrastructure, but when the decision for all that came up, the answer was always no. The answer cannot always be no.
(6 days, 10 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Government support for high street business.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. High streets and town centres play a huge role in our communities. They are a place where people come together, they define our sense of place, they can be a source of local pride and they can be home to a huge number of jobs and opportunities. Retail is the largest private sector employer in the UK. When coupled with the hospitality sector, they are some of the biggest drivers of social mobility. There are endless stories of those who started as shelf stackers or pint pullers making it to the boardroom, with jobs that are accessible to all and where hard work can pay off. Then there are the small family businesses—the people-powered engine room of our economy, with individuals who dared to take the risk and have a punt, who get up early to drive their businesses forward, creating jobs while adding colour, flavour and vibrancy to our town centres.
In recent times the rise of online shopping and changing consumer habits, coupled with the cost of living, have created a challenging environment for many businesses operating on our high streets. It is for that reason that now more than ever we should back the great British high street. It is also why it is so astonishing that the Government’s Budget not only failed to back our high streets, but actually seems to be beating them into extinction. The national insurance tax raid, the slashing of small business rates relief and the ending of the community ownership fund will do irreparable damage to our high streets, and that is before we mention the impact and costs of the Employment Rights Bill.
In the last Parliament I campaigned for the 75% relief for leisure, hospitality and retail businesses. That was game changing for many, but with the stroke of a pen the Chancellor slashed that relief, ending the lifeline that was thrown to many employers. It is estimated that that will represent a 140% increase in business rates for more than 250,000 high street premises in England. The average shop will see business rates increase from £3,589 to £8,613. The average pub will see its business rates increase from £3,938 to £9,451, and the average restaurant will also see its bill rocket from £5,051 to £12,122. That is a huge cost for small businesses in an already challenging environment that will prove insurmountable for many. But it does not stop there.
The Government’s national insurance tax raid—their jobs tax—is doing exactly what everybody said it would do. Job losses in the retail sector are already mounting up. Tesco has announced plans to axe 400 jobs. New Look is expected to close as many as 91 stores.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing forward this debate. The point he makes is a really important one. He has mentioned New Look and Tesco. I think we have already heard comments from Marks and Spencer; HSBC is another group. We are hearing of job losses from some of those big high street names, but smaller businesses are affected as well. Does he agree that we cannot simply keep squeezing and squeezing businesses and thinking, “Well, they are making lots of profit; they can pass it on to their customers.” We squeeze them out of business, which means loss of jobs, loss of vibrancy on our high streets and loss of that sense of community that is so, so important.
As a former Woolies worker, I know only too well the consequences for businesses. Not only are we squeezing many businesses out of a future; there is a cost to be paid on the prices in those stores and costs on those jobs and the opportunities that they provide for young people and others to get on in life. There are huge costs to what has been done. We can only squeeze so far. The pips are definitely squeaking in retail.
Sainsbury’s has announced plans to axe 3,000 jobs. Retail and hospitality are already two of the most taxed businesses in our economy, but the sectors employ large numbers of people in entry-level or part-time roles, so are disproportionately hit. A CBI survey of business leaders found that 62% are slashing hiring plans. Almost half will be forced to lay off staff, and 46% are looking to delay pay rises for their workforce. Almost every Labour Government in history has left office with more people out of work than when they arrived. With these measures it looks like the Government are trying to set a record. All too often we see employment figures as numbers, but the jobs that will be lost as a result of this measure are not just numbers; they are families without the security of a pay packet, people stripped of ambitions, dreams and aspirations and left on the scrapheap.
The commercial director at the British Independent Retailers Association gave a realistic but depressing summary of what the Budget means for retailers. He said it was the
“Worst Budget for the high street in my 35 years working in retail”,
and that it showed a
“complete disregard for the thousands of…shop owners who form the backbone of our high streets. Small retailers, who have already endured years of challenging trading conditions, now face a perfect storm of crippling cost increases; their business rates will more than double…while they’re hit simultaneously with employer National Insurance increases.”
The outlook is bleak for traders because of the Budget, but it goes beyond that.
The previous Government sought to support high streets by responding to changing consumer habits and investing to reconfigure our town centres and create other reasons to go to them. Funds such as the community ownership fund allowed people to take back control of their community assets and turn around vacant, lifeless high streets. They were about more than a lick of paint. They were about creating valuable community spaces and restoring pride in our towns.
It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to contribute to this debate on high street businesses, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) again for securing it. He clearly demonstrates what a local champion he is for his constituency. I have visited Stockton on many occasions, and I have even been to Billingham and been on the ice rink—more than one or two years ago.
High streets are the beating heart of our communities. They provide jobs, essential services and a vital sense of place, but all too often small businesses feel that they are fighting an uphill battle—grappling with rising costs, declining footfall, an ever-changing retail landscape and, of course, Government policy. Many of those challenges are not new, but they have been fuelled by covid, the cost of living crisis and rising inflation. I increasingly hear from businesses in my constituency that more needs to be done.
In Aldridge-Brownhills, we are fortunate to have a vibrant network of independent businesses, many of them family-run shops and essential services that our residents rely on every day. One of these is The Plaice to Eat, which is the most fantastic local fish and chip shop in Brownhills. If hon. Members are passing, I recommend its battered chips, with are a local Black Country speciality.
My right hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. On behalf of Scottish Members, can I also recommend a deep-fried Mars bar supper and a haggis supper, which are other delicacies that fish and chip shops might be able to provide?
My hon. Friend reminds me of a visit to Scotland, many years ago, when I tried a deep-fried Mars bar; I think it was in Blairgowrie. I must admit that I have never had deep-fried haggis—I am not sure about that one—but I have certainly tried the Mars bar.
Despite their hard work and determination, many businesses are struggling. I am in regular contact with local businesses, and they tell me quite candidly about the financial pressures they face. One issue that comes up time and again is the crushing burden of employer national insurance contributions. Quite simply, they are a tax on jobs. They actively punish the very businesses we should be supporting. Businesses are being squeezed into cutting staff hours and freezing recruitment. In some cases, as we have heard, they are shutting their doors altogether. Household names that we have heard today—WHSmith, New Look and HSBC—are among those affected. When they are gone, they are gone forever.
Let us be clear: this is not just an economic issue; it is a community issue. When a high street business closes, that affects us all. It means fewer jobs, less investment in our local economy and empty shop fronts, which drain the vibrancy of our centres. The Government cannot claim to support small businesses while quietly taxing them out of existence.
In Brownhills, one of the most pressing concerns is the derelict Ravenscourt shopping precinct. Once a thriving hub, it has now become an eyesore and for far too long has attracted antisocial behaviour. Local business owners and residents are rightly frustrated by the slow progress. I am, too. My local council and our councillors are working incredibly hard to deliver on this, with plans for redevelopment including the prospect of a new supermarket, but delays, the need for a complex compulsory purchase order, and drawn-out negotiations over remaining units are stalling much-needed investment.
Such stagnation is not unique to Brownhills. Across the country, high streets are being held back by vacant buildings that discourage footfall and undermine local economies, and the increase in employer national insurance contributions only adds to the difficulties. If this Government are serious about revitalising our high streets, there are two things they could do to make a big difference to all our high streets: look again at both employer national insurance contributions and business rates.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. Before I respond to the debate on behalf of the Government, I should say that I am a proud member of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, a union that works tirelessly on behalf of its 360,000 members to negotiate better pay and conditions for shop workers throughout the country.
I thank all the many Members who participated in this worthwhile and timely debate, and pay tribute to each and every one who spoke compellingly about the high streets in their constituencies. I also pay tribute to the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) for securing the debate and thank him for speaking so eloquently—I particularly enjoyed his reference to the “skanky toilets”—in support of our high streets. He has shown considerable interest in this policy area for many years, not least as chair of the former all-party parliamentary group for the future of retail. It is fair to say that he has been a persistent champion of high streets, not just in his constituency, but across the country, so his insights and views are always welcome.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Livingston (Gregor Poynton) for speaking so powerfully about the perpetual review roundabout that we see in Scotland in relation to planning and, alas, the Scottish Government’s approach to the high streets. I acknowledge the real, if temporary, cross-party consensus identified by the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont)—albeit that I am not sure there is quite as wide a culinary Caledonian consensus on the health and dietary benefits of the deep-fried Mars bar. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) and confirm that we share his ambition to improve safety on our high streets—an issue to which I shall return.
I also pay generous tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). There is no stronger champion than he for Stockton and for the interests of its residents. I was intrigued to hear about the three businesses that are planning to open on Stockton high street. That is indeed welcome news, and I commend and congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing it to the attention of the House. He also raised the critical issue of policing and public safety—again, I shall return to that.
The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) spoke about the fiscal measures announced in the Budget, to which I will also return, although I note that she offered no alternatives in the course of her speech. My hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley (Josh Fenton-Glynn) added a perhaps necessary health warning about deep-fried Mars bars and spoke passionately about the Calder Valley businessmen and women who started with a dream and built a proud business community. There could be no more eloquent description of the experience of many entrepreneurs on high streets the length and breadth of the United Kingdom.
Reference to the whole of the United Kingdom brings me to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who described his mother’s careful management of the family budget—an all-too-common concern during the cost of living crisis of recent years, after 14 years of Conservative economic mismanagement. Be assured, the Government want to ensure that businesses in every part of the United Kingdom—in Northern Ireland, in Scotland, in Wales and in England—benefit from measures that deliver economic stability and the Government’s mission of growth.
My hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank), as both a proud Bairn and a self-described Falkirk boy, described where and how he spends his Saturday afternoons. I am not sure that every Member of the House would be wise to do that; none the less, it was helpful and educative for the rest of us to understand his commitment to the Falkirk community. He paid generous tribute to the hospitality workers in Falkirk and in communities and high streets the length and breadth of the country and highlighted the dangers they face. I concur that a new direction for Scotland is needed, not only in relation to our high streets, planning and retail crime, but much, much more fundamentally.
My hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) spoke powerfully, and I noted his remarks carefully. The hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling) recognised a truth sadly missing from some of the other speeches when he acknowledged, candidly and rightly, that high streets have faced challenges for decades. These are constantly changing retail offerings that we need to recognise are subject to pressures far beyond the reach of individual Governments, but reflect changing patterns of life, of culture and of leisure.
The Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) spoke of high streets as the beating heart of our communities—on that at least we agree—before making a speech that omitted the fact that Liz Truss crashed the economy and left not only an impaired fiscal balance sheet, but a flatlining economy and devastated public services. Again, I waited with bated breath for the Conservatives’ official spokesman to offer their fiscal alternative, in the teeth of the criticism directed toward the Government—but alas, I waited in vain.
Time is against me. I want to address as many of the points raised today as I can, but before I do, I want to say a bit about the Government’s wider commitment to supporting our high streets.
Hon. Members in all parts of the House agree that high streets play a vital role in providing a place for communities to come together, to work, to socialise, to shop and to access essential services. The sectors that underpin the high streets play a huge role in our broader economy. The retail sector directly supports some 2.9 million jobs across the UK, and in 2023 generated £110 billion gross value added. The UK hospitality sector employs about 2.2 million people; it is estimated to have contributed about £52 billion GVA in 2023, and it remains a key driver of the UK’s tourism industry.
Let us be clear: high street businesses can prosper and grow only on firm foundations of economic stability—and that, alas, is certainly not what we inherited last July. Instead, we faced a £22 billion black hole created by the previous Government, featuring hundreds of unfunded pressures on public finances and countless uncosted measures that failed to withstand even the slightest scrutiny. The hon. Member for Stockton West spoke eloquently about his experience working for Woolies, but I respectfully point out that Woolies ceased to trade under a Conservative Government—a fact he omitted from his speech.
At the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor made some, frankly, very difficult choices, but decisions were necessary to fix the foundations of a broken economy—
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I thank the right hon. Gentleman, my former colleague from the Scottish Parliament. I will touch on that issue shortly. I also invite him to perhaps surmise that petitions are dealt with rather better in this place than in that other place where we once served, but we will leave that aside for the moment.
I will put it very simply: an election cannot be called as a result of a petition. It is a fact that on 4 July, the Labour party won a majority, and they will remain in office for the duration of their term or until the Prime Minister seeks permission from the sovereign to dissolve Parliament at a time of his choosing. That is the way we do things in this country. Furthermore, it is absolutely intrinsic to the proper function of democracy to respect and uphold the democratic mandate that the current Government hold from the British public. I assert that that mandate cannot be overturned by this or any future petition; that would fundamentally undermine the existing institutional constitutional mechanisms that empower the public. The British people had their say in July. They chose the current Government and we must continue to honour that choice. I believe that is a fundamental principle of the way we do things in this country.
The hon. Gentleman touched on the word “mandate”. I think most people would accept and acknowledge that the Government were elected on a mandate for change, but would he agree that one of the reasons why there is so much traction and engagement with this petition, including in my constituency, is that people feel so let down and disappointed? We have seen so many manifesto promises broken already.
I accept the point, but I remind the right hon. Lady that I am a servant of the House and have to be an impartial chairman in this matter. I think we all know that that is the way this place works. Tempting though it might be for me to say something, it would be very wrong, but I may touch on some things like that in due course.
It is the case, however, that the Government must respectfully acknowledge the frustration of those who signed the petition and do their utmost to understand the motivation of those good people. In response to the petition, the Cabinet Office reassured the public that it was committed to
“fixing the foundations, rebuilding Britain, and restoring public confidence in government.”
In particular, the Cabinet Office cited the “£22 billion black hole” as the reason for the very difficult decisions that have had to be made in the past and will be made in the future. None of them is easy and, in all fairness, we should recognise that.
In recent months we have witnessed widespread dissatisfaction with various policy decisions that the Government have chosen to make, and that has been touched on by hon. Members today. The decisions to cut winter fuel payments, terminate inheritance tax exemptions for farms, and increase national insurance contributions for employers are three that have proved controversial. That is the case in all our constituencies, including mine, regardless of the colour of the Member involved. We know that from the press comment.
I return to our guest here: the man who raised the petition, Mr Michael Westwood. He placed a specific emphasis on economic growth as a motivation for creating the petition, and made his dissatisfaction with the Government’s response clear. That is an example of the sort of dialogue that petitions should initiate. I learned something from my discussions with Mr Westwood; I think we can all learn from them. I very much hope that this debate will help the Government address some of the inadequacies that have been identified.
I think I speak for us all when I say that we all want to see an economy where large and small businesses can thrive and prosper. That is what drives the nation. We all want an NHS that is properly funded, so that everyone gets the care they need, and we want a society that has proper safeguards so that the most vulnerable are protected from all the horrors that might come their way, which we should stop as best we can. These are, however, huge ambitions. They are very proper and right ambitions that we should sign up to, but they will be expensive. They are not cheap, and allocating resources fairly will be a challenge for a Government of any colour.
May I be so bold as to suggest that we improve engagement still more? I hope that communication will improve in the months and years ahead of this debate and that the Government can also be involved in that sort of discussion and deliberation. The electorate must be reassured that all of us as their representatives, who are here at their behest, are willing to listen to their needs. I think that any Government would be wrong to assume that they act in a vacuum. Explanations will always be necessary in a democracy as long-standing and robust as ours—one that I believe is the envy of many other parts of the world.
We have a particularly well-attended debate today, which I find, as Chair of the Select Committee, immensely encouraging. I am sure we are going to hear some most interesting and thoughtful contributions. I will draw my remarks to a close, Mrs Harris, and listen with great interest to what follows.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. Petitions in our Parliament have often been used to discuss a particular issue of concern to people in the country; they are not normally used as a mechanism to hijack and play party politics.
In the last 14 years, we saw crisis after crisis caused by the ill-thought-out policies, plans and rank cronyism of the previous Government, but we engaged in the process and had debates. We did not commandeer a public petition to demand a new election; we opposed the Government and worked within the parliamentary ambit to do what was right. This petition has grown partly because of a lot of misinformation and partly because of foreign interference—[Laughter.] Members may laugh, but that happens to be correct.
When Labour formed the Government—
I want to make some points and then I will take interventions. When Labour got elected, the first thing we found was a £20 billion deficit—a big black hole that no one knew about. We therefore had to take the decision—[Interruption.] Members can try to shout and whatever else, but I am not giving up. Will whoever is making the noise let me speak, please? There was a £20 billion black hole, so the Government obviously had to make some policy in order to plug it. That meant raising winter fuel bills, introducing inheritance tax and raising national insurance contributions—things mentioned in the petition. We must recognise that if we are going to provide services and bring changes in the country, that requires financial expenditure, and no one knew about the £20 billion deficit.
When we took over, we found that our prisons were incredibly overcrowded. The previous Government said that they would find 20,000 prison places by the mid-2020s, but they created only 50. In our criminal justice system, victims have been waiting for trials to be heard in the Crown court—at least 73,000 trials—including serious cases. When the Conservatives were in power, we had about eight different Secretaries of State for Justice. It is therefore not surprising that our judicial system and prison system are in a complete mess at the moment.
In relation to the NHS, I remember that in 2010, when we left power, the time that people spent waiting in accident and emergency at a hospital was maybe a few hours; now, that time is eight or 10 hours. Getting an operation or seeing a doctor now takes years, as opposed to six months. Again, that is because the previous Government did nothing to deal with the issue, so we have had to deal with it. We have heard today’s statement by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and there will be a debate later about all the things that we want to bring into play to make our NHS work better, because people need that.
We are the party that came in and solved the doctors’ dispute, which had been going on for years and years. Why does that matter? Because it means that our health service will have good, decent provision and that some of the delays hopefully will be taken away. The Prime Minister today mentioned that we have plans to reduce waiting lists massively. These are the things that we are doing; the previous Government, which had 14 years, did nothing and left us with what we have.
We are the Government who have paid our teachers more, so that our children can be educated properly. We are the Government who have dealt with the issue of public transport and our drivers being on strikes. That is important, because we need to get the country going. Public transport is very important for the proper running of any country, and we need to have that. Just before Christmas, we also announced over £1 billion for people who are homeless and £1 billion or so for potholes.
The issue of regenerating the economy has been touched on. All these things will solve the problems of bad roads and help people who are homeless to be able to sleep warmly, but building roads also creates jobs and regenerates the economy. We have said that we will build more than 1.5 million houses. What will that do? It will regenerate our economy as well. Everybody is talking about how we can regenerate the economy, and the stuff that we are doing on green energy and renewables will also create loads of jobs and regenerate our economy—[Interruption.] I hear some Opposition Members sniggering and laughing. Well, do you know what, Mrs Harris? Some of them have been MPs for the last 14 years, as I have been, and they know the failures of their Government.
I can talk about only a few things in six minutes, but the Labour Government have been doing enough to ensure not only that our economy is regenerated but that many institutions are properly financed, especially our health service, which everyone uses. It is so important that we look after it. The Labour party created the NHS, and it is the party that will always look after and save the NHS.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris.
I have the privilege of speaking in this Chamber today because, six months ago, the country voted for change—the biggest change, in fact, that this Parliament has seen in generations. We know why people voted for change. It was because, for 14 years, the Conservatives have been taking the country down a road that has left everybody worse off: NHS waiting lists spiralling out of control; no grip on the prison crisis; no plan for the economy; and no control over the cost of living crisis.
We stood on a manifesto of setting that right. That is why the general election that we have just had reduced the Tories to the smallest number in their history. Ours was a message of hard work and of sorting out the mess they made that everyone could see. But for all their failures, I think one of the cruellest things that the last Government did was to take away hope and to take away the belief that things can be changed not by gimmicks or by slogans but by doing the work and doing the right thing, even when it is difficult.
I am going to make some more progress.
I know the frustration that people feel after years of chaos and neglect by their Government—in the case of Scotland, by two Governments, as a matter of fact—but I would say to everyone who feels let down by 14 years of broken promises: what the last Government did, lurching from crisis to crisis or from drama to drama, is not the way to make people’s lives better. They dodged the difficult decisions, and we are not doing that.
It has been just six months since we were elected, and we have already increased funding to the NHS, protected the pensions triple lock, invested in housing and delivered the biggest settlement to Scotland in the history of devolution. We have also set a Budget that funded all that, while protecting the pay packets of working people. Our manifesto said that we would stabilise the economy and rebuild public services, and that is what we are doing. The job is far from finished, but we will get there.
I ask Opposition Members, what has happened to their party? The Tory party we once knew was the biggest winner in Britain’s electoral history, but its Members now sit here diminished and looking around—as they always do—for someone else to blame. But of course, blaming the voters is never the right thing to do. I am not going to criticise the people who signed this petition, because we all feel the frustration of the last decade and a half of people not being able to get what they need for themselves and their family.
I am going to finish soon, so I will make progress.
When people have been let down so badly and for so long, they do not forget. They do not forget quickly—I understand that—but fixing this country is not a six-month job, and Conservative Members must be honest that it took them longer than that to get us into this mess. I know that people have had their hope trampled on, but better times lie ahead, and this Labour Government are here to see that we get there.
(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberAbsolutely not, and my hon. Friend is right to mention the fact that that kind of assessment flies in the face of not only common sense, but all the economic evidence. When we support women to return to work and to progress at work, while being able to spend time with their families, we grow our economy—something that this Government are determined to do.
I assure the right hon. Lady that we are absolutely determined to encourage our women and girls to take part in sport and physical activity—something that falls off all too often as girls reach their teenage years. In my work in the Department for Education, through the curriculum and assessment review, we are looking at what more schools can do, and going beyond that, we are working with sporting bodies to deliver more.
(10 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberLabour Members might want to forget it, but I remember the day the Conservatives came into office in 2010. What was the note left on the desk of the Chief Secretary to the Treasury? “There is no money left.” That is the challenge that we have addressed through the Prime Minister and Chancellor successively.
Labour’s mayoral candidate in the West Midlands talks about housing, but makes no commitment to protect our precious green belt. He talks about transport, but he fails to commit to reopening Aldridge train station. He committed to saving police stations such as Aldridge; then, when the Labour police and crime commissioner said he would close them, he changed his mind and agreed to that. So we are left wondering in my constituency what he stands for. Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that only Mayor Andy Street has a plan and a track record to be trusted to deliver for the West Midlands?
As ever, my right hon. Friend is absolutely correct to highlight the record of Labour’s police and crime commissioner, and West Midlands police has actually been put in special measures on Simon Foster’s watch. When it comes to the green belt, we have all seen the new wheeze from the Labour party—redesignate green belt “grey belt” and concrete all over it. Well, the Conservatives will not allow that to happen, and people up and down the country will vote Conservative to stop that happening.
(1 year, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend is right to champion Barrow’s industry. We talk regularly with the Department for Education, colleagues from the Department for Work and Pensions, tech sectors and academia to ensure we get it right. We must remember that domestic and international talent are so important in this space.
To support innovation across the whole of the UK, a central pillar of our innovation nation mission, the UK Government are investing £52 billion in public research and development over these next three years. We have made a groundbreaking commitment in the levelling up White Paper to increase the percentage of Government R&D outside of the greater south-east, which is, of course, home to some of our historic research institutes, by 40%. We have an active programme—through the Catapults, the innovation accelerators and cluster support—all around the UK to that end.
Innovation is in the DNA of the businesses in my constituency, including Surespan, a leading manufacturer of roof access hatches, and Phoenix Tooling and Development—after all, our region was the birthplace of the industrial revolution. I support the Government’s levelling-up mission, but will the Minister bring forward individual regional targets for rebalancing research and development funding, as recommended by a House of Lords Committee report?
(1 year, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Lady for raising that important case. I do not know all the facts, but if she writes to me I would be happy to look at it. We will make sure that the resourcing and the care are there. As I say, if she writes to me, I am sure we can arrange for a meeting with the relevant Minister.
My right hon. Friend raises an important point. The antisocial behaviour action plan will help us to crack down on antisocial behaviour and to make sure that those who are responsible for antisocial behaviour undertake repairs within 48 hours by, for example, cleaning up litter and graffiti. I am delighted that the west midlands enhanced hotspot will get additional funding. She is right that it is for PCCs to determine the precise allocation of funding, but I am sure she will make representations in her usual powerful way.
(2 years, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberMy hon. Friend is always the very embodiment of dynamism. I absolutely agree: there is a huge amount of talent that we seek, and I am delighted to say that our focus is not just on the senior civil service. We wish to go and get the very best all the way through. Our apprenticeship schemes have been launched for the next three years, and we want to have 5% of the entire civil service formed of apprentices. That is yet another example of how we are reaching out to all starters to make certain that we get the very best talent.
The Government ensured that all infected and bereaved partners who are registered on the UK support schemes received an interim payment of £100,000 in October, thus meeting Sir Brian Langstaff’s interim recommendation in full. That builds on support already provided, but I want to make it absolutely clear that those interim payments are the start and not the end of this process. Work continues.
As my right hon. Friend knows, there are thousands of victims of this historic blood scandal up and down the country. I know from some of my constituents just how traumatic that is, and how hard they have been campaigning, for a long time, to right what we recognise as an historic wrong. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is critical for the Government to be ready to respond to the Langstaff report as soon as possible?
It is indeed critical, and we commissioned the compensation framework study to ensure that we could be ready to respond quickly to the inquiry’s recommendations. It was a pleasure to meet the co-chairs of the all-party parliamentary group on haemophilia and contaminated blood, from whom we may hear shortly. Work is ongoing, and I hope to give the House a further update as soon as possible on how that work is progressing and how we will continue to take it forward.
I know what a passionate advocate the hon. Gentleman is on acquired brain injuries. He may know that I took a close interest in this when I was Culture Secretary and started gathering evidence in relation to acquired brain injuries in sporting incidents. I wholeheartedly endorse all the points he makes and will make sure the Cabinet Office plays its role.
In the west midlands, our Mayor Andy Street is an excellent ambassador and champion for the region, and he understands why boosting skills and investment really matters, including for businesses in my constituency. How much more could the Government use the GREAT initiative to further boost skills and enterprise right across the country?
My right hon. Friend makes a very important point. In fact, I met the Mayor of the west midlands just two days ago. We did not have GREAT on the agenda on that occasion, but as the Minister responsible for GREAT, I shall certainly pick up the points she raises.
(2 years, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe Chancellor will set out our plans in the autumn statement shortly, but this is the Government who put in place plans that will significantly increase capital expenditure. Even though difficult decisions need to be made, I think the country can rest assured that we will continue to invest in our future productivity and, indeed, invest in our public services like the NHS.
In Aldridge-Brownhills, we are at risk of 8,000 new homes being dumped in the constituency. Will my right hon. Friend use this Prime Minister’s question as an opportunity to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to protecting the green belt and adopting a really rigorous “brownfield first” policy?
I can indeed give my right hon. Friend that assurance. She is absolutely right: we must protect our green belt and we are adopting a “brownfield first” strategy. I am pleased that we had a record number of new homes built in the last year, but it is important that we build those homes in the right places.
(2 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for allowing me as Chief Whip to speak this afternoon. This is an opportunity rarely afforded to members of the Whips Office, who normally keep quiet, but this is such an important occasion. I want to recognise the special and unique relationship that the Whips Office had with Her late Majesty’s household, through the positions that some Whips hold, and to pay tribute to Her late Majesty on behalf of all my Aldridge-Brownhills constituents.
We all have personal stories and memories. I never actually met the Queen, but I often saw her at a distance. I reflect on how, during the silver jubilee in 1977—I was a little bit younger than I am now—I cut the pictures out of my mum’s magazines and the newspapers to create a scrapbook. So many of us did that in the days before social media—I see hon. Members nodding. I still have that scrapbook somewhere at home; when I get back, I want to go and find it. I have so many memories of that jubilee and how the village came together as a community. Everybody was a part of it.
I reflect on the more recent platinum jubilee celebrations across my constituency and the many community events—the tea parties and street parties—that took place, but most of all I remember the tremendous community spirit, which is a hallmark of Aldridge-Brownhills and a real testament to the huge amount of love and respect that so many had for Her late Majesty. She not only really understood people, communities and the nation, but had a unique way of bringing our country together.
In speaking on behalf of my constituency, we remember and recognise above all Her late Majesty’s service and duty to all across our nation, the Commonwealth and, indeed, the world. She was truly remarkable. For many of us, she was and will remain an inspiration. As we come together as a nation to mourn the loss of Her late Majesty and say farewell, I do so while pledging my total commitment and support to King Charles III. God save the King.